Homeopathy serves as an indicator of bad science. Few have recognised the similarities with quality accreditation. Both ideologies rely on an oddly plausible, but false, theory, “It worked for us!” testimonies, and some degree of official patronage.
Homeopathy offers cures that cannot work. ISO quality accreditation offers laboratories treatments so inefficacious they promise a lifetime of dependence and waste. Accreditation adds marketplace coercion which homeopathy cannot.
DC’s Improbable Science blog tells how Prince Charles’ pseudo-medical Foundations and Colleges influenced the Department of Health to maintain its endorsement of homeopathy on the NHS Choices website.
Click through and read this story which shows how supposedly clinical evidence is dictated by government policies and other persons of influence:
“A mail dated 1 December 2009 said
“This is the most direct statement I’ve seen that, in the Department of Health, policy dictates evidence. NHS Choices is meant to provide evidence, but what they say has to be checked by DH to make sure they “don’t clash with any policy messages”.”
Do you think the quacks in the quality cartel would become as venomous as the homeopathy fans if the failings of their foundational dogma was similarly challenged?