MVIIIHealth The MVIII app
← Back

Research · Therapies

Homeopathy

Pooled placebo-controlled trials favored homeopathy slightly, and the edge shrank or vanished in the largest, most reliable trials. Australian and UK national reviews found no condition with reliable evidence beyond placebo. Trial side effects matched controls. The FDA acted on teething tablets with excess belladonna and on zinc nasal products linked to lost smell.

Checked 2026-11-13
Status
Homeopathic products are regulated as drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA states that there are currently no homeopathic drug products approved by FDA [1][2]. Since December 2022 the FDA applies a risk-based enforcement approach to homeopathic products sold without approval [2]. Laws on practicing homeopathy vary by state, and Arizona, Connecticut and Nevada have homeopathic licensing boards for medical and osteopathic doctors [1].
Also called
homeopathy, homoeopathy, homeopathic remedies, homeopathic medicine, homeopath, classical homeopathy, individualized homeopathy, Oscillococcinum, arnica, Arnica montana 30C, homeopathic teething tablets, Zicam, nosodes, potentized remedies, ultra-dilutions
Used for
colds, flu, influenza, sore throat, children's coughs and colds, hay fever, allergies, allergic rhinitis, asthma, anxiety, stress, insomnia, pain, bruising, recovery after surgery, sprains, fibromyalgia, teething, general wellness

Strong several reviews agree · Moderate one review or consistent trials · Limited one or a few small studies · Untested no study in people, listed with what it rests on

Shown to help1

Reported risks5

What it is used for, and what was found

Shown to help1

Limited

Fibromyalgia

Limited evidence: four small trials found lower pain and fewer tender points than placebo, results the review authors call preliminary.

Compared with placebo [19]

The numbers and sources
Effect
Against placebo, homeopathy lowered tender point count (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.05), pain intensity (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.10) and fatigue (SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.90 to -0.05) [19].
Population
4 randomized trials, plus case reports and observational studies [19].
Sources
[19]
Caveats
Few small trials. The authors write that any conclusions are preliminary [19].

Mixed results3

Strong

Any condition, pooled placebo-controlled trials

Mixed results: pooled trials across conditions favored homeopathy over placebo, and the advantage shrank or disappeared in the largest, most reliable and registered trials.

Compared with placebo [5][6][7][8][9]

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 89 trials the pooled odds ratio was 2.45 (95% CI 2.05 to 2.93) in favor of homeopathy, 1.66 in the 26 good-quality trials, and 1.78 after correcting for publication bias. The authors found insufficient evidence of a clear effect for any single condition [5]. Across 110 homeopathy trials, restricting to 8 large, higher-quality trials gave an odds ratio of 0.88 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.19), no difference from placebo, while matched conventional drug trials kept an effect (0.58) [6]. For individualized homeopathy, 22 trials gave an odds ratio of 1.53 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.91), and the 3 trials with reliable evidence gave 1.98 (95% CI 1.16 to 3.38) [7]. For non-individualized homeopathy, 54 trials gave a standardized mean difference of -0.33, reduced to -0.16 after adjusting for publication bias, and the 3 reliable trials showed no significant difference (-0.18, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.09) [8]. Unregistered trials showed larger effects (SMD -0.53) than registered trials (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.07), and about 38% of registered homeopathy trials since 2002 were never published [9].
Population
89 trials [5]. 110 homeopathy and 110 conventional trials, median 65 participants [6]. 32 trials in 24 conditions [7]. 75 trials in 48 conditions [8]. Registered and published homeopathy trials to 2021 [9].
Sources
[5], [6], [7], [8], [9]
Caveats
Most trials were rated at high or unclear risk of bias [7][8]. In both homeopathy and conventional medicine, smaller and lower-quality trials showed larger effects [6]. Several reviews pool many different conditions and remedies.
Moderate

Flu and flu-like illness, Oscillococcinum

Mixed results: Oscillococcinum did not prevent flu-like illness more than placebo, and two low-quality trials found slightly more symptom relief at 48 hours.

Compared with placebo [10]

The numbers and sources
Effect
For prevention, flu-like illness did not differ from placebo (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.34, 2 trials). For treatment, symptom relief at 48 hours was 7.7 percentage points more common than with placebo (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.73), smaller at 3 days (RR 1.27), and not different at 4 days (RR 1.11) or 5 days (RR 1.06). The reviewers found insufficient good evidence for robust conclusions [10].
Population
6 trials: 327 young to middle-aged adults in two prevention trials in Russia, and 1,196 teenagers and adults in four treatment trials in France and Germany [10].
Sources
[10]
Caveats
Trial reporting was poor and many methods had unclear risk of bias. Only 2 treatment trials could be fully analyzed [10].
Limited

Hay fever, allergies and allergic asthma

Mixed results: early small trials found less nasal blockage than placebo, and later trials in allergic asthma and hay fever found no difference.

Compared with placebo [5][12][13][14]

The numbers and sources
Effect
In an early pooled analysis, four trials of one remedy for seasonal allergies favored homeopathy for eye symptoms at 4 weeks (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.74) [5]. In 51 people with perennial allergic rhinitis, a 30c dilution of their main allergen improved nasal airflow by 19.8 L/min more than placebo (95% CI 10.4 to 29.1), and symptom scores did not differ [12]. In 242 people with asthma allergic to house dust mite, homeopathic immunotherapy did not differ from placebo on most outcomes over 16 weeks [13]. In 62 people with seasonal allergic rhinitis, neither a standard nor an individualized remedy improved quality of life more than placebo [14].
Population
4 trials [5]. 51 adults in Scotland [12]. 242 adults in 38 English general practices [13]. 62 adults in Germany [14].
Sources
[5], [12], [13], [14]
Caveats
The 2026 trial reached about a quarter of its planned size [14]. The 51-person trial was run by the group whose three earlier trials it added to [12].

Not shown to help4

Strong

Any condition, national and expert evidence reviews

Not shown to treat any health condition beyond placebo, in Australia's 2015 review of 57 systematic reviews and in UK parliamentary and European academy assessments.

Compared with placebo or other treatments [3][4]

The numbers and sources
Effect
Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) assessed 57 systematic reviews on 68 health conditions and concluded that "there are no health conditions for which there is reliable evidence that homeopathy is effective" [4][3]. The UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (2010) wrote: "In our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analysis conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebo" [3]. The European Academies' Science Advisory Council (2017) agreed "that there are no known diseases for which there is robust, reproducible evidence that homeopathy is effective beyond the placebo effect" [3]. NCCIH reports the Australian conclusion and finds little evidence for any specific condition [1].
Population
57 systematic reviews including 176 studies, compared with placebo or other treatments [4]. Trials across many conditions, among them rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, anxiety, depression, ADHD in children, malaria and stroke [3].
Sources
[3], [4], [1]
Caveats
The NHMRC and Commons committee pages could not be opened for this file. Their wording is quoted from the EASAC statement [3] and a 2020 review [4]. Some conditions in the Australian review rested on a single study [3].
ModerateStudied in children

Colds and respiratory infections in children

Not shown to prevent or cure respiratory infections in children. Every trial at low risk of bias found no benefit over placebo.

Compared with identical placebo or self-selected conventional treatment [11]

The numbers and sources
Effect
Non-individualized products had little preventive effect (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.57). Individualized prevention had little effect on antibiotic use (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.76). Short-term cure (OR 1.31 favoring placebo, 95% CI 0.09 to 19.54) and long-term cure (OR 0.99) were too uncertain to judge. All studies at low risk of bias showed no benefit, while trials at uncertain or high risk of bias reported benefits [11].
Population
8 trials with 1,562 children aged 0 to 16 with upper respiratory tract infections [11].
Sources
[11]
Caveats
Evidence was low or very low in quality, with high attrition and selective reporting. Three trials were funded by homeopathy manufacturers [11].
Limited

Anxiety

Limited evidence: one trial in generalized anxiety disorder found anxiety fell as much on placebo as on individualized homeopathy, and a review found contradictory, underpowered trials.

Compared with placebo [15]; control conditions in eight randomized trials, which the review abstract does not describe [16]

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 44 people with generalized anxiety disorder, Hamilton anxiety scores improved significantly in both the homeopathy and placebo groups over 10 weeks, with no difference between groups [15]. A systematic review found eight randomized trials in test anxiety, generalized anxiety disorder and anxiety around cancer or surgery, with contradictory results and too little power or detail to draw conclusions [16].
Population
44 adults with generalized anxiety disorder, 39 completing [15]. 8 randomized trials and many case reports and uncontrolled studies [16].
Sources
[15], [16]
Caveats
Small trials. The trial authors note that the size of improvement on placebo could explain belief in homeopathy [15].
Moderate

Bruising, swelling and pain after surgery or injury, arnica

Not shown to differ from placebo in a 1998 review of 8 trials. A 2021 meta-analysis found a small edge over placebo that fell short of statistical significance.

Compared with placebo [17][18]; active comparators and no treatment [18]

The numbers and sources
Effect
Eight placebo-controlled trials, most in tissue trauma and most with severe methodological flaws, did not suggest homeopathic arnica worked better than placebo [17]. In 18 placebo-controlled comparisons after surgery, the pooled effect was Hedges' g 0.18 (95% CI -0.007 to 0.373, P = 0.059). Active-comparator trials gave g 0.26 with high heterogeneity, an effect driven by nonrandomized studies that moved toward zero in randomized trials [18].
Population
8 trials [17]. 23 publications with 28 comparisons in surgical patients [18].
Sources
[17], [18]
Caveats
The 2021 authors read their result as a small effect, though the placebo-controlled interval included zero [18].

Claimed, not studied in people1

Untested

Teething pain in infants

Not studied in people. Homeopathic teething tablets and gels were sold in the US for infant teething, and no trial of them was located.

No study in people. This rests on documented traditional use.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Homeopathic teething tablets containing belladonna were marketed for infants in the US until the FDA requested a recall of the largest brand in 2017 [2][20]. A search of Europe PMC for trials of homeopathic teething products found none.
Population
No study population. Products sold for infants [20].
Sources
[2], [20]
Caveats
Marketing a product for teething says nothing about whether it relieves teething pain. The risk record for these products is under Risks.

Protocols studied

Trials used two approaches. Individualized homeopathy, where a homeopath chooses a remedy for each person after a long consultation, and non-individualized homeopathy, where everyone gets the same product [7][8]. Oscillococcinum is a 1% extract of wild duck heart and liver diluted 1 in 100 two hundred times (200C) [10]. The allergy trials gave a 30c dilution of each person's main allergen for 4 weeks [12] or homeopathic immunotherapy for 16 weeks [13]. The anxiety trial gave an individually chosen remedy for 10 weeks [15]. Children's respiratory trials gave remedies for 1 to 3 months and followed them for the rest of the year [11].

Risks

Reported risks5

LimitedVery common

Temporary worsening of symptoms

One trial found initial worsening of rhinitis in 30% of people on homeopathy against 7% on placebo. Homeopaths call this an aggravation.

The numbers and sources
How common
Very common: more than 1 in 10 people.
Effect
In 51 people with perennial allergic rhinitis, initial aggravations of symptoms occurred in 7 (30%) given homeopathy and 2 (7%) given placebo (P = 0.04) [12]. Five of 41 trials (12%) reported homeopathic aggravations, 98% of them graded mild [21]. A review of anxiety studies found "remedy reactions" of temporary worsening and the return of old symptoms [16].
Population
51 adults [12]. 41 trials [21]. Anxiety studies [16].
Sources
[12], [21], [16]
Caveats
One small trial gives the only rate per person.
LimitedStudied in childrenHow often is not known

Belladonna toxicity from teething tablets

FDA states it found 99 adverse event cases consistent with belladonna toxicity, including infant deaths and seizures, possibly related to homeopathic teething products.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
In 2016, an FDA search of its adverse event database identified 99 cases consistent with belladonna toxicity, including reports of infant deaths and seizures, possibly related to teething products. FDA testing found belladonna alkaloids in some teething tablets far exceeding the labeled amounts [2]. In April 2017 the FDA requested a recall of all lots of Hyland's Baby Teething Tablets and Nighttime Teething Tablets, judged the varying alkaloid content "a serious health hazard", and noted that infants' ability to break down and clear belladonna alkaloids is limited [20].
Population
Infants given homeopathic teething tablets or gels [2][20].
Sources
[2], [20]
Caveats
Adverse event reports show a possible link, not proof that the product caused each case, and give no rate [2].
LimitedHow often is not known

Loss of smell from zinc nasal products

FDA states it had received more than 130 reports of lost sense of smell linked to Zicam homeopathic intranasal zinc products by 2009.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
By 2009 the FDA had received more than 130 reports of anosmia, loss of the sense of smell, associated with Zicam homeopathic intranasal zinc products. FDA determined that use as labeled gave significant daily exposure to intranasal zinc [2].
Population
People using intranasal zinc products labeled as homeopathic [2].
Sources
[2]
Caveats
Report counts, with no denominator.
LimitedHow often is not known

Contaminated eye drops

FDA states that homeopathic eye drops it tested in 2019 were not sterile and had a dangerously high pH, which could cause eye infection or injury.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
In 2019 the FDA warned four companies making Puriton Eye Relief Drops. Multi-dose, preservative-free drops were made without any attempt at sterility, and samples were contaminated with Bacillus species or particulate matter and had a pH the FDA called dangerously high, which could lead to eye infection, glaucoma, corneal scarring and vision loss [2].
Population
FDA product testing [2].
Sources
[2]
Caveats
A finding about manufacturing of one product, not about homeopathy as a whole. FDA lists products for the eye and by injection among its higher-risk categories [2].
LimitedHow often is not known

Harms in case reports, including delayed care

Case reports: 38 reports described harms in 1,159 people, including four deaths, from remedies themselves or from homeopathy replacing conventional care.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
Of 38 reports, 30 described direct harms from homeopathic remedies and 8 described harm when homeopathy replaced conventional medicine. Harms ranged from mild to severe and included four deaths. Allergic reactions and poisoning were the most common, and Rhus toxicodendron was the remedy most often implicated [22]. FDA lists products for serious or life-threatening conditions as higher risk because they may lead people to delay or stop treatments shown to work [2].
Population
1,159 people in 38 case reports and case series [22].
Sources
[22], [2]
Caveats
Case reports give no rate and cannot show how often harm occurs.

Checked, no increase found1

Moderate

Side effects in trials

Not shown to cause more side effects than control treatments in 41 randomized trials. Most reported effects were mild.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
In 41 trials with 6,055 participants, the share of patients with adverse effects did not differ between homeopathy and control (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.14). About 68% of adverse effects were grade 1, the mildest level [21]. The children's respiratory review found adverse events reported inconsistently, with no serious events and one study showing more non-severe events in the homeopathy group [11]. One flu trial reported one headache [10].
Population
41 randomized trials [21]. 8 trials in children [11].
Sources
[21], [11], [10]
Caveats
The review counted trials reporting effects, not a rate per person. Controls included placebo and conventional medicine [21].

