Homeopathy and Antimicrobial Resistance...HRI Malta 2017¿Cutting Edge Research in Homeopathy: Presentation Abstracts

Homeopathy and Antimicrobial Resistance...HRI Malta 2017¿Cutting Edge Research in Homeopathy: Presentation Abstracts


Fisher, Peter


Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine, London, United Kingdom


Homeopathy (HOMEOPATHY), 2018 Supplement; 107: 55-78. (24p)

Publication Type:

Article - abstract, proceedings



Minor Subjects:

Homeopathic AgentsDrug Resistance, Microbial


Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a massive global problem. An estimated 10 million people die annually from antibiotic resistant infections. The costs are projected to rise to $100 trillion a year by 2050. Dr Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) has said 'We are approaching a time when things as common as a strep throat or a child's scratched knee could once again kill'. The WHO takes AMR very seriously and has published data on AMR worldwide. Methods : I will review current strategies for tackling AMR. The Independent Review on AMR published in May 2016 made several recommendations. These include a global public awareness campaign, improved surveillance and more rapid diagnostic methods. The British Government has also published a strategy to tackle AMR. These recommendations will only slow, not reverse the spread of antibiotic resistance, unless new antibiotics are discovered. It is several decades since a new class of antibiotics was discovered. Neither of these strategies recommend exploration of innovative integrated medicine approaches. Results: I will present a head-to-head randomised clinical trial of an Echinacea preparation against oseltamivir, which has lessons for homeopathy research. I will discuss randomised controlled trials of homeopathy for infectious respiratory tract conditions and a health technology assessment of homeopathy. I will review the evidence from clinical effectiveness studies of homeopathy in this domain, including the large-scale French EPI-3 study and the two multinational IIPCOS studies. These consistently indicate that use of homeopathy is associated with much reduced use of antibiotics. Conclusion: Homeopathy should be part of an integrated strategy for tackling AMR. The homeopathic approach is not about killing micro-organisms; it seeks to promote patient resistance to infection, modulate innate immunity, and cultivate a healthy microbiome.

Journal Subset:

Alternative/Complementary Therapies; Europe; Expert Peer Reviewed; Peer Reviewed; UK & Ireland




NLM UID: 101140517

Entry Date:


Revision Date:




Accession Number:



CINAHL Complete

Homeopathic treatment as an alternative prophylactic to minimize bacterial infection and prevent neonatal diarrhea in calves.

Homeopathic treatment as an alternative prophylactic to minimize bacterial infection and prevent neonatal diarrhea in calves.


Bovine neonatal diarrhea is common due low immunity in newborn calves, poor management (or absence) of sanitary barriers, and other factors. Newborn calves with diarrhea in the first days of life suffer failure to thrive and may die if left untreated. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether prophylactic administration of a homeopathic product (Dia 100 ® ) can control bovine neonatal diarrhea in calves born on a farm with substantial sanitary challenges. We counted total bacteria and protozoan parasites in fecal samples. We measured serum glucose, total protein, globulin, albumin, cholesterol and triglycerides on days 1, 7 and 14 of life. Twenty newborn calves were maintained in individual stalls, and were divided in two groups: ten untreated animals (control) and ten animals treated with Dia 100 ® . Fecal consistency was evaluated daily. We diagnosed diarrhea in five animals in the treated group, and in all animals from the control group. Infections with Escherichia coli and Giardia duodenalis were identified as the responsible organisms. The E. coli count was low in the treatment group on day 7 of life compared with the control group. Antibiotics were given to eight animals in the control group, and to two animals in the treatment group. On day of life 7, serum levels of total protein and globulins were higher in the control group, but were lower on day 14. Serum levels of glucose and triglycerides were greater in treated animals on days 7 and 14, suggesting that the homeopathic product contributes to improvement of intestinal health and absorption and nutrients. We conclude that Dia 100 ® controls diarrhea with 50% of efficacy, and reduces antibiotic utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Microbial Pathogenesis is the property of Academic Press Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)


Fortuoso, Bruno F.1
Volpato, Andreia2
Rampazzo, Luana1
Glombowsky, Patrícia1
Griss, Luiz Gustavo1
Galli, Gabriela M.1
Stefani, Lenita M.1,2
Baldissera, Matheus D.3
Ferreira, Emanuel B.4
Machado, Gustavo5
da Silva, Aleksandro S.1,2 aleksandro_ss@yahoo.com.br


Microbial Pathogenesis. Jan2018, Vol. 114, p95-98. 4p.

