Monday, August 9, 2010

Homeopathy Associated With Dramatic Reduction In Leptospirosis Infection

Homeopathy Associated With Dramatic Reduction In Leptospirosis Infection In Cuban Population


rate icon
Editor's Choice
Main Category:
Complementary Medicine / Alternative Medicine
Also Included In:
Infectious Diseases / Bacteria / Viruses
Article Date: 09 Aug 2010 - 0:00 PDT


A report of the largest study of homeopathy ever undertaken, based on data from over 11 million people (the entire population of Cuba), is published in the journal Homeopathy.1 It provides fascinating evidence that a highly dilute substance, prepared according to homeopathic principles, may contribute to the prevention of Leptospirosis.

Leptospirosis (also known as Weil's Disease) is an infectious disease carried by rats and caused by bacteria called spirochetes. People contract the disease through contact with contaminated water. Leptospirosis occurs worldwide, but it is most common in the tropics during periods of heavy rain.

In Cuba, Leptospirosis is recorded by an efficient national surveillance programme. Its incidence correlates closely with heavy rainfall and subsequent flooding. In late 2007, in response to a developing epidemic, and with only enough vaccine to treat 15,000 high-risk people, the government decided to treat the entire population of the region, over one year of age, with a homeopathic medicine. This was prepared from the inactivated causative organism by the Cuban National Vaccine Institute.

The homeopathic medicine was given to the 2.3 million population of the provinces usually worst affected. Within a few weeks the number of cases had fallen from the forecast 38 to 4 cases per 100,000 per week, significantly fewer than the historically-based forecast for those weeks of the year.The 8.8 million population of the other provinces did not receive homeopathic treatment and the incidence was as forecast. The effect appeared to be sustained: there was an 84% reduction in infection in the treated region in the following year (2008) when, for the first time, incidence did not correlate with rainfall. In the same period, incidence in the untreated region increased by 22%.

"Infectious diseases are still the bane of humanity, particularly in the developing world", states Dr Sara Eames, President of the Faculty of Homeopathy. "Anything which appears to reduce infection rates in a potentially fatal infection, particularly when it can be prepared and delivered quickly, safely and cost effectively, has to be taken seriously and studied further."

Dr Peter Fisher, Editor of Homeopathy, notes "This is a very large study and its results, if confirmed, have huge potential impact. We need more research into the effectiveness of homeopathic preparations in preventing infectious diseases, complications, and the economic viability of a homeopathic approach."

Reference

1.Bracho G, Varela E, Fernández R, et al. Large-scale application of highly-diluted bacteria for Leptospirosis epidemic control. Homeopathy 2010; 99: 156-166.

Source: Elsevier


Tuesday, July 20, 2010

More Research Funds For Homeopathy Needed

Monday, 19 July 2010, 1:05 pm
Press Release: Council of Homeopaths
More Research Funds For Homeopathy Needed

The New Zealand Council of Homeopaths (NZCH) would like to see more
Research and Development money made available for homeopathic research
following the presentation by a Nobel Prize winner for Physiology and
Medicine, Dr. Luc Montagnier. Dr Montagnier received the Nobel prize
for his work on isolating the HIV virus.
Dr Montagnier spoke to his colleagues at the Lindau Nobel Laureate
meeting in Germany about his research on using a new method to detect
viral infections, by looking for radio waves that are emitted by
viruses in high dilutions. In 2009, Dr Montagnier published research
[2] on the effect of viruses on extreme dilutions (D12). The study
found that electromagnetic waves are detectable after stimulation.

Dr Montagnier's work shows that extremely attenuated particles can
still be detected in a water medium. The NZCH believes these links are
a step forward in the understanding of homeopathy and its place in
science.
Homeopaths have been discovering the fingerprint of their medicines by
trialing the effects of their remedies on healthy people and observing
the effects that are produced. These are then matched to the symptoms
of an animal or person thus defining the homeopathic term "like cures
like".
Dr Montagniers work is very exciting for Homeopaths and comes just
after recognition by Rural Women earlier who awarded Tineke Verkade
and her business Homeopathic Farm Services the Supreme Enterprise
Award. Her homeopathic products are used successfully by many farmers.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

homeopathy really does work

I don't know how, but homeopathy really does work

More of a mystery is why scientists continue to debunk it despite mounting evidence that homeopathy is effective

I was a dedicated scientist about to begin a PhD in neuroscience when, out of the blue, homeopathy bit me on the proverbial bottom.

Science had been my passion since I began studying biology with Mr Hopkinson at the age of 11, and by the age of 21, when I attended the dinner party that altered the course of my life, I had still barely heard of it. The idea that I would one day become a homeopath would have seemed ludicrous.

That turning point is etched in my mind. A woman I'd known my entire life told me that a homeopath had successfully treated her when many months of conventional treatment had failed. As a sceptic, I scoffed, but was nonetheless a little intrigued.

She confessed that despite thinking homeopathy was a load of rubbish, she'd finally agreed to an appointment, to stop her daughter nagging. But she was genuinely shocked to find that, after one little pill, within days she felt significantly better. A second tablet, she said, "saw it off completely".

I admit I ruined that dinner party. I interrogated her about every detail of her diagnosis, previous treatment, time scales, the lot. I thought it through logically – she was intelligent, she wasn't lying, she had no previous inclination towards alternative medicine, and her reluctance would have diminished any placebo effect.

Scientists are supposed to make unprejudiced observations, then draw conclusions. As I thought about this, I was left with the highly uncomfortable conclusion that homeopathy appeared to have worked. I had to find out more.

So, I started reading about homeopathy, and what I discovered shifted my world for ever. I became convinced enough to hand my coveted PhD studentship over to my best friend and sign on for a three-year, full-time homeopathy training course.

Now, as an experienced homeopath, it is "science" that is biting me on the bottom. I know homeopathy works, not only because I've seen it with my own eyes countless times, but because scientific research confirms it. And yet I keep reading reports in the media saying that homeopathy doesn't work and that this scientific evidence doesn't exist.

The facts, it seems, are being ignored. By the end of 2009, 142randomised control trials (the gold standard in medical research) comparing homeopathy with placebo or conventional treatment had been published in peer-reviewed journals – 74 were able to draw firm conclusions: 63 were positive for homeopathy and 11 were negative. Five major systematic reviews have also been carried out to analyse the balance of evidence from RCTs of homeopathy – four were positive (Kleijnen, J, et al; Linde, K, et al; Linde, K, et al; Cucherat, M, et al) and one was negative (Shang, A et al). It's usual to get mixed results when you look at a wide range of research results on one subject, and if these results were from trials measuring the efficacy of "normal" conventional drugs, ratios of 63:11 and 4:1 in favour of a treatment working would be considered pretty persuasive.

Of course, the question of how homeopathy works is another matter. And that is where homeopathy courts controversy. It is indeed puzzling that ultra-high dilutions of substances, with few or no measurable molecules of the original substance left in them, should exert biological effects, but exert biological effects they do.

There are experiments showing that homeopathic thyroxine can alter the rate of metamorphosis of tadpoles into frogs, that homeopathic histamine can alter the activity of white blood cells, and that under the right conditions, homeopathic sodium chloride can be made to release light in the same way as normal sodium chloride. The idea that such highly-diluted preparations are not only still active, but retain characteristics of the original substances, may seem impossible, but these kinds of results show it's a demonstrable fact.

Surely science should come into its own here – solving the riddles of the world around us, pushing the frontiers of knowledge. At least, that is the science I fell in love with. More of a puzzle to me now is the blinkered approach of those who continue, despite increasing evidence, to deny what is in front of them.

In the last few years, there has been much propaganda and misinformation circulated, much of it heralding the death of homeopathy, yet the evidence shows that interest in complementary and alternative medicine is growing.

In February, the "sceptics" campaign had a breakthrough – a report from the House of Commons Science and Technology Committeerecommended no further NHS funding for homeopathy, despite a deeply flawed hearing.

The Society of Homeopaths – the largest body representing professional homeopaths – was refused permission to give oral evidence. Also notable by their absence from the panel were primary care trusts who currently commission homeopathy and representatives of patients who use homeopathy. Yet oral evidence was heard from a journalist previously investigated by the Press Complaints Commission for unsubstantiated criticism of homeopaths, and a spokesperson for a charity that has long publicly opposed homeopathy. It is significant that one of the four MPs asked to vote on the report abstained due to concerns about the lack of balance in the evidence heard.

Homeopathy is well-established in the UK, having been available through the NHS since its inception in 1948. More than 400 GPs use homeopathy in their everyday practice and the Society of Homeopaths has 1,500 registered members, from a variety of previous professions including pharmacists, journalists, solicitors and nurses.

And yet the portrayal of homeopathy as charlatanism and witchcraft continues. There is growing evidence that homeopathy works, that it is cost-effective and that patients want it. As drugs bills spiral, and evidence emerges that certain drugs routinely prescribed on the NHS areno better than placebos, maybe it's time for "sceptics" to stop the witch hunt and look at putting their own house in order.

