There was an error in this gadget

Thursday, December 25, 2008

Flow Chat of Acutes

Courtesy : devjgd

Click on the picture to see the enlarge image
Flow charts are always self explanatory. Like other types of diagram, they help visualize what is going on and thereby help the viewer to understand a process, and perhaps also find flaws, bottlenecks, and other less-obvious features within it.Thanks to Devjgd for the flow chart of Acutes . As you notice this is based on Dr Praful Vijayrkar's Predictive Homeopathy programme.I am using it since a year & this is really a gem for every homeopath in dealing with acute cases.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Predictive Homeopathy

This book is written by Dr Praful Vijayrkar , is an essay to produce 'conviction' in those homoeopaths who are not fortunate enough to get results in acute and serious cases. If the book and chart is followed strictly, anybody can get results in such cases and that too with ideal ONE DOSE. Once they grow in confidence I'm sure they shall all prescribe holistically both in Acute and Chronic illnesses and this, I am sure, shall ring the Death-knell for those hypocritic Homoeopathic leaders of multi-homoeopathic-patent fame.
Finally, a word of advice dear friends, remember our homoeopathic motto-- AUDE SAPERE

Download Link: - Systematics & Homeopathy


This site is the unique site . Its database currently includes 
2387 single remedies in their natural systematic position
938 entries on remedy provings with their exact source and is constantly being extended.

The Substance Search enables you to find any homeopathically used or manufactured substance with its latin, english (or german) name or parts of that name.

The Taxonomy Search finds the families, orders, classes etc that the remedies belong to. You can be shown which substances of that family are homeopathically used and you see easily for which ones you can find a proving.

If you enter the site via the kingdoms  you find introductions and many taxonomic diagrams, from where you can click through the systematic structure.

With the Extended Search you can choose remedy provings after different criteria (author, language, time, substance, family) and be shown the exact source. Most of the provings are directly linked, so that you can read the original proving text with just one more click.

Monday, December 22, 2008

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

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

Witt CM, Lüdtke R, Baur R, Willich SN.

Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, D-10098 Berlin, Germany.

BACKGROUND: On the range of diagnoses, course of treatment, and long-term outcome in patients who chose to receive homeopathic medical treatment very little is known. We investigated homeopathic practice in an industrialized country under everyday conditions.

METHODS: In a prospective, multicentre cohort study with 103 primary care practices with additional specialisation in homeopathy in Germany and Switzerland, data from all patients (age > 1 year) consulting the physician for the first time were observed. The main outcome measures were: Patient and physician assessments (numeric rating scales from 0 to 10) and quality of life at baseline, and after 3, 12, and 24 months.

RESULTS: A total of 3,981 patients were studied including 2,851 adults (29% men, mean age 42.5 +/- 13.1 years; 71% women, 39.9 +/- 12.4 years) and 1,130 children (52% boys, 6.5 +/- 3.9 years; 48% girls, 7.0 +/- 4.3 years). Ninety-seven percent of all diagnoses were chronic with an average duration of 8.8 +/- 8 years. The most frequent diagnoses were allergic rhinitis in men, headache in women, and atopic dermatitis in children. Disease severity decreased significantly (p < 0.001) between baseline and 24 months (adults from 6.2 +/- 1.7 to 3.0 +/- 2.2; children from 6.1 +/- 1.8 to 2.2 +/- 1.9). Physicians' assessments yielded similar results. For adults and young children, major improvements were observed for quality of life, whereas no changes were seen in adolescents. Younger age and more severe disease at baseline were factors predictive of better therapeutic success.

CONCLUSION: Disease severity and quality of life demonstrated marked and sustained improvements following homeopathic treatment period. Our findings indicate that homeopathic medical therapy may play a beneficial role in the long-term care of patients with chronic diseases.

The LM Potencies in Homeopathy: From their beginings to the present day


In 2007, the company ARCANA Dr Sewerin GmbH & Co KG celebrated its 50th anniversary. To honour the occasion they decided in favour of a publication that looks back into the past: a history of the LM-potencies from their irst beginnings to the present day.  
A survey of this kind does not exist yet in the history of homoeopathy and there are also hardly any previous studies to fall back on. What causes additional diiculties is that there is still no consensus on the ultra high potencies. The historian must therefore steer clear of any partiality and critically evaluate the wide-spread hand-written and printed source materials. The author hopes that he has achieved this and that he has contributed to avoiding any
further fictionalisation in this field.
To  avoid  confusion  it  needs  to  be  pointed  out  that  the  terminology  around  the  50 millesimal  potencies has  remained  inconsistent.  It varies depending on  the manufacturer,  for historical reasons, with some producers using the abbreviation ‘Q’ and others  the  original  name  ‘LM-potencies’. The  official  German
pharmacopoeia Homöopathisches Arzneibuch (HAB) allows both names  and  only  makes  sure  that  the  manufacturing  speciications  are  consistent. he  term  ‘Q-potency’  (from  Lat.  quinquaginta milia = 50,000) that is commonly used today traces back to Jost Künzli  von  Fimmelsberg  (1915–1992).  Rudolf  Flury (1903–1977), who rediscovered Hahnemann’s 50 millesimal potencies preferred the abbreviation ‘LM’ (from the Roman numerals L for 50 and M for 1,000). ARCANA Dr Sewerin GmbH & Co KG and other manufacturers therefore follow a tradition if they use this name .


Friday, December 19, 2008

The facts about an ingenious homeopathic experiment that was not completed due to the “tricks” of Mr. James Randi.

The facts about an ingenious homeopathic experiment that was not completed due to the “tricks” of Mr. James Randi.

Courtesy : Dr vithoulkas

In 2002 the BBC Horizon program presented a documentary that showed that the Benveniste experiment about homeopathy was a fake one and therefore... homeopathy was also fake!

Does homeopathy work?

 James Randi

James Randi believes homeopathy is a delusion

The American illusionist James Randi offered a million dollars to anyone able to prove that homeopathic remedies can really cure people. The producer of the BBC's Horizon programme explains why he took up the challenge.

Mr.Vithoulkas had repeatedly stressed in many communications that the experiment was in any case a falsely conceived one from its very beginning (see the correspondence). The opponents of homeopathy basing in this false experiment by Benveniste their hypocritical arguments maintained that homeopathy was simply placebo effect.

Mr Randi after this false experiment (ignoring all other experiments that showed the effect of homeopathy) declared in his website ( that whoever could prove the validity of the action of a homeopathically potentized remedy beyond the Avogadro number would be winning one million $ as a prize.

Mr Vithoulkas challenged this statement and with this idea a new experiment was conceived that would prove that the highly potentized remedies could actually have a biological effect upon the human organism.

The experiment was simple: An individualized remedy would be given to a number of patients in a double blind fashion and half of the patients would receive placebo the other half would get the real remedy. The Greek Homeopathic physicians that would participate in taking of the cases and prescribing the remedies should point out in the end of the experiment the ones that they had got the real remedy.

The protocol was structured by a group of internationally known scientists and the experiment had to take place in one of the hospitals in Athens.

What follows is the real story (with facts in correspondence that transpired) of how through several "tricks", Mr.Randi refused to go through the experiment and rescued his million.

We sent the following statement to Mr. Randi in order to be posted to his website but he refused to post it.



INTRODUCTION: This is a retraction statement against the erroneous piece of information published on JREF (James Randi Educational Foundation) website , concerning the supposedly "withdrawal of Homeopaths" from a experiment (agreed upon between JREF and the Greek homeopathic team of medical doctors) that was devised in order to prove that there is a biological effect on human organism from the ultra high dilutions of homeopathic remedies, beyond the Avogadro number.


- The group of homeopaths led by Prof. George Vithoulkas contracted an agreement with JREF on 2003, with the objective of matching a ``challenge'' posed by JREF, in order to carry out a scientific experiment that proves that the human organism responds to homeopathic ultra dilutions, and claim the 1 million USD challenge prize offered by JREF.

- On 2003, a team of ``skeptics'' was set up, to represent the JREF side in the scientific experiment that would follow. The group of skeptics and the group of homeopaths led by Prof. George Vithoulkas have been conducting preparatory work continuously since then.

- A protocol was drawn up with the title: “Do homeopathic remedies have a recognizable biological effect on the human organism?”

- The venue for the experiment was to be a Greek hospital. Eventually, after several contacts with several hospitals, the municipality hospital "ELPIS" in Athens, Greece had agreed to host the experiment. The pharmacist that would provide the homeopathic remedies for the experiment -Mr. Korres Pharmacy-, was also found and the agreement was finalized on 12.10.2005. At that time Ms. Althea Katz, representative of Mr. Alec Gindis (he was one of the representatives of Mr. Randi) visited the Greek municipality hospital in Athens and discussed all the details about the experiment exhaustively.

- In 26.10.2005, Mr. Alec Gindis informed Prof. Vithoulkas by e-mail that the finances for the experiment were not yet raised and therefore the experiment could not start in spite of the fact that everything else was ready.

- In 17.8.2006, we received a signed agreement from Mr. Randi in which he stated that he was satisfied with the suggested protocol and he waived the claim of a preliminary test.

- As we waited for the finances to be raised, in order to start with the experiment, in 2.2.2006, we were informed that Mr. Randi had a health problem. When Mr. Gindis asked him to assign a representative in order to deal with all the procedures for the starting of the experiment, Mr. Randi refused to do so. As a result of his refusal the experiment was delayed so much until a new Mayor was elected in Athens who replaced the authorities of the ELPIS hospital, something that we had anticipated and repeatedly stressed to the “sceptics” long ago. The new Mayor Dr. Kaklamanis, a conventional medical doctor was indifferent if not hostile to the project. We had repeatedly warned the “sceptics” that if the experiment did not start the latest in the beginning of 2006, the new Mayor will change the key persons in the hospital -the president of the hospital and also the chairman of the scientific committee- and the new people most probably would not respect the decision of the previous scientific committee.

At this crucial time in the beginning of 2006 that the experiment had to start, Mr. Randi declared that he was sick and that his rehabilitation was ...going to last from the beginning of February till July! But this was the crucial period that the experiment should have started in order not to be affected by the new authorities of the hospital.

