{"id":16546,"date":"2020-11-06T14:32:32","date_gmt":"2020-11-06T14:32:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/?page_id=16546"},"modified":"2020-12-07T13:20:36","modified_gmt":"2020-12-07T13:20:36","slug":"article-de-shang-et-al-dans-la-revue-the-lancet","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/ressources\/homeopathie-en-debat\/article-de-shang-et-al-dans-la-revue-the-lancet\/","title":{"rendered":"Article de Shang et al. dans la revue The Lancet"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>En ao\u00fbt 2005, la revue The Lancet a publi\u00e9 une \u00e9tude<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16125589\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><sup>1<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e comme ayant compar\u00e9 110\u00a0essais similaires sur l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie et la m\u00e9decine conventionnelle et ayant conclu que l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie n\u2019\u00e9tait pas meilleure qu\u2019un placebo.<\/p>\n<p>L\u2019article \u00e9tait accompagn\u00e9 d\u2019un \u00e9ditorial intitul\u00e9 \u00ab\u00a0La fin de l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie\u00a0\u00bb<a href=\"http:\/\/www.thelancet.com\/journals\/lancet\/article\/PIIS0140-6736(05)67149-8\/fulltext\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><sup>2<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0et qui a attir\u00e9 l\u2019attention des m\u00e9dia.<\/p>\n<p>Or,\u00a0<strong>les conclusions de l\u2019\u00e9tude ne s\u2019appuient que sur 8 de ces 110 essais<\/strong>, dont aucun ne porte sur un soin hom\u00e9opathique habituel. Par ailleurs, en changeant ne serait-ce qu\u2019un seul des 8 essais s\u00e9lectionn\u00e9s parmi les 110 disponibles, on obtient le r\u00e9sultat inverse, \u00e0 savoir que l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie fonctionne au-del\u00e0 du placebo.<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC1375230\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><sup>3<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Cela d\u00e9montre que\u00a0<strong>les conclusions de cet article ne sont absolument pas fiables<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>Les \u00e9v\u00e9nements entourant ce num\u00e9ro de la revue The Lancet, ses r\u00e9percussions politiques et les principales lacunes de l\u2019\u00e9tude Shang <em>et al<\/em> elle-m\u00eame sont r\u00e9sum\u00e9es dans l\u2019article\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC1375230\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">\u00ab\u00a0Homeopathy and the Lancet<\/a>\u00a0\u00bb (<em>L\u2019hom\u00e9opathie et The Lancet<\/em>).<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC1375230\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><sup>3<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Un article aux r\u00e9percussions globales sans fins<\/h3>\n<p>L\u2019article de Shang <em>et al<\/em> est devenu c\u00e9l\u00e8bre \u00e0 force d\u2019\u00eatre cit\u00e9 comme la \u00ab\u00a0preuve\u00a0\u00bb d\u00e9finitive de l\u2019inefficacit\u00e9 de l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie, en d\u00e9pit de ses d\u00e9ficiences fondamentales.\u00a0Ainsi,\u00a0<strong>Ben Goldacre,\u00a0<\/strong>m\u00e9decin, universitaire et r\u00e9dacteur scientifique britannique, affirmait (Pharma Chameleon\u2019, New Europe, Issue 93, 17 avril 2011) :<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"no-margin\"><em>Nous avons \u00e0 pr\u00e9sent plus de 100 essais d\u2019hom\u00e9opathie disponibles. Peu importe le traitement concern\u00e9 : si apr\u00e8s 100 essais, on n\u2019a obtenu aucune preuve fiable d\u2019un quelconque b\u00e9n\u00e9fice, toute personne sens\u00e9e, et non li\u00e9e par des int\u00e9r\u00eats particuliers, devrait crier haut et fort : \u00ab Arr\u00eatons de financer cette impasse de recherche \u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<div class=\"highlight-box accent-border\">\n<h3><strong>L\u2019\u00e9tude Shang et al. dans les grandes lignes<\/strong><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Malgr\u00e9 l\u2019inclusion dans l\u2019\u00e9tude de 110 essais d\u2019hom\u00e9opathie et de 110 essais de m\u00e9decine conventionnelle correspondants,<strong>les conclusions s\u2019appuient seulement sur 8 essais d\u2019hom\u00e9opathie et 6 essais de m\u00e9decine conventionnelle<\/strong>,\u00a0d\u00e9crits comme \u00ab\u00a0des essais plus grands et d\u2019une qualit\u00e9 sup\u00e9rieure\u00a0\u00bb.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Si les auteurs de l\u2019\u00e9tude avaient analys\u00e9 les 21 essais d\u2019hom\u00e9opathie identifi\u00e9s comme \u00e9tant de qualit\u00e9 sup\u00e9rieure, ils auraient obtenu le r\u00e9sultat oppos\u00e9<\/strong>\u2013 \u00e0 savoir que l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie a un effet au-del\u00e0 du placebo.<sup>10\u00a0<\/sup>Aucun argument n\u2019est avanc\u00e9 pour justifier la d\u00e9cision de rejeter les 13 autres essais de qualit\u00e9 sup\u00e9rieure du seul fait qu\u2019ils \u00e9taient plus petits.<\/li>\n<li><strong>L\u2019\u00e9tude ne r\u00e9siste pas \u00e0 l\u2019analyse de sensibilit\u00e9<\/strong>: il suffit de changer un seul des 8 essais s\u00e9lectionn\u00e9s parmi les 110 disponibles pour obtenir le r\u00e9sultat inverse, \u00e0 savoir que l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie fonctionne au-del\u00e0 du placebo.<sup>4<\/sup><\/li>\n<li><strong>Les 8 essais retenus rel\u00e8vent de l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie non individualis\u00e9e\u00a0<\/strong>(tous les patients re\u00e7oivent le m\u00eame traitement). Les conclusions de l\u2019\u00e9tude n\u2019ont donc\u00a0<strong>aucun lien avec la pratique habituelle de l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie<\/strong>, qui repose sur la prescription individualis\u00e9e de m\u00e9dicaments apr\u00e8s une consultation minutieuse.<\/li>\n<li>L\u2019\u00e9tude<strong>ne pr\u00e9cise pas quels sont les 8 essais d\u2019hom\u00e9opathie et les 6 essais conventionnels retenus<\/strong>. Ce manque de transparence, qui ne serait pas tol\u00e9r\u00e9 dans les \u00e9tudes de m\u00e9decine conventionnelle,<sup>6<\/sup>\u00a0a suscit\u00e9 un tel toll\u00e9 que les auteurs ont fini par fournir ces informations.<\/li>\n<li>L\u2019article de\u00a0<strong>Shang, qui contient des \u00e9tudes publi\u00e9es jusqu\u2019en 2003, est d\u00e9sormais d\u00e9pass\u00e9 et\u00a0<\/strong><strong>a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9tr\u00f4n\u00e9<\/strong>par des revues syst\u00e9matiques plus r\u00e9centes et fiables.<sup>13<\/sup><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<h3 class=\"no-margin\"><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">R\u00e9sultats de l\u2019article de Shang<br \/>\n<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Les r\u00e9sultats de Shang <em>et al<\/em>, telles qu\u2019ils sont pr\u00e9sent\u00e9s dans l\u2019extrait de l\u2019article, sont les suivants :<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>110 essais hom\u00e9opathiques ont \u00e9t\u00e9 compar\u00e9s \u00e0 110 essais conventionnels. La taille moyenne des \u00e9chantillons \u00e9tait de 65\u00a0participants (de 10 \u00e0 1573). 21\u00a0essais hom\u00e9opathiques (19\u00a0%) et neuf essais de m\u00e9decine conventionnelle (8\u00a0%) \u00e9taient de qualit\u00e9 sup\u00e9rieure. Dans les deux groupes, les essais de petite taille et de faible qualit\u00e9 m\u00e9thodologique ont montr\u00e9 davantage de r\u00e9sultats b\u00e9n\u00e9fiques que les grands essais de bonne qualit\u00e9 m\u00e9thodologique. Quand l\u2019analyse portait uniquement sur les grands essais de bonne qualit\u00e9 m\u00e9thodologique, il y avait un OR \u00e0 0,88 (IC95 =0,65\u20131,19) pour l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie (huit essais) et \u00e0 0,58 (IC95 = 0,39\u20130,85) pour les essais conventionnels (six essais).<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h3><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">Quelle est la fiabilit\u00e9 de ces r\u00e9sultats ?<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>\u00c9tant donn\u00e9 la port\u00e9e de l\u2019\u00e9tude de Shang <em>et al<\/em>. dans le d\u00e9bat sur l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie, les questions de sa qualit\u00e9 et de sa fiabilit\u00e9 sont primordiales.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;\">Or, le manque de qualit\u00e9 scientifique de l\u2019article saute aux yeux, comme l\u2019ont d\u00e9nonc\u00e9 des experts dans le domaine de la recherche en hom\u00e9opathie<\/span><sup style=\"font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;\"><a title=\"Fisher, P. Homeopathy and the Lancet. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. Mar 2006; 3(1): 145\u2013147\" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC1375230\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">3<\/a>,<a title=\"L\u00fcdtke R &amp; Rutten ALB. The conclusions on the effectiveness of homeopathy highly depend on the set of analyzed trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 61, 1197\u20131204 (2008).\" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/18834714\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">4<\/a>,<a title=\"Helmut K, et al. Failure to Exclude False Negative Bias: A Fundamental Flaw in the Trial of Shang et al. JACM, 2005; 11(5): 783 \" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16296905\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">5<\/a>,<a title=\"Bell, IR. All Evidence Is Equal, but Some Evidence Is More Equal than Others: Can Logic Prevail over Emotion in the Homeopathy Debate? JACM, October 2005, 11(5): 763-769 \" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16296897\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">6<\/a>,<a title=\"Frass M, et al. Bias in the Trial and Reporting of Trials of Homeopathy: A Fundamental Breakdown in Peer Review and Standards? JACM, October 2005, 11(5): 780-782. \" href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16296904\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">7<\/a><\/sup><span style=\"font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;\"> ainsi que le\u00a0<strong>professeur Hahn, chercheur ind\u00e9pendant, qui d\u00e9crit ainsi son principal \u00e9cueil <\/strong>:<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"no-margin\"><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\"><em>Pour conclure que l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie n\u2019a pas d\u2019effet clinique, il faut ignorer plus de 90\u00a0% des essais cliniques disponibles<\/em>.<span class=\"no-underline\"><a title=\"8. Hahn RG. Homeopathy: Meta-Analyses of Pooled Clinical Data. Forsch Komplementmed 2013;20:000\u2013000 Published online: October 17, 2013\" href=\"https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/24200828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><sup>8<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"embed-youtube\" style=\"text-align:center; display: block;\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"youtube-player\" width=\"520\" height=\"293\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/TONxD5lUsew?version=3&#038;rel=1&#038;showsearch=0&#038;showinfo=1&#038;iv_load_policy=1&#038;fs=1&#038;hl=fr-FR&#038;autohide=2&#038;wmode=transparent\" allowfullscreen=\"true\" style=\"border:0;\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts allow-same-origin allow-popups allow-presentation allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox\"><\/iframe><\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#\" class=\"expand-content\" id=\"6a05934310885\"><span class=\"expand-content-more\">Plus<\/span><span class=\"expand-content-less\">Moins<\/span><\/a><\/p><div class=\"collapse-content\" id=\"panel-6a05934310885\"> Understandably it has often been scientists, researchers and clinicians specialising in homeopathy research and\/or homeopathy who have been motivated to understand the paper in detail\u00a0and write articles on this subject. Whilst this does not mean that their arguments are wrong, critics suggest that\u00a0bias influences these opinions.<\/p>\n<p>However, Prof Hahn from Sweden has \u2018never practiced, received, or studied homeopathy, but has worked in clinical medicine and performed traditional medical research in anesthesiology and surgery for the past 30 years\u2019. His paper details why the\u00a0results of the Shang paper, which includes trials on many different diseases, would not usually be accepted in scientific circles:<\/p>\n<p><em>The ultimate argument against homeopathy is the &lsquo;funnel plot&rsquo; published by Aijing Shang&rsquo;s research group in 2005. However, the funnel plot is flawed when applied to a mixture of diseases.<\/em><sup><span class=\"no-underline\"><a title=\"Hahn RG. Homeopathy: Meta-Analyses of Pooled Clinical Data. Forsch Komplementmed 2013;20:000\u2013000 Published online: October 17, 2013\" href=\"https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/24200828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">8<\/a><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/sup><\/div><!-- fr -->\n<h3>\u00c0 l\u2019heure actuelle, l\u2019article de Shang et al. 2005 est compl\u00e8tement d\u00e9pass\u00e9.<\/h3>\n<p>Le manque de fiabilit\u00e9 de l\u2019analyse n\u2019est pas le seul \u00e9cueil de l\u2019article de Shang. Au vue des donn\u00e9es disponibles en 2018, on peut \u00e9galement se demander dans quelle mesure cette \u00e9tude refl\u00e8te toute la base actuelle de donn\u00e9es probantes.<\/p>\n<p>Shang <em>et al<\/em>. inclut des \u00e9tudes publi\u00e9es jusqu\u2019en 2003. Or, pas moins de 41\u00a0essais randomis\u00e9s contre placebo ont \u00e9t\u00e9 publi\u00e9s apr\u00e8s cette date, qui auraient pu \u00eatre pris en compte.<\/p>\n<p>Cela d\u00e9montre \u00e0 quel point cet article <strong>vieux de 13 ans<\/strong>\u00a0est d\u00e9pass\u00e9, et a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9tr\u00f4n\u00e9 par des articles plus r\u00e9cents, notamment le\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/resources\/essentialevidence\/clinical-trials-overview\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">programme de revues syst\u00e9matiques engag\u00e9 par le Dr. Mathie<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Ainsi, l\u2019\u00e9tude\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/HRI_ResearchArticle_29_RobertsTournier_IndividualisedHomeopathyReview.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><strong>Mathie <em>et al.<\/em>\u00a02014\u00a0<\/strong><\/a>a d\u00e9montr\u00e9 que\u00a0 <strong>les m\u00e9dicaments hom\u00e9opathiques, \u00e0 condition d\u2019\u00eatre prescrits dans le cadre d\u2019un traitement individualis\u00e9, ont 1,5 \u00e0 2 fois plus de probabilit\u00e9 d\u2019avoir un effet b\u00e9n\u00e9fique qu\u2019un placebo.\u00a0<\/strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/23290875\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><sup>13<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\"><p><a href=\"#\" class=\"expand-content button accent-bg\" id=\"6a059343108b0\"><span class=\"expand-content-more\">R\u00e9f\u00e9rences<\/span><span class=\"expand-content-less\">Moins<\/span><\/a><\/p><div class=\"collapse-content\" id=\"panel-6a059343108b0\"><\/span><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Shang A, Huwiler-Muntener K, Nartey L, et al. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy. <em>Lancet<\/em> 2005; <strong>366<\/strong>: 726\u2013732 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16125589\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Editorial. The end of homeopathy. <em>Lancet<\/em>., 2005;<strong>366<\/strong>:690 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.thelancet.com\/journals\/lancet\/article\/PIIS0140-6736(05)67149-8\/fulltext\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Full text<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Fisher P. Homeopathy and the Lancet. <em>Evid Based Complement Alternat Med.,<\/em>\u00a02006; <strong>3(1)<\/strong>: 145\u2013147 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.thelancet.com\/journals\/lancet\/article\/PIIS0140-6736(05)67149-8\/fulltext\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Full text<\/a><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">L\u00fcdtke R &amp; Rutten ALB. The conclusions on the effectiveness of homeopathy highly depend on the set of analyzed trials. <em>J. Clin. Epidemiol.,<\/em>\u00a02008;\u00a0<strong>61:\u00a0<\/strong>1197\u20131204 