Little Mountain Homeopathy, 351 E. 39th Ave., Vancouver, BC V5W 1K3
Phone: (604) 677-7742 Email: LMhomeopath@gmail.com

Little Mountain Homeopathy

Classical homeopath in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Award-winning holistic natural health practitioner.

Month: January 2010

Dr. Isaac Golden’s Homeoprophylaxis Research Overview

Homeoprophylaxis – A Proven Alternative to Vaccination

By Dr Isaac Golden

I prepared my first formal program of homeopathic remedies to prevent infectious diseases in 1986. In the following 20+ years, tens of thousands of Australian children have been immunized homeopathically – a method called homeoprophylaxis (HP) – using programs from myself as well as other practitioners across the country. The method itself is over 200 years old, and has considerable clinical and research experience to support its claims.

In 2004, I integrated 18 years of data collection from parents of children using my program with 4 years of doctoral research at Swinburne University in Melbourne. The purpose of this article is to share with you the findings of this and other research into the effectiveness and safety of HP.

Background

The use of HP was first described by Dr Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, in 1801. He used the remedy Belladonna 30 to successfully treat patients with the disease Scarlet Fever, but fortuitously found that the remedy also helped to prevent the disease. He then used HP to prevent such diseases as Cholera and Typhoid. In the decades following, many leading homeopaths used HP to prevent a variety of infectious diseases, mainly in acute epidemic situations.

The largest trial of the short-term use of HP was against an outbreak of Meningococcal disease in Brazil. The researchers gave 65,826 children the homeopathic remedy Meningococcinum. Another 23,539 were not protected. The effectiveness of HP after 6 months was 95%, and after a 12 months follow-up was 91%.

Whilst many homeopaths also use HP for long-term prevention (mainly in Australia and the Indian subcontinent), there had been very little formal statistical research into the long-term use of HP prior to 1985. The data I have collected since that time provides a useful guide as to the effectiveness and safety of long-term HP. It confirms that the findings regarding epidemic use also extend to long-term use, with an average effectiveness of around 90%, and a very high level of safety. These findings are presented below.

The Effectiveness of Homeoprophylaxis

As mentioned above, we have a considerable amount of clinical evidence showing that HP provides a high level of protection against targeted infectious diseases. This is supported by a small number of statistical trials which are summarized in Table 1 below. These show an average effectiveness of around 90%, which certainly is comparable to measures of vaccine effectiveness, which range from 70% to 99%, depending on the individual vaccine, and the type of trial used to measure efficacy (real-world experiences show lower rates than clinical trials).

These figures confirm that no method of disease prevention is ever 100% effective.

No statistical study is ever perfect, and of course the reliability of my data is open to question. So as part of my Swinburne research, I applied seven statistical tests to validate the long-term data I have been collecting since 1985. These are described in detail elsewhere, and they did show a high level of reliability. For example, my single figure measure of long-term HP effectiveness was 90.4%, with 95% confidence limits of 87.6% – 93.2% (i.e. it can be stated with 95% confidence that the efficacy lies between 87.6% AND 93.2%), a very strong result.

Table 1: The Effectiveness of HP – Statistical Trials in Humans

Year Researcher* Numbers of Participants Length of Survey Effectiveness %
1907 Eaton 2,806 < 1 year 97.5
1950 Taylor-Smith 82 (12 definitely exposed) < 1 year 100.0
1963 Gutman 385 < 1 year 86.0
1974 Castro &Nogeira HP 18,000
Not HP 6,340
3 months 86.1
1987 English 694 2 years 87.0 – 91.5
1987 Fox 61 5 years 82.0 – 95.0
1998 Mroninski et al HP 65,826
Not HP 23,539
6 months
12 months
95.0 – 91.0
1997 Golden 593 children1,305 questionnaires 10 years 88.8
2004 Golden 1,159 children
2,342 questionnaires
15 years 90.4

* References for these studies may be found in Vaccination and Homeoprophylaxis – A Review of Risks and Alternatives, 6th edition

So those in pharmaceutical medicine who state that there is no evidence supporting the effectiveness of HP are clearly wrong. It is not essential to rely only on randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide evidence, and in fact the findings of many RCTs are shown to be questionable over time (e.g. drugs such as Vioxx that were tested in RCTs, then later withdrawn from use because of side-effects not discovered or acknowledged during the RCTs).