It is characteristic of the urgency from the exchange of e-mails and more especially the e-mail Mr. Gindis wrote to Mr. Randi: “I want to underline, though, that your participation is critical… As you can imagine, the homeopaths are very concerned about your health. In their eyes you “failed” them by getting sick right when they just about put it all together”.

In 7.4.2006 Mr. Gindis wrote to Mr. Randi in order to signal to him that the homeopathic team was ready to start: “All in all, I am impressed that he (Prof. Vithoulkas) managed to put together such a team, find a sponsoring hospital and find a way to recruit patients with advertising efforts and costs carried by the hospital and participating homeopaths”. But instead Randi suspended all activities of the experiment attributing it to his supposedly state of health!

Mr. Randi knew very well that this period was crucial for us to start the experiment and we had made this urgency explicit by sending several e-mails urging them that it was necessary to go ahead immediately. But Mr. Randi needed ...six months "to recover" denying to assign a collaborator. As expected, in Autumn of 2006 a new Mayor Dr. Kaklamanis M.D. was elected in Athens.

For us, all this extended period of recovery was obviously an excuse for not starting the experiment.

After the election of the new Mayor, a new chairman for the scientific committee and a new president of the hospital were installed.

Immediately we started pressing them to respect the decision of the previous scientific committee or to decide -in a new meeting- in favour of the experiment.

The interesting thing was that on 16.5.2008, Mr. Randi -thinking most probably that we could never succeed in getting a second permission- suddenly became very gallant and wrote: “In any case, it may not be necessary for me to actually be present in person for these tests. I am prepared to assign security and protocol duties to Alec Gindis and to Mr. Gabor, so they can act in my behalf”. But in the mean time and as early as March 2008 was already putting up in his website a text claiming that the "Greek homeopaths have withdrawn from the experiment expected"!!

The important question is: why Mr. Randi delayed the starting of the experiment by the moment everything was in place in 2006, claiming that he...would be recovering for six months and that nobody else could replace him, while the next time, when he thought that we could never succeed in obtaining a second permission from the ELPIS hospital, he became so gallant as to assign a collaborator?!!

He was so sure that we will not succeed in getting a second permission from the hospital that in 16.5.2008 Mr. Randi sent us a... notarized statement saying:

I intend to go through with the proposed test of the claims of homeopathy, as previously discussed in exchanges between George Vithoulkas and myself. This stance has not changed, and it will not change”. !!! See his new statement later on (17.10.2008) when he knew already that we had the permission!!

- In the end of July of 2008, after a lot of efforts, we obtained for a second time the permission to conduct the proposed homeopathic experiment at the ELPIS hospital.

- On 2nd and 3rd September of 2008, there was a final meeting in the International Academy of Classical homeopathy in Alonissos to discuss last details of the experiment. In the meeting were present the representative of Randi, Mr. Hrasko Gabor, Ms Althea Katz (representative of Mr. Alec Gindis), Dr. Menachem Oberbaum, principal investigator of the experiment and Prof. George Vithoulkas. They discussed for two days all the details about the experiment and the discussion was taped officially and also some of it videoed by a professional camera man from Israel.


In the document was stated that a major test of homeopathy in Greece has met the expected fate, being abandoned by the homeopathy community!!!!

This information infuriated the group of homeopaths led by Prof. George Vithoulkas and a lot of damage was caused to him as was accused for been associated with such unreliable people.

But the most outrageous event happened on 17.10.2008, when we actually received an "ultimatum" from Mr. Randi by which he was changing all the previous agreements refusing to go ahead with the experiment as planned.

Here is what he wrote:

“…Forget all previous correspondence exchanged on the subject. …What appears here is the current status. …First, we require that George Vithoulkas submit a regular, properly-filled-out application and submit it –just as we require everyone to do. After that has been received, we’ll go ahead– as with any regular applicant- with the arrangements, including the requirement for the preliminary stage”.

Here you can see his whole statement with some remarks from us in red:

To All Concerned:

The brouhaha that began as a comprehensive homeopathy test In Greece, has been consuming far too much of my time and attention, and of my colleagues, as well. Forget all previous correspondence exchanged on the subject. What appears HERE is the current status. Mr. Randi asked from us to forget all previous correspondence after we discovered the false, slanderous and deceptive posting at his website JREF with the title: “Another Withdrawal”.

We’re starting anew. Bear in mind that WE are offering the million-dollar prize, and WE will control the parameters, in line with the rules of the challenge – which are available to everyone. There will be no more exceptions, which I had – unwisely – granted to certain persons in order to be more accommodating; they have always chosen to be difficult, capricious, and arrogant as a result of this courtesy. No more.

First, we require that George Vithoulkas submit a regular, properly-filled-out application, and submit it – just as we require EVERYONE to do. After that has been received, we’ll go ahead – as with any regular applicant – with the arrangements, including the requirement for the preliminary stage. Mr. Randi changed the terms of agreement when he saw that everything was ready for starting the experiment. While his representatives were discussing with Prof. George Vithoulkas in Alonissos (September 2008), he was publicizing to his website that the Greek homeopaths had withdrawn!!! Since I’m not personally handling the challenge applications, I’m not aware of how many places George Vithoulkas has tried for a venue, but I know that his own country turned him down, as well as some others. Second, we’ll require that Mr. Vithoulkas obtain a venue and all the necessary facilities for conducting a double-blind, correct, acceptable protocol, before we will go ahead – following the receipt of the application.

Mr. Randi pretends that he ignores the fact that we had already the permission and the facilities for a second time though we had informed the “skeptics”.

The protocol used by the Royal Society/BBC tests in the UK – based on Jacques Benveniste’s design, and carefully supervised by the homeopathic community there – would be acceptable for this set of tests.

Mr. Randi wants to change even the terms of protocol that took years to be contracted!!

Don’t contact me personally on this matter. I’ll not entertain any arguments or pleas. It will be handled by Alison Smith, working with others on our staff.

Actually Mr. Randi is dismissing his previous collaborators, Mr. Alec Gindis and Mr. Hrasko Gabor!!!

These 300 words constitute my entire commentary on the matter.

James Randi.

It was clear now for a second time that when everything was in place in order to start the experiment, Mr. Randi didn’t wish to go ahead and found ridiculous excuses for withdrawing.

Consequently, as a least compensation, for the moral damage caused to Greek homeopaths and to the homeopathic community in general, we demand:

1. The apologies from Mr. Randi personally posted at his website.

2. The retraction of the text “Another Withdrawal” from all sites.

3. This document to be posted in the same place in the website of JREF where the "withdrawal statement" was posted.

4. A legal, notarized statement retracting the last statement of 17.10.2008 that has cancelled all Mr. Randi’s previous commitments.

If Mr. Randi fulfils all these conditions we will continue as planned. If these conditions are not fulfilled within a month, we will consider that Mr. Randi has withdrawn from the experiment. In any case, we will go ahead and complete the experiment without Mr. Randi, only with the help of sceptics Mr. Alec Gindis and Mr Hrasko Gabor who really care in seen this experiment finally completed.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

OpenRep-free open source homeopathic software


OpenRep -free open source homeopathic software :

courtesy : Vladimir Polony

OpenRep is the first truly free Open Source homeopathic software, developed by Vladimir Polony with only one goal - to provide functional and portable homeopathic software that could contribute to the whole homeopathic community. The whole design is driven by the functionality and ease of use, always offering the least complicated way of repertorizing and evaluating a homeopathic case. OpenRep is the first homeopathic software developed in Java, making it the most portable homeopathic software that can be run under a wide variety of operating systems.

The source code of OpenRep FREE is freely available for download making in the world's first and only Open Source homeopathic software.

List of Repertories included  :

Open source repertory model
All the repertories used in OpenRep are open source, which means, that their source code is freely available and can be used in other softwares, publications, etc. provided, that the name of the author of the repertory and the repertory name is always visibly declared. The description of the repertory model of the repertories is available here.

Repertorium Publicum
The first open source repertory. It is based on the latest edition of Kent's Homeopathic repertory and has undergone a lot of changes. For more information on the project, please see the Repertorium Publicum project page.

Short Repertory of Bach Flower Remedies by Vladimir Polony
This repertory was donated by its author Vladimir Polony and is declared to be open source. This means that it is open to any changes and modifications. See also

Boenninghausen's Repertory by Timothy Field Allen
This is the original Boenninghausen's repertory composed by Baron Clemens Maria Franz von Boenninghausen and translated by T.F. Allen in 1891, although it is not as complete as Boenninghausen's Repertory from C.M. Boger, it certainly does not lack the originality of approach. In this repertory we can clearly see the original Boenninghausen's approach of dividing symptoms into their components according to Locality, Condition, Modality and Concomitants and repertorizing by putting these symptoms together based on patients symptomatology.

Sensations as if by Herbert Roberts
This is a truly unique repertory containing rare symptoms expressed as Sensations as if. It contains unique symptoms not listed even in the most modern repertories. This repertory is a must for a thorough prescriber.

Homeopathic Repertory by James Tyler Kent
This is a the classic among all the repertories. All the modern repertories have taken to some extent this repertory as their basis. It is the biggest and most complete of the older repertories.

Boenninghausen's Repertory by Cyrus Maxwell Boger
A truly unique repertory that uses the characteristic approach of Boenninghausen. Although this repertory does not contain modern addition, from the point of view of completeness of remedies available in the repertory, it is considered the most complete and homogeneous repertory. The version you can find in OpenRep is the version from 1937 including Dunham's notes.

General Analysis by Cyrus Maxwell Boger
Although small in size, this repertory is considered to be a life-saver when encountering difficult cases. It consists of a small number of very general symptoms with a lot of cross-references that allow to perform a general analysis of a case based on general symptoms and conditions.