Claims tested and not found

  1. That Oscillococcinum prevents flu. Flu-like illness did not differ from placebo in two prevention trials (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.34) [10].
  2. That homeopathic products prevent or cure children's respiratory infections. All low-risk-of-bias trials found no benefit over placebo [11].
  3. That individualized homeopathy relieves generalized anxiety disorder beyond placebo. Anxiety scores improved equally on homeopathy and placebo in 44 patients [15].
  4. That homeopathic immunotherapy improves asthma in people allergic to house dust mite. Most outcomes did not differ from placebo in 242 people [13].
  5. That the effects of homeopathy hold up in the largest, most rigorous trials. In 8 large, higher-quality trials the odds ratio was 0.88 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.19) [6].

Sources

  1. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Homeopathy. 2021. https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/homeopathy
  2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Homeopathic Drug Products: Guidance for FDA Staff and Industry. 2022. https://www.fda.gov/media/163755/download
  3. European Academies' Science Advisory Council. Homeopathic products and practices: assessing the evidence and ensuring consistency in regulating medical claims in the EU. 2017. https://easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF_s/reports_statements/EASAC_Homepathy_statement_web_final.pdf
  4. Cukaci C, Freissmuth M, Mann C, Marti J, Sperl V. Against all odds: the persistent popularity of homeopathy. Wiener klinische Wochenschrift. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-020-01624-x
  5. Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. The Lancet. 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(97)02293-9
  6. Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L, et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. The Lancet. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)67177-2
  7. Mathie RT, Lloyd SM, Legg LA, et al. Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-142
  8. Mathie RT, Ramparsad N, Legg LA, et al. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0445-3
  9. Gartlehner G, Emprechtinger R, Hackl M, et al. Assessing the magnitude of reporting bias in trials of homeopathy: a cross-sectional study and meta-analysis. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111846
  10. Mathie RT, Frye J, Fisher P. Homeopathic Oscillococcinum for preventing and treating influenza and influenza-like illness. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001957.pub6
  11. Hawke K, van Driel ML, Buffington BJ, et al. Homeopathic medicinal products for preventing and treating acute respiratory tract infections in children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005974.pub5
  12. Taylor MA, Reilly D, Llewellyn-Jones RH, et al. Randomised controlled trial of homoeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial series. BMJ. 2000. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7259.471
  13. Lewith GT, Watkins AD, Hyland ME, et al. Use of ultramolecular potencies of allergen to treat asthmatic people allergic to house dust mite: double blind randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7336.520
  14. Siewert J, Cramer H, Ortiz M, et al. Homeopathic medication for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Frontiers in Allergy. 2026. https://doi.org/10.3389/falgy.2026.1815934
  15. Bonne O, Shemer Y, Gorali Y, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of classical homeopathy in generalized anxiety disorder. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 2003. https://doi.org/10.4088/jcp.v64n0309
  16. Pilkington K, Kirkwood G, Rampes H, et al. Homeopathy for anxiety and anxiety disorders: a systematic review of the research. Homeopathy. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2006.05.005
  17. Ernst E, Pittler MH. Efficacy of homeopathic arnica: a systematic review of placebo-controlled clinical trials. Archives of Surgery. 1998. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.133.11.1187
  18. Gaertner K, Baumgartner S, Walach H. Is Homeopathic Arnica Effective for Postoperative Recovery? A Meta-analysis of Placebo-Controlled and Active Comparator Trials. Frontiers in Surgery. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.680930
  19. Boehm K, Raak C, Cramer H, et al. Homeopathy in the treatment of fibromyalgia: a comprehensive literature-review and meta-analysis. Complementary Therapies in Medicine. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2014.06.005
  20. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Requested Recall: letter to Standard Homeopathic Company on Hyland's Baby Teething Tablets. 2017. https://www.fda.gov/media/104395/download
  21. Stub T, Musial F, Kristoffersen AA, et al. Adverse effects of homeopathy, what do we know? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2016.03.013
  22. Posadzki P, Alotaibi A, Ernst E. Adverse effects of homeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series. International Journal of Clinical Practice. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12026

Everything in the library