Craen, A., Kaptchuk, T., Tijssen, J. & Kleijnen, J. (1999). Placebos and placebo effects in medicine: Historical overview. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 92: 511-515. Web.
This article traces the use of placebo from its historical context. It goes in detail to trace how the practice was done during the Second World War. The article traces the introduction of placebo in clinical research in the fifties. It examines how this practice had started as a small treatment and enlarged into a complex reliable treatment. The article winds up by addressing the issue in the contemporary clinical trials. The writers hence conclude by arguing that due to the consistent need for quality in health care, it is important that the optimum point of efficacy is noted so the most favorable diseases can be used while those that do not respond can be subjected to alternative medicines. This article brings into question the need for alternative medicine to fill up the gap for medical conditions that do not respond to placebo.
Cucherat, M., Haugh, C., Gooch, M. and Boissel, P. (2000). Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy. A meta analysis of clinical trials. HMRAG. Homeopathic Medical Research Advisory Group. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 56(1): 27-33. Web.
Considering that the use of alternative medication was on the increase since 1990, it is important to determine whether they are efficient or not. As a result, these writers from the Hospitals of Lyon and the University of Claude Bernard in France decided to carry out this study. They employed the use of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to determine whether the clinical trials of homeopathic trials were successful or not. To facilitate this, they did a randomized sampling from records and did a comparative analysis of homeopathic treatment and placebo. Their study could be reliable because of the large number of sample. The study involved 17 samples from 2,617 reports. Although subject to questioning due to the low methodological quality, it was found that homeopathy was more efficient as compared to placebo. On its part, the issue of unreliability is introduced in the question of alternative medicine. While results and the conclusion point out that homeopathy is better, the methodological quality leaves this issue unascertained.
Eisenberg, D., Davis, R., Ettner, S., Appel, S., Wilkey, S., Rompay, M. & Kessler, R. (1998). Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990 – 1997. Journal of the American Medical Association. 280: 1569-1575. Web.
This was a research carried out by prominent personalities in the field of academia, specifically in the realms of medicine. The main objective of the research was to find out the trend assumed by the use of alternative medicines by the Americans since the year 1990 to 1997. The research methodology and findings are reliable considering the sampling which was characterized by randomly chosen people from all over the country. The research was carried out through telephone interviews. The research also employed measures like prevalence, costs, and the disclosure of information concerning alternative medicines to the doctor. Results highlighted an increase in the use of alternative medicines from 33.8% to 42.1% since 1990 to 1997. This research concluded that the use of alternative medicines increased substantially during this period. The increase was however not attributed to increased visits per patient but to the proportion of the alternative therapy seeking patients.
Ernst, E. (2002). A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. Department of Complementary Medicine, University of Exeter. Web.
Given the increasing number of literature trying to ascertain the effectiveness of homeopathy as compared to placebo, many studies had concluded that homeopathic interventions exhibited better results as compared to placebo. Using 17 articles on research in this field, Ernst makes an analysis of the authenticity of these researches. Through gauging their methodology and other research techniques employed during the studies, Ernst comes up with the conclusion that most of these researches that place homeopathy at an advantage are not well conducted. They were marred by bias. In addition, he purports that no medical condition was established to have a strongly believed (convincing) results of responding better to homeopathy than placebo. As a conclusion, homeopathy should not be taken as a warranted recommendation because of the shortcomings associated with it. Instead, more research should be carried out so that convincing results are found in order for homeopathy to be recommended.
Jonas, W., Kaptchuk, T. & Linde, K. (2003). A critical overview of homeopathy. Complementary and alternative Medicine Series. Web.
This is an article that examines the development and the role of homeopathy in treatment. The writers critically examine the available information on the efficacy of homeopathy as compared to placebo. In their review, they examine different results with different results about this subject. In one, it was identified that homeopathy is much effective as compared to placebo. On the other side, one experiment concluded that both homeopathy and placebo are similar and none gives better results as compared to the other. Contrarily, another report pointed out that the two came out more efficient in given medical conditions. This article therefore examines whether it is important to substitute proven treatment methods with placebo which seems to have inaccurate results that are not well proven. As a result, they propose that further research should be carried before homeopathy is given the warrant to replace placebo.
Taylor, M., Reilly, D., Llewellyn, R., McSharry, C. & Aitchison, T. (2000). Randomised controlled trial of homeopathy vs. placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial series. British Medical Journal. 321(7259):471-476. Web.
In this article, the medical practitioners and researchers sort out to identify whether homeopathy is a better option as compared to placebo. To achieve this, they employed the use of patients with allergic rhinitis that was considered perennial. To facilitate this, a randomized design that was also double blind was used. Placebo acted as the control of the experiment. Considering the sample, this research involved the use of 51 patients who had been diagnosed with perennial allergic rhinitis. During the study, it was found out that the group that was treated using homeopathy demonstrated a better nasal airflow as compared to those who used placebo. Although both groups were marked by improvement, the homeopathy treated group was more stable as compared to the placebo one. It was therefore concluded that treatment of allergic rhinitis using homeopathy was more recommendable as compared to placebo. This was evidenced by the better results exhibited by this method as compared to the control group.
Tilburt, J. & Kaptchuk, T. (2008). Herbal medicine research and global health: an ethical analysis. Bulletin of World Health Organization. 86(8): 577-656. Web.
While the use of herbal medicine becomes more popular, several issues concerning ethics emerge. Initially, there were very limited material and information concerning the topic of ethics and its application in herbal medicine. This article, therefore, intends to point out how ethics could be applied in the issue of herbal medicines as a form of alternative medicine. Therefore, the writers argue that it is more appropriate that this topic is approached collectively. The two sorts of medicine could work together so that knowledge and skills would be exchanged from one point to the other. Specifically, research partnership should be foster for a way forward in alternative medicine.