This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Drug Therapy, Other  • Neurology  • Neuro-otology  • Balance Disorders  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine  • Drug Therapy  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The article entitled "Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo,"¹ published in the 1998 issue of the ARCHIVES compared a homeopathic product, Vertigoheel, with the compound betahistine hydrochloride. Betahistine was formerly marketed in the United States as Serc (Unimed Corp, Morristown, NJ), and was removed from the market by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1968 for lack of proof of effectiveness and because the major report of effectiveness contained deficiencies and misrepresentations. The manufacturer contested FDA action in the courts, but the Court of Appeals, Second District, upheld the FDA action in 1972. Betahistine has not been marketed in the United States since then. I have that information, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

A number of clinical trials of betahistine followed the court action, published mainly in German and other European journals. Results have been mixed, and although some trials show slight advantage of betahistine over placebo . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLES

On Equivalence Trials and Alternative Medicine
Bevan Yueh and Jay F. Piccirillo
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;129(4):403-404.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo—Reply
Michael Weiser, Wolfgang Strösser, and Peter Klein
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;129(4):498.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT