Susan Curtis, Medicines Director of Neal's Yard Remedies, says "Neal's Yard Remedies has not advertised or sold the remedy, Malaria Officinalis 30c, as a prevention for Malaria. It has been supplied on request by practitioners working in Neal's Yard Remedies stores, and in fact, practitioners have been trained to always explain that the remedy should not be considered as a guarantee of prevention of malaria. The name of the remedy is based on its Latin name and not on its claim to cure or prevent an ailment. However, as this was obviously a contentious issue which could cause our customers concern, and at the request of the MHRA, Neal's Yard Remedies took the decision to withdraw the product from sale, with immediate effect, on 17 April 2008".

 

Alarmist condemnation of all alternative therapies ignores the crucial role some could play in the human healing process...More

Suckers: How Alternative Medicine Makes Fools of Us All; Snake Oil Science; and next month sees another, Trick or Treatment: what these new books have in common is varying degrees of frustration at the seemingly inexorable rise of complementary medicine. It seems the aim of some of these authors is to finish off a burgeoning health industry that they believe is based on charlatans and quacks preying on the gullible and desperate.

The books reflect the growing exasperation in some quarters that public opinion is not as amenable to persuasion and scientific evidence as they would hope. The language gets lurid; the mood music to pronouncements on complementary medicine is increasingly alarmist - we are living in dangerous times, an unEnlightenment looms as tides of irrationality threaten to overwhelm the palisades erected by science. "Reason is a precious but fragile thing," declared Richard Dawkins in his series, The Enemies of Reason, last autumn. "Reason has liberated us from superstition and given us centuries of progress. We abandon it at our peril."

What so troubles these science warriors is that it is estimated a third of people in the UK now use complementary medicine, at a cost of £1.5bn a year. In the US, the figures are substantially higher; it has been calculated that more visits are made to healing therapists than to doctors. There is an extraordinary paradox here: a half-century of astonishing conventional medical advances has not succeeded in eliminating complementary medicine. Quite the reverse: the breakthroughs in conventional medicine have been accompanied by the proliferation of other forms of healing - many of which have little or no evidence base to prove their efficacy. Indeed, it only takes a short surf on the web to discover that the wilder shores of this burgeoning industry are, well, pretty wild.

To the science warriors, this bizarre state of affairs can only be explained by irrationality. They bemoan the state of science education and lament how, contrary to expectation, literacy and access to information have failed to eradicate superstition. Meanwhile, in this increasingly sharply polarised debate, complementary medicine practitioners are equally exasperated by what they see as blinkered scientific reductionism.

So it takes a brave scientist to launch into this territory and risk getting attacked from both camps by daring to ask a simple question: is there anything science can learn from complementary medicine? That is precisely what Kathy Sykes is doing in her current television series, Alternative Therapies (the second programme is on BBC2 tonight). As Bristol University's professor of public engagement in science and the director of the Cheltenham Festival of Science, no one can challenge her credentials as a scientist, yet her scrutiny of particular therapies throws up serious challenges to conventional medicine.

Sykes is too good a scientist to give complementary medicine an easy run. Tonight she examines reflexology, and gives it pretty short shrift. There are 30,000 reflexologists working on a million British feet a year. They base their work on a theory that parts of the sole of the foot correlate to organs in the body. The only problem is that Sykes could find no one, reflexologist or scientist, who could explain how these correlations might work. Furthermore, it turned out that this "ancient" healing system seems to have originated with an imaginative American woman in the 1930s. But patients swear by it. One reflexologist points Sykes to her annual garden party full of babies and children as evidence of the success she has had with infertility problems. This is the point where most scientists snort with derision at the use of personal anecdote as evidence, but Sykes presses on and it takes her into two areas of scientific research. First, she digs up new research on the importance of touch, which can have a profound impact on the brain. Even the hand of a stranger reduces anxiety and that of someone with whom one has a close relationship is even more significant. In fact, Sykes finds some scientific underpinning which goes beyond placebo in many of the therapies she looks at. But it is placebo which emerges as a recurrent and crucially important thread in her quest, and it leads her to the work of several American scientists who are trying to identify what placebo is, who it works for, and why it works.

