High time to proceed with review of homeopathic remedies

While we seem to still hear a lot about David Stephan, we no longer hear much about the review of naturopathic regulations that followed the father’s conviction in connection with the death of his young son Ezekiel.

In 2016, after David and his wife Collet were convicted of failing to provide the necessaries of life, Health Minister Sarah Hoffman pledged a review of those regulations.

The trial had heard evidence about the fact the Stephans had sought out advice from a naturopath before providing homemade remedies to their son. Ezekiel later died of bacterial meningitis, which could have been treated.

The College of Naturopathic Doctors of Alberta ultimately dismissed a complaint against the naturopath in question and the supposed provincial review just kind of faded away. In short, nothing has changed.

Back in 2012, when the province first announced the creation of the College of Naturopathic Doctors of Alberta, concerns were raised that the government was bestowing legitimacy upon a form of alternative medicine that was not worthy of such recognition.

When then-Health Minister Fred Horne declared the province wanted to ensure naturopathic “professionals are safe and … effective and that they meet the highest possible standard,” concerns were raised that the Alberta government was sending a message that visiting a naturopath was a legitimate health care choice.

Neither of those concerns has gone away. And in the aftermath of a rather troubling case in B.C., they’re as relevant as ever.

Health Canada is now investigating the case of a Victoria naturopath who says she treated a four-year-old boy with a homeopathic remedy made from rabid-dog saliva. B.C.’s provincial health officer had first raised red flags about this case, warning that lyssin — an ingredient purporting to contain the infected saliva — could expose people to rabies.

Of course, when it comes to homeopathy, that’s not a concern at all: there’s nothing in the remedy. Even the naturopath herself admits that “the remedies are prepared to the point that not even one molecule of the original substance is left in the solution” — and she’s saying that as an advocate of homeopathy.

That’s the bizarre, pseudoscientific case for homeopathy: that the more diluted it is, the more effective it is. It’s absurd and it’s been disproven over and over again. Just last year, in fact, the European Academies Science Advisory Council — which represents 29 national academies across Europe — released a 12-page statement describing homeopathy as “nonsense” and “scientifically implausible” and that “the promotion and use of homeopathic products risks significant harms.”

Because while homeopathic remedies may contain nothing helpful nor harmful, they may displace actual medical interventions, which can indeed prove to be harmful in the long run. The behavioural issues that the Victoria naturopath was ostensibly addressing with that child clearly still need to be addressed. Hopefully, the parents realize that.

Homeopathy is but one service offered by naturopaths, and not necessarily all naturopaths. It is, however, part of the training that naturopaths go through, and one can easily find numerous Calgary naturopaths touting homeopathy on their websites.

A 2011 study by researchers at the University of Alberta found that a whopping 94 per cent of naturopathic websites advertised homeopathic remedies.

So we have these bizarre and concerning mixed messages in Alberta. We don’t regulate those wacky homeopaths (although, Ontario now does), but naturopaths — who extensively use and promote homeopathy — are treated as health professionals.

The concerns with naturopathy go much further, but homeopathy is a logical place for policy-makers and regulators to draw a line: you can either be regulated as a health professional or you can embrace homeopathy. You can’t do both.

The NDP obviously didn’t create Alberta’s status quo, but they’ve done nothing to address these concerns. Two years ago, we got talk of change, but nothing in the way of action.

How many more children have to be subjected to useless homeopathic remedies in place of legitimate, evidence-based treatment?