Download Links :

List of available versions

OpenRep FREE 1.6 (2008-11-30) MS Windows

OpenRep FREE 1.6 (2008-11-30) all operating systems

Sunday, December 07, 2008

The American Institute of Homeopathy Handbook for Parents: A Guide to Healthy Treatment for Everything from Colds and Allergies to ADHD, Obesity, and Depression

The American Institute of Homeopathy (AIH) is the oldest medical organization in the United States founded three years before the American Medical Association. The American Institute of Homeopathy Handbook for Parents is the first AIH publication that offers another option for parents who are reluctant to participate in the widespread extreme measures of conventional medicine such as stimulants, antidepressants, and overuse of antibiotics. Step-by-step Edward Shalts, a medical doctor who practices homeopathic medicine, explains what homeopathy is and how it works. He presents a user-friendly overview of acute and chronic issues and shows how parents can deal with them, either on their own for some problems, or in many cases, with a qualified practitioner. This important resource explains the principles of homeopathy, the nature of remedies, and the appropriate time to use homeopathy.

Click HERE to Download this book .

Friday, December 05, 2008

Two New Studies Find Anti-Homeopathy Review Wrong

Two New Studies Find Anti-Homeopathy Review Wrong

Source: Natural News

In August of 2005, the prestigious British medical journal the Lancet published a review comparing clinical trials of homeopathy with trials of conventional medicine. The conclusion of this study, which was widely hailed as evidence that homeopathy is worthless quackery, stated that homeopathic medicines are non-effective and, at best, just placebos. What’s more, an accompanying editorial in the Lancet said this “evidence” should close the door on the non-toxic, alternative treatment method, and flatly proclaimed this review should mark “the end of homeopathy”. Now two newly published studies, one in the journal Homeopathy and the other in the mainstream medical Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, have both gone on record to say the Lancet review was enormously flawed and downright inaccurate. Instead of showing homeopathy doesn't work, the conclusion should have been that, at least for some ailments, it is effective.
Homeopathy involves giving very small doses of substances called remedies that, according to homeopathy, would produce the same or similar symptoms of illness in healthy people if they were given in larger doses. The goal of homeopathy is to stimulate the body's defense system in order to prevent or treat illness. Homeopathy treatment is tailored to each individual and homeopathic practitioners work to select remedies according to a total picture of the patient, including not only symptoms but lifestyle, emotional and mental states, and other factors.
The original claim made in the Lancet review that homeopathic medicines are worthless treatments (other than being placebos) was based on six clinical trials of conventional medicine and eight studies of homeopathy. But what trials, exactly, were studied? It turns out the Lancet did not reveal this most basic information and, as the new studies point out, seriously flawed assumptions were made about the data that was presented. There are a limited number of homeopathic studies so it is not difficult to pick and choose facts to interpret selectively and unfavorably, which appears to be just what was done in the original Lancet anti-homeopathy article.
Bottom line: the Lancet’s report showing homeopathy is worthless lacked the academic care and scientific approach called for in medical journals. In fact, it could well be seen as a hack job.
In a statement to the press, George Lewith, Professor of Health Research at Southampton University in Great Britain, stated: “The review gave no indication of which trials were analyzed nor of the various vital assumptions made about the data. This is not usual scientific practice. If we presume that homeopathy works for some conditions but not others, or change the definition of a 'larger trial', the conclusions change. This indicates a fundamental weakness in the conclusions: they are NOT reliable.”
The two recently published scientific papers that investigated the previous Lancet review conclude that an analysis of all high quality trials of homeopathy show positive outcomes. What’s more, the eight larger and higher quality trials of homeopathy looked at a variety of medical conditions. The new studies point out that because homeopathy worked consistently for some of these ailments and not others, the results must indicate that homeopathic remedies can’t be simply placebos. In addition, the studies conclude that comparing homeopathy to conventional medicine was a meaningless apples-and-oranges approach. There are also concerns that the original anti-homeopathy review used unpublished criteria. For example, the researchers didn’t bother to define what they meant by “higher quality” homeopathy research.
The new studies not only cast serious doubts on the original Lancet review, which was headed by Professor Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne, but they strongly indicate Egger and his team based their conclusions on a series of hidden judgments that were prejudiced against homeopathy. So far,Professor Egger has declined to comment on the findings of the new studies in Homeopathy and the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,
A press statement from the National Center for Homeopathy explains that an open assessment of the current evidence suggests that homeopathy is probably effective for many conditions including allergies, upper respiratory tract infections and flu, but agrees that much more research is needed. To that end, the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) has announced it is currently supporting research in these areas:
* Homeopathy for physical, mental, and emotional symptoms of fibromyalgia (a chronic disorder involving widespread musculoskeletal pain, multiple tender points on the body, and fatigue).
* Homeopathy to help relieve or prevent brain deterioration and damage in stroke and dementia.
* Homeopathy (specifically the remedy cadmium) to potentially prevent damage to the cells of the prostate when those cells are exposed to toxins.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Ozone- a new wonder drug in homeopathy


A New Medical Drug


Velio Bocci
Medical Doctor, Specialist in Respiratory Diseases and Haematology and Emeritus Professor of Physiology at the University of Siena,
Siena, Italy

Oxygen-ozone therapy is a complementary approach less known than homeopathy and acupuncture because it has come of age only three decades ago. This book clarifies that, in the often nebulous field of natural medicine, the biological bases of ozone therapy are totally in line with classic biochemical, physiological and pharmacological knowledge. Ozone is an oxidising molecule, a sort of superactive oxygen, which, by reacting with blood components, generates a number of chemical messengers responsible for activating crucial biological functions such as oxygen delivery, immune activation, release of hormones and induction of antioxidant enzymes
, which is an exceptional property for correcting the chronic oxidative stress present in atherosclerosis, diabetes, infections and cancer. Moreover ozone therapy, by inducing nitric oxide synthase, may mobilize endogenous stem cells, which will promote regeneration of ischaemic tissues. The description of these phenomena offers the first comprehensive picture for understanding how ozone works and why, when properly used as a real drug within the therapeutic range, not only does not procure adverse effects but yields a feeling of wellness. Half of the book describes the value of ozone therapy in several diseases, particularly cutaneous infections and vascular diseases where ozone really behaves as a "wonder" drug. The book has been written for clinical researchers, physicians and ozonetherapists but also for the layman or the patient interested in this therapy.

Download Link :

Saturday, October 18, 2008

MU plans centre for research on 'Ayush'

Source: The Times Of India

LUCKNOW: With government of India (GoI) deciding to integrate traditional forms of medicine — ayurveda, unani, siddha and homeopathy (Ayush) — in

the national health system, plans are on the anvil in the Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University (CSMMU) to develop a centre for research and studies in 'Ayush'.
While Central Council for Research in Ayurveda and Siddha (CCRAS) has submitted a proposal requesting CSMMU to grant one acre land where an institute for studies and research in Ayurveda and Siddha can be established, the department of pharmacology, CSMMU, has applied before Central Council for Research in Homeopathy (CCRH) to fund a project for conducting research on homeopathy medicines.
"The GOI has established 32 ayurveda and siddha research centres in various parts of the country. CSMMU, if approves our proposal, would be the first in UP to have a research centre for ayurveda and siddha, where apart from studies in traditional medicines, clinical trials of various ayurveda and siddha preparations will also be done on patients before bringing them in the market," SN Upadhyay, assistant director, pharmacology, CCRAS, told TOI on Friday.
Upadhyay was in the city to take part in the two-day national conference on 'relevance of modern methods of pharmacological studies to traditional medicines' organised by the department of pharmacology, CSMMU. He along with other experts who spoke in the conference stressed on the need of enhancing traditional forms of medicine by providing them a scientific base.
Prof KK Pant, head pharmacology, CSMMU, informed that he has also submitted a project worth Rs 45 lakh before the CCRH for conducting research and drug trials of four homeopathy medicines. "Homeopathy stream has been providing treatment to people since long but we need to find out scientific evidences as to how homeopathy medicines work and use them for general welfare of the masses," he said.
For example, Prof Pant said, alloxan is used by scientists to induce diabetes in animals for research work but homeopath doctors claim that if used in low power and quantity, the compound can treat diabetes. Similarly, he said, ayurveda and siddha practitioners claim that they have treatment of cancer, diabetes etc. "But we need proof which can come through scientific analysis," he said.
Dr S Natesh, advisor, department of biotechnology, GOI, said that traditional medicines are being used in India for centuries. Clinical pharmacology can use modern techniques to evaluate their efficacy, safety and quality. We know through experience that some of these medicines work but the question is how and, whether there are any side effects," he said. "Of 34 bio-diverse hot spots in the world, three are in India. We also have a traditional knowledge base. Now the need is to apply modern techniques to make use of traditional wisdom," he said while welcoming the idea of developing an Ayush research centre in CSMMU.
YK Gupta, head pharmacology, AIIMS, New Delhi, said that the biggest strength of Indian traditional medicine is that it's based on over 5,000 years of experience. "We have infrastructure and brains to identify new drugs and formulations but the problem is that there is no road map," he said.
Dr Sanjay Khattri, pharmacology department, CSMMU, said extensive research is needed to ascertain the efficacy and safety of traditional medicines as there have been instances in US and other countries where Chinese traditional medicines proved fatal for people.
Prof Saroj Chooramani Gopal, vice-chancellor, CSMMU, also thinks that interaction between Ayush and allopathy experts would result in inter-disciplinary research leading to discovery of new medicines and drugs. She said that CCRSA proposal to set up a centre in CSMMU is a good one but there are some problems as well. "While CCRSA will provide funds and manpower for the centre, CSMMU has to provide land," she said. However, she said, some faculty members have objected to allotment of land for the said centre because there is paucity of space for many in-house projects. "But I am working for a solution," she said.

Friday, September 26, 2008

The Effectiveness of Homeopathic Therapeutics in Sports Induced Injuries

Thesis Paper

Ontario College of Homeopathic Medicine

By: Bryce Wylde and John vanDyk

Courtesy : Bryce Wylde

Sports medicine is a branch of medicine that specializes in the prevention and treatment of injuries that result from physical training and participating in athletic events. Homeopathy is a branch of medicine that specializes in the prevention and treatment of a vast majority of disease and can include within its scope the treatment of injuries that commonly result from athletic participation. Homeopathy can be effective in treating common sports injuries as well as chronic diseases. It more specifically involves treating the vital life force, which provides resiliency, flexibility and ability to adapt to circumstances that we experience in daily life when under stress. In the case of sports injuries, conventional treatment modalities should also be considered as an adjunct to homeopathy.

