BMJ  2007;335:951 (10 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.39388.393970.1F

Letters

What to do about CAM?

How much of orthodox medicine is evidence based?

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Scientific heavyweights deplore the NHS money wasted on unproved and disproved treatments used by practitioners of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM),^{1 2} but Lewith, a CAM proponent [see previous letter], is cited elsewhere as saying that the BMJ reckons that 50% of the treatments used in general practice aren't proved, and 5% are pretty harmful but still being used.³

His data were taken from the BMJ Clinical Evidence website (http://clinicalevidence.com/ceweb/about/knowledge/jsp, viewed 6 May 2007). A pie chart indicates that, of about 2500 treatments supported by good evidence, only 15% of treatments were rated as beneficial, 22% as likely to be beneficial, 7% part beneficial and part harmful, 5% unlikely to be beneficial, 4% likely to be ineffective or harmful, and in the remaining 47% the effect of the treatment was "unknown." The text says, "The figures suggest that the research community has a large task ahead and that most . . . [Full text of this article]

The Dial House, Rickmansworth WD3 7DQ

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Dead

John H Noble, Jr
BMJ 2007 335: 736. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Wham, bam, thank you CAM

Douglas Kamerow
BMJ 2007 335: 647. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Valuing Research

George T Lewith
bmj.com, 16 Nov 2007 [Full text]

Taxpayer funding of CAM research

John S. Garrow
bmj.com, 19 Nov 2007 [Full text]

Funding for alternative medicine research

David Colquhoun
bmj.com, 19 Nov 2007 [Full text]

Adequate funding?

George T Lewith
bmj.com, 26 Nov 2007 [Full text]

Re: Funding for alternative medicine research

John P Heptonstall
bmj.com, 27 Nov 2007 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more >>