You might’ve noticed that I’ve never mention Weleda here on the blog. There’s a reason for that. Let me tell you why – I’ll take a deep dive into the main problems. This piece is for everyone stumbling into the brand thinking that many influencers can’t be wrong and want to learn more about the underlying belief system of Weleda. So: Is Weleda problematic?

The reason I finally decided to write about Weleda was a fluff piece in the New York Times, titled “The deep roots of Weleda’s Skin Food – For almost a century, the ultrarich moisturizer has been made from plants grown by methods both scientific and spiritual”. I’ve no idea if it’s sponcon, the author is naïve or the paper can’t bother to fact check anymore, but trust me: you’ve never read a more uncritical and gushing piece.

Whenever I write about problematic brands, I can rely on somebody popping up and telling me that it doesn’t matter anyway, all companies are to some degree corrupt, they’re all the same, whatever. I don’t think that’s true, and I also think that Weleda occupies a somewhat unique position.

While other brands might employ questionable practices, those below are built into Weleda’s raison d’etre.

Scandals in the beauty industry

scandals in the beauty industry

There’re two kinds of companies in the beauty world. There’re the likes of Estee Lauder: a money making machine, capitalism at its finest. While EL doesn’t have any values but to earn money, they play both sides equally well: one Lauder gives money to Trump, the rest of the company will donate to abortion funds. Scandals surround single people, and single issues: they try to appeal to everyone. Then there’re companies build around their founders’ beliefs like sustainability or diversity (e.g. Ilia, Juvia’s Place, many many indie brands). If they stumble, they often crash.

Looking at the wider world, then there’re companies catering to members of belief systems or religious groups: financial funds that only invest in sustainable companies, for example, or Shabbat-adhering electrical appliances.

Weleda is a brand that roots firmly in the belief system of its founder, Rudolf Steiner’s anthroposophy. It doesn’t cater to homeopathy and anthroposophy believers only, though: it will suck in the random, uneductated buyer in with vague ethics that mask the rather sinister belief system hiding underneath. The CEO of the company actually knows and wants that:

“In the anthroposophical orientation of many products, Ammendola sees no problems for sales, since in his experience quite a few customers buy the products on the basis of hearsay without knowing the philosophical superstructure. The advertising is also planned in such a way that several readings of the products are possible for all herbal, homeopathic and anthroposophic substances.”

Anthroposophie.Blog (my translation)

Weleda masquerades as a do-good company (sustainable! natural!) that appeals to the casual buyer and the die-hard homeopathy fan.

Who is Steiner and what is anthroposophy?

Is Weleda problematic?

When you visit the official websites of Weleda (I looked at the German and US sites) everything is full of greenery, nature, and sunflowers. That is interspersed with soundbites about “tradition”, “nature”, “wellness”, “health” and “balance”.

The tradition mentioned starts with the brand’s founder, Austrian Rudolf Steiner, the founder of anthroposophy. He is the founder of the brand and of the first Waldorf school. Please keep in mind Weleda stresses its deep connection and the “great importance” of Steiner on the brand. He was a self-proclaimed clairvoyant and occultist, and his proclaimed esoteric worldview is the foundation of today’s belief system anthroposophy (Wikipedia).

The whole movement found its way into education via Waldorf schools, into medicine and wellness brands and biodynamic farming.

When it comes to “religious” beliefs (in lieu of a better word) is it bad though? A lot of people believe in reincarnation or Atlantis (like Steiner). Critics have been calling anthroposophy a “dangerous quasi-religious movement that is fundamentally anti-rational and anti-scientific” and this is where it becomes a problem.

Problem 1: Racism

Weleda problematic
Is Weleda problematic?

Steiner was a racist.

“He thought black people were distinguished by an “instinctual life”, as opposed to Caucasians’ “intellectual life”.
He believed each race had a geographical location where they should live – black people in Europe were “a nuisance”.(…) for him there was also a hierarchy in races; “a soul with good karma could hope to be reincarnated into a race which is higher up in the hierarchy, Steiner argued.”

BBC

And while, for example, the American Anthroposophic Society has explicitly rejected those beliefs, Weleda has not. (Keep in mind for all of the following, Weleda expressedly states its deep connection to Steiner.)

Problem 2: anti-science & anti-vaxx “medicine”

Weleda criticism

Anthroposophic medicine is similar to homeopathy in that it uses ultra-diluted substances. While homeopathy is generally harmless, it stops being harmless when it substitutes scientifically proven cures.

Until 2015, Weleda sold a mistletoe remedy called Iscador that was supposedly effective against cancer, although no clinical evidence of benefits existed. (Apparently, sinking profits made Weleda sell it to another anthroposphic company.)

Weleda’s profit comes from cosmetics (ca. 80%) and medicinal products (20%).