This is one of the most common charges made against complementary medicine - that most of it is no better than placebo. But there is a way of turning that accusation around: perhaps complementary medicine is an effective way to harness placebo as one of the most powerful - and cheapest - of healing processes. Rather than being derogatory about the phenomenon as "just" placebo, perhaps we should see it as one of the most remarkable and little understood aspects of the human body.

That line of inquiry has taken Sykes to the US several times over the course of the two series she has made. There placebo has become a new frontier in medicine. In a range of studies with startling results - even sham knee surgery can be as effective as the real thing - many factors contribute to placebo: the confidence of the doctor; the social, cultural expectations around the procedure; the empathy and warmth of the patient-doctor relationship; the patient's degree of faith. Get all these right, and the outcome can be remarkable. Harvard professor Ted Kaptchuk is publishing a study this week which shows that placebo is as good as any conventional treatment available for irritable bowel syndrome. Given that the eight most industrialised nations spend $40bn a year on medication for this condition, that's revolutionary stuff.

This kind of research into placebo gives some insight into why complementary medicine has boomed and why there are so many people who cite their own experience to passionately defend it. The average consultation with a GP is 4.6 minutes, while the complementary therapist can devote an hour to taking detailed personal histories. That time and relationship provide a context and an opportunity for the ritual and recasting of personal experience which Kaptchuk believes are the crucial elements of placebo.

Complementary medicine is most popular where conventional medicine fails, such as with musculoskeletal conditions and mental health - stress, depression, anxiety (the recent revelations about the inefficacy of Prozac were another reminder of how shaky the science is in a large area of conventional medicine). Several complementary therapies are particularly effective at pain relief - you had to see Sykes's footage of hypnotism helping a woman to have teeth extracted without anaesthetic to believe it. Kaptchuk argues that pain is not a static given but can be experienced dramatically differently.

Conventional medicine prolongs life but is less successful in prolonging good health - we can expect to spend more years of our life in poor health, as a government report showed last week - and in producing wellbeing. So people are voting with their feet, trying to find other ways to fill the gaps left by conventional medicine. We need scientists to help to identify what they are looking for and why, rather than pouring scorn indiscriminately on the whole field and on the relations between belief, mind and body, of which science still has such a fragmentary understanding.

Close article

 

We love the BBC, but we all know from time to time they can be guilty of naughty editing, especially when it comes to showing people apparently storming ‘out’. Our Medicines Director Susan Curtis was interviewed for the Inside Out programme last week, and unfortunately a lot of what she was trying to say was not shown. The most important point, and something we are very passionate about, it that as our health is so important, we advise that people seek professional advice on all matters of health....More

We know there have been no clinical trials for the use of homoeopathy in the prevention of malaria but homoeopathy does have a good track record in preventing and treating other epidemic diseases. Susan said that there is no absolute guarantee that you will not get malaria with any treatment and that the most important factor is to take measures to prevent being bitten by mosquitoes. We do not advertise or sell the remedy as a prevention for Malaria. It is supplied on request by practitioners working in Neals Yard Remedies stores, and in fact, the practitioners have been trained to always explain that the remedy should not be considered as a guarantee of prevention of malaria. The name of the remedy is based on its latin name and not on its claim to cure or prevent an ailment.

However, as this is obviously a contentious issue which is causing customer concern, we have decided to withdraw the product, Malaria Officinalis 30c from sale with immediate effect.

Close article

 

A recently published Cochrane Review of a Danish meta analysis (by Bjelakovic et al), relating to the effects of antioxidant supplementation on all-cause mortality, has prompted news headlines around the world of the type: “vitamin supplements may reduce lifespan” and “vitamin supplements can increase mortality”. Such alarmist headlines have of course caused concern for the many individuals who regularly take vitamin supplements to maintain good health....More

However, the work by Bjelakovic et al misuses the methods of meta-analysis, a statistical process whereby a scientific conclusion is obtained by combining results from a number of separate studies. This study has been widely and severely criticised by many scientific experts, who have concluded that the findings of this study are completely worthless. Expert scientific criticisms of this study have been published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, and have been attached to this press release. Critical points of particular note include inappropriate use of statistical methods on poorly selected data, and author bias in selection of individual studies for inclusion in the analysis. Further information on these points is given under key messages below.

