Health Story

05 July 2009 00:16 BST

Eminent scientists slam alternative medicine

Some of Britain's foremost scientists have today written to all the country's NHS trusts calling for an end to the spread of complementary and alternative medicines.

Thirteen top scientists, led by Professor Michael Baum, the emeritus professor of surgery at the University College London, have urged the trusts to end the use of "unproven or disproved treatments" on the NHS.

The warning is likely to come as an embarrassment to the Prince of Wales, a key proponent of alternative or complementary medicine who is today continuing his attempt to get the World Health Organisation to embrace it.

But the scientists have asked the chief executives of 476 acute and primary care trusts to "review practices in your own trust, and to join us in representing our concerns to the Department of Health (DoH) because we want patients to benefit from the best treatments available".

In the letter, revealed by the Times newspaper, the authors claim there are "two particular developments to which we would like to draw your attention".

"First, there is now overt promotion of homeopathy in parts of the NHS (including the NHS Direct website)," they write, claiming it is an "implausible treatment for which over a dozen systematic reviews have failed to produce convincing evidence of effectiveness".

They add: "Secondly, as you may know, there has been a concerted campaign to promote complementary and alternative medicine as a component of healthcare provision.

"Treatments covered by this definition include some which have not been tested as pharmaceutical products, but which are known to cause adverse effects, and others that have no demonstrable benefits. While medical practice must remain open to new discoveries for which there is convincing evidence, including any branded as 'alternative', it would be highly irresponsible to embrace any medicine as though it were a matter of principle."

The scientists go on to add that "at a time when the NHS is under intense [financial] pressure" it would be a better use of resources to concentrate on "treatments that are based on solid evidence".

"These are not trivial matters," they conclude.

"We urge you to take an early opportunity to review practice in your own trust with a view to ensuring that patients do not receive misleading information about the effectiveness of alternative medicines. We would also ask you to write to the DoH requesting evidence-based information for trusts and for patients with respect to alternative medicine."

Responding to the claims, a DoH spokeswoman said it was down to individual clinicians and trusts to decide whether to use complementary and alternative medicine.

"Patients rightly expect to have clear information about the range of treatments that are available to them, including complementary therapies," she said.