It's all a far cry from the schoolgirl biologist who envisioned spending her life in a laboratory playing with bacteria.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Battle of Homeopathy

Homeopathy works for babies and even pets. Certainly, intellect and patient belief system are not in play here. Homeopathy became popular in the United States and Europe in the 1800s.

The strongest advocates were European royalty, American entrepreneurs, literary giants, and religious leaders. As it gained widespread popularity, it became the object of animosity and opposition from mainstream medicine.

The conflict between homeopathy and orthodox medicine was protracted and bitter.

The battle goes on

We know who won the first round of this conflict. The results of the second round is left to be seen.

Hopefully, we will soon discover that a "fight" over healing is inappropriate and that various approaches to healing are necessary to build a comprehensive and effective healthcare system.

The history of homeopathy begins with the discoveries of its founder, Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), a German physician disillusioned with the medical practice of the time. He first coined the word "homeopathy".

"Homoios" in Greek means similar. "Pathos" means suffering. This refers to the pharmacological principle, the law of similars, that is its basis.

The law of similars was previously described by Hippocrates (the Father of Medicine) and Paracelsus, and was utilised by many cultures, including the Mayans, Chinese, Greeks, Native American Indians and Indians.

But it was Hahnemann who codified the law of similars into a systematic medical science. His first comments about the applicability of the law of similars were in 1789, when he translated a book by William Cullen - leading physicians of the era.

At one point in the book, Cullen ascribed the usefulness of Peruvian bark (Cinchona) in treating malaria due to its bitter and astringent properties.

Similars

Hahnemann wrote a bold footnote in his translation, disputing Cullen's explanation. He asserted that the efficacy of Peruvian bark must be for other factor.

He noted that there were other substances and mixtures of substances decidedly more bitter and astringent than Peruvian bark that were not effective in treating malaria.

He described himself taking repeated doses of this herb until his body responded to its toxic dose with fever, chills and other symptoms similar to malaria.

Hahnemann concluded that this herb was beneficial because it caused symptoms similar to those of the disease it was treating. That was a mind blowing and paradigm changing idea that day! Hahnemann was clearly a brilliant mind.

He was translating Cullen's work, which indicates that he was one of the more respected translators of his day. When he was only 24, Hahnemann could read and write in at least seven languages.

He ultimately translated over 20 major medical and scientific texts. This story reveals Hahnemann as both an avid experimenter and a respected chemist.

He had authored a four-volume set of books called The Pharmaceutical Lexicon, which was considered one of the standard reference texts for apothecaries or pharmacists.

Rebel

Hahnemann was an audacious rebel. He was unafraid to speak his mind, even if it meant correcting the analysis of a very respected physician.

He was unafraid to question commonly accepted truths. After translating Cullen's work, Hahnemann spent the next six years actively experimenting on himself, his family and a small but growing group of followers.

In 1796, he wrote about his experiences with the law of similars in Hufeland's Journal, a respected medical journal in Germany.

Coincidentally, in 1798, Edward Jenner discovered the value of giving small doses of cowpox to people in an effort to immunise them against smallpox. While Jenner's work was generally accepted into orthodox medicine, Hahnemann's was not. Hahnemann was particularly disliked by the apothecaries because he recommended the use of only one medicine at a time and prescribing limited doses of it.

As he recommended only small doses of each medicine, the apothecaries could not charge much for them. And because each medicine required careful preparation, Hahnemann found that the apothecaries were not always making them correctly or were intentionally giving his patients different medicines.

As he grew to distrust the apothecaries, he chose to dispense his medicines, an illegal act at the time in Germany. The apothecaries then accused Hahnemann of "entrenching upon their privileges by the dispensing of medicines".

He was arrested in Leipzig in 1820, found guilty and forced to move.


Prosecuted

He moved to Kothen, where he was delegated special permission to practice and dispense his medicines by Grand Duke Ferdinand, one of the many European royalties who supported homeopathy.

Despite the persecution, homeopathy continued to grow, not just because it offered a systematic approach to treating sick people, but also because orthodox medicine was ineffective and dangerous in some instances, especially for chronic diseases.

Indeed, there is general agreement among medical historians today that orthodox medicine of the 1700s and 1800s in particular frequently caused more harm than good. Besides bloodletting and leeches, orthodox physicians used medicines made from mercury, lead, arsenic and various strong herbs to help purge the body of foreign disease-causing matter.

