Under threat of class action lawsuit, maker of “homeopathic” medicine settles, and exits North America


I’ve written more times that I want to about homeopathy, the elaborate placebo system of “remedies”. It looks like medicine, and pharmacies stock it on shelves alongside products that contain medicine. But with homeopathy the common “strengths” or “potencies” of products are usually so dilute there’s no possibility of a single molecule of the original substance remaining in the remedy. What’s further, the original substance isn’t medicine, either. They can be derived from from substances like Stonehenge (yes, that Stonehenge), shipwrecks, ascending colons, light bulbs, and even vacuum cleaner dirt. While homeopathic products are deemed “safe and effective” by Health Canada’s Natural Health Products Directorate, the awareness that homeopathic products contain no active ingredients and have no medicinal effects has become increasingly well known. In 2011, I noted that manufacturer Boiron had been served by two class action lawsuit, and that this might be the beginning of a trend.

The legal action route seems to be having an effect – which is good, given pharmacies and even regulators have refused to act. Homeopathy manufacturer Heel has decided to exit the North American market completely:

In the USA and Canada, manufacturers of OTC homeopathic medicinal products have been confronted with accusations through class action lawsuits. Heel Inc., the Heel Group’s U.S.-based subsidiary, was also faced with two such attempts recently. Both cases have been settled without conceding the allegations. The financial burden on Heel Inc., however, was substantial.

In a subsequent risk-benefit analysis of its global activities, the Heel Group decided to focus on strengthening its excellent position in South America, Central Europe and Eastern Europe and to withdraw from business activities in the USA and Canada for the time being.

The class action sought refunds for consumers that purchased Heel products. Here’s a few excerpts from the original complaint [PDF]:

Health care costs in the United States reached almost $2.6 trillion in 2010, with 10% of that amount spent on retail and prescription drugs. But unless drug manufacturers disclose the complete truth to consumers, consumers are unable to make informed decisions about where to spend their limited healthcare dollars.  Most consumers who purchase homeopathic drugs in the OTC aisles of retail stores are unaware of homeopathic dilution principles, and are merely seeking a natural alternative to prescription or other OTC non-homeopathic (i.e., allopathic) drugs. Accordingly, the homeopathic drug industry strives to market its wares as natural, safe, and effective alternatives to prescription and nonhomeopathic OTC drugs. But this latter category of drugs, which are all allopathic, have undergone rigorous scrutiny by the FDA and its appointed scientific committees. In contrast, homeopathic drugs undergo no FDA approval of efficacy or labeling claims.  Indeed, the FDA, itself, has publicly stated that it is aware of no scientific evidence that homeopathy is effective.


Generally, Defendant advertises its Pain Relief Products through misrepresentations and omissions, including but not limited to, claims that the Products:

  • provide “Natural” pain relief when, in fact, the Products contain large portions of non-natural ingredients;
  • provide “On the Spot” pain relief when, in reality, homeopathic products allegedly work by aggravating symptoms initially;
  • are “Proven” or “Clinically Proven” as “Effective” when such clinical proof, if it even exists, consists either of biased studies performed by investigators compensated by Defendant or its parent or subsidiary corporations or studies that fall short of relevant agency advertising standards, facts which are not disclosed to consumers;
  • as being “Doctor Recommended,” “Used By Doctors,” and “Used by Doctors Worldwide,” which is untrue, or even if true, is communicated to the public without disclosing whether these doctors are allopathic practitioners or homeopathic practitioners.

There’s more details at heelclassactionsettlement.com, which notes that Heel has settled the lawsuit for $1 million USD, including some amazing concessions agreed to by the manufacturer. It’s not surprising they’ve decided to exit the market completely, rather than comply with these conditions of sale:

