commercial interests
Uterine fibroids are a common gynaecological condition often impacting quality of life. While conventional treatment options exist, there is growing interest in so-called alternative Medicine (SCAM) such as homeopathy. The objective of this review paper was to assess the effectiveness of homeopathic medicines in treating uterine fibroids through the analysis of recent clinical trials and observational studies, aiming to provide insights into the potential role of homeopathy as a SCAM for uterine fibroids.
A thorough search of databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and pertinent medical journals was undertaken to locate recent studies on the efficacy of homeopathic medicines for uterine fibroids. Only studies meeting predefined inclusion criteria, including randomized controlled trials, prospective observational studies, and systematic reviews, were included in the review process.
Recent studies investigating the efficacy of homeopathic medicines in treating uterine fibroids consistently demonstrated positive outcomes, including symptom alleviation, reduction in fibroid size, and improved quality of life. Various remedies showed effectiveness across various potencies. Symptom severity scales, including the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and Verbal Multidimensional Scoring System (VMSS), were utilized to assess pelvic pain, menstrual bleeding, and discomfort. Quality of life measures like the WHOQOL-BREF scale provided insights into overall well-being.
The authors concluded that the collective findings from these studies provide robust evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of homeopathic medicines in the management of uterine fibroids. By employing individualized treatment approaches tailored to patient-specific symptoms and characteristics, homeopathy offers a holistic and personalized approach to addressing fibroids and improving the quality of life for affected individuals. Overall, these studies provide robust evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of homeopathic medicines in treating uterine fibroids.
This is a very odd paper:
- The authors call it a “comprehensive review”, a term that is next to meaningless.
- It certainly is not a systematic review.
- The reason for merely including “recent studies” is unclear; it also makes a mockery of the attribute “comprehensive”.
- The reason for including observational studies, however, seems to be very clear: it is an age-old trick to generate a false-positive result.
- There was no assessment of the quality of the primary studies.
- In total, there were just 6 primary studies none of which was anywhere near to being rigorous.
- The authors never even investigated the safety of homeopathic remedies, yet they draw firm conclusions about it.
My conclusion is that this “comprehensive review” is comprehensive example of how to comprehensively mislead with comprehensively dishonest research. And why would anyone set out to do such a thing? Perhaps the authors’ affiliation provide some hints:
- Department of Homoeopathic Pharmacy,
- Homoeopathic Medical College & Research Centre.
I sometimes like to browse through old articles of mine and amaze myself. It is now 15 years ago that I published this paper:
Since 1994 chiropractic has been regulated by statute in the UK. Despite this air of respectability, a range of important problems continue to bedevil this profession. Professional organizations of chiropractic and their members make numerous claims which are not supported by sound evidence. Many chiropractors adhere to concepts which fly in the face of science and most seem to regularly violate important principles of ethical behaviour. The advice chiropractors give to their clients is often dangerously misleading. If chiropractic in the UK is to grow into an established health care profession, the General Chiropractic Council and its members should comply with the accepted standards of today’s health care.
This begs the question: HAVE THINGS IMPROVED AT ALL?
- Have professional organizations of chiropractic stopped making claims which are not supported by sound evidence?
- Have their members stopped making claims which are not supported by sound evidence?
- Do chiropractors no longer adhere to concepts which fly in the face of science?
- Have they ceased violating important principles of ethical behaviour?
- Is the advice chiropractors give to their clients no longer dangerously misleading?
Here are my answers to these questions:
- No.
- No.
- No.
- No.
- No.
Yes, there are moments when I surprise myself. And there are also those when I ask whether any of my work has ever had any effect. And then, after some reflection, I discover that my job is not nearly as bad as some others.
In January 2024, this remarkable paper was published in a top journal:
Macrophages are associated with innate immune response and M1-polarized macrophages exhibit pro-inflammatory functions. Nanoparticles of natural or synthetic compounds are potential triggers of innate immunity. As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug, Arsenic album 30C.This has been claimed to have immune-boosting activities, however, has not been validated experimentally. Here we elucidated the underlying mechanism of Ars. alb 30C-mediated immune priming in murine macrophage cell line. Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) used for the structural analysis of the drug reveals the presence of crystalline As2O3 nanoparticles of cubic structure. Similarly, signatures of M1-macrophage polarization were observed by surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) in RAW 264.7 cells with concomitant over expression of M1 cell surface marker, CD80 and transcription factor, NF-κB, respectively. We also observed a significant increase in pro-inflammatory cytokines like iNOS, TNF-α, IL-6, and COX-2 expression with unaltered ROS and apoptosis in drug-treated cells. Enhanced expression of Toll-like receptors 3 and 7 were observed both in transcriptional and translational levels after the drug treatment. In sum, our findings for the first time indicated the presence of crystalline As2O3 cubic nanostructure in Ars. alb 30C which facilitates modulation of innate immunity by activating macrophage polarization.
