Homeopathy

I've finally got interested in Politics.

It started with me reading Ben Goldacre's Bad Science, which caused me to subscribe to badscienceblogs.net, which led me to sign www.libelreform.org/sign, which led me to send my first ever correspondence to an MP.

I asked my MP to sign the EDM that supported the reform of the libel laws and she sent me a lovely reply saying she already had. On the back of that, with her seeming reasonable and all, I asked her not to sign the EDM that "expresses concern" at the results of the Science and Technology Committee meeting on Homeopathy.

She writes on 22nd March:

[Y]ou can assured [sic] that I am not intending to sign the EDM in question.

However, I know that many patients are happy with the treatment they receive from homeopaths, and it seems to me that making people with chronic conditions feel a bit better is a worthwhile endeavour for the NHS.

...

Whilst I do not intend to sign the EDM, my view is that Select Committees should consider carefully how they select witnesses to avoid possible imbalance.

I am in the process of writing a letter in reply, saying two things (i) people saying they are happy with the treatments or that they feel "a bit better" is positive evidence in favour of homeopathy, but has not been ignored as Ms Thornberry MP suggests; and (ii) stressing the point made so well by the Select Committee that

Prescribing of placebos is not consistent with informed patient choice—which the Government claims is very important—as it means patients do not have all the information needed to make choice meaningful.

Beyond ethical issues and the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship, prescribing pure placebos is bad medicine. Their effect is unreliable and unpredictable and cannot form the sole basis of any treatment on the NHS.

I will post the letter at the Post Office before I put it up here.

First, I'd like to know your views...