Little Mountain Homeopathy Client Testimonial
After 60 years of suffering with allergies and asthma, I have relief. Over the years I have taken various antihistamines with limited, unreliable results. Recently I decided to try homeopathic medicine with practitioner Sonya McLeod. First she recorded a thorough medical history, then prescribed a homeopathic remedy. During the cottonwood season, my nose dripped, I sneezed, coughed, and my throat and ears itched. I took the remedy and had immediate relief. Now I take a remedy as needed, to maintain and healthy respiratory system.
I found Sonya to be a professional, empathetic and effective homeopathic practitioner. I highly recommend her to anyone seeking a homeopathic practitioner.
Get rid of allergies permanently with no drug dependency or side effects. The following complaints can be treated effectively and naturally with classical homeopathy:
Read my own story published in babyvibe of how I was cured of debilitating fatigue and severe allergic symptoms with homeopathy – Homeopathy: My Cure for Allergies
When treating allergies with classical homeopathy, testing is not necessary, though it may be a useful tool as part of your healing journey. Classical homeopathic treatment desensitizes the body so that the body is strong enough to tolerate the allergen. Our medicines get to the root of the problem instead of merely telling you to limit your exposure to the allergen, so that you can lead a healthy normal life.
Numerous Studies Prove the Effectiveness of Homeopathy for all Kinds of Allergies
There are conceptual and historical links between homeopathic medicine and modern allergy desensitization treatment. Conventional allergy desensitization and homeopathic treatment both utilize small doses of substances that might cause symptoms in order to prevent or treat a hypersensitive state. Homeopathy has historically been associated with allergy treatment. This article reviews evidence from controlled trials for the use of homeopathy in respiratory allergies. Several clinical trials, many of which were published in “high impact” conventional medical journals, describe significant effects of homeopathic treatment in allergic patients. Most of these clinical studies have been deemed to be high quality trials, according to the three most commonly referenced meta-analyses of homeopathic research. Basic in vitro experimental studies also provide evidence that the effects of homeopathy differ from placebo.
A systematic review of results from 93 substantive RCTs was carried out by Robert Mathie (2003). It concludes that of the 35 different medical conditions covered by these trials the weight of evidence favours a positive treatment effect in 8: childhood diarrhoea, fibrositosis, hay fever, influenza, pain (miscellaneous), side-effects of chemotherapy or radiotherapy, sprains and upper-respiratory tract infections.
Richardson J. “Quasi-randomised control trial to assess the outcome of acupuncture, osteopathy and homoeopathy using the short form 36 item health survey.” Health Services Research and Evaluation Unit, The Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust. December 1996.
The effect of homeopathy, acupuncture and osteopathy. Result: 89% of patients stated they experienced positive effect from the treatment. Particularly clear effect on reduction of pain, increased vitality, ability to function socially and with regards to limitations at work and in daily activities influenced by physical problems. Homeopathy was particularly effective for patients suffering from arthritis, hay fever, asthma and skin complaints.
In this study, 13 Dutch medical practitioners submitted patients (who between them had a mean history of hayfever of 9 years), for therapy involving injections of a combination homeopathic product. All but 1 patient were given the medication before the onset of the hayfever season and all were given it during the hayfever season. Of these 13, during the course of the trial 9 people found no increase in nasal and non-nasal hayfever symptoms when the hayfever season began or during it and only 1 of the 13 felt compelled to use conventional hayfever medication.
In this case series, 147 consecutive patients suffering from respiratory allergy who attended a private homeopathic clinic were assessed for their response to constitutional homeopathic treatment. Of these patients, 105 were sufferers of ear, nose and throat allergies. Only 2 of these patients failed to respond to treatment and none experienced an exacerbation of symptoms. The other 42 patients were sufferers of pulmonary allergies, all except 5 of whom experienced relief, with 2 of these experiencing an exacerbation of symptoms.
Ferreri R, Bernardini S, Pulcri R, Cracolici F, Rinaldi M, Porciani C. “Improved quality of life and reduction of conventional drugs in allergic patients treated with homeopathy.” HRI Research in Focus, Issue 31 Summer 2016.
The Centre for Integrated Medicine in Pitigliano, Tuscany, is an innovative hospital providing homeopathy and acupuncture alongside conventional medical care. This article reports the results of an integrated homeopathic protocol used to treat 430 out-patients with seasonal and perennial respiratory allergies (e.g. rhinitis, oculorhinitis and asthma) from 2011-2014. Effectiveness was evaluated through the Quality of Life SF12 questionnaire, the Edmonton symptom assessment scale, change in consumption of conventional drugs and drop-out rates. When taken together, the results demonstrate that patients with respiratory allergies improve clinically following treatment with this integrated homeopathic protocol.
Frenkel M, Hermoni D. “Effects of Homeopathic Intervention on Medication Consumption in Atopic and Allergic Disorders.” Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2002, Jan-Feb, 8, 1, 76-9.
In a study carried out at the Technicon-Israel Institute in Haifa, Israel, 48 patients were treated for allergic disorders with both homoeopathic and conventional medicines, and monitored for their level of use of the conventional medicines. Over the 3 month monitoring period, 56% of patients reduced their conventional medication use by an average of 60%.
Kim LS, Riedlinger JE, Baldwin CM, Hilli L, Khalsa SV, Messer SA, Waters RF. “Treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis using homeopathic preparation of common allergens in the Southwest Region of the US: A randomized, controlled clinical trial.” Annals of Pharmacotherapy. 2005, Apr, 39, 4, 617-24.
In this double-blind trial, 34 people diagnosed with moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis were randomly assigned to receive either placebo or a combination of potentised allergens (made from the pollens of trees, grasses or weeds identified as allergens). After the 4 week treatment period using 2 sprays 3 times a day of either the potentised allergen mix or placebo, the trial subjects were assessed on the basis of their allergy specific symptoms using 3 separate questionnaire formats (RQLQ, MOS SF-36 and the WPAI). The potentised allergen mix showed significant positive changes compared to placebo.
Launso L, Kimby CK, Henningsen I, Fonnebo V. “An exploratory retrospective study of people suffering from hypersensitivity illnesses who attend medical or classical homeopathic treatment.” Homeopathy. 2006 Apr;95 (2):73-80.
This study reports the results of orthodox medical treatment compared to the homeopathic treatment of various hypersensitivity illnesses in 88 people. 34 of these people were treated using orthodox medical means and 54 using constitutional homeopathy. 24% of those treated medically experienced an improvement in their condition while 57% of those treated with homeopathy experienced similar relief.
Ludke R, Weisenauer M. “A Meta-analysis of Homeopathic Treatment of Pollinosis with Galphimia glauca.” Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 1997, 147, 14, 323-7.
In this analysis, 7 randomised double-blind placebo controlled trials and 4 trials without placebo controls were examined to determine the therapeutic benefits of Galphimia glauca in pollinosis. In all studies except for one, Galphimia showed significant benefit over placebo where placebo controls were used, or showed significant clinical benefit where the remedy was not compared to placebo. The recovery rates for Galphimia were comparable with those seen with conventional anti-histamines, but without the same side effects.
Reilly R, Taylor MA, McSharry C, et al. “Is Homoeopathy a Placebo Response?” Lancet, Oct 18, 1986, 881- 885.
144 people suffering from hayfever were enrolled in a randomised, placebo controlled trial. The use of 30C mixed grass pollens provided better clinical outcomes than placebo.
Taylor MA, Reilly D, Llewellan-Jones RH, McSharry C, Aitchison TC. “Randomised Controlled Trial of Homoeopathy versus Placebo in Perennial Allergic Rhinitis with Overview of Four Trial Series.” British Medical Journal, 2000, 321, 471-476, 19 August.
Weiser M, Gegenheimer LH, Klein P. “A Randomised Equivalence Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Luffa comp.-Heel Nasal Spray with Cromolyn Sodium Spray in the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis.” Forschende Komplementarmedizin, 1999, 6, 142-148.
In this trial, 146 people suffering from hay fever were treated with either Luffa comp.-Heel Nasal Spray (a homoeopathic combination product) or with Cromolyn Sodium Spray (a pharmaceutical drug commonly prescribed for hay fever). The treatment outcomes were measured according to a quality of life scale and both medicines provided the same level of remission of the condition, which was rapid and persistent.
Using a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-centre design in this trial, 86 people suffering from hay fever were treated for 5 and a half weeks with either homeopathic Galphimia glauca 4X or placebo. Therapeutic success was seen in 83% of those using the Galphimia and 47% of those using placebo.
Wiesenauer M, Gaus W, Haussler S. “Treatment of Pollinosis with Galphimia glauca.” Allergologie, 1990, 10, 359-363.
54 practitioners treated 201 people suffering from hay fever either with placebo or homeopathic Galphimia glauca. Assessment at the end of the 5 week treatment period found that nasal symptoms were cured or significantly improved in 77% of subjects using Galphimia versus 46% of those using placebo and eye symptoms were cured or significantly improved in 77% of subjects using Galphimia versus 51% of those using placebo.
