A Brief Overview of Homoeoprophylaxis
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 12:33 pm
Please scroll down for an article on A Brief Overview of Homoeoprophylaxis
Rgds
Soroush
(If you want it in HTML format - please email me direct -
finrod@webstar.co.uk
=============
Welcome to the first edition in 2006 of the Homeopathic Informer e-journal.
A New Year always seems a good time for change. So we have decided to change
the format of this homeopathic e-journal. Now we will send you a new edition
on a regular basis but it will contain only 1 main article and all our news
(previously issued on a quarterly basis).
Given the current fears surrounding the impending Bird Flu pandemic we are
very pleased to present you with an article by Isaac Golden on the subject
of Homeoprophylaxis. The idea of homeopathic prophylaxis is an interesting
one - after all aren't we taught as homeopaths to prescribe on the basis of
presenting symptoms? If so, then how can homeopathic remedies work
preventatively? We hope you enjoy this article as much as we did.
Please do give us your feedback on the contents of this edition of the
Informer.
David Witko and the team at Miccant
PS Can't read this email? Are images missing? Then your email software is
not configured to read HTML style emails such as this e-journal. Click here
to read the Informer on our website.
Keep in touch!
When you next change your email address don't forget to let us know!
Want to receive copies of the Informer?
This e-journal is freely available to all homeopaths who wish to receive it
and is automatically sent to all customers of Miccant i.e. those using the
ISIS, CARA and Akiva homeopathic software.
Feel free to send this email journal to your friends and colleagues. All we
ask is that your friends and colleagues register with us to continue
receiving copies.
To register click here
ISIS feedback we have received recently:
"I'm very glad I bought ISIS before starting my supervised cases in my
fourth year. What I have found most useful this year has been the cross
referencing of rubrics that is so comprehensive in ISIS and the information
I can find on small remedies or remedies about which I have nothing at all
in books. I would have been stuck more than once without Isis this year."
Ruth Hall (Student London School of Classical Homeopathy) Jan 2006
"I had been using CARA for years before upgrading to ISIS. I am so glad I
did! ISIS is extremely easy to use and full of useful little extras leaving
me totally inspired by it. I find myself researching remedies and rubrics
once again full of enthusiasm. An invaluable tool for students and
practitioners alike!" Marilene Metzler, RSHom (UK practitioner and teacher
at Purton House College) Jan 2006
"ISIS is fantastic" Paul Francis (Principal - The Integrative College -
Lancaster, London and Leeds) Nov 2005
===================
A Brief Overview of Homoeoprophylaxis
1. Introduction
The essence of homoeopathic medicine is simplicity itself – (1) remedies are
chosen using the Law of Similars (the symptoms capable of being produced in
healthy people by the therapeutic substance should be similar to the
symptoms to be treated, or prevented), and (2) remedies are administered
according to the Law of Minimum Dose (the lowest potency and frequency
required to produce the required therapeutic effect should be used).
However, it seems to be the nature of our species that we inevitably
complicate issues, and any casual reading of a range of homoeopathic texts
will show that there are disputes between “classical” and “non-classical”
homoeopaths, between high and low potency prescribers, between practitioners
who work within prescribing systems (Scholten, Sankaran, ICR etc, etc) and
those who refuse to. There are Kentians, Vithoulkians, and other “ians”,
there are those who believe there is only one similimum and those who
believe there can be more than one, and so the list goes on.
The fact that so many people work differently, but still claim success, to
me indicates that there is tremendous flexibility of practice within the two
fundamentals Laws stated above. To me, adherence to these two Laws is what
makes the practitioner a homoeopath.
There is also substantial disagreement within the profession when it comes
to the prevention of targeted infectious diseases – termed homœoprophylaxis
(or HP). Some say it is just not homoeopathy, some believe it is an
essential part of the homoeopathic armoury; others have no opinion because
they have never heard of HP. Opinion also varies according to locality. In
Australia, we have had a vigorous and informed debate on HP for 15 years,
and it is widely used. In the UK, there appears to be considerable
opposition to HP on the grounds that it is not “homoeopathy”. On the Indian
subcontinent HP is widely used, and so on. Not all of the debate is well
informed.
A survey of Australian practitioners I conducted in 2002 showed that most of
those who were opposed to HP had never even read Hahnemann’s essay,
published in 1801, and titled The Cure and Prevention of Scarlet Fever. This
is the first documented use of HP, by the founder of homoeopathy. Hahnemann
stated that "Who can deny that the perfect prevention of infection from this
devastating scourge, and the discovery of a means whereby this divine aim
may be surely attained, would offer infinite advantages over any mode of
treatment, be it of the most incomparable kind soever?" He believed in
homoeopathic disease prevention, and practiced what he taught.
I have listed elsewhere the masters who used HP – Boenninghausen, Kent, etc.
So why is there such opposition to the method if the founder and many
distinguished homoeopaths all used HP?
