–
Published on: 14/10/2020 15:18
Homeopathy continues to generate debate in the world of science and beyond. “Those who attack it often argue that there are no scientific studies to support its plausibility and that, at most, it can be attributed to a placebo effect. But few go further and just as few know that some studies ‘detractors’ of this practice , first of all the Australian Report of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), have been dismantled, that the CEO of the same NHMRC has taken a step back, and which is now expected – unfortunately for 4 years compared to the usual 6-18 months needed – the decision of a court, the Australian Commonwealth Ombudsman, which is investigating the correctness of the report “. So Rachel Roberts, Chief executive of the Homeopathy Research Institute (HRI) in London, participating in a webinar on homeopathy research with the Italian press.
The expert of the HRI – an international foundation committed to promoting high quality scientific research in homeopathy – taking stock of the state of the art of the research, also detailed the phases of the Australian affair, which bounced widely in the media, when in 2015 , the NHMRC Report was considered the definitive confirmation of the ineffectiveness of homeopathy. In fact, media around the world reported the report’s conclusions, which seemed to highlight that homeopathy does not work in any clinical condition.
“They only reported the conclusions – observes Roberts – where the important Australian research institute had elaborated 300 pages of documentation, and 282 of appendix. All summarized in 40 pages intended for the public and the media. In reality – he claims. – this report is so imprecise and incorrect that we, as HRI, have dismantled it in every point thanks to a work of ‘reverse engineering’, that is, retracing the analyzes made by the same institute “.
In particular – explains the expert – “it was said that the rigorous evaluation was carried out on over 1800 articles, hence the headlines” 1800 studies say that homeopathy does not work. “This is false because the report is focused only on 176 articles, without ever clarifying to the public that criteria of ‘reliability’ were used, such as that of the minimum of 150 participants in the trial, which led to discard most of the studies, reducing them to 30. And it has never been said that other criteria meant that other trials were excluded from the analysis. For example, on the criterion of the minimum number of volunteers – he specifies – we verified that there is no minimum threshold, but in that case it was decided by the NHMRC, and that the same institute finances studies with fewer participants. But there are many other contradictions and studies rejected a priori incorrectly. So – explains Roberts – out of 179 studies discussed, in the end the report ‘saved’ only 5, discarding all the eviden za of others “.
For this, “after our work at HRI, we chose to go the legal path with a complaint to the Ombudsman, the Australian Ombudsman, to whom we had to prove that there was a ‘deliberate intent to distort’ the data. . Not only that, from our investigation we found that the NHMRC research had been done twice, but the results of the first had never been disclosed. So we set up a campaign with the slogan ‘release the first report’, forcing the ‘NHMRC to make it known. The NHMRC released a first draft report made in 2012, which found’ encouraging evidence in favor of the efficacy of homeopathy ‘for five medical conditions including otitis media, respiratory tract infection higher in adults and some side effects of cancer treatment “.
“After the many pressures exerted, in 2016, the CEO of the institute had to make a public clarification, arguing that the report had not concluded that homeopathy is ineffective. So today – he observes – anyone who says that it does not work or that it is a Placebo referring to the Australian report claims false. But despite the CEO’s backward step – notes Rachel Roberts – this report did a lot of damage. Now the NHMRC has turned to a new service provider to review the evidence on homeopathy. All the studies have been repeated, and the hope is that everything will be done correctly, even if the existing report now refers to studies as of January 2013, so all the other studies are missing, because in the meantime the research continues. But of course now let’s check and We monitor everything and we continue to wait for the verdict of the Ombudsman, which usually comes after 6-18 months, but which we have been waiting for for 4 years and we don’t know when it will arrive.
The London video connection expert reviewed the latest research in homeopathy, some versus placebo, others in addition to conventional drugs “which have shown evidence on animals, plants and humans.” “To break down the wall of mistrust – he warned – we must continue to do research for quality, without dispersing it in too many fields of interest. Homeopathy is in fact used in a wide variety of pathologies and this has meant that the evidence collected in years were spread over numerous pathologies, with few replicated studies on the same condition. For the future – according to Roberts – it is desirable that we orient ourselves towards a smaller number of pathologies and the role that homeopathy can have in an integrated medicine approach , alongside conventional medicine “. In particular, according to the expert, very promising fields are those of sinusitis, pediatric inflammatory otitis, arthritis, to name the main ones.
Finally, a reflection on the Covid-19 pandemic, “on which there are also some studies in homeopathy, but for seriousness it is not good to talk about it before there are results or publications”. As for the effect the pandemic has had on the world’s population, Roberts notes: “I think this experience has humbled us all, because we realized that science isn’t always black or white, it’s not always linear, and things are not as simple as they seem. We have eminent scientists who disagree every day about what is right or what is wrong, what the evidence says or does not say, we are faced with conflicting or censored information, everyone is trying to talk about science but often the opinion of some not in line with government decisions is not taken into consideration, it is not disseminated and communicated, not to mention the fake news that run on the net “.
Hence a ‘parallel’ with homeopathy: “in the face of the ‘infodemic’ unleashed on Covid-19 for the first time, many people tell me they now understand how much the scientific message on homeopathy can be distorted or censored. They understand now why there is something that touches them personally like the coronavirus. I therefore hope – he concludes – that this is an opportunity for the public to understand, select and discriminate information in the right way, and without bias “.
–
REPRODUCTION RESERVED © Copyright Adnkronos.
