Winter First Aid Homeopathic Care for Hypothermia and Frostbite

Stocking the First-Aid Kit with Remedies for Winter Exposure

Winter weather can vary dramatically, day by day. It is not uncommon for one day to be warm and unseasonably sunny, so that everyone goes out with the lightest clothing; only to be followed by an extreme swing of temperature to the coldest, below-zero depths. Where I live, this kind of fluctuation can take place within the span of a few hours: its only natural that many people are caught off guard.

Sudden temperature changes in such extremes can create the conditions for all the enjoyable outdoor activities that so many people love: skiing, snowboarding, skating, or simply taking walks in the freshly fallen snow. But these quickly changing conditions can also create opportunities for injury and misery, which can be easily addressed or avoided with good planning. If avoidance can’t be managed, first aid care is the next best thing.

Some of the most common and dangerous winter complaints are frostbite and hypothermia: while everyone knows that dressing warmly is a priority in cold temperatures, there are instances where we don’t often dress as we should, particularly if the weather is prone to sudden changes. Outdoor winter activities such as skiing, snowboarding, tobogganing, and skating involve a lot of exertion, enough movement to keep the body feeling deceptively warm despite the freezing temperatures around us. Kids and outdoor enthusiasts will always over do it: I have a few memories from my childhood where I simply refused to come inside, and spent much more time skating or tobogganing with my friends even though I knew I was starting to feel cold and tired. Those days always ended the same way: with painful, cramping hands and feet that hurt for what seemed like hours, frostbitten from too much exposure.

Children aren’t the only ones who suffer from the risks of frostbite and hypothermia—those whose livelihoods depend on working outdoors, such as construction workers or farmers, also run the risk. Smokers, babies, and the elderly are most vulnerable, as their circulation will be less than ideal as a result of the habit or age, or simply because they may lack the ability to keep moving. The best precautions always involve dressing appropriately, in a number of layers of clothing that can be removed and replaced depending on how warm or cold one feels. Choose appropriate fabrics which insulate the body and wick moisture away from the skin so that the body does not become chilled—wool layers, for example, will insulate the body even if the fibres become wet. If you can’t move for any reason, or if you fall into icy cold waters while skating, ice fishing, or ski-dooing, then the risks of hypothermia and severe frostbite increase dramatically; so it is only reasonable to prepare for any contingency while outdoors. Rule out layering fabrics that simply can't provide you with some level of insulation even though they're completely wet (jeans, for example, are never a good choice of clothing in cold weather activities involving water or snow).

Hypothermia is the condition of having an abnormally low body temperature. It can come on very slowly, making it difficult to notice that its happening. When the body becomes extraordinarily cold, all the systems begin to slow down - eventually to the point where death can result. Sometimes, hypothermia can actually save lives, especially where the body shuts down heart and brain function in order to limit the oxygen the body needs so that it can stay alive; in some of these cases, children have been successfully revived because of the limitations the hypothermia placed on their bodies.

Frostbite, or "chilblains", as our old books refer to it, happens when a part of the body actually freezes. Mild frostbite doesn't leave lasting damage, but severe frostbite can cause permanent damage and may even lead to amputation.

Symptoms of Hypothermia: What to Look For

When the body is cold, it tries to generate heat by shivering - it's trying to warm itself. When hypothermia sets in, the shivering stops, as the body is now trying to conserve all the energy it can. This is one of the first warning signs of hypothermia. Other signs to look out for: disorientation and clumsiness, which take place as body temperature drops; and an irregular heartbeat which takes place when breathing slows down. Frostbite and hypothermia can set in in minutes, if the temperature is extremely cold.

Mild frostbite or "frostnip" makes the skin look pale or waxy, but the colour returns once the skin is warm again. Severe frostbite begins with white or waxy looking skin, but as the damage progresses the colour becomes bluish, or grey. The cold feeling is replaced with numbness, and blisters often form on the surface of the extremity. when things progress to this degree, even more tissue damage can be caused. Trauma injuries can result: a frozen finger can easily break in a fall; a frozen foot can suffer broken bones if walked on. Blisters can burst if they are placed under the pressure of a step, or inadvertently made to rub against the inside of a boot.

Frostbitten skin will burn if it is not warmed up properly, so this is a good time to remember the Law of Similars: warm the frostbitten skin with cold water or snow until circulation is restored to the area—do not try to use hot water for this purpose as permanent tissue damage will result. Keep in mind that as the body part warms up, the affected area may swell, itch, burn, or cramp painfully (this is what I remember to be my experience with this ailment). In cases of extreme frostbite, the skin will turn black: there is a risk that gangrene may set in, and amputation may be necessary.

