Similia Vol 28 No 2 – December 2016

Author: Gerry Dendrinos

Abstract

On 11 March 2015, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) published its report on the review of the evidence on homeopathy,  which concluded, ‘there are no health conditions for which there is reliable evidence that homeopathy is effective’. This was the culmination of a  process NHMRC initiated in 2010, when it decided to develop a position statement on homeopathy, in lieu of any evidence assessment or expert  consultation. This process was abandoned in mid-2011 in favour of instigating a formal evidence review, due to perceptions of bias and lack of  procedural or scientific rigour after the draft NHMRC statement was leaked to the media on 20 April 2011.

This paper is the first in a two-part series examining whether NHMRC fulfilled its obligation to fairly and objectively assess the evidence on homeopathy, according to accepted standards of ethical scientific inquiry and statutory Australian Public Service values and codes of conduct. It also  examines how NHMRC approached reporting and managing anti-homeopathy conflicts of interest involved in the review process according to its  policies. Part 1 predominantly focuses on the period 2010 to 2012 leading up to the commencement of the review of the evidence conducted under the contractor OptumInsight (the focus of Part 2).

This paper is part of a two-part series examining ethical issues associated with the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC’s) focus on homeopathy between 2010 and 2015. Part 1 predominantly focuses on the period October 2010 to August 2012; Part 2 will focus on the period October 2012 to March 2015.