ALIGARH "FATIMA" Advanced Homoeopathic & Naturopathic Centre *** Caring lives ***

Archive for the ‘Homoeopathy in News’ Category


Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on February 27, 2010

homeo drugs

Courtesy: Dr Sreevals G Menon

The renewed and more vigorous attack on the efficacy of homoeopathy as a curative therapy picked up by the media is nothing but a sinister pogrom by the powerful pharmaceutical corporations the world over. The news and the discussion related to it as quoted from those released at UK a few days back, is only based on a latest flare up of events, a part of a few year long series of organized assault against homoeopathy, was very likely triggered, sponsored and funded by a consortium of allopathic pharmaceutical corporations.

The series of events can be traced back to less than a decade. Until then the allopathic and the homoeopathic community including the practitioners and academicians of UK was in close ties for the cause of health care delivery on the private and the NHS frontiers.

If one is keen on finding the genesis of the present tirade, one would find reported in Guardian-online, that The Prince of Wales had ordered a leading independent economist to examine whether the use of complementary therapies could save the NHS money. Homoeopathy was one among the priorities. A draft of the report’s conclusions said ’’economy-wide’’ savings of between £500m and £3.5bn could be achieved by offering spinal manipulation therapies, such as chiropractic therapy, as a standard NHS option for back pain, according to the Times. The report also claims up to £480m could be cut from the prescription drugs bill if 10% of GP’s offered homoeopathy as an alternative to standard drugs, according to the paper. The report was instantly reacted to by the pharmaceutical industry wherein they criticized the Prince. It was reported in

The news and a few others from the royal family favorable for Homoeopathy, pressed the ‘panic button’ for the pharmaceutical manufacturers and as a sequel Lancet, a leading allopathic journal suddenly come up with an article urging to give up homoeopathy and stating it as medicines which has no drug content and that the outcome as a mere  ‘placebo effect’. The interesting observation is that Lancet is known to have always upheld the homoeopathic possibilities, treatment and clinical observations with articles in its previous editions, from its very inception. However, Lancet did succeed in confusing its readers with this one.

For its article, Lancet is known to have conducted drug trials in Homoeopathy. But this time the modes of study and the methods used were purely those used for the study of allopathic medicines, well connected to the quantitative aspect of the drug with respect to the clinical diagnosis. The study proves that Homoeopathic medicines are insignificant and carry only a placebo effect. Prominent U.S. scientists strongly rejected findings on homeopathic medicine to be published in the August 27, 2005 edition of the Lancet. They found that they have successfully applied a methodological approach to the articles they reviewed that is highly suitable for drawing conclusions about conventional medicine but is incomplete in evaluating homeopathic medicine. They did not include criteria that would apply to high quality homeopathic research reflecting the nature of homeopathic practice.

Furthermore, a single remedy selection for a given conventionally-diagnosed condition is not homoeopathy, yet there are numerous conventionally-judged high quality studies that were so designed. The analogy would be to test the effects of penicillin for all patients with symptoms of an apparent infection. The quality of the studies would otherwise be excellent in design. However, penicillin will not work for patients with viral infections or bacterial infections resistant to its effects or for persons with fevers from other non-infectious causes – and it thus might show benefit only for a subset of patients with symptoms of infections, i.e., the ones with true penicillin-sensitive infections. How would penicillin fare in a meta-analysis of studies designed to ignore the intrinsic nature of penicillin in benefiting patients, as observed by Dr Iris Bell MD, PhD.

Well aware about the different philosophical structure of Homoeopathy, this study was more than deliberate as anyone who know homoeopathy and its phil. background close knows that the composite symptom structure, the totality, the miasm and the individualizing elements with respect to the patient and the drug-picture are those based on the selection of medicines and not merely the clinical diagnosis or the pathology though they give clues helping prescription. One could compare this to attempting to read a French book in English, considering the fact that the alphabets used are the same !!.

The lancet has also challenged the plausibility of homeopathic effects given that homeopathic remedies are often administered in dilutions in excess of Avogadro’s number. Dr. Rustum Roy, Ph.D., a distinguished material scientist from Penn State University commented that the chemistry argument made in this study and by conventional medicine in general is false science. “The underpinning of the editorial content of the Lancet as it relates to homeopathy relies on a quaint old idea from the nineteenth century that the only way that the property of water can be affected or changed is by incorporating foreign molecules. This is the Avogadro-limit high-school level chemistry argument. To a materials scientist this notion is absurd; since the fundamental paradigm of materials-science is that the structure-property relationship is the basic determinant of everything. It is a fact that the structure of water and therefore the informational content of water can be altered in infinite ways”.

There has been an allegation on the present development in UK which decides to stop funding the NHS based facilities listening to the remarks by lancet and the observations by those less into detailed exposure into Homoeopathic pharmacology and philosophical background. This is when there is a dire need of funding for the right research for trying to find how the homoeopathic medicines works at the nano-molecular levels with the use of the latest available technology and scientific development.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence. There is every possibility that answer lies somewhere in the new sciences like Quantum Physics and Material-Sciences; both of them are in their infancy and man has got a lot of learning to do. One can hope that the advanced technology in nano-medicine could also help unfold the mystery in the successful action of homoeopathic remedies well satisfying the scientific Community worldwide.

With time, the lancet impact did fade away. But those that have come up off late are more vigorous, renewed and more organized assaults and well focused on the Homoeopathy ‘wash away’. The prolonged waiting times for homoeopathic consultation at NHS when compared to those of allopathic specialties, and the ever increasing popularity as the fastest growing alternative medicine around the world has had a catalytic impact on this fresh attacks on Homoeopathy. Homoeopathy has had an impact on the per-capita health expenditure at the many pro-homoeopathic countries where it is well evolved, like in India, Belgium etc. In India we have a well evolved department of Homoeopathy under a cabinet minister with extensive reach out of national rural health mission as peripheral homoeopathic clinics. This is apart from the hundreds of academic institutions attached to hospitals under govt and private sector and the clinics by local state governments which in few states is present in almost every panchayat, for eg. Kerala.  In India, the private health care in Homoeopathy is also well evolved, with strong presence of Dr Batras positive health clinics & Bakson’s clinics across the nation & Aditya Institute of Homoeopathic Medical Sciences [AIHMS HOMOEOPATHY ltd] in south India, currently spreading into middle east and south east asia. This is apart from the thousands of independent clinics and hospitals in private sector across the nation.

Dr Sreevals G Menon

National Mass media Officer

Indian Homoeopathic Medical Association


Posted in CHALLENGE TO SCEPTICS, Homoeopathy in News, Truth about homoeopathy... | 1 Comment »

Homoeopathy & Cancer Treatment

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on February 22, 2010


Courtesy:- http://,english/

Sunday, 21 February 2010

A landmark paper on homeopathy and cancer has appeared in the February 2010 issue of the International Journal of Oncology. Scientists at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDA), led by Moshe Frenkel, MD, have confirmed the ability of four homeopathic remedies to induce apoptosis (programmed cell death) in breast cancer cell lines in the laboratory. The scientists in question were from the Integrative Medicine Program, the Department of Molecular Pathology, and the Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology of MDA. Their two Indian collaborators were from the Banerji Homeopathic Research Foundation, Kolkata, India, where these same remedies are employed clinically with apparent success. The four ultra-dilute remedies in question were Carcinosin, Phytolacca, Conium and Thuja.

"The remedies exerted preferential cytotoxic effects against the two breast cancer cell lines, causing cell cycle delay/arrest and apoptosis" the authors wrote.

It was particularly interesting that the cell-killing effects of two of the remedies investigated in this study, Carcinosin and Phytolacca, appeared similar to the activity of paclitaxel (Taxol), the most commonly used chemotherapeutic drug for breast cancer, when it was tested in the same two adenocarcinoma cell lines investigated in this study.

Phytolacca is better known as pokeweed root, which grows as a towering weed in the US and elsewhere. Conium maculatum is poison hemlock, while Thuja occidentalis comes from the Eastern Arborvitae tree. Carcinosin is the only non-botanical in the group. It is made from a highly diluted extract of breast cancer tissue. These are typically used at the Banerjis’ clinic in India to treat breast cancer. The use of poisonous plants to treat cancer, while unusual, is not necessarily controversial. Madagascar periwinkle, for instance, yields the familiar vinca alkaloids–vincristine and vinblastine. The aforementioned paclitaxel (Taxol) is derived from the bark of the Pacific Yew tree.

Even the use of a cancer tissue extract might be explained in immunological terms. No, what makes these remedies highly unusual is the degree to which they have been diluted. These are given in the Frenkel article as follows: Carcinosin, 30C; Conium maculatum, 3C; Phytolacca decandra, 200C and Thuja occidentalis, 30C.

