The Science and Technology select committee (a group of MPs) has just published a report into the efficacy of homeopathic treatment, suggesting it shouldn't be provided on the NHS, and that products with no active ingredients shouldn't be regulated by the Medical and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. I think this is really good, because it makes so much sense.
I quote:
'By providing homeopathy on the NHS and allowing MHRA licensing of products which subsequently appear on pharmacy shelves, the Government runs the risk of endorsing homeopathy as an efficacious system of medicine. To maintain patient trust, choice and safety, the Government should not endorse the use of placebo treatments, including homeopathy. Homeopathy should not be funded on the NHS and the MHRA should stop licensing homeopathic products.'
Media coverage of this report seems to be trying to present a 'balanced' viewpoint. Much as has happened in the climate science 'debate' in the media, cranks and quacks are given as big a platform as the credible science is, because the newsmakers chicken out of making any judgements.
For example the BBC's article is titled "NHS money 'wasted' on homeopathic remedies." Rather than the more sensible "WTF! do our taxes really get spent on magic water?" The woman even explains how it 'works' - not mentioning placebo at all...
This kind of stuff gets right under my skin and makes me squirm with incredulity.
Here's how it doesn't work