Posted by Nancy K
Given the current blog series I’m collaborating on regarding the potential harms of homeopathy, I thought it might be useful to stop for a moment and discuss its appropriate place in therapy. Do I believe that informed, consenting adults should be able to choose homeopathy as part of a treatment regime? Yes.
Are most people fully informed, and therefore able to give full consent? No, I don’t believe they are.
If people are making their treatment decisions based simply on assertions like “it’s safe” or “it’s gentle and natural” or (worst of all) “it works for me”, they are not fully informed. (To see why “it works for me” isn’t adequate, take a look at my post on anecdotes). This creates an ethical problem that should be insurmountable for any decent healthcare provider.
The evidence in favour of homeopathy simply does not reach the standard that we demand of conventional medicines. The evidence that it has the potential to cause harms (as we are showing with the Homeopathy Harms blog series) is very real. Does a patient tend to feel better after seeing a homeopath? Probably. In these days of seven minute GP consultations the chance to sit down for an hour with someone who wants to listen, and dig deeper, and really *help* you is probably a really lovely thing. Should we mistake that for thinking that homeopathy is a beneficial discipline? No. Should we allow double standards by accepting lower quality evidence for homeopathy (or any complementary medicine) than we do for conventional medicine? No way.
But knowing all of this, knowing that the most “potent” homeopathic remedies have precisely no active ingredient, that there is no evidence of benefit beyond placebo effect, that at best they’ll derive no therapeutic effect and at worse they may experience serious side effects, should an adult be allowed to choose homeopathy for themselves? Sure. Do many users of homeopathy meet these basic criteria for informed consent? I very much doubt it.