Cures!
In most countries it is illegal in the promotion of goods or services to use this word and yet, we often see it popping up. When making/advertising health claims - personally, I think one should not do this, ever - there absolutely needs to be reference to evidence, and even then it’s a dicey, totally murky area which courts keen interest from consumer and regulatory bodies, and rightly so.
Within complementary medicine this also includes ‘extemporaneous prescribing’ - advising on the use of x remedy for x condition without having formally taken a case history - flying in the face of the highly personalized medical system that is homeopathy, which is based upon the application of the therapeutic similitude principle - the theory that disease can be addressed via use of the substance which produces similar symptoms to the disease.
Highly personalized translates to individualized, and individualized homeopathy especially demonstrates effects at all quality levels according to Cochrane criteria, even in the methodologically high-quality studies.1
The first Systematic Review of Meta Analysis of placebo-controlled randomised trials of homoeopathy for any disorder (Hamre et al., 2023)2 distinguishing between individualized homeopathy (I-HOM); and non-individualized combination products, clinical homoeopathy, complex homeopathy, and isopathy homeopathy (NI-HOM), found significant positive effects beyond placebo.
Applied sample restriction of high-quality trials, effect remained significant for I-HOM, and no longer significant for NI-HOM or for ALL-HOM (I-HOM+NI-HOM). A low risk of bias filter changed the quality of evidence to high for ALL-HOM, remaining high for I-HOM and moderate for NI-HOM.
Three of the four reviewed Meta Analysis showed significant effects of homoeopathy compared to placebo leading Hamre et al., (2023) to conclude positive effects beyond placebo rated as high for I-HOM, and moderate for NI-HOM and ALL-HOM for disease in humans, findings which are in accordance with laboratory experiments showing partially replicable effects of homeopathically potentized preparations in physico-chemical,3 in vitro,4 plant-based56 and animal-based789 test systems.
Hamre et al., (2023) asked ‘Do the findings from these Meta-Analysis support the notion of a common effect—or absence thereof—across different types of homoeopathic treatment (e.g. individualized, clinical or complex homoeopathy) and across different types of indications (e.g. acute, chronic)?,’ reporting the notion of a common positive effect is;
supported for effects across different homoeopathy types, including different subtypes of NI-HOM.
supported for effects of I-HOM.
not supported for effects of NI-HOM10 - suggesting that the effects of NI-HOM may differ across different indications and/or different homoeopathic products used. Such effect differences may include significant positive effects of NI-HOM as well as no significant difference between NI-HOM and placebo in different subgroups.
One of the studied Meta Analysis, Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis (Mathie et al., 2014)11 found I-HOM may have small, specific treatment effects, findings consistent with sub-group data from two previous global systematic reviews1213 - but the low or unclear overall quality of the evidence prompts caution in interpreting the findings.
Also included was the Mathie et al., 2017 Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis which supported a generalized conclusion that NI-HOM is indistinguishable from placebo, but that the quality of evidence is low. The researchers reported that the studies with lower quality tended to report greater benefits of NI-HOM than studies with higher quality.14
There are important differences between the therapeutic approaches of I-HOM and NI-HOM.
