Literature review of the in vitro and in vivo evidence for homeopathic medicines in the treatment or prevention of malaria

https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1016/j.homp.2015.12.047.pdf

https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1016/j.homp.2015.12.047

Literature review of the in vitro and in vivo evidence for homeopathic medicines in the treatment or prevention of malaria

Elena Cecchetto* Access Natural Healing Centre, Canada *

Correspondence: Elena Cecchetto, Access Natural Healing Centre, Canada. E-mail: el@accessnaturalhealing.com (E. Cecchetto)

Background: Malaria is a vector borne infectious disease that affects over 200 million people worldwide every year. Access to treatments on a large-scale is challenging due to the vast geographical and rural spread. Homeopaths have treated infectious disease throughout its 200+ year history however robust data on the efficacy and effectiveness of homeopathic treatments for malaria are lacking. Objectives: To explore the research that has been conducted regarding the use of homeopathy for malaria. Methods: A literature search was performed on the following databases: EBSCO,CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Humanities International Complete Medline with Full Text, Social Sciences Abstracts (H.W. Wilson) and Google Scholar. The search terms used were: “malaria and homeopathy” and “plasmodium and homeopathy”. Articles were deemed ‘relevant’ if the article discussed homeopathy in relation to malaria or anti-malarial properties, and/or if they indicated treatment decisions. Results: Three studies were deemed relevant in this search. Rajan and Bagai studied an in vitro culture, Bagai, Rajan, and Kaur explored an in vivo test and the State Health Resource Centre in Chhattisgarh explored the distribution of a homeopathic intervention to almost 100,000 people. Conclusions: There is minimal data examining homeopathic treatments in the treatment and prevention of malaria. The few studies have shown some interesting findings and further research is needed to discern details such as an ideal choice of potency and ideal amount of remedy repetition for optimal results in this population. Keywords: Homeopathy, Homeoprophylaxis, Malaria, Plasmodium, anti-malarial, China, China sulph Ratio

Homeopathy Safe Medicine

https://safe-medicine.blogspot.com/2021/01/nhs-boss-attacks-homeopathy-it-is.html

Homeopathy Safe Medicine

Searching for safe medicine: wellness without harm. Exposing harm caused by pharmaceutical drugs, vaccines and other conventional medical treatment. Commenting on current medical issues from a 'natural health' perspective.

Tuesday, 26 January 2021

NHS Boss Attacks Homeopathy: it is putting people at risk: meanwhile he watches on, helpless, as 104,000 people die with Covid-19

Sir Simon Stevens is the National Health Service (NHS) Chief Executive in England, an organisation that is now close to collapse. Indeed, for the last year we have all been asked to 'Save the NHS' because it cannot save itself, allegedly as a result of the Covid pandemic. Yet, in fact, the NHS crisis this winter is not significantly worse than the crises that we have been witnessing now every winter for decades (go to 'search' at the top of this page; type in 'NHS Crisis' to find all my previous blogs on this subject, dating back to 2012).

So Sir Simon Stevens has the responsibility for saving the NHS, and one strategy he has adopted for doing so is to embark upon a gratuitous attack on homeopathy through the pages of the Sunday Telegraph (25th January 2021).

            "The head of NHS England last night warned that homeopaths had 'crossed the line' after a Sunday Telegraph investigation disclosed some were peddling myths that taking duck extract was as effective as the coronavirus vaccines. (He) said that people taking their advice from homeopathy were putting themselves at risk, and warned they would slow down the nation's vaccine efforts".

Before responding to this let's be absolutely clear. The NHS has had little or nothing to offer patients who have contracted the Covid virus throughout 2021. NHS nursing and care staff have done sterling work for patients, and this needs to be applauded. Yet there has been no medical treatment. At the time of writing the NHS claims the Covid-19 pandemic has killed over 104,000 people (and rising) in Britain, and during all this time the NHS has been able only to watch over them as they died.

The reason is that the NHS has become totally dependent on a single form of medicine, conventional medicine, dominated as it is by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. Other medical therapies, including natural therapies like homeopathy, have been deliberately excluded from the NHS. Stephens has been at the helm whilst the pharmaceutical monopoly has been established. At the beginning of the Covid crisis the conventional medical establishment had to admit that it had no treatment, and it has subsequently been in a state of panic ever since, as more and more people have died with the virus.

So what does Stevens do? He continues to place his reliance, totally, on conventional medicine, and he continues to exclude and gratuitously attack any medical therapy that is not beholden to pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.

So what has pharmaceutical medicine achieved since the inauguration of the NHS in 1948? There have been promises that it is "winning the war" against illness and disease. New drugs and vaccines have regularly been presented to us as 'miracle cures', 'wonder drugs' that will "transform medical treatment". Illness and disease would be eradicated because of the wisdom of conventional medical science. There has been no transformation, no eradication. The outcome of all these many NHS promises has been quite different:

• Infectious Disease. The Covid-19 outcome has not only been a medical disaster; it has been a social, emotional, and economic disaster too. It's ability to deal with viral epidemics is no better now than it was in 1918 when conventional medicine was faced with the so-called Spanish Flu.

• Chronic Diseases. Almost any form of chronic disease anyone could possibly mention (arthritis, asthma, autism, cancer, dementia, diabetes, eczema, mental health, et al) have increased from 1948 levels and risen to new epidemic proportions; and they continue to increase.

• Pharmaceutical Drugs and Vaccines. Thousands of new drugs have been brought to the market, many as wonder drugs, prescribed to patients, only to be found to be ineffective, harmful, or both, with most of them eventually either abandoned or banned.

• Covid-19 Vaccines. This is an outcome that will become more apparent in future months. These vaccines, that Stevens believes to be so important to bring us out of the pandemic, are already known to be causing serious patient harm, including death.
  

And yet Sir Simon Stevens refuses to look inwardly at the possible reasons for conventional medical failure. He steadfastly refuses to look outside the box to see if there might be alternative treatments that might help the patients who are dying under his care, and make life easier for his exhausted nursing and care staff - even when he has had to continue admitting that his NHS has no effective treatment available!

And then he has the audacity to attack homeopathy!

It is fortunate for Stevens that he faces only an obedient and compliant 'free' media, which either cannot, or will not, question him about NHS failure, and why, year in, year out, the organisation that he leads finds itself in an ever-deepening financial crisis. As I have said many times before, on this blog, the crisis is NOT financial, it is MEDICAL. The NHS is investing in a failed medical system. And the more Stevens spends on pharmaceutical medicine the deeper the NHS crisis becomes.

Other national health services, notably in India and Cuba (and more recently, it seems, in Bavaria, Germany) are now investing in homeopathy. In addition, homeopaths around the world, including in Britain, are working with their patients, seeking to protect them from Covid, and to treat them if they contract it.

Does it work? The homeopathic community, patients and practitioners, thinks so. Stevens does not even want to look, preferring to continue on his myopic path, and attacking anything that lay outside his experience.

And Stevens is right about one this. Homeopaths are, indeed, using 'duck extract'! For anyone who is interested in safe and effective protection from this Covid-19 pandemic, and can consider with an open mind, free from bias or vested interests, it is an alternative that NHS patients could very well do with at the moment. It is a remedy called Anas Barbariae, otherwise known at Oscillococcinum, made from the diseased liver of a duck. I have used it as prophylaxis (prevention) of 'flu now for many winters, as have many of my family and former patients. It rarely seems to fail to protect us. It is disappointing that Stevens is unable to consider it, that he does not make it readily available on the NHS. But homeopathy is available to anyone with a more open mind.

Anas Barbariae is available from all homeopathic pharmacies around the world. For instance, a small bottle costs £4.50 from Helios. Every pharmacy will advice you (but be forewarned, they are currently extremely cautious about giving any advice on the telephone, in case the Sunday Telegraph, or similar, are embarking on another scam attack on homeopathy). I usually take one remedy, each month, during the flu season, although during this Covid-19 pandemic I am taking a weekly dose.

Just think how easily Sir Simon Stevens could find out whether this is a useful, inexpensive, safe, effective alternative to vaccination. His NHS could easily undertake a study to compare the outcomes of this, and other natural treatments, with conventional medicine. Instead he clearly prefers to attack any medical therapy other than the one he supports.

