I voted

[mirrorshard]

Lib Dem, for the record - was considering Green, but their science is about as rigorous as a rubber banana. If you can and you haven't, go do it. Polls close at 10 pm.

Comments

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

It's not the presence of a few woo-types in their party that's the problem, it's the fact that their health policy is apparently being written by them. If they want to be a serious political party, they need to have coherent, evidence-based policies on everything, not just a few hot topics.

[alextiefling.livejournal.com]

Well, they review their policies often, and determine them by the direct involvement of party members and activists. I guess I need to get more involved and try to change the health policy.

It's also still only one policy. If I never voted for any party which had a single policy I disliked, I'd never vote.

[(Anonymous)]

I generally vote people - well, institutional cultures - rather than policies. Partly because I have less than no faith that policies will survive election intact (anyone's policies), and partly because I feel I get a better sense of their likely response to situations that way, rather than just their preliminary intentions.

[mirrorshard.livejournal.com]

Whoops; that was me.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

I also think that the wackiness of this policy is being over-represented. It's not actually advocating treating cancer with crystal healing! The NHS also incorporates alternative medicine in restricted circumstances (eg acupuncture), so it's suggesting continuing an existing practice, and my understanding of the discussion of the policy 2 years ago was that it was meant to encourage the studying and testing on non-traditional treatments to see if there was any validity to claims of efficacy - not to suggest their introduction on the basis of anecdotal evidence.