Materia Medica

Agaricus Muscarius is the first remedy that comes to mind for chilblains, as it produces the stinging and itchy sensations in the toes and feet that are characteristic of frostbite. If no other remedy is specifically indicated, use Agaricus.

Agaricus features the swelling, burning, redness, cramping, and skin eruptions that itch and burn. Some patients experience lasting redness after frostbite and symptoms which look like the puffy, raised skin in rosacea; some experience swollen veins with the cold skin. It is good to keep in mind that the more serious effects of hypothermia are addressed by Agaricus, namely the irregular, tumultuous palpitation of the heart, which can take place when hypothermia has progressed. In general, look for these markers: these patients’ symptoms are all worse for open, cold air; worse after eating, worse after coitus, and worse before a thunderstorm. Slow movement brings about amelioration.

If the patient’s complaints worsen with exposure to heat, or more specifically from being in a warm room, think of Pulsatilla, which always suffers from stuffy heated interiors; think of Pulsatills especially if the affected part feels hot and itchy long after being thawed with cold water. If the thawed skin produces dark, red, itchy inflammations that are worse for cold and damp, think of Rhus Toxicodendron. Some other good remedies for the itching and coldness in skin or in fingers and feet include Abrotanum, Tamus, and Plantago. Abrotanum’s modalities are better for movement, worse for cold air and for suppression of any secretions. Tamus can be applied in a topical cream to soothe the itching; as can Calendula, if the surface blisters break and the skin needs to be sterilized and encouraged to heal.

Nux Vomica is a good remedy to consider if there is superficial inflammation with bright red swelling and burning itch. We can recognize the need for this remedy when the skin begins to crack and bleed as it warms, as well as if we see the typical Nux Vomica emotional state: extreme irritation, anger, and a kind of denial/denouncement of the situation. Where there is bleeding, cracked skin or inflamed, swollen, painful red heels bathed in unpleasant-smelling moisture, we should think about Petroleum as a good remedy. The physical symptoms appear to be similar to Nux Vomica’s, but the mental state in Petroleum will be far more concerned with the approach of death and the need to settle affairs than it will be with anger and irritable frustration.

The patient who needs Arsenicum Album has suffered a more severe frostbite, where the tendency in the frozen skin leans towards gangrene. Blackish vesicles may be present on the affected parts. Don’t forget to look for the characteristic fussy anxiety and restlessness of this patient, to confirm the choice for Arsenicum as the remedy.

Consider Sulphur as a treatment if the chilblain has a tendency to suppurate, and if its burning itchiness only gets worse once the part warms up as it thaws (particularly once the body warms up again in bed). In cases where the swelling and itching is violent, think about Zinc—and look for the characteristic fidgety feet.

Hypothermia

Hypothermia sets in when the core body temperature falls below 35°C (95'F); if the body has been cooled to less than 25°C (77°F) recovery is unlikely. As body temperature dips, the person becomes dreamy, unresponsive, and reluctant to move; the hands, feet, and abdomen feel icy cold to the touch. There may also be cramping, numbness, or paralysis, causing falls and accidents if the person tries to walk or move.

First, check breathing and pulse, and if necessary give artificial respiration. If you are certain that there is no heartbeat, use cardiac resuscitation. Once the person is revived, warming them becomes the next priority.

The best way to look after someone who is hypothermic is to bring the person into the warm, and give them sips of hot, sweet, non-alcoholic drinks. Warm the person up gently, so as to avoid overstraining the heart. Place warm-to-cool (not hot) water bottles, well wrapped, against the person's body, not against the extremities. Resist the urge to “restore” circulation by massaging the limbs, or encouraging the person to do “warm-up” exercises. Cover the body well with blankets. Though it sounds like it may be a good idea, submerging your patient in a bath should not be done.

A hypothermic baby will be unusually limp and drowsy and refuse to feed, even though the baby’s face, hands, and feet may appear to be normal. The most effective way of warming a baby is to hold him or her against your skin in a warm bed. In the elderly, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish hypothermia from a stroke or heart attack, particularly if the hypothermia results not from a winter accident or outdoor exposure, but from something as every-day as not being able to heat the home properly for lack of funds, or for difficulty in repairing faulty heating equipment. These situations are an unfortunate reality for many elderly people, especially if they are used to living alone.

Materia Medica

If the remedy Antimonium Tartaricum is indicated, the patient will experience a sensation of coldness running through the blood vessels. The face will be cold to the touch, and appear blue and pale, covered with cold sweat. The chin and lower jaw will be shivering; and in general the patient will experience chills, trembling, and muscular pains all over the body. Drowsiness, debility and sweat are big symptoms for this remedy. You will also hear lots of rattling mucus in the chest, as if it were filled and congested…but very little mucus is expectorated.

Arsenicum Album features faintness, icy coldness, and great exhaustion made worse after the slightest exertion. Pale coldness is everywhere: the face, which has a death-like colour with a bluish nose and open mouth; coldness felt in the stomach, coldness felt in the chest. Anxiety and agony are the facial expressions which indicate this remedy.

Camphora is indicated when the whole body feels icy cold, the blood pressure is very low, and the pulse is small and weak. These patients experience a sudden sinking of strength. The coldness in this remedy will pervade through to the tongue, and breath—yet the patient will not allow himself to be covered. There is also great numbness, tingling, coldness and cramping, especially in the calves. Everything will feel cold to the touch.

Secale Cornutum is another remedy which refuses to be covered: even though the body feels cold to the touch, the patient feels the sensation of heat and refuses to bear the added warmth of blankets. In this remedy, the extremities will feel icy and cold, and appear blue, shriveled, bent backwards or splayed apart, and numb.

If the patient is icy cold and blue but the head is hot and the breathing is laboured, quickened, and cold, think of “the corpse reviver”, Carbo Vegetabilis. These patients will have such difficulty breathing that they need to be fanned; the pulse is almost imperceptible as the blood stagnates in the capillaries.

If tremendous cramping is the major complaint, and convulsions or spasmodic affections which begin in the fingers and toes present themselves, consider the use of . Look for the characteristic blueness in the face, lips and nails.

The Veratrum Album patient will present with a stuporous, blank, dazed and seemingly indifferent appearance—what they used to describe as “a stupid manner, noticing nothing”. The collapse state in this remedy is extreme, along with the coldness and blueness felt and presented by the patient. The face will be pale, with a sweaty forehead; the pulse will be feeble, but rapid. There is a sensation of a lump of ice, on the vertex--pay attention to the patient's complaints about feeling cold to determine if this is what he or she feels; all of the skin is blue and inelastic, clammy feeling to the touch.

The Question of Potency

Well selected remedies work best if the potency of the remedy matches the case as well as the actual medicine itself. For first aid treatment, I find that carrying a kit with a number of remedies in the same potency can simplify things, and I try to select potencies in the lower rather than higher dilutions because they will give me an opportunity to repeat the dose more easily if they work successfully. A 30c potency in these remedies will allow you to start with treatment using a moderate potency, which can be repeated as indicated by your patient's responses; it can also be a good potency to use dissolved in water, for "plussing" the dose--extending the one dose by simply putting a pellet in a container of water (glass is prefered, and use about 8 ounces or so), which will allow you to give doses in sips. Then, your patient can sip the medicated water as needed without fear of using too much of the remedy. The best thing about the 30c potency remedies is that they can be easily located in health food stores or homeopathic pharmacies without too much travel or trouble; it's usually the most commonly carried potency on the shelves, which makes stocking and restocking the necessary remedies easy. Without too much effort, your kit will always be ready when you need it.

How Universal is the Law of Similars?

Years ago I chanced on what I’ve always thought to be one of the most literal applications of the Law of Similars, in one of the most unlikely places: on a prime time television science show, featuring the ongoing work of the inquisitive and brilliantly creative neuroscientist Vilayanur Ramachandran. In 2001, when the Nova episode in question aired, Dr. Ramachandran was the director of the Center for Brain and Cognition at the University of California, San Diego, and adjunct professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California. The focus of his work was in solving a variety of what he termed to be the “mysteries” of the brain - but the part of the show which grabbed and kept my attention was his work with patients suffering from Phantom Limb pain. In Ramachandran’s experience, some people who suffered from amputations would often experience these pains only temporarily; others were not so fortunate. It was this second type of patient which led Ramachandran to “discover” and implement what homeopaths would know as an example of “Like curing Like” in his research.

Ramachandran saw the problem’s solution lay in developing a “treatment” for pain “in a body part that is no longer there”. In his work, he came across patients like James Peacock, who had tried everything, including painkillers and hypnotism (what, no homeopathy?), to eliminate the excruciating phantom limb pain he suffered following a motorcycle accident which resulted in the paralysis and subsequent amputation of his right arm. Ramachandran’s solution: a device he created called the Mirror Box.