Moreover, this is not all that homeopathy does. The main strategy of homeopathy is to support the immune system, to enhance our natural immunity from infectious disease. This is something the Stevens-led NHS has never told us about during the last year - diet, nutrition, exercise, life-style choices. But turning to this strategy is a choice we all have. 

I only wish more people would observe the chaos that controls the NHS, 

and begin to question whether there are not better alternatives.

Posted by Steven Scrutton at Tuesday, January 26, 2021 Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Labels: Anas Barb, Covid-19, homeopathy, Sir Simon Stephens, Telegraph

Historical Journey of Homoeopathy during Epidemic Diseases in the Light of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pandemic by Renu Bala and Amit Srivastava

https://ijshr.com/IJSHR_Vol.5_Issue.2_April2020/IJSHR_Abstract.0029.html

IJSHR

International Journal of Science and Healthcare Research

Review Article

Year: 2020 | Month: April-June | Volume: 5 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 215-233

Historical Journey of Homoeopathy during Epidemic Diseases in the Light of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pandemic

Renu Bala1, Amit Srivastava2

1,2Research Officer (H)/Scientist-1, Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Imphal, Manipur, Under Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, New Delhi.

Corresponding Author: Renu Bala

ABSTRACT

Homoeopathy is a therapeutic system founded by German physician Dr Samuel Hahnemann in the late 1700’s and has been used for 200 years around the world in acute and chronic disease conditions. Homoeopathy has also flourished during the times of epidemic diseases and the use of homoeopathic remedies as genus epidemicus and homoeoprophylaxis began with Hahnemann. Although the effectiveness of the homoeopathic remedies in epidemics has been scarcely proved by controlled studies, yet there is vast historical evidence which proves that homoeopathic remedies have been successfully used to prevent these conditions. The homoeopathic literature was searched to find out the historical evidences of the use of homoeopathic remedies during epidemics and pandemics.

Homoeopathic treatment during epidemics is reviewed in Eight diseases and their results are found for epidemics of Scarlet fever, Typhus, Cholera, Dysentery, Spanish flu, Diphtheria, Measles, Whooping cough. Also the prophylactic effect of homoeopathic medicines is found in Fourteen epidemic diseases namely Scarlet fever, Smallpox, Poliomyelitis, Meningitis, Whooping cough, Dengue, Cholera, Japanese Encephalitis, Leptospirosis, Diphtheria, Influenza, Hepatitis, Malaria, Chikungunya. Many clinical trials have also been conducted during the epidemics of Chikungunya, Influenza like illness, Dengue, Acute Encephalitis Syndrome/Japanese Encephalitis. The current novel Coronavirus disease, COVID-19, has rapidly spread over the globe and has been declared as pandemic by World Health Organization. Till now, no specific treatment or vaccine has emerged to control this pandemic. However, many homoeopaths over different parts of the world have treated a wide range of COVID positive cases with different remedies. This review not only brings forward the success stories of homoeopathy during past epidemics but also presents its utility in the current pandemic.

Keywords: COVID-19, Epidemic diseases, Homoeopathy, Homoeoprophylaxis, Immunity.

Show me the Research https://accessnaturalhealing.squarespace.com/config/pages/562451cde4b0501d406fc04d

