本帖最后由 beiwei5du 于 2018-5-13 16:39 编辑
有争论总是好事,但是有几点需要考虑的是:
1、最高领导等政治势力参与到科学医药行业,大大推动了中药立法以及经典名方的进程,这个应该极力反对!
2、冒着质疑,第一批《经典名方目录》的制定过程没有征求各方意见,直接出炉,有违过程合理合规性。只有不断的质疑,不断的解疑,并且不断的趋于平衡,政策合理性才能会趋于更加科学。专家治国的理念是否可取??并且现在存在大量伪专家,全身裹着利益的专家。
3、顺势疗法在美国如果声称有治疗效果,是需要进行临床试验的,不知道那位专家为什么这么说??? (原句:美国中西医师、针灸专家李永明博士建议,经典处方不需临床不应操之过急,而应用“试行”方式,由管理部门在执行后总结反馈调整。他提到,美国也有类似的法规,对历史既成事实药品管理的豁免,比如对顺势疗法(homeopath)相关药品的管理。)
选自:HomeopathyIn November 2016, The United States FTC issued an "Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Marketing Claims for Over-the-Counter Homeopathic Drugs" which specified that the FTC will hold efficacy and safety claims for OTC homeopathic drugs to the same standard as other products making similar claims.[341] A November 15, 2016, FTC press release summarized the policy as follows: "The policy statement explains that the FTC will hold efficacy and safety claims for OTC homeopathic drugs to the same standard as other products making similar claims. That is, companies must have competent and reliable scientific evidence for health-related claims, including claims that a product can treat specific conditions. The statement describes the type of scientific evidence that the Commission requires of companies making such claims for their products... For the vast majority of OTC homeopathic drugs, the policy statement notes, 'the case for efficacy is based solely on traditional homeopathic theories and there are no valid studies using current scientific methods showing the product's efficacy.' As such, the marketing claims for these products are likely misleading, in violation of the FTC Act."[342]In conjunction with the 2016 FTC Enforcement Policy Statement, the FTC also released its "Homeopathic Medicine & Advertising Workshop Report", which summarizes the panel presentations and related public comments in addition to describing consumer research commissioned by the FTC. The report concluded: "Efficacy claims for traditional OTC homeopathic products are only supported by homeopathic theories and homeopathic provings, which are not accepted by most modern medical experts and do not constitute competent and reliable scientific evidence that these products have the claimed treatment effects."[343]
|