Homeopathy – a complement to conventional medicine on youtube!

/

A conventional Dr. speaks of why she turns to homeopathy to help her patients.


Travelling with your Homeopathic Remedies to protect homeopathic ingredients from X-Rrays

/


When traveling with homeopathic remedies, pass the remedies to the guard for manual screening and do not put them through the security x-ray scanners. Depending on where you will be travelling to/from - you could find out the EMR (electro-magnetic ray) strength used at each of the luggage and security line ups for each airport you will be travelling to. That way, you can decide which remedies you would like to carry with you or which ones you would like toput in your luggage. The lead bags that film is stored in for airport x-ray prevention may also be of use.

Homeopathic Documentary

/

The best new documentary about Homeopathy by my awesome colleague Ananda More!

https://www.seedandspark.com/studio/magic-pills#wishlist

Homeopathy Works - for your pets.

/

Homoeopathy Works;

It is amazing to me the amount of confusion surrounding homeopathy these days.  Amongst it all, one thing to me is always clear - it works.  Each and every party/social gathering that I go to where I encounter new people and of course they ask what it is that I do - I gather stories.

Last weekend at a wonderful Holiday Season gathering this happened with two lovely hippy-like dykes who enthusiastically recounted the story of seeing a homeopath for their dog. Their lovely dog had a list of complicated dire health needs. They had been going from vet to vet trying to get solutions and spending thousands and thousands of dollars with no results. They gleefully explained about the homeopath who was humbly going to 'give it a try'... to help their canine family member.

It was amazing to them that a $19 vial of homeopathic remedy could do wonders for their little fur baby. Homeopathy helps their dog recover in ways that no other medicine had done. They were so shocked in the contrast of spending over $26,000 on their dog, that the solution was in this very refined homeopathic medicine chosen by an experienced homeopathic practitioner. Homeopathy works wonders.

https://homeopathysquamish.wordpress.com/twyla-brooks-dch-animal-homeopath/

/

Water Research Laboratory

What is this project about?

Current research points towards the likely existence of water structures which, although being largely unexplored, in principle have the necessary characteristics to explain the mechanism of action of homeopathic medicines.

The Water Research Laboratory aims to investigate these new water structures using a multidisciplinary approach involving theoretical physics, mathematical modelling and experimental exploration.

In the field of the physics of high dilutions, which has immediate relevance to homeopathy, many research groups have reported interesting findings. In particular, Prof Luc Montagnier (who won the Nobel Prize for discovering the HIV/AIDS virus), has shown homeopathic dilutions to have electromagnetic properties which differ from those of normal water1,2.

Benveniste was a eminent French immunologist, adviser to the French government on scientific issue, he was the director of INSERM unit 200, directed at immunology, allergy and inflammation.

In a seminal paper published in the prestigious journal Nature in 1988, Dr Benveniste’s team of  reported their results investigating the effects of high-dilutions on human basophils (a type of white blood cell). They diluted a solution of human anti-IgE antibodies in water to such a degree that there was virtually no possibility that a single molecule of the antibody remained in the water solution. They reported, human basophils responded to the solutions just as though they had encountered the original antibody (part of the allergic reaction). The effect was reported only when the solution was shaken violently during dilution.

This publication led to a large controversy around ‘the memory of water‘. Since then 28 scientific papers have been published in this area, 23 of which reported positive results. Of the 11 publications judged to be of high quality, 8 (72%) reported positive results.4

The initial efforts of the HRI/WRL collaboration are centered around repeating the famous basophil degranulation experiments of the late Dr Jacques Benveniste (1935-2004)3, with the aim of making the experiment more easily reproducible in standard laboratory setting and of studying important physical parameters crucial to the phenomenon. In particular we aim to study the influence of electromagnetic fields on the system, in line with Prof Luc Montagnier’s recent results.

  1. Montagnier, L., Aïssa, J., Ferris, S., Montagnier, J.-L. & Lavalléee, C. Electromagnetic signals are produced by aqueous nanostructures derived from bacterial DNA sequences. Interdiscip. Sci. Comput. Life Sci. 2009, 1, 81–90. | Pubmed
  2. Montagnier, L. et al. DNA waves and water. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 306, 012007 (2011). | Link
  3. Davenas E, et al. Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE. Nature. 1988 333(6176):816-8. | Pubmed
  4. Witt CM, Bluth M, Albrecht H, Weisshuhn TE, Baumgartner S, Willich SN. The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies–a systematic review of the literature. Complement Ther Med. 2007 Jun;15(2):128-38. | Pubmed

Lead researcher

Alexander Tournier BSc DIC MASt Cantab PhD

Dr Tournier studied physics at Imperial College, London, and theoretical physics at the University of Cambridge. He wrote his PhD on the biophysics of water-protein interactions at the University of Heidelberg, Germany. For the last 10 years he has been conducting interdisciplinary research at the boundaries between mathematics, physics and biology, as an independent researcher for Cancer Research UK (5th institute worldwide for molecular biology).

Why is this project important?

Confirming the existence of structured phase of water would have considerable ramifications not only for homeopathy, but could also lead to completely novel therapeutic and diagnostic techniques. 

Dr Alexander Tournier PhD

https://www.hri-research.org/hri-research/how-do-homeopathic-medicines-work/water-research-laboratory/

Prevention of swine flu — Is homeopathy the answer? Debjani Arora Mar 09, 2015 at 11:07 am

/

With swine flu claiming lives at an alarming rate, death toll reaching a shocking 1300 across the country, it becomes clear that prevention is better than cure. But the sad part is many fall prey to rumours and quacks while looking for preventive measures to be safe and healthy. However, if one resents the conventional form of treatment, homeopathy stands to be a safe and wise option to follow. Moreover, it stands to be the second largest system of medicine in India. Here are 10 tips every parent should follow to keep children safe from swine flu. ‘It is a safe method of treatment with almost no side effects. The advantage of homeopathy drug is such that apart from taking care of the main symptoms, it also helps in dealing with other problems in a subtle way. So if one patient is given doses for say gastric problem, the same drug could also help in treating other minor issues of the body and build immunity. Going the homeopathy way is a safe and secure method for anyone who is looking for prevention from swine flu,’ informs Dr Bhavi Mody, Vrudhi Homeopathy and Wellness Centre, Mumbai. Here is how you can build immunity to save yourself from a bout of swine flu. 

Can homeopathy be as effective in treating swine flu as the conventional form of medication?

A study conducted by the Central Council for Research in Homeopathy from September 2009 to February 2010 pointed out that homeopathy drugs, when used to treat patients suffering from symptoms of swine flu, showed effective results in treating them. ‘In the discipline of homeopathy, when there is an outbreak of an epidemic, the few main symptoms are taken into consideration along with the major drugs that could treat the same. With swine flu, it was observed that the drug ARS. alb. 30 stood effective in both, treating and preventing a bout of swine flu,’ informs Dr Bhavi. The study also indicated that the drug could treat 80 percent of the symptoms of the flu effectively. Here are 10 facts about swine flu you need to know.

Moreover, the Indian Department of AYUSH (alternative systems) suggests use of the homeopathic medicine ARS. alb. 30, also known as Arsenic alba 30; one dose for three consecutive days as prevention for Swine flu. Here are the symptoms of swine flu that you need to be aware off.

So is homeopathy a better approach for preventing swine flu?

‘Homeopathy drugs don’t just treat the symptoms of the ailment but act on the psycho-neuron-axis of the brain, helping in building immunity and improving overall well-being. So if a patient has been following a homeopathy treatment for some other illness, his immunity is already been taken care of and would not need the said drug to fight swine flu,’ says Bhavi. Here is the answer to an important question — Is swine flu curable? 

However, for others who wish to take adequate prevention to ward off a viral attack, taking homeopathy pills, prescribed by a practitioner, can help. Remember, it is advised not to take homeopathy pills without proper consultation. As with homeopathy, all drugs are not suitable for everyone. ‘Homeopathy is a line of medicine where drugs are prescribed after taking into account the patient’s history, other signs and symptoms, apart from the existing symptoms or illness. It is a long painstaking process, so it is better to see a doctor rather than self-treat,’ says Dr Bhavi. Here is what you should know how life treats one after recovering from swine flu.

When should one turn to homeopathy?

One can take help of homeopathy treatment or use it for preventive measures at any point in time. However, keeping in mind the swine flu epidemic, it is better to reach to your practitioner soon after you see the symptoms – persistent cold, cough, high fever, etc. ‘When taken on time or soon after the symptoms of flu are noticed, homeopathy drugs can help fight swine flu and put one on the road to recovery effectively,’ says Dr Bhavi.