Document Type:


Subject Terms:

*NEONATAL diarrhea in cattle
*BACTERIAL diseases in animals

Author-Supplied Keywords:

E. coli
Intestinal health

Author Affiliations:

1Department of Animal Science, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Brazil
2Post-Graduate Program in Animal Science, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Brazil
3Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM), Brazil
4Medical Veterinarian, Londrina, Brazil
5Department of Population Health and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA





Accession Number:


Chicken Pox by Mail?

I'm not going to pretend like I haven't over-analyzed and over-researched vaccines. I'm not going to pretend that I haven't cornered my doctor for a much longer period of time than she spends with her other patients about MMR, chicken pox, polio, etc. We had discussions, yes. Which are the most important? Which have the least side effects? Which is a dead vaccine? I read books: Dr Sears' The Vaccine Book the most helpful.

My son in fact, did NOT get the chicken pox vaccine, and when he was four he got an actual case of chicken pox from a few kids in his nursery school who HAD BEEN vaccinated. My doctor believed -- and still does -- in chicken pox parties. She felt the actual disease is more efficient than the actual vaccine and though she made sure Jake got polio, pertussis, MMR -- even during the height of the autism-MMR connection scare, which is no longer a scare at all. Chicken pox parties. Yes. She recommended it.

When Jake got chicken pox it was thankfully mild. She drew blood. He's got titers which means there was proof of the chicken pox in his system. That's all a school needs. Titers, yes, ma'am. We got it the good-old-fashioned way. And I was proud! Isn't that silly? I really was. Chicken pox. Who didn't get chicken pox in the 70s and 80s? I did! It was awful. And then it was over.

Now folks are joining closed Facebook groups to specifically send each other infected lollipops, saliva and/or articles of clothing to hold their own chicken pox parties. I'm so outraged by hearing this that I literally want to bang my head against the wall. Slate columnist KJ Dell'Antonia wrote this angry rant that puts it well:

Let's try this sentence on for size: "I just gave my kid a pre-licked lollipop sent to me by a stranger I met on the Internet!" I suspect the "outing" of this practice by the media will also mark its public end. I'm sure we're talking about a very, very small number of people here. But if chicken-pox-by-mail sounds like a good idea to you, then I'm going to have to abandon the polite conversation and bring out the verbal two-by-fours.

I am all for chicken pox parties. Elke hasn't gotten her chicken pox vaccine yet. But the stupidity of passing infected chicken pox lollipops through the mail is terrifying. In fact, it makes me propelled to vaccinate her, like, immediately. Do these parents remember the anthrax scare of 2001? When we thought the world was ending and one of the news anchors had traces of anthrax on his desk. That the Hamilton, New Jersey Post Office was shut down because of traces of ANTHRAX. Now a bunch of die-hards think it's a good idea to send a virus through the mail? This is not only illegal, but highly dangerous.

Dr. Wilbert Mason had this to say to the LA Times:

For starters, he said, sending chicken pox through the mail probably won't work, because the varicella virus needs cells to live in, and there probably would be very few cells in spit or on a used lollipop. "It's unlikely the virus would survive long enough," he said.

But more resilient types of infections -- dangerous ones -- could make it, including hepatitis B, group A strep, and staph germs.

There is a certain point as parents that you have to take a step back and weigh the risks. I'm not a fan of over-vaccinating. I make sure I space my vaccines out. I linger a bit when it comes to the biggies. But there's a certain point you have to say -- okay, I'm not going to take candy from a stranger and put my child at an even greater risk than she would have been in the first place.

This week: Chicken pox vaccine. December 1: Flu shot.

Hayley Krischer