Homeopathic Myth vs. Mythology

“There isn’t a single good quality trial showing homeopathy works”

Many people believe that all high quality randomised controlled trials (RCT) testing homeopathy have been negative. This is untrue.

Below are examples of positive high quality RCTs and systematic reviews/meta-analyses testing various types of homeopathy:

  • Individualised homeopathic treatment for diarrhoea in children. A meta-analysis of three placebo-controlled randomised trials by Jacobs et al. 2003 showed that homeopathic treatment reduced the duration of diarrhea (p=0.008).1
  • Individualised homeopathic treatment for ear infections (otitis media) in children 2,3
  • The homeopathic medicine Galphimia glauca for hay fever (allergic rhinitis)4
  • The isopathic medicine Pollen 30c for hay fever5
  • The homeopathic medicine Oscillococcinum for the treatment of influenza6. This study showed that Oscillococcinum was effective at treating influenza, but ineffective for preventing it.
  • The complex homeopathic medicine Vertigoheel for vertigo.7

More research is needed to confirm the findings of these promising studies, particularly large-scale repetitions by other research teams.

To find out more about promising areas of clinical research, see ‘Homeopathy on trial – The need for targeted research’ by Tournier & Roberts, 2013.

 Cherry Picking Research

Cherry Picking Research

The issue of ‘cherry picking’

‘Cherry picking’ is the practice of publishing or quoting only the positive trials on a given treatment, whilst ignoring conflicting negative trials. This can lead to distortion of the evidence, which is why there has been a recent drive to force research institutions and drug companies to disclose all trial results – both positive and negative – so that the balance of evidence can be considered in its entirety.

When strong positive studies are presented to critics of homeopathy, they often say that this is cherry picking because there are other negative trials on homeopathy. However, those negative trials are only relevant if they were testing the same homeopathic treatment for the same condition.

In the case of the studies listed above, to our knowledge there are no other repetitions of these trials which had negative results, so the evidence is unrefuted.

The need for replication of existing studies

As research in homeopathy is a relatively new field and there is very limited funding to support new trials, few high quality studies have been carried out, let alone repeated – something HRI is keen to change.

As and when more studies become available testing these same homeopathic treatments further, the evidence base will be updated as these findings are either confirmed, or contradicted, by new findings.

REFERENCES:

  • Jacobs J, Jonas WB, Jiménez-Pérez M & Crothers D. Homeopathy for childhood diarrhea: combined results and metaanalysis from three randomized, controlled clinical trials. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J., 2003;22:229–234 | PubMed
  • Jacobs J, Springer DA, Crothers D. Homeopathic treatment of acute otitis media in children: a preliminary randomized placebo-controlled trial. Pediatr Infect Dis J., 2001; 20(2): 177-83 | PubMed
  • Sinha MN, et al. Randomized controlled pilot study to compare Homeopathy and Conventional therapy in Acute Otitis Media. Homeopat. J. Fac. Homeopat., 2012; 101: 5–12 | PubMed
  • Wiesenauer M & Lüdtke R. A meta analysis of the homeopathic treatment of pollinosis with Galphimia glauca. Forsch. Komplementärmed., 1996; 3: 230-234 | Link
  • Reilly DT, Taylor MA, et al. Is homoeopathy a placebo response? Controlled trial of homoeopathic potency, with pollen in hayfever as model. Lancet, 1986; 2(8512): 881-886 | PubMed
  • Mathie RT, Frye J & Fisher P. Homeopathic Oscillococcinum(®) for preventing and treating influenza and influenza-like illness. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2012; 12:CD001957 | PubMed
  • Schneider B, et al. Treatment of vertigo with a homeopathic complex remedy compared with usual treatments – a meta-analysis of clinical trials, Arzneim.-Forschung, 2005; 55(1): 23-29 | PubMed

Homeopathy for ADHD: Hocus Pocus or Science?

By Deborah Mitchell

Parents of children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) face daily challenges and questions concerning how to best cope with, manage, and help their kids. Moms and dads who are not satisfied with a purely conventional medicine approach, typically because of questionable safety and effectiveness of medications, often turn to other options. Should parents consider homeopathy for ADHD?

Some practitioners and researchers vote yes, and they point to the success they have witnessed in their practice and their studies. Many others, however, are not convinced about the value of homeopathy in general nor its use for this neurodevelopmental condition in particular.

Recently I interviewed Beth Landau-Halpern, a Toronto-based, classically trained homeopath who uses a wide range of natural approaches to treat ADHD, including nutritional medicine, relaxation techniques, and natural supplements along with homeopathy. Many but not all of her patients are already taking medications. Her natural therapies can both complement and enhance a child’s treatment program.

Homeopathy and ADHD: Two Studies

Landau-Halpern talked about her involvement in two studies of homeopathy and ADHD as well as about her experiences with her treatment approach overall. The two studies—one pilot study already completed and a new study currently underway that was initiated based on the findings of the first—involved evaluation of the impact of homeopathic remedies on children with ADHD.

The particulars of the first study were explained to me by one of Landau-Halpern’s colleagues, David Brulé, a research associate at the University of Toronto and owner of Riverdale Homeopathic Clinic.A total of 35 children were enrolled in the study, which involved an initial consultation with one of two homeopaths and then nine follow-up consultations.

Eighty percent of the participants completed all 10 consultations over an average of 12.1 months. During that time, a mean of three homeopathic remedies were prescribed for the children from a selection of more than three dozen options. The two found to be the most effective were phosphorus and tuberculinum. Parents were questioned about their child’s diet, but while Brulé said “diet works” for kids with ADHD, this factor was not emphasized in the study.

Overall the findings were positive: 63 percent achieved significant improvement in behavioral symptoms, and the benefits were generally observed at the seventh to eighth consultation. All of this good news prompted the researchers to plan another, larger study, which is now underway.

Based on her observations of participants in this study, Landau-Halpern explained that “most of the clients responded well to the homeopathic remedies, although it sometimes took a few months to find the most beneficial remedy.” This caveat was especially true, she said, among kids who were taking medication since “many of their ‘symptoms’ were masked” by the drugs. Overall, she believed the children’s behavioral symptoms were the most affected by the remedies, “those that the stimulant drugs don’t really affect in any case.”

What about the effect of diet and natural supplements on these patients who were taking homeopathic remedies? Landau-Halpern pointed out that many of the parents were finding it difficult to deal with the challenges of ADHD, so she did not normally introduce dietary suggestions. At the same time, she emphasized that “an optimized diet is obviously important” as are supplements, although she did not stress them in the study.

The new study, which currently is recruiting participants, will follow 180 children with ADHD. Unlike the earlier study, parents will be asked if they are using therapeutic dietary changes. (Download the announcement for recruitment into the new study.)

In her private practice, Landau-Halpern often recommends supplements for children with ADHD, especially omega-3 fatty acids. In addition she suggests B vitamins, iron, magnesium, vitamin D, zinc, and multivitamins, depending on the individual child. She also addresses diet.

When looking at the diet of a child who has ADHD, Landau-Halpern pointed out that while every child responds to preservatives, artificial colors, and artificial flavors differently, “in general, they have absolutely no place in any child’s diet—ADHD or not.” She also emphasized that eliminating these substances “can bring about huge improvements in all sorts of pathological behaviors and physical symptoms.”

In fact, cutting out foods that contain preservatives and artificial additives is the first advice she offers parents of kids with ADHD. Why? Because it works. “For some children, simply removing foods that impair their neurological function can make an enormous difference,” and that includes refined, processed foods containing artificial ingredients and preservatives as well as those to which children have a hypersensitivity.

