Dear All
Apologies - I'd missed one suggestion - ozone.
Which has been suggested for many things:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_therapy#cite_note-8
100+ possible "trials" on pubmed but no systematic reviews.
Best wishes
Paul Glasziou
Fiona Morgan wrote:
> How about ozone for the treatment of just about everything?
>
> Best wishes
>
> Fiona Morgan
> Support Unit for Research Evidence
> Cardiff University
> Neuadd Meirionnydd 1st Floor
> Heath Park
> Cardiff CF14 4YS
>
> Tel: 029 20 687926
> email: [log in to unmask]
>
> NHS Evidence - oral health
> www.library.nhs.uk/oralhealth
> Byte sized oral health information
>
> Support Unit for Research Evidence
> www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/sure
>
>
>
> From: Paul Glasziou <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: 10/06/2010 15:31
> Subject: Popular but ineffective treatments?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Dear All
> Following the influenza discussion, I wanted to ask for ideas of
> treatments that became (or are) popular but where evidence showed them
> ineffective.
> For example,
> 1. Autologous bone marrow transplantation for breast cancer
> 2. Evening primrose oil for menstrual symptoms
> 3. Neuroblastoma screening in infants
> 4. HRT for prevention of CVD in menopause
> These examples are from Testing Treatments which is downloadable (free
> pdf!) at:
> http://www.jameslindlibrary.org/testing-treatments.html
> The book is being updated, and we are looking for new examples.
> I will compile the list and send to everyone.
> If you can include the reference (or clues to it) I'd be grateful
> Many thanks
> Paul Glasziou,
> CEBM
>
>
|