How effective is Conventional Medicine (ConMed)?

A good question that someone asked me. Well, here's what ConMed's own site Clinical Evidence says, at http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/about/knowledge.jsp.

What proportion of commonly used treatments are supported by good evidence, what proportion should not be used or used only with caution, and how big are the gaps in our knowledge? Of around 2500 treatments covered 13% are rated as beneficial, 23% likely to be beneficial, 8% as trade off between benefits and harms, 6% unlikely to be beneficial, 4% likely to be ineffective or harmful, and 46%, the largest proportion, as unknown effectiveness.

Now, are you more impressed by the 13% Treatments rated as beneficial figure (actually shown as 12% on their graph) or the "in 65% of patient cases, GPs documented a health improvement" (from homeopathy) mentioned in my previous post?

If you were the patient, would you ask for Homeopathic or ConMed treatment first?