In conclusion, there is considerable documented evidence both for vitamin deficiencies in the general diet (particularly for specific at-risk groups), and for the health benefits of vitamin supplementation when taken at recommended doses. Those individuals who wish to take vitamin supplements to maintain good health should therefore continue to do so, and should not be discouraged by the shoddy scientific study by Bjelakovic et al.

Key messages – antioxidant supplement and mortality meta-analysis

Background: In February 2007, a Danish meta-analysis of several studies including antioxidants such as Vitamin A and E and beta-carotene prompted news headlines such as “Vitamins may reduce lifespan” and “Certain vitamins could increase mortality”. The researchers responsible for the report conclude that E-vitamin increases mortality by 4 per cent, beta-carotene increases mortality by 7 per cent, and A-vitamin increases mortality by 16 per cent. The meta-analysis, a review of 68 earlier studies including a total of 232,606 people, is published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA. 2007;297:842-857.)

In April 2008, almost identical news stories based on the same study appeared again. The reason for the recurrence seems to be, that the study has undergone a Cochrane Review, normally a mark of the highest quality of science. However, the study has been harshly criticised by both the healthcare industry and scientific community. On the surface, the report appears to deliver a hard blow to vitamin pills, but a closer look reveals quite a few serious errors and does not leave much to support the analysis.

Some points to consider A few studies upset the result of the entire meta-analysis Specificly, two large, well known, high-dosage beta-carotene trials involving smokers provided more than half the deaths in the analysis. An reanalysis of the data, where all 25 trials on beta-carotene were excluded, no longer showed any significantly increased mortality due to either vitamin A or E. Reference:Gluud et al. JAMA, Vol. 298 No. 4, July 25, 2007

The meta-analysis excludes a very large number of studies, which, if included, significantly alters the conclusion. 747 studies were excluded for several reasons, including no mortality in the study groups (405 trials), the studies were not randomised trials (69 trials), they did not fulfil inclusion criteria (245 trials), or the studies are ongoing (four).The review of the remaining 68 studies did not show a negative result until the researchers excluded further 21 studies, leaving them with 48. Several independent medical experts have criticised the selection method used.

Many of the studies examined the effect of antioxidants on people who were already sick.

Most of the trials included in the meta-analysis tested for secondary prevention, looking at how a nutrient works in diseased populations, instead of primary prevention studies in healthy populations. Even among the 21 trials studying people without diseases, many encompassed groups with high health risks from smoking, asbestos exposure, or multinutritional deficiencies. The study and media reports use improper comparison of doses.

Several of the studies involve such large doses of vitamin E and vitamin A that the levels would never be approved for dietary supplements or high-strength vitamin- and mineral preparations. In fact, some of the doses were potentially toxic, yet the media uncritically link the results of the research to food supplements.

Several medical experts have criticised the methods and findings of the meta-analysis.

One of the world’s leading experts in the field of nutrition and epidemiology, Professor Meir Stampfer of the Harvard School of Public Health, the United States, told the Associated Press that the studies selected for the current meta-analysis were far too different for comparison. In addition, he said: “This study does not advance our understanding, and could easily lead to misinterpretation of the data.”

Also, below are selected quotes from medical experts regarding the study, published in JAMA (Vol. 298 No. 4, July 25, 2007):

“Particular aspects of [the authors] approach, analysis, and reported findings may have led to incomplete or biased determinations of the real effect of such nutrients in various populations.” Demetrius Albanes, MD, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.

”We have several concerns about the meta-analysis of randomized trials of antioxidant supplements by Dr Bjelakovic and colleagues.” Han-Yao Huang, PhD, MPH and Steven Teutsch, MD, MPH, Merck & Co, Inc; Eric Bass, MD, MPH, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.

”We believe that the approach used in the metaanalysis of mortality in randomized trials of antioxidant supplements by Dr Bjelakovic and colleagues erred in several important ways, probably resulting in biased conclusions.”

Philip R. Taylor, MD, ScD and Sanford Dawsey, MD, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.

Close article

 

GM Freeze Call for Government, Industry and Scientists to Respond To IAASTD Report Challenges: GM Crops not the silver bullet to feed the world....More

GM Freeze welcomes the findings of the International Assessment on Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) and calls upon Government, industry and scientists to respond by changing their approach to research and development in the global South.