i) FDA Disclaimer: Defendant will include the following language on the same outer label or package panel that bears the Drug Facts box: “These statements have not been reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration. They are supported by traditional homeopathic principles.” (ii) Dilution Disclaimer: The back panel of each Product’s outer label or package shall be modified to include the following language: “X is a homeopathic dilution. For more information, see the Settlement Agreement in the documents section of this website.” (iii) “Natural” claims: Unless the Product contains all natural ingredients, Heel shall use the term “natural” in a manner that is appropriately qualified (e.g., by using an asterisk that links to the phrase: “Contains [X] natural active ingredients out of [X] actives, see Drug Facts”). (iv) “Clinically Proven” claims: Heel will cease using the words “Clinically Proven,” “Proven … Effective” or any similar representation that expressly or impliedly asserts medical, scientific or clinical proof on any Products for which it does not have at least two clinical studies performed by independent researchers that utilize generally accepted protocols such as randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trials, with publication and peer review; further, if any clinical trial are sponsored by Heel, Heel shall adequately disclose this fact to consumers. (v) “Doctor Recommended” claims: Heel shall cease using the words “Doctor Recommended” and “[U]sed by doctors worldwide” unless it also discloses to consumers the percentage of those doctors who are homeopathic practitioners and the percentage who are allopathic or any other type of medical practitioners.

Emphasis added.

This is a tremendous win for consumers. I wrote about the Heel product Traumeel a few years ago and noted that it was Health Canada approved despite any persuasive evidence to show it was actually effective. This class action lawsuit has forced Heel to disclose the facts of homeopathy, something regulators like Health Canada’s Natural Health Products Directorate refuse to do. Even though Heel is leaving the USA and Canada, the regulations still haven’t changed: Homeopathic products are still allowed for sale to consumers yet these “remedies” are not labelled to show that the product has no medicine in it. Pharmacies and other retailers magnify the confusion by stocking these products alongside actual medicine. How can consumers make informed, rational decisions about their health when manufacturers and retailers don’t honestly disclose the facts about the products they sell? Like Randall Munroe noted,

I just noticed CVS has started stocking homeopathic pills on the same shelves with–and labeled similarly to–their actual medicine. Telling someone who trusts you that you’re giving them medicine, when you know you’re not, because you want their money, isn’t just lying–it’s like an example you’d make up if you had to illustrate for a child why lying is wrong.

The continued sale of homeopathy in pharmacies is disgraceful and I’m disappointed that the pharmacy profession continues to prioritize profits above ethical patient care. I’m thrilled to see lawsuits bringing the harsh light of reality on to homeopathy manufacturers, and hope that we’ll see more consumers using the courts to accomplish what regulators refuse to do.



64 thoughts on “Under threat of class action lawsuit, maker of “homeopathic” medicine settles, and exits North America

  1. I wish non-homeopaths wouldn’t use term ‘allopathic’, ever. It doesn’t actually just mean ‘non-homeopathic’. It essentially means ‘an imaginary form of medicine which homeopaths are trained to see whenever they look at actual medicine, and which [like homeopathy itself] hasn’t really changed at all in 200 years’. In terms of the connotation, you could substitute the term ‘muggle’ and not be far off. Though ‘muggle’ is probably less derogatory, even to wizards.

  2. It seems bizarre to be prosecuting these relatively harmless products when oxycontin addiction floods the nation, much of it legally through the hands of prescribers and pharmacists. Perhaps this has nothing to do with science — pursuit of homeopaths seems so trivial when pharmacists blandly and without any liability dispense dangerously addictive drugs, often to obviously wobbly customers — often right before your eyes.

    • Nothing bizarre about it. One of the great harms, and this alas has happened over and over, is that gullible and/or desperate people will skip actual treatment that works in favor of worthless tripe. And other less gullible people, aka con artists, are making tons of money of of them.

      • perhaps they should ban “organic” food also, as there are no regulations for that either and in no way can a company prove that their product is truly organic.

    • Getting the truth out about homoeopathy doesn’t have anything to do with prescription pill abuse, which is also a problem. That would be a second article. Even if you perceive it as the more dangerous of the two problems, it does not make the false claims of homeopathy any less dangerous.

      • It’s not about ‘prescription pill abuse’, it’s about the pill itself which one: does not heal anything. And second: it’s full of side effects, at the point it can harm one big time, even kill you. That’s all.

        The fact that there is no active ingredient left inside a homeopathic remedies (actually it not suppose to), it does not mean there is nothing there… have you heard about energy, vibration. This is the problem, ‘modern’ medicine does not have devices to measure/detect that. Remember Einstein famous formula:
        E = mc2, which means energy can transform in matter and matter (flowers, minerals, animal tissue tincture) can transform in energy (vibration). And this is done by a process called potentiation.