On 21 August 2024, this paper was retracted; here is the retraction notice:
After publication, concerns were raised about the reagents used in this study, in particular that the arsenic trioxide solution is diluted beyond the point at which any active molecules are expected to be present. Post-publication peer review confirmed that the nature of the particles detected in the study is unclear. This means that without further corroborative evidence, the data presented in the paper are not sufficient to attribute the effects observed after treating cells with the compound. The Editors therefore no longer have confidence in the results reported in this Article.
Swift retractions of sloppy science, errors, fraud, scientific misconduct, misinterpretaton of results, etc. are necessary to prevent the harm caused by such unfortunate publications. The editors of SCIENTIFIC REPORTS should be congratulated to have achieved this so quickly and elegantly. This is in sharp contrast to similar events like the protracted hoo-hah that occurred until THE LANCET finally retracted the fraudulent study of Andrew Wakefield or the deplorable ongoing saga of THE ONCOLOGIST, the editor of which has still not retracted the fraudulent paper by Michael Frass et al claiming that homeopathy could prolong the survival of cancer patients.
Irregular menstrual cycle is a common complaint. Recent research suggested that homeopathy is one of the most popular choices for women with various gynecological disorders. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was aimed at differentiating individualized homeopathic medicinal products (IHMPs) from identical-looking placebos in the treatment of menstrual irregularities in early reproductive women.
Group verum (n = 46) received IHMPs plus concomitant care. The control group (n = 46) received placebos plus concomitant care. The proportion patients in whom menstrual irregularities were corrected for consecutive three cycles was the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome measure was the Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MDQ) total score. Both endpoints were measured at baseline and then monthly for up to 4 months.
The intention-to-treat sample (n = 92) was analyzed. Group differences were examined by chi-squared tests with categorical outcomes, two-way repeated measure analysis of variance accounting for the time–effect interactions, and unpaired t-tests comparing the mean estimates obtained individually every month. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05 two-tailed.
- After 4 months of intervention, the group difference in the primary outcome was nonsignificant—IHMPs: 22/46 v/s placebo: 24/46, chi-square (Yates corrected) = 0.043, p = 0.835.
- The improvement observed in the MDQ total score (F1,90 = 0.054, p = 0.816) and subscales scores were also not significant in most of the occasions, except for the behavioral change subscale (F1,90 = 0.029, p < 0.001).
- Pulsatilla nigricans was the most frequently prescribed medicine.
- Kent’s Repertory and Zandvoort’s Complete Repertory were the most frequently used repertories.
- No harm or serious adverse events were reported from either group.
The authors concluded that the analysis failed to demonstrate clearly that IHMPs were effective beyond placebos in all but one of the outcomes. More appropriate outcome measures may be sought for future trials.
I have just four short comments:
- I’d like to congratulate the authors for their courage in reporting a squarely negative result.
- I should nevertheless correct their conclusion regarding the statement “in all but one of the outcomes”; according to their own admission, the subscale of the MDQ was not even a secondary outcome measure.
- The sentence “More appropriate outcome measures may be sought for future trials” seems to imply that the negative result was due to having chosen the wrong endpoints for this study. This would be mistaken: the negative result was due to the ineffectiveness of homeopathy.
- And because of the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, the entire concept of the study was a mistake and arguably not even ethical. To put it bluntly, this trial should have never been conducted in the first place.
‘Conversion therapy’ has previously been a subject on this blog, e.g.:
- Surprise, surprise! Lesbianism is not ‘cured’ by homeopathy (warning: includes very rude language)
- The ‘Association of Catholic Doctors’ and homeopathic conversion therapy
But sadly it is not just a field for homeopaths. It has long been known that religious cults dabble it conversion therapy. Now, it has been reported that a church body enabling “gay exorcism” as conversion therapy and believing in witchcraft is conducting a major expansion in Scotland. The attitudes of the “Forward In Faith Church International Incorporated” (FIFCII) have been described as promoting “vicious homophobia and misogyny”. The FIFCII has even been accepted by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR), despite these extreme beliefs. The church states that women should provide sex for their husbands whenever they desire it. Its ministers regularly oversee miracles, which allow crippled people to suddenly walk and all manner of ailments to be suddenly cured at mass evangelical gatherings.
Two overseers for Scotland have been appointed – seeking to set up in Glasgow, Fife, Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Premises have already been bought in Edinburgh for a Scottish HQ. The National Secular Society (NSS) has raised concerns about FIFCII. NSS human right lead Alejandro Sanchez said: “This organisation promotes vicious homophobia and misogyny, and may well be endangering lives with reckless allegations of witchcraft. Any suggestion it is acting in the public benefit and worthy of charitable status is absurd. We know from experience OSCR has been either unable or unwilling to take action against religious charities that foster intolerance and extreme views. It is now time legislators urgently review ‘the advancement of religion’ as a charitable purpose. It must not be used as a back door for religious groups to promote conversion therapy and the subjugation of women.”
The website of FIFCII describes the exorcism of a man possessed by a “homosexual spirit”. One “Apostle’s Update” blog post on the charity’s website in 2017 describes how the spirit “bound him for many years” but that he was freed during a “miracle night” in St Kitts and Nevis. The blog states: “The atmosphere on Sunday was electric as there was too much joy in the church.” Another blog entry describes the ‘deliverance’ of a 14 year old girl in Zimbabwe who was taken nightly to “eat human flesh and drink human blood” as part of a ‘witchcraft’ ritual.
The founder of the Forward in Faith Church reportedly amassed a personal fortune of $130 million by the time of his death last year, aged 100. “Apostle” Guti was regarded as spiritual leader by many but was criticised by some for his support for Robert Mugabe. Guti formed the Zimbabwe Assemblies of God Africa (Zaoga) in 1960. That led to the creation of a media empire, a university, a hospital and numerous schools, as well as more than 100 publications. His church has the third largest membership in Zimbabwe after the Roman Catholic Church and the Johanne Marange Apostolic Church. It claims to have spread its ministeries to 168 countries, with over three million members.
At an event at last year’s Zimbabwe Ezekiel Guti University – formed by the church’s leader in the city of Bindura, a team of evangelists were reported to have been set free from possession. The report states: “We thank our father Apostle Dr Joseph Joe Guti for sending us a powerful team of evangelists during the week of Spiritual Revival Festival. Many people were set free from spiritual husbands/wives, some were delivered from abnormal period pains and blood flow, others delivered from witchcraft, satanism and marine spirits as well as healings from sight problems.” A blog from 2015 praises the deliverance of 17 people in Zimbabwe from “spiritual husbands, bitterness, homosexuality, witchcraft, satanism – to mention a few”.
In its UK annual report for 2023, FIFCII, reveals its blueprint for Scotland. It declares that the it is growing fast due to “tithing” – where the congregation hand over 10% of their income to the church. It states: “Scotland has seen a big increase in numbers due to the influx from Zimbabwe through the work visa program. This has benefited us in many ways, not least with tithing but also as many of them were already leaders in Zimbabwe. They are eager to do the work of God in their new places of worship. An area calling for attention for church growth is the possibility of new assemblies. We are looking to establish one in Dundee in 2024 and possibly Fife as well, areas which are both to the east between Edinburgh and Aberdeen assemblies. Scotland Province might be small in size but mighty in heart and serving a big God. We are confident that 2024 will be a year with bigger, greater, mightier blessings than we have already seen or even believed possible.”
At the end of 2022, FIFCII bought its own ”provincial centre”, for Scotland in Edinburgh, which is still being renovated, with use of donations. The organisation admits that its extreme beliefs can be a blocker – due to equality laws. The report states: “Finding affordable places of worship can be challenging in some places from practices that are against our guidance, rules and policy, like being asked to sign an agreement to support same sex marriages.”
In the UK, charities are legally required to act in the public benefit but OSCR has tended to turn a blind eye to the most controversial Old Testament beliefs if they are held in the name of religion. The Scottish Government is seeking to legally ban “conversion therapy” that aims to change any individual’s sexuality. A public consultation was launched in January this year and legislation could follow. Equalities Minister Emma Roddick announced the consultation in a statement that claims conversion practice are “damaging and destructive acts” that violate the human rights of those who undergo them. She adds: “Sadly, these practices happen today, and they have absolutely no place in Scotland. We are committed to bringing an end to conversion practices, and to protect LGBTQI+ people from the trauma and harm they can cause.”
According to its website, the ministry has “spread to most of the major cities of the United Kingdom including, London, Manchester, Birmingham, Belfast, Glasgow and Cardiff.
It has been reported that the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) has revoked the certifications for two prominent US physicians. They are both (in)famous for leading an organization that promotes ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.
- Pierre Kory, MD, is no longer certified in critical care medicine, pulmonary disease, and internal medicine, according to the ABIM website.
- Paul Ellis Marik, MD, is no longer certified in critical care medicine or internal medicine.
Marik is the chief scientific officer and Kory is president emeritus of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, a group they founded in March 2020. The FLCCC gained notoriety during the height of the pandemic for advocating ivermectin as a treatment for COVID. It now espouses regimens of supplements to treat “vaccine injury” and also offers treatments for Lyme disease.
Kory and Marik stated, “we believe this decision represents a dangerous shift away from the foundation principles of medical discourse and scientific debate that have historically been the bedrock of medical education associations.” The FLCCC said in the statement that it, along with Kory and Marik, are “evaluating options to challenge these decisions.” Kory and Marik said they were notified in May 2022 that they were facing a potential ABIM disciplinary action. An ABIM committee recommended the revocation in July 2023, saying the two men were spreading “false or inaccurate medical information,” according to FLCCC. Kory and Marik lost an appeal. In a 2023 statement, Kory and Marik called the ABIM action an “attack on freedom of speech.”
To this, Wikipedia adds that, Marik is the inventor of the “Marik protocol”, also known as the “HAT” protocol, which proposes intravenous administration of hydrocortisone, ascorbic acid, and thiamine as a treatment for preventing sepsis for people in intensive care. Marik’s own initial research, published with four other authors in Chest in 2017, showed a dramatic evidence of benefit. The single-center, observational study compared outcomes of 47 consecutive sepsis patients who were treated with HAT during a 7-month period to 47 consecutive control patients during the preceding 7-month period. The study reported 19 deaths in the control group and 4 deaths in the treatment group. Marik’s findings received attention on social media and National Public Radio, but drew criticism from the wider medical community for being science by press conference. ER doctor Jeremy Faust was one of a number of skeptics of the results, noting the low reliability of the study design and potential for bias. The controversy prompted other groups to conduct studies of the HAT protocol. A systematic review of six randomized and five non-randomized controlled trials in 2021 eventually concluded that the claimed benefits of the protocol could not be confirmed.
In November 2022, Pierre Kory and the FLCCC began marketing a cocktail of supplements and drugs (e.g. ivermectin and nitazoxanide) for other viruses, influenza and Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Like the FLCCC-advocated COVID treatments, the recommendations lacked credible supporting scientific evidence. The cocktail could cost over $500.
Wikipedia also mentions that, in March 2024, Kory and Marik published an op-ed in The Hill claiming that long COVID was caused by COVID-19 vaccination instead of COVID-19 infection. The op-ed was republished by the German disinformation outlet Disclose.tv. The fact-checking website Health Feedback found that the op-ed relied on anecdotes that did not provide evidence to support the claim.
The German Magazine FürSie recently published an article on homeopathy. To be exact it is an article on how to lose weight with homeopathy. Here are a few excerpts:
Globules are used in homeopathy and are said to be able to alleviate complaints. Some globules are also said to have a positive effect on weight loss. We present them to you below.
Which globules help with weight loss?
Calcium carbonicum D12 helps against eating out of grief and frustration and brings body and soul back into balance. Dosage and intake: 5 globules 3 times a day.
Fucus vesiculosus D2 stimulates the metabolism and reduces appetite. Dosage and administration: 5 globules 3 times a day. Important: The remedy should not be used for thyroid disorders.
Coffea D6 promotes fat burning and helps you lose weight. Dosage and intake: Melt 3 globules on the tongue in the morning before breakfast.
Is your weight loss stagnating? Then Capsicum D4 can help. Metabolism and fat burning are boosted. It also produces happiness hormones. Dosage and intake: 5 globules 3 times a day.
Lycopodium D12 helps against an unpleasant bloated stomach. The remedy stimulates fat metabolism and regulates digestion. Dosage and intake: 5 globules twice daily.
Argentum nitricum D12 has a balancing effect and curbs cravings in stressful situations. Calorie intake is regulated. Dosage and intake: 5 globules 3 times a day.
