With thanks to Top News Arab Emirates 10.4.13:

From http://topnews.ae/content/215656-homeopathy-becomes-popular-treatment-among-people ’… According to the data provided by district homeopathy authorities, homeopathy has emerged as an effective way of treatment. Homeopathy was earlier used to treat kidney stones. Now, it has gained popularity among people to seek treatment for skin, hair, cyst and other ailments as well.

The data revealed that the homeopathic clinics are burgeoning in the city. The numbers have doubled in last five years. The figures showed that there were 450 clinics in 2006 and the numbers have now crossed the 1,000 mark.

The homeopathy experts said that the treatment does not have any term called disease. Instead, it works on suppression of symptoms. The medicines treat the symptoms and have no side effects.

“Homeopathy is safe. Unlike other medicines, homoeopathic remedies usually do not have side effects. The ability to cause structural damage is nil”, said Dr. Sehdeo Singh, medical officer in-charge of Rajkiya Homoeopathic Hospital at Ursula Horsman Hospital (UHM).

The homeopathic medicines encourage the immune system mechanism and stimulate the healing power. Sub-physiological quantities are recommended to children and adults alike.

The experts said that homeopathy is the only treatment for a large number of chronic ailments which have been marked as incurable by other schools of medicine…’

See also http://avilian.co.uk/2013/01/homeopathy-gets-boost-in-the-united-arab-emirates/

With thanks to Matthew Swayne

at Penn State University 28th March 2013, and the American Society for Microbiology Eric T. Harvill 26th March 2013 (who have finally begun to understand what homeopathy has been trying to tell science for over 200 years!):

From http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/2/e00027-13 Cultivating our “frienemies”: viewing immunity as microbiome management ABSTRACT: Immunology has been studied and understood in the context of the compelling problems of infectious disease. But our rapidly growing knowledge of immune interactions with our healthy microbiota, and the many benefits it confers, suggests there may be value to an alternative view: that mechanisms of defense against pathogens are one aspect of a complex system with the broader purpose of managing our healthy microbiome. From this perspective, adaptive immunity may be viewed as a flexible system for simultaneously recruiting and managing a near limitless number of potential symbionts. This perspective can allow for reinterpretation of many observations and can suggest new experiments to help us better understand our complex interactions with the microbes that surround us. Harvill ET. 2013. Cultivating our “frienemies”: viewing immunity as microbiome management. mBio 4(2):e00027-13. doi:10.1128/mBio.00027-13.

From http://news.psu.edu/story/270294/2013/03/26/research/researcher-suggests-declaring-truce-our-microbiological-frenemies ’… Managing bacteria and other microorganisms in the body, rather than just fighting them, may be lead to better health and a stronger immune system, according to a Penn State biologist. 

Researchers have historically focused on microbes in the body as primarily pathogens that must be fought, said Eric Harvill, professor of microbiology and infectious disease. However, he said that recent evidence of the complex interaction of the body with microbes suggests a new interpretation of the relationship. “Now we are beginning to understand that the immune system interacts with far more beneficial bacteria than pathogens,” said Harvill. “We need to re-envision what the true immune system really is.” 

Harvill said that this reinterpretation leads to a more flexible approach to understanding how the immune system interacts with microbes. This approach should balance between defending against pathogens and enlisting the help of beneficial microbes. While the role that some bacteria play in aiding digestion is better known, microbes assist in improving body functions, including strengthening the immune system and responding to injuries. In some cases, attacking pathogens can harm the beneficial effects microbes have on immune system, according to Harvill.

For example, patients on antibiotics have an increased risk of contracting yeast infections and MRSA. “Viewing everything currently considered immunity, including both resistance and tolerance, as aspects of a complex microbiome management system that mediates interactions with the sea of microbes that surround us, many of which are beneficial, can provide a much more positive outlook and different valuable perspectives,” Harvill said. 

The system that includes bacteria and other microbes in the human body, or the microbiome, is much larger and more integrated into human health than most people suspect, according to Harvill. “The human body has 10 times more bacterial cells than human cells,” said Harvill. Adding to the complexity is the adaptive capacity of the human immune system. The immune system can develop antibodies against certain pathogens, which it can reuse when threatened by future attacks from the same pathogen. 

Harvill, who described his alternative viewpoint in the latest issue of mBio, said that some researchers have not yet accepted this broader approach to the immune system. “Among immunologists or microbiologists this is an alien concept,” said Harvill. “It’s not part of how we have historically looked at the immune system, but it’s a useful viewpoint.” 

Other researchers who study plant and nonhuman biology are already starting to embrace the concept. For example, plant biologists are beginning to recognize that viruses can help plants resist drought and heat. “Within nonhuman immunology, this is not an alien concept because they have seen many examples of beneficial relationships between the host and its microbial commensals,” Harvill said. Harvill said adopting this new perspective could be the first step toward new medical treatments. “This new viewpoint suggests new experiments and results will published,” said Harvill. “And, hopefully, the concept becomes more and more mainstream as supporting evidence accumulates.” The National Institute of General Medical Sciences supported this work….’

With thanks to The Annals of Surgery 12 February 2013 doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182864fa3 

 

 

 

 

From http://journals.lww.com/annalsofsurgery/Abstract/publishahead/Comparison_of_Registered_and_Published_Primary.98546.aspx

Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Clinical Trials of Surgical Interventions

Hannink, Gerjon PhD; Gooszen, Hein G. MD, PhD; Rovers, Maroeska M. PhD

Objective: To assess the proportion of registered surgical trials with results published in journals with high-impact factors; compare the primary outcomes specified in trial registries with those reported in the published papers; and determine whether primary outcome-reporting bias favored significant outcomes.

Background: Outcome-reporting bias, that is, the selective reporting of a subset of the original registered outcome measures based on their results, has not yet been studied specifically for surgical trials.

Methods: We searched PubMed for reports of surgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed between 2007 and 2012 in 10 general medical journals and 10 surgical journals with the highest impact factors. For each article included, we obtained the trial registration information using a standardized data extraction form.

Results: Of the 327 evaluated surgical trials, registration was lacking for 109 (33%) published papers. Two (2%) of these papers were published in general medical journals and 107 (98%) in surgical journals. Twelve (6%) of the trials were still recruiting patients, and 48 (22%) were registered after completion of the study. A total of 152 trials were registered before the end of the trial with the primary outcome clearly specified. Among these papers, 49% (75 of 152) showed some evidence of discrepancies between outcomes registered and the outcomes published, most often related to omitting or introducing a primary outcome. These discrepancies favored statistically significant results in 28% of the papers.

Conclusions: The quality of registration of surgical trials published in surgical journals was inferior to those published in general medical journals. Comparison of the primary outcomes of surgical RCTs registered with their subsequent publication indicated that selective outcome reporting is prevalent and appears to be higher than in general medical trials.

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/09/false-positives-fraud-and-misconduct-are-threatening-scientific-research/#more-3270

See http://www.iscc.cnrs.fr/spip.php?article1666 Why Most Biomedical Findings Echoed by Newspapers Turn out to be False: the Case of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. François Gonon, Jan-Pieter Konsman, David Cohen and Thomas Boraud, Plos One, 2012. ‘… ”Because newspapers failed to inform the lay public that most initial scientific claims were later refuted or strongly attenuated, they did not reflect the evolution of scientific knowledge,” which “might have detrimental consequences on the management and prevention of ADHD,” Dr. Gonon and colleagues write…’

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/05/wikipedia-founder-to-help-in-governments-research-scheme-to-help-academic-spring/#more-3110

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/04/wellcome-trust-joins-academic-spring-to-open-up-science/

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/04/pharmas-influence-over-published-clinical-evidence/#more-3039

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/04/heads-they-wintails-we-lose-how-corporations-corrupt-science-at-the-publics-expense/

