“Pseudoscientific treatments are prevalent in modern society and pose a significant public threat.”

Traditional medicine has a long history of contributing to conventional medicine and continues to hold promise. However, a majority of WHO Member States (102 out of 133) responding to a WHO global survey on traditional medicine reported that they had no policies, laws, or regulations in place to ensure the safety, efficacy or quality of traditional medicines or practices. Some national policies and regulations are comprehensive while others refer to specific aspects.

In this preregistered cross-sectional study on a nationally representative sample (N = 1003), we observed high lifetime prevalence of iNAR (91.3%) and TCAM (99.2%). Overall, 99% of participants reported engaging in at least one TCAM practice during their lifetime. Irrational beliefs, especially magical health beliefs and medical conspiracy theories, were the strongest predictors of TCAM.

State attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) cracked down on misleading marketing and unapproved GLP-1 weight loss products, signaling ongoing scrutiny of this booming market. Health care products need to be backed by science or quackery will be costly, according to government regulators. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced they are putting hundreds of advertisers on notice that if they deceive patients with product claims that cannot be backed up or substantiated, they will face fines up to $50,120 per violation.

Available evidence suggests that infodemics during health emergencies have an adverse effect on society. The most negative consequences of health misinformation are the increase of misleading or incorrect interpretations of available evidence, impact on mental health, misallocation of health resources and an increase in vaccination hesitancy.

The global health and wellness industry has an estimated value of US$4 trillion. As a result, many products are sold on baseless or exaggerated claims, feigned scientific legitimacy, and questionable evidence of safety and efficacy. Pseudoscience in health and wellness, if left unchecked and unchallenged, may have profound implications for the reputation of exercise science as a discipline.

These examples are taken to represent pseudoscience in medicine, which is defined here as scientific denialism associated with moral failure, justifying itself in terms of dissident scientific publication in order to advance agendas with the potential to do medical harm to human populations. Demographic modelling suggests that if the national government had used ARVs for prevention and treatment at the same rate as the Western Cape, then about 171,000 HIV infections and 343,000 deaths could have been prevented between 1999 and 2007. Another example of this type of pseudoscience, in the form of medical denialism, or empirical rejectionism, is the spread of the anti-vaccine movement.

Pseudo-science is a fire under the ashes that ignites with the spread of pandemics and burns the achievements of scientists. These types of therapies, which usually rely on personal experience to prove their effectiveness, are considered examples of pseudoscience because they try to prove something using a non-scientific method. Such treatments reach their peak during pandemics because many people are willing to seek refuge in anything for fear of their lives even without being aware of relevant dangers.

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is used by a substantial proportion of the population. While some CAM therapies have evidence supporting their use, many lack sufficient evidence and some are plausibly ineffective or even harmful. This study examines the prevalence and quality of evidence cited in support of CAM on popular websites.

For decades, wellness misinformation lived in a space that was evidence-adjacent and problematic, but containable: the “outspoken minority” spreading lies about vaccine harms, influencer feeds, supplement marketing, detox culture, lifestyle blogs that could mostly be ignored. That era is over. Wellness ideology is now: Driving health narratives in mainstream media. Informing political platforms and public policy proposals. Framing regulatory oversight as oppression. Rebranding ideology as “medical freedom”.

A pseudotherapy is considered to be “a substance, product, activity or service with a purported health purpose that does not have support from scientific knowledge or evidence guaranteeing its efficacy and safety”. The use of pseudotherapies is quite accepted in Europe—according to the European Social Survey, Round 7 (edition 2.0, 2014), 25.9% of the general population had used them in the last 12 months. The use of pseudotherapies can imply genuine health risks because this use is based on misleading advertising about the expected therapeutic effects, and this can favour the delay or substitution of conventional treatments, or even reduce the effectiveness of the latter.

Pseudoscience and Pseudotherapies may have significant potential risks and harms for various reasons: There is a risk that patients abandon effective proved-to-be effective medical treatments or prevention measures in favour of practices that have not demonstrated therapeutic value, sometimes leading to treatment failure for critical conditions that may even lead to death. There are frequent likelihood of dangerous delays and loss of opportunity in the application of medicines, procedures and techniques recognised and endorsed by the scientific medical community as evidence-based effective interventions.

Conventional medicine relies on methods proved to be safe and effective with carefully designed trials and research. But, many complementary and alternative treatments lack solid research on which to base sound decisions. The dangers and possible benefits of many complementary and alternative treatments remain unproved.

