Healthy Skepticism Library item: 8820

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Colquhoun D.
Should NICE evaluate complementary and alternative medicines?
BMJ 2007 Mar 10; 334:(7592):507
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/334/7592/507

Abstract:

Demand for complementary and alternative medicine is high despite limited evidence. Linda Franck and colleagues believe that a thorough review by NICE would benefit the NHS and patients, but David Colquhoun argues that it cannot afford to re-examine evidence that has shown little benefit

One of the most important roles of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is to assess which treatments produce sufficient benefit that the National Health Service should pay for them. Since the money available to the NHS is not infinite, making choices of this sort is inevitable, and it is in the interests of patients that dispassionate judgments are made on the efficacy of treatments.

If the effectiveness of a treatment is disputed, what could be more obvious than to refer it to NICE for a judgment of the evidence? Nothing is more disputed than the effectiveness of alternative medicine, so why has NICE not adjudicated? Even the Smallwood report, sponsored by the Prince of Wales, did not pretend to find good evidence, but recommended that NICE should be invited “to carry out a full assessment of the cost-effectiveness of the therapies“1 The Smallwood report was . . .

Unaffordable luxury

Lack of evidence