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/04/more-falsified-scientific-research-will-it-never-end/

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/03/scandalous-scientists-and-doctors-falsifying-research-data/

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/02/pharma-fraud-withheld-clinical-trial-data-shows-antidepressants-no-better-than-dummy-pills/

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/02/misconduct-pervades-uk-research-according-to-financial-times/

See http://avilian.co.uk/2012/01/reporting-of-research-ghosts-in-the-machine/

See Why Most Published Research Findings Are False Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 ‘… There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research…’

With thanks to Homeopathy Heals Web Site 21.2.13:

(Original article written by a retired Brazilian Senior Homeopathic Physician)

From http://homeopathyheals.me.uk/site/component/content/article/111-frontpage/2626-big-pharmas-plot-against-homeopathy-in-brazil ’… Suddenly Brazil´s population woke up in the early days of 2000 under heavy fire from Big Pharma’s plot with headlines in the compromised media and press, such as HOMEOPATHY IS OVER, etc. Well, it was the start of three full years of endless discussions in the press and media regarding this medical discipline.

After the first shock, there began a campaign against Homeopathy all over Brazil
with inspections by health authorities on homeopathic pharmacies and the
witch-hunting of pharmacists as well, under the excuse of quality controls, etc.,

and the forbidding in some cases, of sales of homeopathic remedies for several

fake reasons, etc. But Big Pharma made a hazardous Big Mistake by starting such a plot against Homeopathy since this has been an official medical specialty since 1980
under Decree #1000 and signed by the President of the Republic of Brazil
after Congress approval and official legal recognition of the Federal Board of Medicine in Brasilia.During those years several events occurred concerning the matter and slowly medical organisations and civil society reacted against it, as follows below. When everyone was tired of the almost weekly propaganda against Homeopathy, there appeared on the scene a so called leader of skeptics from abroad better known as a famous magician.

This personage was interviewed by top TV channels in Brazil arguing supposedly hard questions against Homeopathy and the population rose against him in HATE and Anger because Homeopathy is a very traditional low cost healing method which is approved and safe and also effective for people for many generations since the 19th century in Brazil.

Even the gay community in Brazil were heavily against this man because of the
development of a LIVE homeopathic nosode for AIDS by the late homeopathic

physician Prof. Dr. Roberto de Andrade Costa MD from Petroplis (RJ).  This had healed several cases since the early 1980s for more than one decade until his death.  The nosode had been proven to be efficacious through lab tests and also from statements of patients after treatment and medical follow ups. This skeptic/magician’s several shows in the media became a reason for growing protests of significant levels in the Brazilian population from North to South during this time.

To avoid high costs of paid propaganda in press and media, people and authorities answered all critics of Homeopathy by writing letters free of charge to the letters pages of newspapers.Finally this skeptic’s past life was under investigation under strict silence by the Brazilian authorities, through a request to his government and he was eventually diplomatically asked to leave Brazil forever as PERSONA NON GRATA, under charges of sedition and disturbance of the social environment and scientific community.

The Brazilian authorities discussed in secrecy Big Pharma’s interests involved in the matter and a public motion was presented to the influential political class in Brasilia with the signatures of more than 3.5 million people identified by ID numbers and addresses, avoiding false premises, charges in lawsuits by the lawyer of this hated
foreign personage.

Finally the well paid Big Pharma agents were defeated by the Brazilian social and scientific environment, with a heavy financial burden prevailing on Brazil´s Homeopathic industry and pharmacies. It was traumatic and shocking having Big Pharma’s unsuccessful attacks and endless plotting against Homeopathy all over Brazil during this time for all people involved.

Finally there was a presentation of a long official report on the efficacy of Homeopathy with comparisons to Big Pharma drugs in terms of all available worldwide medical literature, which found no toxicity of Homeopathy, as well as the low cost of homeopathic remedies which enhanced these facts.

The Brazilian public health care system (SUS) has employed registered
homeopathic physicians all over Brazil with great success for the last few decades

giving free of charge treatment to the public and for large range civil populations. So now Homeopathy is forever consolidated in Brazilian people’s memories as a safe and effective non-toxic medical therapy.And finally to end this report about this nonsensical affair, it was
proven by real facts that the real hidden target in Big Pharma Plot’s in
Brazil was to avoid by all possible means the installation of a top German industrial plant laboratory branch in SaoPaulo of the manufacturer of a well known large range of homeopathic biological medicines which was finally established in 2003.After this, the Big Pharma plot against homeopathy was forever over in Brazil!…’

With thanks to the European Committee for Homeopathy 16.1.13:

From http://www.homeopathyeurope.org/media/news/newsletter-16-january-2013/italian-homeopathic-doctors-on-their-way-to-regulation Last month the Conference of the Regions and Autonomous Provinces in Italy approved a document on the regulation of education and training in homeopathy, acupuncture and herbal medicine for medical doctors.

With thanks to The Gulf Today 20.1.13:

From http://gulftoday.ae/portal/18dc1645-dbc3-4c46-a16e-ae5cedcd1569.aspx

DUBAI: The practice of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) is gaining momentum in the UAE and other countries in the region, with widespread use of it among patients and general consumers in this part of the world.

Homeopathy, in particular, has gained more acceptance in the UAE, due to various factors including stringent regulatory approval processes from the Ministry of Health (MoH). 

A few years ago people had to travel to countries such as India for homeopathic treatment. Now, there is accumulating evidence that many patients visit the UAE to avail of high quality homeopathic treatment.

What has made the UAE a model for practice of homeopathic medicine is the way it is being practiced. Experts attribute this to the greater emphasis put on regulation of the complementary medicine sector in the Emirates.

The MoH makes sure the homeopathic medicines are manufactured in accordance to current GMP standards in high quality pharmaceutical facilities and their safety and quality are guaranteed before being sold through pharmacies.

Homeopathic doctors or practitioners have to pass qualifying exams to be able to practise in the UAE. Currently, the MoH, Health Authority — Abu Dhabi (HAAD) and Dubai Healthcare City (DHCC) have their own system of licensing homeopathic medicine practitioners,  creating more awareness and confidence among the doctors and homeopaths.

Sassan Behjat, former director of Traditional Complementary and Alternative Medicine (TCAM) unit at the MoH, says that homeopathy in the UAE is part of an integrated healthcare approach and a complementary system has evolved as a result.

“Such a setting moderates the practice of homeopaths to be rational and educated enough to not claim anything which is beyond their method of treatment. Such an integrated approach opens the way to medical doctors to learn from CAM therapists and the way they look at a disease and patient,” he added.

Behjat, now serving as CEO and principal consultant at Medblend in California-USA, is a key speaker at the Complementary, Alternative and Integrative Medicine Conference, which will take place on Jan.30 at the Arab Health Congress 2013.

There are many homeopathic associations for professionals in Egypt, Algeria, Morocco and the use of homeopathy is increasing among people in MENA region. This is evident from Arabic online forums and discussions going on regarding the use of homeopathic medicines for variety of health conditions.

With thanks to The National Centre for Research Methods and Methods News Winter 2012:

From http://www.ncrm.ac.uk/news/show.php?article=5305 Article by Paul Stoneman and Patrick Sturgis from the NCRM Hub, University of Southampton. This article also appears in the Winter 2012 issue of the MethodsNews newsletter (opens a .pdf file).

The appropriate place for Complementary and Alternative Medicines (CAM) in modern healthcare continues to emerge as a source of controversy in policy debates. The issue attracted media attention again recently, following the appointment in 2012 of the new Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, who supports the availability of homeopathic cures through the NHS.