Thus homeopaths can confidently say that HP provides a definite level of protection against targeted infectious diseases, which is not 100%, but which is comparable to that of vaccines.

The Safety of Homoeoprophylaxis

Homeopathic medicines are usually prepared using a series of dilutions and succussions (firm striking of the container holding the liquid remedy against a firm surface). The remedies are called “potencies” because at each stage they become energetically stronger. After the 12c potency, no molecules of the original substance remain, yet the remedy is energetically stronger. Pharmaceutical advocates cannot understand this, because their paradigm forces them to believe that as the number of molecules of a substance decreases in a medicine, the medicine becomes weaker. This is true if the kinetic energy of the succussion is not correctly applied, and a simple dilution only is prepared. But we are making much more than a simple dilution.

Doctors agree that homoeopathic potencies cannot be toxic, and so physical safety is not an issue. However, some homeopaths have expressed concerns over the years as to whether the long-term use of the remedies in my HP program is energetically safe. Many people who are not bound to the pharmaceutical paradigm understand that energy can produce real and tangible effects, and if misused can cause problems. One important part of my research at Swinburne was to check the long-term safety of HP.

This was done by examining 5 markers of overall wellbeing in children aged between 4 and 12 years of age – asthma, eczema, ear/hearing problems, allergies and behavioural problems. These were compared to a range of early childhood markers, including breastfeeding status, birthweight, APGAR scores, as well as to 4 possible immunization methods – vaccination, HP, general/constitutional prevention, and no prevention at all. That gave 20 (5 x 4) possible combinations of health conditions and immunization methods. The data was processed using Odds Ratios and Chi Squared Probability tests.

Once again, the full results are reported in detail elsewhere, but the main findings are as follows:

  1. In 19 of the 20 possible measures of health, vaccinated children were less healthy than other children, usually by a significant amount (the 1 measure favouring vaccination was not statistically significant). The most dramatic single finding was that vaccinated children have a 15 times greater chance of becoming asthmatic than children using HP, with P>99%, a highly statistically significant finding.
  2. Children using HP were generally at least as healthy (and often more healthy) as children who used constitutional/general immunization or no immunization at all. The HP group were not exclusively from people who were extremely health conscious. Regularly, parents using my HP program say that it is their first introduction to homeopathy and to natural medicine in general.
  3. Parental estimates of general well-being were very high in the HP group – at least as high as in other groups.
  4. Not all HP programs give consistent results. When comparing children using my HP program to those using other HP programs, the levels of both effectiveness and safety were lower in the group using other programs. So it is advisable to check the basis of a HP program before committing to it. Programs using daily doses of low potencies provide less effective long-term prevention than programs using infrequent doses of (appropriately selected) high potencies.

We may conclude from the parts of my data which were statistically significant (P?95%), that HP is associated with an improvement in general health, compared to other immunization methods (as well as no immunization at all), and that this figure is significantly better when compared to vaccinated children. Therefore we may conclude that the evidence suggests that the use of an appropriate long-term HP program does not lessen the health of children, and evidence suggests that it may in fact assist the maturation of the immune system by gently challenging the system in the first 5-6 years of life.

Concluding Comments

What began as a limited study 20 years ago has grown, for me, into an ongoing attempt to make parents, as well as health professionals, aware of the wonderful opportunity that homoeoprophylaxis offers to provide protection against target infectious diseases, without risking the long-term health of their children. It may be safely used by adults.

Not every infectious disease is a dire threat to a healthy infant. I personally don’t believe that immunization against every infectious disease is essential. But I do believe that the right to choose which diseases should be prevented should belong to the parents of each child. We can confidently say to parents that they can provide a high (but not complete) level of protection against targeted diseases, without risk, by using an appropriate HP program.

We can also say to those within the pharmaceutical industry who disparage HP as being untested and uncertain – take the time to study the facts available. Criticism without facts is the antithesis of the true scientific method, yet it is the response we continually get from pharmaceutical medicine when it comes to HP.

I concluded my doctoral thesis by saying that “a national immunization 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”. The data is unambiguous, and it is time that those who run the health services of this country get serious about long-term health, and fully support the use of the best of what natural medicine in general, and homeopathic medicine in particular, has to offer.

Vaccines offer a level of protection against targeted infectious diseases, but involve a long-term risk that has never been adequately measured. Evidence shows that vaccination is a factor in the increase in asthma (and other chronic diseases) shown earlier. We can achieve a comparable level of protection, without this risk, by using an appropriate long-term HP program. It’s time that those parents who search for facts to inform themselves before vaccinating are encouraged, and not attacked by agents of the pharmaceutical industry. It’s time that parents are supported in their choice of immunization method, for the benefit of their own children and of the entire community.

For a more thorough review of the history, statistics, science and research of Homeoprophylaxis, visit the Little Mountain Homeopathy Homeoprophylaxis Information Page

References

Golden I. Homoeoprophylaxis – A Fifteen Year Clinical Study. 2004. Isaac Golden Publications. Daylesford.

Golden I. Homœoprophylaxis – A Practical and Philosophical Review. 2001. Isaac Golden Publications, Daylesford, Australia. 3rd edition.

Golden I. The Potential Value of Homœoprophylaxis in the Prevention of Infectious Diseases, and the Maintenance of General Health in Recipients. 2005. Swinburne University Press, Melbourne.

Golden I. Vaccination – A Homoeopathic Perspective. Nature & Health. Vol 7. No.3. Sept 1986, pages 67-70.

Golden I. Vaccination and Homoeoprophylaxis – A Review of Risks and Alternatives, 6th edition. 2005. Isaac Golden Publications. Daylesford.

Hahnemann S. The Cure and Prevention of Scarlet Fever. 1801. Republished in Lesser Writings. B Jain Publishers, New Delhi; pp. 369-385.

Mroninski C, Adriano E, Mattos G. Meningococcinum: Its protective effect against meningococcal disease. Homoeopathic Links Winter, 2001. Vol 14(4); pp. 230-4.

National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC). The Australian Immunisation Handbook, 8th Edition. 2003. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

About the Author…

Dr Isaac Golden has been in homeopathic practice since 1984. He has written 8 books on homeopathic topics and currently consults in Gisborne, Victoria. Since 1990, he has been Principal of the A.C.H.H., a correspondence college teaching homeopathy and has recently been appointed as Adjunct Professor of Homeopathy at the Australian College of Natural Medicine. He is a world authority on the use of homeoprophylaxis, and has completed the world’s largest long term trial of the method. He was awarded a PhD from Swinburne University in 2004 as a result of the research on HP he has undertaken over the last 20 years. Click here for further information about Dr Golden and his publications.

Disclaimer

Nosodes are not intended to be an alternative to vaccination.

The CHPA cannot recommend the use of any homeopathic medication, in lieu of conventional medical vaccinations. To their knowledge, there have been no homeopathic substances thoroughly tested as consistently effective replacement therapeutics for conventional medical vaccinations

Natural Eczema Creams and Treatments: A Review

I have treated many cases of eczema successfully using classical homeopathy. Classical homeopaths, such as myself, use only one homeopathic remedy at a time to treat the whole person. We treat the root cause of the eczema, rather than using topical applications. Natural creams only soothe the eczema, and steroid creams suppress the eczema.

The use of steroid cream, for example, is an example of suppression. Although the steroid cream may temporarily alleviate the eczema, the skin problem will usually come back if the steroid cream is discontinued. Homeopaths believe that the use of steroid creams drives the disturbance/imbalance away from the skin and into the internal organs. A classical example of this is using steroid cream on a young child’s eczema, resulting in the disappearance of the eczema and the appearance of asthma. What happened in this example is that the child’s eczema was suppressed by the steroid cream, driving the disturbance inwards to the lungs.

CortisoneChronic cases of eczema can be treated effectively with classical homeopathy. Contact the clinic or a classical homeopath in your area.

Homeopathic remedies help the body heal itself. For some people, especially those who have had eczema for many years, the healing process can be slow. While undergoing homeopathic treatment, there are a number of creams and ointments that can soothe and moisturize itchy, dry and/or cracked skin:

Olive Oil and Coconut Oil
The cheapest and simplest option, though using oils tends to be messier than using a cream. Of the two, I prefer coconut oil, although some of my clients prefer using olive oil. Coconut oil has excellent wound healing abilities – apply it to cracks in the skin and they will heal in no time (if the cracks are deep also apply a bandage over the wound). Another good thing about using oils is that even the most sensitive skin will tolerate them, even a newborn baby’s. Try to use organic, cold-pressed if you can.

Weleda Creams
Completely safe and natural products available in most health food stores and natural pharmacies. This company makes good quality products that smell great. Adults can use “Skin Food,” for dry and rough skin. They have a number of good products for babies. My favourite is “Calendula Baby Cream.” Other options for childhood eczema are “Calendula Diaper Care,” “Calendula Lotion,” and “Calendula Oil.” These products aren’t cheap but I think they’re worth their price tag.

Rescue Cream
Many people are familiar with Bach’s Rescue Remedy. It is also available as a topical cream. I have found this cream to be very effective in alleviating intense itching. The only problem is the price tag. If you are on a budget, you could buy the regular Rescue Remedy tincture, a base cream, and make your own Rescue Cream.

 

Calendula Cream
thompson's calendula creamYou can buy plain calendula cream if you don’t want to spend your money on the high-priced Weleda brand, though you will sacrifice attractiveness and quality. Calendula cream will soothe dry skin and hasten wound healing. Personally, I haven’t found it to be any more effective than applying plain coconut oil. Common brands sold in Canada include Thompson’s, Boiron, Nelsons, and Homeocan.

Ingredients to Avoid
ToxicAlways look at the list of ingredients! Many companies claim that their products are completely natural, but their ingredients are actually harmful. Be on the lookout for these ingredients:

Parabens: can disrupt your endocrine (hormonal) system
Propylene Glycol
: a known carcinogen and skin irritant. Linked to kidney and liver problems.
Mineral Oil, Paraffin, and Petrolatum: comes from crude oil and does not allow the skin to breathe
Phenol Carbolic Acid: Can cause circulatory collapse, paralysis, convulsions, coma, and even death.
Toluene: Chronic exposure linked to anemia, lowered blood cell count, liver or kidney damage.

For a more detailed discussion of problematic skincare ingredients, go to Dr. Mercola’s site: http://www.mercolahealthyskin.com/organic-skin-care.aspx

How to Prevent Vaccine Injury

Many parents who know the risks of vaccines still choose to vaccinate because they feel that the benefits of protection from the disease outweigh the risks of vaccinating. Here are some possibilities to consider for those parents who are concerned about the risks but still want to at least partially vaccinate their children:

1. Homeopath Dr. Tinus Smits is an expert in treating vaccine damaged children. He suggests giving a homeopathic potency of the vaccine before and immediately after the child gets their jab. This is an effective method of preventing vaccine damage, although it is not always effective 100% of the time. Contact the clinic or a classical homeopath in your area to find out more about how homeopathy can be used to prevent vaccine injury.

2. Delay vaccinations until the baby has built up its cellular defenses sufficiently. Dr. Donald Miller recommends delaying vaccination until the child is 2 years old. If you are not willing to wait until your child is 2, consider delaying as long as possible. Dr. Smits recommends waiting until the child is at least 1.5 years old.

3. Administer vaccines separately when possible. Canadians can ask for the DTaP-IPV vaccine to be administered separately from the Hib vaccine, for example.

4. Reduce the total number of vaccinations to three from four for the DTaP-IPV and HIB, the first two with an interval of two months and the third after six months. Other countries follow this protocol.

5. Leave out the vaccines that are not absolutely necessary. If your child is healthy you should consider leaving out the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella), Varicella (chicken pox), Hep B vaccine and (H1N1) Influenza vaccine. Measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox and influenza are relatively mild diseases in healthy children. Most babies and young children in Canada are not at risk for Hep B, though parents may want to consider the vaccination when the child is older or when traveling overseas.

6. If you suspect that your child’s health has been compromised by vaccinations, seek homeopathic help before vaccinating further.

To read more about the homeopathic prevention of post-vaccination syndrome, read this blog post: Homeopathy for Adverse Reactions to Vaccines.

Click here to read about the research in support of Homeoprophylaxis

Scroll to top