Alternative medicine under fire

The doctors say that the public funding of “unproven or disproved treatments” such as homeopathy and reflexology, which are among those promoted by the Prince, is unacceptable while huge NHS deficits are forcing health trusts to sack nurses and limit access to life-saving drugs.

The group, which includes some of the most eminent names in British medicine, has written to the chief executives of all 476 trusts in the country to demand that only evidence-based therapies be provided free to patients under the NHS. It said that if people wanted any other form of treatment, they should pay for it.

The letter was organised by Professor Michael Baum, a cancer specialist, who said he acted because of his “utter despair” at growing NHS use of alternative treatments, while drugs which are known to work are being witheld. He added, “I find it appalling that the NHS should be funding a therapy like homeopathy which is utterly bogus.”

In their letter, the doctors claimed that dozens of reviews of homeopathy — the practice of treating conditions with tiny amounts of chemicals that produce similar symptoms — had failed to show convincing evidence of effectiveness.

The letter also criticised two of the prince’s flagship initiatives on alternative medicine: a government-funded patient guide, prepared by his Foundation for Integrated Medicine, and the Smallwood report last year, which he commissioned to make a financial case for increasing NHS provision for alternative medical care.

Within hours of the group’s letter being made public, Prince Charles was addressing health ministers from around the globe at a World Health Organisation (WHO) assembly in Geneva. In his speech, scheduled three months ago, he called on governments to abandon their conventional mindset.

He said patients should be able to benefit from the best of both worlds, complementary and orthodox treatments. He added, “I believe that the proper mix of proven complementary, traditional and modern remedies, which emphasises the active participation of the patient, can help create a powerful healing force in the world.”

Supporters of the prince said they believed the doctors deliberately timed their letter to make it appear as though he was provoking controversy in Geneva. But he stuck to the beliefs he has championed for more than 20 years, telling the WHO that in the ceaseless rush to modernise, the world was losing touch with ancient traditions that could help fight disease.

He said that ancient treatments like acupuncture understood the need to maintain balance and harmony with our minds and bodies and the natural world. In a rebuff to his critics back in Britain, he said the NHS had so embraced alternative medicine that 55 percent of GPs were now referring patients for complementary treatments.

He said, “For the past 24 years, I have argued that patients should be able to gain the benefit of an integrated approach to healing. Many of today’s complementary therapies are rooted in ancient traditions that intuitively understood this need for balance and harmony. Much of this knowledge, often based on oral traditions, is sadly being lost.”

He stressed the importance of an “integrated and holistic” approach to modern medicine that also dealt with factors like housing, the environment and agriculture. He said the medical world remained divided over the benefits of alternative therapies and although it was widely offered on the NHS, many doctors still remained cynical.

He added, “This is because there is a lack of scientific data to prove how and why alternative remedies work. And unlike mainstream medicines, few have been through years of clinical trials to prove that they are both safe and beneficial. Even treatments such as acupuncture have left Western doctors dubious of its health claims.”

A number of influential people have come down on the side of Prince Charles on the issue. Robert Matthews, visiting reader in science at Aston University, Birmingham, criticised the assertion by the doctors that homeopathy was an implausible treatment and that many studies failed to produce convincing evidence of effectiveness.

Writing in the Daily Express, he said no one could deny that the results of most studies of complementary therapies are less than compelling. But, he added, there is impressive evidence that at least some of them work and that they may even be more cost-effective than conventional medicine.

Dr Peter Fisher, one of Britain’s leading homeopaths, agreed that alternative therapies were cheaper. Writing in the Daily Mail, he said that in many cases, they also have a more positive effect on a patient’s general well-being than conventional drugs.

He said he first encountered the alternative approach to medicine more than 30 years ago when he was studying medicine at Cambridge University. On a field trip to China, he was astonished to see a woman having surgery on her abdomen without an anaesthetic. To manage the pain, all she had were three acupuncture needles in her left ear.

He added, “The sad truth is that the profits made by the drug companies are so often the driving force behind accepted conventional medicine.” Whether he is right about that or not, one thing is certain. Alternative medicine will continue to be under fire for quite some time yet, despite the continuing efforts of Prince Charles.