Leaving aside simple ignorance of HP, most criticism centres on the fact
that when students, many people were taught only about the homoeopathic
treatment of existing conditions. They were taught that the Law of Similars
only applied to the matching of the patient’s existing symptoms to the
proved symptoms of the remedies in our Materia Medica. Some were taught that
the Law of Similars can not be applied to something that has not yet
happened. Others believe that we should never prevent specific infectious
diseases, but only treat them if they arise.
However, I believe that these views limit, unnecessarily, the wonderful
potential of homoeopathic medicine to help make our lives healthier, more
productive, and more complete. The following is a very brief summary of the
basis of HP, some evidence showing the safety and effectiveness of the
method, and a suggestion regarding its mechanism of action.
2. Homœoprophylaxis Defined
I define homoeoprophylaxis (HP) as the use of potentised substances in a
systematic manner to prevent the development of the characteristic symptoms
of infectious diseases.
I have highlighted the key phrases which we shall now consider.
“Systematic manner” means that an HP program should select remedies only on
the basis of the similarity of the remedy symptoms to the symptoms of the
disease to be prevented, i.e. according to the Law of Similars. This
similarity may be arrived either (i) through recording symptoms that the
chosen substance is capable of either producing in otherwise healthy people
(e.g. Hahnemann’s proving of China, and its use in preventing Malaria; or
disease-specific Nosodes), or (ii) of removing in unwell people (e.g.
Hahnemann’s use of Belladonna to first cure, and then to prevent Scarlet
Fever).
Further, the number of doses of each individual medicine should be the least
possible needed to produce a protective effect. This of course, like all
cases of posology, is a judgement call. It involves balancing a higher (or
lower) potency with fewer (or more) doses, and the fact that the effect of a
higher potency will last longer than that of a lower. But the potency and
frequency used must be based on reasoned experience.
“Characteristic symptoms” means that unlike homoeopathic treatment, where
the patient’s unique individual response to a challenge guides the remedy
selection (something which obviously can only occur after the infection), in
prevention we only need to know the common or characteristic symptoms of the
disease to be prevented, and choose a remedy similar to them. As Kent
stated, "Now you will find that for prophylaxis there is required a less
degree of similitude than is necessary for curing. A remedy will not have to
be so similar to prevent disease as to cure it, and these remedies in daily
use will enable you to prevent a large number of people from becoming sick."
Thus the appropriate use of HP requires both skill and care. It is not a
random technique, but one totally based on the correct application of
fundamental homoeopathic principles. Hahnemann and the masters were not
wrong when they saw (and used) HP as an important part of mainstream
homoeopathy. My question is simple – why are the people who deny the
relevance of HP correct, and Hahnemann et al wrong? I have yet to hear a
satisfactory answer to this question.
I have been asked whether HP remedies can be antidoted by energetic
influences. I have no doubt that it has happened simply because it can. . I
certainly have seen antidoting occurring when mothers breastfed immediately
after a dose . For this reason I always recommend that HP remedies be taken
away from other homoeopathic treatment, and away from infections and other
traumas. If a patient is taking constitutional treatment, it should have
priority over HP, unless the HP is required to prevent a present epidemic.
We shall now examine evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of HP,
and finally consider a possible mechanism of action.
3. Evidence Supporting the Safety and Effectiveness of Homœoprophylaxis
The evidence may be divided into that supporting short-term or epidemic use
of HP, and evidence supporting long-term use of HP.
(i) Short-term or epidemic use of HP
There are some homoeopaths who only accept the epidemic use of HP, based as
it is on a 200 year history of use recorded in homoeopathic journals. Most
records show only the clinical experience of practitioners, but a few have
statistically quantified their experience.
The most dramatic, and statistically convincing result, was recorded by
Mroninski , Adriano, and Mattos. In their study, 65,826 children were given
the HP remedy Meningococcinum, and 23,539 children were unprotected. In a
rigorous statistical analysis, the authors showed that HP was 95% effective
after 6 months and 91% effective after 12 months. This result is not only
consistent with both the anecdotal and statistical evidence of short-term
use over 200 years, but is similar to the reported effectiveness of orthodox
vaccines.
There is no reported evidence (as opposed to unsupported assertion) that I
am aware of that appropriate short-term use of HP has caused any harm to
recipients.
(ii) Long-term or systematic use of HP
This involves the use of an appropriate program of HP over a period of years
to prevent a number of commonly occurring infectious diseases in our
community. Some homoeopaths who accept short-term use of HP in an existing
epidemic situation, say that long-term use is not homoeopathic, unnecessary,
and potentially damaging to the health of recipients due to too many
remedies in too high potencies.
I have been using a long-term program of HP since 1985. I have collected
data on the safety and effectiveness of my program since then, and in 2004
completed Doctoral research at a mainstream Australian university (S.U.T.)
which included detailed analysis of the long-term data I had collected, plus
a new study where the long-term health of 4 groups were compared, according
to their immunisation status.
To summarise very briefly:
(a) the single figure effectiveness of long-term HP was 90.4%. This varied
very little between different diseases/remedies. It was totally consistent
with all other evidence supporting the general effectiveness of HP.
