http://www.hribarcelona2013.org/films/

http://www.hribarcelona2013.org/films/

Amazing insights into the Chicken Pox vaccine and the unintended consequences of that decision on the health of US citizens in particular.

Tony Bark, M.D.: When I was a resident in pediatrics I was told “we’ll never promote this vaccine, this vaccine will never be a recommended or mandated vaccine because all vaccines come with risks and Chickenpox is so risk-free”. Of course if your children died from Chickenpox! Well yes, on average in the United States there were a hundred deaths per year from Chickenpox.

That’s not considered a problem, I hate to say it, of course if it’s your child or your spouse who dies, or you, it’s a problem.

But if you look at it statistically, 100 deaths out of how many 100 million people we’ve got in the country, it was a really low rate.

Suzanne Humphries, M.D.: Most people know Chickenpox is a pretty benign entity, now we’re vaccinated for Chickenpox and “hey, the vaccines working, we’re not seeing as much Chickenpox” right, so that seems like a good thing.

However what we’re seeing more of now is Shingles because those us adults who need to be exposed ongoing Chickenpox through children aren’t, so we’re not getting those natural boosters and so what happens is our immunity level starts to drop. This is happening both in children and adults now.

I don’t think this is an overall benefit. The UK is not using that vaccine, they have looked into the danger of Chickenpox and the cost-effectiveness a vaccinating the entire population and they have decided not to implement that in their vaccine schedule.

There are other countries as well who have decided not to use Chickenpox vaccine. United States is one of the most heavily vaccinated countries,

South Korea comes close, and our childhood chronic disease rates are actually also among the highest.

Tony Bark, M.D.: The problem with that vaccine is there are many more deaths from the vaccine then we would have seen from Chickenpox because now what we’ve done is we’ve shifted the burden of disease from Chickenpox to shingles.

What a lot of doctors don’t even understand is that Chickenpox, like pertussis, needs to be in the environment so we can be constantly exposed and the constant exposure maintains our antibodies keeps us from getting Shingles. Which is why when I was a young kid the only people that got Shingles we’re very old people because they weren’t exposed to young children anymore.

If you’re out in the environment and you’re exposed to the population at large and young people, you are exposed to Chickenpox, or you were exposed to Chickenpox and it kept your antibodies adequate to suppress Shingles from coming out.

Gary Goldman, PH.D.: As the vaccine became more widespread and by year 2000, 50% of children, age less than 10 years old had been vaccinate. The boosting from children in the community with natural Chickenpox severely decreased because so many children had been vaccinated. So the young children that it had natural Chickenpox no longer were receiving those exogenous or outside exposures.

As chicken pox exposures declined, shingles increased.

Tony Bark, M.D.: Shingles has a much greater morbidity and mortality rate than Chickenpox.

Gary Goldman, PH.D.: Yes, that’s a good point because the cost to treat Chickenpox are at 25 percent and Shingles is 75 percent of the cost. So if you eliminate Chickenpox but Shingles increases then you’ve offset the benefit that you tried to achieve. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_Vf-A6BHSA#t=34

To critically challenge the epistemology of an element of Homeopathic Practice; specifically the idea that Homeopathy can be successful in preventing disease amongst a population for epidemic or pandemic disease outbreaks.

http://issuu.com/healthactionnetworksociety/docs/2015-spring-health_action-magazine- AUDIENCE: Myself, my professors, other students, other homeopaths, other interested parties.

PURPOSE: To critically challenge the epistemology of an element of Homeopathic Practice; specifically the idea that Homeopathy can be successful in preventing disease amongst a population for epidemic or pandemic disease outbreaks.

ABSTRACT:

I have written this essay to deconstruct an aspect of my clinical practice. There is controversy around the use of homeoprophylaxis in preventing disease during epidemics and pandemics. I wanted to see if there was research that could demonstrate the ability to use homeopathy in epidemics/pandemics. If so, what type of research and can it be recognized as valid. If it is not, why not? I explored and gathered information, interviews with practitioners, charts, essays, population studies and Random Controlled Trials. These helped to see the various levels of ability for homeopathic remedies to be used to prevent infectious diseases in a laboratory and in actual contemporary populations. However, these studies are in contrast within the prevailing paradigm to do with how homeopathic remedies work. Since there is an underlying disbelief in the idea that highly diluted substances could work, there is a difficulty in accepting the studies that demonstrate success for homeopathic remedies.

Introduction:

Can homeopathy help for prevention of disease in epidemics or pandemics? I have been using Dr. Isaac Golden’s (2007) homeoprophylaxis (HP) program for children in my homeopathic clinical practice for 7 years. However, when clients and others ask for the scientific evidence, my reference to historical accounts of the use of homeopathy during actual epidemics doesn’t always seem to satisfy them. As I am questioning what is science and what is knowledge, I am also unsure. The purpose of this essay is to identify and come to an understanding of the idea behind using homeopathy for the prevention of illness in epidemic or pandemic diseases and addressing whether there is valid demonstration of the successful use of homeopathy for epidemics/pandemic diseases. Ranging from historical references, Random Control Trials (RCTs) and population studies, and provings; are these sufficient to demonstrate the premise that homeopathic treatment can be used to have an impact on infectious diseases? Are there factors limiting the research or use of the information generated?

Important aspects of this essay defined:

According to Webster’s online dictionary (2013), Epidemics and pandemics refer to an outbreak of an infections disease where many people are affected in a wide geographic area. A pandemic is the same except it is affecting a larger geographic area that can occur beyond borders of one region or even country. The founder of homeopathy, Samuel Hahnemann explains in the Organon (1996), that homeopathy is most simply defined as a medical art relying on two main principles being the law of minimum dose and the law of similars. Homeoprophylaxis is the use of homeopathic remedies to prevent ahead of time a specific disease. A homeopathic remedy proving is a collection of observed and recorded signs and symptoms conducted according to the instructions outlined in Hahnemann’s (1996) Organon. The material medica is the resource where these provings and other useful sources are compiled for organized reference of each remedy’s therapeutic uses.

How did the use of homeopathy for epidemics start?

Dr. Samuel Hahnemann and homeopaths inspired by him and his writings in the Organon have seemed to make good use of homeopathic treatment to help people who have succumbed to infectious diseases or to help prevent them from succumbing to them. It was Hahnemann’s discriminating observation in 1789 that began the exploration of prevention of disease with homeopathic remedies. In his Lesser Writings (1852), he first described his experience preventing Scarlet Fever by giving them all doses of Belladonna in addition to the members of the family who had contracted it. Using the principles of homeopathic medicine combined with knowledge of homeopathic remedies from provings or other material medica resources has granted the use remedies homeoprophylactically.

Physician’s records:

Historical references of hospital reports are one way a direct comparison can be made between homeopathy and non-homeopathic treatment. In the chart below compiled by Navab (2012), numbers of patient deaths in hospitals are compared to allopathic numbers of deaths. In these reports the rate of success for homeopaths in specific hospitals is shown as a mortality rate of less than 10% for the treatment of scarlet fever, cholera, typhus fever, pneumonia, yellow fever and Spanish influenza. The mortality rates for the conventional doctors of the time (termed allopaths) are over 10% for each of these diseases. The treatments the allopaths had for the 1918 flu were limited to aspirin or acetylsalicylic acid according to Billings (1997) compared to what is available now. It is also very plausible that the results in charts are simply lower for allopaths because the allopathic medicines used between 1798 and 1918 were not as sophisticated as the ones in the present.

Year Location Disease Treatment by Homeopathy Treatment by Allopathy Treatment with No Medicine 1799 Königslütter, Germany Scarlet Fever Mortality <5% 1830 ~ ‘31* Russia Cholera Mortality 11 %Reported by Imperial Council & Foreign Ministry of Russia. Mortality 63 %Reported by Imperial Council & Foreign Ministry of Russia. Not recorded. 1830 ~ 1832 Vienna, Prague, Hungary and Moravia Cholera Mortality 7 %Reported by Dr. Kath, appointed by King of Bavaria. Mortality 31 %Reported by Dr. Kath, appointed by King of Bavaria. Not recorded. 1836** Vienna Cholera Mortality 33 %Lead Homeopath in charge was Dr. Fleischmann Mortality 66 % 1847 Ireland Typhus fever Mortality 2 %Lead Homeopath in charge was Dr. Joseph Kidd Mortality 13 %Lead Allopath in charge was Dr. Abraham Tuckey Not recorded. 1847 England Typhus fever Mortality 2 % Mortality 13 % Mortality 10 % 1848 Edinburgh, Scotland Cholera Mortality 24 %Reported by Edinburgh Dispensary. Mortality 68 %Reported by Edinburgh Dispensary. Not recorded. mid 1800’s Austria Pneumonia Mortality 5 %Lead Homeopath in charge was Dr. Fleischmann Mortality 20 %Lead Allopath in charge was Dr. Dietl Not recorded. 1853 ~ 1855 South of America Yellow fever Mortality 5.4 %Lead Homeopaths in charge were Dr. F. Davis and Dr. W. Holconibe Not Available. Not recorded. 1854 London, England Cholera Mortality 16.4 %Reported by Royal College of Physicians. Mortality 59.2 %Reported by Royal College of Physicians. Not recorded. 1878 New Orleans, USA Yellow fever Mortality 5.6 %Special Commission reported the statistics. Mortality 17 %Special Commission reported the statistics. Not recorded. 1918*** Pittsburgh, USA Spanish Influenza Mortality 1.05 %Reported by Dean, Pittsburgh Hospital Mortality 30 %Reported by Dean, Pittsburgh Hospital Not recorded.

In the 1800’s and early 1900’s when homeopaths were working as physicians within the medical system of society of the day, they had access to a statistically significant number of patients. Because these reports were created centuries ago, the information is open to interpretation. Reading the information in the chart above, different people will have different perspectives on the information presented depending on a person’s prior knowledge, beliefs and filters that can affect the conclusions (Fuller, 2003). A person educated in homeopathy (presumable already believing that homeopathy works) might ask ‘what remedies did they use?’ while a person not knowing homeopathy might simply ask the question ‘how’.