To summarize Peacock’s experience (you can look up Ramachandran’s own notes and cases at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/mind/notebook.html#; or the transcript of the Nova episode here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2812mind.html), James Peacock described the position of the amputated arm and the pain he felt to Ramachandran, who then designed a box and mirror device which allowed Peacock to mimic the exact position of his lost arm with his remaining one in front of a mirror.

Peacock clenched and bent his left arm into the “position” his no-longer-present right arm had been paralyzed in, before it was amputated—and then he “unclenched” and untwisted his functioning arm in front of the mirror, creating a visual image of what his twisted, painful right arm would look like if it were easing itself out of its distress. The result: the excruciating pain Peacock had been suffering for years in his phantom limb disappeared.

Ramachandran’s explanation: “It’s just as though you have visually resurrected the phantom limb. And of course the patient knows it's an illusion, but it's very, very compelling”. So compelling, that as the patient watches the reflection of his remaining limb doing what the ghost limb would do to stop its pain, the pain actually subsides. Ramachandran’s understanding is that the mirror image creates a visual stimulus for the brain which finally ends the creation of pain in the missing limb, as though it were the proper physical response to restore homeostasis and reverse what looks like a “positive feedback” pain creation process. This isn’t far from Hahnemann’s idea about the Law of Similars at all: in fact, the only difference seems to be that the curative, energetic response to the “medicine” happens regardless of the form in which “the medicine” is delivered. It seems that the law’s universal applicability in healing is indisputable.

There is always room for disagreement and further exploration, even though most of our September Poll’s respondents came to the same conclusion. Out of a total of 113 votes, 87.6% (99 votes) voted “yes” to the question of the natural law’s universality. 8 voters (7.1%) simply did not believe in the law’s universality, and 6 voters (5.3%) simply didn’t know. Those who left comments to the poll wished to express their belief in the Law of Similars through experience and practice in Homeopathy. Some wrote about applying the Law of Similars not just in Homeopathy but in other healing modalities as well as in everyday situations, such as Sigi’s response:

I voted for yes, but still, I didn't have Simillimum only in the homeopathic sense of the meaning in mind. When I was young I was told, if you have a hang over, just have one beer next morning. Once I tried it - and it worked pretty well. Thinking about Simillimum always makes me remember Vithoulkas’ principle of resonance. Resonance in waves, according to my limited knowledge, is best achieved by another wave with exactly the same wavelength. To avoid the amplitude to rise too high, the frequency of the added wave should be slightly higher or less (to reduce aggravation) - similar. Bioresonance, colour therapy, Bach flowers, Aromatherapy, Hildegaard medicine (cosmos, spiritual aspect), acupuncture, autohaemotherapy, esogetic medicine, kinesiology, magnetotherapy, bioenergetic therapy, all work with minute stimuli. If these therapies do produce a resonance effect (which could explain their effectiveness in treatment), well, then the Law of Similars is quite universal.

The “no” responders were simply “unconvinced” of its universality (and by extension, homeopathy), or completely dismissive of Hahnemann and homeopathy all together.

Others, like Dr. Manish Bhatia, respond that the Law of Similars may very well be universal (if “universal” as a term is qualified in a scientific context) or it may be conditional, effective only if other homeopathic principles are applied as well:

If you call a law “universal”, if it holds in every condition, then probably Similia does not apply universally. But we have to look at “biological” laws differently from the laws of physics and chemistry. In “biological” systems “chaos” predominates and the variables that affect biological systems are far too many to fall into fixed equations. So we can not call the Law of Similia a “universal” law the way we use this term for the laws of physics and chemistry.

But there is another side to this question. The law of Similia is a law which defines “cure”. A substance that produces a certain set of symptoms in a healthy human being has the potential to remove those symptoms from a sick person. We know cure often means much more than merely the removal of symptoms. We know that we have to approach different cases in many different ways and it is not always as simple or as algorithmic as taking the symptoms, finding the remedy and affecting a cure. If the full depth of this law is understood, it will hold in large majority of cases but if applied superficially, it will often fail. The Law of Similia can not always hold on its own without proper understanding and application of other homeopathic principles, like the homeopathic concepts of health, disease and cure, the laws of minimum, simplex, dynamization etc.

