ABSTRACT
To compare the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life. One hundred eight Indian singleton newborns delivered at 37 to 42 weeks gestation were randomised at birth (1:1) to receive either homoeopathic or conventional primary care for any acute illness over the study period. In the homoeopathic group, conventional medical treatment was added when medically indicated. Clinicians and parents were unblinded. Children in the homoeopathic group experienced significantly fewer sick days than those in the conventional group (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58; p < 0.001), with correspondingly fewer sickness episodes (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; p = .013), as well as fewer respiratory illnesses over the 24-month period. They were taller (F (1, 97) = 8.92, p = .004, partial eta squared = 0.84) but not heavier than their conventionally treated counterparts. They required fewer antibiotics, and their treatment cost was lower. CONCLUSION: Homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illnesses in the first 24 months of life. It necessitated fewer antibiotics and its overall cost was lower. This study supports homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, as a safe and cost-effective primary care modality during the first 2 years of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registry-India (2018/09/015641). https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/login.php What is Known: ⢠Due to their holistic nature, many Complementary and Alternative Medical (CAM) modalities are not readily amenable to assessment by head-to-head RCT for a given Indication. ⢠We propose a pragmatic, RCT comparing homoeopathic with conventional medicine as a system. WHAT IS NEW: ⢠Homoeopathic was apparently superior to conventional primary care in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illness episodes and was significantly associated with growth in height but not weight and required fewer antibiotics in children from birth to 24 months of age.
Subject(s)
Homeopathy , Primary Health Care , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Homeopathy/methods , India , Sick Leave/statistics & numerical data , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a new coronavirus, first appeared in late 2019. What initially seemed to be a mild influenza quickly revealed itself as a serious and highly contagious disease, and the planet was soon faced with a significant morbidity and mortality associated with this pathogen. For homeopathy, shunned during its 200 years of existence by conventional medicine, this outbreak is a key opportunity to show potentially the contribution it can make in treating COVID-19 patients. This should be done through performance of impeccably controlled, prospective, randomized clinical trials, with publication of their findings in well-ranked conventional medicine journals. If the homeopathy community fails to take advantage of this rare opportunity, it might wait another century for the next major pandemic.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Homeopathy/statistics & numerical data , Journalism, Medical , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , Peer Review, Research , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Successful homeopathic prescriptions are based on careful individualization of symptoms, either for an individual patient or collectively in the case of epidemic outbreaks. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic was initially represented as a severe acute respiratory illness, with eventual dramatic complications. However, over time it revealed to be a complex systemic disease with manifestations derived from viral-induced inflammation and hypercoagulability, thus liable to affect any body organ or system. As a result, clinical presentation is variable, in addition to variations associated with several individual and collective risk factors. Given the extreme variability of pathology and clinical manifestations, a single, or a few, universal homeopathic preventive Do not split medicine(s) do not seem feasible. Yet homeopathy may have a relevant role to play, inasmuch as the vast majority of patients only exhibit the mild form of disease and are indicated to self-care at home, without standard monitoring, follow-up, or treatment. For future pandemics, homeopathy agencies should prepare by establishing rapid-response teams and efficacious lines of communication.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Homeopathy/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial with parallel groups, the efficacy of individually prescribed homeopathic medicines was evaluated in women with premenstrual syndrome (PMS). METHODS: In an outpatient department of a university clinic in Jerusalem, Israel (1996-1999), women with PMS, aged 18 to 50 years, entered a 2-month screening phase with prospective daily recording of premenstrual symptoms by the Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MDQ). They were included after being diagnosed with PMS. A reproducible treatment protocol was used: women received a homeopathic prescription based on symptom clusters identified in a questionnaire. The symptoms were verified during a complementary, structured, interview. Only women whose symptoms matched the symptom profile of one of 14 pre-selected homeopathic medicines were included. Each participant was administered active medicine or placebo via random allocation. Primary outcome measures were differences in changes in mean daily premenstrual symptom (PM) scores by the MDQ. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: A total of 105 women were included: 49 were randomized to active medicine and 56 to placebo. Forty-three women in the active medicine group and 53 in the placebo group received the allocated intervention with at least one follow-up measurement and their data were analyzed. Significantly greater improvement of mean PM scores was measured in the active medicine group (0.443 [standard deviation, SD, 0.32] to 0.287 [SD, 0.20]) compared to placebo (0.426 [SD, 0.34] to 0.340 [SD, 0.39]); p = 0.043. CONCLUSIONS: Individually prescribed homeopathic medicines were associated with significantly greater improvement of PM scores in women with PMS, compared to placebo. Replication, with larger sample size and other refinements, is recommended to confirm the efficacy of this treatment in other settings.
