|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homeo- Prophylaxis
A safe and effective alternative to vaccination.
Thomas Dellmann, Homeopath,Naturopath, M. So.Sc |
|
|
| |
What is homeopathy?
Homœopathy is a complete system of medicine developed by German physician
and chemist, Dr Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), based on the principle of "like
cures like".
Hahnemann found that many substances, when administered to healthy people, could
produce symptoms similar to those experienced by sick people. He also found that
illnesses could be cured by using small, specially prepared doses of these substances,
if prescribed on the basis of similarity of symptoms.
For example, coffee stimulates the nervous system and the production of urine.
A homoeopathic dose of coffee can cure a patient troubled with unusual mental
activity and sleeplessness together with excessive production of urine. In the
last 200 years the clinical effectiveness of homœopathy has been clearly
demonstrated and today homoeopathy is used worldwide. It is used in the treatment
of chronic illness, acute conditions and minor accidents requiring first aid.(from
AHA website)
How does homeopathy work?
In the past homeopaths have explained the clinical effects of homeopathy with
the concept of life energy or Chi. The dilution and shaking refines and strengthens
the life energy of the original substance, which in turn strengthens the life
energy of the person taking the homeopathic medicine. This increase in life energy
helps to increase support the body’s self- regulatory mechanisms, e.g.
strengthening the immune system.
Recently two chemist have found that molecules clump together when diluted. But
it only worked in polar solvents like water, in which one end of the molecule
has a pronounced positive charge while the other end is negative. Diluting a
remedy may increase the size of the particles to the point when they become biologically
active. (Bizarre chemical discovery gives homeopathic hint 07 November 01, www.newscientist.com,
quoting Chemical Communication Nov. 2001, p 2224)
What is homeoprophylaxis?
Homeoprophylaxis takes the “law of similars” one step further stating
that a crude substance that is capable of producing a group of symptoms in a
healthy person is capable of preventing this group of symptoms in an unprotected
person if the substance is given in a potentized form. Thereby one can choose
either a homeopathic preparation of the disease causing agent, ie. a virus, preventing
exactly the same symptoms, or a classical homeopathic remedy preventing a similar
group of symptoms.
For Homeoprophylaxis mostly nosodes are used, made from viral material, which
has undergone the process of dilution 1:100 and vigorous shaking, one thousand
or even 10 000 times. Avogadro’s law states that if a substance is diluted
1:100 more than twelve time there won’t be any molecules left of the original
substance. Therefore there is no danger of any viral material causing an acute
viral infection.
Historical evidence for homeoprophylaxis
In the early eighteen hundreds Scarlet Fever was effectively prevented by Samuel
Hahnemann using the homeopathic remedy of Belladonna.
During the European cholera epidemics of the mid eighteen hundreds, the death
rate was between 54% and 90% with conventional treatment, while the rate amongst
persons who received homeopathic prophylaxis was between 5% and 16%.
In 1907 Dr. Eaton collated the results of several homeopathic doctors in
Iowa during a smallpox epidemic and reported an efficacy rate of 97%. During
the 1918-20 Influenza outbreak in the USA the mortality rate was around 30%,
the mortality rate amongst individuals treated homeopathically was less than
1%. Dr. Margarete Blackie, Queen Elisabeth’s homeopathic physician wrote 1981 in “The
Challenge of homeopathy” (p.184, Unwin, London) “Clinical experience
proves that protection through homeopathic flu vaccines is given in individuals”.
Scientific evidence for homeoprophylaxis
There have been more than 200 hundred controlled trials in recent years, which
have conformed to objective scientific standards. The majority of these have
shown homeopathy to have a measurable therapeutic or prophylactic effect: homeopathy
was demonstrated to work significantly better than placebo, or as well as or
better than conventional treatment. Unfortunately there have been only two randomized
controlled trial using homeopathic prophylaxis so far. In August 1974 in Guarantigueta
province in Brazil, there was a severe epidemic of meningitis.
18.640 children were given homeopathic Meningococcinum 10 C, while 6.34o children
served as control. There were 4 cases of meningitis amongst the 18.640 homeopathically
immunized children and 34 amongst the 6.340 unprotected children = 95 % effectivness.
(Eizayaga F.X., Treatise on homeopathic medicine, 1991, pp 282-286, Marrecel,
Buernos Aires).
Another trial involved 65.826 children receiving homeopathic Meningococcinum
10 C and 23.532 seving as controls. After 1 year there were 3 cases of menigits
in the drug group and 13 in the control group = 91% effective (Mroninski C.,
Adriano E., Mattos G., Meningococcinum, Its protective effect against meningococcal
disease, Homeopathic Links, 2001, Vol. 14(4), pp 230-4). Dr. Chavanon reported
that homeopathic Diphtherinum produced a negative Schick test (= presence of
antibodies) for a period of ten years (Sankaran P., 1960, Prophylaxis in homeopathy,
The homeopathic medical publ., Bombay)
Isaac Golden, a Melbourne homeopath and world authority on homeopathic immunisation,
published a survey of 879 children having received homeopathic prophylaxis. Out
of those definitely exposed to infectious diseases only 11% contracted the actual
illness, thus averaging an effectiveness rate of 89%. He further observed that
about 10% of children had some minor, transient side effects such as increased
temperature or irritability. No severe side effects were observed. These side
effects are not due to the toxicity of viral material, but solely due to the
over stimulation of a child’s “life energy”. (Golden I., Vaccination
- a review of risks and alternatives, 5th ed., 1994, self published)
Criticism of homeoprophylaxis
It does not guarantee protection. However, the historical evidence for homeoprophylaxis
certainly doesn’t conform to current scientific standards. Until now there
are insufficient controlled trials to satisfy rigorous scientific methodology.
The trials on homeoprophylaxis were not published in peer reviewed journals.
However, both the historical evidence as well as the scientific trials shows
positive trend and seem to support the effectiveness and safety of homeopathic
prophylaxis. Further research is needed.
Isaac Golden is currently undertaking a Doctoral research at the Graduate School
of Integrated Medicine at Swinburne University in Melbourne undertaking a national
health survey comparing general immune competence of immunized children with
unimmunized children and homeopathically immunized children. Furthermore he is
currently conducting a randomized, placebo controlled clinical trial of homeopathic
measles prophylaxis.
Conclusion
Historical, clinical and scientific evidence show a clear trend that homeopathic
prophylaxis is an effective and safe way to prevent infectious diseases. It has
shown to be about as effective as conventional vaccination without any of the
side effects commonly associated with conventional vaccination, and should therefore
be the method of choice in the prevention of infectious diseases.
If symptoms of any infectious disease should occur after homeoprophylaxis consult
with your health care professional.
.
Contact details: Ph. 8339 6055
delle@picknowl.com.au
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