Taking Petroselinum D6 will make you look slimmer. The ingredients support the elimination of excess water in the body. Dosage and intake: 3 globules 5 times a day…
Slimming globules are particularly impressive because they contain active ingredients that are satiating, boost the metabolism and stimulate fat burning. Another positive aspect is that, as is usual in homeopathy, the globules are purely herbal remedies. Chemical-free, they are regarded as virtually risk-free miracle pills.
Slimming processes, the disappearance of annoying kilos and a good sense of well-being can be achieved more quickly with homeopathic remedies.
I find this article so very remarkable because the author(s) (who is/are not named) managed to make all the above statements without a single one of them being true, supported by evidence or even remotely plausible. The only way one might lose weight by using homeopathy is, if one pays for it with a handful of coins from ones pocket. There is not a shred of sound evidence that homeopathy reduces body weight.
The magazine includes this disclaimer: “This article contains, among other things, product recommendations. When selecting the products, we are free from the influence of third parties. For a referral via our affiliate links, we receive a commission from the relevant service provider/online shop when a purchase or referral is made, with the help of which we can continue to offer independent journalism.”
Independent journalism?
I beg to differ: this is not independent nor is it journalism.
The question I ask myself is this: are such magazines allowed to publish any nonsense, or is there an authority that might control or reprimand them in an attempt to protect consumers?
As you might imagine, I do get a lot of ‘fan mail’ that does not appear in the comments section of this blog and therefore remains invisible to my readers. Most of it is unremarkable but some of it is highly amusing and therefore deserves a wider audience, in my view. The two emails I received a couple of days ago fall in the latter category:
Dear Dr.Edzard,
Your views on HOMEOPATHY are rubbish.you are NOT clinician, but theretician.NHS is defunct…BULLSHIT .. Manipulation ,this same,chiropractic is quacery,I agree. I have practiced for 50 years being BEST in the world.I have invented ……….BACK RACK a manual spine device for BACK PAIN…and ELECTRIC SEAT /spine for Aviation / Automobiles.
..a UNIQUE world wide SPINE device
Rgds,
https://www.theluklinskispineclinic.com// BEST – CLINIC.WORLD /.
https://www.spinalbackrack.com/ . BEST spine devices devices ,WORLD /.
My response was very short:
- My last name is not Edzard
- I am a clinician
- Your English is abominable
- You seem to be a fool
It only took a few minutes for his reply to arrive:
Dear Edzard,
Thank you for your opinion….you are academic,hence ignorant / THICK /,not a clinician.I worked with Dr L.Mount / Queen physician and many others fools..in Harley st. W1,making ml.p/a…..curing thousends of patients.No wonder you were sacked as you are arrogant prick to say least….At least am not a quack…but ..world class..
no rgds,
B.M.Luklinski
I did not send a further resonse to B.M.Luklinski. Instead I’d like to take this opportunity to thank him for amusing me [and hopefully many of my readers as well].
PS
In case you want further amusement, I suggest you click on the two links my friend provided.
The JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS (I did not even know such a journal existed) recently carried a most interesting article. Here is its abstract:
Consumers spend billions of dollars per year on homeopathic products. But there is powerful evidence that these products don’t work, i.e., they are not medically effective. Should homeopathic products be for sale? I give reason for thinking that the answer is ‘no.’ It has been suggested that the sale of homeopathic products involves deception. This might be so in some cases, but the problem is simpler: it is that these products don’t do what people buy them to do. More precisely, homeopathic products don’t meet the “desire-satisfaction condition,” according to which products for sale in markets should satisfy the desires that people buy them to satisfy. I defend my view against objections, and conclude by acknowledging some of the practical difficulties of banning products people want to buy.
Allow me to introduce you to the logic of the author, Jeffrey Moriarty, in a little more detail. Essentially, he argues as follows:
- There is powerful evidence that homeopathic products don’t work, i.e., they are not medically effective. As we have discussed ad nauseam on my blog, this is certainly true.
- Thus they don’t meet the “desire-satisfaction condition,” according to which the sale of a product should satisfy the desire(s) that people buy it to satisfy. Regulators prohibit retailers from advertising in ways that cause reasonable people to have materially false beliefs. It doesn’t matter to regulators whether advertisers cause false beliefs intentionally, and therefore deceive consumers, or unintentionally, and therefore merely mislead them. The point is to prevent consumers from acting on false information; however, they acquire it.
