"The highest ideal of
cure is the rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of health by removal and
annihilation of the whole disease in the shortest, most reliable way."
- Samuel Hahnemann
Excerpted from: Discovering Homeopathy: Medicine for the 21st Century,
Berkeley: North Atlantic, 1991.
Towards the end of Louis Pasteur's life, he confessed that germs may not be
the cause of disease after all, but may simply be another symptom of
disease. He had come to realize that germs seem to lead to illness primarily
when the person's immune and defense system (what biologists call "host
resistance") is not strong enough to combat them. The "cause" of disease is
not simply a bacteria but also the factors that compromise host resistance,
including the person's hereditary endowment, his nutritional state, the
stresses in his life, and his psychological state. In describing one of his
experiments with silkworms, Pasteur asserted that the microorganisms present
in such large numbers in the intestinal tract of the sick worms were "more
an effect than a cause of disease." (1)
With these far-reaching insights Pasteur conceived an ecological
understanding of infectious disease. Infectious disease does not simply have
a single cause but is the result of a complex web of interactions within and
outside the individual. The Homeopathic and Ecological View of Infectious
Disease An analogy to help develop an understanding of the ecological
perspective of infectious disease can be developed from the situation of
mosquitoes and swamps. It is commonly known that mosquitoes infest swamps
because swamps provide the still waters necessary for the mosquitoes to lay
their eggs and for them to hatch without disruption. In essence, swamps are
a perfect environment for the mosquitoes to reproduce.
A farmer might try to rid his land of mosquitoes by spraying insecticide
over the swamps. If lucky, he will kill all the mosquitoes. However, because
the swamp is still a swamp, it is still a perfect environment for new
mosquitoes to fly in and to lay their eggs. The farmer then sprays his
insecticide again, only to find that more mosquitoes infest the swamp. Over
time, some mosquitoes do not get sprayed with fatal doses of the
insecticide. Instead, they adapt to the insecticide that they have ingested,
and with each generation they are able to pass an increased immunity to the
insecticide on to their offspring.
Soon, the farmer must use stronger and stronger varieties of insecticide,
but as the result of their adaption, some mosquitoes are able to survive,
despite exposure to the insecticide. Similarly, finding streptococcus in a
child's throat does not necessarily mean that the strep "caused" a sore
throat, any more than one could say that the swamp "caused" the mosquitoes.
Streptococcus often inhabits the throat of healthy people without leading to
a sore throat. Symptoms of strep throat only begin if there are favorable
conditions for the strep to reproduce rapidly and aggressively invade the
throat tissue. Strep, like mosquitoes, will only settle and grow in
conditions which are conducive for them.
The child with the strep throat generally gets treated with antibiotics.
Although the antibiotics may be effective in getting rid of the bacteria
temporarily, they do not change the factors that led to the infection in the
first place. When the farmer sprays with insecticide or the physician
prescribes antibiotics but doesn't change the conditions which created the
problem, the mosquitoes and the bacteria are able to return to those
environments that are favorable for their growth.
To make matters worse, the antibiotics kill the beneficial bacteria along
with the harmful bacteria. Since the beneficial bacteria play an important
role in digestion, the individual's ability to assimilate necessary
nutrients to his body is temporarily limited, ultimately making him more
prone to reinfection or other illness in the meantime.
Marc Lappe', PhD, University of Illinois professor and author of When
Antibiotics Fail, notes that, "When these more benevolent counterparts die
off, they leave behind a literal wasteland of vacant tissue and organs.
These sites, previously occupied with normal bacteria, are now free to be
colonized with new ones. Some of these new ones have caused serious and
previously unrecognized diseases." (2)
Some clinicians have found that inappropriate antibiotic usage can transform
common vaginal "yeast" infections (candida albicans), which are
characterized by simple itching, into a system-wide candida infection which
can cause a variety of acute and chronic problems. (3) Although the
diagnosis of "systemic candidiasis" is controversial, there is general
consensus that frequent antibiotic use can also transform bacteria that
normally live in our bodies without creating any problems into irritating
and occasionally serious infections in the elderly, the infirm, and the
immunodepressed. (4)
And of course, the bacteria learn to adapt to and survive antibiotics.
Scientists then must slightly change the antibiotics (there are over 300
varieties of penicillin alone), or make stronger and stronger antibiotics
(which generally also have more and more serious side effects). Despite the
best efforts of scientists, Dr. Lappe' asserts that we are creating many
more germs than we are medicines, since each new antibiotic brings to life
literally millions of Benedict Arnolds.
Just 15-20 years ago penicillin was virtually always successful in treating
gonorrhea. Now there are gonorrhea bacteria which have learned to resist
penicillin, and these bacteria have now been found in all fifty states as
well as throughout the world. From 1983 to 1984 alone the number of cases in
the U.S. with resistant strains of gonorrhea doubled. (5)
Alexander Fleming, the scientist who discovered penicillin, cautioned
against the overuse of antibiotics. Unless the scientific community and the
general public heed his warning, Harvard professor Walter Gilbert, a Nobel
prizewinner in chemistry, asserted, "There may be a time down the road when
80% to 90% of infections will be resistant to all known antibiotics." (6)
The scientific community and the general public have ignored the insights of
the late Pasteur and have ignored the importance of host resistance in
preventing illness. Most scientists broadly accepted the germ theory, while
only rare individuals have since acknowledged the importance of the
ecological balance of microorganisms in the body. But the wisdom of Pasteur
remains relevant, and more and more scientists are beginning to acknowledge
the importance of alternatives to antibiotics. Even an editorial in the
prestigious New England Journal of Medicine affirmed the need for the
treatment of infections with "less ecologically disturbing techniques." (7)
Homeopathic medicines will inevitably play a major role as one of these
alternatives.
Are Antibiotics Helpful in Ear and Throat Infections? Claude Bernard, the
esteemed "father of experimental physiology," affirmed Pasteur's contention
that bacteria are not the cause of disease. In his most famous book, An
Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine, Bernard said, "If the
exciting cause were the principle factor, for instance, in pneumonia,
everyone exposed to cold would come down with this disease, whereas only an
occassional case of chilll turns into pneumonia. Unless the subject is
predisposed, the most powerful causes will have no effect on him.
Predisposition is the 'pivot of all experimental physiology' and the real
cause of most disease." (8)
At a health conference in 1976 Jonas Salk noted that there are basically two
ways to heal sick people. First, one can try to control the individual
symptoms the sick person is experiencing, and second, one can try to
stimulate the person's own immune and defense system to enable the body to
heal itself. (9) Whereas conventional medicine's allegiance is to the first
approach, homeopathy and a wide variety of natural healing systems attempt
the latter.
A good example of the questionable value of antibiotic use is their
application in children's earache. Ear infection has become one of the most
common childhood illness. The infection of the middle ear and eardrum is
called "otitis media," a condition for which most physicians prescribe
antibiotics. Several researchers, however, have found that antibiotics do
not improve health of children compared to those not given antibiotics. (10)
Others have found that antibiotics provide a brief relief of symptoms, but
subsequently there was no difference compared to those children given
placebo. (11) Still others have found that 70% of children with otitis media
still had fluid in the ear after four weeks of treatment and that 50% of
children experience another ear infection within three months. (12)
Although some physicians assert that antibiotics ar e responsible for the
presently low incidence of complications from ear infections such as
mastoiditis, research has shown that there no evidence that antibiotics
reduce the incidence of mastoiditis. (13) Homeopaths claim a similarly low
complication rate without the use of antibiotics. (14)
One of the more significant studies showed that patients with ear infection
who were treated with antibiotics had appreciably more recurrences (as much
as 2.9 times) than those people who didn't use any treatment. (15)
In chronic ear infection it has become standard procedure for physicians to
use ear tubes in conjunction with antibiotics or in place of it. These tubes
help drain the pus from the ear, but this treatment only deals with the
results of the problem; it does nothing to treat the reason the
infection was able to spread in the first place. This physiological fact may
be the reason ear tubes have been found to be of questionable value. (16)
Antibiotics and ear tubes treat symptoms of a problem. They do not
strengthen the organism so that it can fight the infection itself, nor do
they make the organism less resistant to future infection.
Another myth which continues to be perpetuated is that of the value of
antibiotics in treating sore throats. The primary rationale for using
antibiotics to treat a sore throat has been to prevent the person from
getting rheumatic fever, a potentially fatal condition. Researchers point
out that there is presently an extremely low incidence of rheumatic fever.
(17)* This low incidence is not the result of antibiotic use because there
was a decrease in rheumatic fever incidence even prior to antibiotic use.
[* In 1986 there have been some reports of new outbreaks of rheumatic fever
in some parts of the United States. However, Ellen Wald, M.D., medical
director of Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, noted that too-early
treatment with antibiotics may impair the body's normal immunlogic response
and open up the possibility of reinfection, and that this problem must be
weighed against the benefit of possibly preventing rheumatic fever. One
study showed that those children who were treated with antibiotics
immediately upon diagnosis had eight times the recurrent rate of strep
throat compared to those children who delayed treatment. (18) In the context
of other studies cited in this chapter, it may be worthwhile to compare
those who received delayed treatment with those who received no antibiotics.
It may also be worthwhile to compare these groups with a group
of people prescribed a homeopathic medicine.]
Recent research has even determined that today's strains of streptococcus
very rarely cause rheumatic fever (19) and that antibiotics do not even
eradicate the strep in 25-40% of the cases, despite demonstrated sensitivity
of the organism to the antibiotic. (20)
Also, it is widely recognized that most strep infections are left untreated,
and yet, a vast majority of these people do not get rheumatic fever.
Further, from 33% to 50% of the cases of rheumatic fever occur without sore
throat symptoms. (21) A recent outbreak of rheumatic fever was reported in
the New England Journal of Medicine. (22) Two-thirds of the children with
this disease had no clearcut history of a sore throat within a three month
period preceding the onset of their condition. Of particular significance,
of the 11 children who had throat symptoms and who thus had a throat culture
performed, 8 tested positive for strep. These children were prescribed
antibiotics, and yet, each still developed rheumatic fever.