The BBC showed in a recent article that children in Steiner/Waldorf schools don’t receive as many vaccinations as children in regular schools. Steiner himself believed illnesses in our current lives could be explained by problems in the previous ones. In overcoming illnesses with a root in a previous life, individuals could gain “reinforced power” and improve their “karma”. Vaccination, in effect, gets in the way.

And then, Covid

And now throw Covid into that mindset. A Guardian article told that there’re 10 Steiner hospitals in Germany, “(…) where some people who fall severely ill with Covid-19 can find themselves taken to hospitals where they are treated, under sedation and without a formalised opt-in procedure, with ginger-soaked chest compresses and homeopathic pellets containing highly diluted particles of iron supposedly harvested from shooting stars that have landed on earth.”

Thinking back to the rise of the anti-vaxx and conspiracy movement during the last years, that kind of mindset pours oil into the fire. Not only is there a widespread conspiracy mindset on the Steiner community (Guardian), hospitals like that are spreaders of misinformation.

And while this seems only loosely connected to Weleda – Weleda is very proud of its founder and has never in any way or form denounced neither Steiner nor his anti-science beliefs.

Problem 3: Biodynamic farming & food for the rich

Weleda history

Weleda is very proud of its gardens and farms worldwide and uses principles of biodynamic farming throughout. I thought that would mean something like sustainable farming in harmony with nature. But it is, in fact, farming with astrology and homeopathy on top.

“Biodynamics has much in common with other organic approaches – it emphasizes the use of manures and composts and excludes the use of synthetic (artificial) fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides on soil and plants. (…) Some methods use an astrological sowing and planting calendar. Biodynamic agriculture uses various herbal and mineral additives for compost additives and field sprays; these are prepared using methods that are more akin to sympathetic magic than agronomy, such as burying ground quartz stuffed into the horn of a cow, which are said to harvest “cosmic forces in the soil.”

Wikipedia

And this is what the NYT article gushingly praised, including the Demeter certificate. (I didn’t know before that Demeter, a certificate that in Germany you see quite often in supermarkets, identifies products that have been produced by biodynamic agriculture).

Sustainability vs. biodynamics

A more sustainable way for farming is definitely needed, no matter if farmers believe in the position of the sun and the moon during planting season. What matters, though, is that they’re producing food for an elite that can spend no matter what.

A biodynamic farmer claims:“What people don’t understand is that biodynamic farming is about responding to the farm, (this is) part of the art of farming, which has been lost in this rat race to produce cheap food.” (Guardian)

More than 820 million of people suffer from hunger globally – all the time. I’d say that cheap food is a) desperately needed, and b) there’s no need to pitch unsustainable farming against affordable foods. There isn’t a dichotomy between cheap=bad and expensive=good, and there’s no need to claim that. What is true is that we desperately need to find ways to cheaply and sustainable feed those 820 millions that are malnourished.

Problem 4: Let’s finance some smear-campaigns!

Weleda organic

Now, would I’ve written this post in 2012, or even in 2015? No, I would’ve not. And that is because in 2012, when Weleda was struggling financially, they (together with other anthroposphic companies) employed a blogger, Claus Fritzsche. They paid 43.000€ a year for what was basically a smear campaign that would discredit scientists and journalists that were vocal against anthroposophy/homeopathy. Fritzsche gamed the system and employed several blogs to rank highest in google searches. One of his victims was Edzard Ernst, the first Professor of Complementary Medicine and holder of the Laing Chair at the University of Exeter in South-West England. He nearly lost his job over this, and was still kind enough to write a short note upon Fritzsche’s death in 2014. (He also heavily under fire from the then Prince of Wales, now King Charles, who apparently is a fan of homeopathy.)

A smear campaign like this is unprecedented from a consortium of pharmaceutical and cosmetics companies.

Tl, dr: Is Weleda problematic?

Weleda problematic
Is Weleda problematic?

After this all, I’m genuinely baffled why anyone would choose to buy any Weleda products. Is Weleda problematic? I absolutely think so!

Weleda is in a unique position when it comes to utterly problematic brands. The problems are woven into the creation of the brand. Whenever we talk about problematic brands, we mostly talk about problematic individuals – look at the old Kat von D or Brandon Truaxe posts on this blog. Weleda, though, builds on an inhuman anti-science belief-system and pursues that in small and big ways. Exploiting fears of cancer patients? Check. Destroying critics’ lives? Check. Buying journalists? Check. Trying to exploit the sustainability mindset, claiming anti-science views and give fodder to anti-vaxx and conspiracy theorists, never denouncing its founder’s racism? Check, check and check.

The anti-science movements start to seep into nearly every corner of our lives nowadays. It’s time to sever ties with every company that uses anti-science to further their means. Knowledge is power. Money is power. Decide wisely whom you’ll give it to.

Want more?