4

I was discussing homeopathy with my regular doctor today, and she said that one of her coworkers, during her education, learned about homeopathy and alternative medicine in addition to other medical topics. Apparently, this coworker learned about alternative medicine in medical school!

Are there any mainstream medical schools that teach their students about alternative medicine and homeopathy as well as mainstream medical practice? If so, what do these school teach about the topics, and does this suggest that homeopathy has some credibility? If not, how can I best understand my doctor's coworker's experience? Here is an example of one place that teaches homeopathy.

I've seen the questions indicating that homeopathy is pseudoscience. I'm asking whether homeopathy is taught in medical schools, which is a different question.

matt_black
  • 56,186
  • 16
  • 175
  • 373
Kevin
  • 410
  • 1
  • 3
  • 13
  • 2
    "Reputable" is a personal judgement and we can't find an objective answer to it. However, as evidenced in the linked question, homeopathy has been proven not to work. Hopefully this answer your question in as sideways manner. – Sklivvz Oct 15 '14 at 22:53
  • @Sklivvz "Proven to work no better than a placebo", probably. At my local pharmacy, if they cannot sell a medicine they may be willing to offer a homeopathic remedy instead. I said "No thank you" but still, maybe some people prefer it. – ChrisW Oct 15 '14 at 22:59
  • 1
    @ChrisW that's what "does not work" means in medicine :-) Less than a placebo would mean it actively harms patients! – Sklivvz Oct 15 '14 at 23:00
  • @Sklivvz Yes but still, at least it might work better than no placebo. – ChrisW Oct 15 '14 at 23:03
  • 1
    I don't believe my question is a duplicate. I'm asking specifically whether there are any medical schools that teach homeopathy, not what research indicates about homeopathy. – Kevin Oct 15 '14 at 23:33
  • [Welcome to Skeptics!](http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/2512/2703) Your question isn't a precise claim, for example because it doesn't say **what** they were taught about homeopathy in medical school, nor for how long. And your chat with one person (even your doctor) isn't necessarily a "notable claim" unless several people believe it. [What is the notable claim](http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/2506/2703) in this question? FYI, Google suggests [The University of Maryland](http://www.compmed.umm.edu/homeopathy.asp). – ChrisW Oct 16 '14 at 00:11
  • 2
    Thanks, ChrisW! I'll look at my question some more when I have more time, and if I can edit it to make your suggested changes, I will. – Kevin Oct 16 '14 at 00:22
  • @ChrisW Homeopathy can harm the patient, if it is used in place of real treatments that do work for pathologies which are somewhat serious (e.g. cancer).Sure, homeopathy does wonders for things like cold, which would pass in a few day without any drugs anyways... Also, I see an ethical problem in a pharmacist selling a preparation that has been shown not to work better than placebo in place of a drug which does work better than placebo (and is often cheaper) **without explaining this to the patient**, as most people don't know what homeopathy is. – nico Oct 16 '14 at 08:40
  • @nico In that case I went to the pharmacy, wanting to buy a nasal/sinus decongestant containing pseudoephedrine for a 'cold', but they couldn't sell that to me because patient has a cardiac arrhythmia ... and they had no alternative to offer except a "homeopathic" preparation. It didn't matter: the patient's health improved anyway. The concern you had (used in place of real treatments) might be an argument for training real doctors; some people are prejudiced against medicine and only want homeopathic-style treatments: so much the better IMO if at least they're still visiting a real doctor. – ChrisW Oct 16 '14 at 08:57
  • @ChrisW IMO it would be so much better if we did educate people... but that's a whole other story, and this is not the place to rant about it :P – nico Oct 16 '14 at 09:20
  • 1
    A university I used to be at had a course in acupuncture for *dogs*. – gerrit Oct 16 '14 at 14:16
  • 3
    This has several problems. The most obvious already mentioned: "reputable" is a judgement call. Second, what is meant by "teach?" Many schools will teach *about* homeopathy, if only to debunk it. I assume you mean a school which offers a degree/certification in homeopathy/AM. Last, "alternative medicine" is a broad spectrum. Certain aspects of are accepted, to varying degrees, by the "mainline" medical community. I.e, while there's a tension (pun intended) between chiropractors and massage therapists, chiropractors will learn something about massage in their "mainstream" training. – Flimzy Oct 16 '14 at 14:54
  • @Sklivvz - "homeopathy has been proven not to work" seems to be an overly broad and unsupported conclusion. Specific methodologies were not proven effective. Specific possible explanations for how it might work were proven invalid. Lack of credible studies means it was NOT proven to work (notice the critical word order). BUT There is no conclusive study or theoretical work that proves that no homeopathy can possibly work at all (there may be valid arguments to support such a concept, but that's not "proof") – user5341 Oct 17 '14 at 17:32
  • DVK, it's water. You must be joking. – Sklivvz Oct 17 '14 at 17:38
  • 1
    A homeopathic curse for dehydration would probably be pretty effective. – Graham Oct 20 '14 at 14:29

1 Answers1

9

UK Universities have taught homeopathy

While some universities have since moved away from teaching Homeopathy and other pseudo-sciences, David Colquhoun's Improbable Science Blog documented a few examples in the UK around 2008.

This story was picked up by The Times.

