Regulation will give homeopathy undue credence: academic

MOVES by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) to regulate homeopathic medicines have met with criticism from a leading public health academic.

Dr Ken Harvey from the School of Public Health at La Trobe University said the regulatory proposals outlined in the TGA’s consultation paper would “eliminate a few shonky products” but would also legitimise other products lacking proof of efficacy.

“[It is] ironic that the TGA should regulate a class of medicines that have no convincing scientific evidence of efficacy,” he said.

“The TGA’s justification is the support of pluralism and freedom to practise alternative systems of medicine, regardless of whether or not they work.”

Complementary Healthcare Council (CHC) executive director Dr Wendy Morrow (PhD) said her organisation had worked closely with the TGA in developing the regulations and had collected industry data to “ensure that an accurate regulatory impact statement could be made in relation to the proposed changes”.

The regulations define homeopathic medicines as those containing no active ingredient other than a homeopathic or anthroposophic preparation of a specified mother substance.

Only pre-approved active ingredients would be available for inclusion on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods.

Ingredients not included in the list, or at a concentration above that specified in the list, would have to undergo a safety evaluation before inclusion.