Due to the high degree of controversy surrounding its use and regulation, a number of studies have been undertaken which seek, in one way or another, to understand why people use these kinds of treatments. Where studies have been based on sample surveys of the general population, attention has focused on measures of reported use over some reference period. Reported use can then be specified as the outcome in a regression analysis, with demographic and attitudinal predictors introduced to enable inferences about the factors associated with CAM uptake.

While this approach has resulted in a number of useful insights, it is problematic to assume that people who report having used CAMs in the past necessarily believe them to be efficacious (that is, better than a placebo) now. Conversely, the fact that an individual does not report having used a CAM in the past cannot be taken as indicating that she believes them to be inefficacious. As a consequence, our understanding of the factors which underpin support and opposition to CAM may be distorted through an exclusive focus on reported use. In this research, funded by the Wellcome Trust, we investigated the correspondence between reported use and the perceived efficacy of a particularly prominent and controversial treatment – homeopathy.

Using data from the 2009 Wellcome Trust Monitor, we found that 18% of UK adults report having used homeopathy at some point in the past. However, when asked their reasons for using it, only 16% spontaneously reported it being due to its superior efficacy relative to conventional treatments. The most frequent response (49%) was ‘(I) didn’t think it could do any harm’. Similarly, the responses of homeopathy users to a direct question about the efficacy of homeopathy reveal that, while a majority said they thought it was ‘just as’ (44%) or ‘more effective’ (13%) than conventional medicine, a substantial minority (21%) believed it to be ‘less effective’ and 6% reported it to be ‘not effective at all’.

A yet more striking degree of variability was evident amongst non-users, with more than a quarter believing homeopathy to be ‘just as’ or ‘more effective’ than conventional treatments and 16% stating that the efficacy of homeopathy ‘depends on the illness’. Although not a strong endorsement, this certainly cannot be taken as rejection of homeopathy as a potentially effective cure. Combining the views of users and non-users, we find that more than half of UK adults appear to believe homeopathy is as effective or more effective than conventional medicine.

Multivariate analyses revealed that the social profile of the typical homeopathy supporter is quite different, depending on whether support is operationalised as perceived efficacy or reported use. Homeopathy use was most strongly associated with the reporting of specific symptoms, as well as scepticism about conventional medicine. Perceived efficacy, on the other hand, was primarily related to concerns about the pace and governance of medical research.

These findings have both methodological and substantive implications. Methodologically, we show that reported past use is a problematic indicator of an individual’s beliefs about treatment efficacy. Substantively it is clear that, when we take into account the high degree of what might be termed ‘latent support’ for homeopathy amongst the sub-group of non-users, a majority of Britons appear to endorse homeopathic remedies as potentially efficacious treatments.

A working paper that this newsletter article is based on is available: ‘Understanding support for Complementary and Alternative Medicine in general populations: Use and perceived efficacy‘ and a podcast with Patrick Sturgis talking about the research.

Forthcoming: Stoneman, P. Sturgis, P. and Allum, N. (in press) Understanding Support for Complementary and Alternative Medicine in General Populations: Use and Perceived Efficacy. PLOSone.

 

 

With thanks to South China Morning Post; Racing pages; Michael Cox 6.12.12:

From: http://www.scmp.com/sport/racing/article/1098262/homeopathy-and-holistic-approach-are-secrets-trainers-success Morning trackwork sessions for the Longines Hong Kong International Races are a melting pot of training techniques as diverse as the nationalities that descend upon Sha Tin at this time of year.

But it’s fair to say none are considered to be as far outside the box as the holistic approach and “horse homeopathy” German handler Michael Figge employs with HK$22 million Hong Kong Cup hopeful Feuerblitz.

Along with the usual array of modern veterinarian treatments, Figge uses alternative therapies – including natural remedies usually used on humans – to keep his horses happy in mind, body and soul. “I want to see a horse that is all over happy and sound,” Figge said yesterday. “I try to see the horse as a big and complex creature – one that is all together. I don’t see him as different parts.

“Before a race it is important the horse is in a perfect physical and nervous condition – calm and strong. When travelling to other countries it is crucial the horse has a good immune system, and with the homeopathy you can help him.