New evidence shows that antibiotics do help reduce the symptoms of sore
throat faster than placebo. However, it is questionable if antibiotics
should be used simply to relieve self-limited conditions. It is certainly
understandable that antibiotic use be considered when there is a
life-threatening condition. However, it is uncertain how effective they are
in preventing one rare disease. It is also uncertain if it is worth
prescribing these powerful drugs to mass numbers of children in the hope
that a very small number might benefit.
Antibiotics should definately not be given routinely to children with
suspected strep throat. Recent research has now shown that 60% of children's
sore throats are virally caused for which antibiotics are useless. (23)
This evidence strongly suggests that alternatives to antibiotic usage should
be sought for ear and throat infection. Homeopathy offers a viable
alternative.
Homeopathic Treatment of Infectious Disease When people think about the
successes of modern medicine, they often assert that we are now living
considerably longer than our parents or their
parents. They also usually point to modern medicine's successes in treating
the infectious diseases that raged during previous centuries such as the
plague, cholera, scarlet fever, yellow fever, and typhoid.
Scientists and historians alike agree that these assumptions are myths, pure
myths. Scientists point out that we are now living longer than ever before,
but this has not primarily been the result of new medical technologies.
Rather, our lengthening life is mostly because of a significant decrease in
infant mortality, which is the result of better hygiene during birth (hurray
for soap!), better nutrition (the creation of cities has enabled more people
to have access to a greater variety of foods, thereby decreasing
malnutrition), and improvements in various public health measures such as
sanitation, better sewage, cleaner water, and pest control. (24)
Even with all these considerations, the increase in life expectancy for
adults has not been very significant. Statistics show that the average white
male who reached 40 years of age in 1960 lives to be 71.9; whereas an
average white male who reached 40 years of age in 1920 lives to be 69.9. The
average white male who reached 50 years of age in 1982 lives to be 75.6
years, while the average white male who reached 50 years of age in 1912,
survived until 72.2 years. (25)
Nobel Prize-winning microbiologist Rene Dubos noted, "the life expectancy of
adults is not very different now from what it was a few generations ago, nor
is it greater in areas where medical services are highly developed than in
less prosperous countries." (26)
Historians remind us that conventional medicine was not at all responsible
for the disappearance or decrease in the fatal infectious diseases of the
15th to 19th century. Antibiotics were not even available until the 1940s
and 1950s, and no other conventional drugs were successfully used to treat
most of the infectious epidemics of the past. Even mortality (incidence of
death) from tuberculosis, pneumonia, bronchitis, influenza, and whooping
cough were on the sharp decline prior to the introduction of any
conventional medical treatment for them. An important exception was the
decrease in the death rate from polio after the introduction of the polio
vaccine.
A little known fact of history is that homeopathic medicine developed its
popularity in the United States as well as in Europe because of its
successes in treating the infectious epidemics that raged during the 19th
century. Dr. Thomas L. Bradford's The Logic of Figures, published in 1900,
compares in detail the death rate in homeopathic versus allopathic
(conventional) medical hospitals and shows that death rates per 100 patients
in homeopathic hospitals were often one-half or even one-eighth that of
conventional medical hospitals. (27)
In 1849 the homeopaths of Cincinnati claimed that in over a thousand cases
of cholera only 3% of the patients died. To substantiate their results they
even printed the names and addresses of patients who died or who survived in
a newspaper. (28) The death rate of patients with cholera who used
conventional medicines generally ranged from 40 to 70%.
The success of treating yellow fever with homeopathy was so impressive that
a report from the United States Government's Board of Experts included
several homeopathic medicines, despite the fact that the Board of Experts
was primarily composed of conventional physicians who despised homeopathy.
(29)
The success of homeopathy in treating modern-day infections is comparable to
its successes in treating the infectious diseases of the last century. It is
common knowledge that homeopathic practitioners rarely resort to using
antibiotics or other drugs commonly given for infectious conditions.
Homeopaths, like any good medical professional, will use antibiotics when
clearly necessary, but it is worthwhile having alternatives that work.
Homeopath Randall Neustaedter of Palo Alto, California, notes that acute ear
infection is "a simple problem to manage with acute (homeopathic) remedies."
(30) Common acute ear infection medicines are Belladonna (deadly
nightshade), Chamomilla (chamomille), Pulsatilla (windflower), Ferrum phos
(phosphate of iron), and Hepar sulph (Hahnemann's calcium sulphide).
If the child gets treated with antibiotics and then has recurrent ear
infections, homeopathic treatment generally takes more time but is often
curative. Such recurrent problems, Neustaedter asserts, require the
homeopathic "constitutional approach," the approach where a homeopathic
medicine is prescribed based on the totality of present symptoms as well as
on an evaluation of the patient's past history. While it is common for
parents to prescribe successfully for acute ear infections, it is
recommended that children receive professional care for recurrent ear
infections or for any chronic condition.
Homeopaths have also found great success in treating a wide variety of other
bacterial infections. Throat infections are commonly treated with Belladonna
(deadly nightshade), Arsenicum (arsenic), Rhus tox (poison ivy), Mercurius
(mercury), Hepar sulph, Lachesis (venom of the bushmaster), Apis
(bee venom), or Phytolacca (pokeroot). Boils which result from bacterial
infection are often successfully treated with Belladonna, Hepar sulph,
Silica (silica), Arsenicum, or Lachesis. And styes, which usually result
from a Staphylococcus infection, are effectively treated with Pulsatilla
(windflower), Hepar sulph (Hahnemann's calcium sulphide), Apis (bee venom),
Graphities (graphite), and Staphysagria (stavesacre).
Homeopathic Treatment of Viral Conditions Conventional drugs at least
relieve the symptoms of bacterial infection; however, there is little in
conventional medicine has to treat most viral conditions. Since homeopathic
medicines stimulate the body's own defenses rather than directly attack
specific pathogens, homeopathy again has much to offer in the treatment of
viral diseases.
In recent research on viruses that attack chicken embryos, 8 of the 10
homeopathic medicines tested inhibited the growth of the viruses 50 to 100%.
(31) This research is of particular significance because conventional
science knows only a very select number of drugs that have antiviral action,
and none of these drugs are as safe as the homeopathic medicines.
Homeopaths commonly treat people suffering from acute and chronic viral
conditions. People with viral respiratory and digestive conditions, viral
infection of the nervous system, herpes, and even a few with AIDS have
reported significant improvement using homeopathic medicines. Sometimes this
improvement is dramatic and immediate, though most of the time there is a
slow, progressive improvement in the person's overall health. British
physician Richard Savage notes, "While the search goes on to find specific
antiviral preparations which are free from side effects, homeopathy can be
used effectively to treat patients in four ways:
1) Prophylaxis to generate resistance to the infection;
2) Treatment in the acute illness to reduce the length and severity of the
illness;
3) Restoration to revitalize the patient during convalescence; and
4) Corrrection of the chronic sequelae to restore the patient to his former
state of health." (32)
PROPHYLAXIS
Homeopaths have found that their medicines can prevent and treat various
infections. There is not much research demonstrating the efficacy of the
homeopathic medicines in preventing viral conditions, though there is some
evidence that the medicines can be used to prevent other infectious
diseases. Homeopathic microdoses can be used as immunizations; for instance,
a single dose of Meningococcin 10c (a homeopathic preparation of Neisseria
meningitidis), 18,000 people in Brazil were immunized in 1974. The immunized
group had significantly less meningitis infections than a control group.
(33)
In the 1800s homeopaths commonly used medicines to prevent or cure what
later came to be understood as bacterial or viral infections. Aconite and
Ferrum phos were frequently given at the early onset of fever and aches as a
way to prevent influenza. Belladonna was the most common medicine for
preventing or treating scarlet fever, and Camphora (camphor) was the major
medicine used to prevent or treat cholera. The dramatic success of the
medicines in the prevention and treatment of these dread diseases gained
homeopathy a large following.
Homeopaths commonly find that successful treatment of acute or chronic
disease with homeopathic medicines often leads to stronger and healthier
people who do not get severely or recurrently ill. During the late 1800s
many life insurance companies offered lower rates to people who went to
homeopathic physicians because actuarial statistics showed that homeopathic
patients were healthier and lived longer. (34) There is also a record that
these life insurance companies paid out larger sums of money to homeopathic
patients since they lived longer than those under conventional medical care.
(35)
TREATMENT OF ACUTE ILLNESS
One of the additional advantages of using homeopathy in treating viral
conditions is that homeopathic medicines can be prescribed even before a
definitive diagnosis has been made. This is because homeopaths prescribe
based on the totality of symptoms, and laboratory work is not always
necessary to find the correct medicine. Since some viral conditions are
difficult to diagnose even after laboratory tests, one is often able to cure
people with homeopathy before a conventional medical diagnosis can be made.
Antibiotics are only helpful in certain bacterial infections, and since
viral diseases are particularly common, conventional medicine offers little
help. In comparison, homeopaths often successfully treat acute viral
conditions such as the common cold, virus-induced coughs, influenza,
gastroenteritis (sometimes called the "stomach flu"), and viral hepatitis.
Homeopaths use Allium cepa (onion), Euphrasia (eyebright), Natrum mur
(salt), or other individually chosen medicines for the common cold. Aconite
(monkshood), Belladonna, Bryonia (wild hops), Phosphorous (phosphorous), or
others are helpful in treating common viral respiratory infections.
Influenza is a condition which results from viral infection, and it is also
a condition that is easily treated with homeopathy. Although
individualization of homeopathic medicines is generally a necessity in
order to them to work, there are conditions in which certain medicines are
particularly effective. Oscillococcinum (pronounced o-cill-o-cock-i-num) is
a medicine that homeopaths have found particularly effective in treating the
flu. Its manufacturer, Boiron Laboratories of Lyon, France, have found that
it is 80-90% effective in treating the flu when taken within 48 hours of
onset of symptoms. Its success is so widely known in France that it is the
most widely used treatment for the flu in that country.
Interestingly enough, Oscillococcinum is a microdose of the heart and liver
of a duck. One might easily wonder how such a substance might ever be
beneficial for the flu, but there actually is some sound logic to it.