- If a product doesn’t meet the “desire-satisfaction condition” condition, then there is a presumption against selling it. When people act on false information in markets, they are likely to make themselves worse off. We can understand how this works in terms of the satisfaction of desires. People engage in market exchanges in order to satisfy their desires. When their desires are satisfied as a result of market exchange, they are better off. You want a car that runs and seek to buy one. When you purchase the car, and it does run, you are better off. But when people act on false information, they are likely to frustrate rather than satisfy their desires. As a result, they are likely to be worse off. If the car you purchase doesn’t run, you are worse off. You spent your money on something you didn’t want.
- The products people buy should satisfy the desires they buy them to satisfy. This is the “desire-satisfaction condition” for market exchange. Transactions that reliably don’t result in desire-satisfaction are problematic. Because desires aren’t satisfied, this is evidence that value isn’t being created; the party whose desires are not satisfied is worse off. Since markets should make people better off, there is a presumption against allowing these transactions.
- The author states that his arguments also apply to other medicines and medical treatments that we have powerful reason to believe don’t work.
Jeffrey Moriatry concludes: When people purchase homeopathic products, they act on false information, and in doing so, fail to satisfy their desires. This is a sign that the purchase does not create value for them. Since market transactions should create value, there is a presumption in favor of prohibiting this transaction … we give states broad authority to decide what sorts of products can and can’t be sold, including medicines. This suggests that people generally think that banning the sale of certain products, despite the costs of doing so, is worth it. It also suggests that people think that the state uses its power competently and fairly—or at least that it doesn’t use it so incompetently and unfairly that it is better for the state not to have this power. The state would be doing nothing out of the ordinary in prohibiting the sale of homeopathic products.
_________________________
These arguments are interesting and relevant (sorry, if I have not represented them fully; I recommend reading the full article). Personally, I have never argued that the sales of homeopathics should be banned; I felt that good and responsible information is essential and would eventually reduce sales to an insignificant level. Yet, after reading this paper, I have to admit that its arguments make sense.
I’d love to hear what you think about them.
Alternative cancer clinics (I’d prefer to call them SCAM cancer clinics), that provide treatments associated with hastening death, actively seek to create favorable views of their services online. An unexplored means where such clinics can shape their public appeal is their Google search results.
For this study, a team of researchers retrieved the Google listing and Google reviews of 47 prominent SCAM cancer clinics. They then conducted a content analysis to assess the information cancer patients are faced with online.
The results show that Google listings of alternative treatment providers rarely declare that the clinic is a SCAM clinic versus a conventional primary cancer treatment provider (12.8% declared; 83.0% undeclared). The clinics were highly rated (median, 4.5 stars of 5). Reasons for positive reviews included:
- treatment quality (n = 519),
- care (n = 420),
- outcomes (n = 316).
288 reviews claimed that the clinics cured or improved cancer. Negative reviews presented SCAM clinics to:
- financially exploit patients with ineffective treatment (n = 98),
- worsen patients’ condition (n = 72),
- provide poor care (n = 41),
- misrepresent outcomes (n = 23).
The authors concluded that the favorable Google listing and reviews of alternative clinics contribute to harmful online ecosystems. Reviews provide compelling narratives but are an ineffective indicator of treatment outcomes. Google lacks safeguards for truthful reviews and should not be used for medical decision-making.
These findings suggest that the Google listings and reviews of SCAM cancer clinic create a favorable online impression to prospective patients. Google listings and reviews are thus part of a most effective multi-level propaganda network promoting SCAM even for the most desperately ill of all patients. As discussed some time ago, in the UK, such misinformation can even be traced back to King Charles. In nearly all cases, these clinics were labeled as speciality primary cancer options. Only a few clinics were marked as an ‘alternative’ option. Positive reviews stated that alternative treatments can cure cancer or prolong life, even in terminal cases. Positive reviews also undermine evidence-based cancer treatments in favor of SCAM. They generate an impression that dangerously misleads patients. As we have seen repeatedly on this blog, the results can be devastating, e.g.:
- SCAM: So-Called Alternative Medicine (Societas): Amazon.co.uk: Ernst, Edzard: 9781845409708: Books
- So-called alternative medicine (SCAM) for cancer: does it prolong survival?
- Leah Bracknell (1964-2019): another victim of cancer quackery?
- Germany, the ‘promised land’ for cancer quacks
- Use of alternative medicine hastens death of cancer patients
- Fatalities in a German alternative medicine clinic caused by 3BP?
- Suzanne Somers has died – another victim of so-called alternative medicine?
