“Not only sick, but also healthy people believe infinite nonsense”

Mr. Ernst, Prince Charles is a tireless advocate of homeopathy. How did he get into it?

The royal family has always flirted with this healing method. The affinity goes back to a doctor who was personally acquainted with Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, around 1800 and who introduced it to England. In the last century there were even five homeopathic hospitals in Great Britain, but they have not survived. But Prince Charles not only propagates homeopathy, but all alternative medicine, as long as it has nothing to do with modern technology.

For example, Charles, the Prince of Wales, believes in aromatherapy?

He believes in almost everything, from acupuncture to Bach flowers and osteopathy to pulse and tongue diagnosis – the main thing is that the procedure is alternative. Charles follows a simple formula: the older and more “natural”, the better. The fact that there is no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of these methods does not seem to bother him. Charles raves about the wisdom of the old days that civilization has buried and needs to be revived. But homeopathy and detox are of no use against cancer, on the contrary.

Of course, some patients feel better after taking homeopathic globules.

That’s right, even animals get better, but that’s not due to the substance ingested, but to placebo effects and the empathy of the doctor. I’m not saying that every alternative method is nonsense, the effectiveness of herbal medicine and mind-body medicine, for example, is backed by good evidence. Conventional medicine can learn a lot from alternative medicine, even from homeopathy. The relationship between doctor and patient is sometimes exemplary here. Alternative therapists usually listen carefully and take sufficient time for their patients.

You have just published a critical book about Prince Charles’ passion for alternative medicine. Aren’t you doing the heir to the throne too much honour?

Charles is just one prominent example in my book that I’m trying to use to shed light on alternative medicine. In this area, Charles’ influence on public opinion around the world is considerable. He has also proudly described himself as an “enemy of the Enlightenment”. It is amazing that he sees himself as a medical expert, even though he has no idea about medicine. It could be used for more meaningful purposes and, for example, lead the fight against global warming more effectively. Charles is not a natural scientist, but studied art history. Under the guidance of his guru Laurens van der Post, he slipped into anti-rationalism at an early age. He sought mystical experiences with him in the Kalahari desert.

So with the writer van der Post, who campaigned against apartheid?

Yes. Sir van der Post was an extremely shady figure. Apparently he wrote fascinating books and at the same time lied his biography together in such a way that in the end he no longer knew what was fiction and what was truth. At fifty he got pregnant with a fourteen-year-old girl who had been entrusted to him. He kept it as a mistress for years.

You and Charles have a history together. The Prince made sure that in 1993 the University of Exeter established the world’s first professorship in alternative medicine, to which you were appointed.

Yes, but Charles and I had completely different ideas about the tasks of this professorship. My team and I researched alternative medicine, but Charles didn’t want to question it, he wanted to promote it. As I found increasing evidence that many alternative medicine procedures are ineffective and sometimes even dangerous, tensions between me and Charles grew. Finally, in 2010, he participated in the abolition of my chair. His private secretary accused me of breach of trust, and my university launched a thirteen-month investigation into me. I had to hire a lawyer. In the end, I was acquitted, but I had lost all support and retired early.

Is Prince Charles’ behavior at the time the reason you are criticizing him now?

no I waited ten years hoping someone would write a book about Charles’ esoteric side. Since no one wanted to touch this hot potato, I took up pen myself. I’ve tried to be as objective as possible. Therefore, I mention the personal dispute only briefly and for the sake of completeness.

Did the prince contact you after the book came out?

Of course not, that would be unthinkable. Meeting up for tea with one of his critics or calling him up isn’t Charles’s style. He has never faced such discussions. If at all, he communicates only through his private secretary. Well, at least I didn’t end up in the Tower of London, the royal dungeon.

Are you disappointed in Charles?

Sure, also sad, but it’s not about me as a person. Charles could have done so much good with his influence, like stopping seriously ill people from desperately clinging to alternative medicine, shortening their lives or wasting vast amounts of money. In England, the patients have to pay for the treatments themselves, while in Germany and Switzerland the health insurance companies pay for a lot of things, which I find incomprehensible. But not only sick people, also very healthy people believe endless amounts of nonsense. On the Internet, millions of websites spread outright lies about all sorts of quackery. My book should be a contribution in the fight against irrationalism. I want to show how Charles and other alternative medicine adepts fall for and spread fallacies.

And what do you think of scientism, of belief in “science”?

I am against that too. Unfortunately, medical students are still being turned into learning machines. You have to stuff yourself to the hilt with knowledge. Thinking falls short. When I was teaching at the University of Vienna, I offered a critical thinking course. After I left for Exeter it disappeared from the curriculum.

How did you design the course?

Quite simply: We have taken on current publications, often from the field of alternative medicine. The students had to identify the weak points and make suggestions as to how the studies could have been carried out better.

You yourself grew up in a homeopathic household. . .

. . . like Charles. We have one more thing in common: we were born in the same year. But that’s it. As a young doctor, I worked for a few months in a homeopathic hospital, even with success. That’s why I know what I’m talking about. The question of what helped the patient, the homeopathic remedy or my attention, was a motivation for me to explore this area.