Edzard Ernst has admitted that he has over the years lied or supported a lie about having homeopathic training. In reality he has had none at all! This purported homeopathic course qualification has been an essential part of his professional personna. Even Wikipedia states:
“Professor Ernst qualified as a physician in Germany in 1978 where he also completed his MD and PhD theses. He has received training in acupuncture, autogenic training, herbalism, homoeopathy, massage therapy and spinal manipulation. Ernst began his medical career at a homeopathic hospital in Munich. The world’s first professor of complementary medicine…
Most of the reviews of his recent disproven book also have reference to the fact that he trained or practiced homeopathy as in the Washington Post:
Ernst is a physician and professor of complementary medicine in Britain, a former practitioner of homeopathic medicine…
He has not in any way denied these qualifications but promotes them as part of his skeptic appraisals of homeopathy and alternative medicine. Most newspapers, journals all quote these credentials as part of their description of who he is. He has appeared on various news shows, lectured and written extensively and even presented his arguments to parliamentarians, all as a skeptical “expert” in the field since he has had this homeopathic training in Germany.
But in a recent interview in the newsletter of German National Association of Homeopathic Physicians he has admitted he has admitted these qualifications are a lie according to a translation in the interview in H:MC21:
In this interview Ernst claims that he “acquired the prerequisites” to be able to add ‘homeopathy’ to his medical title “but never applied for the title”. In fact, a crucial ‘prerequisite’ in Germany, where homeopathy is regulated, is to have passed an exam at the relevant regional branch of the German Landesaerztekammer (medical council), and Ernst never did this.
As the interviewer points out:
“So is it correct that you did not acquire the additional medical title ‘Homeopathy’ but took further medical education courses in homeopathy? If yes, which ones?
Ernst: “I never completed any courses.”
In short, it appears that the leading ‘authority’ on homeopathy, and perhaps its most referenced critic, has no qualifications in homeopathy.[2]
Like David Colquhoun using a dubious damaging quote from a vanished study in a defunct journal or Egger admitting he hated homeopathy before rigging the Lancet meta-analysis, I’m sure Edzard Ernst will just shrug it off as a minor inconvenience.
And like Colquhoun, Ernst has a big thing about ethics and criticizing homeopaths about ethics. Many of his articles have the word ethics in the title and are about that for alternative practitioners. But of course, ethics only applies to others.
At the very least, the Guardian and medical journals should drop all his articles as the fruit of a very poisonous tree and he should be fired from his jobs on various boards evaluating medicines. Of his own admission, he has been perpetrating a fraud on the public and other medical professionals.
The incredible hubris of all these so called “experts” attacking alternative health is beyond belief. But it shows how pathetically corrupt the science skeptic movement is- a bunch of fakes with delusions of grandeur. Luckily, or fatefully, homeopathy will survive as it did the attack by greedy apothecaries at its inception.
Yes, what is more astonishing is that because these individuals are attacking homeopathy or alternative medicine the editors of various journals and news outlets and even parliamentary committees give them a completely free ride. They can say or do anything without it being questioned as to their sources or authority in saying it.
Pub drunks like Andy Lewis suddenly become experts and professors can present blatantly false credentials or sources and get away with it. All because they criticize alternative health.
Perhaps the free ride should be over. Would you not agree?
I would definitely agree. And don’t forget the pharmaceutical industry’s sponsorship of Ben Goldacre and Sense about Science. That is the biggest sham since now this industry also controls much of the press including medical journals.
I commented about what were, in my opinion, a lack of qualifications for Ernst to be pontificating about Homeopathy, way back in Abel Pharmboy’s blog quite some time ago. Ernst himself responded, rather arrogantly and contemptuously I thought, something to the effect that he didn’t think he needed any additional training in alternative medicine or Homeopathy. He was thus, in my opinion, artfully dodging the question of what training he DID have.
Thanks for your comment James.
He’s dodgey all round….
A good article/editorial in interhomeopathy about skeptics:
“Five centuries ago, uncannily similar words were addressed by Luther to Copernicus, who had presented his heliocentric theory: “this fool who wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy.” Isn’t it ironic to find the sceptics caught in the unenviable position of the Church of those times, which relentlessly persecuted anyone who dared oppose its authority and threaten its power, and systematically used brutal repression in lieu of scientific argumentation. Thankfully, times have changed and the flames of the stakes have been replaced by fiery words; Edzard Ernst does not shy away from using the word ‘heretics’ to qualify homeopaths!”
Perhaps you could help me understand why you are so upset about this. To people in academia, your concerns are not understandable.
If Ernst was trying to be a practicing homeopath then his lack of qualifications might be a problem. But Ernst is not trying to practice – he is a medical researcher.
One does not need to spend four years of training to understand the basic claims of homeopathy. It is possible to pick it up in a few hours – to a day or two. It’s not rocket science.
And in common with many medical researchers who are not practicing doctors or qualified in medicine, he is testing the claims made by alternative medicine. Many medical researchers are PhDs, not MDs. Research methods are the key skills you need to know – and most doctors (and homeopaths, dare I say) are not fully trained in research methods, statistics etc.
Academic research is about exploring the frontiers of knowledge. By definition, there are not exams in the subject. Ernst has made it clear that he sees good practice to involve those trained in whatever he is investigation, but there is no requirement for him to be fully practitioner qualified.
Are you sure you are not labouring under a massive misunderstanding of what academic research is?
Dear Helen,
You miss one big point here. HE LIED.
@Helen
Are you suggesting that it is appropriate for academics to lie about their credentials? I think this academic thing is just one big obfuscation for some unethical behaviour.
You seem to be an apologist for all these individual’s seriously wrong behaviour. Makes one suspect that you are doing some risk management PR for the movement or companies involved.
I think Edzard’s own words are appropriate here…
“About 30 years ago, I worked in a homeopathic hospital for several months. There I was trained to practice homeopathy which I did occasionally later on. Thus I have repeatedly said that I was trained in homeopathy. Now some people are trying to demonstrate that I have no formal qualifications in homeopathy. But I never said I had. I am trained just as I was trained to do spinal manipulations or gastroscopy – without qualifying as a chiropractor or gastroenterologist.”
Can you say where Ernst has claimed to have formal qualifications? If so, then you are right.
Helen,
“Missing” the point (and hoping other readers will be distracted by verbiage and miss the point) does nothing but raise the red flag. Why not address the fact that people who lie about their credentials are really not trustworthy “critics”.
Look at many many articles that he has written and the publishers, University he works at quote his qualifications as more than just working in a hospital near homeopaths. Ernst after the discovery of his big lie is attempting to do damage control but just getting himself deeper into the lie.
Comments are closed on this post.