MD, PhD, MAE, FMedSci, FRSB, FRCP, FRCPEd.

I have been banging on about informed consent many times; not because I have a bee in my bonnet, I hope, but because it is of vital importance. Here are a few examples:

I am convinced that informed consent is a key issue in so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). Thus I was delighted to find an article that fully agrees with my view. Even though it has been published a few years ago, it is, I feel, important enough to cite it here:

The demand for informed consent in clinical medicine is usually justified on the basis that it promotes patient autonomy. In this article I argue that the most effective way to promote autonomy is to improve patient understanding in order to reduce the epistemic disparity between patient and medical professional. Informed consent therefore derives its moral value from its capacity to reduce inequalities of power as they derive from epistemic inequalities. So in order for a patient to have given informed consent, she must understand the treatment. I take this to mean that she has sufficient knowledge of its causal mechanisms and has accepted the explanations in which the treatment is implicated. If this interpretation of informed consent is correct, it is unethical for medical professionals to offer or endorse ‘alternative medicine’ treatments, for which there is no known causal mechanism, for if they do, they may end up widening the epistemic disparity. In this way, informed consent may be understood as an effective way of ruling out particular treatments in order to improve patient autonomy and maintain trust in the medical profession.

In other words, if we apply one of the most fundamental rule of medical ethics to SCAM, it would bring about the end of most of SCAM. If we fail to do this, we accept that SCAM is unethical which, in my view, is not a reasonable option.

9 Responses to “It is unethical to offer or endorse alternative medicine”

  • “Informed consent” is a very nice tool for the frauds: Why so? Because it de facto is a legal lever AGAINST the patient.

    The fraud can say: “But I informed the patient. He signed this paper, saying that I told him about x, y, z, and the pros and cons, and he signed the paper.”

    The trap: No-one is there, when the patient is “informed”. Better call it, what it really is: BRAINWASHED!

    The frauds even train how to brainwash the patients. They gather and discuss how to do it, and they have lawyers as aids.

    What is the “informed consent” used for? It is used when a patient objects a treatment he received, realizing that he was cheated, that things went wrong, etc.. AT THAT VERY MOMENT the fraud can show the signed paper, and poof, the accusations by the patient are dust. This, and only this, is, what the “informed consent” is really for.

    One detail about vaccinations is that they work. But, oh yes, but! BUT !!!!! There are so many, many risks. AND, you have to know that for instance measles is so easy so handle. We tell you all you need to know what to do, when you child has measles. And there are so many medicaments (homeopathica, of course), all well known and safe and working well. And measles is harmless anyway. It even has advantages: the children are grown up more after they lived through the infection.

    The fraud tells the patient about the benefits and the risks. But it is the way he does it, which does the brainwashing. And nobody sees it, nobody hears it. And in the end the fraud has his signed paper.

    In http://www.pharmamafia.com is a part dedicated to “informed consent”. There is an example, a paper a pediatrician wants parents to sign. I translated it for you with deepl.com:

    [*QUOTE*]
    ——————————————————-
    ——————————————————————————-
    26 Dear parents,

    This vaccination information sheet is for our legal protection
    in the event that you wish to receive vaccinations
    that deviate from the official recommendations. Please read
    these lines carefully and confirm your vaccination
    vaccination request with your signature

    Consent

    We have informed ourselves through the patient brochure, which we
    or were able to consult / via the book “Impfen Pro
    and Contra” / by studying the literature in detail about the effects
    and side effects of vaccinations and about the course and
    complications of the relevant diseases. We
    are also familiar with the vaccination recommendations of the Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO).

    We were able to clarify any remaining questions in a
    clarified in a final discussion. We have decided on an
    individual vaccination procedure.

    We would like the following vaccinations for our child ______________________________________ (name)

    the following vaccinations (please check yes or no in each case):

    yes no
    Tetanus o o
    Diphtheria o o
    Polio o o
    Hib o o
    Whooping cough o o
    Hepatitis B o o
    Measles o o
    Mumps o o
    Rubella o o
    Chickenpox o o

    If we wish to be vaccinated with vaccines that are not licensed
    (e.g. Td, Td-Polio, Hib single vaccine), we are aware that in the
    event of permanent vaccination damage, the state will not pay compensation.

