The mention of potential harm sends shivers down the spine of complementary practitioners. They feel that their approaches are so much safer than anything that mainstream medicine has to offer. In many cases this may be true, in others, however, not. Safety, I would argue, is far too important to leave to conjecture; we need evidence. Even relatively minor side-effects of, for instance, a herbal medicine, weigh importantly if the potential benefit is small or uncertain. In other words, the ultimately relevant question is, does complementary medicine generate more good than harm?

The answer cannot be found without a commitment to and investment in rigorous and independent research. One reason why the evidence in complementary medicine is so often inconclusive, or at best promising, lies in the fact that few trials have been properly funded. I estimate that for every 100 trials in conventional medicine fewer than one exists in complementary medicine. My unit is generally seen as the best supported one of its kind in the UK, but we too struggle when it comes to conducting clinical trials. Less than 1% of the UK's research budgets go into complementary medicine research.