A review in Current Psychiatry Reports that evaluated evidence for dietary and nutritional treatments, as well as homeopathy, for ADHD noted that “Controlled studies support the elimination of artificial food dyes to reduce ADHD symptoms, and that multivitamin/mineral supplements and especially essential fatty acids are suggested. Evidence for the effectiveness of homeopathy for ADHD, however, was reported to be minimal.

Read more about kids and artificial colors

That could be changing, however, as researchers continue to conduct more comprehensive studies. Therefore, for parents of children with ADHD, alternative and complementary options such as homeopathy and nutritional medicine, including the elimination of artificial dyes and flavors and preservatives, should be considered and discussed with the appropriate healthcare professionals.

Should Quantum Anomalies Make Us Rethink Reality?

Every generation tends to believe that its views on the nature of reality are either true or quite close to the truth. We are no exception to this: although we know that the ideas of earlier generations were each time supplanted by those of a later one, we still believe that this time we got it right. Our ancestors were naïve and superstitious, but we are objective—or so we tell ourselves. We know that matter/energy, outside and independent of mind, is the fundamental stuff of nature, everything else being derived from it—or do we?

In fact, studies have shown that there is an intimate relationship between the world we perceive and the conceptual categories encoded in the language we speak. We don’t perceive a purely objective world out there, but one subliminally pre-partitioned and pre-interpreted according to culture-bound categories. For instance, “color words in a given language shape human perception of color.” A brain imaging study suggests that language processing areas are directly involved even in the simplest discriminations of basic colors. Moreover, this kind of “categorical perception is a phenomenon that has been reported not only for color, but for other perceptual continua, such as phonemes, musical tones and facial expressions.” In an important sense, we see what our unexamined cultural categories teach us to see, which may help explain why every generation is so confident in their own worldview. Allow me to elaborate.

The conceptual-ladenness of perception isn’t a new insight. Back in 1957, philosopher Owen Barfield wrote:

“I do not perceive any thing with my sense-organs alone.… Thus, I may say, loosely, that I ‘hear a thrush singing.’ But in strict truth all that I ever merely ‘hear’—all that I ever hear simply by virtue of having ears—is sound. When I ‘hear a thrush singing,’ I am hearing … with all sorts of other things like mental habits, memory, imagination, feeling and … will.” (Saving the Appearances)

As argued by philosopher Thomas Kuhn in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, science itself falls prey to this inherent subjectivity of perception. Defining a “paradigm” as an “implicit body of intertwined theoretical and methodological belief,” he wrote:

“something like a paradigm is prerequisite to perception itself. What a man sees depends both upon what he looks at and also upon what his previous visual-conceptual experience has taught him to see. In the absence of such training there can only be, in William James’s phrase, ‘a bloomin’ buzzin’ confusion.’”

Hence, because we perceive and experiment on things and events partly defined by an implicit paradigm, these things and events tend to confirm, by construction, the paradigm. No wonder then that we are so confident today that nature consists of arrangements of matter/energy outside and independent of mind.

Yet, as Kuhn pointed out, when enough “anomalies”—empirically undeniable observations that cannot be accommodated by the reigning belief system—accumulate over time and reach critical mass, paradigms change. We may be close to one such a defining moment today, as an increasing body of evidence from quantum mechanics (QM) renders the current paradigm untenable.

Indeed, according to the current paradigm, the properties of an object should exist and have definite values even when the object is not being observed: the moon should exist and have whatever weight, shape, size and color it has even when nobody is looking at it. Moreover, a mere act of observation should not change the values of these properties. Operationally, all this is captured in the notion of “non-contextuality”: the outcome of an observation should not depend on the way other, separate but simultaneous observations are performed. After all, what I perceive when I look at the night sky should not depend on the way other people look at the night sky along with me, for the properties of the night sky uncovered by my observation should not depend on theirs.

The problem is that, according to QM, the outcome of an observation can depend on the way another, separate but simultaneous, observation is performed. This happens with so-called “quantum entanglement” and it contradicts the current paradigm in an important sense, as discussed above. Although Einstein argued in 1935 that the contradiction arose merely because QM is incomplete, John Bell proved mathematically, in 1964, that the predictions of QM regarding entanglement cannot be accounted for by Einstein’s alleged incompleteness.

So to salvage the current paradigm there is an important sense in which one has to reject the predictions of QM regarding entanglement. Yet, since Alain Aspect’s seminal experiments in 1981–82, these predictions have been repeatedly confirmed, with potential experimental loopholes closed one by one. 1998 was a particularly fruitful year, with two remarkable experiments performed in Switzerland and Austria. In 2011 and 2015, new experiments again challenged non-contextuality. Commenting on this, physicist Anton Zeilinger has been quoted as saying that “there is no sense in assuming that what we do not measure [that is, observe] about a system has [an independent] reality.” Finally, Dutch researchers successfully performed a test closing all remaining potential loopholes, which was considered by Nature the “toughest test yet.”

The only alternative left for those holding on to the current paradigm is to postulate some form of non-locality: nature must have—or so they speculate—observation-independent hidden properties, entirely missed by QM, which are “smeared out” across spacetime. It is this allegedly omnipresent, invisible but objective background that supposedly orchestrates entanglement from “behind the scenes.”

It turns out, however, that some predictions of QM are incompatible with non-contextuality even for a large and important class of non-local theories. Experimental results reported in 2007 and 2010 have confirmed these predictions. To reconcile these results with the current paradigm would require a profoundly counterintuitive redefinition of what we call “objectivity.” And since contemporary culture has come to associate objectivity with reality itself, the science press felt compelled to report on this by pronouncing, “Quantum physics says goodbye to reality.”

The tension between the anomalies and the current paradigm can only be tolerated by ignoring the anomalies. This has been possible so far because the anomalies are only observed in laboratories. Yet we know that they are there, for their existence has been confirmed beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, when we believe that we see objects and events outside and independent of mind, we are wrong in at least some essential sense. A new paradigm is needed to accommodate and make sense of the anomalies; one wherein mind itself is understood to be the essence—cognitively but also physically—of what we perceive when we look at the world around ourselves.

The views expressed are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Rights & Permissions

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

Bernardo Kastrup

    Bernardo Kastrup has a Ph.D. in computer engineering from Eindhoven University of Technology and specializations in artificial intelligence and reconfigurable computing. He has worked as a scientist in some of the world's foremost research laboratories, including the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and the Philips Research Laboratories. He has authored many science and philosophy papers, as well as several philosophy books. His three most recent books are: "More Than Allegory," "Brief Peeks Beyond" and "Why Materialism Is Baloney."

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/should-quantum-anomalies-make-us-rethink-reality/

    Influence of pediatric vaccines on social behavior in the rhesus monkey

    doi:10.1016/j.ntt.2014.04.047

    Pediatric vaccines have been considered controversial due to potential negative effects on development, particularly impaired social interaction and communication, hyperactivity, and repetitive stereotyped behaviors that are characteristic of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Some reports suggest that exposure to ethyl mercury (EtHg), in the form of thimerosal, in pediatric vaccines may play a causative role in such negative effects. Male infant rhesus macaques (n = 79) were assigned at birth to one of six study groups (12–16 subjects/group) as follows: (1) the pediatric vaccination schedule from the 1990s including thimerosal-containing vaccines (TCVs), (2) the same 1990s schedule but accelerated to accommodate the developmental trajectory of the infant rhesus macaque, (3) TCVs only (saline placebo for Mumps–Measles–Rubella [MMR]), (4) MMR only (other injections replaced with saline placebo), (5) the expanded vaccine regimen from 2008 (where fewer vaccines contained thimerosal), or (6) a control group following the 1990s schedule with all vaccines replaced with saline placebo. Subjects began socializing at approximately 25 days of age and were socialized 5 days per week in a 4-monkey peer group. Social behavior data, collected between 15 and 18 months of age using a computer system capturing a variety of social and non-social behaviors, were included in this analysis. Data were analyzed using repeated measure ANOVAs with Dunnett’s test post-hoc procedures following significant experimental group or group × age interactions. No significant differences in non-social or social behavior were found when comparing the animals in the vaccine groups to controls. The data do not provide any evidence of abnormal social behavior in rhesus macaques exposed to low-dose thimerosal and should provide reassurance that TCVs do not contribute to the negative effects associated with ASD. Support from the Johnson Family, the Ted Lindsay Foundation, and SafeMinds is gratefully acknowledged.

    Copyright © 2014 Published by Elsevier Inc.

    Health Canada says it takes safety 'very seriously' in face of concerns about homeopathic remedy

    Ottawa has approved 8,500 homeopathic products, including remedy made from rabid dog saliva

    Bethany Lindsay · CBC News · Posted: Apr 18, 2018 4:00 AM PT | Last Updated: April 18

    http://snip.ly/fmamj

    homeopathic meds

     

    More than 8,500 homeopathic treatments are approved by Health Canada. (Josh Reynolds/Associated Press)

    The long list of so-called homeopathic nosodes approved by Health Canada include remedies made from the bacteria that causes chlamydia, the cerebral fluid of meningitis patients and cancer cells — to name just a few.

    After B.C.'s senior physician questioned the federal approval of one of these remedies, a substance developed from the saliva of a rabid dog, Health Canada will only say that it takes the safety of health products "very seriously."

    A Health Canada spokesperson said no one was available Tuesday for an interview about the remedy used by a Victoria naturopath to treat a small boy's behaviour problems, but offered a written statement instead.

    "Homeopathic products ... are regulated as natural health products (NHPs) under the Natural Health Products Regulations," the statement reads.

    "Health Canada takes the safety of health products on the Canadian market very seriously. Should a product not meet the requirements set out in the associated product monograph and guidance, Health Canada will take action." 

    The homeopathic remedy, which is marketed as lyssinum, lyssin or hydrophobinum, is one of more than 8,500 homeopathic products regulated by the federal government.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/health-canada-says-it-takes-safety-very-seriously-in-face-of-concerns-about-homeopathic-remedy-1.4623775

    Homeopathy, ayurveda doctors hold rally supporting NMC

    http://snip.ly/99vqf

    New Delhi, Feb 5 (IANS)

    Author : Indo Asian News Service

    Hundreds of homeopathic and ayurvedic practitioners from across the country on Monday held a rally here in support of the proposed National Medical Commission (NMC) Bill, which they said would benefit poor patients in the rural and remote areas of the country.

    Held under the banner of Swabhimaan rally, it was attended by professionals of the Indian System of Medicine (ISM).

    "The NMC bill is believed to be a proof of the Central government's policies working for the poor. This will facilitate the patients living in rural and remote areas and they will be benefitted from the Centre's health promotion policy. After the passing of legislation, homeopathic doctors will get the right to write allopathic medicines," said a statement from Indian Homeopathic Association.

    The NMC bill has provisions for granting permission to the doctors under Indian systems of medicine, including ayurveda, to be allowed to practice allopathy after clearing a bridge course.

    According to the ISM doctors, doctors from homeopathic and ayurvedic streams have struggled a lot to get their demands fulfilled.

    "The bridge course for all AYUSH doctors will be able to write allopathic medicines to patients once the NMC comes into existence," said a statement issued by the participants of the rally.

    The ISM doctors said that the bill will provide special facilities to the people living in rural and remote areas, where allopathic medicines are not available, where patients have no money to go to allopathic doctors.

    At a time when prices of allopathic drugs are on the rise, patients who are unable to bear the expenses can have the option of homeopathic doctors, they said.

    "The move can be termed as pro-poor and will help both homeopathic doctors and people in long-term," said the participating doctors.

    The NMC Bill, which was tabled in Parliament in December 2017, was protested by the allopathic doctors. The rally was to be addressed by Union Health Minister J.P. Nadda and AYUSH Minister Sripad Yesso Naik, however, none turned up.

    As part of the protest, the Indian Medical Association (IMA) had also called for a 12-hour countrywide shutdown of OPD services at all private hospitals in the country.

    However, the strike was called off after the government agreed to send the National Medical Commission Bill, 2017 to a select committee.

    --IANS

    http://www.bcindian.com/desi/newsdetail.asp?id=339513

    The Materialist View of Homeopathy:

    An Alternative Hypothesis and the Connection with Hormesis...In a recent article entitled, “Metal nanoparticle induced hormetic activation: A novel mechanism of homeopathic medicines,”[1] Chikramane et al

    Upadhyay, Rajendra Prakash, Simillimum Welfare Society, Nainital, Uttrakhand, India. Homeopathy (HOMEOPATHY), 2018; 107(1): 46-49. (4p)

    In a recent article entitled, “Metal nanoparticle induced hormetic activation: A novel mechanism of homeopathic medicines,”[1] Chikramane et al have considered source-drug material as an essential active ingredient, even in high dilutions (potencies) of homeopathic medicine. This concept is causing much confusion in the understanding of homeopathic medicine itself. Hence, it is critical first to undertake a detailed analysis of the concept before any endeavour to understand the observed hormetic activation.

    Chikramane et al formed this concept in their earlier work titled “Extreme homeopathic dilutions retain starting materials: A nanoparticulate perspective.”[2] They studied six metal-based homeopathic medicines in three potencies, namely 6C, 30C and 200C. These medicines, prepared by two different manufacturers, were purchased from standard commercial outlets. In most of these increasing high dilutions, they unexpectedly found their source-drug metals were still present and often imbedded in nanoparticles present in them.[2] To explain it, they hypothesised that during preparation of a potency, after succussion, all the source-drug nanoparticulate metal floats on the surface with the help of nanobubbles forming a monolayer. This monolayer forms 1% of the total volume but contains all the source-drug metal; and all of this monolayer is poured out into a new vial as ‘seed’ for preparing its higher potency, thus retaining the source-drug.[2] [3]

    Chikramane et al upheld this hypothesis as true by ‘physically’ taking gold nanoparticles in simulation.[3] However, homeopathic medicine and its methods of preparation contradict this hypothesis due to the following reasons:

    1. The Korsakoff method is generally used to raise higher potencies.

    2. It is practically impossible to assume monolayer as 1% of the total volume containing all the source-drug and further assume that 100% of the pouring out of this monolayer would be possible to raise the next higher potency. Moreover, potencies are not a few in number but up to CM (105) and even higher with virtually no upper limit.

    3. In homeopathic pharmacopoeia, the top layer is not talked about nor any special value assigned to it.

    4. A higher potency of a medicine can be prepared, even after decades, from its present potency.

    5. Medicine (potency) is consumed up to its last drop for medication or preparing a higher potency.

    6. Medicines based on non-material source-drugs, such as X-ray and magnetic fields, exist.[4]

    7. The potencies of a medicine are also raised in solid form by trituration, taking lactose as a diluent.

    8. Direct sunlight exposure can destroy the medicinal properties of a potency.

    9. The dose-quantity of a potency (medicine) is inconsequential if it is sufficient to produce an effect on a patient.

    Furthermore, in the study of Chikramane et al,[2] the question of contamination cannot be ignored. In fact, contaminations in homeopathic medicines have been so common that even the World Health Organization has issued an advisory against it.[5]

    Two things should be clear regarding the presence of contaminants in homeopathic medicine. First, though homeopathic medicines are extremely diluted, they cannot be extremely pure. One basic reason behind this is that so-called pure water does not exist.[6] [7] Second, as preparation of homeopathic medicine is still traditional, much impurity even in trace level can be expected.

