RCT-Study
Complementary and alternative medicine whole systems research:
Beyond identification of inadequacies of the RCT
Marja J. Verhoef a, George Lewithb, Cheryl Ritenbaughc, Heather Boond, Susan Fleishmane, Anne Leis f
a Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Faculty of Medicine, Canada
b Complementary Medicine Research Unit, Primary Medical Care, Aldermoor Health Centre,Southampton, UK
c Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Arizona, AZ, USA
d Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Ont., Canada
e Integrative Medicine Resource Group, Tucson, AZ, USA
f Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Sask., Canada
A Roadmap for CAM Research towards the Horizon of 2020
Harald Walacha, Sirpa Pietikäinenb
aEuropean University Viadrina, Frankfurt/O., Germany
bMember of the European Parliament, Strasbourg, France
CAMbrella was the first pan-European research project that systematically evaluated the state of usage, motivation, provision, and regulation of CAM usage in European coun- tries. It also documented the need and the way forward for research in Europe. Some of the finest minds in European CAM research were either part of the consortium or were invited as experts to some of the specialist meetings. Thus, CAMbrella formulates a consensus never seen in European research on this topic before. Results of the work packages – most of them systematic reviews – have been published, also in open access format in FORSCHENDE KOMPLEMENTÄRMEDIZIN [1]. Now, the final piece, roadmap 2020, has been published and is available online [2]. This roadmap sums up the findings briefly and points towards the future direction of research.
Science as a battle: The European Academies Science Advisory Council /EASAC attacks all Homeopathy!
Homeopathic products and practices: assessing the evidence and ensuring consistency in regulating medical claims in the EU” - full report under: http:/www.easac.eu/
Please read here the statements of the Homeopathy Reseach Institute/ HRI: https://www.hri-research.org/
Bundesverband Pharmazeutischer Industrie/BPI: http://www.bpi.de/
and our partner ECHAMP:
ECHAMP is the European Coalition on Homeopathic & Anthroposophic Medicinal Products. It works to develop the industry for these medicinal products so as to ensure availability of both medicines for self-medication and medicines recommended by prescribers. It advocates in favour of an appropriate regulatory environment for these products in the EU.
PASCOE–Study
Index:
Preference: Nature Medicine or chemical medication
Advantages of Nature Medicine in comparison to Chemical Medication
Frequency of use of Nature Medicine
Overview: Evaluation of Nature Medicine on the basis of statements (Ø)
Preference between doctors with and without additional identification, „Nature Healing procedures“
Ilnesses or complaints where Nature Medicine was preferred
Influence of the Health Care Reform on the frequency of use of Nature Medicine
Experiences with Nature Medicine
Question and answers on the carcinogenicity of the consumption of red meat and processed meat, WHO
October 2015
1. What do you consider as red meat?
Red meat refers to all mammalian muscle meat, including, beef, veal, pork, lamb, mutton, horse, and goat.
2. What do you consider as processed meat?
Processed meat refers to meat that has been transformed through salting, curing, fermentation, smoking, or other processes to enhance flavour or improve preservation. Most processed meats contain pork or beef, but processed meats may also contain other red meats, poultry, offal, or meat by-products such as blood. Examples of processed meat include hot dogs (frankfurters), ham, sausages, corned beef, and biltong or beef jerky as well as canned meat and meat-based preparations and sauces.
Evidence-based medicine and acupuncture: old bias for new perspectives in clinical context
by Mariateresa Tassinari MPhil, PhD Candidate1 and Paolo Roberti di Sarsina MD2,3
1Member, 2President, Charity for Person Centred Medicine-Moral Entity, Bologna, Italy, 3Researcher, Observatory and Methods for Health, Department of Sociology and Social Research, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
From the moment that evidence-based medicine (EBM) was accepted by the predominant medical-scientific community, it has increasingly represented a refuge for medicine, which has voluntarily chosen to regard the validity of a theory and the truth in the same way. The introduction of placebo in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) serves as such [1]; in order to analyse the reality by dividing it into two poles, the true and the false and, by tertium non datur principle, effectively excluding any other possibility.
All of this was legitimized by means of a methodic rigour, which not only excluded but also deprived value, resulting in everything that was either impossible to measure or standardize as unjustifiable [2]. If this measure of purification has permitted important and useful discoveries, it has, on the other hand, also deprived medical practice of a vision which does not fit into a characteristically pharmaceutical-centred one; for the present circumstances, the certainties on which that paradigm is based are weakening and creak like the floor upon which Ptolemy founded his theory.