Show me the research

By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015

1 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 know about homeopathy as an option if they so choose. 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 publications without having to pay the download fees. You, reading this are lucky too, because I am writing to share this with you. I have been reticent to spend the time to put this type of information out there before now because I realize that there is no way that this article written by a homeopath will ever change the minds of anyone who is bothering to put all their wasted energy in trying to discredit homeopathy. If you are one of those people on a mission to defame individual homeopathic practitioners who are just trying to use their education driven refined skills to help do some good in this world, I have only two requests for you as follows: 1. I would ask only that you just don’t bother choosing homeopathy for yourself. 2. I suggest that you allow those who might have a health concern that they themselves might choose to address with something other than the conventional medical industry, to have the option available to them to do so. SIMPLE right? Right! For any others who are going to read further into this bibliography of research on homeopathy, I suggest that if you are not professionally educated in research, research methods, homeopathy or any other health field that you have someone who is to look through these papers for you. I think my reasons should be obvious to you however I will say it outright – if you are not trained and/or highly experienced in homeopathy – you cannot speak as if you are the expert to those who actually are the experts. In the meanwhile, here are some current research on homeopathic remedies in general. This literature review was conducted using the EBSCO database including the Academic Search Complete thanks to the University of Central Lancashire. The databases Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 2 specifically chosen were Academic Search Complete, Medline, Medline with full text, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medical Database, CINAHL Complete, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Social Sciences ABSTRACTS (H.W. Wilson), and SocINDEX with full text. The search method used was the Advanced Search with subject words Homeopathy and Homeopathic Remedies. Unfortunately this search presented 984 items in the search results so the following edits were made. Any publications older than five years were not included. This resulted in 313 publications. While searching through each and every title of this search, I did not include in this bibliography any of the editorials, opinion pieces or individual case studies that showed up in this search which eliminated 18 of them within the first 100 that I looked through so far. Adler, U. C., Krüger, S., Teut, M., Lüdtke, R., Bartsch, I., Schützler, L., & ... Witt, C. M. (2011). Homeopathy for Depression - DEP-HOM: study protocol for a randomized, partially double-blind, placebo controlled, four armed study. Trials, 12(1), 43-49. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-43 Adler, U. C., Krüger, S., Teut, M., Lüdtke, R., Schützler, L., Martins, F., & ... Witt, C. M. (2013). Homeopathy for Depression: A Randomized, Partially Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Four-Armed Study (DEP-HOM). Plos ONE, 8(9), 1-9. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074537 Ainsworth, S. (2012). Time to consign homeopathy to the history books?. Practice Nurse, 42(10), 34-35. Akaeva, T. V., & Mkhitaryan, K. N. (2014). Foundation of concept of constitutional homeopathic remedy by using electropuncture methods. International Journal Of High Dilution Resarch, 13(47), 132-133. Almirantis, Y. (2013). Homeopathy – between tradition and modern science: remedies as carriers of significance. Homeopathy, 102(2), 114-122. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2013.01.003 Amalcaburio, R., Filho, L. M., Honorato, L. A., & Menezes, N. A. (2009). Homeopathic remedies in a semi-intensive alternative system of broiler production. International Journal Of High Dilution Resarch, 8(26), 33-39. Arlt, S., Padberg, W., Drillich, M., & Heuwieser, W. (2009). Efficacy of homeopathic remedies as prophylaxis of bovine endometritis. Journal Of Dairy Science, 92(10), 4945-4953. doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2142 Arora, S., Aggarwal, A., Singla, P., Jyoti, S., & Tandon, S. (2013). Anti-proliferative effects of homeopathic medicines on human kidney, colon and breast cancer cells. Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy, 102(4), 274-282. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2013.06.001 Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 3 Banerjee, A., Chakrabarty, S. B., Karmakar, S. R., Chakrabarty, A., Biswas, S. J., Haque, S., & ... Khuda-Bukhsh, A. R. (2010). 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), 129-136. doi:10.1093/ecam/nem161 Banerjee, A., Chakrabarty, S., Karmakar, S., Chakrabarty, A., Biswas, S., Haque, S., & ... Khuda-Bukhsh, A. (2009). Can homeopathy bring additional benefits to thalassemic patients on hydroxyurea therapy? Encouraging results of a preliminary study. Homoeopathic Heritage, 34(4), 33-40. Beeraka, P. (2009). The pharmacological action of homeopathic remedies. Simillimum, 22(3), 66. Bell, I. R. (2012). Homeopathy as Systemic Adaptational Nanomedicine: The Nanoparticle-Cross-Adaptation-Sensitization Model. American Journal Of Homeopathic Medicine, 105(3), 116-130. Bell, I., Brooks, A., Howerter, A., Jackson, N., & Schwartz, G. (2013). Acute Electroencephalographic Effects From Repeated Olfactory Administration of Homeopathic Remedies in Individuals With Self-reported Chemical Sensitivity. Alternative Therapies In Health & Medicine, 19(1), 46-57. Bell, I. R., Howerter, A., Jackson, N., Aickin, M., Bootzin, R. R., & Brooks, A. J. (2012). 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), 182-192. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2012.05.007 Bell, I. R., Howerter, A., Jackson, N., Brooks, A. J., & Schwartz, G. E. (2012). 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), 445-453. doi:10.1089/acm.2011.0931 Bell, I., Koithan, M., & Brooks, A. (2013). Testing the nanoparticle-allostatic crossadaptation-sensitization model for homeopathic remedy effects. Homeopathy, 102(1), 66. Bell, I. R., & Schwartz, G. E. (2013). Adaptive network nanomedicine: an integrated model for homeopathic medicine. Frontiers In Bioscience (Scholar Edition), 5685- 708. Bellavite, P., Magnani, P., Marzotto, M., & Conforti, A. (2009). Assays of homeopathic remedies in rodent behavioural and psychopathological models. Homeopathy: The Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 4 Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy, 98(4), 208-227. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2009.09.005 Bellavite, P., Marzotto, M., Olioso, D., Moratti, E., & Conforti, A. (2014). High-dilution effects revisited. 2. Pharmacodynamic mechanisms. Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy, 103(1), 22-43. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2013.08.002 Carter, J., & Aston, G. (2012). Use of homeopathic Arnica among childbearing women: A survey. British Journal Of Midwifery, 20(4), 254-261. Chatfield, K., Mathie, R., & Fisher, P. (2011). 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), 1529. Clayton, L. (2012). Top ten: homeopathic remedies for pregnancy and birth. Essentially MIDIRS, 3(5), 27-31. Copeland, A. (2011). A STUDY TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HOMEOPATHIC WEIGHT LOSS REMEDIES: HCG NON-HCG ~vs~ NON-HCG. Original Internist, 18(3), 107-116. Csupor, D., Boros, K., & Hohmann, J. (2013). Low Potency Homeopathic Remedies and Allopathic Herbal Medicines: Is There an Overlap?. Plos ONE, 8(9), 1-5. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074181 Drozdov, V. V. (2014). Optimization of coprological studies in animals with the use of homeopathic Nux vomica 6CH. International Journal Of High Dilution Resarch, 13(47), 139. Frei, H. (2014). H1N1 Influenza: A Prospective Outcome Study with Homeopathy and Polarity Analysis. American Journal Of Homeopathic Medicine, 107(3), 114-122. Frenkel, M. (2010). Homeopathy in cancer care. Alternative Therapies In Health & Medicine, 16(3), 12-16. Hechavarria Torres, M., Benítez Rodríguez, G., & Pérez Reyes, L. (2014). Efectividad del tratamiento homeopático en pacientes con síndrome depresivo. (Spanish). Medisan, 18(2), 302-308. Hellhammer, J., & Schubert, M. (2013). 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), 161-169. doi:10.1089/acm.2010.0636 Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 5 Hostanska K, Rostock M, Baumgartner S, Saller R. 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 [serial online]. July 2012;11(40):164-165. Available from: Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed January 9, 2015. Jha, C. K., & Madison, J. (2013). Strategies for reinventing and reinforcing the disrupted biography of people with HIV in Nepal. Health Sociology Review, 22(2), 221-232. doi:10.5172/hesr.2013.22.2.221 Kawakami, A. P., Osugui, L., César, A. T., Priven, S. W., de Carvalho, V. M., & Bonamin, L. V. (2009). 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), 41-44. Kay, P. H., Rashid, S., & Panchal, N. (2014). Advances in Homeopathy: Targeting of Health Promoting Genes Using Sequence Specific Homeopathic DNA Remedies. Homoeopathic Heritage, 40(7), 22-24. Lenger, K., Bajpai, R. P., & Spielmann, M. (2014). Identification of unknown homeopathic remedies by delayed luminescence. Cell Biochemistry And Biophysics, 68(2), 321-334. doi:10.1007/s12013-013-9712-7 Majewsky, V., Scherr, C., Arlt, S. P., Klocke, P., & Baumgartner, S. (2012). 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), 196-197. Majewsky, V., Scherr, C., Arlt, S. P., Kiener, J., Frrokaj, K., Schindler, T., & ... Baumgartner, S. (2014). Reproducibility of effects of homeopathically potentised gibberellic acid on the growth of Lemna gibba L. in a randomised and blinded bioassay. Homeopathy, 103(2), 113-126. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2013.12.004 Malhi, L., & Saini, R. S. (2012). Homeopathy as an Adjunct to Allopathic Therapy. UBC Medical Journal, 3(2), 32-34. Marino, F. V. (2012). Homeopathy and Celiac Disease: A Contribution toward Healing. American Journal Of Homeopathic Medicine, 105(1), 4-15. Medhurst, R. (2013). Homoeopathy for Eczema. Journal Of The Australian Traditional-Medicine Society, 19(2), 104-106. Mollinger, H., Schneider, R., & Walach, H. (2009). Homeopathic pathogenetic trials produce specific symptoms different from placebo. Forschende Komplementarmedizin, 16(2), 105. Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 6 Molski, M. (2010). Quasi-quantum phenomena: the key to understanding homeopathy. Homeopathy, 99(2), 104-112. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2009.11.009 Novosadyuk, T. (2013). Effect of dinamization as a characteristic of potentiation of homeopathic remedies. International Journal Of High Dilution Resarch, 12(44), 86- 87. Peckham, E. J., Nelson, E. A., Greenhalgh, J., Cooper, K., Roberts, E. R., & Agrawal, A. (2013). Homeopathy for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. The Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews, 11CD009710. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009710.pub2 Piraneo, S., Maier, J., Nervetti, G., Duca, P., Valli, C., Milanesi, A., & ... Nascimbene, C. (2012). A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the outcomes of homeopathic-phytotherapeutic and conventionai therapy of whiplash in an emergency department. Homoeopathic Links, 25(1), 50. Posadzki, P., Alotaibi, A., & Ernst, E. (2012). Adverse effects of homeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series. International Journal Of Clinical Practice, 66(12), 1178-1188. doi:10.1111/ijcp.12026 Quak, T., Rudofsky, L., & Dugue, R. (2011). Asthma bronchiale - Verschreibung von Ambra grisea aufgrund eines auffallenden Lokalsymptoms. Allgem Homoopath Zeit, 256(5), 8 Rattan, S. S., & Deva, T. (2010). Testing the hormetic nature of homeopathic interventions through stress response pathways. Human & Experimental Toxicology, 29(7), 551-554. doi:10.1177/0960327110369858 Saeed-ul-Hassan, S., Tariq, I., Khalid, A., & Karim, S. (2013). Comparative Clinical Study on the Effectiveness of Homeopathic Combination Remedy with Standard Maintenance Therapy for Dengue Fever. Tropical Journal Of Pharmaceutical Research, 12(5), 767-770. doi:10.4314/tjpr.v12i5.16 Saha, S. K., Roy, S., & Khuda-Bukhsh, A. R. (2013). 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), 162-167. Sampath, S., Narasimhan, A., Chinta, R., Nair, K. J., Khurana, A., Nayak, D., & ... Karundevi, B. (2013). Effect of homeopathic preparations of Syzygium jambolanum and Cephalandra indica on gastrocnemius muscle of high fat and high fructoseinduced type-2 diabetic rats. Homeopathy: The Journal Of The Faculty Of Homeopathy, 102(3), 160-171. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2013.05.002 Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 7 Siebenwirth, J., Ludtke, R., Remy, W., Rakoski, J., Borelli, S., & Ring, J. (2009). Effectiveness of a classical homeopathic treatment in atopic eczema. A randomised placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial. Forschende Komplementarmedizin, 16(5), 315. Stevenson, H. (2010). Breast cancer study: The cytotoxic effects of homeopathic remedies on breast cancer cells. Homeopath Pract, 46. Teixeira, M. Z. (2011). Scientific evidence of the homeopathic epistemological model. International Journal Of High Dilution Resarch, 10(34), 46-64. Teixeira, M. Z. (2014). 'Paradoxical pharmacology': therapeutic strategy used by the 'homeopathic pharmacology' for more than two centuries. International Journal Of High Dilution Research, 13(49), 207-226. Teut, M. (2010). Homeopathic treatment of patients with dementia. Am J Homeopath Med, 103(3), 120. Thompson, E., Shaw, A., Nichol, J., Hollinghurst, S., Henderson, A., Thompson, T., & Sharp, D. (2011). 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), 122-130. doi:10.1016/j.homp.2011.05.001 Treuherz, F. (2013). School suffers salmonella outbreak - how one homeopath helped 100 students. Homoeopath, 32(3), 8. von Hagens, C., Schiller, P., Godbillon, B., Osburg, J., Klose, C., Limprecht, R., & Strowitzki, T. (2012). Treating menopausal symptoms with a complex remedy or placebo: a randomized controlled trial. Climacteric, 15(4), 358-367. doi:10.3109/13697137.2011.597895 Zaidan, S. (2012). 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), 12. Zuzak, T. J., Rauber-Lüthy, C., & Simões-Wüst, A. P. (2010). 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), 681-688. doi:10.1007/s00431-009-1087-9 While reading these research publications, you might remind yourself of the reason 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 Show me the research By ©Elena Cecchetto 2015 8 non-maleolence.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 will be happy to conduct further inquiries. My fees are generally at $150.00 per hour for these services but are also listed on my website at www.accessnaturalhealing.com. 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.