      • Isn’t it odd that none of the world’s physicists seem to explain E=Mc2 the way that you do. You are talking religion (belief) and have no working knowledge of real physics. The people who found the Higgs boson, and who designed and build the Large Hadron Collider for that purpose actually know a thing or two about physics and they would get a big eye roll reading your view of things. The fact that you typed this on a computer is a testament to science, not to the “vibrations” of homeopathy.

    • There is a mechanism in place to deal with complaints against pharmaceutical manufacturers. The same is not true with manufacturers of pretend remedies such as Homeopathy. The risk is real. These companies willingly manufacture remedies not only to insomnia, but to more life-threatening illness (recall the recent petition to the WHO to send homeopathy). Homeopaths also sell “nosodes” which they claim are effects as vaccines to prevent illness, and this is sold to parents who want an alternative to vaccines, which they wrongly feel are more dangerous.

    • Much us being done to better control dangerous drugs to keep them out of the hands of abusers–there is TONS of regulation of the rx industry and virtually zero for magic water being sold as medicine. The two things are not equivalent problems. Each needs to be addressed, making your argument a straw man.

  3. Firstly, you misunderstand the role of the pharmacist, but worse, you describe situations without any references or details. Even if someone is “wobbly”, you have no idea why. Thirdly, much is being done to reduce rx pain med addiction–so much so that a person with real need of them will likely be treated as suspect and many docs are fearful of prescribing.

    There is nothing “bizarre” about getting rid of useless products that make false claims–there is much potential for harm if people waste money on something useless in lieu of getting timely medical treatment.

  4. If you read all of your link, you will see that the problems are with THEFT of these drugs and the abuse associated with that–none of which comes under the supervision of either a physician or a pharmacist. Again, you are mixing oranges and apples.

    I explained the potential harm of homeopathy above, but for the record, the problem is that people who use it may very likely not seek medical treatment. It is also blatant fraud to market water as medicine. Making people pay for little bottles of water is pretty slimy as well.

    You are probably correct to say nobody got hurt overdosing on homeopathy (so what?), but too much of anything (including water) can kill.

      • That is simply a list of anecdotes and very short if compared to the instances of catastrophic results of conventional medicine. The question to be decided would be: even if homeopathy is without effect, how many people have been saved by homeopathy simply because it prevented them from involvement with dangers of conventional medicine, and allowed natural healing to take place. Only such a study, based on the presumption that conventional medicine, tho useful, is not innocent either, would decide this question.

  5. Hi Mark S,
    Perhaps I fail to understand your reasoning?
    Anything that changes the body beneficially can have negative effects as well. There is always a risk involved. However, when benefits vastly outweigh the side effects (also taking into account severity of both), surely this has some impact on assessing a medication.
    However, when something does not change the body (apart from hydration), it has no DIRECT harm. Indirect harm can result in failing to take positive action to remedy the illness.

    I also note your request for ‘real evidence’ (not anecdotal or hypothetical) of the widespread harm that homeopathy causes.’
    Perhaps it’s my inexperience in these matters showing through, but what form would that evidence take? I’m sure you wouldn’t want to perform a study where ‘harm’ is caused intentionally.
    Have the homeopaths not had studies done that show their offerings are both beneficial and without harm?
    Thank you in advance for your time

  6. I had this friend who was “studying” to become a homeopath several years ago. He grew very angry with me when I refused to shell out hundreds of dollars to have his homeopath do a workup of my health history. Anyhow, at this friend’s insistence, I did try one of these homeopathic remedies. I can’t even remember which one I tried, but those sugary little balls would go nicely on some cupcakes.

