Homeopathy and conventional medicine: an outcomes study comparing effectiveness in a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials in homeopathy have suggested that homeopathy is more than a placebo response. OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the effectiveness of homeopathy in primary care with conventional medicine in primary care for three commonly encountered clinical conditions. DESIGN: An international multicenter, prospective, observational study in a real world medical setting comparing the effectiveness of homeopathy with conventional medicine. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty (30) investigators with conventional medical licenses at six clinical sites in four countries enrolled 500 consecutive patients with at least one of the following three complaints: (1) upper respiratory tract complaints including allergies; (2) lower respiratory tract complaints including allergies; or (3) ear complaints. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes criterion was the response to treatment, defined as cured or major improvement after 14 days of treatment. Secondary outcomes criteria were: (1) rate of recovery; (2) occurrence of adverse events; (3) patient satisfaction; and (4) length of consultation. RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-six (456) patient visits were compared: 281 received homeopathy, 175 received conventional medicine. The response to treatment as measured by the primary outcomes criterion for patients receiving homeopathy was 82.6%, for conventional medicine it was 68%. Improvement in less than 1 day and in 1 to 3 days was noted in 67.3% of the group receiving homeopathy and in 56.6% of those receiving conventional medicine. The adverse events for those treated with conventional medicine was 22.3% versus 7.8% for those treated with homeopathy. Seventy-nine percent (79.0%) of patients treated with homeopathy were very satisfied and 65.1% of patients treated with conventional, medicine were very satisfied. In both treatment groups 60% of cases had consultations lasting between 5 and 15 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Homeopathy appeared to be at least as effective as conventional medical care in the treatment of patients with the three conditions studied.

[The effectiveness of paramunization for the control of feline coryza]. / Untersuchungen über die Wirksamkeit der Paramunisierung zur Bekämpfung des Katzenschnupfens.

20 cats in a cat home were treated prophylactically and therapeutically with Baypamun HK. The animals were allocated into three groups as described. 7 freshly admitted clinically healthy cats were treated prophylactically on day 1, 2 and 9 with 1 ml Baypamun HK (group I). 7 cats, who already were allocated for one year in the home and were sick of the feline respiratory disease complex were treated as described for group I (group II). 6 further cats, who also showed symptoms of the feline respiratory disease complex and had stayed for one year in the home were treated with physiol.saline solution according to group I (group III). From all cats blood samples were taken at day 1, 3, 10 and 17. The blood samples were checked for antibodies against feline calicivirus (FCV), feline herpesvirus (FHV), panleukopenia virus (PLV), feline peritonitis virus (FIPV) and feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV). Also the occurrence of the feline leukemia virus (FeLV) was evaluated. The cellular immunity was evaluated by means of the lymphocyte transformations test (LTT), nitroblue-tetrazolium reduction test (NBT) and cytochrome C-reduction test (CRT). Mean value and standard deviation was calculated from the results. The significance was determined by the t-test. The animals were examined clinically daily for 20 days for the feline respiratory disease complex. When necessary, the animals were treated by homeopathic and antibiotic products. At the time of admission to the home all cats were or had been treated with an attenuated panleukopenia vaccine. The serologic parameters were not influenced in the cats of group I.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)