{"id":5110,"date":"2019-09-18T11:32:07","date_gmt":"2019-09-18T09:32:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/netzwerk-homoeopathie.info\/?p=5110"},"modified":"2019-10-26T03:27:04","modified_gmt":"2019-10-26T01:27:04","slug":"offener-brief-an-gesundheitsminister-spahn-zur-fortgeltung-der-erstattung-von-homoeopathie-in-der-gkv","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/netzwerk-homoeopathie.info\/en\/offener-brief-an-gesundheitsminister-spahn-zur-fortgeltung-der-erstattung-von-homoeopathie-in-der-gkv\/","title":{"rendered":"Open letter to Health Minister Spahn on the continuation of the reimbursement of homeopathy in the SHI"},"content":{"rendered":"Lesedauer \/ Reading Time:<\/span> 8<\/span> min<\/span><\/span>
\"Peanuts
Peanuts … ?!?<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn declared yesterday, 17.09.2019, that he would adhere further to the reimbursability of homeopathy by the statutory health insurance funds. He cited the comparatively marginal costs compared to the total expenditure of the SHI funds, i.e. the sufficiently strained “peanuts” argument, as the reason for this.<\/p>\n

There are undoubtedly only bad reasons for Mr. Spahn’s decision, but this is undoubtedly the worst of all. We will see how politicians and other groups react. We, for our part, feel obliged to respond to his decision in the form of an open letter to Mr Spahn:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Header<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Information Network Homeopathy<\/strong>
\nWe clarify – you have the choice!<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

18.09.2019<\/p>\n

Mr
\nFederal Minister for Health
\nJens Spahn
\nby e-mail<\/p>\n

Dear Federal Minister Spahn,<\/p>\n

From your statement of 17.09.19 we have learned that you have decided not to exclude homeopathy from the benefits of statutory health insurance. In our opinion, you are basing your decision on an aspect which is ultimately irrelevant and which has never been or is the subject of scientific criticism of homeopathy.<\/p>\n

Of course, we regard every single euro for homeopathy as an unjustified use of contributions from the solidarity community and not as “peanuts”. However, the reasons underlying the demand for an end to reimbursement and ultimately the questioning of the property as medicine of homeopathic products are quite different and far more important. With your decision and its justification, you give room not least to an increasing hostility to science and facts, the effects of which you then try to recapture elsewhere with a compulsory vaccination.<\/p>\n