Subject(s)
Homeopathy/methods , Precision Medicine/methods , Premenstrual Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The comprehensive systematic review of randomised placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) in homeopathy requires examination of a study's model validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT) as well as its risk of bias (extent of reliable evidence). OBJECTIVE: To appraise MVHT in those RCTs of non-individualised homeopathy that an associated investigation had judged as 'not at high risk of bias'. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: An assessment of MVHT was ascribed to each of 26 eligible RCTs. Another 49 RCTs were ineligible due to their high risk of bias. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MVHT and the prior risk of bias rating per trial were merged to obtain a single overall quality designation ('high', 'moderate', 'low'), based on the GRADE principle of downgrading. RESULTS: The trials were rated as 'acceptable MVHT' (N = 9), 'uncertain MVHT' (N = 10) and 'inadequate MVHT' (N = 7); and, previously, as 'reliable evidence' (N = 3) and 'non-reliable evidence' (N = 23). The 26 trials were designated overall as: 'high quality' (N = 1); 'moderate quality' (N = 18); 'low quality' (N = 7). CONCLUSION: Of the 26 RCTs of non-individualised homeopathy that were judged 'not at high risk of bias', nine have been rated 'acceptable MVHT'. One of those nine studies was designated 'high quality' overall ('acceptable MVHT' and 'reliable evidence'), and is thus currently the only reported RCT that represents best therapeutic practice as well as unbiased evidence in non-individualised homeopathy. As well as minimising risk of bias, new RCTs in this area must aim to maximise MVHT and clarity of reporting.
Subject(s)
Ethics, Research , Homeopathy/standards , Research Design/standards , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Hormesis is a dose-response relationship characterized by a biphasic dose response to stressors with a low dose stimulation and a high dose inhibition. The first systematic description of hormesis appeared toward the close of the 18th century by the German pharmacology professor Hugo Schulz. The stressor agent can be any agent or factor capable of causing a deleterious effect. The biological systems can be diverse: bacteria, fungi, algae, yeasts, animals, humans, protozoa and plants. The range of endpoints covers longevity, reproduction, cancer, survival, growth, metabolic effects and others. Hormesis is a nonspecific phenomenon, which can occur in any biological system and can be caused by any stressor. It is quantifiable and reproducible. The apparent similarity between the basic principle of hormesis and homeopathy's Similia Principle, together with the homeopathic claim that hormesis validates homeopathy caused its marginalization, and its rejection during the past century by central figures in pharmacology. Recent years have seen a slight renaissance in the conventional scientific attitude towards hormesis. METHOD: We compared hormesis and homeopathy. RESULT: There is no convincing evidence of similarity between these two systems. Moreover, there are several crucial differences between them, which seem to refute any idea that they stem from the same root. This paper discusses these differences. The rejection of hormesis on grounds of its similarity to homeopathy is unjustified. CONCLUSION: The authors suggest exploring the differences between both systems. Such exploration may answer the key question of whether they do indeed share a root or embrace the same principles. Such exploration may also spur research within both systems to answer further open questions.
Subject(s)
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Follow-Up Studies , Hormesis , HumansABSTRACT
The debate between those who believe homeopathy and hormesis derive from the same root and those who believe the two are different phenomena is as old as hormesis. It is an emotionally loaded discussion, with both sides fielding arguments which are far from scientific. Careful analysis of the basic paradigms of the two systems questions the claim of the homeopaths, who find similarities between them. The authors discuss these paradigms, indicating the differences between the claims of homeopathy and hormesis. It is time for thorough and serious research to lay this question to rest. One possible approach is to compare the activity of a hormetic agent, prepared in the usual way, with that of the same agent in the same concentration prepared homeopathically by serial dilution and succussion.
