Evidence for Homeopathy

Homeopathic Trials
There is lots of evidence to support homeopathy as a useful medicine in helping healing.  Because homeopathy works in a different way to conventional medicine, it makes sense that the trials of homeopathic medicines are completed in a different way.  However, Western Society is reluctant to acknowledge this difference and this is where controversy flourishes.  

We now have a 200-page bibliographic listing of approximately 5,000 references prepared by Iris Bell PhD MD MD(H) CCH (Professor emeritus, Department of Family Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine) and Peter Gold (former Communications Director of the National Center of Homeopathy) that represents the current scientific evidence base of homeopathy.   Please click on this link to read the 200 page document.

A Homeopath will treat 10 different people with migraine with 10 different medicines, this is because we do not prescribe for the migraine alone, we take the physical symptoms as only part of the information.  We also take into account the patient's medical history, other symptoms past and present, general constitution, the cause of the symptom, the inherited susceptibilities and a number of other criteria which help to build the overall picture and energy.  This, of course, means that each medicine should not be tested for it's ability to help reduce the symptoms of one symptom because we do not treat the migraine - we prescribe a medicine to address the course of the symptom.  

So if we had 50 patients for whom we gave one remedy for a migraine, we would expect less than a tenth to improve because the remedy just wouldn't be the correct one for that person.  We therefore need homeopathic trials to be more general.  So with homeopathic treatment, did the patient improve or not (no matter which medicine was subscribed),

Bristol Homeopathic Hospital
An observational study at Bristol Homeopathic Hospital included over 6,500 consecutive patients with over 23,000 attendances in a 6-year period.

Seventy percent of follow-up patients reported improved health, 50% referring to major improvement.

The best treatment responses were reported in childhood eczema and asthma, and in inflammatory bowel disease, irritable bowel syndrome, menopausal problems and migraine in adults.

Similar patient-reported outcomes have been reported from the UK’s other four NHS homeopathic hospitals.

Royal London Homeopathic Hospital
The 500-patient survey at the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital showed that many patients were able to reduce or stop conventional medication following homeopathic treatment.

The size of the effect varied between diagnoses: for skin complaints, for example, 72% of patients reported being able to stop or reduce their conventional medication; for cancer patients there was no reduction.

References:

1. White A, Ernst E. The case for uncontrolled clinical trials: a starting point for the evidence base for CAM. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 2001; 9: 111–115.

2. Walach H, Jonas WB, Lewith GT. The role of outcomes research in evaluating complementary and alternative medicine. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2002; 8: 88–95.

3. Muscari-Tomaioli G, Allegri F, Miali E, et al. Observational study of quality of life in patients with headache, receiving homeopathic treatment. British Homeopathic Journal, 2001; 90: 189–197.

4. Frei H, Thurneysen A. Treatment for hyperactive children: homeopathy and methylphenidate compared in a family setting. British Homeopathic Journal, 2001; 90: 183–188.

5. Witt CM, Lüdtke R, Baur R, Willich SN. Homeopathic medical practice: long-term results of a cohort study with 3,981 patients. BMC Public Health, 2005; 5: 115.

6. Spence DS, Thompson EA, Barron SJ. Homeopathic treatment for chronic disease: a 6-year university-hospital outpatient observational study. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 2005; 5: 793–798.

7. Clover A. Patient benefit survey: Tunbridge Wells Homoeopathic Hospital. British Homeopathic Journal, 2000; 89: 68–72.

8. Richardson WR. Patient benefit survey: Liverpool Regional Department of Homoeopathic Medicine. British Homeopathic Journal, 2001; 90: 158–162.

9. Sharples F, van Haselen R, Fisher P. NHS patients’ perspective on complementary medicine. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 2003; 11: 243–248.

10. Reilly D, Mercer SW, Bikker AP, Harrison T. Outcome related to impact on daily living: preliminary validation of the ORIDL instrument. BMC Health Services Research, 2007; 7: 139.

This information has been taken from:

www.britishhomeopathic.org the charity promoting patient access to homeopathy.

The website has many evidence based articles for further information.

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial