Recently a post of mine describing attacks on homeopathy as “batty and arrogant” that I wrote last year was retweeted. This meant that again homeopathy’s hard-core detractors rushed out with lectures about the scientific method and the need for randomised trials (obvious) but yet again no attempt to actually deal with the issues I raised […]
Antipsychotics: firmly on the wall of shame for quackery and woo.
September 24, 2013 by 6 Comments
Quackery and woo are among the favourite insults directed at anyone who practices most forms of CAM (Complementary and Alternative Medicine) – and especially those who use of homeopathy, herbs or vitamins – by staunch and vocal supporters of evidence based medicine. However a feature in the Daily Mail today describes a class of drugs […]
What is wrong with randomised trials Part 2
May 5, 2013 by 4 Comments
Could alcohol get a licence as a drug for depression? How do you test for the safety of a drug that causes the same side effects as the disease it is used to treat? These are just two of the points I didn’t have room for in my post last week on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) […]
The evidence–free drug that costs the NHS 70 million a year
March 4, 2013 by 9 Comments
Just as Catholic cardinals condemn paedophilia, so mainstream medicine formally rejects treatments not supported by evidence in the form of clinical trials. But in reality interfering with novices or failing to come up with the evidence, providing of course a drug is involved, doesn’t necessarily mean banishment. Both dodgy priests and drugs can remain on […]
Body of Evidence 
Recent Comments