Subject(s)
Homeopathy/methods , Hormesis/drug effects , Humans , Indicator Dilution TechniquesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Though potentially an important limitation in the literature of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of homeopathy, the model validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT) has not previously been systematically investigated. OBJECTIVE: As an integral part of a programme of systematic reviews, to assess MVHT of eligible RCTs of individualised homeopathic treatment. METHODS: From 46 previously identified papers in the category, 31 papers (reporting a total of 32 RCTs) were eligible for systematic review and were thus the subject of the study. For each of six domains of assessment per trial, MVHT was judged independently by three randomly allocated assessors from our group, who reached a final verdict by consensus discussion as necessary. RESULTS: Nineteen trials were judged overall as 'acceptable' MVHT, nine as 'uncertain' MVHT, and four as 'inadequate' MVHT. CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support concern that deficient MVHT has frequently undermined the published findings of RCTs of individualised homeopathy. However, the 13 trials with 'uncertain' or 'inadequate' MVHT will be a focus of attention in supplementary meta-analysis. New RCTs of individualised homeopathy must aim to maximise MVHT and to enable its assessment through clear reporting.
Subject(s)
Homeopathy/methods , Models, Theoretical , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards , Consensus , Humans , Placebos/standards , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Review Literature as TopicABSTRACT
Gastroparesis is a chronic disorder of abnormal gastric motility causing considerable suffering. We describe two cases of gastroparesis which were treated by methods which were not part of routine conventional therapy, but which, nevertheless, led to significant clinical improvement. In the first case, the patient suffered from gastroparesis following a vagal injury while undergoing a lung transplant. During his illness a mega-bezoar formed, a well-described complication of gastroparesis. After conservative measures failed, and in order to avoid a surgical intervention that carried considerable risk under the circumstances, a successful trial consisting of imbibing large amounts of "Coca Cola" and acupuncture was initiated. The bezoar dissolved completely and considerable improvement of the patient's gastric motility was achieved. In the second case, the patient was a young woman suffering from idiopathic gastroparesis, which responded well to treatment with tricyclic antidepressants. Due to her intention to become pregnant, this treatment was discontinued and she was admitted to receive homeopathic treatment. After two failed attempts in finding the right homeopathic remedy to replace the conventional treatment, the third remedy (Sepia) used brought dramatic improvement in her general condition and her dyspepsia. Today, over two years after her successful homeopathic treatment, she is in the middle of her second pregnancy, without any treatment and free of complaints. These two cases are examples of simple solutions for seemingly complicated and complex conditions alleviated by an integration of conventional and complementary/alternative medicine.
Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies/methods , Gastroparesis/therapy , Materia Medica/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic/therapeutic use , Bezoars/complications , Bezoars/therapy , Dyspepsia/etiology , Dyspepsia/therapy , Female , Gastrointestinal Motility , Gastroparesis/etiology , Humans , Male , Pregnancy , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A method for assessing the model validity of randomised controlled trials of homeopathy is needed. To date, only conventional standards for assessing intrinsic bias (internal validity) of trials have been invoked, with little recognition of the special characteristics of homeopathy. We aimed to identify relevant judgmental domains to use in assessing the model validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT). We define MVHT as the extent to which a homeopathic intervention and the main measure of its outcome, as implemented in a randomised controlled trial (RCT), reflect 'state-of-the-art' homeopathic practice. METHODS: Using an iterative process, an international group of experts developed a set of six judgmental domains, with associated descriptive criteria. The domains address: (I) the rationale for the choice of the particular homeopathic intervention; (II) the homeopathic principles reflected in the intervention; (III) the extent of homeopathic practitioner input; (IV) the nature of the main outcome measure; (V) the capability of the main outcome measure to detect change; (VI) the length of follow-up to the endpoint of the study. Six papers reporting RCTs of homeopathy of varying design were randomly selected from the literature. A standard form was used to record each assessor's independent response per domain, using the optional verdicts 'Yes', 'Unclear', 'No'. Concordance among the eight verdicts per domain, across all six papers, was evaluated using the kappa (κ) statistic. RESULTS: The six judgmental domains enabled MVHT to be assessed with 'fair' to 'almost perfect' concordance in each case. For the six RCTs examined, the method allowed MVHT to be classified overall as 'acceptable' in three, 'unclear' in two, and 'inadequate' in one. CONCLUSION: Future systematic reviews of RCTs in homeopathy should adopt the MVHT method as part of a complete appraisal of trial validity.
Subject(s)
Homeopathy/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards , Reproducibility of Results , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome due to coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) is a novel infectious disease, which has quickly developed into a pandemic. The spectrum of COVID-19 symptoms is broad, ranging from a mild, self-limiting respiratory tract illness to severe progressive pneumonia, multi-organ failure and possible death. Despite much effort and multiple clinical trials, there are, to date, no specific therapeutic agents to treat or cure the coronavirus infection. CASE REPORTS: The present paper presents 5 cases of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 infections, 2 of them hospitalized in the intensive care unit, who were successfully treated with homeopathy. RESULTS: All 5 patients responded to homeopathic treatment in an unexpectedly short time span, improving both physically and mentally. CONCLUSION: The present case series emphasizes the rapidity of response among moderate to severely ill patients to homeopathic treatment, when conventional medical options have been unable to relieve or shorten the disease. The observations described should encourage use of homeopathy in treating patients with COVID-19 during the acute phase of the disease.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Homeopathy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: and purpose. COVID-19 is a novel viral disease causing worldwide pandemia. The aim of this study was to describe the effect of adjunctive individualized homeopathic treatment delivered to hospitalized patients with confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. PATIENT PRESENTATION: Thirteen patients with COVID-19 were admitted. Mean age was 73.4 ± 15.0 (SD) years. Twelve (92.3%) were speedily discharged without relevant sequelae after 14.4 ± 8.9 days. A single patient admitted in an advanced stage of septic disease died in hospital. A time-dependent improvement of relevant clinical symptoms was observed in the 12 surviving patients. Six (46.2%) were critically ill and treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). Mean stay at the ICU of the 5 surviving patients was 18.8 ± 6.8 days. In six patients (46.2%) gastrointestinal disorders accompanied COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The observations suggest that adjunctive homeopathic treatment may be helpful to treat patients with confirmed COVID-19 even in high - risk patients especially since there is no conventional treatment of COVID-19 available at present.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In spite of recent advances in post-operative pain relief, pain following orthopedic surgery remains an ongoing challenge for clinicians. We examined whether a well known and frequently prescribed homeopathic preparation could mitigate post-operative pain. METHOD: We performed a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of the homeopathic preparation Traumeel S in minimizing post-operative pain and analgesic consumption following surgical correction of hallux valgus. Eighty consecutive patients were randomized to receive either Traumeel tablets or an indistinguishable placebo, and took primary and rescue oral analgesics as needed. Maximum numerical pain scores at rest and consumption of oral analgesics were recorded on day of surgery and for 13 days following surgery. RESULTS: Traumeel was not found superior to placebo in minimizing pain or analgesic consumption over the 14 days of the trial, however a transient reduction in the daily maximum post-operative pain score favoring the Traumeel arm was observed on the day of surgery, a finding supported by a treatment-time interaction test (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Traumeel was not superior to placebo in minimizing pain or analgesic consumption over the 14 days of the trial. A transient reduction in the daily maximum post-operative pain score on the day of surgery is of questionable clinical importance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. # NCT00279513.