Despite the fact that historians and scientists today consider medicine of the 18th and 19th Century as unscientific and barbaric, orthodox physicians had the audacity to call homeopathy "quackery", "unscientific", "cultish", and "devilish".

Homeopathy lost out with the masses. But it remained popular with the elite as it was effective, safe and did not cost much.

Indeed, the great Mahatma Ghandi, while studying law in the UK, noticed homeopathy was "safe, cheap and effective" and brought it back for the masses in India. Wide range Homeopaths treat a veritable array of problems.

These include allergies, anorectal disorders, asthma, arthritis, back pain, neuralgia, colic, coughs and colds, cystitis, depression, eczema, gynaecological problems, hair loss, heartburn, hyper-pigmentation, insect bites, insomnia, irritable bowel syndrome, leg cramp, menopausal problems, migraines, morning sickness, nausea, obesity, phobias, pre-menstrual syndrome, sexual disorders, stress, teething pains, tumours and warts.

Most homeopaths regularly treat chronic or recurrent conditions such as eczema, rheumatoid arthritis, fatigue disorders, asthma, migraine, dysmenorrhoea, irritable bowel syndrome, recurrent upper respiratory or urinary tract infections and mood disorders. Patients with ill-defined illness that defy conventional diagnosis are also treated.

Significantly, homeopaths treat children more often than other complementary practitioners.

Homeopathy is most popular in the UK, where the Royal Family has had homeopathic physicians since the 1830s. In England, as many as 45 per cent of conventional doctors (MDs) refer patients to homeopaths.

The treatment is part of the National Health Scheme (NHS). This is of course, highly unscientific and anecdotal in nature. But the Queen Mother lived to 100 and wherever she went, she took her homeopathy kit. And she walked upright although she had arthritis.


Source:asiaonehealth

Monday, April 19, 2010

The homeopathy alternative

2010/04/19

Rajem M.

In England, as many as 45 per cent of conventional doctors refer patients to homeopaths

LAST week, I talked about my moment of “epiphany” that resulted in me turning dramatically to the world of natural medicine.

I realised quickly that much of the world used natural medicine most of the time.

So did our grandmothers and their grandmothers.

But homeopathy itself stood very uncomfortably as it was seen as “nothing” in sugar globules.

Indeed, in a 1997 letter to the editor of The Lancet, titled Homeopathy — Much Ado About Nothing?, Nasir Ali Asfar of the Department of Pharmacology, Zainudduin Medical College in Karachi, bluntly suggested that it was placebo and based on superstition. Placebo Sure, it is based on “energy medicine”.

The Queen Mother took her homeopathy kit wherever she went. She  lived to 100
The Queen Mother took her homeopathy kit wherever she went. She lived to 100

There is sometimes nothing left of the “active substance” of numerous dilutions.

So the claim of placebo comes to mind as it may be seen playing on the patient’s mind and belief systems.

There is a problem with this argument.

Homeopathy works for babies and even pets.

Certainly, intellect and patient belief system are not in play here.

Homeopathy became popular in the United States and Europe in the 1800s.

The strongest advocates were European royalty, American entrepreneurs, literary giants, and religious leaders. As it gained widespread popularity, it became the object of animosity and opposition from mainstream medicine.

The conflict between homeopathy and orthodox medicine was protracted and bitter.

The battle goes on We know who won the first round of this conflict.


The results of the second round is left to be seen.

Hopefully, we will soon discover that a “fight” over healing is inappropriate and that various approaches to healing are necessary to build a comprehensive and effective healthcare system.

The history of homeopathy begins with the discoveries of its founder, Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), a German physician disillusioned with the medical practice of the time.

He first coined the word “homeopathy”.

“Homoios” in Greek means similar.

“Pathos” means suffering.

This refers to the pharmacological principle, the law of similars, that is its basis.

The law of similars was previously described by Hippocrates (the Father of Medicine) and Paracelsus, and was utilised by many cultures, including the Mayans, Chinese, Greeks, Native American Indians and Indians.

But it was Hahnemann who codified the law of similars into a systematic medical science.

His first comments about the applicability of the law of similars were in 1789, when he translated a book by William Cullen — leading physicians of the era.

At one point in the book, Cullen ascribed the usefulness of Peruvian bark (Cinchona) in treating malaria due to its bitter and astringent properties.

Similars Hahnemann wrote a bold footnote in his translation, disputing Cullen’s explanation.

He asserted that the efficacy of Peruvian bark must be for other factor.

