Similia Vol 29 No 1 – June 2017

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’. NHMRC assured the public that it  assessed the evidence using ‘standardised, accepted methods for assessing the quality and reliability of evidence for whether or not a therapy is effective for treating health conditions’, ‘developed by Australian experts in research methods’.

Part 1 predominantly focused on the period 2010 to 2012. Part 2 tells the story of the NHMRC Homeopathy Review from the early termination of a first review process in 2012, to publication in March 2015 of the review produced by the second reviewer. It explores whether NHMRC fulfilled its  obligation to fairly and objectively assess the evidence on homeopathy, according to accepted scientific administrative standards and guidelines,  suggestive of research fraud and misconduct.

Following is Part 2 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 focused on the period October 2010 to mid-2012; Part 2 focuses on events that  occurred from mid-2012 to March 2015 (publication of the final report), presenting key findings of a formal stakeholder investigation into NHMRC’s  procedures and methods spearheaded by the Australian Homoopathic Association (AHA), Complementary Medicines Australia (CMA) and the  Australian Traditional Medicine Society (ATMS), with scientific support from the Homeopathy Research Institute (HRI).