Image source: Getty Images

http://www.thehealthsite.com/news/homeopathy-for-swine-flu-is-homeopathy-the-answer-da0315/

Research Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis Robert T Mathie1*, Suzanne M Lloyd2, Lynn A Legg3, Jürgen Clausen4, Sian Moss5, Jonathan RT Davidson6 and Ian Ford2

/

Abstract

Background

A rigorous and focused systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of individualised homeopathic treatment has not previously been undertaken. We tested the hypothesis that the outcome of an individualised homeopathic treatment approach using homeopathic medicines is distinguishable from that of placebos.

Methods

The review’s methods, including literature search strategy, data extraction, assessment of risk of bias and statistical analysis, were strictly protocol-based. Judgment in seven assessment domains enabled a trial’s risk of bias to be designated as low, unclear or high. A trial was judged to comprise ‘reliable evidence’ if its risk of bias was low or was unclear in one specified domain. ‘Effect size’ was reported as odds ratio (OR), with arithmetic transformation for continuous data carried out as required; OR > 1 signified an effect favouring homeopathy.

Results

Thirty-two eligible RCTs studied 24 different medical conditions in total. Twelve trials were classed ‘uncertain risk of bias’, three of which displayed relatively minor uncertainty and were designated reliable evidence; 20 trials were classed ‘high risk of bias’. Twenty-two trials had extractable data and were subjected to meta-analysis; OR = 1.53 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 1.91). For the three trials with reliable evidence, sensitivity analysis revealed OR = 1.98 (95% CI 1.16 to 3.38).

Conclusions

Medicines prescribed in individualised homeopathy may have small, specific treatment effects. Findings are consistent with sub-group data available in a previous ‘global’ systematic review. The low or unclear overall quality of the evidence prompts caution in interpreting the findings. New high-quality RCT research is necessary to enable more decisive interpretation.

Keywords:

Individualised homeopathy; Meta-analysis; Randomised controlled trials; Systematic review

http://www.systematicreviewsjournal.com/content/3/1/142

 

What should I expect in a homeopathic consultation?

/

What should I expect in a homeopathic consultation?

The choice of homeopathic medicine is based on the patient’s specific symptoms and not the disease itself. Because of this, in the first consultation the homeopath will seek a complete and accurate picture of the health status and symptoms of the patient.

The homeopath will ask you about your condition, physical, physiological, mental and emotional.  He or she will ask you to describe what factors improve and what factors worsen the symptoms, how you react to heat and cold, different weather, different body positions, etc.  He or she will ask you about your food preferences and aversions, how you sleep, your lifestyle and habits, your personality, your medical history and your family’s medical history, etc. The first homeopathic consultation can easily last two hours.  Subsequent ones last a shorter time, often half an hour, and usually happen about once a month.

About 70-80% of patients taking homeopathic treatment for chronic disease report improvement,

/

About 70-80% of patients taking homeopathic treatment for chronic disease report improvement, and in at least one study they prefer it over conventional treatment, according to a collection of studies written up by our friends down under, Homeopathy Plus. Possibly you are aware of the six-year Bristol Homeopathic Hospital study, which showed that out of 6,544 patients with chronic disease, sometimes of many years' duration, 70.7 per cent reported positive health changes.

But there's more.

A study on several alternative health modalities in Northern Ireland shows homeopathy narrowly edging out acupuncture with 79 per cent of patients reporting positive outcomes.

A study carried out at a health clinic in Dorset, England shows 84 per cent of patients reported improvement, and 81 per cent attribute their improvement to homeopathy.

A German study found that most parents with cancer-stricken kids who had them treated homeopathically rated their satisfaction rate as "very high" and would recommend homeopathy to other parents.

A large-scale Swiss study comparing patient satisfaction with homeopathic treatment to conventional medicine for chronic disease showed homeopathy scoring significantly better, with greater improvement and fewer side effects.

Finally, a 103-centre study in Switzerland and Germany followed 3,079 patients over eight years, and found:

* On average, disease severity decreased dramatically and improvements were sustained * Three in ten patients stopped treatment because of major improvement * Mental and physical quality of life scores increased substantially * Biggest and fastest improvements happened for children and the patients who started out the most sick.

