Alternative Medicine Regulation Act
-
Debate will begin NOW and continue until 23:59 GMT on 25 June 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
I agree with Cllr. Tilkanas about the grave threat that alternative medicine poses to the public, especially to those who are deemed to be a vulnerable person. However, it is important that we respect every individual's informed choices as an expression of autonomy, and thus I would like to introduce the following amendment:
III. Alternative medical providers must duly inform users of their services that practices deemed to be 'alternative medicine' under this act are not endorsed by any official health agencies, and the provider must disclose any possible consequences of undergoing alternative medical treatment.
a. All practising alternative medical institutions must apply for and obtain a licence to practise. This licence accredits appropriate compliance with disclosure requirements.
b. The disclosure, and disclosure licence, must be made public and readily available to users and to potential users.
c. The relevant government agency, determined by the government of a respective state, can request evidence of this disclosure and licence to ensure continued compliance, and issue penalties for noncompliance.
-
I would like to thank the Council Speaker for raising this issue in the Council. I agree with the attempt to regulate alternative medicine. At the same time, I have to wonder what she exactly meant by alternative medicine as it is not clear who will be a judge of the "lack of scientific plausibility, testability, repeatability, and/or evidence for the claims made about them". Especially I would like to bring attention to the wording "and/or evidence" meaning as leaving or means they don't have to to have the qualities of scientific plausibility, testability and repeatability as long as there is any vague evidence, since that term doesn't have a definition.
If it is the aim for these to apply uniformly across the EU, there would need to be a list of these practices, likely frequently updated. If it is intended to be left to the Member States, the text should state so in the definitions.
Now to comments the comments made by my other colleague previously, While I agree with the Article III, I feel like paragraphs a. to c. feel in fact like an endorsement of some providers of the alternative medicine, which I am not sure is a desirable outcome.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Sofie Čikarová
Councillor for Czech Slavia -
I echo the concerns of the right honourable Ms. Čikarová.I support and applaud the idea of this act especially as a father of two wonderful Autistic boys who's community so often suffers from such charlatans.However there needs to be definitions for alternative medicine and procedures open criteria to establish scientific plausibility and proof. Without this we could outlaw totally legitimate medicines for minor ailments that don't go through the same tests as crucial medicine such as for cough ailments.
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies
-
In response to the comments made by Cllr. Čikarová, I propose the following amendment:
AMENDMENT II
SECTION I. DEFINITIONS
I. Alternative medicine: practices purported to have palliative or healing effects that lack scientific plausibility, testability, repeatability, and
/orevidence for the claims made about them , as determined by individual member-states.
However, my original intention with this act was merely to allow individuals harmed by alternative medicine practitioners to sue, and thus for local civil courts to hold the responsibility of determining which of their cases have standing - and thus of interpreting it on a case-by-case basis.
I am also confused by the statement made by Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe for similar reasons. This act does not outlaw alternative medicine. It simply holds its providers responsible for telling the truth and for not harming their patients - a standard which modern medicine is already generally held to.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
I also propose the following amendment:
AMENDMENT III
II. Providers of alternative medicine are liable for all harm caused to consumers of the services, practices, or products they offer that arises because of the consumption of said services, practices, or products, the possibility of which was not previously disclosed by the provider.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
Debate has ended. Three amendments have been proposed, as follows:
AMENDMENT I
III. Alternative medical providers must duly inform users of their services that practices deemed to be 'alternative medicine' under this act are not endorsed by any official health agencies, and the provider must disclose any possible consequences of undergoing alternative medical treatment.
a. All practising alternative medical institutions must apply for and obtain a licence to practise. This licence accredits appropriate compliance with disclosure requirements.
b. The disclosure, and disclosure licence, must be made public and readily available to users and to potential users.
c. The relevant government agency, determined by the government of a respective state, can request evidence of this disclosure and licence to ensure continued compliance, and issue penalties for noncompliance.
AMENDMENT II
SECTION I. DEFINITIONS
I. Alternative medicine: practices purported to have palliative or healing effects that lack scientific plausibility, testability, repeatability, and
/orevidence for the claims made about them , as determined by individual member-states.
AMENDMENT III
II. Providers of alternative medicine are liable for all harm caused to consumers of the services, practices, or products they offer that arises because of the consumption of said services, practices, or products, the possibility of which was not previously disclosed by the provider.
Voting on amendments begins NOW and will continue until 23:59 GMT on 3 July 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
On behalf of United Duchies I vote *FOR ALL ammendments
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies -
On the behalf of the Commonwealth of California, I vote FOR all amendments.
Snoop Dogg
Councilor of the Commonwealth of California -
On behalf of the Federal Republic of Yosai I vote For all amendments.
Izumi Miwako
Councillor for the Federal Republic of Yosai -
On behalf of the Republic of Istkalen, I vote AGAINST Amendment I and FOR amendments II and III.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I vote FOR all Amendments.
Lionel Morel
EU-Councilor for Leagio -
On behalf of the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia, I vote AGAINST Amendment I. and vote FOR Amendments II. and III.
Sofie Čikarová
Councillor for Czech Slavia -
I vote FOR all amendments.
Donald Tusk
Candidate for Speaker and Councillor for Spain -
With five votes for and two against, Amendment I has passed.
With seven votes for, Amendments II and III have passed.
Final voting begins NOW and continues until 23:59 GMT on 14 July 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
On behalf of the Republic of Istkalen, I vote FOR this act.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
I do not think it is appropriate for an act to pass by the vote of its author; I am therefore extending voting to 23:59 GMT on 20 July 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
On behalf of United Duchies I vote FOR this act
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies -
On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I vote FOR this Act.
Lionel Morel
EU-Councilor for Leagio -
On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote FOR this act.
Donald Tusk
Council Speaker and Councillor for Spain
The Kingdom of Spain