NHMRC Overview on Homeopathy

Abstract

The National Health and Medical Research Council's conclusion on homeopathy was not legitimate because it was based on homeopathic trials that lacked homogeneity in their intervention. In some trials the intervention was isopathic. The overview and many previously conducted systematic reviews were exclusively based on randomized controlled trials that comprised only 27% of all clinical studies so far published in homeopathy. It is not rational to leave out the evidence generated through uncontrolled studies if these studies showed consistent results.

Keywords

NHMRC - RTCs - effectiveness of homeopathy - level of evidence

• References

• 1 National Health and Medical Research Council. NHMRC Information Paper: Evidence on the Effectiveness of Homeopathy for Treating Health Conditions. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council; 2015
• 2 Taylor MA, Reilly D, Llewellyn-Jones RH, McSharry C, Aitchison TC. Randomised controlled trial of homoeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial series. BMJ 2000; 321 (7259) 471-476
• 3 Lewith GT, Watkins AD, Hyland ME , et al. Use of ultramolecular potencies of allergen to treat asthmatic people allergic to house dust mite: double blind randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ 2002; 324 (7336) 520
• 4 Mathur M, Gupta VK. NHMRC report on homeopathy; mixing apples with oranges. Homeopathy 2016; 105 (1) 126-127
• 5 Fisher P. Update on research in homeopathy. Presented at: Liga Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis, New Delhi, April; 2016
• 6 Fineberg HV. Effects of clinical evaluation on the diffusion of medical technology. In: Assessing Medical Technologies. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1985: 176-210
• 7 Gehan EA. Progress of therapy in acute leukemia 1948-1981: randomized versus nonrandomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1982; 3 (3) 199-207