Freckelton Ian
J Law Med. 2015 Sep;23(1):7-23.
The 2010 report of the United Kingdom Science and Technology Committee of the House of Commons and the 2015 report of the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council have overtaken in significance the uncritical Swiss report of 2012 and have gone a long way to changing the environment of tolerance toward proselytising claims of efficacy in respect of homeopathy. The inquiry being undertaken in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration during 2015 may accelerate this trend. An outcome of the reports and inquiries has been a series of decisions from advertising regulators and by courts rejecting medically unjustifiable claims in respect of the efficacy of homeopathy. Class actions have also been initiated in North America against manufacturers of homeopathic products. The changing legal and regulatory environment is generating an increasingly scientifically marginalised existence for homeopathy. That new environment is starting to provide effective inhibition of assertions on behalf of homeopathy and other health modalities whose claims to therapeutic efficacy cannot be justified by reference to the principles of evidence-based health care. This has the potential to reduce the financial support that is provided by insurers and governments toward homeopathy and to result in serious liability exposure for practitioners, manufacturers and those who purvey homeopathic products, potentially including pharmacists. In addition, it may give a fillip to a form of regulation of homeopaths if law reform to regulate unregistered health practitioners gathers momentum, as is taking place in Australia.
英国下议院科学与技术委员会2010年的报告以及澳大利亚国家卫生与医学研究委员会2015年的报告,其重要性已超过了2012年那份未经严格审查的瑞士报告,并在很大程度上改变了对顺势疗法疗效宣传主张的宽容环境。美国食品药品监督管理局在2015年进行的调查可能会加速这一趋势。这些报告和调查的一个结果是,广告监管机构和法院做出了一系列决定,驳回了有关顺势疗法疗效的医学上不合理的主张。北美还针对顺势疗法产品制造商发起了集体诉讼。不断变化的法律和监管环境使顺势疗法在科学上日益处于边缘地位。这种新环境开始有效地抑制代表顺势疗法及其他健康疗法提出的主张,这些疗法声称的治疗效果无法依据循证医疗保健原则得到证实。这有可能减少保险公司和政府对顺势疗法的资金支持,并使从业者、制造商以及包括药剂师在内的顺势疗法产品供应商面临严重的责任风险。此外,如果像澳大利亚正在发生的那样,规范未注册健康从业者的法律改革势头增强,这可能会推动对顺势疗法从业者的某种形式的监管。