  7. I suppose this is merely speculation, but I’d guess that that a significant magnitude more people have run up considerable medical expenses to cure colds that would have gone away without treatment than have gotten into trouble by taking over-the-counter homeopathic remedies. (We were talking about pharmacy shelves.) This is because of the degree of uncertainty in medical diagnosis and prognosis following on the vagaries of human psychology, and the fact that followers of conventional medicine outnumber homeopathics to another significant magnitude. These are factors that must be taken into account in a fair evaluation of parity of harm. Also, and with respect to colds, the homeopathic remedy may delay recourse to a medical doctor giving the cold a chance to pass on. More to my point, tho, would be, how many people injured on the job with minor back pain or sprains, have turned to homeopaths and become addicted to opiates in short order? As for the catastrophic instances of homeopathy gone wrong, these have nothing to do with over-the-counter remedies. And frankly many more outrages take place every day in hundreds of hospitals. My point is that the disproportionate prosecution of homeopathy based more on ‘principle’ than on fact and all too easily falling back on a shared and unexamined ‘certainty’ about the body and the mind; completely avoids grappling with the virtually criminal extortion that the health industry extracts on the basis of a small, continually fluffed up bag of tricks, and the control of painkillers. Modern medicine has come to a dead end. All improvements now go to the system, not to the patient. Compare the increase in costs in the last two decades to that of life expectancy. This is not due to homeopathy.

    • Hi Mark S,
      Again, perhaps I fail to understand your reasoning. You are referring to the evaluation of harm yet you make no reference to statistics. I am no expert in the field, however shouldn’t we be looking at the proportion people harmed versus people helped by each form of assistance (homeopathy and medical in this case) – as well as the degree of harm/benefit.

      For example, there is a leopard killing drunks in an Indian village. Take this to be the problem.
      One solution is to get a group of people together to hunt it down and deal with it. In the process, someone may step on a sharp stick and hurt themselves, yet the task gets done eventually. A poorly organised task force may incur greater injuries than a well organised task force (inefficient doctor, effective doctor).

      Another form of treatment of the problem may be to approach the local witch doctor who waves his magic wand and spread about his magic fluid (water).

      In the latter case, no one is directly harmed, yet the problem goes unresolved. Perhaps the leopard moves off to another territory and it seems as if the juju worked.

      You can focus your efforts on improving the taskforce (better training, better preparation, better weaponry/defense). Or you could complain about how many people got harmed in the hunt and how it would have been better if the hunt had never happened.

      As a final point, as has often been said, just because aeroplanes may crash occasionally, that’s no justification to support flying carpets.

      • Hi GrahamH –

        GH: “Again, perhaps I fail to understand your reasoning. You are referring to the evaluation of harm yet you make no reference to statistics. I am no expert in the field, however shouldn’t we be looking at the proportion people harmed versus people helped by each form of assistance (homeopathy and medical in this case) – as well as the degree of harm/benefit.”

        Me: There’s a meme going round which cites the 1998 JAMA for the figure 212,000 deaths due to FDA-approved prescription drugs in 2 years, vs. 0 such deaths due to unapproved essential oils. Seems the FDA is about to come down on EOs making health claims. That’s a statistic of some sort, which is only of rhetorical value, but illustrates my point. (However, I’m coming to feel that, especially given the dark underside of the friendly pharmacy, homeopathic remedies ought not to be there, but fine to sell them in supermarkets.) My point is simply that the petty persecution of homeopathy is easier and more fun than a serious critique of current dominant medical catastrophe and the philosophies behind it. It would indeed be interesting to look at “at the proportion people harmed versus people helped” by conventional pharmacy and medicine, but many value-colored issues make that almost impossible — things like unnatural prolongation of life by extreme interventions, economic costs, egregious profits, deep entanglements with financial market manipulation, social effects, widespread undermining of personal responsibility, etc.

        GH: “As a final point, as has often been said, just because aeroplanes may crash occasionally, that’s no justification to support flying carpets.”

        Me: It’s not a small matter of airplanes crashing occasionally but a gargantuan malfunctionality whose guardians distract us with an indignant pursuit of flying carpets.

    • Mark – people are lying (saying that homeopathic medicine works when it clearly does not) and getting paid for it. That’s a huge problem. I don’t see this as a medical issue; I see it as a consumer fraud issue. That some people die from choosing homeopathy over other treatments is an added issue, but not the main concern. That belief in homeopathy promotes sloppy thinking and a misunderstanding of science is also an added issue (and a big one, and a pet issue for me), but not the main one. The main one is consumer fraud.