    In the case of laboratory-made homeopathic samples, Witt et al observed that contaminations from containers and vehicle reached its maximum at the very first potency and afterwards remained more or less the same.[8] It was obvious because every potentising step was a repetition of the same process under the same or similar conditions. Thus, concentrations of contaminants reach a plateau from the very first potency onwards. So, it is understandable that Chikramane et al[2] observed a plateau of the source-drug of the medicine at 6C potency onwards, where it was only left in traces at this stage.

    There is an important route for contaminants to get in, which is hardly paid attention to, especially in commercial manufacturing where many potencies of a medicine or of different medicines are prepared simultaneously or soon one after another in a room. Chaplin cautions that when a bottle is opened after succussion, aerosol can spread in the room for an extended period of time, contaminating other preparations.[7] Though ignored in homeopathy, it is important for microbiologists to take care of such type of situations in their work.[7]

    The chemical analysis data by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES) of Chikramane et al[2] on the presence of source-drugs in market-purchased medicines speaks for itself. For example, in some samples, source-drug metals were not detected. Nevertheless, a variation up to 40% was observed in the samples from one batch of the same manufacturer, and up to 1550% was observed in the samples from different batches or different manufacturers.[2] The enormously large variation indicates that these data are erratic in nature. This suggests that the presence of source-drug metals in their high-potency medicines was more likely due to contamination as opposed to the hypothesis by Chikramane et al.

    Temgire et al[9] repeated the experiment in which they used some water-soluble source-drug-based medicines purchased from the market and claimed the validation of the hypothesis by Chikramane et al. However, how could this be possible? Can the 1% part of a solution contain all the solute of the solution? Can, in the homeopathic dilution process, source-drug material be produced out of the vacuum state? Physics does not suggest the possibility of material extraction from it, even if nanoparticles are involved. Energy, however, may be drawn from it.[10]

    Similarly, in preparing potencies in solid form, the 1% part of the triturated material called ‘seed’ cannot typically contain all the source-drug present. Nanoparticles cannot alter this fact. The source-drug can be of any type, including metal-based as Chikramane et al[2] studied.

    In addition, it should not be forgotten that the selection of potency is most important after the selection of remedy for a patient. Nonetheless, the hypothesis of Chikramane et al is blind to different potencies of a medicine. They believe dilutions are only apparent at 6C potency onwards,[3] retaining the source-drug material nearly in the same size distribution of nanoparticles and their clusters.[2]

    At the time of publication of the hypothesis of Chikramane et al,[2] even guest editors Ives et al raised a finger on it through the Korsakoff method of potency preparation.[11] Bellavite et al were also not satisfied with the hypothesis despite technological advancements.[12]

    Using state-of-the-art techniques, Chikramane et al[2] and Temgire et al[9] revealed, like Upadhyay et al,[13] the presence of nanoparticles in homeopathic medicine, throwing light on their structure. They did their experiments meticulously; however, the observation of Chikramane et al of source-drug ‘survival’ from 6C potency onwards cannot be explained, except in terms of contamination. In this regard, their materialistic hypothesis[2] [3] is also of no help. In fact, it is irrelevant to homeopathic medicine, for which it was proposed. It may work materially in nanoscience where a few quick steps of turbulent liquid dilutions are performed using only the top layer.

    Interestingly, during Hahnemann's lifetime, when the world was unaware of Avogadro's number, there was no theoretical objection to homeopathic high dilutions.[14] Nonetheless, it is amazing that Hahnemann realised that his medicine did not contain source-drug. He took his medicine ‘spirit-like’, which remains no more mystical now as it could contain source-drug specific ‘information’.[15]

    Some models were proposed in the past to explain homeopathic medicine and its seemingly bizarre ‘memory’; but they fell short of expectations.[12] This vacuity seems to open doors for Chikramane et al to propose their hypothesis “thereby resolving the homeopathic conundrum and reconciling it with atomistic theory of matter.”[3]

    Recently, Calabrese has appreciated the hypothesis by Chikramane et al as “outside the box” thinking.[16] The aversion or even fear of associating ‘memory’ with homeopathic medicine has been prevailing, especially after the debacle of the so-called memory of water.[6] [7]

    The above scene is changing again in favour of ‘memory’, but in a different way. This could happen after some new discoveries in nanoscience,[17] homeopathic medicine,[13] and water.[6] Recently, a novel ‘Nanoparticle–EZ Shell Model’ has been proposed, which explains homeopathic medicine wholly in its different and diverse aspects, along with magnet-treated water.[15] This model is an extension of the previous work of Upadhyay et al[13] and it is based on the following three facts:

    1. Nanoparticles can be an environmental sensor.[17]

    2. Homeopathic medicine contains silica-rich nanoparticles, which may retain source-drug specific ‘information’.[13]

    3. Exclusion Zone water is formed on a hydrophilic surface and it excludes nearly everything.[6]

    Interestingly, the protection against impurities is a fundamental feature of this model. This model explains why homeopathy could take birth two centuries ago at the time of impure chemistry when Hahnemann even made his medicine occasionally in whisky.[15] Similarly, the work of Chikramane et al[2] made a shocking revelation, which was never paid attention to; that source-drug may be present even in significant quantity in homeopathic high dilution. This presence was a big challenge for homeopathic theoreticians to explain why it would not vitiate the medicinal properties acquired at that dilution.[15]

    Homeopathic medicine contains source-drug up to 12C potency (Avogadro's limit). In this potency range, homeopathic medicinal effects may be divided into two parts, namely source-drug based and source-drug specific ‘information’ based. Their medicinal effects are under the Similia principle, probably using different pathways. ‘The Nanoparticle–EZ Shell Model’ explains that at 3C potency, the source-drug specific ‘information’ is completely acquired by nanoparticles and their EZ shells; and at 4C potency, this acquired ‘information’ becomes independent of its source-drug.[15] So from 3C potency onwards, homeopathic medicine would work through the acquired source-drug specific ‘information’.[15] By then, most of the source-drugs have already become too diluted in themselves to be therapeutically effective.

    Homeopathy is the best known medical analogue of hormesis.[18] While homeopathy is a therapeutic system of healing, hormesis is an effect. The common thread linking them is that they involve the secondary paradoxical effects of drugs and toxins in biological systems as a function of dose or time.[18]

    Wiegant and Van Wijk have done pioneer work in, now called, ‘post-conditioning hormesis’ at the cellular level.[19] They, however, used unpotentised low material doses of chemical stressors, but they verified the validity of the Similia principle at the cellular level.

    Bellavite et al have done extensive study related to hormesis, developing a pre-conditioning model using homeopathic medicine within material range.[14]

    Presently, Calabrese is very cautious to maintain distance from any homeopathy that claims itself without the presence of source-drug material.[16] His caution is not without reason.[20] His statement, “....it is not possible to kill an idea if it is real” is, however, encouraging.[16]

    It is important to note that clinical homeopathic practice can be taken as related to pre- and post-conditioning hormesis, when it is for prophylaxis and treatment respectively. In both the cases, especially for the latter, medicines are often prescribed beyond material range.

    Furthermore, the proving of a medicine in homeopathy is performed on healthy persons with its source-drug material as well as with its high potency. The proving by higher potencies is particularly needed to bring out the finer characteristics of the medicine. The source-drug of the medicine can be toxic or even poisonous. Thus, the ‘Nanoparticle–EZ Shell Model’[15] already covers hormetic agents. The source-agent is potentised even beyond Avogadro's number. According to this model, by the process of potentisation, nanoparticles and their EZ shells acquire and preserve source-agent specific ‘information’.[15] Acquiring this ‘information’, which this model assures, is one thing but responding to (‘reading’) it by biological systems is another. As homeopathic toxic source-drugs are also hormetic agents, this assures their acquired specific ‘information’ as bioactive, probably for all chemical (including radiation) hormetic agents.

    After the analysis and discussion above, recent observations of Chikramane et al[1] regarding cellular hormetic activation can now be examined. In these experiments, Chikramane et al are appreciated for using high-potency, metal-based medicines. These commercially made market-purchased medicines contain their respective source-drug metals at “a billion-fold lower concentration” than synthetic nanoparticles of the same metals (controls) to cause hormesis.[1] A question arises here that at such a low-level concentration, abundant impurities, including many other homeopathic source-drugs and toxic materials, remain present in homeopathic medicines. As a consequence, in terms of material, such a medicine is a cocktail of numerous contaminants present in it. Then how can the observed hormetic effect be attributed to the source-drug metal of the medicine used? Moreover, how is it possible to claim a new phenomenon on the basis of contamination?

    The observed hormetic effect seems to be at a billion-fold lower concentration of the source-drug than required, and this was in fact ‘extraordinary’. The nanoparticle morphology and stress based explanation, provided by Chikramane et al,[1] for this unusual observation falls short for the occasion, which seems to demand an unusual explanation. Such possible explanation is that, instead of the source-drug metal, the source-drug metal specific ‘information’ that is carried by the medicine, as per the ‘Nanoparticle–EZ Shell Model’,[15] be made responsible for it. What is required here is to design such experiments that could catch this possible phenomenon explicitly. Medicines used in such experiments must be laboratory made, so that they could be as pure as possible and genuine controls could be available to counter unwarranted effects. To avoid any contamination, rarely available suitable hormetic agents that are potentised beyond material range can also be a part of the study.

    The most controversial aspect of homeopathy is its medicine, even beyond Avogadro's number.[18] Such a medicine, however, makes homeopathy unique. Homeopathy will do a great service to hormesis if it is able to extend hormesis beyond Avogadro's number, where most of homeopathic medicines are based. This theory could potentially be a response to Fisher regarding the contribution of homeopathy to hormesis.[18] In addition, homeopathy would get legitimacy and a powerful tool to understand itself better. Homeopathy and hormesis can consequently be united, as Calabrese now aspires.[16]

    https://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0037-1617760

    Influence of adjunctive classical homeopathy on global health status and subjective wellbeing in cancer patients

    A pragmatic randomized controlled trial

    Michael Frassemail
    , Helmut Friehsemail
    , Christiane Thallingeremail
    , Narinderjit Kaur Sohalemail
    , Christine Marosiemail
    , Ilse Muchitschemail
    , Katharina Gaertneremail
    , Andreas Gleissemail
    , Ernst Schusteremail
    , Menachem Oberbaumcorrespondenceemailemail
    Published Online: March 24, 2015

    http://www.complementarytherapiesinmedicine.com/article/S0965-2299%2815%2900037-0/abstract

    Summary
    Objectives

    The use of complementary and alternative medicine has increased over the past decade. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether homeopathy influenced global health status and subjective wellbeing when used as an adjunct to conventional cancer therapy.

    Design

    In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, 410 patients, who were treated by standard anti-neoplastic therapy, were randomized to receive or not receive classical homeopathic adjunctive therapy in addition to standard therapy. The study took place at the Medical University Vienna, Department of Medicine I, Clinical Division of Oncology.

    Main outcome measures

    The main outcome measures were global health status and subjective wellbeing as assessed by the patients. At each of three visits (one baseline, two follow-up visits), patients filled in two different questionnaires.

    Results

    373 patients yielded at least one of three measurements. The improvement of global health status between visits 1 and 3 was significantly stronger in the homeopathy group by 7.7 (95% CI 2.3–13.0, p = 0.005) when compared with the control group. A significant group difference was also observed with respect to subjective wellbeing by 14.7 (95% CI 8.5–21.0, p < 0.001) in favor of the homeopathic as compared with the control group. Control patients showed a significant improvement only in subjective wellbeing between their first and third visits.

    Conclusion

    Results suggest that the global health status and subjective wellbeing of cancer patients improve significantly when adjunct classical homeopathic treatment is administered in addition to conventional therapy.
    Keywords:
    Cancer, Homeopathy, Additive homeopathy, Global health status, Subjective well being

     

    A bridge between homeopathy and molecular biology?

    Gelsemium sempervirens effects in vitro: A bridge between homeopathy and molecular biology?

    https://www.hri-research.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/HRI_ResearchArticle_26_Winter_2014.pdf

    Debora Olioso, Marta Marzotto, Clara Bonafini, Paolo Bellavite
    Department of Pathology and Diagnostics, University of Verona

    Introduction
    Recent studies conducted in human/animal cells 1-4 have suggested that homeopathic remedies may have an effect on the gene regulation, initiating a cascade of gene actions to correct the disorder or disease at a cellular level. We have focused our attention on the possible
    gene modulation effect of Gelsemium sempervirens , a traditional medicinal plant employed in phytotheraphy and homeopathy as a nervous system relaxant to treat various types of anxiety, pain, headache and other ailments. Previous investigations in our laboratory 5 have
    shown a significant anxiolytic-like activity of Gelsemium s . high dilutions in mice emotional models. To follow up on the above evidence, we further investigated the Gelsemium s
    . mechanism of action in in-vitro neuronal  models in order to asses the effects of a wide range of
    drug dilutions on whole genome expression 6-7 . For this gene expression study we used sensitive microarray and real-time PCR techniques, able to survey the whole human transcriptome and specific genes of interest respectively. In our case the high-throughput microarray
    analysis assisted by bioinformatics could provide a strong clue as to the mechanism of action and the biological relevance of ultra-low doses, whereas the real-time PCR was useful in order to validate the microarray data and to further investigate a narrow group of genes, i.e. a panel
    of human neurotransmitter receptors and regulators, involved in neuronal excitatory signaling. To further investigate the possible mechanisms of gene regulation, we also analysed the possible effect of Gelsemium s. on the methylation status of a group of genes involved in mental disorders.
    The chief innovation in our experimental design is that it employs a wide range of doses/dilutions: from low dilutions (2c or 3c), where the active substances can still be expected to exert their normal pharmaceutical action, to high dilutions (9c or 30c), where the most controversial
    principles of high dilution pharmacology come into play. We think that this type of investigation may be useful to start building a bridge between the more subjective point of view of symptomatology – basis of the homeopathic remedy choice – and a more accurate and objective
    one, consisting in the identification of specific molecular markers related with the disease and the prescribed remedy.

    Experimental setup Global changes in gene expression produced by exposure to high dilutions of
    Gelsemium s . extracts in human neuroblastoma cells were investigated by and real-time
    PCR techniques; the methylation analysis was conducted with a PCR Array. Cells were incubated for 24h with the 6 dilutions of Gelsemium s.: 2c, 3c, 4c, 5c, 9c and 30c, produced by
    Boiron Laboratoires, according to the French Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia. Four replicate experiments were carried out under identical conditions.