    Munich, …………………………

    ………………………..
    (Signature)
    ——————————————————————————-
    ——————————————————-
    [*/QUOTE*]

    One of the tricks here: “we are aware that in the event of permanent vaccination damage, the state will not pay compensation.”

    The risk is put on the parents side. So the doctor can walk along quite happily…

    You all have talked with anti-vaxxers or read their papers. They are full of twists and tricks, ob brainwashing and legal tricks.

    No, there is NO “informed consent”! Because people are brainwashed. As laymen in medicine AND as laymen in rhetorics they have no way to withstand the brutal force used on them.

  • You should all be delighted that considerable and relentless campaigns against homeopathy from 2006 resulted in a drastic reduction in the number of homeopaths in the UK.
    What has happened since the end of the campaign is that it is the general public now driving homeopathy. in the UK. Huge public networking groups now thrive where people mostly treat themselves using other therapies as well. If they are lucky and persistent then they will even get help from the NHS as well.
    There are a few busy homeopaths but not 1000s. Please show me evidence if you think otherwise.
    The general public do not need informed consent to use homeopathy themselves.

    • you first: show us evidence that “huge networking groups now thrive where people mostly treat themselves using other therapies as well.”
      [huge = several million?]

      • Tens of thousands is huge for a social media group in my not so humble opinion.
        So where are all those busy UK homeopaths then?
        If they are not there then how can they give informed consent?
        Or are you only referring to countries like Germany?

    • JK:
      “Huge public networking groups now thrive where people mostly treat themselves using other therapies as well.”

      This is very funny to see: The two driving forces behind the homeopathy hype, the manufacturers and the homeopaths (MDs and naturopaths and other junkies) start campaigns, driven by THE PEOPLE. Interestingly the heads and writers of these campaigns and organizations are PR folk for just these two circles. In Germany it is easy to see. It is always the same guys behind the curtains.

      The fun part: In Germany the association of homeopathic MDs, the DZVhAe, was not even able to get its own blog working. Claiming to have about 7000 members (while in reality it was much less), these guys were not even able to get together some few articles OVER YEARS! See this statistics:

      2018: zero
      2017: zero
      2016: zero
      2015: 1 blog text
      2014: 6 blog texts
      2013: 8 blog texts
      2012: 23 blog texts
      2011: 30 blog texts
      2010: 21 blog texts

      This was reported in

      “Es ist viel zu heiß”
      http://www.transgallaxys.com/~kanzlerzwo/index.php?topic=9752.0

      One of the manufacturers, the DHU, started a public campaign campaign some time ago. It was, of course, a damp squib.

      There is NO public campaign by ordinary citizens. It is all paid by people, who profit from selling homeopathy junk.

      More Fun:

      “Schon wieder eine hochnotpeinliche Megabruchlandung der Homöopathiemafia”
      https://www.allaxys.com/~kanzlerzwo/index.php?topic=13044.0

      “Bullshit bei den Homöopathen”
      https://www.allaxys.com/~kanzlerzwo/index.php?topic=8225.0

      “Lebensgefährliche Lügen des Vereins homöopathischer Ärzte DZVhÄ”
      https://www.allaxys.com/~kanzlerzwo/index.php?topic=10561.0

  • Ah! Those scheming purveyors of homeopathic junk!
    Please, please can ‘experts’ like you continue to try to convince the public of this.
    We appreciate your help which is basically free marketing for homeopathy. Not that you would understand why.
    Thanks.

    • Sorry, Sir, you obviously lack the understanding of internet mechanics. And of mass psychology. And of journalism. Just to name a few areas…

      Did you know that the TG-1 and ALLAXYS_1 are free forums? People can register there. Interestingly, homeopaths and other frauds fear it and hide under their blankets. They could register and explain their case. But since they are roasted there like hell, and they got their behinds burnt, they prefer to whine in their forums, but not enter the TG-1 or ALLAXYS-1 again.

      ama
      chef roaster in hell 🙂

      • I have never heard of TG-1 and ALLAXYS_1. I googled ALLAXYS_1 and got a plastic company.

        Regarding your claims of being ‘chief roaster in hell’, I would maybe not use this term as roasting or roaster in recent years refers to rather crude activities that should not be mentioned on this highly esteemed blog.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe via email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new blog posts by email.

Recent Comments

Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.

Archives
Categories