I-HOM treatment plans are highly individualized (so much so that people suffering the same condition often receive a different homeopathic medicine) and prescriber coherence of homeopathic principles are necessary.15 Levels of Health theory (LoH) allows insight into, and estimation of, pervasiveness of pathology thereby enabling prognosis to be made for likely reactions, and the likelihood of successful therapeutic effect.1617 LoH as an adjunctive tool coherently evaluates reaction to I-HOM as improvement, moving in the right direction, or neither, while being able to accurately define and classify adverse reactions / aggravations.18
I-HOM typically takes the 35,000 foot view and has scientific support for potential positive therapeutic effect.192021 The combination, clinical, and complex homeopathy, and isopathy of NI-HOM tend to compartmentalize, and are methodologies with unsupported/unclear therapeutic effect.2223
Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCT) emphasizing potential therapeutic effect for individualized homeopathy (I-HOM) published in 2023 for the following conditions;
Atopic Dermatitis: I-HOM performed significantly better than placebo in reducing the severity of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) in adults - though the medicines had no overall significant impact on AD burden or Dermatological Life Quality Index.24
Irritable Bowel Syndrome: I-HOM acted significantly better than placebos in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Group differences in IBS quality of life questionnaire total scores, IBS severity scoring system, and EQ-5D-5L (self-completion questionnaires by respondents) scores also favored I-HOM against placebo overall.25
Pre-Diabetes: I-HOM produced significantly better results than placebo in fasting blood sugar and in Diabetes Symptom Checklist-Revised (DSC-R) scores but not in oral glucose tolerance test. The secondary outcome was the DSC-R total score, which favoured I-HOM significantly compared with placebo.26
Tinea corporis: Secondary outcomes of a numeric rating scale measuring intensity of itching and the Skindex-29 questionnaire (overall, and three sub-scales - degree of symptoms, psychological functioning, emotional status) included some statistically significant results favouring I-HOM against placebo after three months.27
Hyperuricemia: I-HOM showed significantly better results than placebo in reducing Serum uric acid levels and improving quality of life in patients suffering from Hyperuricemia.28
Psoriasis vulgaris: Improvements were significantly higher in the I-HOM group than in placebo in Psoriasis area and severity index scores after six months of intervention. Dermatological life quality index daily activity subscale scores also yielded similar significant results favouring I-HOM against placebo after six months. Improvement in psoriasis disability index total and all remaining subscales were higher in the I-HOM group than placebo after six months, but nonsignificant statistically.29
Cervical spondylosis: Overall, improvements were clinically significant and higher in the I-HOM group than the placebo group, but group differences were statistically nonsignificant with small effect sizes. An encouraging but nonsignificant direction of effect was elicited favouring I-HOM against placebos in the treatment of Cervical spondylosis.30
Modern medical science is now discovering that although inflammatory focus may be upon a specific organ in chronic diseases systemic inflammation exists, indicating the need for a systemic treatment approach.3132
According to Dr. Iris Bell, the concepts of complex systems science enhance our understanding of how people develop and recover from disease. Dr. Bell states that the systemic healing which occurs during I-HOM involves adaptive patterns of systemic responses to the similimum which generate multi-symptom and multi-system healing within the human being.33
Weiermayer P, Frass M, Peinbauer T, Ellinger L. 2020. Evidenzbasierte Veterinär-/Homöopathie und ihre mögliche Bedeutung für die Bekämpfung der Antibiotikaresistenzproblematik – ein Überblick [Evidence-based homeopathy and veterinary homeopathy, and its potential to help overcome the anti-microbial resistance problem - an overview]. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd. Oct;162(10):597-615. German, French. Available from: https://sat.gstsvs.ch/de/sat/sat-artikel/archiv/2020/102020/evidence-based-homeopathy-and-veterinary-homeopathy-and-its-potential-to-help-overcome-the-antimic.html
Hamre HJ, Glockmann A, von Ammon K, Riley DS, Kiene H. 2023. Efficacy of homoeopathic treatment: Systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled homoeopathy trials for any indication. Syst Rev. Oct 7;12(1):191. Available from: https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-023-02313-2#Abs1
Tournier A, Würtenberger S, Klein SD, Baumgartner S. 2021. Physicochemical investigations of homeopathic preparations: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis, Part 3. J Altern Complement Med. 27(1):45–57. https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2020.0243.
Witt et al., 2007. The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies—a systematic review of the literature. Complement Ther Med. 15(2):128–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2007.01.011.
Ücker A, Baumgartner S, Sokol A, Huber R, Doesburg P, Jager T. 2018. Systematic review of plant-based homeopathic basic research: an update. Homeopathy. 107(2):115–29. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1639580.
Ücker A, Baumgartner S, Martin D, Jäger T. 2022. Critical evaluation of specific efficacy of preparations produced according to European Pharmacopeia Monograph 2371. Biomedicines. 10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10030552.
Bellavite P, Conforti A, Marzotto M, et al. 2012. Testing homeopathy in mouse emotional response models: pooled data analysis of two series of studies. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012:954,374. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/954374.
Bonamin et al., 2015. The use of animal models in homeopathic research—a review of 2010–2014 PubMed indexed papers. Homeopathy. 104(4):283–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2015.06.002.
Endler et al., 2015. Amphibians and ultra high diluted thyroxine—further experiments and re-analysis of data. Homeopathy. 104(4):250–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.001.