There are other aspects too. Not every case is “curable” and when we try to palliate, we often do not take the complete chronic picture into account for fear of undue aggravation in chronic incurable cases. There are other modalities too which are used to “treat” and which can offer cures too. Ayurveda, TCM, Meditation, Psychotherapy, Yoga, Reiki might just be some of them. Not all of them work the same way. It shows that there might be more 'laws' that govern our body’s capacity to heal itself.

Even if Simila is not a universal law, it gives results in large percentage of cases. It has the potential to cure in the most systematic manner possible. But I personally think that we still have a lot to learn about this principle. We have to be open and receptive if we have to enhance our understanding of the Simila further.

Dr. Suhas Patil reminds us in his poll message that Hahnemann himself found the Law to apply universally, though he did specify that there were a limited number of instances where Palliative or antagonistic (allopathic or antipathic) treatments were justified, and why. In a footnote to Aphorism 67 in the Organon, Hahnemann writes that situations that create a danger to life or imminent death often leave no time for homeopathy - and the Law of Similars - to act:

Examples include cases of asphyxiation, apparent death by lightning, suffocation, freezing, drowning, etc. Only in such cases is it permissible and expedient…for the time being…to rouse the irritability and sensibility (the physical life) again by means of a palliative, for example by gentle electric shock, clysters of strong coffee, excitative olfactory means (eg. Smelling salts), gradual warmings, etc. Once the physical life is again roused, the play of the life organs goes on its previous healthy course, because no disease is to be done away with here, but rather only an obstruction or suppression of the life force which, in itself, is healthy.

It is important to note, however, that Hahnemann makes a distinction between disease and what he calls obstructions or suppressions of the life force. Real cure, in Hahnemann’s learned opinion, could only come from the application of the Law of Similars—with or without the use of potentized medicines.

With these observation in mind, and with documentation of cases just like the ones Dr. Ramachandran has amassed in his work in conventional medical science, as an example outside of homeopathy, opportunities for us to continue to explore the boundaries of this law within the context of healing only increase. Let’s look forward to the work.

(originally published in Hpathy.com E-zine May 2006,

at www.hpathy.com/papersnew/siciliana-similia-universal.asp)

Homeopathy: Placebo or Poison, according to whim

Whenever I really want to get frustrated at the state of the world regarding homeopathy, I make myself confront the issue of our remedies, their “safety”, and the Powers That Be. The notion of completely painless, danger-free healing is a seductive one, so attractive to all concerned that the idea sells the medicine in homeopathy better than any fully-fleshed documentation of “cure” ever did. In North America, our remedies and treatment are available to the public largely because of the promulgated belief that Homeopathic medicines are “side-effect free”, “safe” for all to use, and benign in every sense of the word, especially when compared to allopathic medicines or other alternatives such as inappropriately and irresponsibly promoted nutritional supplements and herbs. But the fact is we all know the “safe” part is conditional: as long as the remedy is homeopathic to the case and the patient, and as long as the analysis behind its selection and use is objective, thorough, and the result of the capable application of Hahnemann’s method, treatment is more likely to be “safe”. The arguments about nosodes and sarcodes being “different” from or more dangerous than other homeopathic remedies are moot, and yet they arise every so often and threaten to change public policy wherever we practice. Why does such a non-issue continue to surface?

January’s poll results on the question of limiting access to the “poison” and “disease” remedies provide an interesting overview on where our community stands. The results, in summary:

Do you think homeopathic medicines like Nosodes, Sarcodes and those derived from poisonous sources should be strictly regulated, banned, or supplied on special license?

Out of 318 votes, the vast majority of responses favoured the “no” response to the question of limiting access to nosodes and “poisonous” source remedies (227 votes or 71.4%), and only 6.3% of our participants were undecided. The “yes” responses made up only 22.3% of the total number of responses.

Quite a number of the “no” responses demonstrated an awareness of the political reasons for such restrictions in access to remedies. Like many others who posted responses, H. Balasubramanian wrote:

“On one hand these people suggest that homeopathic medicine does not work and on the other hand they assume that homeopathic medicines may work dangerously. Isn't it ironical! If it continues this way, these guys will soon put a ban on all mineral remedies too.