    Results
    Using microarray analysis, we observed that the diluted drug Gelsemium s . 2c significantly modulates the expression of 56 genes (49 were downregulated and 7 upregulated) involved in neuronal functions (G-protein coupled receptor signalling pathways, calcium
    homeostasis, inflammatory response and neuropeptide receptors). The expression of these genes also decreased significantly, although with small changes, after treatment with medium dilution (3c, 4c and 5c) and high dilutions of Gelsemium s 9c and 30c. In the study conducted using the real-time PCR technique (RT-PCR Array) 7 exposure of a human neurocyte cell-line to
    Gelsemium s . 2c dilution, containing the active principle gelsemine, induced a down-regulation of most genes of this array. In particular, the treated cells showed a statistically significant down-regulation of the prokineticin receptor 2, whose ligand is a neuropeptide involved in nociception (ability to sense pain), and in depression-like behavior. In the latter study, the 9c dilution was not
    active. The difference between the two gene-expression studies 6-7
    is probably due to technical factors: while real-time PCR is the “gold standard” for gene expression analysis of specific genes or small groups of genes,
    microarray is a powerful screening method for the whole genome and in our conditions exhibited higher sensitivity, detecting extremely low dose effects. In the epigenetic study the Gelsemium s
    . 2c treatment induced an increased methylation of the homeobox A1 gene (HOXA1), which has a role in neural development and autism spectrum disorders. The mean methylation frequency after treatment with Gelsemium s . 2c was 53% compared to 28% for the controls (p=0.008).
    The increased level of methylation could indicate a reduced gene expression of this autism related gene.
    Conclusions
    The results of this study, conducted with three different techniques, provided evidence that
    Gelsemium s. exerts a prevalently inhibitory effect on a series of genes across a wide dose-range. The results suggest the extreme sensitivity of human gene expression to regulation by
    ultra-low doses and high dilutions/dynamizations of a plant remedy and encourage further efforts in research on this field. Studies using sensitive genetic approaches may be particularly suitable for surveing of the effects of highly diluted natural compounds and for the identification of specific molecular markers related with the disease.
    Acknowledgements
    Experimental work was supported by grants from Boiron Laboratoires to Verona University – Department of Pathology and Diagnostics and from Italian Research Ministry. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

    References
    1. Sunila ES, Kuttan R, Preethi KC, Kuttan G. Dynamized preparations in cell culture.
    Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2009; 6 :257-263.

    2. Hofbauer R, Pasching E, Moser D, Frass M. Heparin-binding epidermal growth factor expression in KATO-III cells after Helicobacter pylori stimulation under the influence of strychnos
    Nux vomica and Calendula officinalis. Homeopathy 2010; 99 :177-182.

    3. Mukherjee A, Boujedaini N, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Homeopathic Thuja 30C ameliorates benzo(a)pyrene-induced DNA damage, stress and viability of perfused lung cells of mice in vitro.
    J Integr Med 2013; 11 :397-404.

    4. Sikdar S, Mukherjee A, Ghosh S, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Condurango glycoside-rich components stimulate DNA damage-induced cell cycle arrest and ROS-mediated caspase-3 dependent apoptosis through inhibition of cell-proliferation in lung cancer, in vitro and in vivo.
    Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 2014; 37 :300-314.

    5. Magnani P, Conforti A, Zanolin E, Marzotto M, Bellavite P. Dose-effect study of Gelsemium sempervirens in high dilutions on anxiety-related responses in mice. Psychopharmacology
    2010; 210(4) :533-45

    6. Marzotto M, Olioso D, Brizzi M, Tononi P, Cristofoletti M,
    Bellavite P. Extreme sensitivity of gene expression in human
    SH-SY5Y neurocytes to ultra-low doses of Gelsemium
    sempervirens.
    BMC Complement Altern Med
    2014;
    14
    :104.
    7. Olioso D, Marzotto M, Moratti E, Brizzi M, Bellavite P. Effects
    of Gelsemium sempervirens L. on pathway-focused gene
    expression profiling in neuronal cells.
    J Ethnopharmacol
    2014;
    153(2)
    :535-9

    Jury Clears Homeopathy

    Federal jury clears producer, marketer, and seller of homeopathic products in $255m class … Tucker Ellis

    “Bell testified about her scientific studies in multiple chemical sensitivity and homeopathy, including how “nanoparticles” and “nanobubbles” can have an effect in biological cells. Dr. Bell opined, “It is very clear that nanoparticles in low doses are capable of capable of creating hermetic effects…similar to vaccine.” Dr. Bell explained how “hormesis” is a medical principle that describes how small doses of a substance can trigger the opposite effect of high doses of the same substance.”

    USA September 18 2015

    In a class action of importance to producers, marketers, and sellers of homeopathic products, on Friday, September 18, 2015, a federal jury in the false advertising trial of Allen, et al. v. Hylands, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-01150 (“Hylands”) took less than a day to find defendants did not breach any express warranty or violate the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code sections 1750 et seq.

    The putative class plaintiffs sued defendants Hylands, Inc. and Standard Homeopathic Company alleging they made false and misleading representations about the effectiveness of the active ingredients in 12 homeopathic products produced, marketed, and sold by the defendants throughout the United States.

    Homeopathic products are derived from botanical, mineral or biological substances and are classified as either over-the-counter (OTC) or prescription medicines. In contrast to conventional (allopathic) medicines, homeopathic remedies are predicated in part on the “principle of dilutions” under which active ingredients are thought to be more clinically useful or effective when they are significantly diluted, typically with purified water or an alcohol solution.

    Homeopathic remedies and their packaging are not reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). Homeopathic remedies, however, are classified as drugs under, and subject to, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and thus, must comply with the labeling requirements of the Act. The FDA has stated that it is not aware of any scientific evidence that homeopathic products are effective.

    Back in August 2014, a California federal district court judge certified a nationwide class of purchasers of 10 of the products covering February 2008 to the present. The plaintiffs claimed defendants’ 12 homeopathic products, including some intended for infants and children, did not work as advertised because they were so diluted that the ingredients were “effectively non-existent” and the products were therefore not effective for their intended uses. The plaintiffs also alleged the homeopathic products labeling claims of “100% Natural,” “All Natural,” and “Natural” were untrue as the products purportedly contained synthetic chemicals, synthetically derived or chemically reduced elements, artificially produced elements, and/or dangerous or potentially dangerous ingredients.

    The trial in Hylands spanned approximately two weeks and included expert testimony from both sides. Plaintiffs’ expert, Dr. Noel Rose, the director of John Hopkins’ Center of Autoimmune Disease Research testified as a medical expert, having reviewed materials provided by the plaintiffs’ counsel, as well as his own research into clinical and compilation studies, expert reports, published journal reports and the Hyland’s products and their labels. Dr. Rose stated, “[In] my opinion, there is no sound scientific or medical evidence that they provide any benefit to patients with medical conditions, such as those described and indicated on the labels, beyond the placebo effect.”

    Defendants kicked off their defense by calling Dr. Iris Bell, a former Harvard psychiatry instructor and holder of a doctorate degree from Stanford University in neuro- and biobehavioral sciences who has consulted with Highlands, Inc. to design clinical trials. Bell testified about her scientific studies in multiple chemical sensitivity and homeopathy, including how “nanoparticles” and “nanobubbles” can have an effect in biological cells. Dr. Bell opined, “It is very clear that nanoparticles in low doses are capable of capable of creating hermetic effects…similar to vaccine.” Dr. Bell explained how “hormesis” is a medical principle that describes how small doses of a substance can trigger the opposite effect of high doses of the same substance.

    Although the plaintiffs initially sought full refunds worth $350 million, plaintiffs’ counsel wrapped up closing arguments with a demand of $255 million for allegedly tricking consumers into purchasing “simple sugar pills” that provide no medical benefit. The jury of six women and three men did not agree, and needed less than a day to deliberate.