Homeopathy should be the initial consideration for sports injuries, as homeopathics are non-toxic and do not have the dangerous side effects that are common with conventional medicine. Homeopathic remedies do not interact with other drugs, are non addictive, and will not affect drug tests that some athletes are required to perform. With the use of homeopathy, healing time can be cut by 50-85 % (American Homeopathy, June 1984). A well prescribed homeopathic remedy can help the body eliminate lactic acid and other toxins that build up during physical exertion and increase the oxygen supply in blood, improving stamina and recovery time. Because treatment of sports injuries is a first aid type treatment we can propose that there is not the same need for the level of individualization found in the treatment of chronic conditions. As in treating first aid conditions, many sports injuries result in very similar symptoms in individual sufferers, so theoretically a single remedy should be equally effective for any person suffering that particular sports injury. But whether the common homeopathic medicines that are well known for specific complaints of sports induced injury should in fact be considered primary and best indicated- even when implementing classical methodology- is an argument of this paper.

When prescribing acutely, it is important to get a remedy that matches the symptoms as closely as possible because it is important that a medicine is found which acts as quickly as possible. In regards to the latter, it is important to note that lower potencies should be used. For more severe pain you may go as high as 30CH. The more your remedy matches the symptoms, the higher you can go with the potency, even if the pain is not so severe. With a well-matched remedy at a high potency, you can expect to see results within the first few hours for most injuries. When initially giving a remedy for an injury, the remedy can be given every hour, or even more regularly, depending on the severity of the pain, and the frequency of repetition can be decreased as the pain decreases to a frequency of one dose every four hours.

Most sports injuries are due either to muscle strains and sprains from overuse or too much effort, injuries to the joints, and tears- all of which frequently result from not doing enough “warm-up” exercises. Among some of the most common sports injuries are runner’s knee, pulled hamstring muscles, Achilles’ tendonitis, ankle strain and sprain, and inflammation of joint connective tissue (bursitis) to name only a few. (Johnson, 1998)

The homeopathic treatment of any individual patient should be carried through using the defined classical homeopathic methods described in the Organon. That is the prescription should always be- based on homeopathic convention- that remedy which best fits the case by holistic symptom analysis whilst remaining unbiased of the “common” or most often prescribed homeopathic medicines and those symptoms recognized solely by physical indication. But it follows that in an acute situation and without any major differentiating or strikingly unusual symptoms, any athlete with a sprained ankle will likely be given that remedy which was prescribed for any other athlete with the same chief complaint. It is without a doubt that classical homeopathy can be effective in the acute relief or chronic recovery of any sports induced injury.

It is therefore the goal of this paper to define sports related injury in relation to classical homeopathy; to investigate anatomical predispositions for sports injury; to define conventional treatment plans; to study the efficacy of homeopathy in the treatment of those patients having suffered from acute or chronic sports induced injury; and finally to decipher whether the common homeopathic medicines that are well known for specific complaints of sports induced injury should in fact be considered primary and best indicated even when implementing classical homeopathic methodology.

Click HERE to download the thesis paper on Effectiveness of Homeopathy in Sports Injuries.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Recent Agrohomoeopathic experiments in Indian state Chhattisgarh

Courtesy : Dr Pankaj Oudhia

To explore the possibilities of using Homoeopathic drugs to develop desired medicinal properties in medicinal trees used in Traditional healing with the help of Traditional Healers on Indian state Chhattisgarh Dr Pankaj Oudhia has conducted number of experiments by using about 40 homeopathic drugs. These experiments were done in different locations from July 2006 to July 2008. The selected drugs were applied on Buchanania lanzan, Tectona grandis, Oroxylum indicum, Diospyros melanoxylon, Mitragyna parviflora, Chloroxylon swietenia, Cleistanthus collinus, Ficus racemosa, Ficus religiosa, Ficus rumphii, Ficus virens, Ficus benghalensis, Azadirachta indica, Ailanthus excelsa, Pterocarpus marsupium, Terminalia arjuna, Terminalia alata, Terminalia bellirica, Terminalia chebula, Gardenia sp., Boswellia serrata, Madhuca indica, Wrightia tinctoria, Semecarpus anacardium, Acacia nilotica etc. After different durations desired plant parts were collected by the Traditional Healers. They tested its medicinal properties through traditional methods and medicinally rich parts were used in Traditional Healing. Such experiments were done for the first time. Many Healers suggested the use of Homoeopathic drugs with Traditional Allelopathic solutions.

Click HERE to read the full article .

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Organotherapy, Drainage and Detoxification



Detoxification has become a buzz word in the world of natural medicine, yet is often done haphazardly. The book "Organotherapy, Drainage and Detoxification", available from, explains the different steps to go through for a proper result. Recommended to homeopaths, herbalists, naturopaths, traditional healers and enlightened medical doctors.

How does one get the best results from detoxifying the body? By following a logical step of repair of organs and functions first, optimizing their work, then only proceeding with the removal and disposal of harmful substances that are a threat to our health.
Natura Medica Ltd and Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD have written and published such a guide. Based on 20 years of clinical experience, and 3 years in the writing, it takes you through all the phases of organ repair, optimization of functions and removal of toxins.
Many different approaches are described and can be used separately or in combination: physical, nutritional, supplements, herbal, homeopathic, osteopathic, the major clinical approaches are described and explained, with scientific and historic references.
There is a slight emphasis towards homeopathy, but even if you do not use it or dismiss it, the other techniques are useable and well explained.
A welcome and needed addition to the library of health practitioners who want better, safer and faster results for their patients.
Available as "print on demand" from

Click HERE to Preview this book.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

WIKI 4 CAM - New Alternative Medicine Encyclopedia


To counter misinformation about Alternative Medicine at wikipedia,, world’s leading homeopathy portal, has announced a parallel wiki project at


PRLog (Press Release)Aug 10, 2008 – Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has been a target of attack through WIkipedia, world’s most popular online encyclopedia.  A handful of skeptical editors continue to spread misinformation about CAM therapies by constantly editing Wiki content.
To counter this misinformation,, world’s leading homeopathy portal, has announced a parallel wiki project at , on 9th Aug. 2008.
According to Dr. Manish Bhatia, Director of, nearly all CAM articles on Wikipedia are heavily biased against CAM therapies. Everything that does not fall into the realm of modern medicine has been labeled as pseudo-scientific or unscientific at Wiikipedia.
WIkipedia is among the top 10 websites globally. Through it millions of people who use internet to search for alternative medicine are being systematically exposed to anti-CAM data. At the time when the world is rushing towards alternative medicine, the effort to sabotage the alternative medicine cannot be ignored.
To counter this misinformation, the alternative medicine community needed a place where it can build its own knowledge base without the undue interference of skeptics. It needed a place where the CAM practitioners themselves write articles and create a true picture of its history, development, efficacy and positive research.
To ensure that the alternative medicines is not discredited or disputed unfairly and to create a true encyclopedia for Complementary & Alternative Medicine (CAM),, world’s leading homeopathy portal, has announced a new parallel wiki project at
This new wiki will be open only to the practitioners of CAM therapies and will challenge all the skeptical views about CAM by building up an exhaustive database of information about Alternative Medicine

Saturday, August 09, 2008

Knowledge and Attitudes about HIV/AIDS among Homoeopathic Practitioners and Educators in India

courtesy : Indian Journal of Research in Homoeopathy Vol. 1, No. 1, 2007

Download : PDF (421.4 KB)

Adeline Nyamathi1, Vijay Pal Singh2, Ann Lowe1, Anil Khurana2, Divya Taneja2,
Sheba George3 and John L. Fahey4 1School of Nursing, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA, 2Central Council for Research inHomoeopathy,  Delhi, India
3Research Centers in Minority Institutions, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine
and Science and 4UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California

This study is designed to assess AIDS knowledge among Homeopathy educators and
physicians in India, which has not been evaluated previously. India now has the largest number of HIV infected persons worldwide, with an estimated cumulative 5.1 million infections. Homeopathy is the dominant system among the nationally-recognized alternative or complementary systems of medicine, which collectively
provide health care to around 600 million people in India. Homeopathy,with its holistic and patient-centered approach, has a wide reach to people at risk of contracting human immuno deficiency virus (HIV). Participants were 68 homeopathy physicians (34 educators and 34 practitioners) who completed a CDC questionnaire
measuring HIV/AIDS Knowledge regarding AIDS. This study reports the current level of knowledge of, and attitudes about, HIV/AIDS among homeopathy educators and practitioners. These findings will assist in the development of an education module to equip homeopathic health care personnel to impart accurate AIDS information
and prevention counseling to their patients in an efficient manner.
KEYWORDS : Education – HIV/AIDS – Homeopathy – India

Friday, August 08, 2008

Global researches in homeopathy for Maternal & Child Care

Read this document on Scribd: global researches in homeopathy for Maternal

This paper was presented by Dr Hari Singh , Research Officer (CCRH)in a recently concluded State Workshop on "State Campaign on Homoeopathy for Mother & Child Care " in Lucknow on 17-18th March 2008. This paper is the compilation of homeopathic clinical trials conducted by various individuals & institutions globally.

Download : PDF

Friday, July 11, 2008

A Multicentric Open Clinical Trial to evolve a group of Efficacious Homeopathic Medicines in " Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH)

Source : CCRH News Letter
Download : Text
The prostate is a muscular, walnut-sized gland that surrounds part of the urethra, the tube that transports urine and sperm out of the body. A part of the male reproductive system, the prostate secretes seminal fluid, a milky substance that combines with sperm produced in the testicles to form semen. During sexual climax, muscles in the prostate propel this mixture through the urethra and out through the penis.
Anatomy and Physiology
The prostate is located directly beneath the bladder and in front of the rectum. Because the upper portion of the urethra passes through the prostate, if the gland becomes enlarged it can obstruct the passage of fluid through the urethra. While this is uncomfortable, it generally does not impair a man's ability to function sexually; however, the discomfort nd embarrassment it causes can interfere with sexual activity.
Diseases of the Prostate
Benign diseases are noncancerous. They can be uncomfortable and inconvenient but are not life-threatening, and often can be treated with drugs or surgery. The two main benign diseases of the prostate are prostatitis and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). The main malignant (cancerous) disease of the prostate is adenocarcinoma of the prostate, or prostate cancer.
Role of Homeopathy
In homeopathy literature various medicines are given for the treatment of prostatic enlargement but no significant work has being done to elicit their efficacy. As such there is need to explore the efficacy of homeopathic medicines otherwise indicated for various diagnostic symptoms of Benign prostatic hyperplasia in the homeopathic literature.
Central Council Of Homeopathy, India has undertaken this project in its  Lucknow, Gudiwada, Bhopal, Noida, triputh & siliguri centres .
Click HERE to download the study report.
Click on the image to view the enlarged & clear picture.

Sunday, July 06, 2008

Clinical evaluation of Homoeopathic medicines in chronic cervicitis and cervical erosion- A study report

Clinical evaluation of homoeopathic medicines in chronic cervicitis and cervical erosion

S R Sharma, Bindu Sharma , Clinical Research Unit, Shimla.

C Venkataranam, K.S.V Bharat Lakhshmi R V R Prasad, Clinical Research Unit, Tirupati.

Hari Singh, Asha Hari Singh, Praveen Oberai,Sangeeta Duggal, Savita Kattara, Regional Research Institute, New Delhi.

B. K. Singh, Ojit Singh, Clinical Research Unit, Imphal.

S D Pathak, M K Rai, Clinical Research Unit, Varanasi (U.P.).

Source : CCRH News letter 2007

Download : Full Text

Objectives: The objectives of the study were to evolve a group of most effective homoeopathic medicines in chronic cervicitis and cervical erosion and to identify their reliable indications, useful potencies, frequency of administration and relationship with other medicines.

Methods: The study was undertaken by Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy at its Units/Institute at Shimla, Imphal, Varanasi, Tirupathi and New Delhi. Cases of Cervicitis and Cervical erosion, presenting with vaginal discharge, low backache, lower abdominal pain/discomfort or dyspaerunia confirmed by P/V & P/S examination were enrolled in the study. Cases suffering from other chronic disease(s) or under other system of treatment were excluded from the study. Homoeopathic medicines were prescribed on the basis of totality of symptoms of each case, in mother tincture (Q) or 6C, 30C, 200C & 1M potency. A total of 3213 cases were followed up for one year. Assessment of improvement was done on predefined parameters.

Results: There was varying degrees of improvement; 261 cases were cured, 1104 cases improved markedly, 982 cases moderately, 713 cases mildly and 153 cases did not improve. Medicines found effective were: Alumina(n=114), Borax(n=67), Calcarea carbonicum(n=200), Caulophyllum(n=170), Hydrastis(n=110), Kreosotum(n=300), Lachesis(n=160), Mercurius solubilis (n=74), Natrum muriaticum(n=97), Pulsatilla(n=429) and Sepia(n=433). A few of the cases, who required repeated cauterization in the past, got cured permanently and required no cauterization after homoeopathic treatment.

Conclusion: Sepia alone emerged as the most frequently indicated medicine for Cervicitis and Cervical erosion. The objective to identify indications of homoeopathic medicines was achieved. But, other objectives, such as relationship between different medicines, could not be achieved.

Saturday, July 05, 2008

Encyclopedia of Homeopathy by Andrew Lockie

Homeopathy is far more than just a different set of “pills” for everyday ills. It provides a language  for  diagnosis  and  a  range  of  approaches  to  health.  This  book  provides  the information necessary to use homeopathy to treat many every day illnesses by focusing on the cause and the presenting symptoms. Central to this  is an understanding of the homeopathic remedies themselves.  The clear descriptions and illustrations in this book make the exploration of homeopathy and its medicines a delight and bring accurate use of homeopathy for minor ailments into the home. In addition, more serious conditions are described, and the way homeopathy can play a part in the holistic management of these conditions is explored.

Dr. Andrew Lockie was a homeopathic physician and a member of the Royal College of General Practitioners and the Faculty of Homeopathy when he wrote the first edition of Encyclopedia of Homeopathy. In this book, Andrew Lockie has provided an excellent and straightforward  introduction  and overview of  this broad  subject. We,  like Dr. Lockie, believe  that many more  people  can  access  both  the  benefits  of   homeopathy  and  the wonders of the remedies through this book.

Click HERE to download the book in pdf format .

Monday, June 30, 2008

Clinical Trial of Homoeopathic Preparations of Amyleum Nitrosum, Azathioprine, Cocainum Muriaticum and Cyclosporine in HIV Disease- a study report

This Clinical  study was undertaken under guidance of Dr. V.P. Singh ,Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy , New Delhi at the RRI, Mumbai (May, 1989) and CRU, Chennai (October, 1991)  by CCRH to ascertain whether homoeopathy can play a role in the treatment and management of HIV infection . The results obtained during the pilot study prompted a randomized placebo controlled study at Mumbai (1995-97). The results of the study were published in the British Homeopathic Journal (1999).

In  between April 1998 and March 2003  , 237 HIV infected individuals including, 96 Females and 8 children less than 10 years of age were enrolled in the study .Three of these individuals were suffering from concurrent Hepatitis B infection and 2 were reactive to VDRL . Amyleum Nitrosum, Azathioprine, Cocainum Muriaticum and Cyclosporine were primarily used as medicines under trial . Other Homoeopathic medicines were used only during seasonal minor ailments based on presenting signs and symptoms.

Assessment of Outcome :

  • The response to the treatment was assessed at the end of the study and was based on the change in clinical presentation
  • The response to treatment was also assessed by the haematological and immunological  investigations such as CD4/CD8 counts
  • Most of these investigations were conducted at the Council’s HIV Research Lab.

Download the report  in power point presentation .

Friday, June 27, 2008

Scientific Research in Homeopathy

Links To New Articles :

Please click on the provided links to access the full text of the following articles:

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Effects of homeopathy in mice experimentally infected with Trypanosoma cruzi.

Source : Pubmed

Effects of homeopathy in mice experimentally infected with Trypanosoma cruzi

de Almeida LR, Campos MC, Herrera HM, Bonamin LV, da Fonseca AH.

Department of Animal Parasitology, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the action of homeopathic treatment on mice experimentally infected with Trypanosoma cruzi. METHODS: Eighty adult male C57BL/6 inbred mice were randomly allocated to five groups treated with biotherapy (nosode) of T. cruzi 12dH (12x) pre- and post-infection; Phosphorus 12dH post-infection; infected control treated with control solution and uninfected control. The biotherapy was prepared by the Costa method from the blood of mice experimentally infected with the Y strain of T. cruzi. Phosphorus was used because of its clinical and reportorial similarity to Chagas disease. T. cruzi (10(4)) sanguineous forms were inoculated intraperitoneally per animal. Parasitaemia was monitored, leukocyte and serological responses were evaluated at 0, 7, 14 and 42 days after infection. The prepatent and patent periods of parasitaemia, maximum of parasitaemia, day of maximum parasitaemia and mortality rates were compared between groups.

RESULTS: A significantly shorter period of patent parasitaemia was observed in the group treated with the biotherapy before infection (p<0.05) than in the other groups. This group also had the lowest parasitaemias values at 9, 13, 15 (p<0.05), 17 (p<0.05), 22, 24 and 28 days, a lower rate of mortality and a significant increase of lymphocytes compared to the infected control group. The Phosphorus group had the longest period of patent parasitaemia, higher maximum parasitaemia, and a significant reduction of lymphocyte numbers, but no mortality. The infected control group had the highest mortality rate (not statistically significant), and the highest IgG titres at 42 days post-infection (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that pre-treatment with biotherapy modulates host immune response to T. cruzi, mainly during the acute phase of the infection. Phosphorus shows an action on the pathogenicity by T. cruzi infection. Homeopathic treatment of T. cruzi infection should be further investigation.

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Management and Control of Genetic Processes in Cotton Plants through Homoeopathy

Management and Control of Genetic Processes in Cotton Plants
through Homoeopathy

Source : Central Council Of Research In Homeopathy

Dr. H.U. Gangar

Ex-Head, Engineering & Workshop, Central Institute for Research on Cotton Technology, (ICAR) , Mumbai


Detailed study on effects of homoeopathic drugs on plant bodies was undertaken at
Central Institute for Research on Cotton Technology (ICAR) in Mumbai. This paper
presents promising results of some of these preliminary experiments. This study reveals
that electrically neutral and pure distilled water develops internal electrical charges as
soon as homoeopathic drugs are added into it. Different drugs as well as different
potencies of same drug develop different electrical charges. Further experiments,
conducted on plants, proved that medicated water containing drugs of highest potency
strongly influences the genetic processes of plants. It can accelerate germination
process, can shorten cultivation period, can enhance yield as well as quality of cotton
crop and also makes it possible to grow it during off-season.


Homoeopathic drugs are prepared by successively diluting the drug in the medium of rectified spirit.

The original drug diminishes gradually with each successive dilution. After few diluting stages, the
original drug physically disappears from the medium (spirit). However, with each successive dilution, the
drug becomes effectively more powerful as far as its effect on human body is concerned. Researchers
of medical science could not find the physical presence of original drug in homoeopathic medicines of
higher dilutions (potencies). Under the circumstances, very credibility of homoeopathic stream of science
is being suspected.

Under this background, research study on the current subject was carried out in two phases. In the first phase of
work, through series of experiments, it is established that electrically neutral pure distilled water develops internal electrical charges as soon as few drops of homoeopathic medicines are added into it. Different drugs as well as different potencies (dilutions) of same drug produce different electrical charges. In the second phase of this study, through various experiments conducted in pots, it is proved that such medicated water containing drugs like Abrotanum etc. in highest potency (containing electrical charges) influences the genetic processes of cotton plants in a big way. It can accelerate germination process, can shorten the cultivation period, can enhance the yield and quality of cotton crop and also makes it possible to grow it during off-season.

