The lack of evidence for Ibogaine as a treatment for heroin dependence by Alex Wodak/TITLE> <META name="title" content="The lack of evidence for Ibogaine as a treatment for heroin dependence by Alex Wodak"> <META name="description" content="Abstract presented during the ibogaine session in Barcelona, Spain in May 2008, on Monday, May 12th during the International Harm Reduction's (IHRA) 19th Conference by Dimitri Mobenggo Mugianis."> <META name="keywords" content="ibogaine, Alex Wodak, ibogaine conference, International Harm Reduction, 19th International Conference, IHRA, RAI, Recursos dÕAnimaci— Intercultural, Howard Lotsof, Dora Weiner Foundation, Bwiti, Dimitri Mobengo Mugianis, Alex Wodak, Alonso Perez, Ibogaine Association, Daba Beal, Cures Not Wars, Ben de Loenen, Ibogaine: Rite of Passage, Ibogaine therapy, addiction, dependence, treatment, opiate, opiate dependence, chemical dependence, ibogaine art, iboga alkaloids"> <META name="robots" content="index, follow"> <META name="contact" content="ibogaine@desk.nl"> <META name="homepage" content="http://www.ibogaine.org, http://www.ibogaine.desk.nl">  </head> <body> <center><h1>The lack of evidence for Ibogaine as a treatment for heroin dependence</h1></center> <blockquote> <align="left"><h3> Abstract # 1192 - 6PM - Session 2</a> <align="left"><h3>Author(s): Alex Wodak</h3> <align="left"><h3>Presenter: Alex Wodak </h3> <p> Since the tragic experience of thalidomide some decades ago, medicine has been based firmly on scientific evidence. All interventions are assumed to be ineffective, unsafe and cost-ineffective until proven otherwise. Harm reduction is also based firmly on scientific evidence while conventional drug policy relying heavily on supply control has a weak committment to evidence. Theoretical justifications for interventions are of interest but they are no substitute for rigorous scientific evidence of effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness. For example, oral naltrexone has been strongly advocated by critics of harm reduction as a treatment for heroin dependence on the basis of attractive theory. However, empirical studies showed that clearly naltrexone is ineffective, unsafe and cost-ineffective as a treatment for heroin dependence. Published evidence for Ibogaine as a treatment for heroin dependence is unimpressive. Persistent and sincere advocacy for ibogaine is no substitute for rigorous evidence. 'Evidence' means several rigorous scientific trials published in reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals demonstrating major benefits consistently and in the absence of unacceptable side effects. Evidence of effectiveness preferably (but not necessarily) requires randomised controlled trials where this is possible. 'Evidence' is not a strong theoretical rationale. Advocates for Ibogaine and harm reduction clinicians and scientists will be brought closer together when all agree that all prevention and treatment interventions have to be based on rigorous scientific evidence of effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness. </p> </blockquote> <center> <p> <input type="button" value="Close this window" onclick="self.close()"> </p> </center> </BODY> </HTML>