(b) the group using long-term HP were in general healthier (as measured by
the incidence of asthma, eczema, ear/hearing problems, allergies, and
behavioural problems) than groups using general or constitutional
protection, who used no protection at all, and in particular compared to the
vaccinated group. Comparisons were made based on ratio analyses and Chi
Squared probability tests with P>0.05. There was no evidence that
appropriate long-term HP in any way weakened the general health of
recipients, in fact the reverse was found.
(c) Not all long-term HP programs were the same in terms of safety and
effectiveness – some were clearly less safe and less effective.
All the data has been published for interested persons to analyse if they
wish. It shows that not only is appropriate long-term HP comparably
effective to orthodox vaccination, but also that it is much safer. It is
actually associated with a positive impact on long-term health, possibly due
to the beneficial effects of provings spoken about by Hahnemann and many
others.
Some people question whether it is (energetically) safe to prove any
substance. I personally would have no problems participating in any proving
provided it was in a 30 or 200 potency, and properly conducted (i.e.
strictly minimum dose). I don’t believe that external influences on our
bodies are to be feared unless they either (i) the extent of the influence
is severe and (usually) prolonged, or (ii) unless the system is very weak
(which is why unwell people should not undertake provings)
4. How Does Homoeoprophylaxis Work?
Explaining the mechanism of action of any energetic medicine is difficult,
especially in terms of words that have substantial meaning. We are taught
that symptoms are caused by the action of our unique Vital Force combating
the energetic disturbance of the inner disease force. We believe that
homoeopathic treatment works by selecting a remedy which energetically
resonates with the disease and, given that no two similar diseases can exist
in the body at the same time, the stronger will expel the weaker. So if the
energy profile of the remedy is sufficiently similar to that of the disease,
and the potency selected renders the remedy energetically stronger than the
energy of the disease, the remedy force expels the disease, leaving the
patient under the influence of the remedy until the “artifical” energy of
the remedy progressively weakens, and the Vital Force assumes control of the
body.
Can we prove this explanation? – no. Can we observe events in the real world
which are generally consistent with this explanation? – yes. It is on the
basis of these observations that Hahnemann and others developed the model of
homoeopathic treatment that we now use.
However the explanation itself is clearly simplistic. For example, there is
usually more than one discrete disease force present (different miasms).
Remedies may be partially similar, or potencies not quite sufficient to
eliminate a particular disease force at any one point in time. However the
explanation does satisfy, at least in part, our need to have everything
explained.
Some years ago I attempted to explain the homoeopathic therapeutic action in
terms of the energy bodies described in esoteric literature, and especially
in the Theosophical literature . I believe it was a useful effort in that it
allowed the interaction of energies to be discussed in a more tangible
manner, within an existing body of esoteric science. An explanation of HP
may come from this work.
Everything is energy of varying degrees of fineness. Our physical bodies
comprise “measurable” atoms which, because of the speed of the electrons in
some matter, appear solid and dense, or in other matter appear liquid or
gaseous. However there are huge spaces within each physical atom, and the
material of our more subtle bodies easily fits within these spaces. This
matter is so fine that it is not observable to our ordinary senses, but is
capable of being observed by people with highly refined sensitivities (i.e.
seen as auras by a few people). Within our subtle bodies (the lower mental
body, and the emotional or astral body), there are different grades of
energetic material (different levels of “fineness”).
For example, material resonating with the emotion of resentment may be
present, as well as material resonating with forgiveness. They are similar,
but the latter is much finer, or vibrates much more rapidly, than the
former. If an individual’s emotional body which contains the energetic
material of resentment is filled, for a sufficient period of time, with
forgiveness, the lower energy will eventually be burned away. This is why
individuals can “cleanse” themselves with sufficient devotional effort (i.e.
make themselves forgive). This is completely parallel to the homoeopathic
concept of similar diseases meeting, and the stronger eliminating the
weaker.
Now our bodies are continually in a state of flux. They can be changed by
exposure to an immense range of influences (energies). When we talk of our
“constitutional” state, we are suggesting a certain collection of energies
which produce a particular type of personality. All persons are
energetically unique, yet there can exist sufficient similarities which
allow us to say that two different people are constitutionally both a Nat
Mur, or both a Sepia etc.
When we give a person an HP remedy, we know that it changes the person’s
level of sensitivity to a specific challenge (such as the energy of the
measles virus, etc), and that this change can last many years. The questions
we must ask are “how”, and more importantly, “how does it last for such a
long time”?
The “how” question is relatively easy. When we give an HP remedy, we are
introducing a specific energetic material into the energy bodies of the
recipient. The substance of the remedy will mix with the substance of the
person’s bodies, causing a slight but definite change. When the person is
exposed to the energy of the targeted disease (e.g. the energy of the
measles virus), the person will be rendered immune because the more highly
vibrating (stronger) similar energetic material (highly potentised HP
remedy) will repel the less vibrating (weaker) similar energetic material
(disease), IF there is sufficient quantity of the highly vibrational
material to match the quantity of the lower vibrational material (i.e. if
the repeated exposure to the disease is limited).
The really difficult question is - why does evidence suggest that the
introduced energetic material of the HP remedy last for so many years? After
all, the effects of provings appear to pass relatively quickly. Or do they?
It is highly likely that the effects of significant energetic stimuli do
last in the system for many years.
At this point I can hear some opponents of HP say that this is exactly why
we should not use the method for long-term prevention. That epidemic use in
relatively low potencies is OK, especially as the energy of the HP remedy is
likely to be “used up” by the energy of the disease, or quickly pass away
because of the low potency used. If this is your standpoint, then you would
appear to agree that the high potencies HP remedies can confer a protective
effect for many years. I can answer your concerns regarding negative effects
on the recipient with the research findings discussed in the previous
section – appropriate long-term HP is associated with positive long-term
health effects, not the opposite.
If you don’t believe that the energetic effects of a high potency can
influence the person’s total energetic profile for many years, then you won’
t worry about the HP remedies causing problems, but you won’t accept the
explanation offered as to their mechanism of action. My answer to you is
this – claims concerning effectiveness can be made based on evidence. Isn’t
that why most people began using homoeopathy for treatment – because they
saw it work, and saw that it was based on a natural Law (the Law of
Similars)? This can be used just a validly to support the use of long-term
HP – it works, and it is based on the Law of Similars.
I can give no better an explanation than this at this point in time.
5. Concluding Comments
No study is ever perfect, and my results are no different. However they show
clearly that there is considerable consistency in measures of the
effectiveness of both short-term and long-term HP over 200 years (around the
90% mark). No method of diseases prevention is 100% effective, but HP can
offer a significant, and a comparable level of protection to other methods,
and in particular to vaccination.
My research clearly shows that the long-term use of an appropriate HP
program is associated with an improvement in the general health of
recipients, and certainly no weakening of the system.
I believe that not only is HP consistent with the fundamental Laws on which
homoeopathy is based, which no doubt is why the founder and many masters of
homoeopathy have used HP over 200 years, but that it has great potential to
improve the lives of those who use the method, and is a significant part of
mainstream homoeopathy.
The above comments are necessarily brief. To some who are approaching this
topic for the first time, or from a pre-existing position of opposition,
there will be many questions still to be answered, and data to be verified.
I hope you will take the time to do this, as the experience and the evidence
are available for those who care to look.
My Doctoral thesis concluded that “a national immunisation system where both
vaccination and HP were available to parents would increase the national
coverage against targeted infectious diseases, and reduce the incidence of
some chronic health conditions, especially asthma”
My personal hope is that one day a country with politicians capable of
making informed, independent decisions, will allow HP and vaccination to be
equally available to parents in the prevention of certain infectious
diseases. It would be a win-win situation, and would demonstrate yet again
the immense potential value of homoeopathic medicine to all societies.
Dr Isaac Golden
Isaac is a world authority on homoeoprophylaxis - the use of homoeopathic
medicines for specific disease prevention, and he has undertaken the world’s
largest long-term study of parents using such a program. In 2004 he
completed a PhD research program at the GSIM, Swinburne University,
Melbourne, studying homoeoprophylaxis. This is the first time a mainstream
Australian University has accepted such a topic for orthodox research.
Isaac has been a homoeopathic practitioner since 1984. Isaac was President
of the Victorian branch of the Australian Homoeopathic Association -
Australia’s largest national organization of professional homoeopaths - from
1992 to 1998.
In March 1999 he was awarded the Association’s Distinguished Service Award
for his “many years of service to the Australian Homoeopathic Association
and for his significant contributions to the homoeopathic profession in
Australia”
Isaac is the author of eight books on Homoeopathy, including –
Vaccination & Homoeoprophylaxis? A Review of Risks and Alternatives (6th
edition)
Homoeoprophylaxis - A Fifteen Year Clinical Study
Homoeoprophylaxis - A Practical and Philosophical Review (3rd edition)
Homoeopathic Body-System Prescriber - A Practical Workbook of Sector
Remedies (2nd edition)
Australian Homoeopathic Home Prescriber –Part 1: The Treatment of Simple
Everyday Conditions (2nd edition)
Australian Homoeopathic Home Prescriber –Part 2: A Simple Materia Medica of
Common Remedies with Repertory
Homoeopathic Treatment of the Energy Bodies – Traditional Strategies and New
Developments.
Homoeoprophylaxis - A Ten Year Clinical Study
He may be contacted by email on i_golden@netconnect.com.au and his website
address is http://www.homstudy.net/
Want to get more from ISIS?
Are you an ISIS user? Is there something preventing you from getting the
most out of your ISIS system? Well don't just sit there frustrated - contact
us! We can help. Call our support team on +44 870 141 7053 or click here to
email us. We want you to get the very best you can from ISIS.
Want to unsubscribe?
Prefer not to receive the Homeopathic Informer any longer? We do not want to
send emails to anyone who does not want to receive them. If you do not wish
to receive further copies of the Informer please click here to send us an
email message - please ensure you type the word 'unsubscribe' in the Subject
field of your email.