Download the full report in PDF format .

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

Free Homeopathy Book from Nelson

Source : Freebie Fanatic

if you are an avid reader of homeopathy books then you will be delighted to discover the Wigmore Publication book that you can get for free thanks to Nelsons. Nelsons is one of the leading producers of homeopathic remedies, and they have a vast selection of products that are available all throughout Britain.

In order to spread the word and raise awareness about homeopathy and how it can be used, they are willing to send out this free book that is valued at £2.99. You can actually choose between a couple of different books, whichever one you would like – Homeopathy or The 38 Bach Flower Remedies. In order to request your free book just visit their website and complete a few short questions they ask you to do and select the title you would like to receive.

The 38 Bach Flower Remedies is a look into the remedies that can be used on a daily basis, and is a great addition to your library or as a gift for someone who is interested in natural remedies.

Click here.

Sunday, June 01, 2008




 Part 1 :  Abies abies to Arctostaphylos (36 illustrations)
Part 2 :  Arctosraphylos (cont.) to Cannabis (33 illustrations)
Part 3 :  Capsicum to Citrus aurantium, var. sinensis (40 illustrations)
Part 4 Citrus aurantium, var. sinensis (cont.) to Ecballium elaterium (33 illustrations)
Part 5 Echinacea to Gaultheria (30 illustrations)
Part 6 :  Gaultheria (cont.) to Jateorhiza calumba (39 illustrations)
Part 7 Juglans to Nectandra (39 illustrations)
Part 8 Nepeta to Polygala senega (27 illustrations)
Part 9 Polygala senega (cont.) to Ricinus (35 illustrations)
Part 10 : Ricinus (cont.) to Styrax benzoin (41 illustrations)
Part 11 : Styrax benzoin (cont.) to Zingiber (35 illustrations)

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

THE TRUTH ABOUT HOMEOPATHY - Dispelling the MYTHS that Surround it!

Thanks to : Louise Mclean, Editor, Zeus Information Service.



In this article, I would like to dispel a plethora of myths surrounding homeopathy which have been used to discredit this highly efficacious healing art and science.  Homeopaths are given few opportunities in the media to defend their profession, so a lot of misconceptions abound. The medical profession in general presents a fierce and blinkered opposition, yet as Big Pharma is learning of all sorts of amazing cured cases, they are determined to stamp out competition

via EU regulation.

Myth No. 1Homeopathic medicines cure nothing.

Homeopathy works by stimulating the body’s OWN healing mechanisms, through like for like. A substance that would cause symptoms in a healthy person can be used to cure the same symptoms in a sick person by giving a minute, highly potentised dose of that substance acting as a catalyst to jump start their own healing mechanisms.  Everyone of us has our own natural innate healing powers.  All that is needed is the correct stimulus to kick start it.  In healthy people this may just be rest and good food but many people become 'stuck' in their physical, emotional or mental illness and cannot recover. Of course there are different levels of health and the choice of potency given should reflect that.  Low potencies are given for very physically ill people and higher for those whose problems are emotional or of the mind.  Homeopathy is very successful in treating emotional problems such as stress, anxiety and fears.

Myth No 2 – Homeopathic medicines are just water

Homeopathic medicines are NOT made using only dilution.  Dilution alone would do nothing whatsoever.  Many homeopaths are getting tired of reading this highly inaccurate reporting in the media. All homeopathic medicines are made by a process of dilution and SUCCUSSION (potentisation through vigorous shaking - 100 shakes between each potency - i.e. between a 1c and a 2c, between a 2c and a 3c potency, between a 3c and a 4c, etc. etc.)  Most homeopathic medicines can be bought in either 6c or 30c from Boots or from health shops.  Higher potencies of 200c and 1m (1000c) can be obtained only from homeopathic pharmacies. Succussion is nowadays done by machines, originally by hand.  Succussion brings out the formative intelligence of the substance and imprints it upon the 60% distilled water + 40% alcohol medium used to make homeopathic medicines - alcohol acting as a preservative.

Myth No. 3homeopathic medicines are unscientific

Homeopathic medicines undergo a scientific 'Proving' where a control group of 50+ healthy volunteers ('Provers') are instructed to keep taking a remedy under trial until they develop symptoms which they must record in detail.  Substances that have been rigorously tested include nearly everything on the Periodic Table - metals, minerals and gases as well as plants and even things like snake venom. 

The Provers are given a bottle of a new remedy being tested in the 30c potency and must keep taking it until they develop symptoms, which must be carefully recorded and then submitted to a database.  The Provers must be healthy and symptom-free to start with so that the symptoms they experience are new ones CAUSED by the remedy.

They must keep a careful daily note of what happens and not discuss it with any of the other Provers.  Whatever symptoms the Provers all experienced in common become the black type symptoms of the remedy which are then added to the Materia Medica of homeopathic medicines and Homeopathic Repertory (encyclopedia of symptoms). Thus the curative indications of a remedy are obtained for clinical use.

Symptoms have also been obtained through historical records of accidental poisonings, such as Arsenic and Belladonna.  For example, poisoning by Arsenic causes vomitting, diarrhoea, restlessness, anxiety and extreme chill. Therefore you might get a patient in this state (possibly after food poisoning) and Arsenicum in a homepathic tablet will quickly alleviate them.

There are more than 4,000+ homeopathic medicines including nearly everything on the periodic table. But of course all of the remedies tested have been diluted and succussed (potentised), so they are not toxic like modern drugs.

The Homeopathic Materia Medica and Repertory are extremely large books or divided into volumes. The Repertory is divided into sections in this order: Mind, Vertigo, Head, Eye, Vision, Ear, Hearing, Nose, Face, Mouth, Teeth, Throat, External Throat, Stomach, Abdomen, Rectum, Stool, Bladder, Kidney, Prostate Gland, Urethra, Urine, Male, Female, Larynx, Respiration, Cough, Expectoration, Chest, Back, Extremities, Sleep, Dreams, Chill, Fever, Perspiration, Skin, Generals.  Obviously some sections are bigger than others! 

In the various Repertories, remedies are listed alongside the full range of symptoms (rubrics) in abbreviated form - all information being systematically taken from Provings and clinical practice. Every human state of mind, emotions and body is listed. Symptoms that would mean nothing to a medical doctor can be looked up and the curative remedy found in these huge book. Homeopathy is a study of human nature, endlessly fascinating and how negative states of mind and emotions affect the physical body culminating in illness. Nowadays many homeopaths use computer software programmes which contain all this information.

Myth No. 4homeopathic practitioners receive inadequate training

In fact all qualified homeopathic practitioners undergo a four year training course at accredited Colleges, which includes Anatomy and Physiology, as well as Pathology and Disease, Materia Medica, Homeopathic Philosophy and study of the Homeopathic Repertory.  Yet medical doctors and nurses treat after much shorter homeopathy courses. To be really good, you need to study intensively for about 10 years.  Homeopathy is a lifetime's work and you never stop learning. 

Myth No. 5 - there are no studies that prove homeopathy works 

In the past 24 years there have been more than 180 controlled, and 118 randomized, trials into homeopathy, which were analysed by four separate meta-analyses. In each case, the researchers concluded that the benefits of homeopathy went far beyond that which could be explained purely by the placebo effect. Another meta-analysis found that 65 of the 89 trials analysed had produced an effect way beyond placebo (source WDDTY )  

A study of 6500 patients at the Bristol Homeopathic hospital was conducted showing that over 70% of patients reported complete cure or significant improvement of their symptoms.

A study on the properties of water was performed by Dr. Rustrum Roy. This paper provides an interdisciplinary base of information on the structure of liquid water.

The Structure Of Liquid Water; Novel Insights From Materials Research; Potential Relevance To Homeopathy

Rustum Roy1, W.A. Tiller2, Iris Bell3, M. R. Hoover4

Received: 2 August 2004 Revised: 6 September 2004 Accepted: 14

Homeopathy can never be tested properly through conventional trials because each prescription is individualised as every person is unique.  Therefore 10 people with arthritis, for example, may all need a different homeopathic medicine.  So it is far from ideal to follow the allopathic trial paradigm to test homeopathy.  In orthodox medicine trials, all are given the same medicine to be tested.  In homeopathy all may be given different medicines!

Anybody who has an understanding of the principles of homeopathy can be left in no doubt that we are dealing with a scientific therapeutic method in the best possible sense: it is based on observation, facts and phenomena and follows the rules of inductive logic that can be tested in daily practice. It is a comprehensive and comprehensible mode of therapy, which in some countries is first line treatment for the whole range of acute and chronic conditions. It has been proven abundantly that it is superior in the treatment of epidemic diseases to allopathy.

It is amazing how people, who like to see themselves on the side of unprejudiced evaluation, can be so blinkered. People pass judgment on homeopathy who have never bothered to study it. Like any science it takes time to learn (especially to learn it correctly) and years of practice to master but the rewards for patients, practitioners and the NHS purse are great. Before those who preach pure science come down on therapies like homeopathy too heavily, they should ask themselves how many of the accepted treatments within the NHS have a scientific evidence base?

With every homeopathic medicine we know exactly the substance it was made from, unlike most modern drugs where we have no clue of the ingredients.  This is ironic too as ALL natural health products, whether vitamin, mineral or food supplement must clearly state on the label every single ingredient.  When we go to the supermarket or health food shop, we hold up the packet or bottle and read what is in the product, yet people happily swallow prescription drugs with no idea whatsoever what they have taken!  They could contain cyanide or any poison and the patient would be none the wiser.  With the new class of genetically modified drugs, such as the one used in the Northwick Park drug trial in London, the dangers of a massive allergic reaction, such as the drug testers experienced, are even greater.

Those, who claim to be scientists, should have the ability to at least try to understand different paradigms. If not, they look more like people who have settled on a comfortable view of the world which might soon look very outmoded indeed. As the great musician and conductor Sir Yehudi Menhuin once said: 'Homeopathy is one of the few specialised areas in medicine, which carries no disadvantages but only advantages.'.

