Homeopathy company under investigation for promoting ineffective baby and toddler treatments

The book cites ‘15 gentle, natural, safe and effective medicines that use homeopathic ingredients to quickly restore your child’s health’

Homeopathy has been repeatedly discredited by scientific studies
Homeopathy has been repeatedly discredited by scientific studies

A company promoting homeopathy for babies and toddlers, against all scientific evidence, is under investigation by Australian drug regulators.

The Little Book of Natural Medicines for Children is promoted by Brauer, one of Australia’s largest homeopathy companies, on its website.

“Symptoms such as cough and cold, pain and fever, stomach aches and more can naturally be relieved and soothed with our products,” the ebook claims.

One passage reads: “Our homeopathic remedies have evolved from an ancient form of natural medicine used all over the world. Our tips can be tried on many different illnesses to deliver short-term relief and promote general wellbeing for your child.”

The book also cites “15 gentle, natural, safe and effective medicines that use homeopathic ingredients to quickly restore your child’s health” and persuades parents not to “expose [their] child to unnecessary medicines or harsh chemicals”.

Ken Harvey, a professor of public health and drugs policy expert, told The Guardian that “statements [in the book] are deceptive, misleading and in breach of a number of sections of areas of consumer law”.

Homeopathy is based on the theory that disease symptoms can be treated by ingesting minute doses of substances that cause those symptoms. This has been repeatedly debunked by scientists.

Last year, a leading scientist declared homeopathy a “therapeutic dead-end” after a systematic review concluded the controversial treatment was no more effective than placebo drugs.

Professor Paul Glasziou, a leading academic in evidence-based medicine at Bond University, was the chair of a working party by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council, which was tasked with reviewing the evidence of 176 trials of homeopathy to establish if the treatment is valid.

A total of 57 systematic reviews, containing the 176 individual studies, focused on 68 different health conditions – and found there to be no evidence homeopathy was more effective than placebo on any.

In November the US government began requiring that producers of homeopathic remedies provide proof for any health claims. If they cannot do so they must point out that there is “no scientific evidence that the product works”.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in