Perhaps you too heard about the research at the Mayo Clinic that showed that
chicken soup has some antiviral action. Since chicken soup is basically a
broth of the organs of chickens, perhaps Oscillococcinum is effective
because it is "duck soup."
Ben Hole, M.D., a practicing homeopath in Spokane, Washington, reports,
"Oscillococcinum is impressively successful, but if in the rare situations
where it doesn't work or isn't available, there are several other
homeopathic medicines which can be used with excellent results when they are
individually prescribed." Otherher commonly used homeopathic medicines for
the flu include Gelsemium (yellow jasmine), Bryonia, Rhus tox, and
Eupatorium perfoliatum (boneset).
RESTORATION FROM RECURRENT OR LONGLASTING VIRAL INFECTION
Although conventional medicine offers very little relief for recurrent or
longlasting viral infections, homeopaths have observed that microdoses
relieve the symptoms of various chronic viral conditions such as herpes
simplex, herpes genitales, chronic Epstein-Barr virus, and warts. One cannot
claim that homeopathic medicines actually "cure" these viral conditions
since the virus is assumed to remain in the body throughout one's life,
though homeopaths find that their patients get significantly less severe
bouts of infection or do not get any symptoms for long periods of time.
The homeopathic approach to treating all these disorders includes a
thorough analysis of the person's totality of symptoms. There is thus no one
medicine for a specific disease.
CORRECTION OF THE CHRONIC SEQUELAE
After a viral (or even bacterial) infection people sometimes feel they
are still not back to their same healthy self. Generally, an individually
chosen homeopathic medicine is prescribed. If the individualized medicine is
not working, homeopaths will occasionally give a potentized dose of the
specific virus which previously infected the person as a way to strengthen
their ability to regain health. Varicellinum (the chickenpox virus) is
commonly given in a safe microdose for symptoms that linger after the
chickenpox, and Parotidinum (the mumps virus) is often given for symptoms
that linger after the mumps.
For the post-herpetic neuralgias, the common medicines are Hypericum (St.
John's Wort), Kalmia (mountain laurel), Magnesia phosphoria (phosphate of
magnesia), Causticum (Hahnemann's potassium hydrate), Mezereum (spurge
olive), or Arsenicum.
A state of weakness after a bout of influenza is often treated with China
(cinchona bark), Gelsemium, Sulphur (sulphur), Phosphoricum acidum
(phosphoric acid), Cadmium (cadmium), and Avena sativa (oat).
Respiratory infections occasionally linger creating chronic nasal discharge,
sinusitis, and ear infections. Some of the common medicines given are Kali
bichromium (bichromate of potash), Kali iodatum (potassium iodide), Kali
carbonicum (potassium carbonate), Kali muriaticum (Chloride of potassium),
Kali sulphuricum (potassium sulphate), Silica, Mercurius, Pulsatilla,
Alumina (aluminum), Nux vomica (poison nut), and Conium (hemlock).
REFERENCES
1. Rene Dubos, Mirage of Health, San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1959, 93-94.
2. Marc Lappe', When Antibiotics Fail, Berkeley: North Atlantic, 1986, xii.
3. William Crook, The Yeast Connection, New York: Vintage, 1986.
4. Lappe', xiii.
5. Lappe', xvii.
6. R. Cave, editor. "Those Overworked Miracle Drugs," Newsweek, August 17,
1981, 63.
7. R.B. Sack, "Prophylactic Antibiotics? The Individual Versus the
Community," New England Journal of Medicine, 300, 1979, 1107-1108.
8. Claude Bernard, An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine,
New York: Dover, 1957 (originally written in 1865), 160-163.
9. Jonas Salk, Mandala Holistic Health Conference, San Diego, September,
1976. Proceedings published in Journal of Holistic Health, 1976.
10. F.L. Buchem, "Therapy of Acute Otitis Media: Myringotomy, Antibiotics,
or Neither? A Double-Blind Study in Children," Lancet, 883, October 24,
1981.
11. J. Thomsen, "Penicillin and Acute Ototis Media: Short and Long-term
Results," Annals of Otolology, Rhinology, and Laryngology. Supplement.
68:271, 1980.
12. E.M Mandel, et.al., "Effifacy of Amoxicillin with and without
Decongestant--Antihistamine for Otitis Media with Effusion in Children,"
New England Journal of Medicine, 316:8, February 19, 1987, 432-437.
13. Buchem.
14. Randall Neustaedter, "Management of Otitis Media with Effusion in
Homeopathic Practice," Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy,
79(3-4)87-99, 133-140, September- December, 1986.
15. M. Diamant, "Abuse and Timing of Use of Antibiotics inAcute Otitis
Media," Archives of Otolaryngology, 100:226, 1974.
16. D. Kilby, "Grommets and Glue Ears: Two Year Results," Journal of
Laryngology and Otology, 86:105, 1972. M.J.K.M. Brown, "Grommets and Glue
ear: A Fie-year Followup of a Controlled Trial," Journal of Social
Medicine, 71:353, 1978. T. Lildholdt, "Ventilation Tubes in Secretory
Otitis Media," Acta Otolaryngology. Supplement. 398:1, 1983.
17. Bisno, 1983. M. Land, "Acute Rheumatic Fever: A Vanishing Disease in
Suburbia," JAMA, 249:895-898, 1983.
18. "Pediatricians Urge Confirmatory Test for Suspected Strep Throat,"
Medical World News, January 12, 1987, 42.
19. Alan L. Bisno, "Where Has All the Rheumatic Fever Gone?" Clinical
Pediatrics, December, 1983, 804-805.
20. A. Gastanaduy, "Failure of Penicillin to Eradicate Group A Streptococci
During an Outbreak of Pharyngitis," Lancet, 8193:498- 502, 1980. E. Kaplan,
"The Role of the Carrier in Treatment Failures After Antibiotic Therapy for
Group A Streptococci in the Upper Respiratory Tract," Journal of Laboratory
and Clinical Medicine, 98:326-335, 1981.
21. Alan L. Bisno, The Concept of Rheumatogenic and Non-rheumatogenic Group
A Stregtococci," in Red: Streptococcal Diseases and the Immune Response,
New York: Academic Press, 1980, 789-803. Alan L. Bisno, "Streptococcal
Infections that Fail to Cause Recurrences of Rheumatic Fever," Journal of
Infectious Disease, 136:278-285, 1977.
22. A. George Veasy, et.al., "Resurgence of Acute Rheumatic Fever in the
Intermountain Area of the United States," New England Journal of Medicine,
316,8, February 19, 1987, 421-426.
23. Health Facts, 12, 96, May, 1987, 2.
24. Rene Dubos, Mirage of Health, New York: Harper and Row, 1959. Thomas
McKeown, The Role of Medicine, Princeton: Princeton University, 1979.
25. Vital Statistics of the United States, 1982, Life Tables, volume II,
section 6, Hyattsville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics, 13.
26. Rene Dubos, Man Adapting, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965, 346.
27. Thomas L. Bradford, The Logic of Figures or Comparative Results of
Homoeopathic and Others Treatments, Philadelphia: Boericke and Tafel, 1900.
28. Ibid., 68.
29. Harris L. Coulter, Divided Legacy: The Conflict Between Homoeopathy and
the American Medical Association, Berkeley: North Atlantic, 1973, 302.
30. Neustaedter, 87.
31. L.M. Singh and Girish Gupa, "Antiviral Efficacy of Homoeopathic Drugs
Against Animal Viruses," British Homoeopathic Journal, 74(3):168-174, July,
1985.
32. Richard Savage, "Homoeopathy: When No Effective Alternative," British
Homoeopathic Journal, 73(2):75-83, April, 1984.
33. "Sesenta mil Brasilenos se Vuelcan en Farmacias Homeopaticas: Cunde la
Meningitis," (front page headline), Excelsior, July 29, 1974.
34. Transactions of the New York State Homoeopathic Medical Society, 1867,
57-59.
35. "Report of Life Insurance Committee," Transactions of the American
Institute of Homoeopathy, 1897, 53-58; 1898, 81-90.
36. Victor Gong, Understanding AIDS: A Comprehensive Guide, New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers University, 1985, 77-89.
37. Richard Smith (editor), Newsweek, August 12, 1985, 22.
38. Physicians' Desk Reference, Oradell, N.J.: Medical Economics Co., 1985.
39. Hans H. Neumann, "Use of Steroid Creams as a Possible Cause of
Immunosuppression in Homosexuals," New England Journal of Medicine, 306,15,
935, April 15, 1982.
40. Personal Communication. For additional information, see Mike Strange,
"Aid: What Homoeopathy Can Offer," The Homoeopath: Journal of the Society
of Homoeopaths, 6,3, 1987, 117-124.
41. Singh and Gupa.42. R.G. Gibson, et.al., "Homoeopathic Therapy in
Rheumatoid Arthritis: Evaluation by Double-Blind Clinical Therapeutic
Trial," British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 1980,9, 453- 459.
The Consumer's Guide to Homeopathy is available from Homeopathic Educational
Services or through your local bookseller (starting January, 1996).
Dana Ullman, M.P.H. is one of America's leading educators on homeopathic
medicine. He has authored Discovering Homeopathy, Homeopathic Medicine for
Children and Infants, The One-Minute (or so) Healer and co-authored
Everybody's Guide to Homeopathic Medicines. Dana is the formulator of the
Medicine From Nature line of homeopathic products. He is also the Director
of Homeopathic Educational Services, a leading resource of homeopathic
books, tapes, medicines, and software in Berkeley, California. In January,
1996, Dana's newest book, The Consumer's Guide to Homeopathy, will be
published.

http://www.homeopathy.ca/articles/what_is.html
What is Homeopathy?
by Dr. André Saine
Homeopathy is the art of healing par excellence. When homeopathy is well
practiced, it is generally the medicine of choice to recover one's health.
Homeopathy is a scientific method of treatment which is based on the
application of the law of similars. For thousands of years, man searched
for a method to promote healing which is efficient, gentle and permanent.