    Tucker Ellis – Ronie M. Schmelz, Matthew I. Kaplan and Ndubisi Ezeolu

    http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7d9b009a-e041-422c-b9cc-bb0437958523

    Management of Upper Respiratory Tract Infections

    Management of Upper Respiratory Tract Infections by Different Medical Practices, Including Homeopathy, and Consumption of Antibiotics in Primary Care: The EPI3 Cohort Study in France 2007–2008

    Lamiae Grimaldi-Bensouda,1,2,* Bernard Bégaud,3 Michel Rossignol,4,5 Bernard Avouac,1 France Lert,6 Frederic Rouillon,7 Jacques Bénichou,8,9 Jacques Massol,10 Gerard Duru,11 Anne-Marie Magnier,12 Lucien Abenhaim,13,14 and Didier Guillemot15,16
    C. Mary Schooling, Editor
    Author information ► Article notes ► Copyright and License information ►
    This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
    Go to:
    Abstract
    Background

    Prescribing of antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) varies substantially in primary care.
    Objectives

    To describe and compare antibiotic and antipyretic/anti-inflammatory drugs use, URTI symptoms’ resolution and occurrence of potentially-associated infections in patients seeking care from general practitioners (GPs) who exclusively prescribe conventional medications (GP-CM), regularly prescribe homeopathy within a mixed practice (GP-Mx), or are certified homeopathic GPs (GP-Ho).
    Method

    The EPI3 survey was a nationwide population-based study of a representative sample of 825 GPs and their patients in France (2007–2008). GP recruitment was stratified by self-declared homeopathic prescribing preferences. Adults and children with confirmed URTI were asked to participate in a standardized telephone interview at inclusion, one-, three- and twelve-month follow up. Study outcomes included medication consumption, URTI symptoms’ resolution and potentially-associated infections (sinusitis or otitis media/externa) as reported by patients. Analyses included calibration to account for non-respondents and groups were compared using multivate analyses adjusting for baseline differences with a propensity score.
    Results

    518 adults and children with URTI (79.3% rhinopharyngitis) were included (36.9% response rate comparable between groups). As opposed to GP-CM patients, patients in the GP-Ho group showed significantly lower consumption of antibiotics (Odds ratio (OR) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27–0.68) and antipyretic/anti-inflammatory drugs (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.38–0.76) with similar evolution in related symptoms (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.64–2.10). An excess of potentially-associated infections (OR = 1.70, 95% CI: 0.90–3.20) was observed in the GP-Ho group (not statistically significant). No difference was found between GP-CM and GP-Mx patients.
    Conclusion

    Patients who chose to consult GPs certified in homeopathy used less antibiotics and antipyretic/anti-inflammatory drugs for URTI than those seen by GPs prescribing conventional medications. No difference was observed in patients consulting GPs within mixed-practice. A non-statistically significant excess was estimated through modelling for associated infections in the GP-Ho group and needs to be further studied.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3960096/

    WWNLD What Would Nobel Laureates Do?

    What Nobel Laureates said on Homeopathy June 5, 2012 · homeopathy

    homeopathiccuresOctober 5, 2015Leave a comment

    by Dr. Nancy Malik BHMS

    Nobel laureates, doctors, scientists, professors and science writers had plenty to say on homeopathy.

    Nobel Laureates agreed that there’s strong evidence for Homeopathy [click to tweet]. Homeopathic remedies act as they are supposed to. By the end of year 2013, there have been 5 Nobel laureates in support of Homeopathy, 1 in opposition and 857 have not stated any opinion on Homeopathy.

    1. Emil Adolf von Behring (1905)

    The Father of Immunology

    Emil Adolf von Behring (1854–1917) won the first Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine in 1901 for his discovery of the diphtheria antitoxin.

    FATHER OF IMMUNOLOGY Emil Behring asked to suppress his successful work on Homeopathy. He discovered that homeopathic medicine enhances immunogenic activity. Behring wrote: “Samuel Hahnemann was right when he took his starting point in the symptoms of patients.”

    Ref: Coulter, Harris L, Divided Legacy: A History of the Schism in Medical Thought, Volume IV: Twentieth-Century Medicine: The Bacteriological Era. The North Atlantic Books, Berkley, 1994, p. 96

    In 1892 Behring actually experimented with serial (homeopathic) dilutions and found paradoxically enhanced immunogenic activity, but he was advised to suppress this experiment due to the aid and comfort it would provide to homeopaths. Only after he won the Nobel Prize did he feel comfortable in making public these experiments. In 1905, Behring admitted that colleagues remonstrated with him not to make such remarks public ‘since it was grist for the mill of homeopathy’.

    Ref: ibid p.97

    Behring broke from orthodox medical tradition by recognizing the value of the homeopathic law of similar in 1905

    Ref: Dana Ullman http://bit.ly/HdOryq

    He asserted that vaccination is, in part, derived from the homeopathic principle of similars. “In spite of all scientific speculations and experiments regarding smallpox vaccination, Jenner’s discovery remained an erratic blocking medicine, till the biochemically thinking Pasteur, devoid of all medical classroom knowledge, traced the origin of this therapeutic block to a principle which cannot better be characterized than by Hahnemann’s word: homeopathic. Indeed, what else causes the epidemiological immunity in sheep, vaccinated against anthrax than the influence previously exerted by a virus, similar in character to that of the fatal anthrax virus? And by what technical term could we more appropriately speak of this influence, exerted by a similar virus than by Hahnemann’s word “homeopathy”? I am touching here upon a subject anathematized till very recently by medical penalty: but if I am to present these problems in historical illumination, dogmatic imprecations must not deter me….only the road of Homeopathy lead to my goal.”

    Ref: Behring, A. Emil von, Moderne phthisiogenetische und phthisoitherapeutische: Probleme in historischer Beleuchtung. Margurg: Selbsteverlag des Verfassers, 1905, http://bit.ly/YVpoZs

    Behring concludes, ‘If I were confronted with a hitherto incurable disease and could see no way to treat it other than with homeopathy, I can assure you that I would not be deterred from following this course by dogmatic considerations’.

    Ref: http://sueyounghistories.com/archives/2008/07/08/emil-adolf-von-behring-and-homeopathy-2/

    2. Brian David Josephson (1997)
    Nobel Laureate – Physics 1973

    Nobel Laureate – Physics 1973

    “Simple-minded analysis may suggest that water, being a fluid, cannot have a structure of the kind that such a picture would demand. But cases such as that of liquid crystals, which while flowing like an ordinary fluid can maintain an ordered structure over macroscopic distances, show the limitations of such ways of thinking. There have not, to the best of my knowledge, been any refutations of homeopathy that remain valid after this particular point is taken into account.”

    Dr. Brian D. Josephson’s (Emeritus Professor, University of Cambridge) responding to an article in the New Scientist (October 18, 1997) Ref: How Homeopathic Medicines Work: Nanopharmacology At Its Best 3. Luc Antoine Montagnier (2009)

    Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2008

    “Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier is to science what homeopathy is to medicine” ~Nancy Malik

    Interdisciplinary Sciences: Life Sciences (SpringerL­ink)
    Nanostructures in highly diluted biological samples of bacteria and virus DNA produces electromagnetic signals (2009) FULL TEXT

    Luc Montagnier observed that potentised bacteria and virus DNA sequence emits electro-magnetic signals (low frequency radio waves) at 5C and 6C potencies and forms specific nano-structures which lasts 48 hours and are responsible for the EM effects measured. The EM signature changed with dilution levels but was unaffected by the initial concentration and remained even after the remaining DNA fragments were destroyed by chemical agents. However the EM signal was sensitive to heat over 70 degrees C and freezing -80 degrees C. Not only that, DNA sequences were recreated from its EM signature in pure water. That means EM signals were transmitted to pure water (that never had a DNA in it) placed in a container nearby in 18 hours. He reproduced his results 12 times.

