FDA to Evaluate Homeopathy Regulatory Framework


First published 24th March. Updated 26th March 2015.

(Reuters) - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said it would hold a public hearing seeking information and comment on the use of products labeled 'homeopathic', as well as the agency's regulatory framework for such products.

The hearing, scheduled for April 20-21, will discuss prescription drugs, biological products, and over-the-counter drugs labeled homeopathic, a market that has expanded to become a multimillion dollar industry in the United States.

The agency is set to evaluate its regulatory framework for homeopathic products after a quarter century. (1.usa.gov/1Hxwup3)


Should FDA Make Changes to the Way it Regulates Homeopathic Products? Agency Wants to Know?

24th March 2015


by Alexander Gaffney, RAC
FDA to Assess Homeopathy Business



Private Healthcare Australia (PHA) Dismisses NHMRC Report

PHA hits out at Health Council over homeopathy report

18th March 2015
Private Healthcare Australia (PHA) has dismissed a government report that suggests homeopathy is a waste of time and health insurers should not pay for the alternative treatment.

The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) says there is “no good-quality evidence to support the claim homeopathy is effective in treating health conditions” [see following article].

But the health insurance industry’s peak body says the research council should instead focus on doctors’ compliance with clinical guidelines.

PHA CEO Michael Armitage told Life+Health insuranceNEWS.com.au that private health funds paid out more than $2 billion for medical services last year, compared with just $171.5 million for natural therapies including homeopathy.

“The NHMRC should urgently tackle this $2 billion elephant in the room,” Dr Armitage said.




Gross Deception in Australian Report on Homeopathy by Dana Ullman, MPH, CCH

22nd March 2015

In early March, 2015, the government of Australia published a report on homeopathy that asserted that homeopathy was not found to be effective for ANY condition.

What the media conveniently failed to report was that ANY study that was less than 150 subjects was deemed "inadequate" by this report, and thus, the dozens of studies that have shown the efficacy of homeopathy in treating many ailments were totally thrown out and ignored, including those published in The Lancet, BMJ, Cancer, Pediatrics, Chest, Rheumatology, Pediatrics Infectious Disease Journal, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, European Journal of Pediatrics, and many others!

Further, unless there were at least THREE studies conducted by THREE separate groups of researchers, with each study having over 150 subjects, the results were deemed to be "UNRELIABLE."

Based on these definitions of what "adequate" and "reliable" research, EVERY CAM treatment would be deemed to be INEFFECTIVE and even DISPROVEN (this is what has been said and written about homeopathy).

Further, the VAST majority of drugs on the market today would also be deemed to be INEFFECTIVE and DISPROVEN.

Needless to say, not a single media source reported these definitions or provide ANY context.

Is anyone surprised about the above journalistic and scientific malpractice?  Hopefully, this experience will have you question anything and everything you read.  To read other most detailed critiques of this report, click HERE.  I particularly like the analysis by the Homeopathic Research Institute.  

Dana Ullman's website:



British Homeopathic Association Response to NHMRC Report

Our response to NHMRC’s position statement

The Australian NHMRC’s statement seriously misrepresents the nature of the clinical research evidence in homeopathy. The NHMRC’s conclusion fails to caution that its review admitted that ‘the evidence base for the majority of clinical conditions was considered of insufficient size to enable clear conclusions on the efficacy of homeopathy to be drawn’.

Moreover, the review’s focus on medical conditions fails to recognise that homeopathy is based on individualised treatment, not on a named medical condition. A recent meta-analysis published by the British Homeopathic Association (http://goo.gl/L4Bguw) has provided independently verified evidence that individually prescribed homeopathic medicines may have clinical effects that are greater than those of placebos.



Pharmacists misrepresented in newsletter articles over homeopathy report, Australia?

This sounds ominously as though pressure will be brought to bear on Australian pharmacists to remove homeopathic products from their shelves.
17th March 2015
"A recent headline in medical newsletters stating 'Pharmacists reluctant to give up on homeopathy' misrepresents the public position of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, the peak professional organisation representing pharmacists across Australia."
"Mr Kardachi said he was confident any pharmacies stocking homeopathic products would reassess their position following the release of the NHMRC report.

"Pharmacists are skilled medicine experts and the NHMRC report will help to reinforce their clinical expertise in regard to decisions over homeopathy products.

"PSA is not a regulatory body and cannot force pharmacists to remove products from sale however the NHMRC report provides unequivocal evidence that when dealing with homeopathy products pharmacists must consider not only their interaction with patients but also what stock is to be held within the pharmacy.""


Pharmacists Reluctant to Give up Homeopathy

The leader of Australia’s 27,000 pharmacists has rejected calls for pharmacies to remove homeopathic products from their shelves, suggesting they could still be used...



Homeopath Hits Back at Health Council's Placebo Comparison

20th March 2015

JULIA Sims thinks 200 million people can't be wrong about natural therapies.

The owner of Yeppoon Natural Health and Remedial Massage is adamant her homeopathy treatment works, despite claims from the National Health and Medical Research Council in the past week that homeopathy is "no more effective than placebos".

The NHMRC included only 225 studies in the review, as the scientific quality of the others were considered limited.

The review determined that homeopathy was no more effective than a sugar pill in the treatment of common medical conditions.

Ms Sims has been practising for 20 years.

She said she was disgusted by the research council's approach to the treatment therapy.

"The study included less than 250 participants... they're making assumptions on something based on a very small study," she said.
Read More:

LMHI: Bias and Flawed Methodology in the NHMRC Report on Homeopathy

15th March 2015

Liga Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis (LMHI), an international body which strives to preserve and promote the homeopathic science through its worldwide network of licensed healthcare providers, disagrees strongly with a number of unscientific methods used to draw questionable conclusions from a narrow group of studies on homeopathy by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). NHMRC is Australia’s leading expert body promoting the development and maintenance of public and individual health standards. The NHMRC Statement on Homeopathy was released on 11 March 2015 by the Homeopathy Working Committee (HWC) of that council. 

To read the  press release dated 15.03.2015 please download file on link below