      Are people being harmed by addictions / misuse of oxycontin and other narcotics / approved drugs? Yep. But to say that only one issue can be fought is a false dichotomy. People get killed by misusing guns and cigarettes as well, and you’re not arguing that we (which is to say, the gov’t) should be more active in fighting those problems. You’ve picked your own personal issue, and are using this conversation to link to it.

      Selling homeopathy rememdies to the public is bad. You don’t seem to be disagreeing with that. I (and I think everyone else here) would agree that there are other problems in society as well (heck, lots of ’em). If you want to argue, don’t argue that other things are worse, argue how homeopathy *helps* society, and good luck with that.

      Frankly, teaching the public about how drugs work by this homeopathy issue could help your issue (mis-use of actual, working drugs) just by upper the general public knowledge.

      • What Mark is unwilling to acknowledge is that homeopathy is fraud. It is water and sugar pills and, as such, any claims as to its medical efficacy are unquestionably dishonest.
        Homeopathy is fraud in exactly the same way Bernie Madoff’s financial investment schemes were fraud. And people are harmed simply by being fraudulently parted from their money. People are harmed by being lied to… in order to encourage them to deceive themselves… in order to continue to part with more money for imaginary medicine again, again and again… Homeopathy is probably one of the most successful scams ever devised, because it is so simple.

        Mark is, in effect, an advocate of fraud. Fraud, as far as he is concerned, is perfectly ok.

  8. I have been medically treated with prescriptions and with homeopathic remedies. My body responded better to the natural stuff. The side effects from the prescriptions made life miserable. I have never had any side effects using homeopathic or naturapathic medicine. I do agree that pharmacies should not sell natural products if the pharmacist is not trained to deal with natural remedies. Pharmacies should stick to prescriptions and natural remedies should be sold by a qualified individual.

    • What homeopathic remedies do not have is primary effects. Of course something that has no effectiveness whatsoever will have no side effects.

      On another note, how does one control which part of its history a water molecule remembers? You don’t even want to know where those molecules have been.

    • The natural remedies in homeopathy, water and sugar, are sold in supermarkets and corner stores.
      There was nothing more in any natural remedy any homeopath gave you.

    • Natalie, you seem to have a strange notion of what “natural” is and is not. And you seem to be harbouring the illusion that “natural” is by definition a good thing.
      Firstly “natural” isn’t a qualitative adjective. And, secondly” there’s nothing “natural” about homeopathy. Something tells me you don’t know what homeopathy actually is, in spite of all that’s written above. Have you read it(?) or are you just a dyed-in-the-wool advocate. Actually in the light of the blog post above, your comment is doubtful. However…
      The reason you suffer no side-effects from homeopathy is because it is water and sugar pills. Homeopathy is a form of quackery, deceit, fraud. It’s not medicine at all. It does not and cannot cure anything – and it never has cured anything.

      Naturopathy is also quackery, but for slightly different reasons.

  9. This brand is on sale right now at Amazon. So you know, whatever. I’ll save my outrage for bigger problems.

    • It’s a big problem to me when a baby dies because her parents gave her homeopathic water instead of getting medical treatment that would easily have saved her.

  10. To paraphrase Tim Minchin “Do you know what they ‘alternative medicine’ that’s been proven to work? Medicine”
    How anyone can defend homeopathy baffles me. I just don’t get it. Maybe it’s just people’s need to believe in something and they’re too stupid to know what’s a sensible thing to believe in. Homeopathy is obviously not the only example.

  11. I look forward to no longer seeing Traumeel as a sponsor of events such as the Victoria Marathon in British Columbia.

    The false legitimacy they acquired from associating with such events was disgusting to me. As was the misinformation they appeared to be distributing at product demonstrations setup for the event… Alongside several other snake oil salesmen with everything from herbs to the equivalent to power balance bracelets.

    A couple years ago I confronted the salespeople at the Traumeel table at the Victoria Marathon complaining about some of the things that they have now apparently agreed to no longer do and was given angry non-answers. The marathon organisers gave me no reply when I complained to them… I assume because of the sponsorship money.

    • “Dr” Nancy is not really a doctor and why would you recall vials of water or sugar pills? Ms. Malik makes a nonsensical statement–such is homeopathy and its practitioners. The best I can say is that it might be the cleanest water some Indians have access to, if the standards are enforced and include the water used for preparation. Do Hindus thump the vials on the Bible for sucussing I wonder?

  12. … because they’re manufacturing placebo-flavored candy. (I finished that thought for you, Doc.)

    Orgone, radium therapy, patent medicines, reiki — you can do as much of it as you like. But when you claim it’s an effective substitute for medicine subjected to the scientific method and open dialogue? You become a liar whose job description is “leading scared, vulnerable people to negligent homicide in exchange for money.”

    You’re right, Doc, nobody has issued a “product recall” on wishes and water. Chemotherapy isn’t inexpensive, or fun, or without risk, but homeopathy is the same as ‘doing nothing and assuming cancer will, you know, work itself out.’

    A hundred years of actual science says that’s not what illness does: you can’t punch it in the feelings. By teaching people to distrust the best remedy we have for *anything,* you’re encouraging them away from the uncomfortable, expensive, risky things that represent the best chance they have not to die.

    No product recalls, that’s 100% correct [because when the FDA says, “Change the wording on this or take it off the market,” they do, 100% of the time.] But you, not we, have a large data-set that says: “Did these people choose your methods over Western evidence based medicine? Y/N. Are they dead of things we could’ve cured? Y/N. Is this preventable death permanent and irrevocable? Y/N.”

    Justify that. Don’t scramble to defend your wishes and water, explain why people who have treatable, curable illnesses die over and over of things science has an answer for.

  13. Another win for Big Pharma, and another nail in the coffin for healthcare in the USA. You quote a few cases of supposed harm by homeopathy and no information of the immense damage done by doctors and the chemical rubbish they peddle.. seriously? Hundreds of thousands are killed or maimed annually by pharmaceuticals and the doctors who push them onto people. Tens of millions in the USA are addicted to painkillers and many other pharmaceuticals and you dare attack homeopathy with its near flawless record of improving public health? Truly, none are as blind as those who will not see. Perhaps one day you too will be desperately ill and be bombarded by band aid medications which only make you feel worse, then, as you lie helpless think of homeopathy and the millions of desperate people it is helping in other parts of the world.

  14. You are all forgeting the absolute power of the placebo. Read any medical paper and look at the results section. Actual vs placebo. Placebo rates change during treatment too. Turns out this is maybe how homeopathics work (often the results are short lived). You can argue as much as you like about safety. They do work (placebo does) and yes there is some fraud. To answer that maybe heel can take us through their factory and show us how they are made?

    • I was in a car wreck at 60 mph back in 1998, I tore several muscles in my left arm and the skin around my biceps turned black. I never took and pain killers prescribed by my dr. I did take Traumeel though and was back in action at work and martial arts class in five days.. SO of it’s “placebo” , bring it on …So long as it works i’m for it, But really lets just face the fact that we don’t know why these medicines work, for it defies the normal conditioning of our minds. A conditioning big pharma wishes to continue.

  15. My family came from a medical background so I was a skeptic at first about homeopathy but I swear by it now. I will purchase it and endorse it wherever I can buy it, even if it is not in Canada. Alternative treatments have spared me from going on antiobotics when nothing regularly sold in Canada was working and that was enough proof for me. I don`t care if the “experts” claim its pretend medication or the placebo affect. If that works, then that is what should be used. News about Traumeel is very sad indeed because it is a staple in my medicine toolbox. I will be following them and buying it elsewhere. I am truly, truly sad.

  16. I tried homeopathy after exhausting all other options for my baby’s teething issues and I am so grateful that it worked – calming her and saving my sanity. I don’t think my 9 month old knew about the placebo effect. But it should be prescribed by a homeopath who knows what they’re doing. You have to get the right formulation or it won’t work. The theory is based on energetic principles not biochemical principles. If the remedy energetically matches the issues you’re having, it encourages your body to go into balance, and your symptoms are resolved. Open your mind.

    • Ever think that your baby grew out of the teething issue? The majority of us do without medicinal intervention of any kind.

    • Open your mind, says Mary

      Mary, perhaps you opened your mind so far that your brains fell out. Teething is a self-limiting condition as Doug points out in his comment.