“Of course, we also have a stable vet, but for small problems – or before problems happen – you can help them with this alternative approach. We use medicines that are natural products, things you can buy in a pharmacy, so there is no doping.”

Figge had two distinct, but very different, influences growing up in the form of his now divorced parents, Wolfgang and Marika. Wolfgang Figge is a hardened horseman from the old school, whose uncompromising but common-sense approach was forged under the tutelage of another great German trainer, Sven von Mitzlaff. But it was Marika who opened her son’s eyes to the power of natural remedies. She owns an alternative therapy treatment centre in Doggendorf, and Michael trained there for three years to become a qualified therapist for humans. It wasn’t long before he began experimenting on his horses and getting results.

“In the beginning I gave horses five times the dosage I would give a human,” Figge said. “But I went down to just double because they are very sensitive, like children. “What I do now with my training is a combination of tradition and innovation. I mix the methods up from what I have seen. I was also lucky enough to be a work rider in different parts of the world and see different training styles. “It’s very important for a trainer to get his style – mine, with naturopathy and what I have learned, it’s a good mixture.”

If Feuerblitz’s appearance is any indication, the remedies are working a treat. The colt is no oil painting as you would expect for a horse that cost €3,000 (HK$30,400) as a yearling Figge has described him as “ugly”. But he has a bright and intelligent eye, a relaxed demeanour and a presence that can make you look twice.

Figge is not only innovative with training techniques, but with race programming for his horses. The 39-year-old says he was called “crazy” when he chose the Derby Italiano as a lead-up to the German Derby, but the gamble paid off when Feuerblitz snatched the Group Two in Rome.

After a failure in the German Derby and another unplaced effort, Feuerblitz has finished runner-up three times at Group One level – all against older horses. The last effort in the Premio Roma, the eighth run of his three-year-old season, was a test of his suitability to the Cup distance of 2,000m.

“He performed very well there, but this is more difficult,” Figge said. “We hope he runs a big race and prove he can perform against world class. It’s a nice last race to the season. He has been in top condition since April. He has only raced badly twice and he has hit back in his last three runs against the older horses – they were big performances,” Figge said. “We don’t want the ground too soft, or not too firm – somewhere in the middle.”

With thanks to New Magazine 21.11.12:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From http://www.elevatedexistence.com/blog/2012/11/29/pete-townshend-of-the-who-seeks-homeopathy-for-tinnitus/ Peter Townshend from The Who recently told television host, David Letterman, how he turned to alternative medicine to help him deal with hearing issues from Tinnitus, UK-based New Magazine reported.  

“For me it started in a delightful way. I used to wake up in the morning and think, ‘I can hear the birds singing! I’ve never been able to hear the birds singing.’ It started with peeps and whistles and beeps so it was very much like birds singing,” he told Letterman.

Once he realized the issue, he sought out an alternative medicine expert in homeopathy to help him with the issue.

“Right now I don’t have it badly. I have done quite a lot of new age medicine stuff to help me. And a homeopathic teacher, or a homeopathic doctor, helped me a lot with this, so I would recommend that,” he said.

Townshend also has a new book out called “Who I Am.”

See also http://avilian.co.uk/2009/01/roger-daltrey-homoeopathy-saved-my-babys-life/

With thanks to Christopher M Johnson, The British Medical Journal 27.11.12:

From http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e6184/rr/616928‘… Once again it must be said that what passes for ‘scientific’ discussion amongst homeopathic critics is almost entirely lacking in substance. Scientific statements, by definition, must be precise and testable. Unfortunately, criticisms of homeopathy rarely pass this test.