It is critical that policymakers and public health personnel gain an understanding of the extent to which complementary and alternative health care forms an integral, albeit often marginal or marginalized, part of the public health apparatus at the disposal of any society. CAM may represent a substantial and largely untapped resource base.

Health misinformation poses a threat not only to individuals' health and wellbeing but also to public health more broadly, and it carries steep economic costs. False claims have fueled hesitancy around life-saving vaccines such as the HPV vaccine and cause questioning of evidence-based treatments like chemotherapy in favor of unproven “cures”. One recent study estimates that vaccine hesitancy related to the COVID-19 vaccine led to additional $2 billion in health care costs.

While some health myths are harmless (think okra water), the cumulative effect of bad advice flourishing online poses real risks to our wellbeing and scientific literacy. “Politically motivated conspiracy theories that sow distrust in public institutions and governments and hospitals” might be the most insidious type of health misinformation, says Zakir Hussain.

Health-related conspiracy theories undermine trust in healthcare, exacerbate health inequities, and contribute to harmful health behaviors such as vaccine hesitancy and reliance on unproven treatments. Their rapid spread, amplified by social media algorithms and digital misinformation networks, exacerbates public health challenges, highlighting the urgency of understanding their prevalence, key drivers, and mitigation strategies.

Folk remedies may sound benign, but they can hurt people. For example, believing that drinking warm milk before bed helps you go to sleep is not going to harm you (even if it's not true). However, other beliefs can be dangerous such as the idea that eating particular foods can bolster your immunity, which can lead people to think they don't need to be vaccinated against the flu or COVID.

Pseudoscientific therapies don't just fail to help, sometimes they harm. From “rebirthing therapy” that led to a child's death, to “cold water therapy” promoted as a cure for PTSD, history is full of examples where good intentions met bad science. Even when there's no physical danger, pseudoscientific treatments can waste time, money, and hope.

In just over a year, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has dramatically reshaped vaccines at the federal level, which has drawn considerable controversy given his lack of a medical background and his long history of attacking vaccines and pushing pseudoscience. Public health advocates and researchers are calling him out for pushing anti-vaccine agendas in his publications and in his role at HHS.

Many people believe that complementary therapies are safer than conventional medical treatments because they are more 'natural'. This is not necessarily true. Complementary therapies can cause harm if used incorrectly or by someone for whom they are unsuitable. Relying on complementary therapies alone may delay a person's diagnosis and medical treatment.

A rise in psychological pseudoscience is putting people at risk, psychologists have warned, with social media and celebrity endorsements partly to blame. Mental health apps, mood-boosting supplements and energy therapies are among the therapies that could do 'more harm than good' according to psychologists Jonathan Stea and Stephen Hupp in their new book Investigating Clinical Psychology.

Health misinformation spreads fast—but facts matter. Learn how to spot pseudoscience, find credible sources, and protect yourself from misleading claims.

In recent years, more people are turning to alternative medicine as a way to take control of their health and well-being. While traditional Western medicine remains the foundation of healthcare, the growing interest in natural and holistic approaches reflects a shift in how individuals view healing and prevention. Practices such as acupuncture, herbal remedies, meditation, and chiropractic care are no longer considered fringe—they are becoming part of mainstream conversations about wellness.

Alternative healthcare choices are widely available, but often with little or no good evidence that they work. New research reveals anti-science beliefs predict willingness to take risks on unproven therapies. At least 38% of US adults, especially younger adult women, use some form of alternative medicine, which is an estimated $30 billion a year business in America.

All in all, it's quite concerning to see how much non-evidence-based and pseudoscientific nutrition, largely in the form of 'integrative' and 'functional' medicine, has taken over huge swaths of modern medicine. We've slowly seen the rise of these modalities across medical centers as they've realized this is a cash cow.

The framing of this event as offering "diverse viewpoints" is particularly insidious. It creates a false equivalence between scientific evidence and unsubstantiated or debunked theories. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., with his long history of promoting anti-vaccine views, continued to undermine confidence in vital public health initiatives.

Alternative medicine has several potential benefits, including: Reduced side effects: Many alternative therapies are considered to have fewer side effects than conventional medicine, making them a safer option for some people. Lack of regulation: Unlike conventional medicine, many alternative therapies are not regulated by government agencies or professional organizations, which can make it difficult to ensure their safety and effectiveness.

According to the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), about 38% of U.S. adults and 12% of children use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), but many practices lack strong scientific evidence of safety and effectiveness. While some CAM approaches are supported by evidence, others may pose risks if used instead of proven treatments.