Subject(s)
Hallux Valgus/drug therapy , Hallux Valgus/surgery , Homeopathy , Minerals/therapeutic use , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Plant Extracts/therapeutic use , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pain, Postoperative/etiologyABSTRACT
Postpartum psychosis has long-lasting consequences for mother and child. Beside depression, sleep and eating disturbances, exhaustion, social withdrawal, and anxiety, postpartum depression can also interfere with normal maternal-infant bonding and adversely affect child development. Recent reports show that most affected pregnant women are hesitant about taking antidepressant drugs, with a high percentage discontinuing their use. Some authors suggest that the reluctance of pregnant women to take antidepressant drugs should encourage clinicians to discuss with their patients the use of psychological interventions or alternative forms of treatment. In this article, a case of severe postpartum depression, treated successfully with homeopathic therapy, is presented. Considering the high noncompliance of women suffering from postpartum depression with conventional antidepressant medication, research in safe complementary medical methods is justified. One of these methods should be homeopathy.
Subject(s)
Depression, Postpartum/drug therapy , Homeopathy/methods , Adult , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , PregnancyABSTRACT
In order to better understand the global approach and country differences in physicians' usage, knowledge, and attitudes towards natural remedies and homeopathy in pediatric practice, an online survey involving 582 general pediatricians and general practitioners treating pediatric diseases was conducted in 6 countries. Overall, 17% of the pediatric prescriptions refer to phytotherapy and 15% refer to homeopathic preparations. Natural remedies and homeopathic preparations are more frequently used in upper respiratory tract infections, infant colic, sleep disturbances, and recurrent infections. In the majority of cases, they are used together with chemical drugs. Both treatment options are typically used if parents are concerned about side effects of conventional drugs or prefer natural remedies for themselves. Physicians express high interest in natural remedies and homeopathy; however, their knowledge is variable. Lack of proven efficacy, knowledge on mechanism of action, and information on indications are main factors that limit their usage.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To date, our programme of systematic reviews has assessed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of individualised homeopathy separately for risk of bias (RoB) and for model validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present paper was to bring together our published RoB and MVHT findings and, using an approach based on GRADE methods, to merge the quality appraisals of these same RCTs, examining the impact on meta-analysis results. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: As previously, 31 papers (reporting a total of 32 RCTs) were eligible for systematic review and were the subject of study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each trial, the separate ratings for RoB and MVHT were merged to obtain a single overall quality designation ('high', 'moderate, "low", 'very low'), based on the GRADE principle of 'downgrading'. RESULTS: Merging the assessment of MVHT and RoB identified three trials of 'high quality', eight of 'moderate quality', 18 of 'low quality' and three of 'very low quality'. There was no association between a trial's MVHT and its RoB or its direction of treatment effect (P>0.05). The three 'high quality' trials were those already labelled 'reliable evidence' based on RoB, and so no change was found in meta-analysis based on best-quality evidence: a small, statistically significant, effect favouring homeopathy. CONCLUSION: Accommodating MVHT in overall quality designation of RCTs has not modified our pre-existing conclusion that the medicines prescribed in individualised homeopathy may have small, specific, treatment effects.
Subject(s)
Homeopathy , Placebos , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards , Bias , Homeopathy/methods , Homeopathy/standards , Homeopathy/statistics & numerical data , Humans , RiskABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of Arnica Montana and Bellis perennis on postpartum blood loss. DESIGN: Double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, clinical trial. SETTING: Department of Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem. INTERVENTIONS: Forty parturients were randomized to one of three groups: Arnica montana C6 and Bellis perennis C6 (n=14), Arnica montana C30 and Bellis perennis C30 (n=14), or double placebo (n=12). After 48 h the Arnica/placebo was halted, and patients continued the Bellis/placebo until cessation of lochia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hemoglobin levels (Hb) at 48 and 72 h postpartum. RESULTS: At 72 h postpartum, mean Hb levels remained similar after treatment with homeopathic remedies (12.7 versus 12.4) as compared to a significant decrease in Hb levels in the placebo group (12.7 versus 11.6; p<0.05), in spite of less favorable initial characteristics of the treatment group. The mean difference in Hb levels at 72 h postpartum was -0.29 (95% CI -1.09; 0.52) in the treatment group and -1.18 (95% CI -1.82; -0.54) in the placebo group (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Treatment with homeopathic Arnica montana and Bellis perennis may reduce postpartum blood loss, as compared with placebo.