Conventional Cancer Journal Published MAJOR Study Showing Significant Efficacy of Homeopathic Medicine in a Type of Lung Cancer

https://homeopathic.com/conventional-cancer-journal-published-major-study-showing-significant-efficacy-of-homeopathic-medicine-in-a-type-of-lung-cancer/

Conventional Cancer Journal Published MAJOR Study Showing Significant Efficacy of Homeopathic Medicine in a Type of Lung Cancer

This study was conducted in four outpatients` centers: the Medical University of Vienna (General Hospital of Vienna), Department of Medicine I, Division of Oncology; the Otto Wagner Hospital, Department of Pulmonology I, Vienna; the Hospital of Lienz, Department of Medicine, Tyrol; and the Elisabethinenspital, Department of Medicine, Linz, Austria.  This study was published in a respected conventional cancer journal, called “The Oncologist,” which is the official journal of the Society for Translational Oncology.

In 2020, a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-arm, multicenter, phase III study evaluated the possible effects of additive homeopathic treatment compared to placebo in patients with stage IV advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with respect to Quality of Life (QoL) in the two randomized groups and survival time in all three groups (Frass, Lechleitner, Gründling, et al, 2020). Treated patients visited the university teaching hospital every 9 weeks: 150 patients with stage IV NSCLC were included in the study; 98 received either individualized homeopathic remedies (n = 51) or placebo (n = 47) in a double-blinded fashion; and 52 control patients without any homeopathic treatment were observed for survival only.  The control group (the third group) were patients who refused participation in the randomized trial, but agreed to observation of their course of disease without any homeopathic intervention.

The study found that QoL as well as functional and symptom scales showed significant improvement in the homeopathy group when compared with placebo after 9 and 18 weeks of homeopathic treatment (p < .001). The median survival time was significantly longer in the homeopathy group (435 days) versus placebo (257 days; p = .010) as well as versus control (228 days; p < .001). Survival rate in the homeopathy group differed significantly from placebo (p = .020) and from control (p < .001). The symptoms (nausea, shortness of breath, loss of appetite, etc.) were also rated significantly better in the homeopathy group.

The researchers concluded that homeopathy positively influences not only QoL but also survival and that further studies including other tumor entities are warranted.

According to the best standards of clinical research, this study level is deemed to be at highest level (RCT, multicenter, three-arm design, 150 patients).

All homeopathic prescriptions started with Q1 potencies (also called LM potencies) of the selected remedies for 3 weeks, and continued in ascending order with Q2, Q3, of either the same remedy or a selected alternative (3 weeks each) toward Q30. Where the study substance was changed, whatever the reason, the new cycle started from the beginning with Q1. A primary reason for changing the study substance was disease deterioration.

NOTE: Lung cancer is the second most common cancer in men and women, as well as the leading cause of cancer‐related mortality in the U.S. [1], accounting for 29% of all cancer‐related mortalities in men and 26% of those in women [2]. More than 85% of lung cancers are non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [3], for which surgery is the preferred therapy in the early stages. Unfortunately, most patients are diagnosed at stages III or IV, by which time NSCLC is inoperable [4]. Chemotherapy is the standard treatment for unresectable NSCLC [5], but its adverse reactions frequently prevent completion of the recommended number of cycles [6]. Additional approaches to reduce chemotherapy’s toxicity and enhance its clinical efficacy are, therefore, warranted.

“Non-small cell lung cancer” is a group of lung cancers that behave similarly, such as squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Symptoms are a cough that won’t go away, shortness of breath, weight loss, or coughing up blood.  Treatments typically include surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. The 5-year survival rate for non-small cell lung cancer is 24%, compared to 6% for small cell lung cancer.

REFERENCE:

Frass M, Lechleitner P, Gründling C, Pirker C, Grasmuk-Siegl E, Domayer J, Hochmayr M, Gaertner K, Duscheck C, Muchitsch I, Marosi C, Schumacher M, Zöchbauer-Müller S, Manchanda RK, Schrott A, Burghuber O. Homeopathic Treatment as an ‘Add on’ Therapy May Improve Quality of Life and Prolong Survival in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Three-Arm, Multicenter Study. Oncologist. 2020 Oct 3. doi: 10.1002/onco.13548. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 33010094.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33010094/

By danastore|

December 3rd, 2020|

Inflammatory responses to trivalent influenza virus vaccine among pregnant women

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X11014459?via%3Dihub

Inflammatory responses to trivalent influenza virus vaccine among pregnant women

Author links open overlay panelLisa M.ChristianabcdJay D.IamsdKylePortereRonaldGlaserbf

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.09.039Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

In the U.S., seasonal trivalent influenza virus vaccine (TIV) is currently universally recommended for all pregnant women. However, data on the maternal inflammatory response to vaccination is lacking and would better delineate the safety and clinical utility of immunization. In addition, for research purposes, vaccination has been used as a mild immune trigger to examine in vivo inflammatory responses in nonpregnant adults. The utility of such a model in pregnancy is unknown. Given the clinical and empirical justifications, the current study examined the magnitude, time course, and variance in inflammatory responses following seasonal influenza virus vaccination among pregnant women.

Methods

Women were assessed prior to and at one day (n = 15), two days (n = 10), or approximately one week (n = 21) following TIV. Serum interleukin (IL)-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, C-reactive protein (CRP), and macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) were determined by high sensitivity immunoassay.

Results

Significant increases in CRP were seen at one and two days post-vaccination (ps < 05). A similar effect was seen for TNF-α, for which an increase at two days post-vaccination approached statistical significance (p = .06). There was considerable variability in magnitude of response; coefficients of variation for change at two days post-vaccination ranged from 122% to 728%, with the greatest variability in IL-6 responses at this timepoint.

Conclusions

Trivalent influenza virus vaccination elicits a measurable inflammatory response among pregnant women. There is sufficient variability in response for testing associations with clinical outcomes. As adverse perinatal health outcomes including preeclampsia and preterm birth have an inflammatory component, a tendency toward greater inflammatory responding to immune triggers may predict risk of adverse outcomes, providing insight into biological mechanisms underlying risk. The inflammatory response elicited by vaccination is substantially milder and more transient than seen in infectious illness, arguing for the clinical value of vaccination. However, further research is needed to confirm that the mild inflammatory response elicited by vaccination is benign in pregnancy.

Highlights

► Examined inflammatory responses to trivalent influenza virus vaccine (TIV) in pregnant women. ► Significant increases in serum CRP were seen at one and two days after vaccination. ► TIV elicits measurable and highly variable inflammatory responses. ► TIV may be useful as an in vivo model to examine inflammatory processes in pregnancy. ► Research is needed to confirm that the mild inflammatory response to TIV is benign in pregnancy.

Increased Risk of NonInfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3404712/

COVID-19 is an emerging, rapidly evolving situation.

