It seems that homeopathy might at last be facing some serious opposition from within the NHS, with the prospect of its being blacklisted being considered.
There’s any number of people who’ll be entirely on board with that. Homeopathy doesn’t work. Of course, a lot of medicines turn out not to work, or not to work well. But the difference between homeopathy and unsuccessful drugs is that the latter are at least more likely to have a plausible mechanism – roughly, one of throwing molecules at other molecules, or coaxing the body to throw molecules at molecules. Homeopathy doesn’t even have that. It relies on water having a memory.
At the very best, it contributes nothing. But it does cost money – not much, but more than none, and in the end, the taxpayer has to pony up for it. Money is being wasted every time the NHS pays for homeopathic treatment, and that looks to be unjust. (It’s not the most unjust thing in the world, but that’s neither here nor there. Wrongs are wrongs, even if harms might vary.)
It might even get in the way of effective treatments, if patients use it rather than them. That might mean that they’re worse off than they could otherwise be. At the outside, it might mean that they’re a danger to others – they might be spreading illness by dint of not getting treated properly for it.
To that extent, Simon Singh strikes me as being bang on the money:
Simon Singh, the founder of the Good Thinking Society, said: “Given the finite resources of the NHS, any spending on homeopathy is utterly unjustifiable.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.