Why don't these people realize that in crude form and in excess nearly everything can have toxic effects. Nearly every allopathic medicine has known adverse effects, yet they do not put a ban on them…”

There is a definite irony behind such a “ban” as so many of the vested interests in conventional medicine have been given the authority to dismiss Homeopathy as little more than “placebo”, or worse, quackery based on the ludicrous idea of sequential dilution and succussion (“there’s nothing in that stuff but milk sugar!”). Once we start talking about remedies made from cancerous tissue, gonorrheal discharges, or venom from the glands of snakes, though, no amount of dilution seems to calm the rancour and unrest. Dr. Balasubramanian is correct in stating that all things have the potential to be poisonous, depending on how they are used: the argument that minerals such as zinc or calcium are toxic can easily (and truthfully) be made, and these would easily become the “next” restricted remedies to follow behind the nosode wedge. The difference between medicine and poison is dose, after all; the Greek-derived word “pharmacology” means “the study of poisons”. Most of the “no” respondents, like Tanya Marquette, stated clearly that in the mindset of the conventional medical authorities, “homeopathic remedies are…nothing but…placebo, except when they are dangerous drugs”. Something must be off if the only poisons restricted on the market are the infinitesimally diluted ones Homeopathy uses to help make so many well.

Tanya Marquette continues on in her response to name some of the international forces and vested interests behind the push to limit access to homeopathic remedies (republished here in her own punctuation):

...unfortunately, all these battles we face are political/economic at base. a review of history makes this point all too clear. financial backing and lobbying is what is necessary in the current system of functioning. science is bought. the codex legislation surely demonstrates this. without the power of money, what is left is what is always left--people, the power of vocal numbers. every practitioner should have some written information on a hand out in their office. perhaps a petition, a list of phone numbers to call to express their opinion...

I think she very correctly points out the need for all of us as practitioners to be aware of so many of the forces influencing our practice and our relationships with our patients and each other. We all stand the risk of imposed limitations if we don’t make ourselves aware of international corporate interests being given priority over everyone’s rights to sound, accessible medical treatments outside of the conventional medical model, and we do have to respond to the need to be vocal in our opposition, and to educate our patients to advocate on their own behalf as well. As Dr. Leela D’ Souza points out in her response, the impetus to create these restrictions stems from a “lack of understanding (about) how homeopathy works”. Certainly better education of the public as well as the Powers That Be could help keep such restrictive and destructive limitations at bay. Lets consider the perspective of Amy H. in her response, below:

I think people should be responsible for their own health and their own choices. I want my options open if I am sick. I don't want to be forced to see a practitioner. That is just extra money that I don't need to spend and extra time talking that I may not need. I would like to choose to see a practitioner when I want to and takes(sic) homeopathy, herbs and/or supplements at other times.

It’s clear that the need for widespread, comprehensive public awareness and education about homeopathy is huge. Lately, I’ve encountered a number of people who share Amy H’s opinion and I have to say it’s one that really scares me, simply because it is bred on the idea that alternative medicines—like herbs and nutritional therapies with supplements-- can be practiced by anyone, without training of any kind. It’s sad that people feel they are “forced” to see a practitioner because the money and time “don’t need to be spent”. I don’t believe people would feel comfortable with the idea of performing life-altering surgery on themselves or their family members without any training, yet they feel they ought to be able to use herbs or potentized remedies or supplements without training—and to me, herbs, supplements, and potentized remedies are just as powerful as surgery, and just as demanding of skill and case management. Medical treatment of any kind always involves much more than just “the medicine”. If I were to become sick with a chronic disease of any kind, I would want to know that the process of becoming well again would be overseen by a qualified, objective and analytical practitioner: without that partner in place, all I could do to myself is bring about harm. I can’t forget the old saying, “The doctor who treats himself has a Fool for a patient”. Ideally, I would like to see people have all the access they need to purchase remedies and supplements and herbs when they need treatment, but I would also like them to be well aware of the fact that the use of such medicines requires a great deal of education and training too. In the best possible scenario, Amy could buy Carcinosin whenever she wanted to, as long as she knew enough to find a Homeopath qualified enough to prescribe the remedy to her, and then manage her case as it unfolds to make sure she actually becomes well from the treatment. As unlikely as it seems, Amy H’s “no” argument is at the very root of the majority of the “yes” respondents’ replies, exemplified in this post by Jamie Taylor, below:

Yes, medicine should be regulated as should Homeopaths. We desperately need a National/International register with agreed standards. These standards would then allow free access to medicines needed homeopathically. We do not want anyone experimenting with medicinal agents. Medicinal agents, whether nosodes, sarcodes etc should only be applied when there is certainty of curative action or for proving purposes. Who should regulate? This is difficult, because if Homeopaths regulate themselves they could always be seen as prejudiced and who in politics truly understands the world of Homeopathy and the standards that should be set?