    Discussion on Luc Montagnier paper by Society of Homeopaths, Institute of Science in Society,Homeopathy World Community

    Dr. Luc Montagnier, the French virologist said about homeopathy, “High Dilutions of something are not nothing…”

    Nobel laureate Montagnier says homeopathic medicine is “real” phenomenon & Benveniste is today’s Galileo

    Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier escapes intellectu­al terrorism and he currently works as a full-time professor at Shanghai Jiaotong University in China. He, in an interview in Science (24 Dec 2010) said, “”I am told that some people have reproduced Benveniste’s results (showing effects from homeopathic doses), but they [Europe] are afraid to publish it [homeopathy] because of the intellectu¬¬al terror from people who don’t understand it.” He concluded the interview by saying, “These are real phenomena which deserve further study.”

    It shows intellectu­al terror the so-called science puts up on homeopathy and homeopaths

    Water has a memory

    Nobel Prize Winner does homeopathic study; with supportive findings.

    Nobel Prize winner reports effects of homeopathic dilutions

    Luc Montagnier delivered talk on “Electromagnetic Waves & Water Properties” in UNESCO Headquarter on 8th Oct 2014

    4. Ervin Laszlo (2004)
    Hungary

    Twice nominated for Nobel Peace Prize 2004/5

    “Water has a remarkable capacity to register and conserve information, as indicated by, amongst other things, homeopathic remedies that remain effective even when not a single molecule of the original substance remains in a dilution”,

    -Dr. Ervin Laszlo, Professor of ‘Systems Theory’ and the author of book ‘Science and the Akashic Field’, 2004, p. 53.

    5. Rabindranath Tagore (1936)
    indian writer

    Nobel Prize in Literature 1913

    “I have long been an ardent believer in the science of Homeopathy and i fell happy that it has got now a greater hold in India than even in the land of its origin. It is not merely a collection of a few medicines but a real science with a rational philosophy as its base. We require more scientific interest and inquiry into the matter with special stress upon the Indian environment.”

    Ref: Bagchi, A. K. Rabindranath Tagore and His Medical World. New Delhi: Konark Publishers, 2000

    6. Mother Teresa (1950)
    Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu

    Nobel Peace Prize 1979

    Mother Teresa added homeopathic care to the services at her missions. She opened her first charitable homeopathic dispensary in Calcutta in 1950. At present, four charitable homeopathic dispensaries are run under the guidance of the Mother’s Missionaries of Charity

    Ref: Dana Ullman, The Homeopathic Revolution: WhyFamous people and cultural heroes love homeopathy

    7. Mahatma Gandhi (1936)

    Nominated 5 times Nobel Peace Prize between 1937-1948

    “Homeopathy is the latest and refined method of treating patients economically and nonviolently. Government must encourage and patronize it in our country. Late Dr. Hahnemann was a man of superior intellectual power and means of saving of human life having a unique medical nerve. I bow before his skill and the Herculean and humanitarian labour he did. His memory wakes us again and you are to follow him, but the opponents hate the existence of the principles and practice of homeopathy which in reality cures a larger percentage of cases than any other method of treatment and it is beyond all doubt safer and more economical and the most complete medical science.”
    -Mahatama Gandhi, 30 Aug 1936

    Ref: Das, 1950; All India Homeopathic Medical Conference, 1968, http://sueyounghistories.com/archives/2009/07/26/mohandas-karamchand-gandhi-1869-%E2%80%93-1948/

    “Homeopathy is the most modern and the most intelligent way to economically and nonviolent sick to treat. The government must promote in our country and support.”

    -Ghandi cited in Martin Schmitz (ed.), Strömungen der Homöopathie, KVC Verlag Essen, Essen 2002

    Gandhi also persuaded people to study homeopathy

    https://drnancymalik.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/nobel-prize-winners-on-homeopathy/

    Extreme homeopathic dilutions

    Extreme homeopathic dilutions retain starting materials: A nanoparticulate perspective.

    homeopathiccuresOctober 19, 2015Leave a comment

    Homeopathy. 2010 Oct;99(4):231-42.
    Extreme homeopathic dilutions retain starting materials: A nanoparticulate perspective.

    Chikramane PS, Suresh AK, Bellare JR, Kane SG.
    Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, Adi Shankaracharya Marg, Powai, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

    Comment in:

    Homeopathy. 2010 Oct;99(4):229-30.
    Abstract
    Homeopathy is controversial because medicines in high potencies such as 30c and 200c involve huge dilution factors (10⁶⁰ and 10⁴⁰⁰ respectively) which are many orders of magnitude greater than Avogadro’s number, so that theoretically there should be no measurable remnants of the starting materials. No hypothesis which predicts the retention of properties of starting materials has been proposed nor has any physical entity been shown to exist in these high potency medicines. Using market samples of metal-derived medicines from reputable manufacturers, we have demonstrated for the first time by Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), electron diffraction and chemical analysis by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES), the presence of physical entities in these extreme dilutions, in the form of nanoparticles of the starting metals and their aggregates.

    Copyright © 2010 The Faculty of Homeopathy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

    Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2011/01/14/f-homeopathy-naturopathic-marketplace.html#socialcomments#ixzz1B8T9HgtE

    Does additional antimicrobial treatment have a better effect on URTI cough resolution than homeopathic symptomatic therapy alone?

    A real-life preliminary observational study in a pediatric population.

    Zanasi A1, Cazzato S2, Mazzolini M3, Ierna CM3, Mastroroberto M4, Nardi E4, Morselli-Labate AM4.
    Author information
    Abstract
    BACKGROUND:

    The effectiveness of a homeopathic syrup on cough has been demonstrated in an adult population in a previous double-blind randomized study. The present prospective observational study investigated children affected by wet acute cough caused by non-complicated URTIs, comparing those who received the homeopathic syrup versus those treated with the homeopathic syrup plus antibiotic.
    OBJECTIVES:

    The aims were: 1) to assess whether the addition of antibiotics to a symptomatic treatment had a role in reducing the severity and duration of acute cough in a pediatric population, as well as in improving cough resolution; 2) to verify the safety of the two treatments.
    METHODS:

    Eighty-five children were enrolled in an open study: 46 children received homeopathic syrup alone for 10 days and 39 children received homeopathic syrup for 10 days plus oral antibiotic treatment (amoxicillin/clavulanate, clarithromycin, and erythromycin) for 7 days. To assess cough severity we used a subjective verbal category-descriptive (VCD) scale.
    RESULTS:

    Cough VCD score was significantly (P < 0.001) reduced in both groups starting from the second day of treatment (-0.52 ± 0.66 in the homeopathic syrup group and -0.56 ± 0.55 in children receiving homeopathic syrup plus oral antibiotic treatment). No significant differences in cough severity or resolution were found between the two groups of children in any of the 28 days of the study. After the first week (day 8) cough was completely resolved in more than one-half of patients in both groups. Two children (4.3 %) reported adverse effects in the group treated with the homeopathic syrup alone, versus 9 children (23.1 %) in the group treated with the homeopathic syrup plus antibiotics (P = 0.020).
    CONCLUSIONS:

    Our data confirm that the homeopathic treatment in question has potential benefits for cough in children as well, and highlight the strong safety profile of this treatment. Additional antibiotic prescription was not associated with a greater cough reduction, and presented more adverse events than the homeopathic syrup alone.
    KEYWORDS:

    Anti-bacterial agents; Antitussive agents; Cough; Homeopathy; Respiratory tract infections

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26251722