Regarding the Horizon programme on homeopathy, Prof. Madeleine Ennis was not involved in the Horizon test. The test was carried out by Wayne Turnbull at Guys hospital, London. It has been conceded that the Horizon test was not an exact replica of Ennis' successful trials. Many of his protocols were different. You can read at this link where he added in an ammonium chloride lysis step which would have ended up killing the very basophils that were such an integral part of the test.,55
Ennis' original test was replicated in 4 different labs in 4 different countries.

Dr. Peter Fisher's article in PubMed discusses the 'End of Homeopathy' editorial and meta-analysis published in the Lancet of 26th August 2005 and how nearly 100 successful studies that showed homeopathy worked were thrown out and only a few that were inconclusive were used.  Dr. Fisher is the Queen's homeopathic physician and heads the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital. (The vitriolic editorial was caused by the World Health Organisation bringing out a draft report in 2005 which was favourable towards homeopathy!)

"The final analysis which concluded that ‘the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects’ was based on just eight clinical trials of homeopathy. The Lancet's press release did not mention this, instead giving the impression that the conclusions were based on all 110 trials."  "One of the most serious criticisms is the complete lack of transparency: we have no idea which eight trials were included in the final, damning, analysis."  "The literature references are not given, nor any information on the diagnoses, numbers of patients, etc., nor can these be deduced from the article.  Prof. Egger has refused several requests to disclose the identity of the eight trials. This is not even a matter of scientific method, but of natural justice: the accused has the right to know the evidence against him."

“The Lancet meta-analysis in 2005 of homeopathic trials was said to be based upon 110 placebo-controlled clinical trials of homeopathy and 110 clinical trials of allopathy, which were said to be matched but were in fact reduced to 21 trials of homeopathy and 9 of conventional medicine and further reduced to 8 and 6 trials.”

Other Responses from the Homeopathic Community on the Lancet Article

from WDDTY

George Vithoulkas' 'Science of Homeopathy' is still considered an excellent exposition of the science.

More scientific studies:

Myth No. 6 - homeopathic hospitals are a waste of money

There are 5 homeopathic hospitals in the UK - in London, Liverpool, Tunbridge Wells, Bristol and Glasgow. They cost the NHS about £6 million a year. Compare that to the £100 billion for the total 2008 annual NHS budget!! These homeopathic hospitals SAVE money for the NHS as the Smallwood report commissioned by Prince Charles has demonstrated.

At one of the earliest debates on the NHS Act 1948 the Government pledged that homoeopathy would continue to be available on the health service as long as there were "patients wishing to receive it and doctors willing to provide it".  Many people who depend upon it are alarmed at the possibility that Homeopathy may no longer be available on the NHS.  Since the passing of the NHS Act in 1948, a provision has always been made for people to be treated at homeopathic hospitals in the UK and until PCTs began to stop referring patients, there had indeed been long waiting lists, some 6 months or more.

See this letter sent out to all Primary Care Trusts in 2006 signed by a group of professors hostile to homeopathy and putting pressure on PCTs not to refer patients to the 5 homeopathic hospitals in the UK. They wrote the letter on NHS headed paper!

Myth No. 7 – Cure with homeopathy is simply the Placebo Effect. 

When Prince Charles treats his farm animals at Highgrove with homeopathic medicines do they know that a remedy has been put in the water they drink?  Farmers successfully use homeopathic medicines for their cows suffering from mastitis.  Does a tiny baby know when their fever drops dramatically using Belladonna or Aconite, that they have been given a homeopathic medicine?!  As anyone who has treated animals and babies with homoepathic medicines will tell you, homeopathy works even better on animals and babies than it does on adults!  If proof were needed, this is it. Not placebo.

Perhaps the most striking research on homeopathy that goes some way to debunking the placebo argument is when homeopathic remedies are tested on live tissue in a petri dish or studies involving animals (mice in this case)

Myth No. 8 - homeopathic medicines contain no molecules

Any remedy under a 12c or a 24x potency still contains the original molecules of the substance and this is known as Avogadro's number.  These low potencies are most suitable for physical illness of long duration as well as to heal specific organs that are not functioning properly.

Myth No. 9 ‘Anecdotal Evidence’ does not constitute scientific evidence!

Most medical, surgical procedures and drug usage are not backed by studies - only by anecdotal evidence.  According to the US Government's Office of Technology Assessment (Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment: Assessing the efficacy and safety of medical technologies. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1978), only 10-20% of all medical procedures and off-label drug usage are backed by clinical studies.

Strong anecdotal evidence among informed professionals is actually quite reliable - at least as reliable as clinical testing.

Many clinical tests come to diametrically opposed conclusions. You could say that the problem was discovered through anecdotal evidence - and merely confirmed through a peer reviewed study.

The problem isn't with the use of anecdotal evidence. It's with the double standard applied by the establishment (medical and regulatory) that holds complementary medicine to an absurdly higher standard, allowing medical doctors to do pretty much whatever they want. If informed anecdotal evidence is allowable for 85% of all medical procedure and drug usage, why is alternative health held to an impossible 0% standard?

Millions of people worldwide testify that homeopathy cures their illnesses yet apparently that cannot be construed as 'evidence'.

If a person were to walk out of their house to the town centre and witness someone having their bag snatched or witness a car accident, then when they relay this information to the Police or to their friends and family, it is anecdotal evidence.

If someone go on holiday, stays at a nice hotel, eats delicious food, comes back home and relates the holiday to their friends, that is anecdotal evidence.

Does that mean that the above never happened? According to the detractors of complementary or alternative medicine, yes it does!

Millions of people have been cured of their diseases or afflictions using homeopathy, herbs, healing, vitamin supplements, special diets and on and on. Yet according to orthodox medicine all of these cures are anecdotal evidence and as such do not merit any further investigation, study, or validity. As far as orthodox medicine is concerned, these cures never happened.

Yet what if someone witnessed a car accident and the Police wanted them to make a statement? Would the statement in court be dismissed as anecdotal evidence? Would the police, even if they arrived at the scene of the accident to find the person still there comforting the passengers or trying to help, say they had not been there and their evidence is non existent? I don’t think so.

So how for so long have we put up with the top dogs in the medical establishment dismissing our cures as total nonsense, figments of our imagination, placebo cures, or outright lies?

How when millions are cured around the world using homeopathic medicines, can these cures be dismissed as unworthy of attention, simply ‘anecdotal evidence’.

Orthodox medicine implies through this that all cures with alternative medicine are untrue or simply imagined. Even when all the evidence is put before them, they become angry and even aggressive, simply refusing to see or to listen.

All the case notes in the surgery show that Mr. A had arthritis for 5 years, had been on anti-flammatory medicines, yet after homeopathic treatment for 6 months, the arthritis is cured. The reaction of the doctor is either disbelief or an attitude where they will not talk about it and do not want to know.

Of course there are some orthodox doctors who practise acupuncture, homeopathy or herbs themselves and who do believe that these therapies cured the patient but they are in the small minority.

It is always the top cancer specialists and professors whose lives and vested interests are the most challenged by the idea that anything other than pharmaceutical drugs or surgical interventions can cure the patient.

Yet pharmaceutical drugs cure nothing. They merely SUPPRESS the symptoms driving them deeper into the body of the patient.

Hence the eczema patient whose skin symptoms have been suppressed, goes on to develop asthma. The arthritic patient whose joint pains are suppressed, eventually will go on to develop heart disease.

The doctor makes no connection whatsoever that their drugs have created these deeper illnesses but just goes on to give the patient more and more powerful drugs, making the patient sicker still. Then when they die, they say, ‘We did everything we could’. Yes and you killed the patient!

After homeopathic treatment, careful analysis is taken of the Direction of Cure of the patient’s symptoms. Constance Hering was a converted skeptic of homeopathy. As a young man in Germany in the early nineteenth century, Hering had been assigned the task of reviewing Homeopathy because his medical mentor (a fervent anti-homeopath) had been asked by a publisher to write a book exposing homeopathy as unworthy. Having been given this task, Hering conducted a detailed study but concluded the opposite from the requested results! He was the first to talk about the Law of Cure which says that symptoms are cured from above down, from the inside out and in the reverse order of their appearance. This has stood the test of time in clinical experience. A simple example would be after a curative remedy is given for eczema all over the body, we would see the eczema start to move down and when it is only on the ankles, we know it is nearly cured.

The body is always intelligent. That is why the human race has survived. When a baby is conceived, Nature chooses the best genes from both parents in order to create a stronger, healthier human. If the parents are both taking drugs of any kind, whether legal or illegal, the health of the baby will be compromised.

If only doctors and scientists would study Nature, they would find all the answers and instead of going against it, learn from it. There is only one true science and that is the science of Nature.

The human race has survived because we all have an innate healing power in our bodies. In homeopathy for example, this is called the Vital Force. Homeopathy stimulates the vital force to heal the body, through like for like (using a potentised substance that would cause the symptoms but in a tiny dose acts as a catalyst for healing).

So in conclusion, there is no question that dismissing cures as Anecdotal Evidence through the use of natural medicine, is nothing more than a whitewash and a desperate means of suppressing the knowledge of those cures to the public as a whole.

Samuel Hahnemann

Hahnemann was a doctor but gave up his practice because he was appalled at the poisonous side effects of most available medicine. He started experimenting and did something rather novel - he took some quinine, while perfectly healthy. He observed that the effect on him was identical to a malarial attack: alternating fever with heat and chills. This is where homeopathy started: a substance, given to a healthy individual, causes symptoms. If given to someone who suffers those symptoms, it will thus neutralise the sickness.

After his observations on quinine, Hahnemann went on to test hundreds of substances on himself and willing, healthy volunteers, used the tested substances for matching symptoms in his patients and all the while kept accounts of detailed observations.