Get the latest public health information from CDC: https://www.coronavirus.gov

Get the latest research information from NIH: https://www.nih.gov/coronavirus

Find NCBI SARS-CoV-2 literature, sequence, and clinical content: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sars-cov-2/

• Journal List

• OUP Public Health Emergency Collection

• PMC3404712

Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jun 15; 54(12): 1778–1783.

Published online 2012 Mar 15. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis307

PMCID: PMC3404712

PMID: 22423139

Increased Risk of Noninfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections Associated With Receipt of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine

Benjamin J. Cowling,1 Vicky J. Fang,1 Hiroshi Nishiura,1,2 Kwok-Hung Chan,3 Sophia Ng,1 Dennis K. M. Ip,1 Susan S. Chiu,4 Gabriel M. Leung,1 and J. S. Malik Peiris1,5

Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

Go to:

Abstract

We randomized 115 children to trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) or placebo. Over the following 9 months, TIV recipients had an increased risk of virologically-confirmed non-influenza infections (relative risk: 4.40; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-14.8). Being protected against influenza, TIV recipients may lack temporary non-specific immunity that protected against other respiratory viruses.

Influenza vaccination is effective in preventing influenza virus infection and associated morbidity among school-aged children [1, 2]. The potential for temporary nonspecific immunity between respiratory viruses after an infection and consequent interference at the population level between epidemics of these viruses has been hypothesized, with limited empirical evidence to date, mainly from ecological studies [3–15]. We investigated the incidence of acute upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) associated with virologically confirmed respiratory virus infections in a randomized controlled trial of influenza vaccination.

Go to:

METHODS

Recruitment and Follow-up of Participants

In a double-blind randomized controlled trial, we randomly allocated children aged 6–15 years to receive 2008–2009 seasonal trivalent influenza inactivated vaccine (TIV; 0.5 mL Vaxigrip; Sanofi Pasteur) or placebo [16]. Serum specimens were obtained from participants before vaccination from November through December 2008, a month after vaccination, in midstudy around April 2009, and at the end of the study from August through October 2009. Participants were followed up for illnesses through symptom diaries and telephone calls, and illness reports in any household member triggered home visits during which nasal and throat swab specimens (NTSs) were collected from all household members. We defined the follow-up period for each participant from 14 days after receipt of TIV or placebo to collection of midstudy serum samples as the winter season and from collection of midstudy samples through final serum sample obtainment as the summer season.

Proxy written informed consent was obtained for all participants from their parents or legal guardians, with additional written assent from those ≥8 years of age. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Hong Kong University.

Laboratory Methods

NTSs were tested for 19 respiratory viruses by the ResPlex II Plus multiplex array [17–19] and for influenza A and B by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) [16, 20] (Supplementary Appendix). We refer to infections determined by these assays as “confirmed” infections. Information on influenza serology is provided in the Supplementary Appendix .

Statistical Analysis

We defined an acute respiratory illness (ARI) determined by self-reported signs and symptoms as ≥2 of the following signs or symptoms: body temperature ≥37.8°C, headache, sore throat, cough, presence of phlegm, coryza, and myalgia [16]. We defined febrile acute respiratory illness (FARI) as body temperature ≥37.8°C plus cough or sore throat. Because duration of follow-up varied by participant, we estimated the incidence rates of ARI and FARI episodes and confirmed viral infections overall and during the winter and summer seasons and estimated the relative risk of these episodes for participants who received TIV versus placebo with use of the incidence rate ratio using Poisson regression (Supplementary Appendix). All statistical analyses were conducted using R, version 2.11.0 (R Development Core Team, Vienna, Austria). Data and syntax to reproduce these statistical analyses are available on the corresponding author's Web site.

Go to:

RESULTS

Among the 115 participants who were followed up, the median duration of follow-up was 272 days (interquartile range, 264–285 days), with no statistically significant differences in age, sex, household size, or duration of follow-up between TIV and placebo recipients (Table 1). We identified 134 ARI episodes, of which 49 met the more stringent FARI case definition. Illnesses occurred throughout the study period (Supplementary Appendix Figure 1). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of ARI or FARI between participants who received TIV and those who received placebo, either during winter or summer 2009 (Table 2).

Table 1.

Characteristics of Participants and Duration of Follow-up

CharacteristicTIV (n = 69)Placebo (n = 46)Age group, No. (%) 6–8 years19 (28)16 (35) 9–11 years41 (59)27 (59) 12–15 years9 (13)3 (7)Female sex, No. (%)30 (43)23 (50)Median duration of follow-up, days272272Mean no. of individuals per household3.73.6

Abbreviation: TIV, trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine.

Table 2.

Incidence Rates of Acute Upper Respiratory Tract Infection Among 115 Participants Aged 6–15 Years Who Received Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine or Placebo

TIV (n = 69)Placebo (n = 46)VariableRatea(95% CI)Ratea(95% CI)Relative Risk (95% CI)P ValueWinter 2009 ARIb episodes2080(1530–2830)2260(1550–3300)0.92(.57–1.50).74 FARIb episodes609(346–1070)753(392–1450)0.81(.34–1.92).63Summer 2009 ARIb episodes1510(1130–2020)1160(757–1780)1.30(.78–2.18).31 FARIb episodes658(424–1020)442(221–884)1.49(.65–3.38).33

Abbreviations: ARI, acute respiratory illness; CI, confidence interval; FARI , febrile acute respiratory illness; TIV, trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine.

a Incidence rates were estimated as the number of ARI or FARI episodes per 1000 person-years of follow-up.

b ARI was defined as at least 2 of the following symptoms: body temperature ≥37.8°C, cough, sore throat, headache, runny nose, phlegm, and myalgia; FARI was defined as body temperature ≥37.8°C plus cough or sore throat.

We were able to collect 73 NTSs for testing from participants for 65 of 134 (49%) ARI episodes, which included 22 of 49 (45%) FARI episodes. The mean delay between ARI onset and collection of first NTS was 1.22 days, and 5% of NTSs were collected >3 days after illness onset, with no statistically significant differences between TIV and placebo recipients. We detected respiratory viruses in 32 of 65 NTSs (49%) collected during ARI episodes, which included 12 of 22 (55%) FARI episodes. We collected 85 NTSs from participants at times when one of their household contacts reported an acute URTI but the participants were not ill, and identified viruses in 3 of the specimens (4%), including influenza A (H3N2), coxsackie/echovirus, and coronavirus 229E.

There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of confirmed seasonal influenza infection between recipients of TIV or placebo, although the point estimate was consistent with protection in TIV recipients (relative risk [RR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], .13–3.27). TIV recipients had significantly lower risk of seasonal influenza infection based on serologic evidence (Supplementary Appendix). However, participants who received TIV had higher risk of ARI associated with confirmed noninfluenza respiratory virus infection (RR, 4.40; 95% CI, 1.31–14.8). Including 2 additional confirmed infections when participants did not report ARI, TIV recipients had higher risk of confirmed noninfluenza respiratory virus infection (RR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.19–10.1). The majority of the noninfluenza respiratory virus detections were rhinoviruses and coxsackie/echoviruses, and the increased risk among TIV recipients was also statistically significant for these viruses (Table 3). Most respiratory virus detections occurred in March 2009, shortly after a period of peak seasonal influenza activity in February 2009 (Figure 1).

Table 3.

Incidence Rates of Respiratory Virus Detection by Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction and Multiplex Assay

VariableTIV (n = 69)Placebo (n = 46)P ValueNo.Ratea(95% CI)No.Ratea(95% CI)Any seasonal influenza358(19–180)388(28–270).61 Seasonal influenza A (H1N1)239(10–160)259(15–240).68 Seasonal influenza A (H3N2)119(3–140)00(0–88).31 Seasonal influenza B00(0–58)129(4–210).17Pandemic influenza A (H1N1)358(19–180)00(0–88).08Any noninfluenza virusb20390(250–600)388(28–270)<.01 Rhinovirus12230(130–410)259(15–240).04 Coxsackie/echovirus8160(78–310)00(0–88)<.01 Other respiratory virusc597(40–230)129(4–210).22ARI episode with specimen collected but no virus detected19369(235–578)14412(244–696).75ARI episode with no specimen collected41796(586–1080)28824(569–1190).89

Incidence rates are from respiratory specimens collected from 115 participants aged 6–15 years who received trivalent influenza vaccine or placebo during 134 acute respiratory illness episodes.