Well, as for the questions of who should regulate and the problem of “prejudice”, conventional medical doctors self-regulate all over the world, in politically powerful organizations which all exhibit extreme prejudice in terms of self-determination and the protection of their own rights as medical doctors. Dr. Bhatia reiterates this sentiment in his post below:

I think the work of creating guidelines for the manufacture and sale of homeopathic medicines should be left to homeopathic organizations. And no medicine should be banned till it is proven to be a health hazard. There should always be an international inquiry before any restrictive action is taken. And the restrictions should not be more than making the medicine available on prescription or a warning label (for very low potencies) - just the way they do with conventional medicine.

One of the things which make me hopeful for the future is all the evidence that the creation of these kinds of national and international Homeopathic Organizations is inevitable, given the freedom and connection homeopaths all over the world now enjoy with technology. I no longer just see the “threat” of globalized corporate interests, I also see the immense possibilities brought to us by things like the internet, and the enrichment we can make out of our shared experiences as practitioners and continuous learners of Homeopathy. The potential for us in terms of research, data collection and sharing, education, and accessibility has never been greater for us as Homeopaths, and our numbers can only continue to grow as we become more unified in what we do as practitioners. Perhaps we can begin to see some of the changes we’d like to bring about take place, and much of the misinformation that’s “out there” in the world be replaced by better education, and better drug marketing practices of our remedies and methods. Bans on certain remedies serve no purpose for homeopaths or their patients: if public safety were really the concern, we’d see information dissemination become a priority before any ban on substances became legislation anywhere. Personally, I think some current labeling on the packaging of homeopathic remedies is far more dangerous than any nosode or poison can ever be, under any circumstances. Imagine how much pain and suffering could be avoided if we could pressure some of the best known Homeopathic labs in the world to stop printing “one-size-fits-all” dosing instructions on the sides of their tubes, or restrict them from selling polypharmacy concoctions as over-the-counter “Homeopathy”. Such small things would make a tremendous difference in real public “safety”, and go a long way towards making the public that much more aware about, and open to, what we do.

(originally published in Hpathy.com e-zine February 2006
http://hpathy.com/papersnew/siciliana-remedy-ban.asp

The Lancet Journal's Meta-analysis

When the Lancet’s meta-study analysis on Homeopathy was published in September last year, news of its conclusions reached homeopaths all over the world to find many of us in shock. Not because such negative “news” about homeopathy was unexpected or unheard of—but because the Lancet study’s findings were given top priority attention absolutely everywhere. Suddenly, local and national newspapers and magazines of all stripes all over the world -- papers which had never previously given homeopathy attention enough to fill a paragraph -- found space to print the news in prominent, often front page, articles. Suddenly, unlikely media such as msn.com homepages were making the Lancet’s findings known, despite the fact that their usual “scientific” news bits consisted of sports scores, diet tips, dating hotlines, and celebrity gossip. “News” sources which never gave homeopathy the figurative time of day gave the Lancet’s dismissive analysis the spotlight, all with summary articles citing the Lancet as the authority. That’s quite a stir when you consider that the vast majority of articles published in peer reviewed medical journals seldom generate sufficient interest in the mainstream media to warrant any attention whatsoever.

Of course, none of the information about the actual meta-analysis accompanied those brief but prominent articles. No one was interested in publicizing information about the financing for the analyses; their structure and execution; or the materials, facilities, and methods used. Nor was there any mention whether actual homeopaths—or homeopathy as qualified homeopaths practice it--were involved in any way. The means by which the conclusions were drawn were never publicly illustrated or questioned. Though much was made about the Lancet as an authoritative journal, not one of the well-publicized reports made mention of the fact that the Lancet’s publication history includes the publication of at least one Homeopathy-positive study, which was also “peer reviewed” but never so widely published. No one ever paused to consider the existence of such a contradiction, or to ponder why the Lancet’s previous conclusions about homeopathy were now being made to seem so misguided. Though this type of critical thinking may be second nature to people in the Homeopathic community (who’ve seen hundreds of similar, dismissive statements in the press before), it may not be the way the general public would respond to such information. Which brings us to the December poll’s question:

“What will be the effect of the Lancet meta-analysis and editorial on homeopathy in the long run?”

The majority of the 132 respondents to the poll believe that the outcome of the meta-analysis will be a good one (43.2%), while 32.6% believe the publicity will have no effect on homeopathy at all. 18.2% of our respondents do fear a negative outcome will result (it is by far a minority, but it is almost 20% of all respondents—-a significant number). Only 6.1% of our respondents felt that they “couldn’t say” what the outcome of the publicity would be.