Compiled by trawling the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service and university websites, they conclude that 43 institutions offer a total of 155 "unscientific" courses in areas including homoeopathy, traditional Chinese medicine, acupuncture, Ayurvedic medicine, aromatherapy, Naad yoga (healing through music) and general complementary medicine.

It was also picked up by Nature: Article, Special Report

For example: Thames Valley University:

Thames Valley University is one of those shameful institutions that offer Bachelor of Science degrees in homeopathy. They don’t stop there though. They’ll teach you several other forms of make-believe medicine. Among these is “nutritional medicine”. This is taught at the Plaskett Nutritional Medicine College which is now part of Thames Valley University.

Are they reputable?

The question as to whether they are reputable is troublesome, partly because that isn't a well-defined idea.

For example, the Thames Valley University, mentioned above, (and now part of the University of West London) was a proper accredited public university, not some backyard operation. It now (in its modern form) has over 47,000 students. Is that sufficient to be considered "reputable"?

Another aspect is that a university may have many departments which have varying reputations.

We can use the Complete University Guide league tables as a proxy for reputation.

The University of Westminster (mentioned in the articles, about 24,000 students) is ranked in the "leagues tables" as the 4th best university in the UK in the area of Complementary Medicine. So, it has a good reputation for complementary medicine!

Overall, however, it rates 96th overall (out of 123).

The University of Lincoln offers a BSc in Herbal Medicine and is overall ranked 55th of 123, which I think could fairly be described as reputable.

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
  • 3
    With regards to the point about courses are those literally single courses or are they entire qualification granting programs? I think an argument could be made for a CAM course being a useful offering for medical practitioners just on the grounds of "Here's a detailed look at what some people believe, why it doesn't work, and how to address their concerns in a clinical setting." So in that sense it might make sense to expand the answer a bit to make it clear if they are just courses or qualifications. – rjzii Oct 16 '14 at 13:02
  • I know Homeopathic ≠ Acupuncture ≠ Herbal Medicine, but Westminster offers BSc and MSc degrees in the [latter](http://www.westminster.ac.uk/courses/subjects/complementary-medicine/undergraduate-with-foundation-courses/full-time/u09ffhbm-herbal-medicine-with-foundation-bsc-honours) [two](http://www.westminster.ac.uk/courses/subjects/complementary-medicine/postgraduate-courses/full-time/p09fpcma-msc-chinese-medicine-acupuncture). The answer shows Lincoln offers a BSc in Herbal Medicine. – Oddthinking Oct 16 '14 at 14:54
  • University of West London now only offers "Nutritional Therapeutics" under Complementary Medicine. (No idea if that is pseudoscience or not. Never heard of it.) BSc and DipSc are available. – Oddthinking Oct 16 '14 at 14:54
  • 2
    Charles Sturt Uni (regional New South Wales, Australia) teaches [Complementary Medicine](http://www.csu.edu.au/courses/bachelor-of-health-science-complementary-medicine) but "CSU does not teach homeopathy, iridology, reflexology or any other subjects that are not based on experimental evidence." and "This course is not designed to teach you to become a complementary medicine practitioner, so there are no subjects that teach specific modalities." It is supposed to teach you how to evaluate research on complementary medicines. – Oddthinking Oct 16 '14 at 15:02
  • I'd say that the Herbal Medicine ones are going to be very difficult to classify as alternative medicine per se since there is still a demand for herbalists for reasons other than a rejection of pharmaceuticals. I have no idea what the "nutritional therapeutics" is either, that might be a question in and of itself for this site. – rjzii Oct 16 '14 at 15:13
  • @rjzii: I'm not sure what demand you are referring to. Oxford defines [alternative medicine](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/alternative-medicine) as "Any of a range of medical therapies that are not regarded as orthodox by the medical profession, such as herbalism, naturopathy, and crystal healing. See also complementary medicine." Clearly herbalism is considered alternative by them. – Oddthinking Oct 16 '14 at 15:52
  • 1
    You still see limited demand for herbalists in countries that don't have access to pharmaceutical medicine for obvious reasons and some pharmaceutical companies will try and have "herbalists" on staff so they can evaluate the claims made about traditional medicines (usually herbs) to determine if there is a compound that is worthy of investigation. Military survival schools will also have some trainers that have had training in it as well, again for obvious reasons. Herbalism is an odd duck since one of the major reasons it is "alternative" is because we have better alternatives for it ... – rjzii Oct 16 '14 at 17:17
  • 1
    ... in the form of purified compounds in measured doses. Don't forget that herbalism was taught as part of an MD up until about the 1960's if I recall correctly and most pharmacists also had training in it as well. – rjzii Oct 16 '14 at 17:24
  • The answer is good if we assume universities are the base but less so if the question is about universities with medicals schools or about just medical schools. I don't know whether the presence of homeopathic hospitals in the UK's NHS is relevant (there are several) or whether we should read the question to be about the curriculum of a mainstream medical school (as opposed to another unrelated department in the same university). – matt_black Oct 19 '14 at 12:40
  • On wikipedia, I find this: "In Germany, to become a homeopathic physician, one must attend a three-year training program" – GEdgar Mar 03 '15 at 16:31
  • 1
    One might argue that claiming to teach homeopathy has in itself a negative effect on the reputation of the institution, making it less 'reputable'. – A E Mar 04 '15 at 12:09