Yes to Jennings!

In fact , WDDTY, can we have a multipage investigation in the wddty magazine on Edzard Ernst and his department?  Who is he, what did he do before he came to this present post, who appointed him - etc?

But how easy is it to access the research that has been done , mainly in Europe, that is well done and gives answers to the questions that Ernst claims to ask and answer?

Maybe I'm asking something that has already been answered in Proof, but a concerted effort to start the exposure of Ernst is desparately needed.

I should add that the quote referred to was in a full page article in the Guardian, one of whose science correspondants is Ben Goldacre who is very anti alternative healing.

So, WDDTY, a long article please, - arm us for a bit of a battle please!

So far as I am aware Merck (the drug company) funded the chair of Alternative medicine originally! Prof. Ernst quotes that he is qualified in homoeopathy, herbal medicine, acupuncture, et. etc. i suspect that what he means is that he has attented weekend training courses for GPs! I am sure that he has no PROFESSIONAL qualifications in these areas. So far as alternative medicine the man is a charlatan. It is basically a wicked wicked scam.

Sounds to me like Prof.Ernst has been planted in his position by BIG PHARMA to undermine alternative medicine.I wonder if he has shares in any drug company?

Herbs have been around for THOUSANDS of years and have proved themselves over the test of time.

Most drugs would fail the so called scientific research that is quoted.

Vaccines have never been proven to work but are foisted upon our children at birth.

I think GOD would have provided adequate medicine within nature for human kind to prevent/cure any illness or disease....but  the medical profession would have us believe HE just screwed up AGAIN like HE did with organic food and everything else natural.

Drugs are synthetic copies of chemicals found in healing  plants.  In  medicinal plants  there are trace elements which make the plant safe.  In most prescription drugs, the chemical copy of the plant´s i main ngredient doesn´t carry the trace elements which make it harmonious with the body functions...therefore often creating dangerous imbalances which lead to unwanted side effects.

yes indeed the peninsula school at exeter uni is indeed funded by several big pharma companies.why is ernst never ousted as the biased ,poor scientist that he so frequently and clearly demonstrates himself to be.As a herbalist I find his constant denigration of alternative medicine and the sway he has over the media seriously depressing .( oops , better not take any of my st johns wort though  - who knows what I may gather enough strength to do !)

Were alternative medicine so useless and ineffective why is there such constant denigration and denial of its efficacy? Each time I read a report on a pharma drug that throws its efficacy into doubt like avandia, viocx, thalidomide amongst others I try to recall the damage done by the alternatives. I know which ones I will be taking and which ones I will avoid.

There is no such thing as bad publicity so I'm thinking this is a good thing.  Most of us are aware of the political games the pharma companies play and thanks to WDDTY and other wonderful places those seeking the 'alternate' can obtain education and make informed choices.

Additionally this could also suggest that the herbal remedies the pharmaceutical companies manufacture (to gain market share) are perhaps adulterated or of a reduced quality and are therefore not worth the bottle they are in.

I guess we are getting to a point where it is adviseable to know where our herbal remedy has come from and been because the plant is receptive to it's environment.  

Perhaps Prof Ernst is just a selectively quoted orator and the media is the one firing the ammunition because it sells.  I am over the concept that people with lots of letters after their name are any closer to universal truth than I am & I have also disabused myself of the notion that research reported in the media is valuable.  I see it as inflammatory and effectively affirmations in reverse.  It's what I refer to as mass-media meditation and very detrimental to mass wellbeing.

I am a homeopath. Ernst has made many attacks on Homeopathy. There has been a lot of exchange of information on Ernst on the Society of Homeopath's intranet which if WDDTY were to do an expose of the venerable professor may be useful? We need a concerted effort to get the positives of complementary medicine in front of the media.

In response to the comment about checking out Prof Earnst's 'alternative medical' credentials I think contacting his former colleagues in Austria might be useful.  I heard one such peer state "best thing for Austria the day he left" and "what possessed Exeter Univerisity to appoint him?".  Yes it would be useful to know exactly what his qualifications are and what his track record was in that field.

There is one aspect of the work of Edzard Ernst which renders him totally untrustworthy. He regularly cites research into alternative medicine, especially homeopathy, carried out by the Regierungs Gesundheits Amt, the health ministry of the Nazi regime. The main plank was racial purity. They sacked all Jewish doctors. They carried out ghastly experiments to do with fertility (medicine: Caladium seguinum) in concentration camps. And they did spend funds on homeopathy and supported the international homoeopathic conference of 1936. He cites so called outcomes research by Donner to state that homeopathy is bunk. Anyone who cites Nazi medical research as support now is morally bankrupt, inept and unethical.

From which medical school does Ernst come to us? The University of Vienna.

Which medical school used preserved specimens of dead concentration camp victims for anatomy or pathology lessons, longer than any other medical school in Germanic countries after WW2? The University of Vienna.

How can a man who has never done any proper original  research himself on complementary medicine  be called a professor of complementary medicine?

Paper studies comparing different complementary treatments are not original, can be manipulated to suit the question and answer that the researcher puts forward,is biased and using oneself as a reference in a paper research speaks volumes for the type of research this man hasn't done.

Try comparing plant sterols and  chemical statins and their effects(side, cholesterol lowering,cardiovascular) on peoples health; you might finally do something useful to show that the  pharmaceutica is not the answer and stop the big rip off.

Whenever there is any positive news about any complementary therapy eg acupuncture and back pain recently Edzard Ernst is wheeled in and pulls the whole arguement apart - It is so obvious to anyone who is aware of his destructive presence among the complementary medical world that he is not there to help it.  

If we can highlight this obvious pattern to the media maybe they will stop bringing him on as such an expert.

The problem here folks is that all of you are preaching to the converted. There are a lot of people out there who have blinding faith in the medical profession, and I count most of my family amongst them. Even if they disbelieve some of what their GPs say on the grounds that they are only generalists, they will always believe the positively spun publicity about cancers, immunisations, medicines.

The only way you are going to combat the negative publicity is with plenty of positive trials, data and publicity of your own. Even then, it's going to be like the slow drip of Chinese water torture before it receives acceptance - look at the grudging praise for acupuncture. People like Ben Goldacre are in the mainstream press and are very difficult to dislodge or refute.

You need a cast iron case.

I couldn't agree more Yvonne.  Alternative therapies, like any therapies, need a cast iron case if they are to be accepted.  Herbalism seems highly plausable in some cases since many very useful medicines have their origins there.  However, that doesn't mean that herbs actually work, just that some might and its important to get really rock solid RCT data to consistently demonstrate that.

The same goes for other forms of altnerative medicine, although the evidence so far for them looks very bleak indeed.

It's not good science, but it is good ammunition.

Exactly, Allopathic 'science' in a nutshell.  Herbal medicine could wipe out

Allopathy all by its lonesome, as Dr Shulze points out http://www.whale.to/c/shulze.html

They know that.  They have always nicked from herbal med when it suits

them but only make drugs to get the patent, which is why they don't work,

and notice they never nick the ones herbalists use eg for cancer, like Essiac

and Hoxey formulas, Chapparel, Red Clover.  Too obvious, we might cotton on,

and it might cure someone which is against chemo design.

"He was one of my most dramatic recoveries with AIDS, and the reason I say

that is that he was the most far gone. He was in the absolute, end stage --

they have that wing in the hospital where they have given up on you.

You can smoke pot and do anything you want. They had given up on him."

—Dr Shulze, who cured 16 from last stage full-blown AIDS.

"My opinion, however, is that they (herbs) are superior 95% of the

time to any pharmaceutical drug!"---Willner, M.D.

PS: Ernst is a pharma shill, what would you expect from an Allopathic

created word--Complementary med.  They hate the word Alternative.

I suggest that everyone reads the book written by Phillip Day - "Health Wars" and buy lots of copies to give them as Xmas presents to all the sceptics. Phillip exposes the multinationals and drug companies in a brilliant way, all backed by research.

You can also visit his website at credence.com

Phillip is a fantastic speaker too, and he travels up and down the country educating the public, so that people can make more informed choices.