|It's so easy...
||[Nov. 21st, 2005|12:25 pm]
New study is boost to homeopathy, reports the BBC. We don't know if/when it was published, so we only have the BBC to go on. |
"More than 6,500 patients took part in the study with problems ranging from eczema to menopause and arthritis".
Ooooh, lots of people, must be good...
"Professor Matthias Egger, of the University of Berne, who worked on The Lancet study said the study was weakened by the lack of a comparison group."
No controls? Okay then...someone needs to relearn their year 7 science lessons.
The BBC's token commitment to balance:
"The results contradict a study published earlier this year in The Lancet, which concluded that using homeopathy was no better than taking dummy drugs."
Does comparing one study (with er...no controls) to a review of 110 different papers and implying they are of equal value counts as balanced reporting?
We could be wrong, it could be a well designed bit of research. If someone can point us in the direction of the journal it is published in and it turns out that this is the case, we will phagocytose our hats.*
* we don't have hats, so we'll need you to provide those too