Homeopathy for Teething Babies

If like me, your baby is currently teething…
You probably aren’t having the easiest time, especially at night. Grouchy, tearful and very clingy are probably the best words to describe baby Bourne just before a tooth manages to break its way through but something that I have found very effective are Homeopathic remedies.


Homeopathy is a gentle and non-toxic therapy, making them ideal for babies and children…
It works in the principle that ‘like cures like’. A homeopathic remedy is a pure, natural substance that has been diluted many times which triggers the body’s own healing mechanism, meaning that given in small amounts it can cure what it would cause if given in large amounts. For example, one remedy which might be used for insomnia is coffea, a remedy made from coffee. Given in large amounts it could cause insomnia, but in this diluted form, it cures… not that insomnia is anything that a new mum needs to worry about! 

Teething can produce different reactions in different babies…

And there are quite a number of Homeopathic remedies for teething, depending on the symptoms your baby is getting.

Chamomilla: For when gums are red, swollen and tender to the touch. The baby is irritable, worse at night, and needs a lot of comforting through cuddles or being carried. Earache is often linked to the teething pain.

Pulsatilla: When baby has earache following the baby being cold or damp and is particularly fearful, nervous and tearful. Baby will respond well to fresh air, gentle movements and lots of loving attention.

Belladonna: When pain is coming and going suddenly and is quite extreme. Particularly good for hot or burning, red skin and throbbing.

Obviously the best way of knowing which remedy is best for your baby is to visit a Homeopath…
(details of how to find a Homeopath at the end of the article), especially with regards to the correct dosage, but there are also a few remedies that are available on the high street which is what Baby Bourne has been using.

Baby Bourne has been having…
The Boots Teething Pain Relief Sachets which are the homeopathic remedy, Chamomilla.

The best thing about them is…
I have found them to be really effective; they appear to work very quickly and are only a couple of quid for a packet (and being Boots they are often on 3 for 2 offers).

The bad side is…
The packaging and getting them in his mouth. Baby Bourne seems to have developed a notion that anything coming near his mouth is horrid so he screws his mouth up as small as possible to stop anything getting in, but now he is starting to recognise the packaging he is more willing to open his mouth… but it still isn’t easy. They come in a paper sachet which is quite wide so the granules tend to go everywhere and if you put the packet further in his mouth to avoid this, he tends to close his mouth or bite down, making the paper soggy which the graduals then stick too.

Obviously the fact that this remedy is so effective completely outweighs any negative points…
And I would recommend the Boots Teething sachets to anyone who was going through teething with their little one.

To find a registered Homeopath in your area visit…
The Society of Homeopaths at http://www.homeopathy.soh.org/


7 thoughts on “Homeopathy for Teething Babies

    1. That it appeared to work very well on both my children. They would be kicking off & once they had a sachet they would clearly feel better, calm down & stop trying to eat their fingers and at 1 I think they are a bit young for the placebo effect… that’s why I would recommend it to other parents.

      In terms of the bigger question of does Homeopathy work, I think anyone could find an equal amount arguments for yes or no so people should try it and decide for themselves, but all my experience have been VERY positive.


      1. “at 1 I think are a bit young for the placebo effect”
        Sure, you can think that if you like, but it’s not very likely to be the case. Even animals have been shown to exhibit a placebo effect, and then there’s also the fact that your own observations are likely to be biased since you administered treatment to them.

        What you have is only anecdotal in nature. Anecdotes do not constitute strong evidence because they have no predictive power. You may have an anecdote that your children felt better after receiving a particular treatment, but that does not mean you should necessarily expect the same to be true for others, or even for your children if the experience were to be repeated.

        Even if it is the case that the treatment made your children feel better, you have not ruled out the possibility that what they have experienced is entirely a placebo response, so you can’t say that the particular treatment given played a specific part in their apparent recovery.

        In a real medical science, anecdotes are useful only for informing hypotheses. For example, from your anecdote you might form a hypothesis that a particular homeopathic treatment can help treat the symptoms of teething in some identifiable, measurable way. This hypothesis can then be tested, and data obtained from a rigorous experiment can then be used predictively. This is what it means to be a medical science.

        If your practice is based on anecdotes and not data, then it is not based on science. You may think that your conclusions are justified, but the most dangerous words in medicine are “in my experience”. The story of Bill Silverman is a great example of this (his own written account can be found here: http://www.jameslindlibrary.org/essays/cautionary/silverman.html).


        Dr Silverman was a pediatrician who, in 1949, was given a patient who also happened to be the child of the professor of biochemistry at his university. The infant showed signs of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), a newly described disease that caused crippling blindness in babies. In desperation, he tried treating the child with what was that the time a new anti-inflammatory drug called ACTH, and the child recovered! Powerful proof that ACTH works, right? But the story does not end there.

        Following this instance, 31 more infants that showed the early signs of ROP were treated with ACTH. Of these, 25 recovered, 2 became blind, 2 lost all vision in one eye, and 2 had useful vision but some scarring. In comparison, of 7 untreated infants at another hospital, 6 had become blind. This was only a small sample, but certainly much stronger evidence than a single anecdote. Surely you’re entirely convinced by now, if all it takes to convince you of a medicine’s efficacy is one or two anecdotes and here I have 25. However, the story does not end there either.

        Following this small preliminary experiment, instead of advising that the treatment become widely adopted, Dr Silverman set up a randomised controlled clinical trial involving 2 hospitals in order to settle the question once and for all with rigorous evidence.

        The result of this trial, which involved many more participants, showed that infants treated for ROP with ACTH actually fared significantly *worse* than those that did not receive the drug. The doctors had been mislead not only by the initial isolated anecdote, but also by the following case series in which the treatment had appeared successful.

        Only because they had the intellectual integrity to seek rigorous data was the potential catastrophe of widespread adoption of this treatment able to be averted. Surely you can see that, if a man of your principles were in Dr Silverman’s place, this harmful treatment may have been adopted and could have led to blindness in many infants who may otherwise have been spared that fate.


        Since homeopathic remedies tend to be diluted down to the point that there is nothing left but water (or whatever other solvent may be used), I wouldn’t expect side effects to be a problem. However, isn’t it important that medical interventions actually be effective?


      2. The example you have given is interesting & also shows that ‘scientific’ treatment isn’t always the best way. Personally I think both have their place and often use ‘complementary’ alongside ‘conventional’.

        Thankfully the remedy I’m talking about isn’t new like the example given. As I said, you will always find arguments for both sides of the story so it is up to anyone to decide what works best for them & their families but parents have been giving other parents tips has been going on since time began. It was actually a pharmacist who recommended it to me when I went in beside myself not knowing what to do with my screaming baby who nothing seemed to work on. She said lots of other parents said it was fantastic so maybe I should try that & the results were fantastic.


  1. When I initially left a comment I seem to have clicked on the -Notify me when new comments are added- checkbox and from now on whenever
    a comment is added I recieve 4 emails with the same comment.
    Perhaps there is a way you are able to remove me from that
    service? Many thanks!


    1. Sorry about that Camilia, I am quite new to wordpress so still working out their systems but will try & alter it, at the moment I can’t see anyway that I can alter your settings. Will keep trying. Nicola


      1. I don’t think that was a real comment, I think it was spam. I’ve seen the same template used many times on my blog, although there it’s usually caught in the spam filter. So don’t worry, I don’t expect you’ve done anything wrong behind the scenes.


Please tell me what you think…..

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s