      Please define “energetic principles”. If you are losing your sanity with one child, don’t have another. I had four, all who teethed with varying degrees of discomfort. They are all grown up now and I have lots of memories that mostly don’t include teething. This too shall pass, Mommy–no homeopathy needed.

  17. Leave the fools to their drugs, it is already coming round to bite them in the backside with the over use of antibiotics

    • A main area of overuse of antibiotics is their use in factory farming, not so much anymore in the doctors office. The only “fool” here is the one who paints with far too large a brush. Antibiotics have saved countless lives. You are likely too young to remember the scores who died from a simple cut becoming infected. Antibiotics have allowed surgery to expand to save or greatly improve untold more lives.

      The difference between science and quackery is that science is a process that acknowledges its mistakes and takes concrete steps to right them. It also keeps on conducting research that is leading to new sources and methods for obtaining new classes of antibiotics. Your comment is ill-conceived and demonstrates a profound ignorance of the history of science and public health.

  18. Your assertions here that homeopathy does not work are bogus. Why don’t you talk to the thousands of families, pet owners, etc who have used them with unmistakable success? I’ve used homeopathy on pets and seen dramatic results. My pets don’t have preconceived ideas about what will or what won’t happen when they are given anything, let alone homeopathy. Children and infants, as well. I was a total (can’t be overstated) skeptic when I first tried homeopathy- I did so as a “favor” for a friend who kept telling me how it would get rid of a situation I had. Sure enough. As much as I DIDN’T want it to work, as much as I DIDN’T want to admit it did, it did. I have been a believer ever since.

    I’m sorry for anyone who has had a poor outcome due to not being aware when the homeopathy isn’t working *in their situation*. Sometimes you have to take a different route, be it alternate or conventional. When using any sort of treatment, homeopathic or pharmaceutical, one must pay attention and see what is happening with the body. RX’s are no guarantees. Steve Jobs may still have died had he been using conventional medicine- any suggestion to the contrary is merely speculation. Same with the poor, dear baby. Steroids are not benign or without risk (and that is likely what would have been prescribed for the child).

    Additionally, what I’m reading here is that you individuals believe that options for many ought to be taken away because of the decisions of a few. It sounds to me as if you (collectively) would prefer to see all of life regulated to save people from their “obvious stupidity”. Steve Jobs was obviously, following your logic, too stupid to make his own medical treatment decisions. Was he the victim of homeopathy?? It overtook him and he had no way to change course or choose differently?? If only homeopathy had been regulated or even outlawed, then Steve would still be with us. Or not. He obviously chose not to participate in the conventional medicine machine, like it or not. Played out, your logic leads us to a very UN-free society where we are protected from ourselves at every turn.

    You claim homeopathy is a placebo; it is not- ask the bruise on my arm that disappeared after a few applications, over the course of a day, of homeopathic cream. My bruise had no bias or preconceived ideas about what works and what doesn’t and, last I checked, I haven’t been able to *will away* a bruise. So, you want a placebo outlawed. Why? See above paragraph. This comes down to your belief that people can’t be trusted to make good decisions for themselves and that people who don’t agree with you are idiots, which is faulty logic. You are advocating the abolition of personal choice; the freedom for everyone to choose what they want to do with their own health. Leave my “placebos” alone and I’ll leave you and your RX’s alone. “Live and Let Live”

    • It’s hard to know where to begin to rip down so many straw men, Kristen. There simply isn’t enough time to deconstruct the multitude of false premises and other logic fallacies you have laid down. Use your magic water all you want, but pharmacies do not have the right to market water as medicine. Leave that to the churches.

      • I don’t know why you would leave a comment saying you don’t have time to leave a comment, darwinslapdog but I thought Kristen’s comments were well thought out.
        I use both Homeopathic and Traditional medicine and have personally had successes with both and failures with both. I wouldn’t lump them all together in two opposing camps. For some solutions you can’t beat a surgeon or chemical intervention and for others you want to stay well away from hospitals and physicians, which homeopathy can help with.
        There are dangerous and/or unnecessary and ineffective treatments of both types. I would rather that experts educate us about the benefits and risks of each treatment are instead of worrying about which camp it falls into.

Comments are closed.