Homeopathy & Treasure

my query of a 'proving'

February 20, 2020 at 1:00 pm

‘‘ Could the author please clarify whether or not permission was sought from Kaitiaki (Maori guardians) to proceed with this experiment?

Maori people of New Zealand have whanaungatanga (kinship) with all things animate and inanimate in their world, including people (living and dead), gods, plants, animals, mountains and rivers.

This was officially recognized in New Zealand in 2011 by Wai 262 (commonly known as the “flora and fauna” claim) which addresses ownership and use of Maori knowledge, cultural expressions, indigenous species of flora and fauna – all known as taonga (treasures), and inventions and products derived from indigenous flora and fauna and/or the utilization of Maori knowledge.

Wai 262 recognizes that culturally significant species of flora and fauna are acknowledged and protected and that future laws, policies and practices do acknowledge and respect those relationships and, that commercial use of taonga should occur only after consulting and gaining the consent of Kaitiaki.

Article 31 of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People states;

‘Indigenous people have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.’

Kea is taonga, I sincerely hope permission from Kaitiaki was granted for this experiment as the ‘official approval of the zoo’ is insufficient and in breach of Wai 262 and Article 31.

Investigation, consideration and abidance by national and international laws governing a prospective substance for ‘proving’ need to be diligently undertaken by persons wishing to experiment with taonga from any country; And, seeking the explicit permission of relevant Kaitiaki from the country of the prospective substance’s origin needs to occur before a ‘proving’ can be conducted – Article 31 of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People tells us so and applies to us all, including homeopaths, no matter how well intentioned – these should be mandatory requirements (where applicable) before any ‘proving’ is conducted.

He taonga rongonui te aroha ki te tangata! (Goodwill towards others is a precious treasure) ’’

---

You’ll note that I have not linked this ‘work’ as it was far, far, far from being properly conducted and, to quote a colleague, smacked of an outdated conquistador attitude. The reply - which took six months!, - was a passive/aggressive ad hominem attack that unsurprisingly did not speak to any of the issues raised.

Homeopathy’s hard won, intimate materia medica knowledge is becoming diluted with the inclusion of incorrectly ‘proved’ substances, so much so there is real danger of our repertories - an index of materia medica by symptom - becoming useless in their ability to guide us to the similimum. A case in point is that apparently the above ‘proving’ obtained 300 symptoms… WTF?!

I am now confident to begin to publicly call this type of ‘work’ controlled opposition as it does far more damage to real homeopathy than the most vehement, well paid skeptics can conjure up and put on the record... think the NHMRC report, and the EASAC statement¹ (where more than 90% of studies were excluded and did not show any effectiveness of homeopathy beyond placebo - an interesting percentage in light of the 2013 review which confirmed that more than 90% of studies must be excluded to be able to find homeopathy ineffective.²)

Mankind needs the gift that is homeopathy now more than ever in our age of technological terror to which we’re all tethered without knowledge or consent.

The Organon’s Aphorism 21 provides us with the theoretical basis for provings.³ In the Science of Homeopathy Professor Vithoulkas outlines the scientific process of proving a remedy - please note, there is no mention of fourth year student supervision.

There are three criteria to determine whether a remedy is fully proven:

1. Symptoms must be recorded from (adequately conducted) provings on healthy individuals using toxic (as recorded from accidental poisonings!), hypo-toxic (low potency), and highly potentized doses.

2. The recorded symptoms must be drawn from all three levels of the organism - mental, emotional, and physical.

3. Symptoms must be included which have been cured in the process of treatment of the whole organism after administration.

‘‘If we give a test substance in great enough quantity, it will disturb the vital force sufficiently to mobilize the defense mechanism, which in turn generates a group of symptoms which are entirely peculiar to the substance being tested.’’⁴

---

Medical literature has renamed the homoeopathic proving the homoeopathic pathogenetic trial (HPT), defined as an experiment conducted to establish the curative properties of a drug via pathogenetic effects on healthy volunteers to inform and ground the application of the therapeutic similitude principle.⁵

The Central Council for Research in Homeopathy (CCRH) has conducted over one hundred and ten Homoeopathic Pathogenetic Trials via the multi-centre double-blind placebo controlled method, typically in three  potencies; 6CH, 30CH and 200CH.⁶ The data has been published in Drug Proving volumes, Monographs and Drug Proving articles in bulletins, and the Indian Journal of Research in Homoeopathy.⁷

---

Just to clarify, I am not a luddite.

I have the firm stance that our homeopathic materia medica armamentarium requires continual expansion but in accordance with the established and predetermined scientific parameters. This is the only way to ensure a firm scientific basis, which gives us our intimate knowledge of the power of the substance that is required in order for us to be able to make a successful prescription of it - one that can actually mitigate the suffering of the unwell us scrupulous homeopaths work so hard for.

Always keen to hear your thoughts!

1. European Academies Science Advisory Council. Homeopathic products and practices: assessing the evidence and ensuring consistency in regulating medical claims in the EU, 2017. Halle, Deutschland. (letzter Zugriff 20.7.2020).

2. Hahn, 2013. Homeopathy: meta-Analysis of pooled clinical data. Forsch Komplement 20(5): 376–81. Available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24200828/

3. Hahnemann, S. 2005. Organon of Medicine. Sixth edition. Translated from German by W. Boericke. New Delhi. Indian Books and Periodicals Publishers. (Originally published in 1842.)

4. Vithoulkas, G. 2014. 7th ed., The Science of Homeopathy.  International Academy of Classical Homeopathy, Alonissos, Greece.

5. Teixeira. Scientific Evidence for Homeopathy. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2023 Jul 25;78:100255. Available from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10413079

6. Manchanda et al, 2020. Homoeopathic drug proving researches (1996–2018): A scoping review. Indian Journal of Research in Homoeopathy. 14:1. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340506206_Homoeopathic_drug_proving_researches_1996-2018_A_scoping_review/link/5e913b254585150839d232ed/download?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QiLCJwYWdlIjoicHVibGljYXRpb24iLCJwcmV2aW91c1BhZ2UiOiJfZGlyZWN0In19

7. Central Council for Research in Homeopathy. Ministry of AYUSH. Government of India. Concluded studies. Available from: https://www.ccrhindia.nic.in//admnis/admin/showimg.aspx?ID=12795