Complementary and alternative medicine and the Internet

Katja Schmidt, Edzard Ernst
UK Peninsula Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom

Abstract text Objectives: Our objectives were to assess the value (or otherwise) of the Internet in guiding the public regarding complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Study design: 9 independent Internet/E-mail surveys Methods: We identified the main websites that patients with various conditions were likely to consult and evaluated these sites according to the following criteria: advice regarding conventional therapies, number and nature of CAM recommended, advice on disease prevention, and an overall judgement by the present authors regarding the safety of the advice provided. In total we assessed 83 web sites.

We also carried out 5 surveys assessing email advice given by CAM practitioners to a) a fictitious patient or b) a researcher. Results: Our results showed that on CAM for cancer websites a plethora of unproven CAM treatments is recommended with little consensus between different sites. Some websites had the potential to harm patients through misinformation or discouragement of conventional therapies. We found 12 websites overtly discouraging patients from using conventional treatments and 21 websites were graded as unsafe or possibly unsafe. Our results from the email communication surveys suggested that some CAM providers advise their clients irresponsibly; for instance, against government policy regarding the measles, mumps and rubella vaccination. Conclusions: In conclusion, the Internet is an important source for information on CAM. For the consumer there may be risks in using it for that purpose.