Health skills course opposed

Colin Williams - 1 August 1988

An access training scheme to teach alternative medicines is about to start in New Plymouth. But the four-week health skills course has drawn criticism from le to alternative therapies and to the course’s ing. The course, in mid-November, will teach homeopathy, reflexology, massage, herbal knowledge and stress management.

It is to be run by a naturopath couple who operate a health clinic in New Plymouth.

Organiser Shirley Tussery said the course aimed to help the 12 trainees feel better about themselves.

“The course is not just physical. It operates on all levels and makes trainees feel more worthwhile,” she said.

There could also be employment opportunities, specially for people who might seek work in health food shops.

People could also set themselves up, part-time or fulltime with the skills that will be learnt.

New Plymouth Regional Employment and Access Council coordinator Dianne Van-de-Water said the health skills course was “one off” at this stage.

Evaluation afterwards would decide if it was to be repeated.

Factors in that evaluation would be the administration of the course, any placement into further training and ”an enhanced job readiness job through self development,” she said.

The cost of the government-backed scheme was not to be made public, a policy of the New Plymouth Regional EmploymentAccess Committee, she said.

REAC’s New Plymouth chairwoman, Elaine Gill, defended the worth of the course.

“There is a whole range of courses that could be called esoteric under Access and don’t necessarily have any direct path to employment.”

But New Plymouth had a wide range of alternative health services and job opportunities could open up, she said.

Criticism of the course would come only from “a few rationalists doing their bun,” she said.

One critic is Dr Peter Dady of Wellington Hospital’s oncology department.

Such a training scheme under Access was worrying and potentially dangerous, he said.

The whole area of alternative medicine was an article of faith, without any evaluation, he said.

The Access course could only encourage people to feel legitimate about their services.

“People are seeking these services and anyone can set themselves up offering their help,” he said.

Government funding of the scheme would provide a dangerous edge to the course.

“People tend to look uncritically at government sponsored things. It puts a mark of respect on them that shouldn’t be there.”

Keith Lockett, a member of New Zealand Skeptics Society, has also opposed the Access course.

The subjects to be taught were dangerous if applied instead of conventional medicines to sick people, he said.

The trainers and the trainees would be well meaning but ill advised, he said.

“I fail to see why Access should legitimise this at all. It is an insult and it’s dangerous. People can die from homoeopathy practices.”

He said he would appeal to his local MP and to Health Minister David Caygill, to have the funding reviewed.