Objective: 1) To assess the efficacy of homeopathically prepared Galphimia glaucacompared with placebo in the treatment of pollinosis; 2) to estimate the corresponding overall success rate of Galphimia glauca.
Design: Meta-analysis of clinical trials. Study Selection: Seven randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials and 4 non-placebo-controlled trials (1 randomized and controlled, 1 prospective and uncontrolled) performed by our study group between 1980 and 1989. An additonal MEDLINE search revealed no further trials on this topic. Exclusion and inclusion criteria were identical over all trials. In total, 1,038 ambulatory patients who suffered from acute pollinosis (752 in placebo-controlled trials) entered the analysis.
Main Outcome Measures: Relative frequency and relative change for showing noticeable and soothing relief in ocular symptoms as assessed by the patient.
Results: The overall rate of improved eye symptoms is about 1.25 [confidence interval (CI): 1.09–1.43] times higher in the verum group than in the placebo group. Verum success rate is estimated by 79.3% (CI: 74.1–85.0%). Across the single studies the results were highly comparable except for the study run in 1985.
Conclusions: A significant superiority of Galphimia glauca over placebo is demonstrated. Estimates of verum success rates are comparable with those of conventional antihistaminics, but no side effects occurred. The results may be slightly biased since not all of the single studies were analyzed by intention-to-treat analysis.
Witt C, Keil T, Selim D, Roll S, Vance W, Wegscheider K, Willich SN. “Outcome and costs of homoeopathic and conventional treatment strategies: a comparative cohort study in patients with chronic disorders.” Complement Ther Med. 2005 Jun;13(2):79-86.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of homoeopathy versus conventional treatment in routine care.
DESIGN: Comparative cohort study.
SETTING: Patients with selected chronic diagnoses were enrolled in medical practice.
INTERVENTIONS: Conventional treatment or homeopathy.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Severity of symptoms assessed by patients and physicians (visual rating scale, 0-10) at baseline, 6 and 12 months and costs.
RESULTS: The analyses of 493 patients (315 adults, 178 children) indicated greater improvement in patients’ assessments after homoeopathic versus conventional treatment (adults: homeopathy from 5.7 to 3.2; conventional, 5.9-4.4; p=0.002; children from 5.1 to 2.6 and from 4.5 to 3.2). Physician assessments were also more favourable for children who had received homoeopathic treatment (4.6-2.0 and 3.9-2.7; p<0.001). Overall costs showed no significant differences between both treatment groups (adults, 2155 versus 2013, p=0.856; children, 1471 versus 786, p=0.137).
CONCLUSION: Patients seeking homoeopathic treatment had a better outcome overall compared with patients on conventional treatment, whereas total costs in both groups were similar.
Belon P, Cumps J, Ennis M, et al. “Inhibition of Human Basophil Degranulation by Successive Histamine Dilutions: Results of a European multi-centre trial.” Inflammation Research, 48, Supplement 1, 1999, S17-18.
In this controversial, blinded multi-centre trial (which confirmed earlier studies published in Nature in 1988), homeopathic potencies of histamine were found to substantially reduce the potential for degranulation by sensitised basophils when exposed to allergens.
In this study, which was a replication of work by Jacques Benveniste published in Nature in 1988, the researchers attempted to use homeopathic dilutions of histamine to inhibit the activation of human basophils exposed to an inflammatory mediator. The study was carried out blind in 4 separate laboratories. Histamine dilutions equivalent to 30X and 38X were found to inhibit basophil activation and subsequent histamine release.
Chirila M, Hristescu S, Manda G, Neagu M, Olinescu A. “The Action of Succussed Substances on the Human Lymphocytes and PMN Granulocytes in Vitro Stimulated with Phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) and Zymosin Opsonised (ZO).” Berlin Journal on Research in Homoeopathy, Congress Report, 1991, June, 1, 3, 166-167.
Peripheral blood lymphocytes were taken from people with a history of allergy to bee products (Group 1), and from people who were immunosuppressed (Group 2). These cells were incubated in culture media supplemented with a succussed water control, various homoeopathic potencies of bee venom (for Group 1 cells), or cortisone (for Group 2 cells), and the cells were grown. The proliferation of Group 1 cells was inhibited by the potencies of bee venom, indicating that these remedies may be useful in the management of allergies to bee products. The effects of the potencies of cortisone on the Group 2 cells varied from stimulation to inhibition.
In this study, potentised dilutions of Apis mellifica and Histamine were found to significantly reduce basophil degranulation in vitro.