My “problem” with the King

I recently asked ‘GOOGLE GEMINI’ about my problems with King Charles. The reply was concise, to the point and roughly correct:

Edzard Ernst’s “problem” with King Charles (then Prince Charles) stemmed from a fundamental disagreement over the promotion and integration of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) within mainstream healthcare, particularly the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK.

Here’s a breakdown of the key issues:

• King Charles’s Advocacy for CAM: King Charles has been a long-time, vocal proponent of various alternative therapies, including homeopathy, and has actively lobbied for their greater inclusion in the NHS. He established and supported organizations like The Prince’s Foundation for Integrated Health to promote these views.
• Ernst’s Evidence-Based Approach: Edzard Ernst, as the world’s first professor of complementary medicine, took a strictly evidence-based approach. His research consistently aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CAM treatments through rigorous scientific methods (like systematic reviews and meta-analyses). He concluded that the vast majority of alternative therapies lacked scientific evidence of effectiveness beyond a placebo, and some were even potentially harmful.
• Clash over the Smallwood Report (2005): A major point of contention was a report commissioned by Prince Charles in 2005, written by economist Christopher Smallwood, which claimed CAM was cost-effective and should be available on the NHS. Ernst was initially involved in this report but withdrew his name and publicly denounced it as “complete misleading rubbish,” stating that the conclusions were written before the evidence was properly reviewed. He argued the report failed to address whether CAM treatments were actually effective.
• Lobbying and “Black Spider Letters”: Ernst criticized King Charles for “relentlessly meddling” in UK health politics and for using his influence to push for unproven treatments. This included Charles’s infamous “black spider letters” (so-called due to his distinctive handwriting) to government officials, lobbying for the inclusion of alternative therapies, such as homeopathy, in the NHS.
• “Duchy Originals” Products: Ernst also criticized products sold by Duchy Originals (a company founded by Prince Charles) that made unproven health claims, such as “Detox Tincture,” calling them “outright quackery” and “financially exploiting the vulnerable.”
• Impact on Ernst’s Career: The dispute had personal repercussions for Ernst. Prince Charles’s private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, filed a complaint with Exeter University, alleging that Ernst had breached confidentiality regarding the Smallwood report. Although Ernst was eventually “cleared of wrongdoing,” he stated that the ensuing 13-month university investigation was “very unpleasant” and led to the cessation of funding for his research unit, ultimately contributing to his early retirement. He felt that the university, despite clearing him, treated him as “persona non grata.”

In essence, the “problem” was a clash between the King’s personal conviction and advocacy for alternative medicine, and Ernst’s unwavering commitment to scientific rigor and evidence-based healthcare. Ernst believed that the King’s promotion of unproven therapies was irresponsible, potentially harmful to public health, and undermined scientific progress in medicine.

______________________

In case you want to learn the full details about “the King’s personal conviction and advocacy for alternative medicine”, please read the book below.