Abbreviations: ARI, acute respiratory illness; CI, confidence interval; TIV, trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine.

a Incidence rates were estimated as the no. of virus detections or illness episodes per 1000 person-years of follow-up. ARI was defined as at least 2 of the following symptoms: body temperature ≥37.8°C, cough, sore throat, headache, runny nose, phlegm, and myalgia.

b In TIV recipients there were 4 detections with both rhinovirus and coxsackie/echovirus, and 1 detection with both coxsackie/echovirus and coronavirus NL63.

c Including positive detections of coronavirus, human metapneumovirus, parainfluenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). The ResPlex II multiplex array tested for 19 virus targets including influenza types A and B (including 2009-H1N1), RSV types A and B, parainfluenza types 1–4, metapneumovirus, rhinovirus, coxsackievirus/echovirus, adenovirus types B and E, bocavirus, and coronavirus types NL63, HKU1, 229E, and OC43.

Figure 1.

Timing of influenza and other respiratory virus detections in 115 participants aged 6–15 years (A–D), compared with local influenza surveillance data (E). Solid red bars indicate detections in 69 participants who received 2008–2009 trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine, and black dashed bars indicate detections in 46 participants who received placebo. The bottom panel shows local laboratory surveillance data on the proportion of influenza virus detections among specimens submitted to the Public Health Laboratory Service (PHLS). Less than 2% of PHLS specimens were positive for influenza B throughout the year. “Other viruses” included coronavirus, human metapneumovirus, parainfluenza, and respiratory syncytial virus.

Go to:

DISCUSSION

In the prepandemic period of our study, we did not observe a statistically significant reduction in confirmed seasonal influenza virus infections in the TIV recipients (Table 3), although serological evidence (Supplementary Appendix) and point estimates of vaccine efficacy based on confirmed infections were consistent with protection of TIV recipients against the seasonal influenza viruses that circulated from January through March 2009 [16]. We identified a statistically significant increased risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infection among TIV recipients (Table 3), including significant increases in the risk of rhinovirus and coxsackie/echovirus infection, which were most frequently detected in March 2009, immediately after the peak in seasonal influenza activity in February 2009 (Figure 1).

The increased risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infection among TIV recipients could be an artefactual finding; for example, measurement bias could have resulted if participants were more likely to report their first ARI episode but less likely to report subsequent episodes, whereas there was no real difference in rhinovirus or other noninfluenza respiratory virus infections after the winter influenza season. The increased risk could also indicate a real effect. Receipt of TIV could increase influenza immunity at the expense of reduced immunity to noninfluenza respiratory viruses, by some unknown biological mechanism. Alternatively, our results could be explained by temporary nonspecific immunity after influenza virus infection, through the cell-mediated response or, more likely, the innate immune response to infection [21–23]. Participants who received TIV would have been protected against influenza in February 2009 but then would not have had heightened nonspecific immunity in the following weeks. They would then face a higher risk of certain other virus infections in March 2009, compared with placebo recipients (Figure 1). The duration of any temporary nonspecific immunity remains uncertain [13] but could be of the order of 2–4 weeks based on these observations. It is less likely that the interference observed here could be explained by reduced community exposures during convalescence (ie, behavioral rather than immunologic factors) [14].

The phenomenon of virus interference has been well known in virology for >60 years [24–27]. Ecological studies have reported phenomena potentially explained by viral interference [3–11]. Nonspecific immunity against noninfluenza respiratory viruses was reported in children for 1–2 weeks after receipt of live attenuated influenza vaccine [28]. Interference in respiratory and gastrointestinal infections has been reported after receipt of live oral poliovirus vaccine [29–32].

Our results are limited by the small sample size and the small number of confirmed infections. Despite this limitation, we were able to observe a statistically significant increased risk of confirmed noninfluenza respiratory virus infection among TIV recipients (Table 3). A negative association between serologic evidence of influenza infection and confirmed noninfluenza virus infection in winter 2009 was not statistically significant (odds ratio, 0.27; 95% CI, .01–2.05) (Supplementary Appendix). One must be cautious in interpreting serology in children who have received TIV [2, 33]. Finally, acute URTI incidence was based on self-report with regular telephone reminders, and we may have failed to identify some illnesses despite rigorous prospective follow-up.

Temporary nonspecific immunity leading to interference between epidemics of respiratory viruses could have important implications. First, as observed in our trial, TIV appeared to have poor efficacy against acute URTIs (Table 2), apparently because the protection against influenza virus infection conferred by TIV was offset by an increased risk of other respiratory virus infection (Table 3). Second, interference between respiratory viruses could suggest new approaches to mitigating epidemics [32]. Mass administration of live polio vaccine in children has been used to control enterovirus 71 epidemics [10, 31]. Finally, viral interference could bias estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in test-negative case-control studies (Supplementary Appendix) [2, 34–43]. One test-negative study reported an association between receipt of TIV and the risk of influenza-like illness associated with a noninfluenza virus [38].

Additional work is required to more fully characterize temporary nonspecific immunity overall and in specific groups, such as children. Animal studies [44–50] and volunteer adult human challenge studies [51] could provide useful evidence. Additional community-based observational cohort studies and community-based experimental studies, such as our vaccine trial, may be particularly suitable for investigating temporary nonspecific immunity, because most acute URTIs do not require medical attention.

Go to:

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Data

Click here for additional data file.(854K, zip)

Go to:

Notes

Acknowledgments. We thank Chan Kit Man, Calvin Cheng, Lai-Ming Ho, Ho Yuk Ling, Lam Yiu Pong, Tom Lui, Edward Ma, Loretta Mak, Gloria Ng, Joey Sin, Teresa So, Winnie Wai, Lan Wei, Jessica Wong, Eileen Yeung, and Jenny Yuen for research support and Sarah Cobey, Ed Goldstein, Heath Kelly, Nancy Leung, Marc Lipsitch, Ryosuke Omori, Mary Schooling, and Joe Wu for helpful discussions.

Financial support. This work was supported by the Area of Excellence Scheme of the Hong Kong University Grants Committee (grant number AoE/M-12/06), the Hong Kong University Research Council Strategic Research Theme of Public Health, the Harvard Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (grant number U54 GM088558), and the Research Fund for the Control of Infectious Disease, Food and Health Bureau, Government of the Hong Kong SAR (grant number PHE-2). The funding bodies had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, preparation of the manuscript, or the decision to publish.

Potential conflicts of interest. B. J. C. has received research funding from MedImmune. D. K. M. I. has received research funding from Roche. J. S. M. P. receives research funding from Crucell MV. All other authors report no potential conflicts.

All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed.

Go to:

References

1. Jefferson T, Rivetti A, Harnden A, Di Pietrantonj C, Demicheli V. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(2):CD004879. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Osterholm MT, Kelley NS, Sommer A, Belongia EA. Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2012;12:36–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Glezen P, Denny FW. Epidemiology of acute lower respiratory disease in children. N Engl J Med. 1973;288:498–505. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Glezen WP, Paredes A, Taber LH. Influenza in children. Relationship to other respiratory agents. JAMA. 1980;243:1345–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Anestad G. Interference between outbreaks of respiratory syncytial virus and influenza virus infection. Lancet. 1982;1:502. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Nishimura N, Nishio H, Lee MJ, Uemura K. The clinical features of respiratory syncytial virus: lower respiratory tract infection after upper respiratory tract infection due to influenza virus. Pediatr Int. 2005;47:412–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Linde A, Rotzen-Ostlund M, Zweygberg-Wirgart B, Rubinova S, Brytting M. Does viral interference affect spread of influenza? Eurosurveillance. 2009 Available at: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=19354 . Accessed 18 April 2012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Anestada G, Nordbo SA. Virus interference. Did rhinoviruses activity hamper the progress of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic in Norway? Med Hypotheses. 2011;77:1132–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Casalegno JS, Ottmann M, Duchamp MB, et al. Rhinoviruses delayed the circulation of the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 virus in France. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010;16:326–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Berencsi G, Kapusinszky B, Rigo Z, Szomor K. Interference among viruses circulating and administered in Hungary from 1931 to 2008. Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung. 2010;57:73–86. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Mak GC, Wong AH, Ho WY, Lim W. The impact of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 on the circulation of respiratory viruses 2009–2011. Influenza Other Respi Viruses. 2012 doi: 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00323.x. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

