Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Papers

Randomised controlled trial of homoeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial seriesCommentary: Larger trials are needed

BMJ 2000; 321 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7259.471 (Published 19 August 2000) Cite this as: BMJ 2000;321:471

Rapid Response:

Flying in the face of the RCT

The study by Taylor et al of homeopathy versus placebo in the
treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis was objectively well conducted.
No convincing theories for the physiological effect of homeopathy have
been proposed. The results of this study are unpalatable to our rational
biomedical community.

The randomised controlled trial (RCT) is the foundation of evidence
based medicine. Good clinical practice requires RCT evidence to be
evaluated and applied according to merit. To reject the findings of this
RCT simply due to lack of understanding is to question the principles of
evidence based medicine.

Can homeopathy be integrated into clinical practice? Trials are
required to compare homeopathy with current standard therapy in a range of
conditions. The safety of homeopathy in conjunction with standard therapy
also needs to be proven. This would establish an appropriate role for
homeopathy in the management of a range of conditions.

Competing interests: No competing interests

24 August 2000
Stephen Pettit
4th Year Medical Students
U Kalum Amarasuriya, Anna Buckley, James Heath, Clara Russell
Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, The Medical School, University of Newcastle upon Tyne