The homeopathic physicians had the same or similar access to clinical surroundings and tools available to the allopathic physicians. During the 1918 Influenza in California, Elsa Engle was a nurse practitioner using homeopathic remedies under instruction from Dr. Engle. As Malthouse (2010) wrote from an interview that was conducted by Frances Kalfus in 1992, the then 97 year old Elsa Engle explains their success at Hahnemann Hospital; “They all had about the same symptoms. You didn't have to do anything else but give them a bottle of Gelsemium, followed with a bottle of Eupatorium perfoliatum... In five days practically all of them were well”. Gelsemium and Eupatorium perfoliatum are homeopathic remedies that are still commonly used for influenza. The CBC report (Puri, 2009) explained to viewers during the many homeopathic clients were turning to the remedy Gelsemium that was “used extensively during the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918” for the H1N1 flu. However, with information or data and its style of presentation, each person will come to a different conclusion depending on prior experiences and beliefs. In order for something like homeopathy, because it might be in contrast with a strong belief, even the highest quality of research won’t suffice to change that belief despite what a study shows. Rutten (2008) describes the problem that “Prior beliefs are updated in the Bayesian process, but the first prior belief has a special position. This first prior belief is very strong, we need to consider how strong and why. It is in fact paradigmatic and might not be susceptible to Bayes’ theorum”. Perhaps only a strong personal experience (seeing is believing) might be the only thing that can change a strong prior belief.

RCTs Japanese Encephalitis (JE):

Looking at two Random Control Trials (RCTs) in a clinical laboratory where studies were done with the infectious disease Japanese Encephalitis (JE) and doses of the homeopathic remedy, Belladonna. The authors Bandyopadhyay et al. (2010 and 2011) found statistically significant success showing that Belladonna is effective in preventing disease indicators. This is a chart from Bandyopadhyay et al. (2010) showing decreased viral infection found in the Choriallontoic Membrane (CAM) of unhatched chicks dosed with Belladonna in the four different potencies of 3, 6, 30 and 200;

For the RCT done on suckling mice by Bandyopadhyay et al. (2011), average survival rates of the infected suckling mice treated with Belladonna 200C daily for 14 days had almost double the survival rate than those not treated with Belladonna 200C. 47% survival rate for untreated mice versus 79.24% and 80.60% for the Belladonna treated mice for 7 and 14 days. In the discussion of this successful study, the authors Bandyopadhyay et al. (2011) state that homeopathic practitioners have historically been using the homeopathic remedy Belladonna for the prevention of JE without any RCT experimental proof of how it works and therefore there is further need to test how it is that the homeopathic remedy Belladonna has showed an ability to prevent JE. This study has successfully shown a specific outcome. However, the question of the properties of Belladonna that made it work is what the authors chose to recommend as required further study.

Population Studies: Swine Flu in India:

In India 2009 a Swine Flu patient study involving 23 Homeopaths and 1146 patients was conducted by Mathie et al. (2013) which took a set of previous agreed upon (by the Centre for Clinical Research of Homeopathy (CCRH)) group of symptoms defining Swine Flu by Homeopaths working in government approved health centres in India. The Homeopaths agreed to record their results in a formatted excel chart between October, 2009 and February, 2010. The most frequently prescribed remedy that helped the patients as the primary care for the Swine Flu was Arsenicum album; the very same remedy that the CCRH had identified as the as a prophylactic Genus Epidemicus for this pandemic. Results like this can tempt the enthusiast to proclaim at this as proof that homeopathy can be used in epidemics.

However, the overarching challenge in demonstrating the proof that homeopathy can be successful for epidemics and pandemics through research and information is that it contrasts the current prevailing paradigm. To express this idea Rutten (2008) quotes Vandenbroucke (2001) “Accepting that infinite dilutions work would subvert more than conventional medicine; it wrecks a whole edifice of chemistry and physics”. With this in mind, the work shown in this study could present to different conclusions to people with different prior beliefs. If accepting the validity of homeopathic remedies is not a possibility within the belief system than accepting this study as successfully demonstrating that homeopathy can help in epidemics is also not a possibility.

Leptospirosis in Cuba:

A study by Bracho et al. (2009) was conducted with 2.3 million people in Cuba. The population above 1 year of age was given two oral doses of the Leptospirosis Nosode in the 200C and 10M potencies with an interval of 7-9 days between doses. Then ten to twelve months later, they were given another two oral doses of the 10M potency 7-9 days apart. These homeopathic remedies were administered by approximately 5000 Cuban public health system personnel using five drops (250-300 µL) under the tongue (sublingually) 20 minutes away from eating or drinking or smoking. One year of comparison between the area that received doses (the Intervention Region, IR) and the Rest of the Country (RC) showed a significant decrease of cases of Leptospirosis in the IR. This study looked at the numbers generated by the same institutions that are responsible for managing epidemic disease diagnosis and prognosis in Cuba (the national weekly report based on provincial data generated by the Trend Analysis Unit from the Minister of Epidemiology of the Ministry of Public Health of Cuba). According to Bracho (2009) their prediction of number of cases of Leptrospirosis was 111-461 in the Intervention Region in the most precarious 3 week period (weeks 47-52 of 2007 because of number of days between the start of the increased rainfalls and infection rates) when only actually 38 confirmed cases showed up. This was a reduction of 91.8% to 65.8% in the IR. Despite that there were increased risks of Leptospirosis infection that year due to extreme rainfall in October-November in the IR, the annual number of cases decreased by 84% while in the RC there was an increase of 21.7%. The authors conclude that these findings lend to a high degree of confidence that using homeopathic remedies to prevent disease in populations is a useful tool for epidemics and pandemics.

This study shows successful implementation of homeopathy for a population during an actual epidemic and demonstrates that homeopathy is successful in preventing illness during epidemics or pandemics. Whether this study will model a way that homeopathy can show success in preventing disease amongst a population for epidemic or pandemic disease outbreaks is still in question (Roniger, 2010). The positive aspect of this study is that there were millions of Cubans who willingly experienced homeopathy by taking those remedies in compliance with their predominant health professionals. As Rutton (2008) points out, changing towards a belief in homeopathic medicine might require a turning point such as a personal experience. What that has been shown to do is “We may accept evidence that we did not accept before. We may abandon the first prior, rearrange and re-interpret the evidence and then the process of sequential updating can start”. That way a previous belief that contradicts the idea that homeopathic remedies will not continue to stand in the way of some possible data or information being presented in research of various types.

Conclusions:

In this essay I’ve brought to attention various types of demonstrations of the use of homeopathy for epidemics and pandemics, including some that are the accepted standard for medical science. Using these examples it seems to be possible to demonstrate the specific success with RCT studies, population studies plus historical records on the use of homeopathy during epidemics/pandemics. As Bracho says (2010) it is also possible to conduct further studies with a significant level of confidence that homeopathy will prove itself as a valid way to address the health of populations during epidemics/pandemics. However, the criteria required in order to conduct this type of research isn’t always easily available to homeopaths in various parts of the world. So far it seems that there is a facility in Cuba that has opportunity to do this plus certain homeopaths in certain clinics of India are also already established for these types of studies.

There are challenges to the understanding and acceptance of use of homeopathic remedies for epidemics and pandemics. Part of it lies within the current paradigm that predominates. The disbelief that highly diluted substances such as homeopathic remedies could have a therapeutic action is the paradigm that limits the acceptance of studies on homeopathy despite their success in showing specific outcomes. With a prior acceptance of biochemical medicine combined with an expectation that homeopathy would act in the same manner, there is not a certain type of research that would qualify to change that disbelief that homeopathic remedies work because the prior belief is too many steps away from the new belief. It is recommended from this overview that any further studies to address the ability to use homeopathy for epidemics and pandemics should acknowledge that whether the reader concludes the study acceptable or not has to do with the challenge of the paradigm surrounding how homeopathic remedies work.

REFERENCES:

Bandyopadhyay, B. (2010) Decreased intensity of japanese encephalitis virus infection in chick chorioallantoic membrane under influence of ultradilutions of belladonna extract. American Journal of Infectious Diseases 6 (2): 24-28.

Bandyopadhyay, B. (2011) Suckling mice of “belladonna 200” fed mothers evade virulent nakayama strain japanese encephalitis virus infection. International Journal of Microbiological Research 2 (3): 252-257.

Billings, M. (1997) The Medical and Scientific Conceptions of Influenza. Last accessed December 16th, 2013 at http://virus.stanford.edu/uda/fluscimed.html

Bodman, F. (1975) The quest for specifics. British Homoeopathic Journal. 64 (1): 30-39.

Bracho, G., Varela, E., Ferna ́ndez, R., Ordaz, B., Marzoa, N., Mene ́ndez, J., Garc ́ıa, L., Gilling, E., … Campa, C. (2010) Large-scale application of highly-diluted bacteria for leptospirosis epidemic control. Homeopathy 99, 156-166. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2010.05.009

Fuller, S. (2003) Kuhn vs. Popper. Duxford, Cambridge, UK: Icon Books Ltd.

Golden, I. (2007) Vaccination & homeoprophylaxis? A review of risks and alternatives (6th edition), Canberra: National Library

Hahnemann, S. (1996). Organon of the medical art (6th Edition) edited and annotated by W.B. O’Rielly. Redmond, Washington: Birdcage Books.

Hahnemann, S. (1852) Lesser writings of Samuel Hahnemann last accessed Dec 2, 2013 at http://books.google.ca/books?id=YwTZzl_fk74C&dq=lesser%20writings%20by%20samuel%20hahnemann&pg=PR7#v=onepage&q=lesser%20writings%20by%20samuel%20hahnemann&f=false

Mathie, R., Baitson, E., Frye, J., Nayak, C., Manchanda, R, and Fisher, P. (2013) Homeopathic treatment of patients with influenza-like illness during the 2009 A/H1N1 influenza pandemic in india. Homeopathy 102, 187-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2013.04.001

Malthouse, S., (2010) Homeopathy and Influenze; The Spanish Flu experience. The Immunity Challenge Conference Presentation. last accessed December 2, 2013 at http://www.cmcgc.com/media/handouts/061035/040_Malthouse.pdf

Navab, I. (2012) Lives saved by homeopathy in epidemics and pandemics. last accessed November 23, 2013 at http://drnancymalik.wordpress.com/2013/01/23/epidemics-and-pandemics/

Puri, B. (2009) Last accessed Dec 12-13 at http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/some-seek-alternative-swine-flu-therapies-1.833973

Roniger, H & Jacobs. (2010) Prophylaxis against leptospirosis using a nosode: Can this cohort study serve as a model for future replications?. The Faculty of homeopathy 99, 152-155. doi.10.1016/j.homp.2010.06.004

Rutton, A. (2008) How can we change beliefs? A bayesian perspective. The Faculty of Homeopathy 97, 214-219. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2008.09.007

Vandenbroucke, JP & de Crean. (2001) Alternative medicine “a mirror image” for scientific reasoning in conventional medicine. Ann Intern Med 135, 507-513

Webster’s online dictionary. Last accessed November 23rd, 2013 at http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/epidemic

Webster’s online dictionary. Last accessed November 23rd, 2013 at http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/pandemic

Homeopathy in the public health system: a seven-year observational study at Lucca Hospital (Italy) Elio Rossi1, , , , Cristina Endrizzi1, Maria Alessandra Panozzo1, Alba Bianchi1, Monica Da Frè2

Homeopathy in the public health system: a seven-year observational study at Lucca Hospital (Italy)By; Elio Rossi1, , , , Cristina Endrizzi1, Maria Alessandra Panozzo1, Alba Bianchi1, Monica Da Frè2

Introduction

Homeopathy is the most widely-used non-conventional medicine in Italy, as confirmed by an epidemiological research project conducted on behalf of the Italian Ministry of Health (coordinated by the Higher Institute of Health).1 During the period 1997–1999, 15.6% of the Italian population used non-conventional therapies, especially homeopathy (8.2% of the population).