Posted in CANCER, Diseases, HEALTH, Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News, RESEARCH | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Homeopathic Individualized Q-potencies versus Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression: Double-blind, Randomized Non-inferiority Trial

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on February 22, 2010

U. C. Adler, N. M. P. Paiva, A. T. Cesar, M. S. Adler, A. Molina, A. E. Padula and H. M. Calil

Faculdade de Medicina de Jundiaí, Homeopathy Graduation Programme, Department of Psychobiology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil



Homeopathy is a complementary and integrative medicine used in depression, The aim of this study is to investigate the non-inferiority and tolerability of individualized homeopathic medicines [Quinquagintamillesmial (Q-potencies)] in acute depression, using fluoxetine as active control. Ninety-one outpatients with moderate to severe depression were assigned to receive an individualized homeopathic medicine or fluoxetine 20 mg day–1 (up to 40 mg day–1) in a prospective, randomized, double-blind double-dummy 8-week, single-center trial. Primary efficacy measure was the analysis of the mean change in the Montgomery & Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) depression scores, using a non-inferiority test with margin of 1.45. Secondary efficacy outcomes were response and remission rates. Tolerability was assessed with the side effect rating scale of the Scandinavian Society of Psychopharmacology. Mean MADRS scores differences were not significant at the 4th (P = 0.654) and 8th weeks (P = 0.965) of treatment. Non-inferiority of homeopathy was indicated because the upper limit of the confidence interval (CI) for mean difference in MADRS change was less than the non-inferiority margin: mean differences (homeopathy–fluoxetine) were –3.04 (95% CI –6.95, 0.86) and –2.4 (95% CI –6.05, 0.77) at 4th and 8th week, respectively. There were no significant differences between the percentages of response or remission rates in both groups. Tolerability: there were no significant differences between the side effects rates, although a higher percentage of patients treated with fluoxetine reported troublesome side effects and there was a trend toward greater treatment interruption for adverse effects in the fluoxetine group. This study illustrates the feasibility of randomized controlled double-blind trials of homeopathy in depression and indicates the non-inferiority of individualized homeopathic Q-potencies as compared to fluoxetine in acute treatment of outpatients with moderate to severe depression.

…..For full Article  READ

Posted in Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News, Online Books & Articles, RESEARCH | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Response of George Vithoulkas to 10.23 anti-homeopathy campaign (23.1.2010)

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on February 21, 2010

The end of sceptics ?
The Sceptics lost a battle before it has even started. Trying to ridicule homeopathy they ridiculed themselves.
Homeopaths for years have claimed that a homeopathic remedy highly diluted (beyond the Avogadro number) will never act unless the symptoms of the patient fit the symptoms that the remedy has produced in the healthy.
The homeopathic doctor has to be trained well and then devote a lot of his time in searching in a huge homeopathic pharmacopoea (called Materia Medica) in order to find the correct remedy that fits the symptoms of the patient. All other remedies will be ineffective.
In the same way that an infinitesimal amount of an allergen will affect only those who are very sensitive to it.
Homeopaths have always claimed that even a child can swallow a whole bottle of a remedy by accident and not be affected !
Why then they have programmed such a foolish move ?
Only God knows, to whom also they do not believe !
What may happen with the sceptics who will swallow all these remedies ? Maybe by accident in one of them the remedy will fit and then he will find out the next day that his…chronic constipation is gone !
The remedy I suggest for them to swallow is Alumina 200. Good luck.

George Vithoulkas
Alternative Nobel Prize, 1996

Prof. University of the Aegean, Greece
Prof. Kiev Medical Academy
Hon. Professor Moscow Medical Academy (Department Restorative Medicine)
Collaborating Professor Basque Medical University


Posted in CHALLENGE TO SCEPTICS, Homoeopathy, Homoeopathy in News, Mr.Randi Exposed, RESEARCH | Leave a Comment »

Breast Cancer: Homeopathic Remedies Effective and Non-toxic

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on February 15, 2010


A recent study just published in the International Journal of Oncology reveals that homeopathic remedies have a similar action to chemotherapy but none of their toxicity.

Dr Moshe Frenkel, the lead researcher for this study said, "We felt that homeopathy needed to be tested in the same way that we test new chemotherapeutic drugs. We were quite impressed to find that homeopathic remedies have similar effects to chemotherapy on breast cancer cells but without affecting normal cells, a very exciting finding."  

The homeopathic remedies tested included: Carcinosin; Conium maculatum; Phytolacca decandra; and Thuja occidentalis.

The researchers concluded, "the ultra-diluted natural homeopathic remedies investigated in this study offer the promise of being effective preventive and/or therapeutic agents for breast cancer and worthy of further study."

Courtesy :-

Posted in Diseases, HEALTH, Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News, RESEARCH, Truth about homoeopathy... | 3 Comments »

Homeopathic treatment for the Flu

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on November 3, 2009

John Benneth explains the Homeopathic treatment for the Flu


John Beneath is back again . This time he explains what homeopathic medicines are for H1N1 or seasonal flu . For scientific validation, in physics using modern instrumentation, in vitro using biochemistry, in vivo using zoological and botanical, go to watch the argument against homeopathy fall to pieces.
To read the studies referenced in this video, click on the following links:
In vitro evaluation of the antiviral effects of the homeopathic preparation Gripp-Heel on selected respiratory viruses.
Antiviral activity of Engystol: an in vitro analysis.$=relatedarticles&l..



Posted in Diseases, Flu, HEALTH, Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News | Leave a Comment »

Homeopathic Individualized Q-potencies versus Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression: Double-blind, Randomized Non-inferiority Trial

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on August 20, 2009

Homeopathic Individualized Q-potencies versus Fluoxetine for
Moderate to Severe Depression: Double-blind, Randomized
Non-inferiority Trial

U. C. Adler, N. M. P. Paiva, A. T. Cesar, M. S. Adler, A. Molina, A. E. Padula
and H. M. Calil
Faculdade de Medicina de Jundiaı ´, Homeopathy Graduation Programme, Department of Psychobiology,
Universidade Federal de Sa ˜ o Paulo, Sa ˜ o Paulo, Brazil

Homeopathy is a complementary and integrative medicine used in depression, The aim of this study is to investigate the non-inferiority and tolerability of individualized homeopathic medicines [Quinquagintamillesmial (Q-potencies)] in acute depression, using fluoxetine as active control. Ninety-one outpatients with moderate to severe depression were assigned to receive an individualized homeopathic medicine or fluoxetine 20mg day–1(up to 40mg day–1) in a pro-
spective, randomized, double-blind double-dummy 8-week, single-center trial. Primary efficacy measure was the analysis of the mean change in the Montgomery & Asberg Depression Rating  Scale (MADRS) depression scores, using a non-inferiority test with margin of 1.45. Secondary  efficacy outcomes were response and remission rates. Tolerability was assessed with the side
effect rating scale of the Scandinavian Society of Psychopharmacology. Mean MADRS scores  differences were not significant at the 4th (P¼0.654) and 8th weeks (P¼0.965) of treatment.  Non-inferiority of homeopathy was indicated because the upper limit of the confidence interval (CI) for mean difference in MADRS change was less than the non-inferiority margin: mean differences (homeopathy–fluoxetine) were 3.04 (95% CI 6.95, 0.86) and 2.4 (95% CI 6.05, 0.77) at 4th and 8th week, respectively. There were no significant differences between the percentages of response or remission rates in both groups. Tolerability: there were no significant differences between the side effects rates, although a higher percentage of patients treated with fluoxetine reported troublesome side effects and there was a trend toward greater
treatment interruption for adverse effects in the fluoxetine group. This study illustrates the feasibility of randomized controlled double-blind trials of homeopathy in depression and indicates the non-inferiority of individualized homeopathic Q-potencies as compared to fluoxetine in acute treatment of outpatients with moderate to severe depression.

Source :

Posted in Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News, RESEARCH | Leave a Comment »

Research Supporting Homeopathy

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on March 1, 2009


Courtesy : HealthNews

By: Melanie Grimes
Published: Friday, 13 February 2009

The first double-blind crossover study ever performed was conducted by homeopaths in 1906. This study was run concurrently in eleven different cities on fifteen subjects. The documentation of this experiment consisted of 665 pages, published as Research Provings of Belladonna. Also at the turn of the nineteenth century, a book on homeopathic research was published called The Logic of Figures or Comparative Results of Homeopathic and Other Treatments. This book provided dozens of charts comparing disease and death rates in homeopathic and allopathic (mainstream) hospitals. This research also investigated statistics on the epidemic diseases of scarlet fever, yellow fever, and typhoid. The research showed that homeopathic hospitals had an average of 50 to 80 percent fewer deaths per 100 people, depending on the disease compared.
During World War II, an early double-blind study of homeopathy was sponsored by the British government. The experiment demonstrated that those given homeopathic remedies experienced a significant improvement in burns from mustard gas compared to those given placebo.
Many modern clinical trials are currently underway, looking for evidence of the efficacy of homeopathy from controlled trials in human subjects. More than 100 clinical trials have been conducted, some published in highly prestigious journals such as Lancet and JAMA. In 1997, K. Linde and W. Jonas, directors of the Alternative Medicine Evaluation Department of the National Institute of Health, co-signed a meta-analysis which evaluated 186 clinical trials on homeopathic therapies. Among the 105 trials whose results could be interpreted, 81 presented positive results, while homeopathy did not have a positive effect in 24 others. The authors concluded that, "the results of this meta-analysis are incompatible with the hypothesis that the clinical effects of homeopathy are due exclusively to a placebo effect."

Proliferation of interest in the area of clinical research abounds. In April 2003, a two-day conference was held in London on the topic of clinical research. Dick Koster  reports: "Those who are opposed to homeopathy…base their conclusion on the last negative study…. Followers of homeopathy herald all positive news and complain about serious design flaws in negative studies…. Both sides claim their successes and failures as definitive while in reality, new research…would only add or subtract a small effect to or from the already existing evidence…of homeopathy being true." This being said, Koster goes on to say that "homeopaths look at their patient results and believe that no amount of negative research could topple their belief in homeopathy."
A recent double-blind study has shown the antiviral effect of homeopathic remedies. Eight of the ten remedies tested inhibited viruses in chicken embryos from 50 to 100 percent depending on the potencies used. German scientists at a Veterinary College showed use of the homeopathic remedy Chelidonium lowered serum cholesterol when given twice a day to rabbits on a cholesterol rich diet.
The British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published a double-blind experiment on patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Of those given a homeopathic medicine, 82 percent experienced some relief of symptoms, while only 21 percent of those given a placebo experienced any similar degree of improvement.
Research has also been conducted in the use of homeopathy in cancer. In 77 mice that received a transplant in fibrosarcoma, 52 percent survived more than a year when treated with homeopathic remedies. The 77 untreated mice died within 10-15 days.
Many critics of homeopathic research site flaws in the designs of the studies, weakness in reporting and measuring techniques, small numbers of study participants, and the difficulties in replicating results. Homeopathy works and the proof is in the pudding. Because the science is based on one remedy for one person, it is difficult to construct studies and judge the results. Clinical results have noted homeopathic cures taking place around the globe for over 100 years. The miniscule doses are still immeasurable by today’s science, but in the future, equipment will be designed that can adequately measure the healing effects of homeopathy.

