 |
|
|
RiEN Brussels Group (RBG)
The RiEN Brussels Group (RBG) was established as a working group within RiEN in 1997.
Mission Statement
The RiEN Brussels Group (RBG) was established as a working group to further official recognition of reflexology.
RiEN Brussels Group (RBG) - Contact Persons
Hans van der Werff
Bovenover 59
NL-1025 JJ Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel +31.20-636 3915
E-mail: hansvanderwerff@hetnet.nl
Recently, meetings on complementary & natural medicine were organised in Brussels by the Health Intergroup of the European Parliament. RiEN participated in these meetings. Read more about these meetings by clicking on their dates: 27 June 2001 or 25 April 2002.
Complementary & Natural Medicine
Part of the Health Intergroup of the European Parliament
Bureau of the working group:
Nuala Ahern MPE, chairman
Giles Chicester MPE, vice-chairman
Laura Gonzales Alvarez MPE, vice-chairman
Renzo Imbeni MEP, vice-chairman
Paul Lannoye MEP, vice-chairman
Olga Pisano, secretary
Preliminary meeting in Brussels on Wednesday, 27 June 2001
Report by Hans van der Werff
Participants: 50 delegates of various European countries, representing:
- (European) healthcare - mostly therapy - organisations such shiatsu, homeopathy, flower essence,
kinesiology, reflexology, acupuncture, Alexander technique;
- pharmaceutical industries;
- ministries of Public Health (U.K., Germany, Luxemburg, Belgium).
(A true basket of different exotic fruit!)
Aim of the meeting (contrary to what was published in the invitation) was to make an inventory of what is going on in the various countries in the field of complementary medicine and to inform the European Commission about this. It was observed that a lot of attention has been given by the European Commission to medication and less to health therapies.
The meeting was chaired by Nuala Ahern, MEP for the Green Party
In the European Parliament (the same party of Paul Lannoye).
Within the 6th Framework of the European Parliament, special attention will be given to the following items:
- education (statutory regulations for quality educational levels);
- public safety;
- efficacy of therapy (competences);
- self-regulation;
- research.
The suggestion was made that organisations must apply to their own national governments and put pressure on and ask what is done in these fields.
It was a pleasure to notice how important it is for RiEN to be an EPHA member as this organisation will also be asked about their opinion on integrated health matters.
RiEN had the opportunity to present ITSELF and explain ITS aims. It was received with much admiration, as it appears that some other organisations are not yet organised European-wide on the same level.
RiEN hand-out & introductory letters were handed over to the Chair which she appreciated a lot and will give her insight in RiEN in a nutshell.
At the end of the meeting a discussion was set up to try to find a better word for 'medicine', as in many European languages this word is misinterpreted and people do not understand it can also be 'therapy'. Probably the word 'health care' is better.
This meeting was an excellent opportunity to get involved on European level & put reflexology on the European map.
25th April 2002
SUMMARY OF POINTS RAISED
The meeting was hosted by Nuala Ahern, the group's president and present on the panel were representatives involved in the process of recognition and regulation of complementary therapies in the UK.
PANEL
The following people sat on the panel:
Lord Walton of Detchant – chairman of the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology which produced a report on Complementary and Alternative Medicine in November 2000.
Gordon Brown from the British Government's Department of Health
Michael Fox Chairman of FIM (Foundation for Integrated Medicine)
Stephen Gordon a Homeopath who is General Secretary of the European Society of Homeopaths, he also represents the Society of Homeopaths in the UK and is on the board of FIM.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the meeting was to present the developments in complementary therapy in the UK to representatives of the European Union Ministers for Health
In practice most of the delegates seemed to be from other Complementary Therapies and pharmaceutical companies.
CONTENT
Lord Walton of Detchant
- Provided the background against which the House of Lords report was produced
- 185 written submissions were taken for the report and 44 organizations were interviewed
- The report defined complementary therapies in the UK in the following way:
1. Alternative means therapies that have their own diagnostic and therapeutic techniques eg osteopathy/chiropractic,
herbalists,a cupuncture, homeopathy.
2. Complementary means therapies which work alongside and complement traditional medicine eg aromatherapy,
massage, reflexology, hypnotherapy, counseling, healing.
3. Therapies indifferent to medicine such as traditional Chinese medicine and Ayurvedic medicine and therapies which
were felt to have no credible evidence base and were therefore unlikely to be of benefit eg crystals, dowsing, iridology,
kiniesiology
- The report found many divisions within therapies, eg in UK 13 organisations represent reflexology and these divisions
are unhelpful to public, practitioners and government.
- Closer liaison between therapies and medicine was desirable.
- Recommended a core curriculum for those complementary therapies – the alternative ones were considered to have
this already.
- Recommended all medical students should be made familiar with complementary and alternative therapies during their
training.
- USA have also produced a report with similar recommendations whose author is Professor Stephen Strauss.
- Report recommended that NHS should be the means of publishing information to the public about CAM.
- Recommended also that those in group 2 needed to have an understanding of principles of conventional medicine.