Samuel Hahnemann, a German physician who lived between 1755-1843, pursued
this philosophical and scientific quest by developing an ideal system of
therapeutics by bringing together a number of discoveries and reflections
found throughout the history of medicine. After years of perfecting this
therapeutic method, he called it homeopathy, by uniting two Greek roots,
homoios meaning "similar," and pathos meaning "what one feels." Homeopathy
consists of treating sick people with remedies which, in crude doses, would
produce in healthy people symptoms similar (homoios) to those of the
disease needed to be overcome.
Remedies used by homeopaths come from natural sources and are prepared in
such a way that they are devoid of all chemical toxicity. In conventional
medicine, drugs are generally given for their effects on the organism,
while in homeopathy, a single remedy is given to provoke a reaction of the
organism. This reaction is the healing reaction. Since only the living
organism can heal itself, the homeopathic remedy is merely an influence
used to provoke a reaction to bring about recovery. The greater the degree
of similarity between the symptoms that are provoked by the remedy on a
healthy person and the symptoms displayed by the person who is sick, the
greater will be the recovery.
Generally speaking, people affected with chronic diseases do not expect
their level of health to improve with the years when treated with
conventional medicine. This is not the case with homeopathy because
homeopathic treatment, in the majority of cases, directly targets the
fundamental cause of the disease.
The fundamental cause of disease or the basic reason why a person becomes
sick is their intrinsic susceptibility to be sick. In general, one can
assert that disease is a state of imbalance resulting from the combination
of several factors. To simplify, we can use three main groups to summarize
these factors or causes: first, the general susceptibility of the
individual to be sick, determined by heredity; second, the environment and
all factors of stress; and third, the way one conducts his life which
includes hygiene (diet, exercise and mental hygiene).
Years of experience enabled homeopathic physicians to confirm that in the
great majority of cases, the fundamental cause of disease is the
predisposition of the individual to be sick. The imbalance, which is the
disease state, is in fact only the expression of this predisposition to be
sick once the conjuncture of other factors has become favorable to its
expression. With the most similar remedy (or in other words, the most
homeopathic), the organism re-balances itself globally so that the tendency
to be sick is greatly decreased. This explains the extraordinary result
achieved by homeopathy!
The person who is afflicted with an acute disease (due to an infection, a
poisoning, an accident, an emotional shock, etc.), or with a chronic
disease (of psychological, emotional or physical nature), is in a state of
imbalance which is unique to him. The role of the homeopathic physician
will be to gain all the symptoms associated with a general understanding of
the patient to be able to find the remedy that will be the most specific
for this individual in that state.
How does a visit to a homeopathic physician take place? You will be asked
to describe all your problems in detail as well as a complete description
of everything that characterizes you, especially your feelings, sensations,
sensitivity, psyche, and all that concerns your organism in terms of
energy, sleep, appetite, digestion, etc. The homeopathic physician will
complete this study with a physical examination. This thorough and initial
interview requires approximately two to three hours. The better the
homeopathic physician understands his patient and his problems, the better
he can individualize to find the specific and most similar remedy for this
patient's morbid condition.
This remedy will usually be administered in a single dose, once, until the
next follow-up visit. During the follow-up visit, which generally takes
place two to six weeks after the original consultation for people afflicted
with chronic diseases and earlier in acute cases, the homeopathic physician
will review all the changes which have occurred since the initial
homeopathic remedy was taken. A follow-up visit lasts 20 to 30 minutes on
the average. If the patient reacted favorably to the remedy, the
homeopathic physician will choose the ideal time for the second dose. The
remedy does not need to be given continually. It is not the remedy that
heals. Only the life force within can heal. No treatment, no doctor, no
acupuncture needle or homeopathic remedy can heal, only the life force. The
right remedy triggers the healing response like a spark that triggers the
furnace to go on. As long as the furnace is on, there is no need to respark
it. As long as the patient improves, there is no need to redose. Redosing
too quickly disturbs the healing process.
Which diseases can be treated with homeopathy? This may sound strange but
in homeopathy we do not treat diseases, but treat the person who is sick.
Whether a person has a chronic or an acute disease, all of their symptoms,
whether physical, mental or emotional form a whole representing a state of
imbalance very specific to this individual. The goal of the physician is to
recognize through the unique expression of symptoms of a patient the
pattern of disturbed energy and identify among the great number of remedies
available the one most homeopathic, or most similar to, the patient's
disease.
Can a pregnant woman or a newborn baby benefit from homeopathy? Since
homeopathic remedies are devoid of all chemical toxicity, homeopathy is the
ideal system of medicine for people of all ages, even the most sensitive
like an expectant mother or a newborn baby. Difficulties during pregnancy
and the delivery or its aftermath as well as all the problems experienced
by the newborn can be dealt with very efficiently and without side-effects
with homeopathy.
How does homeopathy deal with patients affected with mental grid, emotional
problems, resulting from emotional trauma, severe grief, or the consequence
of mood disorders such as anger, depression or anxiety? As incredible as it
may seem, all such emotional problems normalize with the application of the
homeopathic remedy that is the most similar to the state of the patient.
Patients who are already under psychotherapy find out as a rule that they
recover far more rapidly after they begin homeopathic treatment.