Data was recently published in a multipurpose survey of the diffusion of non-conventional medicine in 20052 conducted on a wider sample of families than in the previous survey of 2000 (60,000 compared to 25,000); the study confirmed that 13.6% of Italians (7,900,000) had used at least one form of non-conventional therapy in the last 3 years. The most widespread form of non-conventional medicine is homeopathy, used by 7.0% of the population; manual treatment was chosen by 6.4%; phytotherapy and acupuncture by 3.7% and 1.8% respectively; other types of non-conventional therapies accounted for 0.4%. An in-depth analysis of the data of the multipurpose ISTAT survey of 2005 for the Region of Tuscany showed that 15.5% of the Tuscan population during the three-year period prior to the survey used at least one non-conventional therapy, and homeopathy was the most widely used of the unconventional therapies (7.5%), higher than manual therapies (7.4%).

Considering also this data, in 1998 the Homeopathic Clinic in Lucca was initially established and funded by the Tuscany Region as part of a pilot project aimed at assessing the possibilities of integration of complementary medicine in the public health sector. Through successive health programming legislation, the Region financed study projects on non-conventional medicine and created a Regional Reference Centre for non-conventional therapies.

The 2005–2007 Regional Health Plan3 guarantees complete integration within the regional health system for non-conventional medical treatment, defined as complementary medicine (specifically, acupuncture, phytotherapy, homeopathy and manual medicine), whose therapies have been evaluated as demonstrating an adequate level of efficacy.

The Homeopathic Clinic of ASL 2, Lucca (the Regional Reference Centre for Homeopathy) consists of one homeopathic doctor with clinical activity and responsible for directing and coordinating the service; one homeopathic specialist doctor in obstetrics and gynaecology, to meet the specific needs of the female population; one homeopathic doctor whose role is research and production of data for verifying clinical activity and research projects in response to requirements and in collaborations with other hospital services; one pharmacist, and administrative staff. Furthermore, the clinic is also visited by doctors following courses on homeopathy in clinical practice.

Since September 2006 homeopathic doctors have been equated to specialist clinic doctors in accordance with the Tuscan Regional Integrative Agreement of the National Integrative Agreement for Specialist Clinics.4

The object of this study is to assess the response to homeopathic treatment and analyze homeopathic clinical practice in the public health sector. Materials and methods

A longitudinal observational study was conducted on all patients attending the Homeopathic Clinic at the Campo di Marte Provincial Hospital – ASL 2 Lucca from its establishment in September 1998 until December 2005. Data were collected concerning homeopathic consultations from September 1998 to December 2005 for all patients who returned for at least one follow-up appointment.

Patients who attend the clinic currently pay a public health service charge of €18.59, the amount payable for all other specialist visits. Homeopathic visits last half an hour and are booked by telephone to the Central Booking Centre of the Campo di Marte Hospital. In many cases patients are referred by their GP or by the specialist who has generally already made a clinical diagnosis.

The homeopathic prescription strategy is to administer a single remedy and involves the initial use of the remedy in Quintamillesimal dilutions (LM, Q)5 beginning with 6LM/Q and on a progressive scale of dilutions. If there is a subsequent phase, the prescription then proceeds with a single centesimal dose (CH). Treatment of acute cases generally involves the use of remedies in centesimal dilutions from 6 to 30CH.

Quality control for homeopathic prescriptions is carried in collaboration with the Associazione Lycopodium – Homeopathia Europea of Florence, which has been active since 1978 and operates independently of the clinic.

Patient data (demographic data; clinical diagnoses according to ICD 10; remedy prescribed; potency and dosage; prescription strategy, identification of the case as acute-chronic-recurrent) were collected on paper and by WinCHIP (Computerized Homeopathic Investigation Program).6 Each patient was assigned a numerical identification code for the anonymous treatment of data, and signed a privacy disclaimer.

At the first consultation, the current state of health and the severity and nature of the patient's symptoms were recorded in detail in accordance with the procedures of the homeopathic consultation. For patients seen for follow-up the effect of the therapies in relation to the main pathology (the object of the request for intervention), was assessed. An adaptation of the Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital Outcome Score (GHHOS)7 was used to assess outcome; whereas the degree of symptom intensity as reported by the patient, and the change after treatment (if any) were assessed by means of a numerical rate scale (NRS). The reference values of the GHHOS scale, distributed according to a Likert scale from −1 to +4, define different degrees of improvement as follows: 0 = none, 1 = slight improvement, 2 = moderate improvement, 3 = important improvement, 4 = cured/back to normal, and −1 = slight deterioration.

Patients attending a homeopathic visit who were already using conventional pharmacological therapy reduced and subsequently to discontinued this, where possible.

Coding and data entry were carried out by the staff of the Homeopathic Clinic of the Campo di Marte Hospital, Lucca, while data analysis was performed by staff of the Observatory of Epidemiology of the Regional Health Agency of Tuscany. Statistical analysis was performed using the statistical package Stata SE (Version 9.0). The Chi-square test was used to assess the association in the univariate analysis (Table 1). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate factors associated with successful therapy (significant improvement or resolution – values 3 and 4 of the GHHOS scale, in contrast to GHHOS scale values of ≤2). The Wald test was used to assess the statistical significance of each variable in the model (Table 4).

Table 1.

Characteristics of patients in follow-up by age ≤14 years 15–39 years ≥40 years Total p-Value n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) Total number of patients 166 (25) 250 (37) 251 (38) 667 (100)

Sex Male 92 (55) 60 (24) 75 (30) 227 (34) <0.001 Female 74 (45) 190 (76) 176 (70) 440 (66)

Occupation Student – 65 (26) 0 65 (13) <0.001 Clerk – 57 (23) 63 (26) 120 (24) Teacher – 19 (8) 28 (11) 47 (10) Medical staff – 14 (6) 26 (11) 40 (8) Entrepreneur, freelancer – 14 (6) 16 (6) 30 (6) Manual worker, artisan, farmer, technician – 38 (15) 24 (10) 62 (13) Trader – 17 (7) 13 (5) 30 (6) Housewife – 17 (7) 29 (12) 46 (9) Unemployed – 7 (3) 1 (0.4) 8 (2) Retired – 0 46 (19) 46 (9)

Have you already used conventional therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 125 (75) 161 (64) 182 (73) 468 (70) 0.035

Have you already used homeopathic therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 53 (32) 66 (26) 93 (37) 212 (32) 0.035

Existing pathology Respiratory 111 (67) 62 (25) 37 (15) 210 (32) <0.001 Digestive tract 11 (7) 48 (19) 57 (23) 116 (17) Dermatological 22 (13) 41 (16) 29 (12) 92 (14) Psychological 14 (8) 40 (16) 37 (15) 91 (14) Obstetric-gynecologic 1 (0.6) 28 (11) 27 (11) 56 (8) Headache 3 (2) 11 (4) 11 (4) 25 (4) Cardio-circulatory 0 6 (2) 16 (6) 22 (3) Urological 1 (0.6) 8 (3) 10 (4) 19 (3) Osteoarticular 0 3 (1) 13 (5) 16 (2) Neurological 3 (2) 2 (0.8) 6 (2) 11 (2) Other 0 0 7 (3) 7 (1)

Follow-up visits 2 Months 45 (27) 108 (43) 111 (44) 264 (40) 0.012 6 Months 38 (23) 46 (18) 53 (21) 137 (21) 12–18 Months 44 (27) 53 (21) 43 (17) 140 (21) ≥24 Months 39 (23) 43 (17) 44 (18) 126 (19) Table options

Results Demographics

From September 1998 to December 2005, 1514 patients came to the Homeopathic Clinic of the Campo di Marte Provincial Hospital, Lucca, for a total of 3771 consecutive visits. To assess the results of treatment, we analyzed the data of patients returning for at least one check-up visit after the initial consultation (667 patients: 44% of the total) with follow-ups up to 84 months (from a minimum of one to a maximum of 10 visits subsequent to the initial one).

The percentage of new patients lost to follow-up was 56%; the proportion was the same in all categories of the following variables: sex, age, occupation and use of conventional therapies for treatment of the existing pathology. However, among those who had previously used homeopathic treatment for the pathology in question, the percentage of patients lost was lower than those who had not used it (51% vs 58%).

The issue of drop-out was formerly investigated in a specific study9 conducted by telephone interview of a sample of patients who had attended at this clinic, but did not return, over a period of 1 year. This revealed that 50.7% of those interviewed were satisfied, stating that homeopathic treatment was effective and that they did not return for a check-up for this reason; 35.6% of patients interviewed reported various reasons for dissatisfaction such as problems of communication with the doctor during the visit, or relating to the use of the remedy, or to higher expectations than the results obtained; 2.7% of those interviewed did not start treatment due to the disappearance of symptoms. In relation to the perception of therapy effectiveness in the sample of patients lost to follow-up, only 11% said they had not returned for check-up visit due to the ineffectiveness of the prescribed treatment. If we consider only patients who had at least commenced treatment, 60% reported that the treatment was effective; of patients who had completed the prescribed therapy 81% stated the treatment to be effective.

Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of included patients. Twenty-five percentage of patients up to the age of 14; 37% aged between 15 and 39; 38% aged 40 or more. The sample consisted of 34% male patients and 66% female patients. The distribution of sex varied significantly across the age ranges: 70% or more of adult patients were female; there was a prevalence of males (55%) in childhood age. At the time of the first visit, 70% of patients had had prior recourse to conventional therapies for treatment of their pathology, 32% had already used homeopathic therapies for the same purpose. The most frequent pathologies were as follows: respiratory (32%); digestive tract (17%); dermatological (14%) and psychological (14%). A significant difference was observed in the distribution of pathologies by age. In children, two thirds of the patients came to the homeopathic clinic for respiratory pathologies, compared to 25% of patients aged 15–39 and 15% of patients aged 40 or more. Other frequent pathologies in the 15–39 age group were of the digestive tract (19%), dermatological (16%) and psychological problems (16%); while those aged 40 or more had a higher prevalence of problems of the digestive tract (23%).

The duration of follow-up was 1 year or more for 50% of children age, 37% for patients between the ages of 15–39 and 35% for those of 40 or above. Outcomes

Overall 74% of patients reported at least moderate improvement (+2), 91% showed an improvement of at least (+1), and 50% of patients reporting an important improvement or complete resolution (+3 or 4), 9% did not respond, 0.3% deteriorated. Table 2 shows the outcome distribution for each variable.

Table 2.

Outcome by patient characteristics (%) n −1 0 1 2 3 4 Slight worsening (%) No change (%) Slight improvement (%) Good improvement (%) Significant improvement (%) Resolution (%) Total 667 0.3 9 17 24 31 19

Sex Male 227 0 9 15 23 32 21 Female 440 0.4 9 17 24 31 19

Age ≤14 166 0 5 13 19 35 29 15–39 250 0.4 7 17 24 33 18 ≥40 251 0.4 14 19 26 27 14

Have you already used conventional therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 468 0.4 7 16 23 35 18 No 199 0 14 19 24 23 22

Have you already used homeopathic therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 212 0 8 17 27 32 15 No 454 0.4 9 16 22 31 21

Existing pathology Respiratory 210 0 4 12 20 36 27 Digestive tract 116 0 11 13 33 28 16 Dermatological 92 0 8 22 16 29 25 Psychological 91 2 13 23 29 25 8 Obstetric-gynecologic 56 0 16 12 20 32 20 Headache 25 0 12 24 28 24 12 Cardio-circulatory 22 0 9 27 18 41 5 Urological 19 0 5 16 16 37 26 Osteoarticular 16 0 12 25 19 25 19 Neurological 11 0 9 18 36 27 9 Other 7 0 14 14 29 43 0

Follow-up visits 2 Months 264 0.8 15 27 27 22 8 6 Months 137 0 7 18 26 36 13 12–18 Months 140 0 5 9 28 34 25 ≥24 Months 126 0 3 2 10 41 44 Table options

The proportion of subjects reporting a significant improvement or resolution of the complaint decreased with increasing age. Current or previous use of conventional pharmacological treatment was positively associated with the positive result of homeopathic therapy. Pathologies with a higher outcome score were respiratory complaints (with 36% reporting a significant improvement and 27% a resolution); while psychological complaints were those which responded least well, although there was good improvement for 29% of subjects.

For psychological problems duration of follow-up significantly influenced the result of therapy: the longer the duration, the higher the outcome score: after 2 years, 44% of patients reported the resolution of the complaint, compared to 8% of patients after 2 months. Table 3 shows the proportion of patients reporting a significant improvement or resolution of the symptoms in relation to the duration of the therapy. The success rate was 51% and was closely correlated to the duration of therapy: after 2 months the percentage was 30%, rising to 85% after 24 months or more of follow-up. This trend persisted even when all demographic and clinical variables are taken into account.

Table 3.

Number and proportion of cases reporting a significant improvement or the resolution of the complaint Total 2 Months 6 Months 12–18 Months ≥24 Months n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) Total 337 (51) 80 (30) 68 (50) 82 (59) 107 (85)

Sex Male 120 (53) 27 (33) 28 (49) 31 (65) 34 (87) Female 217 (49) 53 (29) 40 (50) 51 (55) 73 (84)

Age ≤14 106 (64) 17 (38) 23 (61) 30 (68) 36 (92) 15–39 128 (51) 33 (31) 24 (52) 33 (62) 38 (88) ≥40 103 (41) 30 (27) 21 (40) 19 (44) 33 (75)

Have you already used conventional therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 249 (53) 58 (31) 53 (54) 61 (66) 77 (84) No 88 (44) 22 (28) 15 (38) 21 (45) 30 (88)

Have you already used homeopathic therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 100 (47) 22 (31) 16 (36) 28 (53) 34 (81) No 236 (52) 58 (30) 51 (56) 54 (62) 73 (87)

Existing pathology Respiratory 133 (63) 31 (45) 23 (57) 39 (67) 40 (93) Digestive tract 50 (43) 14 (25) 12 (48) 8 (44) 16 (89) Dermatological 50 (54) 13 (34) 13 (57) 11 (73) 13 (81) Psychological 30 (33) 8 (19) 5 (33) 9 (45) 8 (57) Obstetric-gynecologic 29 (52) 8 (35) 1 (17) 6 (55) 14 (87) Headache 9 (36) 1 (9) 1 (20) 3 (75) 4 (80) Cardio-circulatory 10 (45) 3 (30) 3 (43) 2 (67) 2 (100) Urological 12 (63) 1 (17) 6 (86) 1 (50) 4 (100) Osteoarticular 7 (44) 0 3 (60) 2 (33) 2 (67) Neurological 4 (36) 0 1 (50) 0 3 (75) Other 3 (43) 1 (33) 0 1 (100) 1 (100) Table options

A logistic regression model was fitted for all the variables considered (Table 4). The table confirms that the variables influencing the success probability of homeopathic treatment are as follows: patient age (p = 0.034), the pathology (p = 0.040) and duration of follow-up (p < 0.001). Young patients had the best outcomes, when all other variables are the same. Those with respiratory pathologies, and urological, cardio-circulatory, dermatological and obstetric-gynecological problems also had relatively favourable outcomes. The variable with the greatest influence on the outcome is the duration of follow-up: an adjusted success probability of 30% after 2 months rises to 86% after 2 years or more.

Table 4.

Logistic regression model: adjusted proportions of significant improvement or resolution Adjusted proportions(95% CI) p-Value Sex Male 51.0 (43.3–58.6) 0.785 Female 52.3 (46.8–57.8)

Age 0–14 59.0 (49.3–68.0) 0.034 15–39 55.0 (47.9–61.9) ≥40 44.0 (36.8–51.4)

Have you already used conventional therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 53.5 (48.2–58.8) 0.280 No 48.0 (39.7–56.3)

Have you already used homeopathic therapies for treatment of the existing pathology at the time of the visit? Yes 47.8 (40.1–55.5) 0.217 No 53.8 (48.4–59.1)

Existing pathology Respiratory 60.8 (52.4–68.6) 0.040 Digestive tract 49.5 (39.2–59.9) Dermatological 56.9 (45.4–67.6) Psychological 33.9 (23.7–45.7) Obstetric-gynecologic 52.2 (37.0–66.9) Headache 35.2 (17.7–57.7) Cardio-circulatory 57.6 (35.2–77.2) Urological 65.8 (41.2–84.2) Osteoarticular 43.4 (20.9–69.0) Neurological 28.3 (8.6–62.4) Other 52.1 (17.6–84.7)

Follow-up visits 2 Months 30.4 (24.9–36.5) <0.001 6 Months 48.2 (39.6–57.0) 12–18 Months 58.5 (49.7–66.8) ≥24 Months 86.1 (78.8–91.2) Table options

Discussion

The first point concerns the demographic data: this clinic confirms the tendency found in other studies8 of the greater likelihood of women using homeopathic treatment (in our sample 2:1 female–male ratio). In terms of age, 39% of patients are 40 years old or more; 37% between 15 and 39; while 24% are under the age of 15. Sixty-five percentage of patients older than 15 were in employment, the remaining 35% consisting of students, housewives, pensioners and unemployed. Another important aspect is the chronicity and variety of pathologies observed: this makes the type of user comparable to that of a regional general medicine clinic, in contrast to data from epidemiologic sector studies.

The percentage of patients lost to follow was significantly lower among those who were already familiar with homeopathy. This result might explain the difficulties encountered by those who begin an unfamiliar treatment perhaps with high expectations, or hope that homeopathic treatment will accelerate healing times and reduce consumption of conventional drugs.

The study highlights a progressive improvement related to the length of the follow-up period. Perhaps this is determined by the relationship established with the doctor, given that the homeopathic interview seems to be an important investment in the doctor–patient relationship, when the therapeutic alliance with the patient is sought. This finding, which also contributes toward a bias influencing the results of observational studies, would benefit from further investigation with targeted studies.

A period of at least 3 months is necessary, according to Witt et al. 10 to improve chronic illnesses and the result of homeopathic therapy then stabilizes during the subsequent months. It is possible to surmise – particularly with regard to chronic pathologies – the importance of the patient's adherence to a therapeutic program which in our homeopathic clinic generally involves a progression of increasing dilutions of the same remedy, or of complementary remedies, in order to progress to a single dose. This differs from what occurs in conventional pharmacological treatment when a change in symptoms remains linked to continuing taking treatment. In fact, the duration of follow-up in this study does not only correspond to the period of consumption of the remedy since, after the single dose, the patient does not receive any treatment for a certain period of time, although the patient's clinical state is still observed at follow up visits.

One might expect that if the therapeutic program is discontinued before the overall clinical picture at the basis of the prescription has resolved, the probabilities of success will change. If we consider the sample of patients who did not return for follow-up but were interviewed by telephone, the percentages of improvement are reduced when subjects who discontinued treatment are included, even if the discontinuation was due to improvement. In order to confirm the assumption that it is necessary to complete a therapeutic program to reach stable objectives, it would have been useful to examine the type of prescription (remedy strength, whether or not treatment concerned the recurrence of a clinical picture with chronic tendencies, etc.), as well as assessment of the outcome, specifying whether assessment was monitored during or after consumption of the remedy.