12. Wang Z, Malanoski AP, Lin B, et al. Broad spectrum respiratory pathogen analysis of throat swabs from military recruits reveals interference between rhinoviruses and adenoviruses. Microb Ecol. 2010;59:623–34. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Kelly H, Barry S, Laurie K, Mercer G. Seasonal influenza vaccination and the risk of infection with pandemic influenza: a possible illustration of non-specific temporary immunity following infection. Eurosurveillance. 2010 Available at: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=19722 . Accessed 18 April 2012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Rohani P, Green CJ, Mantilla-Beniers NB, Grenfell BT. Ecological interference between fatal diseases. Nature. 2003;422:885–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Yang Y, Halloran ME, Daniels MJ, Longini IM, Burke DS, Cummings DA. Modeling competing infectious pathogens from a Bayesian perspective: application to influenza studies with incomplete laboratory results. J Am Statist Assoc. 2010;105:1310–22. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Cowling BJ, Ng S, Ma ES, et al. Protective efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccination against seasonal and pandemic influenza virus infection during 2009 in Hong Kong. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;51:1370–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Han J, Swan DC, Smith SJ, et al. Simultaneous amplification and identification of 25 human papillomavirus types with Templex technology. J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44:4157–62. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Brunstein J, Thomas E. Direct screening of clinical specimens for multiple respiratory pathogens using the Genaco Respiratory Panels 1 and 2. Diagn Mol Pathol. 2006;15:169–73. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Li H, McCormac MA, Estes RW, et al. Simultaneous detection and high-throughput identification of a panel of RNA viruses causing respiratory tract infections. J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45:2105–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Cowling BJ, Chan KH, Fang VJ, et al. Comparative epidemiology of pandemic and seasonal influenza A in households. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2175–84. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. McGill J, Heusel JW, Legge KL. Innate immune control and regulation of influenza virus infections. J Leukoc Biol. 2009;86:803–12. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Khaitov MR, Laza-Stanca V, Edwards MR, et al. Respiratory virus induction of alpha-, beta- and lambda-interferons in bronchial epithelial cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Allergy. 2009;64:375–86. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Hayden FG, Fritz R, Lobo MC, Alvord W, Strober W, Straus SE. Local and systemic cytokine responses during experimental human influenza A virus infection. Relation to symptom formation and host defense. J Clin Invest. 1998;101:643–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Duffy CE. Interference between St. Louis encephalitis virus and equine encephalomyelitis virus (Western Type) in the chick embryo. Science. 1944;99:517–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Henle W, Henle G. Interference of inactive virus with the propagation of virus of influenza. Science. 1943;98:87–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Isaacs A, Lindenmann J. Virus interference I. The interferon. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London - Series B: Biological Sciences. 1957;147:258–67. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Lindenmann J. From interference to interferon: a brief historical introduction. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1982;299:3–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Piedra PA, Gaglani MJ, Riggs M, et al. Live attenuated influenza vaccine, trivalent, is safe in healthy children 18 months to 4 years, 5 to 9 years, and 10 to 18 years of age in a community-based, nonrandomized, open-label trial. Pediatrics. 2005;116:e397–407. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Seppala E, Viskari H, Hoppu S, et al. Viral interference induced by live attenuated virus vaccine (OPV) can prevent otitis media. Vaccine. 2011;29:8615–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Contreras G. Effect of the administration of oral poliovirus vaccine on infantile diarrhoea mortality. Vaccine. 1989;7:211–2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

31. Shindarov LM, Chumakov MP, Voroshilova MK, et al. Epidemiological, clinical, and pathomorphological characteristics of epidemic poliomyelitis-like disease caused by enterovirus 71. J Hyg Epidemiol Microbiol Immunol. 1979;23:284–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

32. Voroshilova MK. Potential use of nonpathogenic enteroviruses for control of human disease. Prog Med Virol. 1989;36:191–202. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Petrie JG, Ohmit SE, Johnson E, Cross RT, Monto AS. Efficacy studies of influenza vaccines: effect of end points used and characteristics of vaccine failures. J Infect Dis. 2011;203:1309–15. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

34. Skowronski DM, Gilbert M, Tweed SA, et al. Effectiveness of vaccine against medical consultation due to laboratory-confirmed influenza: results from a sentinel physician pilot project in British Columbia, 2004–2005. Can Commun Dis Rep. 2005;31:181–91. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

35. Skowronski DM, Masaro C, Kwindt TL, et al. Estimating vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza using a sentinel physician network: results from the 2005–2006 season of dual A and B vaccine mismatch in Canada. Vaccine. 2007;25:2842–51. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

36. Belongia EA, Kieke BA, Donahue JG, et al. Influenza vaccine effectiveness in Wisconsin during the 2007–08 season: comparison of interim and final results. Vaccine. 2011;29:6558–63. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

37. Cheng AC, Kotsimbos T, Kelly HA, et al. Effectiveness of H1N1/09 monovalent and trivalent influenza vaccines against hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed H1N1/09 influenza in Australia: a test-negative case control study. Vaccine. 2011;29:7320–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

38. Kelly H, Jacoby P, Dixon GA, et al. Vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza in healthy young children: a case-control study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2011;30:107–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

39. Skowronski DM, De Serres G, Crowcroft NS, et al. Association between the 2008–09 seasonal influenza vaccine and pandemic H1N1 illness during spring-summer 2009: four observational studies from Canada. PLoS Med. 2010;7(4):e1000258. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

40. Kissling E, Valenciano M, Cohen JM, et al. I-MOVE Multi-Centre Case Control Study 2010–11: overall and stratified estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in Europe. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27622. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

41. Kelly HA, Grant KA, Fielding JE, et al. Pandemic influenza H1N1 2009 infection in Victoria, Australia: no evidence for harm or benefit following receipt of seasonal influenza vaccine in 2009. Vaccine. 2011;29:6419–26. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

42. Orenstein EW, De Serres G, Haber MJ, et al. Methodologic issues regarding the use of three observational study designs to assess influenza vaccine effectiveness. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:623–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

43. Fielding JE, Grant KA, Garcia K, Kelly HA. Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine against pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus, Australia, 2010. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17:1181–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

44. Steel J, Staeheli P, Mubareka S, Garcia-Sastre A, Palese P, Lowen AC. Transmission of pandemic H1N1 influenza virus and impact of prior exposure to seasonal strains or interferon treatment. J Virol. 2010;84:21–6. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

45. Imai K, Nakamura K, Mase M, Tsukamoto K, Imada T, Yamaguchi S. Partial protection against challenge with the highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus isolated in Japan in chickens infected with the H9N2 influenza virus. Arch Virol. 2007;152:1395–400. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

46. Van Reeth K, Gregory V, Hay A, Pensaert M. Protection against a European H1N2 swine influenza virus in pigs previously infected with H1N1 and/or H3N2 subtypes. Vaccine. 2003;21:1375–81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

47. Kreijtz JH, Bodewes R, van den Brand JM, et al. Infection of mice with a human influenza A/H3N2 virus induces protective immunity against lethal infection with influenza A/H5N1 virus. Vaccine. 2009;27:4983–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

48. Domok I. Studies on the interaction between Coxsackie and poliomyelitis viruses. I. Simultaneous infection with B1 Coxsackie and Lansing poliomyelitis viruses in mice of different ages. Acta Microbiol Acad Sci Hung. 1957;4:183–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

49. Domok I. Studies on the interaction between coxsackie and poliomyelitis viruses. III. The course of resistance to poliomyelitis virus induced by coxsackie B1 virus in young mice. Acta Virol. 1959;3:222–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

50. Duffy CE, Jordan RT, Meyer HM., Jr. Effect of multiple inoculations on interference between St. Louis encephalitis virus and equine encephalomyelitis virus. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1952;80:279–81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

51. Keitel WA, Couch RB, Quarles JM, Cate TR, Baxter B, Maassab HF. Trivalent attenuated cold-adapted influenza virus vaccine: reduced viral shedding and serum antibody responses in susceptible adults. J Infect Dis. 1993;167:305–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7126676/

Homeopathy Promotes Tiny Doses for Physical Emotional Issues

https://gazette.com/life/live-well-homeopathy-promotes-tiny-doses-for-physical-emotional-issues/article_5997ba9e-fdd0-11ea-a503-afb7fea022c4.html

It often seems humans think bigger is better and more trumps less.