How does homeopathy address patients with infectious diseases? Homeopathic
treatment is ideal to optimize the body's natural defenses against
microbes. With the appropriate homeopathic treatment, people recover from
infectious diseases, even the most serious ones, gently and rapidly. During
past great epidemics such as diphtheria, scarlet fever, typhoid, cholera,
yellow fever, malaria, etc., homeopathy decreased mortality by 10 to 30
times versus conventional medicine. During the infamous Spanish flu
epidemic of 1918-19, it has been estimated that 25 to 50 million people
died worldwide. In the United States alone, 550,000 died, approximately 10%
of the people afflicted with the flu. Homeopathic physicians documented
then more than 62,000 patients treated with homeopathy resulting in a
mortality of 0.7%. For people who were sick enough to be hospitalized,
conventional medicine had a mortality of 30% while with 27,000 documented
hospitalized cases, homeopathy was reporting a mortality of 1.05% (Journal
of the American Institute of Homeopathy 1921; 13:1028-43).
Which conditions are outside the scope of homeopathy? If a patient has a
problem that necessitates a surgical intervention, the homeopathic
physician will be the first to refer this patient to a surgeon. But as
surgical interventions are a shock to the organism, homeopathic treatment
will be ideal to prepare the patient for surgery and help them recover from
the operation. Of course, cases with dislocation or fracture will be dealt
with by an orthopedic doctor. For less serious mechanical physical
problems, patients will be referred to a chiropractor, osteopath,
massotherapist or other appropriate therapist. Generally, people afflicted ith genetic, congenital, or fixed metabolic diseases or with very advanced
degeneration cannot always expect full recovery, but more often a
palliative relief with homeopathy, free of side effects usually expected
when palliation is done with modern drugs.
With careful application of the law of similars homeopathy grows and
evolves and yesterday's limits are continually pushed further back.
Homeopathy makes the most of the organism's capacity to heal itself. The
limits of homeopathy are in fact only those of the organism to heal itself,
which are in fact extraordinary when put to work. With its truly scientific
research, homeopathy continues to fully explore the greatly underestimated
organism's capacity for self-healing (in an editorial of the British
Medical Journal, it was reported that only 1% of articles published in the
30,000 biomedical journals in existence is scientifically sound. British
Medical Journal, 1991; 303:798-9).
To achieve the greatest success, a homeopathic physician must undertake
long and rigorous studies to understand the subtleties of the human being,
whether healthy or sick, to be able to give a precise diagnosis before
choosing the remedy that will restore the healing process. The better the
physicians skill as a diagnostician, the greater will be his success.
What has been the position of conventional medicine towards homeopathy?
Since the beginning, conventional medicine has tried to halt the progress
of homeopathy. At best, it accuses it of giving "placebos" despite double
blind studies which demonstrate the absolutely undeniable efficacy of
homeopathic treatments. If homeopathy is so extraordinary, why is it not
recognized universally? Although homeopathy has been practiced for more
than two hundred years, it is still in its early period of growth. It is
probably the most difficult medical discipline to master because it is
based on the pure observation of nature, and the strict application of a
natural law. Until very recently, of all the physicians who had studied
homeopathy, only a very small minority had succeeded in mastering this
discipline. Today with the general disillusionment in conventional
medicine, homeopathy is beginning to bloom again and spread throughout the
world. People find in homeopathy a system of medicine that not only
displays more common sense by its respect for the whole person, but which
is also more efficient in restoring health to the sick since it optimizes
the extraordinary innate self-healing powers of the organism. With the
advent of modern communication, the teaching of homeopathy has improved and
a better comprehension and practice of homeopathy has been observed in
certain circles.
Homeopathic remedies are to be found in almost all pharmacies in Europe. At
least 40% of the British population receives a homeopathic prescription
every year and more than one third of the French are treated with
homeopathy. Famous people that have used homeopathy include John D.
Rockefeller (who lived 99 years), three American presidents, Mahatma
Gandhi, Mark Twain, Samuel Morse, Sir Yehudi Mehuhin, a great part of the
aristocracy and European royalty (i.e. members of the British royal family
such as the Queen mother, the present Queen Elizabeth II, her son Prince
Charles) and a number of popes including Pius X and the current pope, John
Paul II.
In some countries, homeopathy is taught at universities and is recognized
as official medicine. In Germany, by a mandate of the government, all
medical students must now learn the basics of homeopathy. In other
countries such as Canada, homeopathy has until now been reserved to an
elite. In Montreal, the Queen Elizabeth Hospital was formerly called the
Montreal Homeopathic Hospital. In Toronto, the Princess Margaret Hospital
was once a homeopathic hospital. In almost all pharmacies of Europe and
Quebec, one can find a homeopathic department. One day, maybe in the near
future, homeopathic medicine will be the most sought out medicine in the
world because of its efficacy and gentleness. Choosing homeopathy for
ourselves or our families should not be a question of belief, but a
decision based on knowledge acquired through experience. One does not
believe in homeopathy, one experiences it.
Copyright © 2000, The Canadian Academy of Homeopathy
Back to page