Several studies underline the complex typology and chronic evolution of the complaint treated homeopathically, often after the failure of pharmacological or conventional treatment,11 in which homeopathy influenced not only the quality of the symptom but also the subjective perception of a state of general wellbeing.12 and 13

The usefulness of homeopathy has been evidenced for treatment of recurrent infectious episodes, when antibiotic therapy is not effective in reducing the frequency of recurrence.14 In our study, many problems concern worsening of pathologies which tend to relapse (respiratory infections, asthma, allergies). With regard to respiratory pathologies, the change in pharmacological consumption during the course of homeopathic therapy has been monitored15: showing a reduction of approximately 50% in pharmacological expenses, both for specific medicines and for general pharmacological expenses. The reduction in pharmacological expenses was significantly greater in patients who combined homeopathic therapy with conventional pharmacological therapy, compared to the pharmaceutical expenses of patients who took only conventional therapy.

In the sample examined in this study, there was a trend suggesting that homeopathic therapy is more effective when combined with conventional pharmacological treatment, although this is not significant in the multivariate regression model (Table 4). It would have been useful to distinguish between those who were still using conventional therapies while receiving homeopathic treatment and those who had used such therapies but discontinued them with the start of homeopathic treatment. Nevertheless, the data obtained from the study monitoring pharmacological expenses in patients affected with respiratory pathologies suggest an advantage for the patient even when homeopathic and pharmacological therapies are combined. This finding seems to contradict the view widely held in homeopathic circles that conventional treatment previous to, or in association with, homeopathic treatment reduces the probability of success.

The 74% improvement of at least +2 (if we also include “slight” improvement the percentage rises to 91%), is consistent with that observed in previously published studies: (89% Wassenhoven,13 78% Robinson,8 70.7% Spence11); likewise, the data relative to the non-effectiveness of the therapy are also consistent (9% in this study, 8.5% in Wassenhoven). Robinson reports a higher percentage of failures (19%), which these authors related to factors such as incorrect prescriptions, or the inability of the homeopath to obtain useful information for the prescription due to the patient's reticence in talking about him/herself. In that study, 73% of prescriptions were “targeted to the pathology” (modalized symptoms, key notes, and organ affinity) in contrast to 19% of prescriptions “based on the patient” or on the totality of symptoms; in Wassenhoven's study, 68% of prescriptions related to the overall picture (therefore using a strategy based on the patient) and 18% were symptomatic.

These differences can probably also be explained in part by a prescription strategy that was not always uniform, an issue which we attempted to address in our study through a greater standardization of prescription methodology. Our clinical practice follows the classic methodology targeting the totality of symptoms.

The percentage of unresponsive patients reported by Spence (approximately 15% in children and 24–28% in female and male adults) poses the question of the impact of homeopathic therapy different age groups, an issue we have also attempted to assess in this study. Our results showed greater therapeutic effect in young patients. Witt and collaborators, who analyzed pediatric data separately from adult data from questionnaires on the quality of life completed by patients or the parents of children who were treated, have also reached a similar conclusion: young patients and patients with more serious illnesses benefit from homeopathy. This finding seems to be important in the light of some publications in the Italian National Press which reported negative conclusions or even reasons for concern regarding the use of homeopathy, above all in children: in 2001, the National Bioethics Committee16 stated that non-conventional medicine was acceptable “only in marginal and essentially harmless situations”.

The data in this case study reveal an extremely low percentage for the worsening of symptoms (0.3% reported a slight worsening) compared to data already published (3.1% Spence, 3% Robinson, 2.4% van Wassenhoven). In a prospective observational study17 also conducted at this clinic and targeted to assess the incidence and type of adverse effects in homeopathic treatment, nine adverse reactions were reported from 335 consecutive visits in the period of 1 year (2.68%). A study evaluating the different phenomena of homeopathic aggravation is currently in progress.

In our sample examined, respiratory complaints generally seem to respond best to treatment, whatever the other variables considered, followed by urological, dermatological, obstetric-gynecological and cardio-circulatory complaints. We attempted to assess which pathologies responded better to treatment within different age groups. For pathologies of the digestive tract and for dermatological problems, the success rates were better for patients under the age of 15.

Psychological disturbances generally responded less to homeopathic treatment, compared to other pathologies. In our study, this type of pathology is represented above all by anxiety–depressive syndromes (excluding severe depression), which for the most part had not been previously diagnosed, where patients chose homeopathic therapy due to fear of side-effects of psycho-pharmacological therapy.8 A targeted study seems necessary to examine the specificity of homeopathic therapy and its indications compared to other treatment systems.18 Limitations

This is a longitudinal observational study in which we considered all patients who came under our observation. There was no control group. The difficulty of carrying out randomized studies of patients who choose this method of treatment19 has often been noted and this has limited the credibility in the scientific community of the positive data in many observational studies. There is possible bias related to the doctor–patient relationship in the subjective evaluation of the symptoms on the part of the patient. A further limitation is that 70% of patients had already received pharmacological treatment and no distinction was made between previous or continuing pharmacological treatment during homeopathic therapy. Conclusion

Homeopathic therapy is associated with good results in relation to the variation of symptoms of chronic and recurring pathologies. There seem to be some specific characteristics in certain groups of pathologies and age ranges that would benefit from further investigation including, if possible, randomized, controlled studies.

References

1 F. Menniti-Ippolito, L. Gargiulo, E. Bologna, E. Forcella, R. Raschetti

Use of unconventional medicine in Italy: a nation-wide survey

Eur J Clin Pharmacol, 58 (2002), pp. 61–64 View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (105) 2 Istituto nazionale di statistica (Istat) (National Statistics Institute)

Le medicine non convenzionali in Italia [Non conventional medicine in Italy]

Year of 2005 (August 2007) [accessed in January 2009] 3 2005/2007 Regional Health Plan

[accessed in January 2009] 4

Tuscan Regional Executive Resolution No. 655 of 20.06.2005, Tuscan Regional Integrative Agreement for Specialist Clinics

[accessed in January 2009] 5 L. De Schepper

LM potencies: one of the hidden treasures of the sixth edition of the Organon

Br Homeopath J, 88 (1999), pp. 128–134 Article | PDF (209 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (14) 6 Rezzani CM. WinChip: computerized homeopathic investigation program: a data collection tool to help the doctor in daily practice and a real instrument to prove and improve homeopathy. In: Proceedings of the International Conference “Improving the Success of Homeopathy 2. Developing and Demonstrating Effectiveness” London, 15–16 April 1999; 32. 7 W.R. Richardson

Patient benefit survey: Liverpool Regional Department of Homoeopathic Medicine

Br Homeopath J, 90 (3) (2001), pp. 158–162 Article | PDF (86 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (33) 8 T. Robinson

Responses to homeopathic treatment in National Health Service general practice

Homeopathy, 95 (2006), pp. 9–14 Article | PDF (154 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (14) 9 C. Endrizzi, E. Rossi

Patient compliance with homeopathic therapy

Homeopathy, 95 (2006), pp. 206–214 Article | PDF (445 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (8) 10 C.M. Witt, R. Lüdtke, R. Baur, S.N. Willich

Homeopathic medical practice: long-term results of a cohort study with 3981 patients

BMC Public Health, 5 (2005), p. 115 [accessed in February 2009] Full Text via CrossRef 11 D.S. Spence, E. Thompson, S.J. Barron

Homeopathic treatment for chronic disease: a 6 year University Hospital outpatients observational study

J Altern Complement Med (2005), pp. 793–798 View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (104) 12 C. Güthlin, O. Lange, H. Walach

Measuring the effects of acupuncture and homoeopathy in general practice: an uncontrolled prospective documentation approach

BMC Public Health, 4 (2004), p. 6 [accessed in February 2009] Full Text via CrossRef 13 M. Wassenhoven van, G. Ives

An observational study of patients receiving homeopathic treatment

Homeopathy, 93 (2004), pp. 3–11 14 M. Trichard, G. Chaufferin, N. Nicoloyannis

Pharmaeconomic comparison between homeopathic and antibiotic treatment strategies in recurrent acute rhinopharyngitis in children

Homeopathy, 94 (2005), pp. 3–9 Article | PDF (160 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (33) 15 E. Rossi, L. Crudeli, C. Endrizzi, D. Garibaldi

Cost–benefit evaluation of homeopathic vs conventional therapy in respiratory disease

Homeopathy, 9 (2009), pp. 2–10 Article | PDF (219 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (14) 16 Italian Government, National Bioethics Committee

Scopi, limiti e rischi della medicina, 14 dicembre 2001 cap. 4 [Objectives, limitations and risks of medicine, 14 December 2001, Chapter 4]

[accessed in January 2009] 17 C. Endrizzi, E. Rossi, L. Crudeli, D. Garibaldi

Harms in homeopathy: aggravations, adverse drug events or medication errors?

Homeopathy, 94 (2005), pp. 233–240 Article | PDF (156 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (19) 18 P. Cassano, M. Fava

Depression and public health an overview

J Psychosom Res, 53 (2002), pp. 849–857 Article | PDF (131 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (206) 19 T. Katz, P. Fisher, A. Katz, J. Davidson, G. Feder

The feasibility of a randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial of homeopathic treatment of depression in general practice

Homeopathy, 94 (2005), pp. 145–152 Article | PDF (168 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (16)

Correspondence to: Elio Rossi, Ambulatorio di omeopatia, Padiglione B, Ospedale Provinciale Campo di Marte, 55100 Lucca, Italy.

Copyright © 2009 The Faculty of Homeopathy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

#homeopathy Individualized Homeopathic Treatment and Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression in Peri- and Postmenopausal Women (HOMDEP-MENOP Study): A Randomized, Double-Dummy, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

RESEARCH ARTICLE #homeopathy Individualized Homeopathic Treatment and Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression in Peri- and Postmenopausal Women (HOMDEP-MENOP Study): A Randomized, Double-Dummy, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial Emma del Carmen Macías-Cortés1,2*, Lidia Llanes-González3, Leopoldo Aguilar-Faisal1, Juan Asbun-Bojalil1 1 División de Estudios de Posgrado, Escuela Superior de Medicina, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Distrito Federal, México, 2 Consulta Externa de Homeopatía, Hospital Juárez de México, Secretaría de Salud, Distrito Federal, México, 3 Unidad de Salud Mental, Hospital Juárez de México, Secretaría de Salud, Distrito Federal, México * ecmc2008@hotmail.es Abstract Background Perimenopausal period refers to the interval when women's menstrual cycles become irreg- ular and is characterized by an increased risk of depression. Use of homeopathy to treat de- pression is widespread but there is a lack of clinical trials about its efficacy in depression in peri- and postmenopausal women. The aim of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of individualized homeopathic treatment versus placebo and fluoxetine versus placebo in peri- and postmenopausal women with moderate to severe depression. Methods/Design A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, superiority, three-arm trial with a 6 week follow-up study was conducted. The study was performed in a public research hospital in Mexico City in the outpatient service of homeopathy. One hundred thirty-three peri- and postmenopausal women diagnosed with major depression according to DSM-IV (moderate to severe intensity) were included. The outcomes were: change in the mean total score among groups on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Beck Depres- sion Inventory and Greene Scale, after 6 weeks of treatment, response and remission rates, and safety. Efficacy data were analyzed in the intention-to-treat population (ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test). PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0118440 March 13, 2015 1/24 OPENACCESS Citation: Macías-Cortés EdC, Llanes-González L, Aguilar-Faisal L, Asbun-Bojalil J (2015) Individualized Homeopathic Treatment and Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression in Peri- and Postmenopausal Women (HOMDEP-MENOP Study): A Randomized, Double-Dummy, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. PLoS ONE 10(3): e0118440. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0118440 Academic Editor: Yiru Fang, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, CHINA Received: September 18, 2014 Accepted: January 13, 2015 Published: March 13, 2015 Copyright: © 2015 Macías-Cortés et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: Data are available upon request to the Research and Ethics Committee of National Homeopathic Hospital, Mexico City [Dr. Gustavo Aguilar-Velázquez ( gav5799@gmail.com

Results After a 6-week treatment, homeopathic group was more effective than placebo by 5 points in Hamilton Scale. Response rate was 54.5% and remission rate, 15.9%. There was a sig- nificant difference among groups in response rate definition only, but not in remission rate. Fluoxetine-placebo difference was 3.2 points. No differences were observed among groups in the Beck Depression Inventory. Homeopathic group was superior to placebo in Greene Climacteric Scale (8.6 points). Fluoxetine was not different from placebo in Greene Climac- teric Scale. Conclusion Homeopathy and fluoxetine are effective and safe antidepressants for climacteric women. Homeopathy and fluoxetine were significantly different from placebo in response definition only. Homeopathy, but not fluoxetine, improves menopausal symptoms scored by Greene Climacteric Scale. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01635218 Protocol Publication http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/14/1/105 . https://www.hri-research.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Mac%C3%ADas-Cort%C3%A9s-2015-Depression-menopause.pdf

You Too Can Test Homeopathy

For those who still doubt … here’s a simple little ‘homeopathy’ experiment to check if potentisation really does have an effect. Grab some common green bean seeds and divide them into two groups. In the first group (your control group) water them as per normal. In the second group, your test group, water them as well but only after adding 5 drops of potentised table salt (Nat-m 6C) per 50ml. As happened in the following research, you should see the beans from your test group grow more quickly and profusely than the control group even though a 6C potency is indistinguishable from plain water.

And where can you get the Nat-m 6C? It is easy to buy from most homeopathic pharmacies or you can make your own – its simple. Just follow the instructions found in one of the below links.

(For the purpose of this experiment, you won’t need a ‘mother tincture’ or alcohol as per the instructions. Just add approximately 1 part of common table salt to 99 parts of water. Potentisation is quite flexible so measures don’t have to be exact for an effect to take place).

So, for the price of a few beans you too can test homeopathy.

(Green beans are not the only plants you can experiment with – any plant can be affected by a homeopathic potency as Darwin himself discovered. Just Google for the growing list of homeopathic research with other plants.) Links to More Information

Bean growth research: A pilot study of the influence of Natrum muriaticum 6cH and 30cH in a standardized culture of Phaseolus vulgaris L.

Potentisation instructions: Three Scales of Potency

Darwin’s story and homeopathic plant experiments: The Surprising Story of Charles Darwin and His Homeopathic Doctor From; http://homeopathyplus.com.au/you-too-can-test-homeopathy/

My Presentation Proposal accepted at the Homeopathic Research Institute conference in Rome! Help get me there!

http://www.gofundme.com/HomeopathyResearch One of my research projects has been accepted to be 'postered' (see project picture) at the Homeopathic Research Institute Conference in Rome, Italy in June 2015. I applied to present at the Homeopathic Research Institute because most of my publishing homeopathic colleagues are in Europe (and my heritage is Italian) and this is my opportunity to create important research colleagues and alliances to forward this world of research hopefully extending all the way back here to There currently is the evident catch 22 of asking a homeopath for 'the science' on homeopathy and the abismal lack of funding for homeopathic research.

Where exactly would this money go? Luckily - I am VERY good at finding deals: Conference Fee is 320Euros = CDN$543 Flight to Rome is CDN$1059 Hotel (AirBnB) 6 nights is 360 Euros =$485 Print & Ship the Poster $250 Plus transportation and food

So much can be changed with so little funding with homeopathy because of the strong principles of healing that homeopathy is based on and has been using in the very same manner for over 200 years. Once 'the science' of homeopathy can penetrate the narrow prevailing conventional medical system I see a way that it can quickly turn the tides on the current view of homeopathy and holistic medicine and allow the evidence of how perfectly useful that homeopathy can be to help ourselves, our societies and generations become healthier instead of less healthy. In essence, I am realizing the importance of 'infiltrating from within'. References made to 'the science' has become more of a belief system than the actual knowledge that science has been known to elicit. When systems become so closed and ideas so dogmatic that 'the science' is not even willing to question something in order to find the answer(s) ie. knowledge then it is no longer be described as science. I hear and see these kinds of references to 'the science' sounding more and more out of context and as if it is some kind of religion which is why I sometimes feel like it is used like a belief system. My goal is to highlight that as a societal problem with specific reference to the implications within our narrow focused health system.

As I am in the throws of trying to finish my second year of my MSc of Integrated Medicine and plan this presentation in Rome, I am started to realize how little our Canadian dollars go in Europe. Plus there is a lack of funding for research in homeopathy which is why I am asking for your own generosity - your willingness to place your dollars into the faith that there are opportunities here for us to turn the tides and change perspectives on what are important aspects of health and healing.

While reading this plea, you might wonder to yourself of the reasons that I continue to follow my attempt to offer homeopathy despite the odds. That NOT doing so feels like an abandonment of the primary code of conduct as a health practitioner ‘do no harm’ and against following the code ethics within the principles of beneficence and non-malevolence 4. If I don’t offer something that I know can benefit someone’s condition of health; then I feel that I am not acting as the compassionate human being that I know I am. If you would like to find out more, please contact me.

I feel that this little poster presentation is imperative to the forward movement of homeopathy as an option in Canada and will have very positive implications on my abilities to pursue important avenues as a rigorous and relevant researcher of holistic health options for all of us.

Homeopathy has a long history of popular use (hundreds of years). It also has a history of being criticized in North America where the medical industry is dominated by the pharmaceutical industry. Homeopathy is second only to Jesus as the two most controversial topics according to Wikipedia 1.

Considering my previous career in political advocacy focusing on environmental and conservation issues, I sometimes ask myself; Is that what attracted me to homeopathy? No! It was the fact that once I gave it a try for my lifetime struggle with de-habilitating eczema, it did something that nothing else could do for me and so I was ecstatic 2. That success indeed was what made me passionate about ensuring that people have ACCESS and know about homeopathy as an option if they so choose.

Fortunately (unfortunately?), that passion has led me here – writing to justify the amazing healing that I am now able to do for many others, now that I’ve spent over ten years continuing to study all aspects of homeopathy above and beyond my four year diploma requirement in order to call myself a homeopathic practitioner 3. Luckily I now have access to University level databases of research publication and you - reading this are lucky too, because I am writing to share this with you and others who can make a choice (and a donation) towards making important changes.

REFERENCES:

1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman/dysfunction-at-wikipedia-_b_5924226.html last accessed January 9, 15.

2.Medhurst, R. (2013). Homoeopathy for Eczema. Journal Of The Australian Traditional-Medicine Society, 19(2), 104-106.

3. https://homeopathiccures.wordpress.com/about/ last accessed January 9, 15.

4. http://www.studydroid.com/index.php?page=viewPack&packId=545924 last accessed January 9, 15. Risks and challenges Risks and Challenges. This project may get the attention of some skeptics and could be somehow interpreted as a negative project, however, as outlined above, this is not from a love of rigorous science but for a fear of change. This - I have discovered is just part and parcel of being a professionally sought after homeopathic practitioner and will not deter me from my passion for the truth and knowledge of true health and healing for everyone. http://www.accessnaturalhealing.com

Australia’s NHMRC publishes flawed report despite concerns raised during public consultation

Australia’s NHMRC publishes flawed report despite concerns raised during public consultation12 March 2015

Although the HRI welcomes thorough research in homeopathy, only studies carried out using appropriate and rigorous scientific methods can produce meaningful results. We therefore lament the recent publication by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), which fails to meet this standard.

During a public consultation on the draft version of this report, HRI and others highlighted deep flaws in how the NHMRC had analysed the evidence on homeopathy. None of these serious problems were addressed in the final publication. This raises questions as to whether the public consultation was ever meant to have any impact on the final report, leading to serious concerns about the conduct of this governmental body.

We maintain that the conclusions of the NHMRC report are inconsistent with the evidence.

The inaccuracy of the NHMRCs conclusions stem primarily from one fundamental flaw at the heart of this report – the NHMRC reviewers considered the results of all trials for one condition together as a whole, even though the individual trials were assessing very different types of homeopathic treatment.

To illustrate this flaw, the NHMRC reviewers asked, “Is homeopathy effective for condition A?’, working from the premise that a positive trial showing that one homeopathic treatment is effective is somehow negated by a negative trial which shows that a completely different homeopathic treatment for that same condition is ineffective. This is a bizarre and unprecedented way of assessing scientific evidence. In conventional research the question asked would be, “Is treatment X effective for condition A?”, not “Is conventional medicine effective for condition A?” based on combining the results of all drug trials together. Some treatments work, some don’t. The whole point of medical research is to establish which treatments are useful and which are of no value. This is no different in homeopathy.

This single methodological flaw explains why the NHMRCs has failed to find any ‘reliable’ evidence that homeopathy is effective for any of the 61 conditions under consideration.

Secondly, we are deeply perplexed as to the reasons for the exclusion of some of the best evidence for key clinical conditions. In brief:

Jacobs et al performed meta-analysis a meta-analysis of the treatment of childhood diarrhea using homeopathy in 2003, N=242 in placebo controlled trials, p-value = 0.008. This meta-analysis was excluded … why? [Link] Wiesenauer & Lüdtke conducted a meta-analysis into the treatment of hayfever in 1996, N=752 in placebo controlled RCTs, p-value <0.0001. This meta-analysis was excluded. Again we ask ourselves why? [Link] Schneider et al conducted a meta-analysis of non-inferiority trials of homeopathy compared to usual care for the treatment of vertigo, N=1388, non-inferiority was clearly demonstrated. Again excluded, again why? [Link]

A Cochrane review by Mathie et al inspected the evidence for the treatment of influenza using homeopathy concluded in favor of homeopathy (N=1259, placebo RCTs, p=0.001) yet this evidence was simply ignored in the final conclusions on the grounds of possible bias in the underlying studies [Link].

The NHMRC also need to justify their use of N=150 as a line between reliable and unreliable trials and they certainly need to explain why size is relevant at all when the findings are statistically significant.

Furthermore we do not see how there could be any justification for the absence of a homeopathy expert on the NHMRC review board. The presence of such an expert would potentially have prevented many of the issues raised here and would definitely have reassured the public about allegations of bias on the part of the NHMRC.

We note that the conclusions of the NHMRC report are at odds with the conclusions of the recent extensive meta-analysis of RCTs using homeopathy performed by Mathie and co-workers which concludes in favour of an effect of homeoapthy[Link].

The HRI does not dispute the fact that there are few high-quality, positive studies in homeopathy and that these need independent replication, but we do dispute the NHMRC’s failure to identify these positive studies in their Information Paper as promising studies which should be repeated.

Despite the considerable means spent on this report and great profession of due process and absence of bias, as demonstrated above the NHMRC has failed both in terms of the process they used and in the fairness of their assessment of the evidence.

The NHMRC documents can be found here, with the final statement here.

The HRI’s response to the initial draft can be found here, and our submission to the NHMRC can be found here. https://www.hri-research.org/2015/03/nhmrc-publishes-flawed-report-despite-concerns-raised-during-public-consultation/

18 Supporters in 18 days!

18 funders in 18 days! Thank you SOOO much - you are sooo appreciated. I will send you video clips of the poster presentation in Roma, Italia! http://www.gofundme.com/HomeopathyResearch

Just some research to do with homeopathy; a tiny bibliography G & M ...argh! compiled by Elena Cecchetto

Works CitedAdler, Ubiratan C., Stephanie Krüger, Michael Teut, Rainer Lüdtke, Iris Bartsch, Lena Schützler, Friedericke Melcher, Stefan N. Willich, Klaus Linde, and Claudia M. Witt. "Homeopathy for Depression - DEP-HOM: Study Protocol for a Randomized, Partially Double-blind, Placebo Controlled, Four Armed Study." Trials 12.1 (2011): 43-49. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Adler, Ubiratan C., Stephanie Krüger, Michael Teut, Rainer Lüdtke, Lena Schützler, Friederike Martins, Stefan N. Willich, Klaus Linde, and Claudia M. Witt. "Homeopathy for Depression: A Randomized, Partially Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Four-Armed Study (DEP-HOM)." PLoS ONE 8.9 (2013): 1-9. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Ainsworth, Steve. "Time to Consign Homeopathy to the History Books?" Practice Nurse 42.10 (2012): 34-35. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Akaeva, T. V., and K. N. Mkhitaryan. "Foundation of Concept of Constitutional Homeopathic Remedy by Using Electropuncture Methods." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 13.47 (2014): 132-33. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Almirantis, Yannis. "Homeopathy – between Tradition and Modern Science: Remedies as Carriers of Significance." Homeopathy 102.2 (2013): 114-22. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Amalcaburio, Rosane, Luiz Carlos Pinheiro Machado Filho, Luciana Aparecida Honorato, and Nelton Antônio Menezes. "Homeopathic Remedies in a Semi-intensive Alternative System of Broiler Production." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 8.26 (2009): 33-39. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Arlt, S., W. Padberg, M. Drillich, and W. Heuwieser. "Efficacy of Homeopathic Remedies as Prophylaxis of Bovine Endometritis." Journal of Dairy Science 92.10 (2009): 4945-953. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Arora, Shagun, Ayushi Aggarwal, Priyanka Singla, Saras Jyoti, and Simran Tandon. "Anti-proliferative Effects of Homeopathic Medicines on Human Kidney, Colon and Breast Cancer Cells." Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy 102.4 (2013): 274-82. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Banerjee, A., Sb Chakrabarty, Sr Karmakar, A. Chakrabarty, Sj Biswas, S. Haque, D. Das, S. Paul, B. Mandal, B. Naoual, P. Belon, and Ar Khuda-Bukhsh. "Can Homeopathy Bring Additional Benefits to Thalassemic Patients on Hydroxyurea Therapy? Encouraging Results of a Preliminary Study." Homoeopathic Heritage 34.4 (2009): 33-40. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Banerjee, Antara, Sudipa Basu Chakrabarty, Susanta Roy Karmakar, Amit Chakrabarty, Surjyo Jyoti Biswas, Saiful Haque, Debarsi Das, Saili Paul, Biswapati Mandal, Boujedaini Naoual, Philippe Belon, and Anisur Rahman Khuda-Bukhsh. "Can Homeopathy Bring Additional Benefits to Thalassemic Patients on Hydroxyurea Therapy? Encouraging Results of a Preliminary Study." Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM) 7.1 (2010): 129-36. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bell, Ir, Aj Brooks, A. Howerter, N. Jackson, and Ge Schwartz. "Acute Electroencephalographic Effects From Repeated Olfactory Administration of Homeopathic Remedies in Individuals With Self-reported Chemical Sensitivity." Alternative Therapies in Health & Medicine 19.1 (2013): 46-57. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bell, Iris, R., Amy Howerter, Nicholas Jackson, Audrey, J. Brooks, and Gary, E. Schwartz. "Multiweek Resting EEG Cordance Change Patterns from Repeated Olfactory Activation with Two Constitutionally Salient Homeopathic Remedies in Healthy Young Adults." Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine 18.5 (2012): 445-53. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bell, Iris, R., Amy Howerter, Nicholas Jackson, Mikel Aickin, Richard, R. Bootzin, and Audrey, J. Brooks. "Nonlinear Dynamical Systems Effects of Homeopathic Remedies on Multiscale Entropy and Correlation Dimension of Slow Wave Sleep EEG in Young Adults with Histories of Coffee-induced Insomnia." Homeopathy 101.3 (2012): 182-92. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bell, Iris R., and Gary E. Schwartz. "Adaptive Network Nanomedicine: An Integrated Model for Homeopathic Medicine." Frontiers In Bioscience (Scholar Edition) 5 (2013): 685-708. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bell, Iris, R. "Homeopathy as Systemic Adaptational Nanomedicine: The Nanoparticle-Cross-Adaptation-Sensitization Model." American Journal of Homeopathic Medicine 105.3 (2012): 116-30. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bellavite, Paolo, Marta Marzotto, Debora Olioso, Elisabetta Moratti, and Anita Conforti. "High-dilution Effects Revisited. 2. Pharmacodynamic Mechanisms." Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy 103.1 (2014): 22-43. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Bellavite, Paolo, Paolo Magnani, Marta Marzotto, and Anita Conforti. "Assays of Homeopathic Remedies in Rodent Behavioural and Psychopathological Models." Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy 98.4 (2009): 208-27. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Carter, Jenny, and Gillian Aston. "Use of Homeopathic Arnica among Childbearing Women: A Survey." British Journal of Midwifery 20.4 (2012): 254-61. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Clayton, L. "Top Ten: Homeopathic Remedies for Pregnancy and Birth." Essentially MIDIRS 3.5 (2012): 27-31. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Copeland, Annette. "A STUDY TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HOMEOPATHIC WEIGHT LOSS REMEDIES: HCG NON-HCG ~vs~ NON-HCG." Original Internist 18.3 (2011): 107-16. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Csupor, Dezső, Klára Boros, and Judit Hohmann. "Low Potency Homeopathic Remedies and Allopathic Herbal Medicines: Is There an Overlap?" PLoS ONE 8.9 (2013): 1-5. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Drozdov, V. V. "Optimization of Coprological Studies in Animals with the Use of Homeopathic Nux Vomica 6CH." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 13.47 (2014): 139. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . F, Treuherz. "School Suffers Salmonella Outbreak - How One Homeopath Helped 100 Students." Homoeopath 32.3 (2013): 8. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Frei, Heiner. "H1N1 Influenza: A Prospective Outcome Study with Homeopathy and Polarity Analysis." American Journal of Homeopathic Medicine 107.3 (2014): 114-22. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Frenkel, M. "Homeopathy in Cancer Care." Alternative Therapies in Health & Medicine 16.3 (2010): 12-16. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . H, Mollinger, Schneider R, and Walach H. "Homeopathic Pathogenetic Trials Produce Specific Symptoms Different from Placebo." Forschende Komplementarmedizin 16.2 (2009): 105. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . H, Stevenson. "Breast Cancer Study: The Cytotoxic Effects of Homeopathic Remedies on Breast Cancer Cells." Homeopath Pract (2010): 46. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Hechavarria Torres, Maricel, Gricel Benítez Rodríguez, and Leidys Pérez Reyes. "Efectividad Del Tratamiento Homeopático En Pacientes Con Síndrome Depresivo. (Spanish)." Medisan 18.2 (2014): 302-08. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Hellhammer, Juliane, and Melanie Schubert. "Effects of a Homeopathic Combination Remedy on the Acute Stress Response, Well-Being, and Sleep: A Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial." Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine 19.2 (2013): 161-69. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Hostanska, Katarina, Matthias Rostock, Stephan Baumgartner, and Reinhard Saller. "Effect of Two Homeopathic Remedies at Different Degrees of Dilutions on the Wound Closure of 3T3 Fibroblasts in in Vitro Scratch Assay." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 11.40 (2012): 164-65. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Hostanska, Katarina, Matthias Rostock, Stephan Baumgartner, and Reinhard Saller. "Effect of Two Homeopathic Remedies at Different Degrees of Dilutions on the Wound Closure of 3T3 Fibroblasts in in Vitro Scratch Assay." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 11.40 (2012): 164-65. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Ir, Bell, Koithan M, and Brooks Aj. "Testing the Nanoparticle-allostatic Cross-adaptation-sensitization Model for Homeopathic Remedy Effects." Homeopathy 102.1 (2013): 66. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . J, Siebenwirth, Ludtke R, Remy W, Rakoski J, Borelli S, and Ring J. "Effectiveness of a Classical Homeopathic Treatment in Atopic Eczema. A Randomised Placebo-controlled Double-blind Clinical Trial." Forschende Komplementarmedizin 16.5 (2009): 315. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Jha, Charndra Kant, and Jeanne Madison. "Strategies for Reinventing and Reinforcing the Disrupted Biography of People with HIV in Nepal." Health Sociology Review 22.2 (2013): 221-32. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . K, Chatfield, Mathie Rt, and Fisher P. "Comment 2 On: Homeopathy Has Clinical Benefits in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients That Are Attributable to the Consultation Process but Not the Homeopathic Remedy: A Randomized Controlled Trial." Rheumatology (oxford) 50.8 (2011): 1529. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Kawakami, Ana Paula, Lika Osugui, Amarylis Toledo César, Silvia Waisse Priven, Vania Maria De Carvalho, and Leoni Villano Bonamin. "In Vitro Growth of Uropathogenic Escherichia Coli Isolated from a Snow Leopard Treated with Homeopathic and Isopathic Remedies: A Pilot Study." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 8.27 (2009): 41-44. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Kay, Peter, H., Saqib Rashid, and Nikunj Panchal. "Advances in Homeopathy: Targeting of Health Promoting Genes Using Sequence Specific Homeopathic DNA Remedies." Homoeopathic Heritage 40.7 (2014): 22-24. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Lenger, Karin, Rajendra P. Bajpai, and Manfred Spielmann. "Identification of Unknown Homeopathic Remedies by Delayed Luminescence." Cell Biochemistry And Biophysics 68.2 (2014): 321-34. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . M, Teut. "Homeopathic Treatment of Patients with Dementia." Am J Homeopath Med 103.3 (2010): 120. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Majewsky, Vera, Claudia Scherr, Sebastian P. Arlt, Peter Klocke, and Stephan Baumgartner. "Reproducibility of Effects of the Homeopathic Dilutions 14x - 30x of Gibberellic Acid on Growth of Lemna Gibba L." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 11.40 (2012): 196-97. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Majewsky, Vera, Claudia Scherr, Sebastian, Patrick Arlt, Jonas Kiener, Kristina Frrokaj, Tobias Schindler, Peter Klocke, and Stephan Baumgartner. "Reproducibility of Effects of Homeopathically Potentised Gibberellic Acid on the Growth of Lemna Gibba L. in a Randomised and Blinded Bioassay." Homeopathy 103.2 (2014): 113-26. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Malhi, Luvdeep, and Ram S. Saini. "Homeopathy as an Adjunct to Allopathic Therapy." UBC Medical Journal 3.2 (2012): 32-34. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Marino, Francesco, V. "Homeopathy and Celiac Disease: A Contribution toward Healing." American Journal of Homeopathic Medicine 105.1 (2012): 4-15. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Medhurst, Robert. "Homoeopathy for Eczema." Journal of the Australian Traditional-Medicine Society 19.2 (2013): 104-06. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Molski, M. "Quasi-quantum Phenomena: The Key to Understanding Homeopathy." Homeopathy 99.2 (2010): 104-12. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Novosadyuk, Tatiana. "Effect of Dinamization as a Characteristic of Potentiation of Homeopathic Remedies." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 12.44 (2013): 86-87. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . P, Beeraka. "The Pharmacological Action of Homeopathic Remedies." Simillimum 22.3 (2009): 66. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Peckham, Emily J., E. Andrea Nelson, Joanne Greenhalgh, Katy Cooper, E. Rachel Roberts, and Anurag Agrawal. "Homeopathy for Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome." The Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews 11 (2013): CD009710. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Posadzki, P., A. Alotaibi, and E. Ernst. "Adverse Effects of Homeopathy: A Systematic Review of Published Case Reports and Case Series." International Journal Of Clinical Practice 66.12 (2012): 1178-188. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Rattan, Suresh I. S., and Taru Deva. "Testing the Hormetic Nature of Homeopathic Interventions through Stress Response Pathways." Human & Experimental Toxicology 29.7 (2010): 551-54. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . S, Piraneo, Maier J, Nervetti G, Duca P, Valli C, Milanesi A, Pagano F, Scaglione D, Osio M, and Nascimbene C. "A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing the Outcomes of Homeopathic-phytotherapeutic and Conventionai Therapy of Whiplash in an Emergency Department." Homoeopathic Links 25.1 (2012): 50. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . S, Zaidan. "Belladonna, Hyoscyamus and Stramonium Pharmaceutical Drugs or Homeopathic Remedies. The Effect of These Plants in Treating Mental Illnesses: A Comparative Study." Homeopath Int 2012.2 (2012): 12. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Saeed-ul-Hassan, Syed, Imran Tariq, Ayesha Khalid, and Sabiha Karim. "Comparative Clinical Study on the Effectiveness of Homeopathic Combination Remedy with Standard Maintenance Therapy for Dengue Fever." Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research 12.5 (2013): 767-70. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Saha, Santu Kumar, Sourav Roy, and Anisur Rahman Khuda-Bukhsh. "Evidence in Support of Gene Regulatory Hypothesis: Gene Expression Profiling Manifests Homeopathy Effect as More than Placebo." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 12.45 (2013): 162-67. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Sampath, Sathish, Akilavalli Narasimhan, Raveendar Chinta, K. R Janardanan Nair, Anil Khurana, Debadatta Nayak, Alok Kumar, and Balasubramanian Karundevi. "Effect of Homeopathic Preparations of Syzygium Jambolanum and Cephalandra Indica on Gastrocnemius Muscle of High Fat and High Fructose-induced Type-2 Diabetic Rats." Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy 102.3 (2013): 160-71. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . T, Quak, Rudofsky L, and Dugue R. "Asthma Bronchiale - Verschreibung Von Ambra Grisea Aufgrund Eines Auffallenden Lokalsymptoms." Allgem Homoopath Zeit 256.5 (2011): 8. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Teixeira, Marcus Zulian. "'Paradoxical Pharmacology': Therapeutic Strategy Used by the 'homeopathic Pharmacology' for More than Two Centuries." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 13.49 (2014): 207-26. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Teixeira, Marcus Zulian. "Scientific Evidence of the Homeopathic Epistemological Model." International Journal of High Dilution Resarch 10.34 (2011): 46-64. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Thompson, E.A., A. Shaw, J. Nichol, S. Hollinghurst, A.J. Henderson, T. Thompson, and D. Sharp. "The Feasibility of a Pragmatic Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare Usual Care with Usual Care plus Individualised Homeopathy, in Children Requiring Secondary Care for Asthma." Homeopathy 100.3 (2011): 122-30. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Von Hagens, C., P. Schiller, B. Godbillon, J. Osburg, C. Klose, R. Limprecht, and T. Strowitzki. "Treating Menopausal Symptoms with a Complex Remedy or Placebo: A Randomized Controlled Trial." Climacteric 15.4 (2012): 358-67. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Zuzak, Tycho Jan, Christine Rauber-Lüthy, and Ana Paula Simões-Wüst. "Accidental Intakes of Remedies from Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Children—analysis of Data from the Swiss Toxicological Information Centre." European Journal of Pediatrics 169.6 (2010): 681-88. Web. 9 Jan. 2015. . Show me the research 2014

