Talk:Gripe water

Commentary

Strange pity (=incompetence & ignorance) that the fungicide, sodium hydrogen carbonate (=baking soda), is still not recognized for Gripe water. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capiert (talk • contribs) 05:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

note to all comments bellow, homeopathic is the wrong term. Gripe water contains active incredients in measurable quantities. there is no 30C quantum medicine here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.121.5 (talk) 15:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I found this sentence amusing.. "ColicCalm is regulated as an over-the-counter homeopathic medicine and conforms to stricter quality testing protocols". One wonders what sort of strict protocols could be employed for a homeopathic remedy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.107.26 (talk) 14:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, I found that part strange. Homeopathic "remedies" are nothing but pure 100% water with no more effect than a placebo. So it seems to be the wrong catagory. 74.14.133.253 (talk) 22:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that made me smirk too, I'm not even sure that homeopathic medicines have any regulations in most markets, especially as they'd be impossible to force. I could sell distilled water as homeopathic and defy you to prove me wrong, hell, I could probably get away with tap water.

This one had me too "Many people now consider it to be a viable and preferable alternative to common medications". I mean, it's a common medication, predating evidence based prescription. Whether people "consider it viable" is irrelevant, and preferable means nothing ... sounds like weasel words to me.

Homeopathic treatments are regulated by the FDA. It isn't hard to confirm. This may be a stricter regulation than for food products. =Axlq 04:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

They may well be, but you'd do better to cite an original source, rather than a fanzine for homeopathy. The "most markets" comment would perhaps better have been directed towards a US slant to part of the article, FDA regulation is not in dispute. The strictness or otherwise of such regulation is a completely absurd assertion. Homeopathic remedies are water only, with an unproven mystical quality introduced in the dilution process. In other words, the FDA testing can do no more than prove it is harmless, unpolluted etc. and possibly shaken according to wizard's spell in the Oraganon. It says nothing about efficacy, and as homeopathy has never managed prove itself as better than placebo, it can't, and is therefore difficult to see what relevance the statement had in the article. Someone less accomodating of alternative remedies than I has already edited the homeopathy stuff out of the main article anyway. Which is probably for the best. Pointing out a homeopathic remedy exists with the same name is fairly trivial, as homeopathic equivalents tend to be available for most traditional and herbal remedies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.131.8 (talk) 20:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The article no longer refers to Gripe Water as a homeopathic remedy. David notMD (talk) 09:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Remedy?

If there is no evidence of Gripe water's effectiveness, I don't think it's accurate to call it a remedy. Sancho 10:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

"Remedy" no longer appears in article. David notMD (talk) 10:52, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

No clinical evidence?

There is no clinical evidence for the effectiveness of gripe water.

This sentence is supported by reference to an article from 14 years ago. I think we need a more recent reference for this sentence. Sancho 09:09, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Added ref to study published in 2015 documenting MORE colic, vomiting and constipation with use of gripe water in infants. There does not appear to be any other trial in the recent scientific literature. David notMD (talk) 10:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)