Anfang August 2019 reichten Abgeordnete der Christlich-Sozialen Union (CSU) und der Freien Wähler den Antrag "Todesfälle durch multiresistente Keime vermeiden IV-Studie zu einem reduzierten Antibiotikaeinsatz" im Bayerischen Landtag ein. Der Antrag diskutiert, wie alternativmedizinische und homöopathische Präparate den Einsatz von Antibiotika reduzieren oder verhindern könnten. Die Antragsteller fordern unter anderem eine Studie, die diese Frage erforschen soll (Seidenath et al. 2019a). Diesem Antrag und somit auch der Studie wurde am 07.11.2019 zugestimmt (Ärzteblatt 2019). Dieser Vorgang wirft ethische Probleme auf, die wir in diesem Kommentar erläutern und diskutieren möchten. Hintergrund Krankenhauskeime und antibiotikaresistente Bakterien entwickeln sich zu einem ernsten medizinischen Problem. Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) schätzt, dass die Wahrscheinlichkeit, an einer Infektion mit resistenten Pathogenen zu sterben, 64 % höher ist als an einer Infektion mit nichtresistenten Pathogenen (WHO 2018). In Berlin starben in den letzten Jahren 534 Menschen an Krankenhauskeimen (Ärzteblatt 2018). Durch die steigende Nutzung von Antibiotika haben Bakterien und andere Pathogene die Möglichkeit, sich an diese anzupassen (Dodds 2017).

SummaryHomeopathy was first postulated by the German physician Samuel Hahnemann in 1796 and 220 years later homeopathy is the most popular and widespread alternative medicine. Partly, it is also part of the national healthcare and insurance systems but homeopathy is not without controversy within the medical and healthcare community. Its implausible basic assumptions, some of which contradict natural laws, do not lead us to expect that its remedies have any specific effect. In fact, there is no study or systematic review to date that reliably certifies homeopathy to have an effect beyond the placebo effect and other context effects. In this respect it must be disconcerting how widely homeopathy is applied and represented in therapeutic practice. It indeed claims a role within scientific (evidence-based) medicine but cannot substantiate this claim. It displays clear characteristics of pseudoscience [1]. This implies a lot of problems, such as misleading people and tackling medical ethics up to scientific publication practices. Furthermore, it turns out that quite a few people do not know exactly what homeopathy is, which may lead them to make wrong decisions for their personal health. This article summarizes the information about homeopathy and its problematic implications and serves as a general introduction to this topic and its unacceptable role in today’s medicine.The medical irrelevance of the sham method of homeopathy has been proven with more than sufficient probability [2]. As a major testimonial, the statement “Homeopathic products and practices” of the European (EASAC 2017) can be regarded. The primary aim of this brief report is therefore not to take another look at homeopathy from a medical scientific perspective, but rather focus attention on the implications of the still continuous and largely uncritically accepted existence of this method in medical practice, in the medical scientific sphere and in the judgement of the general public.

Alternative medicine methods and treatments enjoy great popularity. However, many users fail to recognise the dangers associated with these methods. One of these is called Black Ointment or Black Salve. Oncologists and attending physicians should be aware of alternative medical methods such as these and be in a position to provide appropriate advice, intervention, if necessary, at any time when counselling patients in difficult situations.