Tim Caulfield, Canada Research Chair at the University of Alberta, speaks with Alberta Primetime host Michael Higgins about recent comments by the premier about chemtrails, homeopathy and more.
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Michael Higgins: Let’s start on the prospect of homeopathic treatment coverage. The health minister didn’t rule it out during the news conference. What do you make of this as a consideration at the current stage of the health system overhaul?
Tim Caulfield: Incredibly frustrating. Homeopathy is complete scientific nonsense. You don’t have to pull your punches at all when you talk about homeopathy. It is magical thinking and the fact that the government is even spending a moment of time considering homeopathy as one of the things that they want to do to solve this massive crisis that we’re having with our health care system is mind blowing.
They should quickly set that aside and focus on evidence-based strategy. We’re not going to fix our health-care system with pseudoscience and magical thinking. We need evidence-based solutions, we need empathy, we need good public engagement, not this.
MH: If members of the (United Conservative) base are demanding this, would it not be on the government to, at the very least, explore the idea and then have a basis to explain either why it’s rejecting the concept or rationalize acceptance?
TC: I can’t emphasize this enough: This would be like spending time considering, ‘Is the world flat?’ (and) ‘Should we be using flying carpets to deal with the congestion at airports?’ That’s the level of absurdity here.
If there are people in the government that think that homeopathy works, that’s worrisome in itself. Or are they just leaning into this because there may be individuals in their base that are interested in it? That’s also worrisome because then the government should take this opportunity to nudge people towards critical thinking and science-based approaches.
MH: How much funding or support does alternative medicine such as homeopathy receive in other provinces?
TC: There is a variety of approaches that you’re seeing from the regulatory perspective, but in general, they don’t receive that much funding. We’re supposed to be taking the evidence-based approach. It should be services that are deemed medically necessary that are covered and there are very few alternative medicines that fit that category.
It’s important to recognize here (that) we have a lot of research on this because a lot of people might be saying, ‘Well, at least let’s study it.’ It’s been studied over and over. I would argue it’s been studied too much. The conclusions are always the same: It’s complete nonsense. Please, Alberta government, move on.
MH: Let’s say the Alberta government does provide some form of funding or support. How would you see that playing with the existing medical system? Could it be that family doctors would be expected to acknowledge or engage in some form of alternative medicine?
TC: I would argue that family physicians have a legal and ethical obligation to say, if a patient asks for homeopathy, ‘The evidence tells us this does not work. The evidence says that there are conventional therapies that might be more appropriate. Do you still want it?’
People should be able to make their own choices but those should be informed choices. Also, it’s different when you’re talking about using public dollars to fund something like this. It can be harmful, too, because it’s legitimizing pseudoscience. It’s sort of inviting misinformation to become part of our health-care system, and holy cow, that’s not a good idea.
MH: The latest round of flu and COVID-19 vaccines are now available in the province. What is your assessment of how this year’s fall campaign is being rolled out in Alberta?
TC: There have been a lot of missteps already. I think that we really need to have a stronger campaign, stronger public messaging about the value of vaccines.
We’re seeing a decrease in the uptake and we’re also seeing an increase in distrust. I think it’s incumbent on the government to put out science-informed messaging about the value, because it’s a win-win. If we get people vaccinated, it’s also good for the health-care system, it reduces the burden on the health care system, it’s better for our community and of course, it’s better for individuals.
MH: Much has been made in recent weeks of so called chemtrails and how they’ve become a point of discussion as the premier travels the province to hear from party supporters. What impact, if any, does this have on the state of political dialogue in Alberta?
TC: This is a hardcore conspiracy theory. This is like, ‘We didn’t go to the moon’, ‘The earth is flat.’ It’s that kind of conspiracy theory.
We’re not talking about cloud seeding for weather; we’re not talking about research on using those strategies to help with rain. Chemtrails are the idea that there are evil forces using weather to poison us for mind control. There’s just no evidence to support this at all.
And again, this should be an opportunity for the government to embrace scientific thinking, not pseudoscience and conspiracy theories. This is spreading all over the world. We’re seeing this discussion in the United States as part of their election cycle. We’re seeing states in the U.S. actually ban chemtrails. This is just horrible and I can’t believe this is where political dialogue is now. We can do better world, we can do better. So let’s do better.
MH: And your expectation is maybe that this falls off the government’s radar once the Premier is free and clear of the UCP leadership review?
TC: I hope so. I can’t believe that these individuals think that the evidence actually supports chemtrails. It must be that they’re playing to their base, that they just don’t want to say that for fear of hurting their base.
I’m speculating here, but I personally think that you can answer questions about things like chemtrails and homeopathy empathetically, and explain, in a respectful manner, why this stuff is nonsense. We need more of that from our political leaders.