Reminder: Homeopathy Is Unscientific, Unproven Rubbish

Last year, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) released a draft paper that suggested there was zero evidence that homeopathy -- which improbably claims that massively diluted substances are an effective treatment for practically anything -- had any scientific credibility whatsoever. The final paper is out, and it reaffirms that conclusion: Homeopathy is unproven, dangerous bollocks.

Dropper picture from Shutterstock

The advice from the report is blunt but necessary:

Based on the assessment of the evidence of effectiveness of homeopathy, NHMRC concludes that there are no health conditions for which there is reliable evidence that homeopathy is effective. Homeopathy should not be used to treat health conditions that are chronic, serious, or could become serious. People who choose homeopathy may put their health at risk if they reject or delay treatments for which there is good evidence for safety and effectiveness.

Overpriced drops of water are not going to cure what ails you. It's a waste of effort, a waste of money, and a serious health risk if you choose that option over treatments based on actual evidence.



    This is going to be the least controversial article ever posted on Lifehacker

    Do people really need reminding about this at this point? That being said I'm sure the venn diagrams of Anti-Vax people and Homeopathic people have significant crossover... one giant circle levels of crossover.

      Yes, there are many people that need reminding of this, and indeed, who continue to swear by its effectiveness no matter how many facts they are presented with.

      There's some overlap, but the Venn overlap isn't a perfect circle. At least in Australia, the modern anti-vaccination movement is typified by yuppies on social media, whereas homeopathy is most popular with migrants from South Asia, where it is more established, e.g. the Indian government endorses homeopathy and even has a state register for homeopaths. It's analogous to the popularity of herbal medicine in Chinese communities, despite unproven efficacy in clinical trials.

    Health funds cover homeopathy. I disagree with non evidence based activities being subsidised. Now... back to my Church.

      If health funds cover homeopathy, then maybe I can devise some kind of homeopathic remedy by which I am given money and I have to put it in my wallet to make me better.
      Covered by health fund!

    Gotta disagree with the assertion that homeopathy is dangerous.
    A little water is not dangerous.

    What's dangerous is that people act based on a belief in homeopathy's validity.
    Their *belief* is dangerous.

      I think what you are getting at is that homeopathic preparations are not dangerous.
      Be that as it may, homeopathy is dangerous in and of itself.

      As dr batman was getting at, its dangerous because your taking that instead of something that actually works.

      For example, taking homeopathetic water for cancer instead of chemo is dangerous.

      There is one thing that homeopathy is good for, separating fools from their money.

      I suppose it could also be used to treat dehydration, since it is just coloured water.

        Your point is that people don't take chemo because they believe in homeopathy.
        And that *is* my point.
        Their belief leads them to a stupid action (or in this case, inaction).

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now