Mathie et al., 2017. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. Mar 24;6(1):63. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5366148/
Mathie et al., 2014. Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. Dec 6;3:142. Available from: https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4326322/
Linde et al., 1997. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. Lancet. Sep 20;350(9081):834-43. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9310601/
Shang et al., 2005. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet. Aug 27-Sep 2;366(9487):726-32. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16125589/
Mathie et al., 2017. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. Mar 24;6(1):63. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5366148/
Gaertner et al., 2023. Bibliography of Homeopathic Intervention Studies (HOMIS) in Human Diseases. J Integr Complement Med. Jan;29(1):14-21. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364144294_Bibliography_of_Homeopathic_Intervention_Studies_HOMIS_in_Human_Diseases
Vithoulkas, G. 2017 (a). Levels of Health, The second volume of the Science of Homeopathy, revised edition. Alonissos: International Academy of Classical Homeopathy.
Chabanov et al., 2018. Levels of Health Theory With the Example of a Case of Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis. Journal of Evidence Based Integrative Medicine [online]. Jan-Dec;23:2515690X18777995. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2515690X18777995?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed
Teut et al., 2020. Recommendations for Designing, Conducting and Reporting Observational Studies in Homeopathy. Homeopathy [online]. Aug;109(3):114-125. Available from: https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/html/10.1055/s-0040-1708045
Hamre et al., 2023. Efficacy of homoeopathic treatment: Systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled homoeopathy trials for any indication. Syst Rev. Oct 7;12(1):191. Available from: https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-023-02313-2#Abs1
Mathie et al., 2014. Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2014 Dec 6;3:142. Available from: https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4326322/
Weiermayer P, Frass M, Peinbauer T, Ellinger L. 2020. Evidenzbasierte Veterinär-/Homöopathie und ihre mögliche Bedeutung für die Bekämpfung der Antibiotikaresistenzproblematik – ein Überblick [Evidence-based homeopathy and veterinary homeopathy, and its potential to help overcome the anti-microbial resistance problem - an overview]. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd. Oct;162(10):597-615. German, French. Available from: https://sat.gstsvs.ch/de/sat/sat-artikel/archiv/2020/102020/evidence-based-homeopathy-and-veterinary-homeopathy-and-its-potential-to-help-overcome-the-antimic.html
Hamre et al., 2023. Efficacy of homoeopathic treatment: Systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled homoeopathy trials for any indication. Syst Rev. Oct 7;12(1):191. Available from: https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-023-02313-2#Abs1
Mathie et al., 2017. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. Mar 24;6(1):63. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5366148/
Mandal et al., 2023. Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in Atopic Dermatitis in Adults: A Replication Trial with 6 Months' Follow-up. Homeopathy. Nov;112(4):251-261. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36882111/
Das et al., 2023. Efficacy of individualized homeopathic medicines in irritable bowel syndrome: A double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Explore (NY). Jul-Aug;19(4):519-527. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36307315/
Guha et al., 2023. A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in Pre-diabetes. Homeopathy. Jun 26. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37364594/
Laskar et al., 2023. Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in the Treatment of Tinea Corporis: Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Homeopathy. May;112(2):74-84. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36122589/
Ghosh et al., 2023. Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in Treatment of Hyperuricemia: Evaluation by Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Homeopathy. May;112(2):85-96. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36122588/
Balamurugan et al., 2023. Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in the Treatment of Psoriasis Vulgaris: Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Complement Med Res. 30(4):317-331. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37263249/
Tomar et al., 2023. Efficacy of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in the Treatment of Cervical Spondylosis: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Complement Med Res. 30(1):26-36. English. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36244334/
Brunner et al., 2017. Councilors of the International Eczema Council. Increasing Comorbidities Suggest that Atopic Dermatitis Is a Systemic Disorder. J Invest Dermatol. Jan;137(1):18-25. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27771048/
Fernandes et al., 2016. C-reactive protein is increased in schizophrenia but is not altered by antipsychotics: meta-analysis and implications. Mol Psychiatry. Apr;21(4):554-64. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26169974/
Bell, IR. 2020. The Complexity of the Homeopathic Healing Response Part 1: The Role of the Body as a Complex Adaptive System in Simillimum-Initiated Recovery from Disease. Homeopathy. May;109(2):42-50. Available from: https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-0039-1694998.pdf