This approach does not apply in the world of homeopathy, an alternative health care system practiced by more than 500 million people around the globe. In homeopathy, those seeking relief from physical or emotional issues are given the smallest amount of a dose for the shortest amount of time.

The practice is based on the law of similars, or like cures like.

“Medicine in a large crude dose could be toxic,” says certified homeopath Susie Overmyer, owner of Pikes Peak Homeopathy. You can find her online at pikespeakhomeopathy.com.

“But when given as a homeopathic remedy in a diluted and much smaller amount, it can be very therapeutic. Remedies are so safe that a child could swallow a whole bottle and it’s safe. They’re not toxic.”

Homeopathy is no new trend or passing fad. More than 200 years ago, Samuel Hahnemann, a German doctor, felt the techniques of his day were too harsh and damaging. After delving into his own studies, he determined small amounts of medicine were more therapeutic than large doses. Modern medicine has now moved in that direction, says Overmyer.

Take aspirin, for example.

“One or two will cure a headache, but an entire bottle could be fatal to somebody,” she says. “(Homeopathic) remedies are all natural substances. There are no additives, no toxicity, no addiction. They’re purely therapeutic.”

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, there were more homeopaths than medical doctors in the U.S., she says. Homeopathic nurses served in WWI and there were a number of homeopathic hospitals, more than 1,000 homeopathic pharmacies and a couple hundred homeopathic schools in the country.

But then conflict arose between homeopaths and medical doctors and homeopathy temporarily fell from favor. Medicine became the primary source of care.

A resurgence of the alternative health care system came in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s and is now mainstream, says Overmyer, who regularly teaches classes to mothers and other groups.

“Homeopathy is wonderful, safe, gentle and effective,” she says. “The basics are easy to learn, easy to implement and it empowers people, especially young mothers who take care of their families.”

During the first session, which typically lasts 60-90 minutes, Overmyer and her client would discuss the current issue, family and personal histories and how the person is being impacted by the condition. Homeopathy also takes the personality of the person into consideration.

“The body might be expressing something the mind doesn’t want to experience or express,” she says. “Not all the time. Sometimes you just go over the handlebars of your bicycle. But often chronic issues are things we don’t want to deal with. Our subconscious doesn’t let us get away from them.”

Overmyer will see her client about four to six weeks later for an update. Remedies can work immediately, if it’s something like a burn, for example. If something has been a long-term problem, chances are it will take longer to work through the issue.

She’s careful to say she’s not a doctor and not medically licensed.

“As a nonlicensed medical practitioner, I do not diagnose, prescribe for, treat or cure any condition, which is not to say people don’t get better.”

Any number of issues can bring a person to a homeopath, including injuries, surgery, illness, emotional issues, post-traumatic stress disorder, acute and chronic conditions, autism and those who have never been well since an accident, illness or emotional event.

“Ten people with cough and fever might see a medical practitioner and get the same cough medicine,” she says. “Those same 10 people see a homeopath, who would take into consideration their physical state, emotions, how they’re being impacted and any other contributing factors. Each person will be addressed differently and likely given different homeopathic therapy. It’s all individualized.”

Why do small doses work? Overmyer believes the body becomes overwhelmed and reacts to the medicine itself and has to recover from the medicine. For example, antibiotics. As necessary as they are, they’re known to kill good bacteria in the body along with the bad.

“They may take care of the issue you have, but have created a new issue,” she says. “Homeopathy stimulates the immune system to help the body recover more quickly. That’s what we’re trying to do. When you do that, the body responds pretty quickly.”

As with many alternative healing systems, there come claims of pseudoscience, or a theory, methodology or practice considered to be without scientific foundation. Overmyer acknowledges those claims, but cites volumes of research proving the efficacy of homeopathy.

“It’s been around for centuries,” she says. “Remedies are overseen by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) and the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States.”

And as a Christian, she believes homeopathy is a God-given medicine.

“God has given us everything we need and if we are alert and willing, then he will provide,” she says. “This is an excellent example of that. Remedies are all-natural substances, readily available and over the counter mostly. You use a tiny amount and it’s inexpensive, effective and safe. What else would you want in a medicine?”

Contact the writer: 636-0270

Randomised controlled trials of homeopathy: examining the evidence

Randomised controlled trials of homeopathy: examining the evidence

The review programme’s findings

Phase 1: Placebo-controlled RCTs of individualised homeopathic treatment (study protocol). These studies focus on ‘classical’ homeopathy, which involves in-depth consultation and an individualised prescription per patient: 32 RCTs were eligible for the review. The article reporting the findings was published in the journal Systematic Reviews in December 2014. Its statistical analysis identified an effect of individually prescribed homeopathic medicines that was greater than that of placebos and was statistically significant.

Phase 2: Placebo-controlled RCTs of non-individualised homeopathic treatment (study protocol). Each of these examined a homeopathic medicine pre-selected for its match with the typical symptoms of a given clinical condition: 75 RCTs were eligible for this review. The article reporting those findings was published in Systematic Reviews in March 2017.

The original literature search for the review programme included all RCT papers published up to and including 2011. Each new systematic review necessarily requires an updated search. The relevant flowchart for Phase 2 of included and excluded RCT papers updates the original search up to the end of 2014. There are associated detailed lists of RCT papers that are potentially eligible for systematic review and RCT papers that have been rejected from further analysis.

Phase 3: Other-than-placebo-controlled RCTs of individualised homeopathic treatment (study protocol). The relevant flowchart for Phase 3 of included and excluded RCT papers updates the original search to the end of 2015. There are associated detailed lists of potentially eligible RCT papers and rejected RCT papers.

Phase 4: Other-than-placebo-controlled RCTs of non-individualised homeopathic treatment (study protocol). This work is ongoing. The relevant flowchart for Phase 4 of included and excluded RCT papers updates the original search to the end of 2016. There are associated detailed lists of potentially eligible RCT papers and rejected RCT papers.

Researcher

Dr Robert Mathie attained BSc, then PhD, in Physiology at the University of Glasgow. During 25 years in the university sector, he published around 100 peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters, mostly on the topic of blood flow regulation. He then held the post of Research Development Adviser at the British Homeopathic Association for 15 years during which he led clinical data collection projects with the Faculty of Homeopathy’s doctors, dentists and veterinarians. Latterly, in a key initiative to identify robust evidence in homeopathy, Robert has extended his work in reviewing and clarifying the research literature by means of a major programme of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. His research publications in homeopathy currently total more than 30. Robert became an independent research consultant in March 2016.

https://www.hri-research.org/hri-research/learning-more-from-existing-evidence/systematic-review-programme/

Publications related to this project

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised, Other-than-Placebo Controlled, Trials of Individualised Homeopathic Treatment.
Mathie RT,  Ulbrich-Zürni S, Viksveen P, Roberts ER, Baitson ES, Legg LA, Davidson JRT.
Homeopathy, 2018; 107(4): 229-243 [Full text]

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Mathie RT, Ramparsad N, Legg LA, Clausen J, Moss S, Davidson JRT, Messow C-M, McConnachie A.
Systematic Reviews 2017; 6: 63 [Full text]

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Mathie RT, Lloyd SM, Legg LA, Clausen J, Davidson JRT, Moss S, Ford I. Systematic Reviews 2014; 3: 142 [Full text]

Randomised controlled trials of homeopathy in humans: characterising the research journal literature for systematic review.Mathie RT, Hacke D, Clausen J, Nicolai T, Riley DS, Fisher P.
Homeopathy 2013; 102: 3-24 [Abstract]