Patients are being continuously and seriously misled by both sides of the debate on complementary medicine, according to a leading clinical expert.

One of the most important questions about complementary medicine — does it generate more harm than good? — remains unanswered because two alternative and antagonistic attitudes are influencing the evidence, says Professor Edzard Ernst in the journal BMJ Clinical Evidence.

According to Professor Ernst, the sceptics often ignore the evidence for complementary medicine.

He says that, despite thousands of clinical trials and hundreds of systematic reviews, mainstream journals rarely publish positive findings, giving the impression that little serious research is being done in this field, or that the findings show complementary medicine to be useless or even dangerous.

In contrast, he argues, the proponents claim that “scientific evidence cannot be applied to complementary medicine” when data fail to show what they had hoped for.

But the real loser in these ongoing disputes is the patient, warns Professor Ernst.

He points out that complementary medicine has become important not because of the eagerness of doctors, the interests of scientists or the attention of politicians, but because of the “almost insatiable hunger of patients.”

In Britain, £1.6bn is spent each year on complementary medicine —therapies rarely available on the NHS — yet there is little evidence available to patients about what really works.

To remedy the situation, reliable information intended specifically for lay people must be produced as a matter of urgency, Professor Ernst concludes.

BMJ Clinical Evidence