Conditions treated ran the gamut, covering both physical and emotional afflictions.

Those who wonder why homeopathy continues to grow in popularity worldwide despite a mechanism of action that defies common "wisdom" and a well-funded and highly-motivated opposition should take note of these studies.

Read the original article, which has more details and full citations, here.

MYTHs of Homeopathy - A Series. Ep. 4

/

“Homeopathy is just a placebo effect”

It is frequently argued that homeopathic medicines are ‘just sugar pills’ that don’t contain any active ingredients, so any benefits patients report are due purely to the placebo effect i.e. people believe the pills are going to help and this belief alone triggers a healing response.

With any medical treatment there is likely to be some degree of ‘placebo effect’ and in this respect homeopathy is no different, but the theory that homeopathy’s effects are only a placebo response is not supported by the scientific evidence.

If homeopathy is really just a placebo effect, how does one explain:

  1. The existence of positive high quality placebo-controlled trials? These trials are designed specifically to separate out the placebo effect from the real clinical effect of the treatment being tested.
  2. Homeopathic medicines having effects in laboratory experiments? Effects have been seen on white blood cells, frogs and wheat plants to name just a few examples.
  3. The fact that homeopathy works in animals? A rigorous research study found that homeopathy can prevent E. coli diarrhoea in piglets1 – a big problem in commercial farmingMore

References

Find out more about similar statements:

“A top research organisation in Australia just found homeopathy doesn’t work for anything and is just placebo”

“The UK Parliamentary report has looked at the evidence and said it’s just placebo”

Myths about Homeopathy - A Series. Ep. 3

/

“Scientists say homeopathy is impossible”

Not all scientists believe homeopathy is impossible. Prof Luc Montagnier, who won a Nobel prize in 2008 for his role in discovering HIV, says homeopaths are right to use these high dilutions.

In an interview for Science magazine, when asked, “Do you think there’s something to homeopathy…?” he replied, “…What I can say now is that the high dilutions are right. High dilutions of something are not nothing. They are water structures which mimic the original molecules.”1

More

Science is a constantly evolving field and what the scientific establishment declares to be ‘impossible’ in one era, is often proved to be ‘fact’ in another.

To take just one famous example of medical U-turns, in 1982, when Dr Barry Marshall and Dr Robin Warren first put forward their theory that bacterial infection was an underlying cause of stomach ulclers, their idea was ridiculed.2  

Scientists said it was impossible for bacteria to survive the acidic environment in the stomach, let alone thrive there, but years later Marshall and Warren were vindicated when it was finally accepted that they were right – Helicobacter pylori infection is indeed the commonest cause of stomach ulcers.

In 2005 they were awarded the Nobel prize for Physiology. In the Nobel citation the doctors were praised for their “tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas”.

While scientists continue to investigate how homeopathic medicines have a biological effect, perhaps we should be more cautious about using the word ‘impossible’ when it comes to medical science.

References

Priorities and methods for developing the evidence profile of homeopathy

/

Priorities and methods for developing the evidence profile of homeopathy Recommendations of the ECH General Assembly and XVIII Symposium of GIRI

M. Van Wassenhovencorrespondence†
†Vice president of the GIRI, Research Coordinator of ECH.
Received: December 9, 2004; Received in revised form: December 24, 2004; Accepted: January 24, 2005;
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2005.01.001

 

Abstract

To achieve scientific acceptance, homeopathy must investigate several questions:

  • 1.

    The activity of very highly diluted preparations. The consensus of the meeting was that there is clear evidence of this.

  • 2.

    The content of very highly diluted homeopathic preparations. More research is needed but evidence exists that a specific signal is present in homeopathic preparations.

  • 3.

    A theoretical framework in which the effects of homeopathic diluted preparations can be explained. The ‘Body Information Theory’ is such a theory.

  • 4.

    The clinical effectiveness of homeopathy. Because they avoid the placebo effect, animal studies are a priority.

For human trials using Quality of Life questionnaires, studies on the activity, content and theoretical basis of homeopathic preparations were reviewed approximately 70% of cases; more in children showed improvement. Homeopathy reduced costs and allowed a better improvement in work-days lost compared with conventional practice. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) implicitly test the placebo hypothesis; RCTs have been performed and meta-analyses conclude that there is clear evidence of efficacy which cannot be attributed to placebo effect.