He noted that there were other substances and mixtures of substances decidedly more bitter and astringent than Peruvian bark that were not effective in treating malaria.

He described himself taking repeated doses of this herb until his body responded to its toxic dose with fever, chills and other symptoms similar to malaria.

Hahnemann concluded that this herb was beneficial because it caused symptoms similar to those of the disease it was treating.

That was a mind blowing and paradigm changing idea that day! Hahnemann was clearly a brilliant mind.

He was translating Cullen’s work, which indicates that he was one of the more respected translators of his day.

When he was only 24, Hahnemann could read and write in at least seven languages.

He ultimately translated over 20 major medical and scientific texts.

This story reveals Hahnemann as both an avid experimenter and a respected chemist.

He had authored a four-volume set of books called The Pharmaceutical Lexicon, which was considered one of the standard reference texts for apothecaries or pharmacists.

Rebel Hahnemann was an audacious rebel.

He was unafraid to speak his mind, even if it meant correcting the analysis of a very respected physician.

He was unafraid to question commonly accepted truths. After translating Cullen’s work, Hahnemann spent the next six years actively experimenting on himself, his family and a small but growing group of followers.

In 1796, he wrote about his experiences with the law of similars in Hufeland’s Journal, a respected medical journal in Germany.

Coincidentally, in 1798, Edward Jenner discovered the value of giving small doses of cowpox to people in an effort to immunise them against smallpox. While Jenner’s work was generally accepted into orthodox medicine, Hahnemann’s was not. Hahnemann was particularly disliked by the apothecaries because he recommended the use of only one medicine at a time and prescribing limited doses of it.

As he recommended only small doses of each medicine, the apothecaries could not charge much for them.

And because each medicine required careful preparation, Hahnemann found that the apothecaries were not always making them correctly or were intentionally giving his patients different medicines.

As he grew to distrust the apothecaries, he chose to dispense his medicines, an illegal act at the time in Germany.

The apothecaries then accused Hahnemann of “entrenching upon their privileges by the dispensing of medicines”.

He was arrested in Leipzig in 1820, found guilty and forced to move.

Prosecuted He moved to Kothen, where he was delegated special permission to practice and dispense his medicines by Grand Duke Ferdinand, one of the many European royalties who supported homeopathy. Despite the persecution, homeopathy continued to grow, not just because it offered a systematic approach to treating sick people, but also because orthodox medicine was ineffective and dangerous in some instances, especially for chronic diseases.

Indeed, there is general agreement among medical historians today that orthodox medicine of the 1700s and 1800s in particular frequently caused more harm than good.

Besides bloodletting and leeches, orthodox physicians used medicines made from mercury, lead, arsenic and various strong herbs to help purge the body of foreign disease-causing matter.

Despite the fact that historians and scientists today consider medicine of the 18th and 19th Century as unscientific and barbaric, orthodox physicians had the audacity to call homeopathy “quackery”, “unscientific”, “cultish”, and “devilish”.

Homeopathy lost out with the masses.

But it remained popular with the elite as it was effective, safe and did not cost much.

Indeed, the great Mahatma Ghandi, while studying law in the UK, noticed homeopathy was “safe, cheap and effective” and brought it back for the masses in India.

Wide range Homeopaths treat a veritable array of problems.

These include allergies, anorectal disorders, asthma, arthritis, back pain, neuralgia, colic, coughs and colds, cystitis, depression, eczema, gynaecological problems, hair loss, heartburn, hyper-pigmentation, insect bites, insomnia, irritable bowel syndrome, leg cramp, menopausal problems, migraines, morning sickness, nausea, obesity, phobias, pre-menstrual syndrome, sexual disorders, stress, teething pains, tumours and warts.

Most homeopaths regularly treat chronic or recurrent conditions such as eczema, rheumatoid arthritis, fatigue disorders, asthma, migraine, dysmenorrhoea, irritable bowel syndrome, recurrent upper respiratory or urinary tract infections and mood disorders. Patients with ill-defined illness that defy conventional diagnosis are also treated.

Significantly, homeopaths treat children more often than other complementary practitioners.

Homeopathy is most popular in the UK, where the Royal Family has had homeopathic physicians since the 1830s.

In England, as many as 45 per cent of conventional doctors (MDs) refer patients to homeopaths.

The treatment is part of the National Health Scheme (NHS).

This is of course, highly unscientific and anecdotal in nature.

But the Queen Mother lived to 100 and wherever she went, she took her homeopathy kit.

And she walked upright although she had arthritis.