- Recommended that those therapies in group 2 be increasingly available through the NHS provided they were covered by Statutory Regulation of a strong system of Voluntary Self-Regulation.
RiEN raised question of concern among practitioners of costs of introducing Statutory Regulation especially where practitioners practice more than one therapy. (Statutory Regulation means an Act of Parliament – a law – is passed governing the therapy.
Lord Walton's answer was that Self Regulation has limited sanctions against a practitioner when things go wrong and that therapies could be regulated under the existing Health Act rather than requiring a separate act for each therapy.
The House of Lords report is available through:www.parliament.uk - look at House of Lords section – go to Select Committees and highlight Committee on Science and Technology – back 2 sessions and report on Complementary and Alternative therapy was published November 2000.
UK Government's response to this report can be found at www.whccamp.hhs.gov.
Gordon Brown
He works for the Department of Health and is responsible for policy on complementary and alternative therapies. He is responsible for implementation of the report. At present progress has been slow – but he works with various agencies in private and public sectors. Particularly with FIM (Foundation for Integrated Medicine).
The objectives for CAM are as follows:
· NHS is being reformed and CAM needs to be aware of this
· Widen patient choice by including CAM
· CAM needs to meet same standards as normal professionals in NHS
· Improve regulation for CAM practitioners for two reasons:
1) If they want to be taken seriously they must demonstrate professionalism
2) Threat to public health by CAM needs strong regulation
· herbal medicine and acupuncture are next on list for Statutory regulation
· In future there will be one council for a group of professions
· Has to build the process step by step – each therapy must unite itself first and then move forward
· FIM working with therapies, eg Reflexology Forum to help them develop
· National Councils will develop
1) Education and training
2) National standards
3) Possibly with an accreditation committee like acupuncture
NATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL STANDARDS being developed for every therapy – those for Reflexology now published by Healthworks UK.
Research
A strategy for research needs to be developed as there is no infrastructure for research in CAM.
Fellowships will be available to those undergoing formal training in research methodologies.
First stage will be 5 post-doctoral awards – one to each of five universities.
Second stage – a research development award at a lower level to train people with lower levels of qualifications.
This will be repeated annually – with around 30 awards per year over a period of year to give a classic research background to those who need it .
In addition there are on-going projects to develop CAM in NHS.
RiEN asked if EU was looking to UK for a lead on this.
Reply – no question of harmonization across the EU. Each member state is its own domain. The meeting was designed to help exchange information .
However, as a principle in EU Law – if something is legal in one country, it should not be illegal in another.
Michael Fox
From Foundation for Integrated Medicine (FIM).
FIM wants to see integration of the best of CAM and conventional medicine offered to the public. Public in UK want it – there are an estimated 50,000 CAM practitioners and only 38,000 GP's (doctors) in UK.
FIM established by Prince of Wales in 1996 (www.fihealth.org.uk)
It is a charity working in partnership with government, but independent from it.
On Prince of Wales website is his 1982 speech on integration of CAM, and a recent article in Daily Mail re-emphasises it.
Today, both conventional medicine and CAM are more open-minded about one another.
He emphasized that the House of Lords report emphasized proper regulation as the most important thing for CAM as opposed to Research.
Five main points that FIM promotes
- Research and development – encouraging infrastructure
- Regulation
- Education
- Service Provision – they give an annual award for good practice in integrated medicine
- Information – more needed
Issue of access to CAM in UK – 90% is privately purchased so if you can't afford it you don't get it.
The move is to encourage patients to access CAM through the NHS who would recommend the best treatment for the patient.
Government's response to report was rapid and now money is being made available to back up its support.
Stephen Gordon
A homeopath, General Secretary of European Council for Classical Homeopathy and sits on board of FIM. He also contributed to the House of Lords report.
His advice was to integrate CAM across Europe – don't reject conventional medicine but allow people to make informed choices about the appropriateness of treatment.
He commented that some people want to get better, rather than have their disease managed.
Professional practice is growing across Europe. Many doctors are taking up CAM therapies.
Public are happy with non-medical therapists, but there are concerns about quality of treatment and safety.
He highlighted the differences across Europe, eg France where it is limited to medical practitioners only whereas UK is free market.
He also highlighted progress:
UK laws to regulate Osteopathy and Chiropractors
Belgium law recognizing 4 therapies
Netherlands in 1993 freeing up practice
Denmark – homeopaths and reflexologists don't pay VAT on services any mmore
Changes are due to consumer pressure and government responding.
He mentioned EU policy and the Lannoye report which recommended that the Commission study effectiveness and safety of therapies (Nuala Ahern stated there had been problems getting this started).
Commission's resolution was never responded to.
A research programme from 2002-2006 was proposed but turned down by the Parliament but it is now in its second reading and proposes research on
Therapies - method of action
- cost benefit
- effects on livestock
Council of Europe 1999 supports the recommendation that non-conventional and conventional medicine should exist side by side, based on freedom of choice.
World Health Organization (WHO) is also encouraging integration.
Nuala Ahern commented that the Commission was unwilling to deal with this contentious issue and it was dropped. Therefore it was felt that it should work from the bottom up – ie therapies in partnership with their governments.