Posted in Homoeopathy, Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News, RESEARCH, Why Homeopathy Makes Sense and Works | 5 Comments »

The facts about an ingenious homeopathic experiment that was not completed due to the “tricks” of Mr. James Randi.

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on December 20, 2008

Courtesy: Dr. Vithoulkas

The facts about an ingenious homeopathic experiment that was not completed due to the “tricks” of Mr. James Randi.

In 2002 the BBC Horizon program presented a documentary that showed that the Benveniste experiment about homeopathy was a fake one and therefore… homeopathy was also fake!

Mr.Vithoulkas had repeatedly stressed in many communications that the experiment was in any case a falsely conceived one from its very beginning (see the correspondence). The opponents of homeopathy basing in this false experiment by Benveniste their hypocritical arguments maintained that homeopathy was simply placebo effect.

Mr Randi after this false experiment (ignoring all other experiments that showed the effect of homeopathy) declared in his website ( that whoever could prove the validity of the action of a homeopathically potentized remedy beyond the Avogadro number would be winning one million $ as a prize.

Mr Vithoulkas challenged this statement and with this idea a new experiment was conceived that would prove that the highly potentized remedies could actually have a biological effect upon the human organism.

The experiment was simple: An individualized remedy would be given to a number of patients in a double blind fashion and half of the patients would receive placebo the other half would get the real remedy. The Greek Homeopathic physicians that would participate in taking of the cases and prescribing the remedies should point out in the end of the experiment the ones that they had got the real remedy.

The protocol was structured by a group of internationally known scientists and the experiment had to take place in one of the hospitals in Athens.

What follows is the real story (with facts in correspondence that transpired) of how through several "tricks", Mr.Randi refused to go through the experiment and rescued his million.

We sent the following statement to Mr. Randi in order to be posted to his website but he refused to post it.



INTRODUCTION: This is a retraction statement against the erroneous piece of information published on JREF (James Randi Educational Foundation) website , concerning the supposedly "withdrawal of Homeopaths" from a experiment (agreed upon between JREF and the Greek homeopathic team of medical doctors) that was devised in order to prove that there is a biological effect on human organism from the ultra high dilutions of homeopathic remedies, beyond the Avogadro number.


– The group of homeopaths led by Prof. George Vithoulkas contracted an agreement with JREF on 2003, with the objective of matching a “challenge” posed by JREF, in order to carry out a scientific experiment that proves that the human organism responds to homeopathic ultra dilutions, and claim the 1 million USD challenge prize offered by JREF.

– On 2003, a team of “skeptics” was set up, to represent the JREF side in the scientific experiment that would follow. The group of skeptics and the group of homeopaths led by Prof. George Vithoulkas have been conducting preparatory work continuously since then.

– A protocol was drawn up with the title: “Do homeopathic remedies have a recognizable biological effect on the human organism?”

– The venue for the experiment was to be a Greek hospital. Eventually, after several contacts with several hospitals, the municipality hospital "ELPIS" in Athens, Greece had agreed to host the experiment. The pharmacist that would provide the homeopathic remedies for the experiment -Mr. Korres Pharmacy-, was also found and the agreement was finalized on 12.10.2005. At that time Ms. Althea Katz, representative of Mr. Alec Gindis (he was one of the representatives of Mr. Randi) visited the Greek municipality hospital in Athens and discussed all the details about the experiment exhaustively.

– In 26.10.2005, Mr. Alec Gindis informed Prof. Vithoulkas by e-mail that the finances for the experiment were not yet raised and therefore the experiment could not start in spite of the fact that everything else was ready.

– In 17.8.2006, we received a signed agreement from Mr. Randi in which he stated that he was satisfied with the suggested protocol and he waived the claim of a preliminary test.

– As we waited for the finances to be raised, in order to start with the experiment, in 2.2.2006, we were informed that Mr. Randi had a health problem. When Mr. Gindis asked him to assign a representative in order to deal with all the procedures for the starting of the experiment, Mr. Randi refused to do so. As a result of his refusal the experiment was delayed so much until a new Mayor was elected in Athens who replaced the authorities of the ELPIS hospital, something that we had anticipated and repeatedly stressed to the “sceptics” long ago. The new Mayor Dr. Kaklamanis, a conventional medical doctor was indifferent if not hostile to the project. We had repeatedly warned the “sceptics” that if the experiment did not start the latest in the beginning of 2006, the new Mayor will change the key persons in the hospital -the president of the hospital and also the chairman of the scientific committee- and the new people most probably would not respect the decision of the previous scientific committee.

At this crucial time in the beginning of 2006 that the experiment had to start, Mr. Randi declared that he was sick and that his rehabilitation was …going to last from the beginning of February till July! But this was the crucial period that the experiment should have started in order not to be affected by the new authorities of the hospital.

It is characteristic of the urgency from the exchange of e-mails and more especially the e-mail Mr. Gindis wrote to Mr. Randi: “I want to underline, though, that your participation is critical… As you can imagine, the homeopaths are very concerned about your health. In their eyes you “failed” them by getting sick right when they just about put it all together”.

In 7.4.2006 Mr. Gindis wrote to Mr. Randi in order to signal to him that the homeopathic team was ready to start: “All in all, I am impressed that he (Prof. Vithoulkas) managed to put together such a team, find a sponsoring hospital and find a way to recruit patients with advertising efforts and costs carried by the hospital and participating homeopaths”. But instead Randi suspended all activities of the experiment attributing it to his supposedly state of health!

Mr. Randi knew very well that this period was crucial for us to start the experiment and we had made this urgency explicit by sending several e-mails urging them that it was necessary to go ahead immediately. But Mr. Randi needed …six months "to recover" denying to assign a collaborator. As expected, in Autumn of 2006 a new Mayor Dr. Kaklamanis M.D. was elected in Athens.

For us, all this extended period of recovery was obviously an excuse for not starting the experiment.

After the election of the new Mayor, a new chairman for the scientific committee and a new president of the hospital were installed.

Immediately we started pressing them to respect the decision of the previous scientific committee or to decide -in a new meeting- in favour of the experiment.

The interesting thing was that on 16.5.2008, Mr. Randi -thinking most probably that we could never succeed in getting a second permission- suddenly became very gallant and wrote: “In any case, it may not be necessary for me to actually be present in person for these tests. I am prepared to assign security and protocol duties to Alec Gindis and to Mr. Gabor, so they can act in my behalf”. But in the mean time and as early as March 2008 was already putting up in his website a text claiming that the "Greek homeopaths have withdrawn from the experiment …as expected"!!

The important question is: why Mr. Randi delayed the starting of the experiment by the moment everything was in place in 2006, claiming that he…would be recovering for six months and that nobody else could replace him, while the next time, when he thought that we could never succeed in obtaining a second permission from the ELPIS hospital, he became so gallant as to assign a collaborator?!!

He was so sure that we will not succeed in getting a second permission from the hospital that in 16.5.2008 Mr. Randi sent us a… notarized statement saying:

I intend to go through with the proposed test of the claims of homeopathy, as previously discussed in exchanges between George Vithoulkas and myself. This stance has not changed, and it will not change”. !!! See his new statement later on (17.10.2008) when he knew already that we had the permission!!

In the end of July of 2008, after a lot of efforts, we obtained for a second time the permission to conduct the proposed homeopathic experiment at the ELPIS hospital.

– On 2nd and 3rd September of 2008, there was a final meeting in the International Academy of Classical homeopathy in Alonissos to discuss last details of the experiment. In the meeting were present the representative of Randi, Mr. Hrasko Gabor, Ms Althea Katz (representative of Mr. Alec Gindis), Dr. Menachem Oberbaum, principal investigator of the experiment and Prof. George Vithoulkas. They discussed for two days all the details about the experiment and the discussion was taped officially and also some of it videoed by a professional camera man from Israel.


In the document was stated that a major test of homeopathy in Greece has met the expected fate, being abandoned by the homeopathy community!!!!

This information infuriated the group of homeopaths led by Prof. George Vithoulkas and a lot of damage was caused to him as was accused for been associated with such unreliable people.

But the most outrageous event happened on 17.10.2008, when we actually received an "ultimatum" from Mr. Randi by which he was changing all the previous agreements refusing to go ahead with the experiment as planned.

Here is what he wrote:

“…Forget all previous correspondence exchanged on the subject. …What appears here is the current status. …First, we require that George Vithoulkas submit a regular, properly-filled-out application and submit it –just as we require everyone to do. After that has been received, we’ll go ahead– as with any regular applicant- with the arrangements, including the requirement for the preliminary stage”.

Here you can see his whole statement with some remarks from us in red:

To All Concerned:

The brouhaha that began as a comprehensive homeopathy test In Greece, has been consuming far too much of my time and attention, and of my colleagues, as well. Forget all previous correspondence exchanged on the subject. What appears HERE is the current status. Mr. Randi asked from us to forget all previous correspondence after we discovered the false, slanderous and deceptive posting at his website JREF with the title: “Another Withdrawal”.

We’re starting anew. Bear in mind that WE are offering the million-dollar prize, and WE will control the parameters, in line with the rules of the challenge – which are available to everyone. There will be no more exceptions, which I had – unwisely – granted to certain persons in order to be more accommodating; they have always chosen to be difficult, capricious, and arrogant as a result of this courtesy. No more.

First, we require that George Vithoulkas submit a regular, properly-filled-out application, and submit it – just as we require EVERYONE to do. After that has been received, we’ll go ahead – as with any regular applicant – with the arrangements, including the requirement for the preliminary stage. Mr. Randi changed the terms of agreement when he saw that everything was ready for starting the experiment. While his representatives were discussing with Prof. George Vithoulkas in Alonissos (September 2008), he was publicizing to his website that the Greek homeopaths had withdrawn!!! Since I’m not personally handling the challenge applications, I’m not aware of how many places George Vithoulkas has tried for a venue, but I know that his own country turned him down, as well as some others. Second, we’ll require that Mr. Vithoulkas obtain a venue and all the necessary facilities for conducting a double-blind, correct, acceptable protocol, before we will go ahead – following the receipt of the application.

Mr. Randi pretends that he ignores the fact that we had already the permission and the facilities for a second time though we had informed the “skeptics”.

The protocol used by the Royal Society/BBC tests in the UK – based on Jacques Benveniste’s design, and carefully supervised by the homeopathic community there – would be acceptable for this set of tests.

Mr. Randi wants to change even the terms of protocol that took years to be contracted!!

Don’t contact me personally on this matter. I’ll not entertain any arguments or pleas. It will be handled by Alison Smith, working with others on our staff.

Actually Mr. Randi is dismissing his previous collaborators, Mr. Alec Gindis and Mr. Hrasko Gabor!!!

These 300 words constitute my entire commentary on the matter.

James Randi.

It was clear now for a second time that when everything was in place in order to start the experiment, Mr. Randi didn’t wish to go ahead and found ridiculous excuses for withdrawing.

Consequently, as a least compensation, for the moral damage caused to Greek homeopaths and to the homeopathic community in general, we demand:

1. The apologies from Mr. Randi personally posted at his website.

2. The retraction of the text “Another Withdrawal” from all sites.

3. This document to be posted in the same place in the website of JREF where the "withdrawal statement" was posted.

4. A legal, notarized statement retracting the last statement of 17.10.2008 that has cancelled all Mr. Randi’s previous commitments.

If Mr. Randi fulfils all these conditions we will continue as planned. If these conditions are not fulfilled within a month, we will consider that Mr. Randi has withdrawn from the experiment. In any case, we will go ahead and complete the experiment without Mr. Randi, only with the help of sceptics Mr. Alec Gindis and Mr Hrasko Gabor who really care in seen this experiment finally completed.

Posted in Homoeopathy in News, Mr.Randi Exposed | 4 Comments »

55 Facts About Homeopathy

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on December 19, 2008

Presenting 55 Facts About Homeopathy
By Louise Mclean, LCCH MHMA.

In the last few years there have been many articles in the newspapers attacking
homeopathy, claiming it contains nothing more than water, ignoring all the positive
studies and saying it works through the placebo effect. Therefore I decided to
compile a list of facts to counter this criticism and present the salient points as
clearly as possible. So far I have come up with 55.


How Homeopathy Works

FACT 1: Hippocrates ‘The Father of Medicine’ of Ancient Greece said there were two
Laws of Healing: The Law of Opposites and the Law of Similars. Homeopathy treats
the patient with medicines using the Law of Similars, orthodox medicine uses the Law of
Opposites, e.g. antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, anti-convulsants, anti-hypertensives,
anti-depressants, anti-psychotics.

FACT 2: Homeopathic theories are based on fixed principles of the Laws of Nature
which do not change – unlike medical theories which are constantly changing!

FACT 3: Homeopathy is an evidence-based, empirical medicine.

FACT 4: Homeopathy is both an art and a science.

FACT 5: The Homeopathic PROVINGS of medicines are a more scientific method of
testing than the orthodox model.

FACT 6: Homeopathic medicine awakens and stimulates the body’s own curative
powers. The potentised remedy acts as a catalyst to set healing into motion.

FACT 7: Homeopathic medicines work by communicating a current/pattern/frequency of
energy via the whole human body to jump start the body’s own inherent healing

FACT 8: Homeopathy assists the body to heal itself, to overcome an illness which brings
the patient to a HIGHER level of health. Orthodox medicine suppresses the illness,
bringing the patient to a lower level of health.

FACT 9: The homeopathic practitioner endeavours to search for and treat the CAUSE of
the disease in order to heal the EFFECT.

FACT 10: Outcomes of homeopathic treatment are measured by the LONG TERM
curative effects of prescribing and complete eradication of the disease state.

FACT 11: The homeopathic practitioner treats the WHOLE PERSON, believing all
symptoms are interrelated and seeks to select a medicine which most closely covers them

FACT 12: Homeopathy works FAST in acute illnesses, slower in chronic illness.

FACT 13: Homeopathic medicine has been proven extremely effective in Epidemics
such as cholera, typhoid, diptheria, yellow fever, polio and influenza and were used
extensively in 19th century.

Homeopathic Medicines

FACT 14: Homeopathic remedies are cheap.

FACT 15. Pharmaceutical medicines are expensive.

FACT 16: Homeopathy is the 2nd most popular and widely used medicine in the world.

FACT 17: There are more than 4,000 homeopathic medicines.

FACT 18: Homeopathic medicines have no toxic side-effects.

FACT 19: Homeopathic medicines are NON-ADDICTIVE.

FACT 20: In 200 years, there has never been a single homeopathic medicine recalled,
unlike pharmaceutical medicines.

FACT 21: Every true homeopathic medicine is made using ONE SUBSTANCE –
whether plant, mineral, metal, etc. The exact substance is known, unlike most modern
drugs where we are rarely informed of the ingredients.

FACT 22: Any remedy up to a 12c or a 24x potency still contains the original molecules
of the substance and this is known as Avogadro’s number.

FACT 23: Every Patient is Unique so homeopathic medicines are individualised.

FACT 24: Homeopaths treat genetic illness, tracing its origins to 6 main genetic causes
or ‘miasms’: Tuberculosis, Syphilis, Gonorrhoea, Psora (scabies), Cancer, Leprosy.

FACT 25: High fevers will drop within minutes after taking the homeopathic medicine
Belladonna and Aconite.

FACT 26: There are thousands of homeopathic books, available at specialist outlets, not
sold in the high street.

Homeopathic Hospitals

FACT 27: There are 5 homeopathic hospitals in the UK – in London, Tunbridge Wells,
Bristol, Liverpool and Glasgow. They cost the NHS under £10 million a year compared
to the £100 billion for the total annual NHS budget for 2008!

FACT 28: At one of the earliest debates on the NHS Act of 1948 the Government
pledged that homoeopathy would continue to be available on the NHS, as long as there
were "patients wishing to receive it and doctors willing to provide it".

FACT 29: There is a campaign by certain UK Professors to oust homeopathy completely
from the NHS after they wrote on NHS headed paper to all Primary Care Trusts in 2006
telling managers not to refer patients to the homeopathic hospitals.

FACT 30: The Homeopathic Hospitals are clean, with friendly, well informed staff. The
patients are generally pleased with their treatment unlike many orthodox National Health
Service hospitals.

FACT 31: The chances of contracting MRSA or C. Difficile at a Homeopathic Hospital
are extremely rare.

FACT 32: Unlike orthodox medicine, where the side-effects of pharmaceutical
medicines bill for negligence claims can run into millions, one UK leading insurance
company reported only ‘a couple’ of claims against homeopaths in a ten year period!
Hence insurance cover for homeopathy is cheap reflecting low risk.
Orthodox Medicine Opposing Homeopathy

FACT 33: In the United States in the early 1900s there were 22 homeopathic medical
schools and over 100 homeopathic hospitals, 60 orphanages and old people’s homes and
1,000+ homeopathic pharmacies.

FACT 34: Members of the American Medical Association had great animosity towards
homeopathy after its formation in 1847 and it was decided to purge all local medical
societies of physicians who were homeopaths.

FACT 35: Big Pharma does not want the Public to find out how well homeopathy works!
Scientific Studies

FACT 36: In 2005 World Health Organisation brought out a draft report which showed
homeopathy was beneficial causing Big Pharma to panic and the Lancet to bring out an
editorial entitled ‘The End of Homeopathy’.

FACT 37: In 2005 the Lancet tried to destroy homeopathy but were only looking at 8
inconclusive trials out of 110 of which 102 were positive. This was a fraudulent analysis.
"The meta-analysis at the centre of the controversy is based on 110 placebo-controlled clinical trials of homeopathy and 110 clinical
trials of allopathy (conventional medicine), which are said to be matched. These were reduced to 21 trials of homeopathy and 9 of
conventional medicine of ‘higher quality’ and further reduced to 8 and 6 trials, respectively, which were ‘larger, higher quality’. The
final analysis which concluded that ‘the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects’ was based on just the eight ‘larger, higher
quality’ clinical trials of homeopathy. The Lancet’s press release did not mention this, instead giving the impression that the
conclusions were based on all 110 trials."

FACT 38: There have been many clinical trials that prove homeopathy works. In the
past 24 years there have been more than 180 controlled, and 118 randomized, trials into
homeopathy, which were analysed by four separate meta-analyses. In each case, the
researchers concluded that the benefits of homeopathy went far beyond that which could
be explained purely by the placebo effect.

FACT 39: The Bristol Homeopathic Hospital carried out a study published in November
2005 of 6500 patients receiving homeopathic treatment. There was an overall
improvement in health of 70% of them.

FACT 40: Homeopathy can never be properly tested through double blind randomised
trials because each prescription is individualised as every patient is unique. Therefore 10
people with arthritis, for example, may all need a different homeopathic medicine.

FACT 41: Homeopathic medicines are not tested on animals.

FACT 42: Homeopathic medicines work even better on animals and babies than on
adults, proving this cannot be placebo effect.

FACT 43: Homeopathy is safe for women to take while pregnant and safe for old people.

FACT 44: Scientists agree that if and when homeopathy is accepted by the scientific
community it will turn established science on its head.

Homeopathic Practitioners

FACT 45: Homeopathic Practitioners train for 4 years in Anatomy and Physiology, as
well as Pathology and Disease, Materia Medica, Homeopathic Philosophy and study of
the Homeopathic Repertory.

FACT 46: Most homeopaths treat patients who have been referred to them by
word of mouth. Most patients seek out homeopathy because conventional treatment has
not benefitted them or because it poses too great a risk of side-effects.

FACT 47: The homeopathic community has thousands, even millions, of
written case notes that demonstrate the positive benefits of their treatment. Some
homeopaths have video proof of their patients before and after treatment.

FACT 48: Homeopaths charge patients an average of £50 an hour. Specialist
Doctors can charge up to £200 or more.

Popularity of Homeopathy

FACT 49: The popularity of homeopathy has grown in the past 30 years, its revival
entirely through word of mouth and estimated to be growing at more than 20% a year the
world over!

FACT 50: Hundreds of famous people throughout the past 200 years have enjoyed the
benefits of homeopathic medicine.

FACT 51: The aristocratic patronage of homeopathy in the UK extended well into the
1940s and beyond can be easily demonstrated. In the Homeopathic Medical Directories
there are lists of patrons of the dispensaries and hospitals. They read like an extract from
Burke’s or Debrett’s.

FACT 52: The Royal Families of Europe use homeopathic medicine and Queen
Elizabeth II of England never travels anywhere without her homeopathic vials of

FACT 53: Homeopathy is practised nowadays in countries all over the world. In
India there are 100 homeopathic medical schools and around 250,000 homeopathic

FACT 54: In a recent Global TGI survey where people were asked whether they trust
homeopathy the following percentages of people living in urban areas said YES: 62% in
India, 58% Brazil, 53% Saudi Arabia, Chile 49%, United Arab Emirates 49%, France
40%, South Africa 35%, Russia 28%, Germany 27%, Argentina 25%, Hungary 25%,
USA 18%, UK 15%.

FACT 55: The media as a whole has been unwilling to air a defence of the efficacy of
homeopathy and the validity of this 250 year old profession.

Copyright Louise Mclean © 2008

Posted in 55 Facts About Homeopathy, Homoeopathy in News, Truth about homoeopathy... | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

New Evidence for Homeopathy

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on November 4, 2008

Two new studies conclude that a review which claimed that homeopathy is just a placebo, published in The Lancet, was seriously flawed. George Lewith, Professor of Health Research at Southampton University comments: ‘The review gave no indication of which trials were analysed nor of the various vital assumptions made about the data. This is not usual scientific practice. If we presume that homeopathy works for some conditions but not others, or change the definition of a ‘larger trial’, the conclusions change. This indicates a fundamental weakness in the conclusions: they are NOT reliable.’

The background to the ongoing debate is as follows:

In August 2005, The Lancet published an editorial entitled ‘The End of Homeopathy’, prompted by a review comparing clinical trials of homeopathy with trials of conventional medicine. The claim that homeopathic medicines are just placebo was based on 6 clinical trials of conventional medicine and 8 studies of homeopathy but did not reveal the identity of these trials. The review was criticised for its opacity as it gave no indication of which trials were analysed and the various assumptions made about the data.

Sufficient detail to enable a reconstruction was eventually published and two recently published scientific papers based on such a reconstruction challenge the Lancet review, showing that:

  • Analysis of all high quality trials of homeopathy yields a positive conclusion.
  • The 8 larger higher quality trials of homeopathy were all for different conditions; if homeopathy works for some of these but not others the result changes, implying that it is not placebo.
  • The comparison with conventional medicine was meaningless.
  • Doubts remain about the opaque, unpublished criteria used in the review, including the definition of ‘higher quality’.

The Lancet review, led by Prof Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne, started with 110 matched clinical trials of homeopathy and conventional medicine, reduced these to ‘higher quality trials’ and then to 8 and 6 respectively ‘larger higher quality trials’. Based on these 14 studies the review concluded that there is ‘weak evidence for a specific effect of homoeopathic remedies, but strong evidence for specific effects of conventional interventions’.

There are a limited number of homeopathic studies so it is quite possible to interpret these data selectively and unfavourably, which is what appears to have been done in the Lancet paper. If we assume that homeopathy does not work for just one condition (Arnica for post-exercise muscle stiffness), or alter the definition of ‘larger trial’, the results are positive. The comparison with conventional medicine was meaningless: the original 110 trials were matched, but matching was lost after they were reduced to 8 and 6. But the quality of homeopathic trials was better than conventional trials.

This reconstruction casts serious doubts on the review, showing that it was based on a series of hidden judgments unfavourable to homeopathy. An open assessment of the current evidence suggests that homeopathy is probably effective for a number of conditions including allergies, upper respiratory tract infections and ‘flu, but more research is desperately needed.

Prof Egger has declined to comment on these findings.

Published: Monday, November 3, 2008 – 17:22 in Health & Medicine

Posted in Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News | Tagged: , | 2 Comments »

Can Water Remember

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on September 20, 2008

Source :




The much-anticipated documentary Water – The Great Mystery, from the creators of What the Bleep Do We Know?, has just been released in South Africa.

The blockbuster made waves in the UK and US earlier this year, and is centred on the theme of so-called “water memory” – a controversial theory which proposes that water responds to our thoughts and, through this mechanism, has a profound effect on our health.

The launch coincided with the South African tour of Japanese researcher Dr Masaru Emoto, author of the New York Times best-seller Hidden Messages of Water, who believes water is deeply connected to our individual and collective consciousness.

Do we really know all there is to know about water? Are these theories as far-fetched as they seem to be? Take a look at some of the theories proposed in the documentary – then you decide:

Water – The Great Mystery
Scientists worldwide agree: water is unique and without it life on Earth simply wouldn’t be possible.

H2O is a particularly interesting molecule in the sense that it makes up the only substance on the planet that can exist in three states – solid, liquid and gas. Water has the highest surface tension of all liquids, it’s the most powerful solvent on Earth and has the remarkable ability to rise up through the trunks of massive trees, defying gravity and immense atmospheric pressure in the process.

This much is made clear in the introduction of Water – The Great Mystery.

The documentary features several scientists from around the world who’ve researched water. The impressive list includes, among others, Prof Kurt Wüthrich, Swiss chemist and Nobel Chemistry laureate, Prof Rustum Roy from the State University of Pennsylvania and member of the International Academy of Science, Prof Vladimir Voeikov, a biologist from the Moscow State University, Prof Konstantin Korotkov, a physicist of St. Petersburg State Technical University in Russia, and Dr Emoto, who is also President Emeritus of the International Water for Life Foundation.

Interesting theories are proposed:

1. It’s noted that water receives and makes an “imprint” of any outside influence, “remembering” everything that occurs in the space that surrounds it. Research seems to indicate that any substance coming into contact with water leaves a trace behind (incidentally, this theory is also central to homeopathy).

2. It’s further noted that, as water records information, it acquires new properties, yet its chemical composition remains unchanged. It seems that the structure of water – i.e. how its molecules are organised into clusters – is key to the remarkable properties that are proposed. It’s hypothesised that the clusters work as “memory cells”, in which water records the history of its relationship with the world.

3. Its proposed that, while water remains water, its structure reacts to “irritation”. It’s noted that “modern instruments have made it possible to record that within each of water’s memory cells, there are 440 000 information panels, each of which is responsible for its own type of interaction with the environment.”

4. Brief mention is made of the difference between free-flowing water in nature and the water that’s distributed to our homes through intricate water-supply systems – i.e. the water we most often come into contact with. It’s suggested that our tap water is basically “dead” in structural terms: when crystals are formed from this water, there’s no beauty or symmetry. Austrian researcher Allois Gruber suggests that this water “sucks energy out of people, plants and animals”.

5. Scientists quoted in the movie claim that water responds to our thoughts. As our bodies are mostly made up of water, it’s said that if the water in our cells can become peaceful, so can we.

6. Mention is made of experiments on the effect that diverse factors, such as magnetic and electrical fields, various objects and human emotions, have on samples of water. According to Prof Konstantin Korotkov, there seems to be evidence that positive and negative human emotions have the strongest influence. When study participants were asked to project emotions onto flasks with water, negative emotions (e.g. fear, aggression and hatred) reduced the energy of the sample water, whereas positive emotions (e.g. love, tenderness and concern) increased the water’s energy levels.

7. This theory is expanded with reference to experiments conducted by Dr Emoto. His research seems to show that water reacts positively to words such as “love” and “gratitude” by forming beautiful crystals when frozen in a cryogenic chamber. The opposite seems to be true for a phrase such as “You disgust me”. Water also seems to react to prayer and music.

What’s your opinion?
We’re amazed. If some of these theories are even just partly true, it certainly turns our understanding of the physics of water on its head.

But although the theories are laid forward by some heavyweight scientists, there are many other experts around the world who are extremely sceptical about the concept of water memory, branding it as “pseudoscience”.

For example, research done years ago by French scientist Jacques Benveniste has been widely discredited. The researcher made headlines when his work on water memory was published in the reputable journal Nature in 1988. His research seemed to show that water that had been in contact with an allergenic substance retained a memory of this substance even after it was diluted several times (so much so that nothing but pure water was left).

However, efforts to replicate his work proved futile and investigators found that the results obtained from Benveniste’s laboratory were unreliable. John Maddox, editor of Nature, conducted the investigation himself and, according to the BBC, later stated that Benveniste’s assistants were being subconsciously selective in the way they interpreted the data.

Regarding more recent work, only one article on Dr Emoto’s controversial theory that human emotion has an effect on the structure of water has appeared in a peer-reviewed journal. This is an indication that Dr Emoto’s theories at least (on which a large part of the documentary is built) can’t be accepted as truth at this stage. More research simply has to be done. Dr Emoto has also been criticised for the fact that he too seems to be doing selective sampling.

It’s furthermore worth noting that many opportunists have jumped on the bandwagon, and have started marketing products made from “structured” or “clustered” water as a cure for a range of ills and an antidote to ageing. To our knowledge, however, no substantial research has been done on the efficacy of these products, which means that they could very well be a waste of money.

Health24 will be following the controversy and will, in time, also conduct interviews with some of the other experts quoted in the Water documentary. In the meantime, we’d like to hear from you: post your comments below and let us know what you think!

– (Carine van Rooyen, Health24, September 2008)

Posted in Homoeopathy, Homoeopathy & Science, Homoeopathy in News, Water Memory | Tagged: , , | 3 Comments »

Interview with DANA ULLMAN, M.P.H. by Louise Mclean, Editor, Zeus Information Service

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on August 15, 2008

INTERVIEW with DANA ULLMAN, M.P.H. ,Author of The Homeopathic Revolution:

Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy.

Dana Ullman has written numerous articles for magazines, academic journals, authored many books, organized conferences for homeopaths (for 20 years he organized the annual conference for the National Center for Homeopathy in the US) and is often quoted in various media and internet sites.

His main website is:

14th August 2008.

By Louise Mclean,

Editor, Zeus Information Service


Early on Sunday morning, 3rd August, I rushed out to Heathrow Airport to meet Dana, who was flying home to San Francisco after his summer holiday in Italy. Despite a little mix up, we nonetheless found each other and managed to fit in a breakfast interview. Dana was full of energy and enthusiasm and here is what he had to say on a multitude of topics concerning homeopathy.

LOUISE: How long did it take you to research your book, The Homeopathic Revolution?!

DANA: I’m laughing because it is something that I have been working on for several decades! In fact I have always collected what I consider fascinating facts and figures about homeopathy. So I have collected the historical and present day information in various files about famous people. Good writing is weaving together bodies of information but the actual writing of the book went relatively fast, over a year’s period of time. I also admit to experiencing a fair amount of magic on a regular basis. What I mean is that whenever I would start working on a chapter on politicians or peacemakers, corporate leaders or philanthropists, I would actively seek, read books, go online and then all of a sudden someone would email me some vital information which would just happen to be about the chapter that I was working on!

Amazing synchronicity!

Yes, even beyond synchronicity. I am just always amazed at the regular experiences of ‘coincidence’. It is remarkable and it also let me know I was on the right track. The 16th century French essayist, Michel de Montaigne, once wrote: “No wind blows on a ship without a port of destination.” When we are doing good work, the Universe ultimately supports it. A wind seems to come to help one’s journey. That’s not to say there aren’t obstacles. To me part of the hero’s journey is accepting the obstacles and not being put off by them but seeing them as steps on the way and then all of a sudden some gift would be given to me of yet more evidence that I should consider.

The idea for the book came shortly after Coretta Scott King (Martin Luther King’s wife) passed away and the media in America highlighted the fact that she died in an alternative medicine hospital in Mexico where she was seeking out homeopathic treatment. As soon as I read that, I literally threw down the gauntlet and said to myself, ‘That does it! Here’s yet another person people know and respect who sought out and/or appreciated homeopathy.’ Maybe it was too late in her life but at least she sought it out. And I said I am going to connect the dots of all the most famous people who had some kind of treatment or experience of homeopathy.

At first I wasn’t certain that I was going to have enough information for a book. Well the book ended up being almost 400 pages! I had more than enough information. It is like the work that Sue Young is doing on a regular basis which I appreciate greatly. She has been running with a lot of this historical information and the internet certainly makes our lives a lot easier in terms of finding it.

I never expected to find stories of 7 different Popes, let alone 11 American Presidents and so many other Heads of State. I never expected to find so many literary greats and so many cultural heroes, names we all know and respect.

I will tell you a personal story about my father who was a paediatrician and an allergist. When I got into homeopathy he was sceptical because he didn’t know what it was. In the 1980s I mentioned to him that Yehudi Menhuin was the President of one of the top homeopathy organisations in the UK. My father had once had the opportunity to become a professional violinist and he had always had the highest regard for Yehudi Menhuin because he was not only a great musician but also a wonderful philanthropist and so he was very moved to hear that this man was an advocate of homeopathy.

Sometimes a person needs convincing about homeopathy by research, others need a personal experience and other times people need to know that someone they have heard of and admire uses it. I simply try and tell people whatever they need to know to convince them that they should investigate it or try it.

I have written a lot about research in homeopathy and I’ve written a lot about how people can use the medicines at home to treat themselves and their families.  The third strategy is to simply show that so many of the most successful, most respected and even most famous people in the last 200 years have been advocates. This is all part of a body of evidence that will encourage people who may not be familiar with homeopathy to consider becoming familiar with it.

And so have you found a lot of outlets for the book or is it mainly on your website and on the internet?

I have to admit that it is challenging getting the word out. There is a lot of noise we all experience from the news, various medias and the internet. So although the book has gone into its second printing, I expected it to be into its eight printing or tenth printing by now. I expected this book to really hit a nerve in a profound way and even possibly be on a best sellers list. So it has not reached my personal expectations. It’s a very popular book but I expected it to be more of a breakthrough book.

Are you able to get it into bookshops?

One never knows where a book is. You see it on Amazon, you see it on various sources, I don’t know where it is in the world.

I feel there is a kind of media censorship with homeopathy.

Sadly the world doesn’t know much about homeopathy, so I have some sensitivity to bookshop stores that may not want to sell the homeopathy books because they don’t sell that well. The difference with The Homeopathic Revolution is that whether one is interested in homeopathy or not, we all have an interest in knowing what successful people do to help them become successful. How they become healthy is an integral part of someone’s creativity and/or success so I thought this book would touch a nerve in people. It has begun to but of course we have a long way to go.

I think that homeopathy has just started to have a revival in America since the days when the AMA contributed to making it almost die out. I am very pleased to see that homeopathy is taking off there at the moment. Mike Adams who runs and Dr. Joseph Mercola have both recently been putting out articles on homeopathy which they didn’t do in the past and they have huge email lists reaching millions. It’s great because we’ve got to get it promoted which you and I are both in to. Get the word out: ‘It works, it works, it works!’

But what we are worried about at the moment over here, is that via EU regulation, they might say only people who have state registered qualifications will be allowed to practise. That will mean the qualifications gained at our private colleges may not be recognised. But EU regulation can only be imposed when all 27 member countries have ratified it which has not happened yet.

I think one of the reasons why the attacks are getting stronger is also because the professional homeopaths are stronger here in Europe. So they are going after them here.

Homeopathy is still quite small in the US. I think what is happening in England is interesting in terms of all the attacks. I think the attacks are taking place because of homeopathy’s integration within the mainstream, that it is being taught in various Universities and the medicines are being sold in Boots and various mainstream pharmacies. So that is threatening. To be candid, I look forward to the time when homeopathy is attacked in America because that will mean that homeopathy is achieving some degree of integration that is threatening.

It’s almost like there’s no such thing as bad news. If it’s attacked in the newspapers, then people will ask ‘what’s this?’ and want to know about it. Before that, they may never have heard of it.

I don’t want to say the attacks homeopathy is experiencing is good news and I don’t think any bad news is good news. I am just saying it is a symptom of a disease and it’s a symptom of homeopathy’s successes that it is being attacked and that it’s worthy of attack.

What they do is first they completely ignore you. For years there was nothing in the media at all about homeopathy in the UK, nothing. They kept it out. Homeopathy has become so popular and they don’t know what to do, so then they have to attack it.

The media is funny because they will cover you to bring you up and they’ll cover you to bring you down – this sells in newspapers, magazines and TV.

Are there any restriction for homeopathic practitioners in America – I suppose it depends upon the state you live in?

Every state has its own laws. California and Minnesota are the freer states. Most other states are not enforcing restrictions because the medical board are investigating doctors doing dangerous medical practices, which is a higher risk problem than a natural healer. I do predict there will be some district attorneys who might go after homeopaths if they think that they are dangerous, charging a lot of money, making exaggerated claims or if someone complains. I also predict that some of the spooks, as you call them, will create these bogus complaints just to get more investigations going.

They do that and make a big thing in the newspapers, holding one practitioner up as an example, in order to send a clear message to the rest of us. Fortunately there are few legal cases against natural practitioners.

I read that great book by Martin Walker, Dirty Medicine I love him. When his book came out I bought 100 copies from him and I sold some and I gave a bunch away. He is one of these people who has a backbone and he really showed how the quackbusters are so much more livid in England compared to anywhere else. These guys are just crazed, they are so certain of their limited point of view. They diminish anything. You are damned if you do and damned if you don’t. You point to research and they want more. I’m all for more but you just have to acknowledge what’s there. When you look at the body of evidence – all the basic science, all the empirical work, all the historical work. I think one has to be very sceptical to believe it is all psychic abilities and placebo response. When these spooks say homeopathy is for the birds, I agree with them it is for the birds and every other living creature on the planet!

Ultimately in the 21st century, I strongly believe that homeopathy represents the very modern if not futuristic medical paradigm because to me it is a form of nano-pharmacology. I like that word because nano is the only word in our language which means both very very small AND very powerful. I encourage my colleagues to use it too and use the word nanodoses. Part of its definition means one billionth but its real origins comes from the word which simply means very small and so I don’t think of it as simply a billionth. It is very small and very powerful.

If you think of what an ideal drug should do, to me an ideal drug should be something that augments immuno-competence and that’s what homeopathy does. I don’t mean simply strengthen the immune system because the immune system doesn’t always need strengthening. Sometimes it’s too hyperactive and that is what auto-immune disease is all about. In other words homeopathic medicines can and will augment immune response when necessary and they will tonify it when it’s overactive … and that’s what we are seeing again and again in the clinical practice of homeopathy.

Balances out the system.

In fact there is a new study that is coming out shortly which is a re-analysis of the 2005 Lancet review of Shang. The researchers got it accepted in a major international journal of research. What they have finally done is what Shang didn’t do. He didn’t review ALL of the high calibre research but only a small part of it. He ignored comprehensive analysis entirely. I think he knew exactly what it was but he didn’t want to report on it, as it was too positive. Instead he only reported on trials with very large numbers of subjects because when you do that, most of those studies use one remedy for everybody without any degree of individuality.

We individualise.

We do individualise but sometimes the single remedy or the formulas will work for a broad number of people.

Like Mixed Pollen for hayfever.

That’s right or Oscillococcinum. But for some reason they did not include any of David Reilly’s research.

I don’t know why they ignored it.

It was too positive.

In fact they had a remark in the Shang article published in the Lancet, where they specifically made reference to trials on respiratory ailments and that the results were robust, but they said they couldn’t trust them because there were only 8 studies. But then again they based their entire analysis on 8 homeopathic studies and 6 conventional ones. So they can’t have it both ways and this new journal article in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology which is ranked as one of the top international journals of reviews of research, has accepted the new studies.

I also want to let you know there have been a number of new plant studies that some Swiss and Italian researchers have conducted, showing powerful effects of homeopathic doses on plants.

I don’t think that’s the Placebo Effect!!  So did you meet the researchers when you were on holiday in Italy?

No, I met them two years ago in London at the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital conference. Stephan Baumgartner is a leader in the group.

Very interesting.

There was a group of mostly physicians and scientists who I also met in London 2 years ago at the same conference. They came with a large contingent of researchers.  If you have read the journal Homeopathy of the UK Faculty of Homeopathy, it is the best academic journal with the best information on research.

I heard that Professor Edzard Ernst is on the Editorial board of Homeopathy.

Yes, he is on their editorial board but I don’t mind having dialogue with our critics.

He used homeopathy and he thought it was great and now he is saying the opposite.

It is a tad ironic that one of his own studies in 1990 tested a homeopathic formula in the treatment of people with varicose veins, and it showed positive results!

This thing about plants is interesting as a homeopathic practitioner in the US, Phyllis Geordic, was also telling me about this and how they use it in their garden and how their plants grow so much better.

There is a book that has come out called Homeopathy for Farming and Gardening and I want more people to investigate and read it and expand upon it further to see what works and what doesn’t. I believe that homeopathy really is going to be one of the important technologies for the future, not just for medicine but for planetary health, plant health, for ecological disasters even. I wonder what we can do there?

It’s amazing and once we start proving how it works in the garden, they really do have to shut up about the placebo effect!

One of my other bodies of information that I am very proud of, which alot of people are not familiar with, is the ebook I wrote called Homeopathic Family Medicine.

This is the most up to date and comprehensive body of information on clinical research verifying the efficacy of homeopathy and it is an ebook because I update it every 3 or 4 months. I have several hundred clinical trials that are referenced. Each of them is referenced according to the disease for which they are known to treat. As an ebook, it is organised according to a disease, so you can read about what research has been done to treat people with asthma or allergies or arthritis or ADD or whatever. There is over a 100 ailments provided in this ebook.  There isn’t research on every one of them but it is amazing how many for which there is research. It is usually double blind, placebo controlled trials, though sometimes there are other types of studies that are done that have been published in peer reviewed journals which are worthy of reference.

Because a number of people really do need convincing through seeing the research, I am always shocked about how few homeopaths know anything about our scientific evidence. It is not that homeopaths need this information for their own convincing, they don’t. Even the patient in front of them doesn’t need it but the patient’s spouse does, the patient’s neighbours do, the patient’s in-laws do. We are all surrounded by certain people who are sceptical for whom it is good to have this information.

I have been disappointed many times at the ignorance of homeopaths about our body of scientific evidence. It’s almost as though most homeopaths don’t give a damn about what evidence there is or isn’t. Some homeopaths even say that research is impossible with homeopathy because the medicines have to be individualised. They don’t understand that you can do research that allows for individual treatment. It’s tricky to do that but it’s all doable and more important, it has been done. There have been studies of some of the single remedies and some of the formula products which have shown beneficial results. Not all research is positive and you can do a trial in a tricky way so it fails and there have been plenty of those studies done but still the bulk of research on homeopathy has had positive results.

And even when you put all that evidence to the Quackbusters on these websites and blogs, they still ignore it, don’t they?

Yes, absolutely (laughs). I have in front of me a very powerful statement by one of the world’s leading skeptics of not just homeopathy but of other alternative stuff. It’s a man named Martin Gardner and it comes from a magazine called The Skeptical Enquirer – one of those magazines full of articles published by skeptics. They have a special article about Sir Arthur C. Clark, the science fiction writer who wrote the book which became the movie ‘2001 A Space Odyssey’. Martin Gardner quotes Clark and I love this quote: ‘A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.’ I fully agree.

Ultimately many of our skeptics insist that homeopathy is magic or that it is completely placebo but guess what, you can’t do what we do in homeopathy through placebo. Besides all the body of scientific evidence, when one does even a cursory review of homeopathy’s history, you cannot explain so many of the successes that we’ve experienced – in treating infectious diseases, epidemics, treating people with very serious chronic illness and life-saving conditions that would normally kill people and having such good results with homeopathy.

Absolutely and when you see a child’s high fever go down within minutes or a haemorrhage stop practically instantly after the right remedy, you have to see it to believe it. In acutes, that’s when you really see the magic happen. Do you have a busy practice?

No, I don’t. I don’t see patients. I spend all my time writing about homeopathy, teaching homeopathy, publishing books.  You may or may not know it, my company Homeopathic Educational Services has co-published about 35 different books with a Berkeley company called North Atlantic Books. I usually bring the books to them and we co-publish them together. North Atlantic and my company have published some of the best modern homeopathic books, ranging from a couple of books by Whitmont, Bailey’s Homeopathic Psychology, Paul Herscu’s The Homeopathic Treatment of Children, Hamilton’s Homeopathic Medicines for Cats and Dogs, Peter Chappell’s Emotional Healing with Homeopathy . These are an integral part of the modern body of information and if you notice, all these books are extremely reasonably priced. So I have always been committed to making information available at as reasonable a price as possible. To me that is part of my own personal ethic.

In a way you’re more into promoting homeopathy, which is really good, because that’s what we need to do.

I myself took it seriously and at the same time found the means of providing information about it. I think there’s a tendency among homeopaths to talk to themselves and to talk to the already converted and just expect people to come to them when they’re ready. I think sometimes you need to rattle the bushes and wake people up who may not initially have a prediliction towards homeopathy – to at least have them consider it.

I also found in writing the book The Homeopathic Revolution that not only were there 7 different Popes that used or advocated for it but I found a whole host of other clergy and spiritual leaders ranging from leading Muslim clerics and Rabbis to Eastern gurus and so my hope is that homeopathy becomes one of the means for common ground that can be used to realise that we are all in this together. Even if we have different beliefs, we can have some agreed upon understandings about health and healing which we can share with each other and benefit from each other and heal each other.

Yes, unite the religions a bit.

Boy, do we need that one!

Is there anything else that you would like to say?

I hope that homeopaths will consider the importance of supporting homeopathic companies first. If a homeopathic company has a product, buy it from them. Support our own organisations. Support our own companies before rushing off to Amazon and some of the other discount websites. I have also read that some people use machines to make homeopathic medicines as a way of not having to buy them from the pharmacies.

Radionics machines.

I really hope that people realise how damaging that can be to our industry and I do believe that it is important that we support our industry in order to achieve the success that we’re due.

Keep it alive. I agree.

I do devote a lot of my time and effort in getting the word out for homeopathy.  However, due to all of my volunteer efforts, I need support from fellow advocates for homeopathy.  I need people to consider donating money to these active media efforts.  If, by chance, someone could come forward with some significant financial support, I would hire a professional PR person with whom I could create an active media response team that would make homeopathy a "household word." 
If your life (or someone close to you) has benefitted greatly from homeopathy, I sincerely hope that you reach out to me and/or to other individuals or organizations who are really making a difference.  It is amazing how a reasonable little amount of money can create a significant effect.  I hope that someone out there reaches out to help me put homeopathy on the map.

Copyright Louise Mclean 2008

Author’s Note: Interviews are conducted to present the opinions and ideas of people who are doing important work to further the cause of Homeopathy.  The views expressed may not always necessarily reflect those of the Author.

Zeus Information Service
Alternative Views on Health

Posted in Homoeopathy in News | Tagged: , | 2 Comments »

Top 50 Homoeopathic Blogs

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on July 22, 2008

Top 50 Homeopathy Blogs

Click here

July 22nd, 2008

By Laura Milligan

Homeopathy, a controversial form of holistic healing that uses very diluted forms of natural elements to cure ailments and diseases, is catching on in the alternative medicine world and through online health blogs. The following list of homeopathy blogs explain the processes and remedies associated with homeopathy, share news and research study findings that affect homeopathic treatments, and give information on holistic healing in general.

Explaining and Discovering Homeopathy

Get an overview of homeopathic practices, treatments, education and philosophies by reading these blogs.

  1. Homeopathy4Health: Myths about homeopathy are debunked on this website
  2. Goodscience Weblog: This blog goes into detail about how science and homeopathy are interrelated in an effort to prove the effectiveness of homeopathy treatments.
  3. Sue Young Homeopathy: This London writer and homeopath explains homeopathy by relating it to the works and philosophies of different writers, scientists, physicians and scholars.
  4. Interhomeopathy: This international blog and journal has been fostering discussion and sharing remedies for almost two years.
  5. Homeopathy – A New Approach: Posts feature online seminars, an encyclopedia for homeopathic terms, health studies and more.
  6. Recent posts on this blog include “Classical Homeopathy versus Modern Homeopathy” and the two-part series “Homeopathy:Proven Medicine or a Placebo,” which discusses one of the criticisms of homeopathy.
  7. Glenn Ellis’ Homeopathic Health Blog: Glenn Ellis’ blog appears on the RealHeatlh The Black Wellness Magazine website. Here, he talks about effective remedies and general homeopathic philosophies.
  8. Jo Rodes Homeopathy: Jo Rhodes is a scientist “dedicated to all things homeopathic.” Read his blog to find out how health insurance companies view homeopathic treatments, homeopathy around the world and more.
  9. Homeopathy: Read the guide to homeopathy and then browse posts that discuss homeopathic healing, social and scientific acceptance of homeopathy, and more.

Homeopathy News

Catch up on news, scientific studies and trends in homeopathy here.

  1. Laughing My Socks Off: Here, you can read about science and health news, especially stories and studies related to homeopathy.
  2. PhoenixHomeopathy Blog: This blog’s mission is to inspire and help “you transform your health.” Posts discuss homeopathy in popular culture and various homeopathy treatments.
  3. Minimum Homeopathy Blog: Get reviews of homeopathy books and CDs on this blog, as well as analysis of homeopathy and health news.
  4. This “complete homeopathy portal” features a seminar on homeopathy, photo gallery, research studies, book reviews and a lot more.
  5. Holistic Health Living Blog: Get holistic health news, read articles about holistic living and view photos of massage and exercise routines that can help your mental and physical body heal.
  6. Homeopathy News: Get “tips for a healthy life” from this blog, which also covers news and updates in the homeopathy sector.
  7. DocRoberts Holistic Health Blog: News stories and holistic health tips are archived in the following categories on this site: men’s health, diabetes, cancer, low back pain, headache, neck pain, and others.
  8. Vibrant Glow: Be sure to check out this stylish news blog that also provides “tips for holistic health and radiant beauty.”
  9. Natural Health News: This blogger shuns the effectiveness of traditional, scientific medicines and is an advocate for natural healing.
  10. Natural Health and Organic Living Blog: The posts on this site analyze health studies and organic living news to share information about natural health and remedies.
  11. Up Date News on Homeopathic and Alternative Medicines: This blog shares all of the news coming out of the homeopathic medical and educational worlds, including international conferences.

Remedies and Treatments

For lists of remedies, treatments, and information about natural elements that help the healing process, click through this list of blogs.

  1. Freetochoosehealth’s Weblog: This blog gives particular attention to homeopathy as a non-addictive way to treat diseases and ailments. Recent posts include “Sensible Homeopathy’ and “Homeopathy Defined — Protect Your Right to Health Freedom.”
  2. Homeopathy Heals You Blog: This blog is all about “the homeopathic healing journey” and has information about vaccines, what to expect when you first try homeopathy, and various treatments.
  3. RemedyReality’s Weblog: Find practitioners and discover how homeopathic treatments work by reading this blog.
  4. 4minnie’s Weblog: 4minnie’s post about “safe and effective healthcare with homeopathy” explains how this healing process works.
  5. Homeopathic Elements Weblog: This blogger goes over each scientific element and how it is used in the homeopathic healing processes.
  6. Homeopathy for Women Blog: Learn about the homeopathic lifestyle and different cures on this women’s website.
  7. homeopathy: Find out which elements and remedies work at different times of the year and for different ailments.
  8. Modern Homeopathic Blog: This website discusses treatments and remedies used with a topical Ibuprofen cream and provides information on various homeopathic processes.
  9. Kitchen Table Healing: Sue Geller is a certified classical homeopath and blogs about scientific studies, her own journey with homeopathy, and natural healing ingredients and elements.
  10. Herbal Household Remedies: Get recipes, learn how to grow your own herbs, and look up ingredients on this natural healing blog.

Homeopathy and Alternative Medicine

Turn to these blogs to learn how homeopathy and alternative medicine can offer natural, gentle cures.

  1. Vital Patterns: A software developer and professional homeopath writes this blog to discuss science vs. scientism, and alternative medicine and homeopathy.
  2. Dr. Joe’s Natural Medicine: Dr. Joe gives special consideration to homeopathy in his natural medicine blog.
  3. The C.A.M. Report: Read about complementary and alternative medicine treatments and news on this site, which gives “fair, balanced, and to-the-point” analysis.
  4. Natural Health Remedies: From diet recommendations to finding natural sources of healing vitamins and minerals, this natural living blog incorporates many of the same philosophies as homeopathy.
  5. Natural Health: This blog is all about natural health, alternative medicine and homeopathic treatments. Look up natural vitamins and minerals and browse categories like holistic health, homeopathic remedies, and natural health news.
  6. Homeopathic 365: Get information on homeopathic remedies and treatment, news, and more on this site.
  7. Alternative Medicine Zone: This blog “covers a wide variety of issues related to alternative medicine” and strives to debunk common myths about CAM.
  8. Your Alternative Health Medicine Blog: Learn about different types of alt medicine here, including natural treatments for acne and internal cleansers.
  9. Alternative Medicine Blog: From chronic fatigue to vitamin C, this blog focuses on natural remedies and alternative medical treatments to boost your energy and cure your ailments.
  10. The Natural Cures Blog: Just like homeopathy, this natural cures blog believes that traditional medicines and vaccines can be more harmful than helpful to your body.

Homeopathy Philosophy

Read about holistic healing, natural medicines and other homeopathic principles when you check out these blogs.

  1. Aspiration of the Soul: This blogger considers how poetry, science, nature and homeopathy unlock “the hidden secrets of the universe.”
  2. Natural Holistic Health Blog: Get reviews of health foods, natural health remedies and more on this site that shares many viewpoints with homeopaths.
  3. Primal Mommies: This blog and network encourages natural child rearing, including avoiding vaccines and natural medical treatments.
  4. Natural Health From Answers for Your Health: Browse posts like “Marketing the Miracle Cure” and “Healing Herbs” to learn more about natural health news and remedies.
  5. Live Life…Organics and Your Health: While not all homeopaths follow an organic lifestyle, the philosophy of pure, natural living is similar.
  6. Jentle Earth Healing: Homeopathy is all about gentle healing, and this blog features natural health news and information.
  7. Revitalize Your Health: Continue learning about natural supplements that are good for your health and natural healing processes here.

Blogs from the Experts

Find advice and information from experts in the field of homeopathy in these informative blogs.

  1. Healing from the Inside Out: Blogger Pam Pappas is also a psychiatry and homeopathy specialist. Read her blog for analysis on society, health and wellness, and popular treatments.
  2. “LIFECARE” Advanced Homeopathy: Dr. Mukhtar Ahmad is a homeopathic consultant physician at the “LIFECARE” Advanced Homeo Clinic & Research Centre in India. Read his blog to find seminars on homeopathy, as well as how homeopathy is an effective method for treating diseases like HIV.
  3. Ask Dr. Luc: Dr. Luc De Schepper doles out advice and tips for homeopathic treatments. Recent posts include “Time to see remedy working” and “Pregnancy morning sickness.”

Posted in Homoeopathy in News | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Homoeopathy…effective in killing HIV

Posted by Dr.Mukhtar Ahmad on May 28, 2008

Homeopathy medicine found effective in killing HIV: ICMR DG
New Delhi | Wednesday, Nov 7 2007 IST

A homeopathic medicine has been found to be very effective against HIV/AIDS during screening at National AIDS Research Insititute, according to Dr N K Ganguly, Director General of Indian Council of Medical Research. ”The homeopathy compound screened in vitro at NARI against HIV has been found to have a lot of potential in effectively killing the virus,” Dr Ganguly told UNI.

However, he refused to name the compound as there were Intellectual Property Rights issues involved. Moreover, there was an MoU with the company which had given the compound, which is already being used in treatment of some other disease, for testing against HIV so the details could notbe divulged, he said.

He said that now the compound would be tested on human being only then it could be released for commercial exploitation. However, since there was not much toxicology involved in the homeopathy medicine, given by the Indian company for testing, it would not take much time.

Dr Ganguly asserted that it was a very significant development considering the fact that thousands of compounds are tested in NARI and sometimes none of them were found to be effective.

”We are adopting a lengthy process so that only an effective drug is launched,” he said and added that the time taken in the entire process may be four to five years.


Posted in Homoeopathy in News | Leave a Comment »