Homeopathy for children?

[fraktious]

I know this might be a bit woo but does anyone else use homeopathic treatments for common childhood ailments? We have (magic) teething powders and I've laid in arnica in anticipation but I'm not sure what else people typically use homeopathy for.

Our GP is very pro homeopathy and I swear by it for many things, I know that it can be used for a whole range if things but I'm looking for anecdotes/advice on where it does work and where it doesn't. I'm not planning to treat him myself but any advice about when to ask for a homeopathic remedy would be welcome :)

Right - I see where you're coming from. Live and let live means absolutely nothing to you. That's fine, you're entitled to your point of view.

I have the freedom to put anything in my body - whether I accept responsibility for the consequences is an entirely different issue.

I find it highly bemusing how people get so riled about these issues.

If it makes someone, somewhere happier and more content, I really don't see what the problem is.

Ashtangini: x-post, see above. If you're old enough to make an informed choice and able and willing to pay for it out of your own pocket, you are welcome to use anything you like. Including homeopathy or any other placebo therapy.

Gullibility is not forbidden in the Uk.

Live and let live? Ok, so lets all those nice people who like heroin just go ahead and have that, and all those other drugs and stuff. Live and let live huh? And all those pesky rules about getting drugs prescribed by the doctors, why don't we just put them all on the shelves and let people have what they like?

Pot makes me very happy and content, so why is it a problem for me to have that when I like?

And anyway, I don't care if adults are dimwitted enough to take sugar pills instead of actual medicines, they can join the people who think crystals will cure cancer and reiki will make their pain go away. But have you bothered to look at the links of parents killing their children by denying them real treatment iand giving them the sugar pills instead? Where is your live and let live stance going there?

I've no idea - you tell me!

Look if someone harms their own child through their own actions then I'm sure living with that would be hard enough.

The NHS funding the sugar pills bothers me, when they don't have enough money to provide lots of drugs with a proven benefit.

Ashtangini: a) they may never know and b) you seriously think it's okay for children to come to harm in order for adults to have more freedom to follow whichever brainfart they have decided to believe in? Seriously?

What about mousey and her lung damage? What about the fact that I still break out in cold sweat at the mere thought of suffocation? How was it in any way our fault that our parents happened to be gullible?

It's not your fault and I can understand the upset, but the alternative is to limit freedom of thought and action and I don't think that's right and a possible slippery slope to the authorities removing all sorts of freedoms.

Personally, I was harmed by the NHS. Was I angry with them? Sure. Did I eventually accept that they are human and did what they thought was best at the time, however misguided and wrong that was - yes.

There's a difference, though:

Mainstream medicine is evidence based. Yes, mistakes happen to doctors and nurses too, and that's unfortunate. But generally speaking whatever is wrong with a patient will be treated using a method that has been shown to be able to address this particular issue successfully.

Homeopathy, reiki, etc. on the other hand have absolutely no evidence of being able to treat patients successfully. I'm not talking about being able to explain, either: if these methods worked better than placebos in controlled clinical trials whose quality standards satisfy common research criteria, I'd have nothing against them being used. Even if the mechanism in which they work were unknown.

But that's simply not the case. These methids have failed, time and time again, to perform any better than a placebo.

And, no, freedom of thought is not being endangered by limiting people's rights to use quack treeatments to themselves and themselves only. Do you also feel that female genital mutilation should be allowed? After all, parents do it to their daughters because they think it's good for them. Freedom of thought, right, mustn't limit that!

Would love to respond - however, cannot as need to do some work, however, would say that if people somewhere must be benefitting otherwise they wouldn't keep going back to get treatment.

Not fgm again as an example! Sure this came up somewhere else. It's a violent practice that is used for cultural reasons, not for health.
bye

People do (believe they) benefit, we all know how strong the placebo effect can be. The comfort people get from homeopathy is obvious.

It's this pesky "evidence" that's lacking. No proper study has found homeopathy to be better than placebo.

Actually, the way some conventional drugs work isn't really understood, but they've passed the scientific test, so are used.

I think it's a very fair example: something which people do to their children in the belief that it benefits them when it's actually harmful.

You yourself seemed to much prefer the idea of potential harm to children to that of "thought control" (preference being given to medication that actually works as far as the rest of the world is concerned).

FWIW, the will to believe in stuff without evidence seems reasonably "cultural" to me. You ceryainly cannot call it rational.

*certainly

yes, too busy to wow us all with your well thought out reasoning as to how homeopathy works and is a wonderful thing?

We'll all await your return, agog no doubt.

Wonder what the OP thinks now?

er, look, sorry to duck out but I had to go to a meeting. I then had to get home and I now have to put my kid to bed. I'm then going out for the evening.

Before I go I would say that I wasn't here to debate science vs homeopathy, I'm just pointing out that some people get positive things from it and evidence or no, I don't see a problem with something that does that. I don't have an issue with others' beliefs, how ever mad they seem. The more the madder the merrier in fact. A bit of colour in life!

Anyway, have a good evening. Hope someone else comes along to debate with you (although "debate" is pushing it with some of you! More like take up positions in the trenches.)

Okay, there is no such thing as a choice between medication that actially works and "colour in life" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

You are trying to portray adherence to irrational, unfounded beliefs as something positive here. Let me say it loudly and clearly so that everyone can hear: THERE. IS. NOTHING. GOOD. ABOUT. NOT. THINKING. CRITICALLY.

I realize full well that you probably think the phrase "critical thinking" refers to being "open minded" towards other traditions than mainstream medicine, being inclusive and yada, yada, yada.

IT DOESN'T!

Critical thinking means to gather and evaluate evidence and to use rational reasoning. If it is applied to homeopathy, the result is inevitably the conclusion that a) it cannot work in theory and b) has never been shown to work in practice.

No amount of feelgood factor is going to change that.

What Dude said.

Look if someone harms their own child through their own actions then I'm sure living with that would be hard enough

The child doesn't get to live with at all in some cases.

www.smh.com.au/national/parents-guilty-of-manslaughter-over-daughters-eczema-death-20090605-bxvx.html

Another one

Last year in Melbourne, Australia, Isabella Denley, an epileptic toddler, died after her parents ditched the anti-convulsant medication she had been prescribed by her neurologist. The drugs had terrible side effects, including sleep loss and hyperactivity, so they turned to alternative therapies, visiting a vibrational kinesiologist, a cranial osteopath and a psychic who told them Isabella was suffering from a past-life trauma.

An inquest heard that when she died, the toddler was exclusively on homeopathic medication. Her parents believed they were doing their utmost. But clearly the potential pitfalls of Cams go beyond ruthless charlatans. Indeed, the real peril may be our faith that alternative therapies will inevitably reach - and cure - the parts that allopathic medicines will not.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/dec/16/health.medicineandhealth

This little one was caused unecessary suffering, but lived.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2662879.stm

I guess it's ok as long as parents aren't told in the strongest possible terms that putting their childrens' health at risk is not on. god forbid we should ask parents to think critically, the height of fascism.

Malka Sitner. Died aged 1, treated with homeopathy instead of ABs.

Jane Roe died aged one. Homeopathy used, antibiotics refused.

And there is my nieghbours son. At aged 8 he has been hospitalised for pnumonia FOUR times. He has apnea. He weighs more than my 11 yo becuase he can barely move without respiratory issues. His mum is an ardent homeoquack fan. The chld does notmget antibiptics until he is admited on ward and usually doesn't come out of hospital for at least a week. There is an underlying issue that could be resolved, but mum won't let the docs treat the issue and instead spends thpusands on homeo bollocks and other alt crap.

But it's ok right, him burning up and gasping for breath is a small price to pay for mum's freedom to "feel chemicals are just Wrong" rather than think.

The OP thinks this has gone rather beyond what she intended and off track from what she meant! She's also been googling homeopathy and realises that the stuff she uses it for is mostly 'in her head' anyway and it may well be the placebo effect but the homepathy/placebo effect is clearly doing something.

And she will now stop talking about herself in the third person.

Honestly though I didn't really think about the science behind it. It looked plausible (ie herbal, sort of Bach flower remedies in pill form), it says it has an active ingredient, other people say it works, I tried it and it helped me so this has been educational.

I'm still going to continue buying the placebo teething powder though.

It might not work now.

Placebos don't work as well when the person intended to experience the placebo effect (the mum in the case of teething powders) knows they are using a placebo.

Haha! Haemareamadeamafluxollin :o

The testing powders will still work. They are mostly sugar- what child doesn't stop crying when given a sweetie?

That's curious. I would be perfectly happy to agree with this explanation were it not for the fact that I've only ever used Nelson's teething granules (after recommendation) which are sugar free. The results are not instantaneous but kick-in after 15 minutes or so. Grumpy, fed-up, clingy and difficult child turns into calm and practically smiling. Also the effects seem to last for several hours.

I would also be happy to accept a placebo explanation were it not for the fact that we were given a sachet to try and were pretty sceptical they would do anything. Same results then and every time since.

I understand that the science can't work, yet these do. Go figure.

Grrr the Nelsons website has made me quite stabby

"Those first few months can also be pretty nerve-racking, especially once your baby starts teething" so we're going to flog you a useless product targeted at your weaknesses.
"Homeopathy is a system of medicine which stimulates the body's own natural healing processes and has been used for decades. Homeopathic medicines are suitable for all the family." Yes, since there's nothing..... Oh, just see all the above posts!

Sorry- been googling. Not sugar, xylitol - a naturally occurring substance used as a sugar substitute. So very sweet, and my original argument still stands. Sweet stuff is very effective medicine!