Of course, Hahnemann had an antecedent, still well-known today because all doctors still swear an oath to him to promise best medical practice: Hippocrates. Hippocrates stated that there were two laws of healing – the law of opposites (allopathy) and the law of similars (homeopathy). A Greek physician called Galen had laid these rules down in about 150 AD. Homeopathic theories are based on fixed principles of the Laws of Nature which do not change - unlike medical theories which are constantly changing! Homeopathy is both a science and an art.

Far from being ideas-based, this is completely evidence-based, empirical medicine an almost unique concept at the time. After some years of practicing like this, Hahnemann was still not satisfied. The substances he was using, while more effective than normal medical practice, were still having side effects. Or, if he reduced dosage too far, there was no effect. This is when he developed the concept of potentisation, the serial dilution that opponents of homeopathy deride.

Treating the Whole Person or Holistic Healing

We are not just a collection of parts to be fixed as doctors treat us but ALWAYS operating as a whole person ALL of the time.  In other words medicines are chosen that treat the whole person and not just the part.  This may seem strange to grasp and yet doesn't it in fact make total sense?  Do we leave our sore throat on the desk of the physician as we leave the doctor's surgery?  Or our arthritic knee behind.  No, every single tiny function of our body operates as a WHOLE, all of the time.  You cannot treat one thing and not affect the rest.  That is why pharma drugs are so dangerous as for example, in treating a cancerous tumour, the medicine will affect and disturb the other systems of the body.

We are all energy beings.

The electricity in our bodies transmits messages to all parts/systems of the body. Illness is caused when these messages are not getting through. All systems of the body are communicating with each other at all times. Water is a great conductor of electricity and it transmits the electrical current. This is how homeopathic mediums work – by communicating a current/pattern/frequency of energy via the whole human body to jump start the body’s own inherent healing mechanisms.

Homeopathy treats different sorts of people with distinct characters and personalities as well as different physical looks and natures. It individualises each person and looks at their symptoms AS A WHOLE.

Is it not true that no two people are alike?  That every person is unique?  This is why you could line up 20 people with asthma and they might all need a different homeopathic medicine. There are in fact about 250 homeopathic medicines for asthma but the correct one for each person must be selected taking into consideration such things as what makes the condition better or worse, what time of day it comes on, whether the person is hot or cold, worse for damp, need fresh air or prefer the windows closed and so on.  You would be amazed how each person's symptoms are so different and yet they have all been diagnosed with asthma.

If people want to improve their looks, homeopathy does just that.  When you are healthy and well, you obviously look better!  Homeopathic practitioners believe in PREVENTION, having treatment can prevent illness rather than leaving it to the surgeon’s knife. There are thousands of homeopathic medicines which treat every ailment known to man, truly the most wonderful science on this planet.

Many people buy self help books or think they can treat themselves with over the counter remedies.  This is a short term solution.  The reason is as stated above.  You cannot treat individual symptoms without taking into consideration the rest of you!  Only a qualified and experienced homeopath who will spend 1-2 hours taking your full medical history and all of your symptoms can prescribe the remedy that fits best.  In other words if you have hayfever, the homeopath will take into consideration all other physical symptoms a as well as your personality, to come to the correct prescription.  Itchy, watery, red eyes, worse morning and evening would be Sulphur but only if all the other things about you fit the Sulphur picture.  You cannot prescribe for yourself as you cannot take all of it into consideration at once.  So if for example you buy Natrum Mur. for your hayfever (which is also an excellent remedy for this), it may work for a bit if you are healthy but the hayfever will come back, will not be cured for good, because it was not the remedy that fitted best.

The only exception to this rule is in the treatment of first aid and even then it often has to be individualised. An example of when it does not is having a molar removed at the dentist. Firstly you would take Arnica for bruising of the gums, secondly Hypericum for the pain as the anaesthetic wears off (will remove pain completely), thirdly Ledum for injection and fourthly Calendula (the remedy not the cream!) for fast healing of the gums (or any other injury). Symphytum is the great healer of broken bones.

Homeopaths believe that illnesses manifest for three reasons:  firstly they are genetically inherited from our parents, grandparents, forefathers.  Secondly, they can be caused by an traumatic event such as death of a loved one, divorce, job loss - any event that has a serious impact upon the person.  Thirdly they can be caused from drugs taken by our parents (passed onto the foetus) or by ourselves. There is also of course accidents and injury.

Inherited disease can be traced back to one or more of what homeopaths call MIASMS - these are syphilis, gonorrhoea, psora (scabies), tuberculosis and cancer.  We are all a mix of all of these as especially TB, dates back thousands of years.  However one or more of the miasms is uppermost in a person and is an important aspect of the case-taking to determine the appropriate medicines.

So many people are in total ignorance of the VAST amount of study needed to become an expert in this field.  Also there are hundreds of homeopathic books only available at specialist bookshops, many printed in India where homeopathy is more popular than orthodox medicine.

Attacks on Homeopathy

After the ever increasing attacks on alternative medicine in the media and in particular homeopathy, once again Professor Edzard Ernst, the 'first professor of complementary medicine' (whose qualifications for the job are still in question) discredits homeopathy.  Yet in an interview with Geoff Watts in 2003

entitled  'A  Scientist in the Alternative Camp', Professor Ernst stated:

"Our family doctor in the little village outside Munich where I grew up was a homoeopath. My mother swore by it. As a kid I was treated homoeopathically. So this kind of medicine just came naturally. Even during my studies I pursued other things like massage therapy and acupuncture."

"As a young doctor I had an appointment in a homoeopathic hospital, and I was very impressed with its success rate. My boss told me that much of this success came from discontinuing mainstream medication. This made a big impression on me."  

The truth is that homeopathy is getting ever more popular and the drugs companies are putting out their spin in overdrive through their science and media PR operation outlets to counteract this in any way they can.

The reason there is this incessant assault in the press against homeopathy is because Pharma wields enormous power over the media and because the popularity of homeopathy has been increasing due to side effects of modern medicine.  Also, unlike other natural therapies, it is pills and in direct competition.

At leat six million people use complementary treatments each year in the UK, which offers clinically-effective and cost-effective solutions to common health problems faced by NHS patients. 

Historical Facts

In view of the highly inaccurate reporting and vitriolic attacks in the  recent press coverage on homeopathy, I would like to point out some little known historical facts concerning homeopathy.

The practice of homeopathic medicine flourished in both Europe and the US during the 1800s and early 1900s  and was spectacularly popular with European royalty and the British aristocracy, American entrepreneurs, literary giants, and religious leaders. 

John D. Rockefeller referred to it as 'a progressive and aggressive step in medicine' and was under homeopathic care throughout the latter part of his life living to 99 years of age.  A strong advocate of homeopathy, major grants of between $300-$400 million he intended for homeopathic institutions were instead used for orthodox medical institutions in the early 1900s, under pressure from his son and his financial advisor, Frederick Gates.  (Source Dana Ullman)

In the United States in the early 1900s there were 22 homeopathic medical schools and over 100 homeopathic hospitals, 60 orphanages and old people's homes and 1,000+ homeopathic pharmacies.  Members of the American Medical Association had great animosity towards homeopathy after its formation in 1847 and it was decided to purge all local medical societies of physicians who were homeopaths.  This purge was successful in every state except Massachusetts because homoepathy was so strong among the elite of Boston.

The AMA wanted to keep homoepaths out of their societies and discourage any type of association with homeopaths.  In 1855 the AMA established a code of ethics which stated that orthodox physicians would lose their membership if they even consulted with a homeopath.  If a physician lost his membership, it meant that in some States he no longer had a licence to practice medicine. 

Drug companies were antagonistic towards homeopathy, collectively trying to suppress it.  The medical journals they published were used as mouthpieces against homeopathy and in support of orthodox medicine.

At an AMA meeting, a respected orthodox physician said: 'We must admit that we never fought the homeopath on matters of principles; we fought him because he came into the community and got the business.' Economic issues played a major role in what was allowed to be practised.

Homeopathy attracted support from many of the most respected members of society in the US, such as William James, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Louisa M. Alcott, Mark Twain, former American Presidents James Garfield and William McKinley. In Britain among its supporters were George Bernard Shaw, Charles Dickens, W.B. Yeats, William Thackarey, Benjamin Disraeli, Yehudi Menuhin.  Other famous supporters were Dostoevsky, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Mahatma Ghandi.

Nowadays, celebrities using and supporting homeopathy are many and include among others :  Catherine Zeta-Jones, Tina Turner, Whoopi Goldberg, Pamela Anderson, Jane Fonda, Cher, Rosie O'Donnell, Martin Sheen, the Chilli Peppers, Jane Seymour, Lesley Anne Warren, Mariel Hemingway, Lindsay Wagner, Paul McCartney, Axl Rose, Linda Gray, Susan Blakely, Michael Franks, Cybil Sheppard, Dizzy Gillespie, Vidal Sassoon, Angelica Houston, Boris Becker, Martina Navratilova, David Beckham, Priscilla and Lisa Marie Presley, Cliff Robertson, Jerry Hall, Diane von Furstenberg, Ashley Judd, Naomi Judd, Olivia Newton-John, Julianna Margulies, JD Salinger, Blythe Danner, Pat Riley (coach of the Miami Heat).  The list of famous people who supported homeopathy is endless.....

See 'The Homeopathic Revolution' by Dana Ullman MPH

The aristocratic patronage of homeopathy in the UK extending well into the 1940s and beyond can be easily demonstrated.  In the Homeopathic Medical Directories there are lists of patrons of the dispensaries and hospitals. They read like an extract from Burke’s or Debrett’s. 

(See A History of Homeopathy in Britain by Peter Morrell, Honorary Research Associate in the History of Medicine, Staffordshire University, UK.)

Homeopathy is practised nowadays in countries all over the world and is especially popular in France, South America and India where there are around 250,000 homeopathic doctors! In a recent Global TGI survey where people were asked whether they trust homeopathy the following percentages of people living in urban areas said Yes: 62% in India, 58% Brazil, 53% Saudi Arabia, Chile 49%, United Arab Emirates 49%, France 40%, South Africa 35%, Russia 28%, Germany 27%, Argentina 25%, Hungary 25%, USA 18%, UK 15%.