Report this content as offensive or unsuitable

Tell us about this content

Important, please read before continuing

This form should only be used for serious complaints about comments posted to the Page Comments section that break the NHS Choices Moderation Rules. This would include, but is not limited to harassing, abusive, threatening, libelous, or otherwise objectionable material.

The comment about which you complain will be sent to a moderator, who will decide whether it breaks the NHS Choices Moderation Rules. You will be contacted in due course once a decision has been made.

We need your email address so we can keep you updated about the status of your complaint.


Return to this content

Original content

Gabby Xray said on 14 February 2013

This is an appalling page. At a time when professions in the NHS, like myself, are being told we must base all our work on evidence of efficacy the DoH puts out rubbish like this! They provide a link to long and detailed House of Commons report, but some fail to mention one of its conclusions: "In our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebos." In the wake of the Mid-Staffordshire scandal, with recommendations for "transparency" throughout the NHS, why is this site, aimed at informing patients, not being upfront and clear about the lack of evidence that homeopathy is no better than a placebo? Is it for this reason?: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/feb/13/prince-charity-lobbied-government-homeopathy These are Prince Charles' academic qualifications: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1531553/The-family-qualifications.html The DoH should no more take advice from this man, than he should take advice from me on how to talk to plants. The people who authorised this puff piece should be ashamed. Gabby