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.