Ralf Jeutter, a director of the Society of Homeopaths, ignores Code of Ethics, treats nasty diseases with magic potions
Posted by gimpy on November 3, 2007
Ralf Jeutter, PhD., is a director of the Society of Homeopaths (SoH) and a member The Society’s Professional Standards Committee. Amongst other things the Professional Standards Committee has a direct line of responsibility for the Professional Conduct Committee. You would expect any director whose remit includes responsibility for both Professional Standards and Professional Conduct to observe rigorous adherence to the Code of Ethics. Sadly for Ralf Jeutter and the SoH, his attitude to the Code of Ethics makes further mockery of the SoH’s claims, given to the House of Lords, that:
The Society of Homeopaths noted that its members were “subject to a rigorous Code of Ethics” and that it was also “a key player in the Council of Organisations Registering Homeopaths … working to establish a single register for the profession” which would allow patients and healthcare workers “to be sure of the professional standards, competency and accountability of the homeopaths they employ
You may remember that in July 2006, Newsnight and Sense About Science discovered that homeopaths were recommending homeopathic malaria vaccines over the orthodox medical vaccine. The homeopathic vaccine is mere water and alcohol with none of the protective properties of proper vaccines. In response to this scandal the SoH issued a statement:
For the public reassurance, registered members of The Society of Homeopaths (identifiable by their designation RSHom) are bound by a strict Code of Ethics & Practice (available on our website at www.homeopathy-soh.org). This clearly states that “all speculative theories will be stated as such and clearly distinguished.[regarding homeopathic malaria vaccination]” [section 11] We do consider anecdotal evidence to be speculative theory……
Our members have recently been issued a reminder of their obligations under the Society’s Code of Ethics & Practice and Core Criteria for Homeopathy, including the importance of making patients aware of treatments other than homeopathy, which, in the case of malaria include bite prevention measures such as covering up exposed skin, using repellent and mosquito nets plus anti-malarial drugs
This advice has not been followed by Ralf Jeutter.
Ralf has a very smart looking website, in welcome contrast to the usual homeopath websites which look like the web circa 1999 and display a fondness for purple, that advertises his practice and services. Ralf practices homeoprophylaxis, homeopathic vaccinations. Ralf charges £35/hr and £6 per vaccination. There is no indication on Ralf’s website that homeoprophylaxis is a speculative theory, this means he is breaking section 11 of the Code of Ethics.
11 Homeopaths report research findings and clinical experience methodically, honestly and without distortion. All speculative theories will be stated as such and clearly distinguished.
Ralf claims that homeoprophylaxis can prevent, Cholera, Hepatitis, Malaria, Tetanus, Typhoid and Yellow Fever and without the side effects of conventional vaccines. This is in breach of the following parts of section 48 of the Code of Ethics and section 72.
48 Advertising shall not contain claims of superiority.
No advertising may be used which expressly or implicitly claims to cure named diseases.
Advertising shall not be false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, extravagant or sensational.
72 To avoid making claims (whether explicit or implied; orally or in writing) implying cure of any named disease.
Ralf also doesn’t mention non-homeopathic anti-malarial drugs despite the SoH insisting that its members have an obligation to do so. Ralf has no excuse for not doing so as he is on the committee that oversees such advice.
Just to put into perspective how dangerous Ralf’s advice regarding homeoprophylaxis is, deaths from malaria run at around 1-3 million people a year.
The Society of Homeopaths are a joke, a shambles and habitually dishonest. If a director of the SoH, responsible for standards and conduct, cannot even be bothered to uphold standards and conduct as required by the Code of Ethics then it is farcical for them to present themselves as a serious organisation to the House of Lords.
November 3, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Great find, thanks for writing on this vital topic. Podblack.
November 3, 2007 at 3:27 pm
The Society of Homeopaths are a joke, a shambles and habitually dishonest.
Homeopathy is dishonest, therefore the promotion of it is dishonest. Dishonesty is what the SoH do and they make sure they do it in properly dishonest way.
My take on it all is this. It’s marketing at it most cynical. In previous years when homeopathy was regarded as a harmless eccentricity the function of an organisation like the SoH would be no more than acting as a registrar and coordinator for the practising homeopathically deluded. A bit like a private club really. But now they’ve recognised there’s a growing market (i.e. money to be made) for Alt/sCAM therapies and magical medical mumbo jumbo, and homeopathy fits the bill perfectly. So not wanting to miss the boat and a share of the projected $millions to be made from exploiting the vulnerable and gullible, the money grubbing bastards have jumped onto the marketing bandwagon big time.
Honestly, I don’t believe for one moment that the SoH is staffed and run entirely by people who think homeopathy is medicine. I expect they’ve all been vaccinated and, when the need arises, take real pain killers and make use of real medical doctors and real evidence based medicine.
November 3, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Wow, that’s a pretty blatant breach of the ‘code of ethics’. I wonder how far a complaint to the SoH would get considering he’s a director. They are a complete and utter joke.