Alan Henness, who calls himself a ‘challenger of misleading health claims,’ continues to make vague assertions and accusations without having any grasp of the basic facts. His previous attempts to delegitimize the Cuban homeopathic leptospirosis trial having been defused by David Eyles, he falls back on this last attempt: ‘... Presumably then, if homeoprophylaxis for Leptospirosis was so successful and saved so many lives, the Cuban health authorities will have been boldly rolling it out all over Cuba for the last five years?…’

In fact, this is precisely what has been done, with remarkable effect: leptospirosis is now nearly eradicated – so much so that the homeopathic prophylaxis is no longer routinely needed. Somehow, ten years of using the conventional vaccine never brought about such success. It is clear that homeopathic ‘skeptics’ do not like being bothered with data and evidence, but for those who are interested, the facts of the Cuban experience with prophylactic homeopathy are as follows:

1) The authors of the Cuban homeopathic leptospirosis trial were not homeopaths. They were veteran conventional medical researchers and scientists who had been manufacturing, testing and implementing the use of conventional vaccinations for decades. They were highly respected in the vaccine world. Their work had previously been published in many of the major vaccine journals such as, Vaccine, Human Vaccines, Expert Review of Vaccines, etc. They were and are in fact, amongst the world’s leading experts on leptospirosis vaccination – with the trivalent Vax-spiral (the only conventional leptospirosis vaccine made anywhere in the world) designed and manufactured in their own facilities (the Finlay Institute – a WHO-designated research center). In sum, they were not homeopathic apologists. Prior to the leptospirosis study, they had no ‘skin in the game’ whatsoever, and no reason at all to defend or advocate for homeopathy.

2) The authors implemented the use of the homeopathic leptospirosis prophylaxis as a last ditch effort in 2007, when the island was overwhelmed by a record hurricane season and there were insufficient resources/time to produce enough of the conventional vaccine. They tried homeopathy in light of having no other options.

3) Unlike the conventional vaccine, the homeopathic product could be produced in less than 2 weeks (compared to 6 months), cost 2% of the conventional vaccine, and was far more easily stored and administered.

4) The results of using the homeopathic product in 2007 were far more successful than any previous use of the conventional vaccine, despite what was objectively one of the worst Atlantic hurricane seasons in modern history. Within 2 weeks of administering the homeopathic product, they observed a 90% decrease in incidence of leptospirosis in the intervention region (comprising 2.1 million persons), while in the low-risk areas which did not receive any intervention (either homeopathic or conventional) incidence of the disease continued to rise – a set of facts that would have been drastically reversed if the homeopathic product had no efficacy.

5) The homeopathic prophylaxis was then, in the ensuing years, administered to the entire Cuban population (11 million persons), to the effect of near eradication of the disease on the island – a result not achieved with use of the conventional vaccine product.

6) Despite the fact that the researchers had for decades published papers in the leading vaccine journals, none of these journals were willing to publish this groundbreaking trial – by all accounts, one of the largest ever conducted in medicine. What happened? Were the researchers no longer ‘experts?’ Did they forget how to conduct a proper trial? Was the trial of insufficient quality? No legitimate criticism has been registered to date and none was given by the journals. I’ll leave it to readers to make up their own minds, but will provide some historical context: from the beginning of homeopathy the conventional medical community has repeatedly sabotaged homeopathic research. Throughout the 19th century, on numerous occasions, conventional medial authorities simply confiscated and destroyed the records of successful homeopathic trials. Of course, we know the scientific world is much more ‘civilized’ now, right?

7) Despite all this, the researchers and scientists involved with the study still advocate for and use conventional vaccination in many diseases. Unlike homeopathic ‘skeptics,’ these people are actually committed to science – i.e. unbiased and objective observation. They care only about what works and are not blinded by dogma and ideology.

8) Based on the results achieved with leptospirosis, the Cuban Ministry of Health began using homeopathic prophylaxis and treatment for other infectious epidemics, including dengue fever, ‘swine’ flu, hepatitis A and conjunctivitis – all with similar success.

Author: Christopher M Johnson, Naturopathic Doctor, Private Practice, 4910 31st St S, Suite A, Arlington, VA 22206. Competing interests: None declared

See also: