Very high dilutions of dexamethasone inhibit its pharmacological effects in vivo

We evaluated the interaction of dexamethasone 10−17 and 10−33 M (equivalent to 7cH and 15cH) with dexamethasone in pharmacological concentrations, using as experimental models: acute inflammation induced by carrageenan, Ehrlich ascitic tumour, and migration of tumour infiltrating leukocytes (TIL). Male adult BALB/c mice (n=7 per group) were used in all experiments. Carrageenan (1%) was injected into the footpad for oedema evaluation and into the peritoneal cavity (i.p.), for differential counting of inflammatory cells. Ehrlich ascitic tumour cells (107 viable cells/ml) were injected i.p. and tumour cells were counted after 6 days, by the Trypan blue exclusion method. The differential TIL was counted using smears stained by hematoxylin–eosin. Treatments were made immediately after carrageenan inoculation or once a day, during Ehrlich tumour development, until the animals were killed. Animals were treated with the following preparations: (1) phosphate buffer saline (PBS) solution; (2) dexamethasone (0.5 mg/kg for inflammation model or 4 mg/kg for tumour model) mixed with dexamethasone 7cH or 15cH; (3) dexamethasone (same doses) mixed in PBS. Homeopathic dexamethasone partially blocked the anti-inflammatory effect of pharmacological dexamethasone with regard to paw oedema (two-way ANOVA, P≤0.0008) and polymorphonuclear cell migration (χ2, P=0.0001). No important differences were observed between experimental and control groups, in relation to Ehrlich tumour cells viability or count, or bodyweight, but potentised dexamethasone restored control levels of TIL viability, compared to mice treated with pharmacological doses of dexamethasone (χ2, P≤0.001). The results demonstrate that a potentised substance may change its own pharmacological effects and suggest that ultradilutions effects act mostly on host response.

Treatment for hyperactive children: homeopathy and methylphenidate compared in a family setting

The sharp increase of the prescription of methylphenidate (MPD) in hyperactive children in recent years is a matter of increasing uneasiness among professionals, parents and politicians. There is little awareness of treatment alternatives. The purpose of this prospective trial was to assess the efficacy of homeopathy in hyperactive patients and to compare it MPD. The study was performed in a paediatric practice with conventional and homeopathic backgrounds. Children aged 3–17 y, conforming to the DSM-IV criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with a Conners Global Index (CGI) of 14 or higher were eligible for the study. All of them received an individual homeopathic treatment. When clinical improvement reached 50%, the parents were asked to reevaluate the symptoms. Those who did not improve sufficiently on homeopathy were changed to MPD, and again evaluated after 3 months. One hundred and fifteen children (92 boys, 23 girls) with a mean age of 8.3 y at diagnosis were included in the study. Prior to treatment the mean CGI was 20.63 (14–30), the mean index of the homeopathy group 20.52 and of the MPD-group 20.94. After an average treatment time of 3.5 months 86 children (75%) had responded to homeopathy, reaching a clinical improvement rating of 73% and an amelioration of the CGI of 55%. Twenty-five children (22%) needed MPD; the average duration of homeopathic (pre-) treatment in this group was 22 months. Clinical improvement under MPD reached 65%, the lowering of the CGI 48%. Three children did not respond to homeopathy nor to MPD, and one left the study. In cases where treatment of a hyperactive child is not urgent, homeopathy is a valuable alternative to MPD. The reported results of homeopathic treatment appear to be similar to the effects of MPD. Only children who did not reach the high level of sensory integration for school had to be changed to MPD. In preschoolers, homeopathy appears a particularly useful treatment for ADHD.

Homeopathy: progress and promise, a critical perspective

This lecture attempts to analyse the progress made by homeopathy in recent years, by analysing consumer awareness, sales and distribution trends of homeopathic products, and research publications. Sales of homeopathic medicines are growing rapidly, but remain a very small fraction of the total pharmaceutical market. The proportion of combination to single medicines varies widely between countries. The market is concentrated in a relatively small number of the available medicines; many available homeopathic medicines are never used. Regulation of homeopathic practitioners and medicines is problematic, the legal position varies between countries. The volume of research is growing steadily. A series of recommendations is made, including modernisation of the terminology of homeopathy, training of more practitioners, a defined research agenda and integration into the medical system.

Observational study of quality of life in patients with headache, receiving homeopathic treatment

This study describes the results obtained from a prospective observational research of homeopathic treatment for patients suffering from headache (migraine with- and without aura and tension-type headache). Fifty-three patients were asked to complete the SF-36 questionnaire at the beginning of the treatment and after 4–6 months. The homeopathic medicine and potency were not pre-defined, but were adapted to each single patient according to individualised homeopathic prescription. Most patients (73.6%) completed the study. There was heterogeneity in the answers (patients in very poor health as well as those with only slight disorders). Analysis of the data according to the concept of ‘intention-to-treat’ showed that after therapy, the mean and median scores of all life quality dimensions rose. More than 60% of the cases experienced an improvement in pain and the limitations caused by pain, as well as in limitations in social activities and health in general. All the differences between pre/post treatment were statistically highly significant, with the strongest results in the ‘bodily pain’ and ‘vitality’ parameters (P<0.0001).