November 3, 2007 at 3:59 pm
I wonder how far a complaint to the SoH would get considering he’s a director
Hmmmm I think I may just have an idea…….
November 3, 2007 at 4:59 pm
… but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a terminological getout. For instance, they might argue that prophylaxis (i.e. the claim to “prevent” malaria etc) is not the same as claiming a “cure” (i.e. curing it you once you catch it).
November 3, 2007 at 5:28 pm
He’s still in breach of Section 11 and Section 48 even if that get-out is allowed. Which it will be as it will be his mates sitting in judgement.
November 3, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Complain to him about him. should be laugh.
November 3, 2007 at 7:43 pm
it’s great you’re keeping the heat on these cats. This is a pretty damning state of affairs - well done!
November 3, 2007 at 8:05 pm
I might be able to get him for constantly flaunting his PhD. too, it’s in German. Nothing medical at all.
November 3, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Not only does he hawk his magic potions, he also denies that real vaccines work. From the page on children and vaccinations:
“To vaccinate or not to vaccinate is one of the toughest decisions for any parent. For a homeopath the answer is clear: It is better not to vaccinate children. The main reasons for that are:
• Despite a lot of information put out by the medical profession, there is still no evidence that vaccination is in any way effective.”
So double blind randomised controlled trial don’t work for homeopathic potions, and can be ignored for genuine vaccinations. How convenient.
November 4, 2007 at 9:56 am
Maybe the SoH think Ethics is the county to the North of London.
November 5, 2007 at 10:27 am
Gimpy, you are like a little rock hammer…keep chipping away sir, and things will start to crumble.
November 6, 2007 at 1:19 am
Available for download from his immunisations page is “information relating to Influenza Immunisation” in the form of something called the “SWELHOMS Homeopathic Flu Campaign Briefing Autumn 2005“, advising people how to organise their winter flu campaign. One of the aims of the campaign should be “To make people aware of the risks and disadvantages of the flu jab”. Not of any balance of benefits of and risks mind you, but just the risks and disadvantages. The document even includes pre-packaged scare stories about alleged flu vaccine side-effects, eg: “I wonder why so many of my elderly friends have such awful problems afterwards. One lady was in reasonably good health before her flu jab; now she’s in a wheelchair.” If that’s not enough to boost your Homeopathic Flu Campaign then it’s got handy flat-out demonstrable fibs about what the vaccines are made of such as “Depending on the manufacturer - FluVirin, FluShield, FluZone, FluMist etc … All are made using thiomersal [mercury]“ which is a simple lie. Many flu vaccines have never contained thimerosal. The specifically-named FluMist has never contained thimerosal. A thimerosal-free version of FluZone was available at the time the document was written. Thimerosal-free flu vaccines are available on the NHS.
November 6, 2007 at 7:02 am
Rob, the SoH had a very similar flu leaflet here. I was going to criticise it but it’s from 2005 so I thought I’d let them off. I wonder if Dr. Jeutter wrote it?
November 18, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Impressed by Der Ralphie’ idiotic statement on vaccines. Compelling evidence, once again, that having a PhD does not necessarily indicate you are generally smart. And as the possessor of a PhD, and examiner over the last two decades years of well over of a dozen others, I feel qualified to comment.
As far as I recall, Ralf Jeutter was a respectable member of the German Dept of Manchester Metropolitan Univ in his pre-homeo-loonie days. I guess if you spend your working life talking about “symbolism”, competing interpretations and the post-modern absence of “truth”, the transition to preferring magic to any kind of science is fairly easy. Well, apart from the having to totally disregard reality bit.
Talking of vaccines, I’m all for the route used by many American school districts. Kids have to have been vaccinated to come to school. No vaccinations, the kids don’t get in.
December 26, 2007 at 2:29 pm
[...] course several members of the SoH have been exposed as continuing to advocate homeoprophylaxis since then which exposes the inadequacies of self-regulation for the homeopathic industry. However, [...]
January 7, 2008 at 7:15 am
I am not a homeopath or CAM practioner but someone who undertakes research on health services.Of course similar things and lies can be found in many NHS and other medical information about for example cervical cancer screening, flu vaccination (pushed by many GPs and others on people who do not require them let alone current debates about efficacy). However, many scientific bloggers seem to want tpo focus on areas such as homeopathy rather than look at the millions wasted in the NHS on ineffective medicines. Remeber 10-12% of all hospital admissions are the result of ’side effects’ of medicine.
January 7, 2008 at 10:29 am
Debunker - someone who undertakes research on health services would naturally provide references to back up their claims.
July 23, 2008 at 11:35 pm
No response from the soi-disant debunker? What a shame. If there are flaws in conventional medicine then we should certainly point them out and try to overcome them. I wish debunker could share some of their research.
In the meantime, homeopathy is full of flaws - in fact it’s one huge chasm of fiction, wishful thinking, and hypocrisy. Which brings us back to Ralf Jeutter and the society of homeopaths.