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/18834714\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">Helmut K, et al. <\/span>Failure to Exclude False Negative Bias: A Fundamental Flaw in the Trial of Shang et al<span style=\"line-height: 1.5em;\">. <em>JACM,<\/em> 2005; <strong>11<\/strong>(5): 783 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16296905\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/span><\/li>\n<li>Bell IR. All Evidence Is Equal, but Some Evidence Is More Equal than Others: Can Logic Prevail over Emotion in the Homeopathy Debate? <em>JACM,<\/em>\u00a02005; <strong>11<\/strong>(5): 763-769 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16296897\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Frass M, et al. Bias in the Trial and Reporting of Trials of Homeopathy: A Fundamental Breakdown in Peer Review and Standards? <em>JACM<\/em>, 2005; <strong>11<\/strong>(5): 780-782 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/16296897\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Hahn RG. Homeopathy: Meta-Analyses of Pooled Clinical Data. <em>Forsch Komplementmed.,<\/em> 2013;<strong>20<\/strong>:000\u2013000 Published online: October 17, 2013 DOI: 10.1159\/000355916 |\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/24200828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Mathie RT,\u00a0et al. Randomised controlled trials of homeopathy in humans: characterising the research journal literature for systematic review. <em>Homeopathy,\u00a0<\/em>2013<em>;<\/em> <strong>102:<\/strong>3\u201324 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pubmed\/23290875\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PubMed<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Lewith G, Professor of Health Research at Southampton University, Letter to the Editor, Positive Health, December 2008 |\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.positivehealth.com\/article\/water\/letters-to-the-editor-issue-153\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Full text<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Goldacre, Ben.\u2018Pharma Chameleon\u2019, New Europe, 17 April 2011 \u2013 Issue 931.<\/li>\n<li>Faculty of Homeopathy website: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facultyofhomeopathy.org\/research\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">http:\/\/www.facultyofhomeopathy.org\/research\/<\/a> accessed 1 August 2014<\/li>\n<li>Mathie RT, et al. Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews, 2014; 3: 142\u2028 | <a href=\"http:\/\/systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/2046-4053-3-142\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Full text\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0<\/div><!-- fr --><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Revenir \u00e0 la page D\u00e9bat sur l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>En ao\u00fbt 2005, la revue The Lancet a publi\u00e9 une \u00e9tude1\u00a0pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e comme ayant compar\u00e9 110\u00a0essais similaires sur l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie et la m\u00e9decine conventionnelle et ayant conclu que l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie n\u2019\u00e9tait pas meilleure qu\u2019un placebo. L\u2019article \u00e9tait accompagn\u00e9 d\u2019un \u00e9ditorial intitul\u00e9 \u00ab\u00a0La fin de l\u2019hom\u00e9opathie\u00a0\u00bb2\u00a0et qui a attir\u00e9 l\u2019attention des m\u00e9dia. Or,\u00a0les conclusions de l\u2019\u00e9tude ne s\u2019appuient que [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":835,"featured_media":0,"parent":16265,"menu_order":50,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-16546","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/16546","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/835"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16546"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/16546\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/16265"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hri-research.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16546"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}