Is homoeopathy cost-effective?

In 2005 the results of an investigation by leading economist Christopher Smallwood were published. He took a fresh and independent look at the contribution which complementary therapies can potentially make to the delivery of healthcare in the UK.

Having considered evidence from the literature, in practice and case studies he concluded that if only 4% of GPs were to offer homoeopathy as a major frontline approach to treatment, a saving of £190 million would result. Savings achieved by the use of homoeopathy largely relate to reduced drug bills in certain clinical areas.

A series of small studies demonstrate the potential in this area. For example in a 500-patient survey at the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital, 72% of patients with skin complaints reported being able to stop or reduce their conventional medication. Swayne (1992) conducted a study of the prescription costs of 22 doctors and found that, on average, practices with GPs using homoeopathy prescribed 12% fewer items of medication (including conventional and homoeopathic) per patient than other practices in the area. If this figure was extrapolated to a national level the number of items would be reduced by 41.5 million.

"No hot drink works faster!"

________________________________________________________
Quite a claim.
...Or is it?
I hear these claims quite a lot at the moment when medications are being advertised.
It's easy to jump to the conclusion that this is the fastest working hot drink.
However, this isn't the claim.
The claim is NO HOT DRINK works faster, i.e. If you have no hot drink, it'll work faster.
Genius!
Hence they can get away with such claims.
Listen out for them, there's loads!
I can't wait for "no anti-ageing cream works faster!" or "no medicine can get you better quicker!"