Copyright 2006 Miccant Ltd
14 Mulberry Close, West Bridgford, Nottingham, England. NG2 7SS
Tel : +44 870 141 7053 Web: www.miccant.com Email : informer@miccant.com
Rgds
Soroush
(If you want it in HTML format - please email me direct -
finrod@webstar.co.uk
=============
Welcome to the first edition in 2006 of the Homeopathic Informer e-journal.
A New Year always seems a good time for change. So we have decided to change
the format of this homeopathic e-journal. Now we will send you a new edition
on a regular basis but it will contain only 1 main article and all our news
(previously issued on a quarterly basis).
Given the current fears surrounding the impending Bird Flu pandemic we are
very pleased to present you with an article by Isaac Golden on the subject
of Homeoprophylaxis. The idea of homeopathic prophylaxis is an interesting
one - after all aren't we taught as homeopaths to prescribe on the basis of
presenting symptoms? If so, then how can homeopathic remedies work
preventatively? We hope you enjoy this article as much as we did.
Please do give us your feedback on the contents of this edition of the
Informer.
David Witko and the team at Miccant
PS Can't read this email? Are images missing? Then your email software is
not configured to read HTML style emails such as this e-journal. Click here
to read the Informer on our website.
Keep in touch!
When you next change your email address don't forget to let us know!
Want to receive copies of the Informer?
This e-journal is freely available to all homeopaths who wish to receive it
and is automatically sent to all customers of Miccant i.e. those using the
ISIS, CARA and Akiva homeopathic software.
Feel free to send this email journal to your friends and colleagues. All we
ask is that your friends and colleagues register with us to continue
receiving copies.
To register click here
ISIS feedback we have received recently:
"I'm very glad I bought ISIS before starting my supervised cases in my
fourth year. What I have found most useful this year has been the cross
referencing of rubrics that is so comprehensive in ISIS and the information
I can find on small remedies or remedies about which I have nothing at all
in books. I would have been stuck more than once without Isis this year."
Ruth Hall (Student London School of Classical Homeopathy) Jan 2006
"I had been using CARA for years before upgrading to ISIS. I am so glad I
did! ISIS is extremely easy to use and full of useful little extras leaving
me totally inspired by it. I find myself researching remedies and rubrics
once again full of enthusiasm. An invaluable tool for students and
practitioners alike!" Marilene Metzler, RSHom (UK practitioner and teacher
at Purton House College) Jan 2006
"ISIS is fantastic" Paul Francis (Principal - The Integrative College -
Lancaster, London and Leeds) Nov 2005
===================
A Brief Overview of Homoeoprophylaxis
1. Introduction
The essence of homoeopathic medicine is simplicity itself – (1) remedies are
chosen using the Law of Similars (the symptoms capable of being produced in
healthy people by the therapeutic substance should be similar to the
symptoms to be treated, or prevented), and (2) remedies are administered
according to the Law of Minimum Dose (the lowest potency and frequency
required to produce the required therapeutic effect should be used).
However, it seems to be the nature of our species that we inevitably
complicate issues, and any casual reading of a range of homoeopathic texts
will show that there are disputes between “classical” and “non-classical”
homoeopaths, between high and low potency prescribers, between practitioners
who work within prescribing systems (Scholten, Sankaran, ICR etc, etc) and
those who refuse to. There are Kentians, Vithoulkians, and other “ians”,
there are those who believe there is only one similimum and those who
believe there can be more than one, and so the list goes on.
The fact that so many people work differently, but still claim success, to
me indicates that there is tremendous flexibility of practice within the two
fundamentals Laws stated above. To me, adherence to these two Laws is what
makes the practitioner a homoeopath.
There is also substantial disagreement within the profession when it comes
to the prevention of targeted infectious diseases – termed homœoprophylaxis
(or HP). Some say it is just not homoeopathy, some believe it is an
essential part of the homoeopathic armoury; others have no opinion because
they have never heard of HP. Opinion also varies according to locality. In
Australia, we have had a vigorous and informed debate on HP for 15 years,
and it is widely used. In the UK, there appears to be considerable
opposition to HP on the grounds that it is not “homoeopathy”. On the Indian
subcontinent HP is widely used, and so on. Not all of the debate is well
informed.
A survey of Australian practitioners I conducted in 2002 showed that most of
those who were opposed to HP had never even read Hahnemann’s essay,
published in 1801, and titled The Cure and Prevention of Scarlet Fever. This
is the first documented use of HP, by the founder of homoeopathy. Hahnemann
stated that "Who can deny that the perfect prevention of infection from this
devastating scourge, and the discovery of a means whereby this divine aim
may be surely attained, would offer infinite advantages over any mode of
treatment, be it of the most incomparable kind soever?" He believed in
homoeopathic disease prevention, and practiced what he taught.
I have listed elsewhere the masters who used HP – Boenninghausen, Kent, etc.
So why is there such opposition to the method if the founder and many
distinguished homoeopaths all used HP?
Leaving aside simple ignorance of HP, most criticism centres on the fact
that when students, many people were taught only about the homoeopathic
treatment of existing conditions. They were taught that the Law of Similars
only applied to the matching of the patient’s existing symptoms to the
proved symptoms of the remedies in our Materia Medica. Some were taught that
the Law of Similars can not be applied to something that has not yet
happened. Others believe that we should never prevent specific infectious
diseases, but only treat them if they arise.
However, I believe that these views limit, unnecessarily, the wonderful
potential of homoeopathic medicine to help make our lives healthier, more
productive, and more complete. The following is a very brief summary of the
basis of HP, some evidence showing the safety and effectiveness of the
method, and a suggestion regarding its mechanism of action.
2. Homœoprophylaxis Defined
I define homoeoprophylaxis (HP) as the use of potentised substances in a
systematic manner to prevent the development of the characteristic symptoms
of infectious diseases.
I have highlighted the key phrases which we shall now consider.
“Systematic manner” means that an HP program should select remedies only on
the basis of the similarity of the remedy symptoms to the symptoms of the
disease to be prevented, i.e. according to the Law of Similars. This
similarity may be arrived either (i) through recording symptoms that the
chosen substance is capable of either producing in otherwise healthy people
(e.g. Hahnemann’s proving of China, and its use in preventing Malaria; or
disease-specific Nosodes), or (ii) of removing in unwell people (e.g.
Hahnemann’s use of Belladonna to first cure, and then to prevent Scarlet
Fever).
Further, the number of doses of each individual medicine should be the least
possible needed to produce a protective effect. This of course, like all
cases of posology, is a judgement call. It involves balancing a higher (or
lower) potency with fewer (or more) doses, and the fact that the effect of a
higher potency will last longer than that of a lower. But the potency and
frequency used must be based on reasoned experience.
“Characteristic symptoms” means that unlike homoeopathic treatment, where
the patient’s unique individual response to a challenge guides the remedy
selection (something which obviously can only occur after the infection), in
prevention we only need to know the common or characteristic symptoms of the
disease to be prevented, and choose a remedy similar to them. As Kent
stated, "Now you will find that for prophylaxis there is required a less
degree of similitude than is necessary for curing. A remedy will not have to
be so similar to prevent disease as to cure it, and these remedies in daily
use will enable you to prevent a large number of people from becoming sick."
Thus the appropriate use of HP requires both skill and care. It is not a
random technique, but one totally based on the correct application of
fundamental homoeopathic principles. Hahnemann and the masters were not
wrong when they saw (and used) HP as an important part of mainstream
homoeopathy. My question is simple – why are the people who deny the
relevance of HP correct, and Hahnemann et al wrong? I have yet to hear a
satisfactory answer to this question.
I have been asked whether HP remedies can be antidoted by energetic
influences. I have no doubt that it has happened simply because it can. . I
certainly have seen antidoting occurring when mothers breastfed immediately
after a dose . For this reason I always recommend that HP remedies be taken
away from other homoeopathic treatment, and away from infections and other
traumas. If a patient is taking constitutional treatment, it should have
priority over HP, unless the HP is required to prevent a present epidemic.
We shall now examine evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of HP,
and finally consider a possible mechanism of action.
3. Evidence Supporting the Safety and Effectiveness of Homœoprophylaxis
The evidence may be divided into that supporting short-term or epidemic use
of HP, and evidence supporting long-term use of HP.
(i) Short-term or epidemic use of HP
There are some homoeopaths who only accept the epidemic use of HP, based as
it is on a 200 year history of use recorded in homoeopathic journals. Most
records show only the clinical experience of practitioners, but a few have
statistically quantified their experience.
The most dramatic, and statistically convincing result, was recorded by
Mroninski , Adriano, and Mattos. In their study, 65,826 children were given
the HP remedy Meningococcinum, and 23,539 children were unprotected. In a
rigorous statistical analysis, the authors showed that HP was 95% effective
after 6 months and 91% effective after 12 months. This result is not only
consistent with both the anecdotal and statistical evidence of short-term
use over 200 years, but is similar to the reported effectiveness of orthodox
vaccines.
There is no reported evidence (as opposed to unsupported assertion) that I
am aware of that appropriate short-term use of HP has caused any harm to
recipients.
(ii) Long-term or systematic use of HP
This involves the use of an appropriate program of HP over a period of years
to prevent a number of commonly occurring infectious diseases in our
community. Some homoeopaths who accept short-term use of HP in an existing
epidemic situation, say that long-term use is not homoeopathic, unnecessary,
and potentially damaging to the health of recipients due to too many
remedies in too high potencies.
I have been using a long-term program of HP since 1985. I have collected
data on the safety and effectiveness of my program since then, and in 2004
completed Doctoral research at a mainstream Australian university (S.U.T.)
which included detailed analysis of the long-term data I had collected, plus
a new study where the long-term health of 4 groups were compared, according
to their immunisation status.
To summarise very briefly:
(a) the single figure effectiveness of long-term HP was 90.4%. This varied
very little between different diseases/remedies. It was totally consistent
with all other evidence supporting the general effectiveness of HP.