#choosehomeopathy

Congratulations, Homeopathy! Homeopathy is now officially a regulated health profession in Ontario under the Homeopathy Act, April 1, 2015!

http://www.gofundme.com/HomeopathyResearch

http://www.gofundme.com/HomeopathyResearch

http://www.gofundme.com/HomeopathyResearch

Journal of Medicine and the Person April 2015, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 18-22 Date: 22 Oct 2014 Biology and sign theory: homeopathy emerging as a biosemiotic system Leoni V. Bonamin, Silvia Waisse Journal of Medicine and the Person

Abstract Diluted above Avogadro’s number, homeopathic medicines allegedly do not contain any molecule of their starting-materials. As Western science is historically based on the notion of matter, alternative epistemological models are needed to account for the biological actions of homeopathic high dilutions. One such model is provided by biosemiotics, an interdisciplinary field devoted to the integration of biology and semiotics based on the fundamental belief that sign production and interpretation is one of the immanent and intrinsic features of life. Several experimental studies show that the information carried by high dilutions might be evidenced by means of measurable biological effects ranging from intranuclear epigenetic phenomena to inheritable adaptive processes, and regulatory physiological and behavioral phenomena. Therefore, when the action of homeopathic medicines is considered from the semiotic point of view, they become an endless source for studies aiming not only at therapeutic applications, but also to achieve a more refined understanding of living beings and their relationships with the environment.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12682-014-0191-4

According to the philosopher Agne

`

s Lagache

(1940–2009), ‘‘Living beings are informed-informing

structures, a network of relationships between their content

and their surroundings. As a consequence, some biological

elements should not be considered as material things, but

as semantic objects. A sematic object is one that performs

the functions associated to mediation’’ [

17

]. Together,

Lagache and the immunologist Madeleine Bastide

(1935–2007) formulated, along the 1980s and 1990s, the

theoretical model known as ‘‘paradigm of corporeal sig-

nifiers’’, which among other features, is seemingly able to

account for the action of the homeopathic medicines based

on the principle of meaningfulness that rules over infor-

mation systems [

17

].

Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes—A review Helen V. Ratajczak

Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes—A reviewHelen V. Ratajczak Abstract Autism, a member of the pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs), has been increasing dramatically since its description by Leo Kanner in 1943. First estimated to occur in 4 to 5 per 10,000 children, the incidence of autism is now 1 per 110 in the United States, and 1 per 64 in the United Kingdom, with similar incidences throughout the world. Searching information from 1943 to the present in PubMed and Ovid Medline databases, this review summarizes results that correlate the timing of changes in incidence with environmental changes. Autism could result from more than one cause, with different manifestations in different individuals that share common symptoms. Documented causes of autism include genetic mutations and/or deletions, viral infections, and encephalitis following vaccination. Therefore, autism is the result of genetic defects and/or inflammation of the brain. The inflammation could be caused by a defective placenta, immature blood-brain barrier, the immune response of the mother to infection while pregnant, a premature birth, encephalitis in the child after birth, or a toxic environment.

Keywords: Autism; autism spectrum disorder; pervasive developmental disorder

http://www.rescuepost.com/files/theoretical-aspects-of-autism-causes-a-review1.pdf