The IAASTD report clearly states that the current generation of GM crops do not provide a way to tackle hunger.

In also the report emphasises the need to broaden research to include all the key functions of agriculture. These include the enhancement and protection of soil, water and biodiversity, as well as the need to use the knowledge of the millions of small farmers in the South, many of whom are women. The report also highlights the need for research to tackle agriculture's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and the role farming plays in mitigating some of the impacts of climate change.

The failure of current trade policies to help the world's poorest people is a major part of the final report, which was produced by over 4000 scientists, including social scientists, from around the world.

Commenting on the IAASTD's findings, Pete Riley of GM Freeze said: "We welcome the report's thorough analysis of the problems and the need to tackle them from social, economic and political perspectives as well as the sound application of science. We are delighted that the hyped claims about the current development in GM crops feeding the world are rejected. We call upon the Government, industry and science to respond positively to the challenge the report lays down and change their approach to scientific research so it is led by and reflects the needs of those who it should benefit - not the needs of corporations. The research base has to be broadened to take up all the demands placed on farming in addition to producing food in a way that is safe and has no long-term negative impact on the environment. This represents a big culture change in the approach to science for agriculture and must happen quickly."

Close article

 

MMR: Major mumps outbreak proves the vaccine doesn’t work - What Doctors Don’t Tell You, 10 April 2008

At a time when health officials are quietly admitting that there could be a link between the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine and autism, a new study has also discovered that it doesn’t work....More

Researchers investigating a large outbreak of mumps in 2006, when 6,584 cases were reported among college students, have discovered that virtually every sufferer had been vaccinated twice against the disease.

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reveals that at least 84 per cent of young adults aged between 18 and 24 years had received two-dose vaccines against mumps. And in 2006 – when the outbreak occurred – the national two-dose coverage among adolescents reached 87 per cent, the highest in US history, and just one point below that needed for ‘herd immunity’. CDC researchers speculate that the outbreak – primarily among 18- to 24-year-olds – was the result of the ‘wrong type of mumps’. The vaccine is supposed to protect against A-virus mumps, whereas the outbreak in 2006 was caused by the G-virus strain.

Despite its limitations, the CDC team reckons that all children need a third dose of MMR – even though the two-dose vaccine was introduced following a 1980 mumps outbreak among children who had received a single vaccine dose.

It may be a measure that will be hard to introduce at a time when health officials are accepting that the MMR vaccine can cause autism among children with a ‘mitochondrial disorder’.

(Source: New England Journal of Medicine, 2008; 358: 1580-9).

Close article

 

The rise in breast cancer can be cut only by reducing exposure to made-made chemicals, a report warned today....More

The disease has spread dramatically across Europe in the past 20 years with incidences even doubling i some countries. Prof Andrea Kortenkamp, of the University of London, said the use of everyday chemicals such as pesticides and cosmetics which can interfere with the human hormone system must be cut. Calling on the EU to take action, he said: 'We will not be able to reduce cancer without addressing preventable causes'.

Close article

 

Medicines containing certain ingredients specifically intended to relieve cough and cold symptoms and relieve congestion should no longer be used in children under 2 years and in future they will not be marketed for young children.... More

Best-selling brands affected include Calpol, Tixylix, Buttercup, Benylin and Asda and Boots own brand children’s cough syrups.

They have been removed from the shelf and will be returned when the labels have been changed to advise against use for the under 2s and with much clearer restrictions and warnings for the 2-6 year old age group.

The recommendation comes from the drug safety watchdog, the Commission on Human Medicines is based on the view that children under 2, because of their small size, may be at greater risk of potential harm caused by overdose. This advice is intended to reduce that possibility. Cambridgeshire GP Dr David Haslam quoted in the Daily Mail said, “This is about removing potential risk. The problem with combination products is that children get a potentially toxic cocktail of ingredients.”

The MHRA received advice from its own Paediatric Expert Advisory Group that the best management of coughs and colds in under 2s is with simple remedies such as products based on glycerol or honey and lemon.


Safe Natural Alternatives include:

For Fevers
To reduce a fever sponge down your child with tepid water.
Chamomile Tea – cooling and anti-inflammatory.
Children’s Cooling Tea Blend – a blend of herbs suitable for children that will have a cooling and soothing effect.
Belladonna 30 – a homoeopathic remedy to relieve symptoms of heat, redness and fevers.