Priorities depend on the audience. More research is needed especially regarding the content of homeopathic preparations and the transmission of information. Theoretical issues are also important to avoid incorrect design of research protocols. More effort should be dedicated to veterinary research. Clinical effects analysis in humans remains important. Many other questions should be prioritised, such as the potential of homeopathy to avoid invasive procedures in children and the long-term effects of homeopathy in preventing chronic complications.

http://www.homeopathyjournal.net/article/S1475-4916%2805%2900025-1/fulltext

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

/
Gelsemium sempervirens effects in vitro: A bridge between
homeopathy and molecular biology?
Debora Olioso, Marta Marzotto, Clara Bonafini, Paolo Bellavite
Department of Pathology and Diagnostics, University of Verona
Correspondence: debora.olioso@univr.it

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

Homeopathy: meta-analyses of pooled clinical data.

/
Forsch Komplementmed. 2013;20(5):376-81. doi: 10.1159/000355916. Epub 2013 Oct 17.

Homeopathy: meta-analyses of pooled clinical data.

Hahn RG1.

Author information

Abstract

In the first decade of the evidence-based era, which began in the mid-1990s, meta-analyses were used to scrutinize homeopathy for evidence of beneficial effects in medical conditions. In this review, meta-analyses including pooled data from placebo-controlled clinical trials of homeopathy and the aftermath in the form of debate articles were analyzed. In 1997 Klaus Linde and co-workers identified 89 clinical trials that showed an overall odds ratio of 2.45 in favor of homeopathy over placebo. There was a trend toward smaller benefit from studies of the highest quality, but the 10 trials with the highest Jadad score still showed homeopathy had a statistically significant effect. These results challenged academics to perform alternative analyses that, to demonstrate the lack of effect, relied on extensive exclusion of studies, often to the degree that conclusions were based on only 5-10% of the material, or on virtual data. The ultimate argument against homeopathy is the 'funnel plot' published by Aijing Shang's research group in 2005. However, the funnel plot is flawed when applied to a mixture of diseases, because studies with expected strong treatments effects are, for ethical reasons, powered lower than studies with expected weak or unclear treatment effects. To conclude that homeopathy lacks clinical effect, more than 90% of the available clinical trials had to be disregarded. Alternatively, flawed statistical methods had to be applied. Future meta-analyses should focus on the use of homeopathy in specific diseases or groups of diseases instead of pooling data from all clinical trials.

© 2013 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg.

PMID:
24200828
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

MYTHs about Homeopathy - A Series of responses.

/

“There is no scientific evidence that homeopathy works”

This is probably the most frequently quoted, completely inaccurate statement about homeopathy. Homeopathy research is a relatively new field, so it’s true to say that there are not a huge number of studies, but some evidence is very different from no evidence.

By the end of 2013, 188 randomised controlled trials of homeopathy on 100 different medical conditions had been published in peer-reviewed journals1:

  • 44% were positive (82 trials) – finding that homeopathy was effective
  • 5% were negative (10 trials) – finding that homeopathy was ineffective
  • 47% were inconclusive (89 trials)
Slide1

How does this compare with evidence for conventional medicine?

Slide2

An analysis of 1016 systematic reviews of RCTs of conventional medicine had strikingly similar findings2:

  • 44% were positive – the treatments were likely to be beneficial
  • 7% were negative – the treatments were likely to be harmful
  • 49% were inconclusive – the evidence did not support either benefit or harm.

Although the percentages of positive, negative and inconclusive results are  similar in homeopathy and conventional medicine, it is important to recognise a vast difference in the quantity of research carried out; chart A represents 188 individual trials on homeopathy, whereas chart B represents 1016 reviews on conventional medicine, each analysing multiple trials.

This highlights the need for more research in homeopathy, particularly large-scale high quality repetitions of the most promising positive studies.

The difference in quantity is also not surprising when one considers the tiny amounts of funding made available for research into ‘complementary and alternative medicine’ (CAM).  For example, in the UK only 0.0085% of the total medical research 
budget is spent on CAM, of which homeopathy is only one example3.

References

 

https://www.hri-research.org/resources/homeopathy-the-debate/there-is-no-scientific-evidence-homeopathy-works/