Among those who felt the impact would be good for homeopathy were those who felt homeopathy would continue to become more widely accepted despite bad press, such as “Rangan”, who wrote:

“…in my opinion, the lancet report will not make any impact on the homeopathy lovers in India. Those want to get treated by homeopathic way will undoubtedly do so without bothering about the medical journal report.”

Many such as Dr. Rehka Srinivasan felt that one of the “good” outcomes would be an acknowledgement of the need for homeopaths to put together and publish sound research of their own. The Lancet article plays up the importance of uniting homeopaths in their work in terms of research, record-keeping, advocacy towards internationally accepted standards of education and practice, and methodology of practice, which can counter-act the kind of assumptions the conventional medical world makes about exactly how homeopathy is practiced. Others, like Hazel Lucy, believe the Lancet study will drive others scientists to research homeopathy with an open mind, and may attract many people as a method of treatment even if they don’t “believe” in homeopathy’s viability. After all, wasn’t it Constantine Hering who approached Homeopathy as a medical art to be ridiculed and exposed—-until he had to admit it worked very well? Think of where Homeopathy would be if he hadn’t been driven to publicly expose Homeopathy as a fraud!

The respondents who believe that article will have no effect were also represented. One such respondent, “Noelene”, states that:

“…Patients themselves will use what gives them a positive outcome. Many of my patients are new to homoeopathy but are impressed with the results even if they have previously heard that it is "next to useless". These same people are questioning other "authorities" and thinking for themselves. They also refer friends and family to "alternative practitioners."

Essentially, this group of respondents believe that those who do seek to know for themselves will always question authorities, particularly if they’ve tried things out for themselves and experienced good results. For people such as these, the Lancet’s opinion and findings will hold little sway. Homeopathy usually attracts those who will question authority in the first place, often for reasons that have to do with their own experiences of disillusionment or disbelief with what is predominantly believed to be "true" or "right".

“Homeopathy has been here before”, writes J. Havelock Davies, who describes the Lancet study as a bad one, yielding dubious results. The study is evidence that the struggle between conventional medical interests and alternative medical treatments continues, with no resolution in sight. “Snoopy” echoes these sentiments in her opinion, where she describes the impact of the success of homeopathy and the threat it poses to conventional medicine in general:

“…what can you expect from the Drug Industry-controlled media? They don't like us and they're not going to sit around and watch while we take their living away!

You know how it is in families that know homeopathy--no one sees a doctor! No one buys drugs!

We're always shocked when they go on the attack like this but, they're concerned for a reason!”

And that reason is that Homeopathy works, despite what current science can understand about its mechanism. As Banaras Khan Awan writes, very simply, “…unless there are…challenges and…contradictions one can not find and conceive truth. If there were no substance in Homoeopathy it would have vanished from the memory of mankind.”

Homeopaths are, of course, upset by the ongoing, unresolved struggle between the institutionalized medical forces and our own work with our own patients. How can we all see such clear results with Homeopathy, yet the “science” conducted in the name of objective study never bears our own experiences--or the experiences of our patients-- out? The Lancet study does serve to remind us to be aware of our own impact in the world, as practitioners, students, and patients of homeopathy. There is a great need for us to understand the political implications of Homeopathy in the larger context of the industry of medicine, where conventional, orthodox medicine and its proponents hold a great deal of power, resources, and influence on the general public, all theirs to lose. It’s not enough for us to know that homeopathy works and works well: in order for us to remain accessible to patients, as well as to remain viable as practitioners, we need to understand why such supposedly “open” resources as the media and “science” journals like the Lancet can be so easily employed to affect public perception against the very real efficacy of Homeopathic Medicine, and we need to find some way to counteract and/or stop this ongoing problem.

The Lancet’s meta-analysis illustrates clearly that what we do as practitioners, students, and patients of Homeopathy is currently defined by medical authorities who know little about the science of Homeopathy itself, the method by which it is practiced, and the effects of Homeopathy on human health altogether, even though we have so much empirical and scientific data to speak for us, favourably, on our behalf. Those who are currently in the position as “authorities” on Homeopathy often have no interest in representing it as it is actually practiced and experienced by students, homeopaths, and patients. This should never be acceptable to us as a community: never has this been more clear than it is now.

(originally published in Hpathy.com's Monthly e-zine, January 2006 at http://hpathy.com/papersnew/siciliana-lancet.asp)