For Teething
Chamomilla 30 granules – to relieve symptoms of pain and irritability in teething children.

For Colds
ABC 6 or 30 – a combination homoeopathic remedy to relieve symptoms of a feverish cold in children.
Elderberry tincture – proven to reduce symptoms of colds and flu and suitable for children.
Eucalyptus Salve – a decongestant blend of essential oils to relieve symptoms of stuffiness.

For Coughs
Echinacea & Mallow Syrup – a soothing linctus based on organic honey and gentle herbs to soothe away tickly coughs.


Close article

 

Using the counterculture of the 1960s and 1970s as a foundation for a viable business today can be done - just look at Body Shop and Sir Richard Branson's various endeavours - but it is not easy. Such enterprises often come with baggage.... More

Jonathan Hook arrived at the start of this year as managing director of Neal's Yard Remedies, which provides mainly organically sourced health treatments. It grew out of a single shop opened in 1981 by Romy Fraser, recently appointed OBE for services to health, in a hippy enclave of former flower market warehouses tucked away off Monmouth Street in Covent Garden.

The head office comprises a shop and treatment rooms, where various New Age therapies are carried out. Its neighbours include a shiatsu school, a couple of salad bars and a shop selling “music for relaxation”. In an appropriately surreal touch, a blue plaque notes the writing, on the floor above the Neal's Yard shop, of some Monty Python scripts. It is the sort of retailer that should thrive today, when price, at the top end of the market at least, often takes second place to ethics. Mr Hook's job is to expand what was once an unworldly niche brand into the high street.

Neal's Yard has about 30 stores in the UK and also sells its products, in their distinctive blue bottles and packaging, through upmarket retailers, such as Waitrose and Selfridges. It is undeniably an odd product range - and a pricey one. Aside from the various lotions, balms and dietary additives, stored around the walls in huge glass jars are herbs and plant extracts, well-known and obscure. Sage, sarsaparilla, bladderwrack - but what is devil's claw, boneset or boldo?

The various therapies range from the fringe but generally respectable (acupuncture) to the medically discredited (homeopathy). And what about Hopi ear-candling, whereby aromatic candles based on a Native American recipe draw away impurities from the ear?

One detects a slight ambivalence in Mr Hook to this abundance of oddness. He emphasises that he has been in place only two months and is no expert on natural remedies. The business is perched between medicine and cosmetics. There can be no claims that a product might cure a condition, but some undeniably bring comfort. “All our products have a therapeutic intent as well as being beautiful,” he says. “You can say: ‘This is really gentle, it will do good.' You can't say: 'It will cure eczema.'” Of the 600-plus products, nearly all are organic. Cosmetics are not as rigorously policed as in other areas, such as food, and Mr Hook says that some competitors cut corners. Where Neal's Yard products are not, this is for a good reason. For example, goods sourced from the wild, such as frankincense picked as a resin from trees in Somalia, cannot be verified as such. Everything is sourced sustainably. Where it cannot be, it is not stocked. “That's where our ethics come in,” Mr Hook says, “but we're not purist about it. Our ultimate aim is to be entirely organic. That's a journey. You can't just flick a switch.”

Customers go into the shops for what sounds like a New Age version of a medical check-up. Eighty per cent of staff have relevant qualifications in natural medicine. They ask about lifestyle, diet, stress levels, patterns of sleep and try to suggest the appropriate product, perhaps a tincture to help to combat insomnia, perhaps a shampoo or a conditioner. “It's a holistic approach.” Mr Hook himself, although initially sceptical, tried acupuncture several years ago for a bad back. “He stuck needles in places I never thought I would want needles stuck, and it worked.” But isn't much of the therapy simply the placebo effect? “It's the same for Prozac, I would argue. If people think it makes them better, that's a therapy. You've got problems and you are unloading your mind, that's a therapy. We evangelise about the benefits of natural health, but we don't say modern medicine is evil.”

Mr Hook studied the odd combination of economics and environmental biology at Oxford Polytechnic. He was already fascinated by moths and butterflies - nowadays he restricts himself to photography, collecting having become unacceptable - and gives lectures on the subject at a school near his home in Haddenham, Buckinghamshire.

He was working for Orange when he heard of the Neal's Yard job. At first, the company would not consider a mobile phone salesman, but Peter Kindersley, the entrepreneur behind the Dorling Kindersley publisher, who bought Neal's Yard in 2005, is an evangelical organic farmer with a large spread in Berkshire. When he heard that Mr Hook's father also farmed organically, the son was in.

The main attraction of the job was a powerful but underused brand. “It's a hidden gem.” The business has 10 per cent of the market in natural organic beauty products, which is worth £140 million and growing at more than 20 per cent a year.

The aim is to expand the chain to 50 branches by 2010, while boosting links with other retailers and upmarket hotel chains, and £10 million has been raised to fund this expansion from the Kindersley family and Triodos, the ethical bank.

Thus far, the stores have been tucked away, not always in prime retail locations. By contrast, last month one opened in the newly renovated St Pancras railway station. Mr Hook is targetting other areas of high footfall.

“The potential to grow the brand and make these fantastic products and remedies available to the public is hugely exciting,” he says. “I don't want our customers forever to be white, middle-class women.”

Close article

 

Last week the controllers of BBC Health http://www.bbc.co.uk/health, the health section on one of the most accessed websites in the world, decided to remove all coverage of complementary medicine.... More

They used to have substantial coverage with over 40 pages on this subject covering all the major therapies, their pros and cons, evidence for their effectiveness, how to find a qualified practitioner, etc. However the site has in recent months been sent a deluge of letters and emails claiming that complementary therapies such as homeopathy and cranial osteopathy should be removed.

As a result large chunks of this part of the site were simply removed overnight and now, following recent cutbacks, it was decided that, rather than update this part of the site, it should simply be removed altogether!

It may seem incredible that a public service site this prominent can deem complementary medicine so insignificant that it no longer warrants any coverage other than the odd news story. This is despite the fact that complementary medicine is used favourably by a significant proportion of the population (recent surveys have estimated that around 1 in 5 Britons use it at some point or other) and that increasing numbers of people are now seeking to train in these therapies.

However, as the 'quack busters' become more organised and active, evidence of the backlash against complementary medicine is appearing all over the place -such as the removal of PCT funding for homeopathy, the threatened closure of the homeopathic hospitals, many negative news stories in the press and soon. Rather than taking a reasoned view and considering the evidence from good research studies on complementary medicine some groups seem simply hell benton trying to 'stamp out' complementary medicine in any way possible.

The BBC removal of complementary medicine coverage (which has been in place for almost 15 years!) is one example.

If you believe information pages on it should be returned to BBC, please, please take just a minute to express your views using their online comment format: http://www.bbc.co.uk/feedback to make your view known.

Apparently for all the many letters and emails that they received that were against complementary medicine they only received a handful in support. Therefore if you are in support please let them know so they may revise their thinking on this subject.

Close article

 

A BBC Horizon programme, 'Professor Regan's Supermarket Secrets' that was broadcasted on Tuesday, 26 February claims that there is little scientific evidence of organically produced food having any nutritional differences or benefits compared to non-organic food.... More

Robin Maynard, Campaigns Director of the Soil Association said, "Contrary to the programme's assertions there's a large body of scientific evidence indicating significant nutritional differences between organic and non organic food. And the programme is well past its sell-by date when it comes to the latest published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence only last November the British Journal of Nutrition published research showing a significantly lower incidence of eczema in children fed on organic dairy products compared to children consuming non-organic dairy products. And early results of the extensive £12 million 4-year EU Quality Low-Input Food study published in October indicated organic fruit and vegetables contain 40% more antioxidants compared to non-organic foodstuffs. The results also showed higher levels of other beneficial minerals such as iron and zinc.

"The Food Standards Agency (FSA) accepts the evidence of nutritional differences; it is currently reviewing its position on organic food in the light of the gathering body of evidence that indicate that these also bring health benefits. While the FSA deliberates, consumers are making their minds up based on the available published science with a healthy dose of common sense. The fact that nearly 40 pesticides, which officials and industry assured the public were perfectly safe, have been banned or withdrawn from use over the past decade - including 2 just last year shows science can lag behind public concerns. Presenter, Professor Regan, describes her lack of concern about pesticides as Osilly’ - perhaps her most accurate comment.

As an obstetrician, she seems strangely unaware of the well-established links between pesticides and human reproductive problems."
Close article

 

The homoeopathy worked for me campaign is being run by H:MC21 (Homeopathy: Medicine for the 21st Century). H:MC21 is a non-profit-making organisation that was set up to defend the right of people in the UK to choose homoeopathy as a therapy within the NHS, as set out in its charter.... More

Your freedom to choose homeopathy is seriously at risk
Homeopathy is recognised as a safe, inexpensive and effective form of treatment against illness, and it is used by literally millions of people worldwide. Yet in the UK, steps are being taken to reduce your access to this therapeutic tool. A handful of people are waging a fierce campaign against the profession – and it is gaining momentum. Unless people stand up for their right to choose, homeopathy could be seriously marginalised.
The H:MC21 website gives you access to some key facts about homeopathy, explains what’s happening, and let’s you know what you can do before it is too late.

www.homeopathyworkedforme.org

How can you help? There are a number of things you can do to raise awareness of this campaign, with very little effort on your part. They include emailing friends, blogging, or even raising awareness at work. Each of these things might take you only a few minutes, but even if only one in four people help, that's a couple of thousand people who will be raising awareness of the campaign.

Declaration shortly to hit 7,000 signatures
We're moments away from hitting 7,000 "signatures" (both on paper and online). This is a great achievement for us, but we're setting our sights very much higher. We know there are literally hundreds of thousands of people who have used homeopathy - with success - in the UK. The more support we gather for this campaign, the less power the campaign against homeopathy will ultimately have.

New website - more information
It has been professionally built to help us raise awareness of homeopathy, the campaign against homeopathy, and why the objections being raised don't make any sense. There is also a treasure trove of links for anyone wanting to research homeopathy, and details of how you can help raise awareness. Just click here to access the website


Close article

 

Friendly bacteria, superfoods, organic, cholesterol busting spreads, 99% germ free, whiter than white...it's almost impossible to find a product in the supermarket today that doesn't come with impressive claims...scientific claims...with an inflated price tag to match. Are they oversold? Or are they worth the extra cash?.... More

Friendly bacteria, superfoods, organic, cholesterol busting spreads, 99% germ free, whiter than white...it's almost impossible to find a product in the supermarket today that doesn't come with impressive claims...scientific claims...with an inflated price tag to match. Are they oversold? Or are they worth the extra cash?

Prof Lesley Regan has already exploded some of the myths behind beauty products in a previous Horizon. Now she's back, to see if the evidence behind these supermarket products stands up to her levels of scrutiny.

From organic farm produce to the billion dollar brands of the UK's major manufacturers Prof Regan asks tough questions and gets surprising answers. And there's no sitting on the fence: a product is either 'in' or 'out' of her scientifically backed supermarket trolley.;

When it comes to whether pre-packed pineapple is as good for you as fresh pineapple (clearly not), Prof  Regan is on safe ground, but when she asks whether conventionally farmed is as good for you as organic, she leaves a number of questions unanswered.;

She doesn’t, for example, discuss the new research in the US on children’s urine, which shows that children fed on an organic diet have considerably less pesticide residues than those eating conventionally produced fruit and vegetables.  And bear in mind that in the US they still use the pesticide Atrazine, that has been shown to change frogs sex at a concentration of 1 part per billion - the equivalent of 1/2 teaspoonful in an olympic size swimming pool. Even the 2005 Royal Commission stated that there was not the scientific basis for the regulator or government to reassure the public that pesticides did no harm.;

Nor does she mention the early results (released in October 2007) of the £12 million 4-year Quality Low Input Food (QLIF) study, that indicate organic fruit and vegetables contain 40% more antioxidants (believed to cut the risk of heart disease and cancer) in organic produce compared to non-organic foodstuffs. There were also higher levels of other beneficial minerals such as iron and zinc.;

These latest findings underpin the founding philosophy and practices of the organic movement, which seeks to build positive health in the crops and livestock raised through organic farming – and thus of people eating that produce.  They reinforce the growing body of scientific evidence that indicates significant positive nutritional differences in organic food compared to non-organic food.

Tuesday 26th February 2008, 9pm, BBC Two

Close article

 

Millions of people taking commonly prescribed antidepressants such as Prozac and Seroxat might as well be taking a placebo, according to the first study to include unpublished evidence..... More

The new generation of antidepressant drugs work no better than a placebo for the majority of patients with mild or even severe depression, comprehensive research of clinical trials has found.;

The researchers said that the drug was more effective than a placebo in severely depressed patients but that this was because of a decreased placebo effect. The study, described as “fantastically important” by British experts, comes as the Government publishes plans to help people to manage depression without popping pills.;

More than £291 million was spent on antidepressants in 2006, including nearly £120 million on SSRIs. As many as one in five people suffers depression at some point. With that in mind, ministers will today publish plans to train 3,600 therapists to treat depression. Spending on counselling and other psychological therapies will rise to at least £30 million a year. The study, by Irving Kirsch, from the Department of Psychology at the University of Hull, is the first to examine both published and unpublished evidence of the effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which account for 16 million NHS prescriptions a year. It suggests that the effectiveness of the drugs may have been exaggerated in the past by drugs companies cherry-picking the best results for publication.;

While there is no one simple solution in the treatment of depression there are several tried and tested natural alternatives. The herb St John’s Wort for example, has been proven to relieve symptoms of mild to moderate depression, without the side effects commonly associated with pharmaceutical drugs. Lifestyle measures including increased exercise can also make a significant difference, and Neal’s Yard Therapy Rooms offer qualified cognitive therapists now being recognised as a preferable treatment to drugs. For more information and ideas see our ‘Understanding Depression’ booklet, written by a practitioner of natural medicine, Dr Stephen Gascoigne.

This is just one headline on the subject, taken from The Times on February 26th, 2008.
 

Close article

 

Acupuncture can increase the chances of women having a baby with IVF treatment by 65 per cent, according to research.... More

The needle therapy makes IVF treatment more successful by helping the lining on the uterus become more receptive to receiving an embryo, scientists claim. It is thought to alter the autonomic nervous system, which controls muscles and glands, and re-balance hormone levels critical for conception.

Susan Seenan of Infertility Network UK said: 'Preliminary results from this study appear to show that acupuncture given with embryo transfer can help improve success rates and we look forward to further research in this area to confirm this. Infertility treatment is extremely stressful and success is not guaranteed.' She said many women claimed therapies such as acupuncture helped them relax and deal with the stress of IVF treatment - which can boost success rates.

(Metro newspaper 08.02.08)

Close article

 

The new independent self-regulatory body for complementary therapists called the Natural Healthcare Council is to launch in April 2008. The NHC, as a new voluntary professional regulator, will provide enhanced consumer confidence and safety through a credible, robust and professional voluntary regulatory structure for the practice of complementary healthcare in the UK.... More

The purpose of the NHC is to improve public safety, given the popularity of complementary therapies. Members of the public will be able to check that practitioners are properly qualified and registered, and will be able to complain to the NHC if they feel a practitioner has not been acting properly. The voluntary status of the regulator means that individuals who practise one of the therapies it covers can register with it but do not have to do so. Registration will mean that the practitioner has met certain entry requirements and that they subscribe to a stipulated set of professional standards.

Therapies who have participated in developing the regulator are Alexander technique, Bowen technique, cranial therapy, homeopathy, massage therapy, naturopathy, nutritional therapy, shiatsu and yoga therapy. In addition, aromatherapists, reflexologists and reiki practitioners will, if they wish, be eligible to join the register, although their professional bodies have not formally become involved in the NHC.

Close article

 

We are delighted to announce our Founder, Romy Fraser has been awarded an OBE for services to health and beauty in the New Years honours list.... More

Peter Kindersley, chairman, said the award was a fantastic achievement.  He said 'We are delighted that Romy has an OBE.  The award recognises the significant contribution Romy has made to the development of natural medicine in the UK.

Romy was a pioneer of natural and organic health and beauty products more than 25 years ago, from her first Neal's Yard Remedies shop in Neal's Yard, Covent Garden.  It was her vision, strength and determination that has helped the company to grow to 30 stores across the UK with a wealth of highly experienced staff and therapists whose mission is to transform lives through empowering people to live by the principles of natural health.  It is a fantastic achievement.'


Well done Romy!

Close article