(b) the group using long-term HP were in general healthier (as measured by
the incidence of asthma, eczema, ear/hearing problems, allergies, and
behavioural problems) than groups using general or constitutional
protection, who used no protection at all, and in particular compared to the
vaccinated group. Comparisons were made based on ratio analyses and Chi
Squared probability tests with P>0.05. There was no evidence that
appropriate long-term HP in any way weakened the general health of
recipients, in fact the reverse was found.
(c) Not all long-term HP programs were the same in terms of safety and
effectiveness – some were clearly less safe and less effective.
All the data has been published for interested persons to analyse if they
wish. It shows that not only is appropriate long-term HP comparably
effective to orthodox vaccination, but also that it is much safer. It is
actually associated with a positive impact on long-term health, possibly due
to the beneficial effects of provings spoken about by Hahnemann and many
others.
Some people question whether it is (energetically) safe to prove any
substance. I personally would have no problems participating in any proving
provided it was in a 30 or 200 potency, and properly conducted (i.e.
strictly minimum dose). I don’t believe that external influences on our
bodies are to be feared unless they either (i) the extent of the influence
is severe and (usually) prolonged, or (ii) unless the system is very weak
(which is why unwell people should not undertake provings)
4. How Does Homoeoprophylaxis Work?
Explaining the mechanism of action of any energetic medicine is difficult,
especially in terms of words that have substantial meaning. We are taught
that symptoms are caused by the action of our unique Vital Force combating
the energetic disturbance of the inner disease force. We believe that
homoeopathic treatment works by selecting a remedy which energetically
resonates with the disease and, given that no two similar diseases can exist
in the body at the same time, the stronger will expel the weaker. So if the
energy profile of the remedy is sufficiently similar to that of the disease,
and the potency selected renders the remedy energetically stronger than the
energy of the disease, the remedy force expels the disease, leaving the
patient under the influence of the remedy until the “artifical” energy of
the remedy progressively weakens, and the Vital Force assumes control of the
body.
Can we prove this explanation? – no. Can we observe events in the real world
which are generally consistent with this explanation? – yes. It is on the
basis of these observations that Hahnemann and others developed the model of
homoeopathic treatment that we now use.
However the explanation itself is clearly simplistic. For example, there is
usually more than one discrete disease force present (different miasms).
Remedies may be partially similar, or potencies not quite sufficient to
eliminate a particular disease force at any one point in time. However the
explanation does satisfy, at least in part, our need to have everything
explained.
Some years ago I attempted to explain the homoeopathic therapeutic action in
terms of the energy bodies described in esoteric literature, and especially
in the Theosophical literature . I believe it was a useful effort in that it
allowed the interaction of energies to be discussed in a more tangible
manner, within an existing body of esoteric science. An explanation of HP
may come from this work.
Everything is energy of varying degrees of fineness. Our physical bodies
comprise “measurable” atoms which, because of the speed of the electrons in
some matter, appear solid and dense, or in other matter appear liquid or
gaseous. However there are huge spaces within each physical atom, and the
material of our more subtle bodies easily fits within these spaces. This
matter is so fine that it is not observable to our ordinary senses, but is
capable of being observed by people with highly refined sensitivities (i.e.
seen as auras by a few people). Within our subtle bodies (the lower mental
body, and the emotional or astral body), there are different grades of
energetic material (different levels of “fineness”).
For example, material resonating with the emotion of resentment may be
present, as well as material resonating with forgiveness. They are similar,
but the latter is much finer, or vibrates much more rapidly, than the
former. If an individual’s emotional body which contains the energetic
material of resentment is filled, for a sufficient period of time, with
forgiveness, the lower energy will eventually be burned away. This is why
individuals can “cleanse” themselves with sufficient devotional effort (i.e.
make themselves forgive). This is completely parallel to the homoeopathic
concept of similar diseases meeting, and the stronger eliminating the
weaker.
Now our bodies are continually in a state of flux. They can be changed by
exposure to an immense range of influences (energies). When we talk of our
“constitutional” state, we are suggesting a certain collection of energies
which produce a particular type of personality. All persons are
energetically unique, yet there can exist sufficient similarities which
allow us to say that two different people are constitutionally both a Nat
Mur, or both a Sepia etc.
When we give a person an HP remedy, we know that it changes the person’s
level of sensitivity to a specific challenge (such as the energy of the
measles virus, etc), and that this change can last many years. The questions
we must ask are “how”, and more importantly, “how does it last for such a
long time”?
The “how” question is relatively easy. When we give an HP remedy, we are
introducing a specific energetic material into the energy bodies of the
recipient. The substance of the remedy will mix with the substance of the
person’s bodies, causing a slight but definite change. When the person is
exposed to the energy of the targeted disease (e.g. the energy of the
measles virus), the person will be rendered immune because the more highly
vibrating (stronger) similar energetic material (highly potentised HP
remedy) will repel the less vibrating (weaker) similar energetic material
(disease), IF there is sufficient quantity of the highly vibrational
material to match the quantity of the lower vibrational material (i.e. if
the repeated exposure to the disease is limited).
The really difficult question is - why does evidence suggest that the
introduced energetic material of the HP remedy last for so many years? After
all, the effects of provings appear to pass relatively quickly. Or do they?
It is highly likely that the effects of significant energetic stimuli do
last in the system for many years.
At this point I can hear some opponents of HP say that this is exactly why
we should not use the method for long-term prevention. That epidemic use in
relatively low potencies is OK, especially as the energy of the HP remedy is
likely to be “used up” by the energy of the disease, or quickly pass away
because of the low potency used. If this is your standpoint, then you would
appear to agree that the high potencies HP remedies can confer a protective
effect for many years. I can answer your concerns regarding negative effects
on the recipient with the research findings discussed in the previous
section – appropriate long-term HP is associated with positive long-term
health effects, not the opposite.
If you don’t believe that the energetic effects of a high potency can
influence the person’s total energetic profile for many years, then you won’
t worry about the HP remedies causing problems, but you won’t accept the
explanation offered as to their mechanism of action. My answer to you is
this – claims concerning effectiveness can be made based on evidence. Isn’t
that why most people began using homoeopathy for treatment – because they
saw it work, and saw that it was based on a natural Law (the Law of
Similars)? This can be used just a validly to support the use of long-term
HP – it works, and it is based on the Law of Similars.
I can give no better an explanation than this at this point in time.
5. Concluding Comments
No study is ever perfect, and my results are no different. However they show
clearly that there is considerable consistency in measures of the
effectiveness of both short-term and long-term HP over 200 years (around the
90% mark). No method of diseases prevention is 100% effective, but HP can
offer a significant, and a comparable level of protection to other methods,
and in particular to vaccination.
My research clearly shows that the long-term use of an appropriate HP
program is associated with an improvement in the general health of
recipients, and certainly no weakening of the system.
I believe that not only is HP consistent with the fundamental Laws on which
homoeopathy is based, which no doubt is why the founder and many masters of
homoeopathy have used HP over 200 years, but that it has great potential to
improve the lives of those who use the method, and is a significant part of
mainstream homoeopathy.
The above comments are necessarily brief. To some who are approaching this
topic for the first time, or from a pre-existing position of opposition,
there will be many questions still to be answered, and data to be verified.
I hope you will take the time to do this, as the experience and the evidence
are available for those who care to look.
My Doctoral thesis concluded that “a national immunisation system where both
vaccination and HP were available to parents would increase the national
coverage against targeted infectious diseases, and reduce the incidence of
some chronic health conditions, especially asthma”
My personal hope is that one day a country with politicians capable of
making informed, independent decisions, will allow HP and vaccination to be
equally available to parents in the prevention of certain infectious
diseases. It would be a win-win situation, and would demonstrate yet again
the immense potential value of homoeopathic medicine to all societies.
Dr Isaac Golden
Isaac is a world authority on homoeoprophylaxis - the use of homoeopathic
medicines for specific disease prevention, and he has undertaken the world’s
largest long-term study of parents using such a program. In 2004 he
completed a PhD research program at the GSIM, Swinburne University,
Melbourne, studying homoeoprophylaxis. This is the first time a mainstream
Australian University has accepted such a topic for orthodox research.
Isaac has been a homoeopathic practitioner since 1984. Isaac was President
of the Victorian branch of the Australian Homoeopathic Association -
Australia’s largest national organization of professional homoeopaths - from
1992 to 1998.
In March 1999 he was awarded the Association’s Distinguished Service Award
for his “many years of service to the Australian Homoeopathic Association
and for his significant contributions to the homoeopathic profession in
Australia”
Isaac is the author of eight books on Homoeopathy, including –
Vaccination & Homoeoprophylaxis? A Review of Risks and Alternatives (6th
edition)
Homoeoprophylaxis - A Fifteen Year Clinical Study
Homoeoprophylaxis - A Practical and Philosophical Review (3rd edition)
Homoeopathic Body-System Prescriber - A Practical Workbook of Sector
Remedies (2nd edition)
Australian Homoeopathic Home Prescriber –Part 1: The Treatment of Simple
Everyday Conditions (2nd edition)
Australian Homoeopathic Home Prescriber –Part 2: A Simple Materia Medica of
Common Remedies with Repertory
Homoeopathic Treatment of the Energy Bodies – Traditional Strategies and New
Developments.
Homoeoprophylaxis - A Ten Year Clinical Study
He may be contacted by email on i_golden@netconnect.com.au and his website
address is http://www.homstudy.net/
Want to get more from ISIS?
Are you an ISIS user? Is there something preventing you from getting the
most out of your ISIS system? Well don't just sit there frustrated - contact
us! We can help. Call our support team on +44 870 141 7053 or click here to
email us. We want you to get the very best you can from ISIS.
Want to unsubscribe?
Prefer not to receive the Homeopathic Informer any longer? We do not want to
send emails to anyone who does not want to receive them. If you do not wish
to receive further copies of the Informer please click here to send us an
email message - please ensure you type the word 'unsubscribe' in the Subject
field of your email.
Copyright 2006 Miccant Ltd
14 Mulberry Close, West Bridgford, Nottingham, England. NG2 7SS
Tel : +44 870 141 7053 Web: www.miccant.com Email : informer@miccant.com