‘homoeopathia! quo vadis?’s3.amazonaws.com/presspublisher-do/upload/318/hri...cathay sent an...

The Roman Empire has always fas-cinated me – its rise; its fall; howsimilar, yet how different to ourmodern world it was, and how –for better or worse – many of itsideas, institutions, even technologystill survive in one form or another.In its heyday, it stretched from thePillars of Hercules in the west –modern Straits of Gibraltar – to the Euphrates and the Persian Gulf in the east. Its relevance will, I hope, become clearer as this article unfolds.

But, caveat emptor, dear reader!As with my previous reportage ofthe 1st HRI Research Conferencein Barcelona 2013 (Milgrom,2013), this one will be highly per-sonal and idiosyncratic, as mymain interest has always been infundamental research. The Latintitle of this piece (which means,‘Homeopathy! Where are yougoing?’) reflects my feelings during

and after the conference. As usual,however, I’m getting ahead ofmyself …

Of course, this being the secondHRI Conference, a question onmany minds was how it wouldcompare with the brilliantly suc-cessful first. One thing was certainhowever. When the current Romanpontiff, Pope Francis, decides to gowalkabout, the resulting congestionmeans that Rome grinds to a halt.Consequently, getting to the con -ference was the very opposite ofRoman efficiency. It took longer totravel the 31 km from Fiumicinoairport into Rome than it did to fly from Luton. Wish I’d taken thetrain …

I eventually pitched up at theconference hotel – the magnificentRadisson Blu, situated (it has to besaid) in one of the seedier parts oftown, next door to Rome’s mainrailway station, and a short ten

minutes forced march from theColiseum – only to find I hadsomehow forgotten to book myselfa room! Assumption, it is said, is the mother of all screw-ups. A moment’s panic (visions of sleep-ing rough on a station platform for two nights) but sorted quicklyenough, thanks to the magic of the Euro … So I missed the pre-conference knees-up (aka, wel -coming drinks) on the Thursdayevening, and a chance to catch upwith old friends prior to the hurly-burly of the conference proper.

‘Carpe diem!’ (‘Seize the day!’ –or, in this case, breakfast) Breakfast next morning could havebeen an augur of things to come.Perched on the top floor of ourconference hotel, the stunningopen-air dining facility (and swim-ming pool) also played host tosome particularly aggressive

FEATURE

Homeopathy in practice Summer 201516

Lionel has been a homeopath forover 16 years, training at thenow-defunctLondon College ofHomeo pathy, andthe Orion coursein advanced homeo -pathy. He worksfrom home now but has laboured at Nelson’s, Ains -worths, and an inte-grated dental prac-tice in London’sfashionable WestEnd. He has alsobeen a scientist(co-founding ananti-cancer biotechspin-out company)and a sciencewriter for over 30years and cameinto homeopathy to ‘find out how itworks’. Heading upthe Programme forAdvanced Homeo -pathic Research, hehas over 170 publi-cations in both thescientific and CAMacademic litera-tures on his ideas,including manyrebuttals of the so-called ‘sceptical’case against homeo -pathy. He wisheshe’d trained as amathematician, jazz/ concert pianist,and Ninja warrior.

‘Homoeopathia! Quo vadis?’ Rome, 5-7 June 2015:

The 2nd HRI International Conference on homeopathic research

by Lionel Milgrom PhD CChem FRSC LCH MARH

Praecursio: ‘Omnes viae Romam ducunt’(Introduction: ‘All roads lead to Rome’)

Rome: The Eternal City … and yes: once all roads did lead to it. A fit-ting venue, then, for a veritable homeopathic ‘horde’ to descend upon,bent on celebrating the HRI’s 2nd International Research Conference.And descend on Rome they did … from all corners of the Empire –sorry, world – they came: homeopathic researchers from all over Europe,Arabia, Africa, Australasia, India, the Americas (North and South), andfrom way beyond Rome’s old Eastern frontier in Mesopotamia, even farCathay sent an emissary of around 30 of Hong Kong’s finest.

As Pontifex Maximus, Il Papapresides not only over millions of Catholics worldwide but alsoover what’s left of the old RomanEmpire in the West, namelyVatican City. The title PontifexMaximus (‘great bridge builder’)refers to the miraculous powersof Roman concrete in, eg, settingunder water, and originated inancient Rome for the leading priestof the Republic, and later Empire.

P16-29.dh2.sw2.Milgrom.QXD_Layout 1 07/09/2015 16:50 Page 2

Roman seagulls (identified by‘SPQR’ stamped on their wings).Take your eyes off your brecky fora second, and in they’d swoop,screaming like a gaggle of avianstukas, to snatch the lot. Consumedin one gulp while ruining what wasleft of the table, they would thencasually preen themselves in thepool, awaiting the next unsuspect-ing diner. Being the 75th anniver-sary of the Battle of Britain, yourcorrespondent stoutly defended hisbacon and eggs with a triple-A bar-rage of frantic arm waving, foullanguage (sic) and assorted cutlery …

And so the auguries proved cor-rect. During conference registrationthat first day, it was announcedthat one of the main speakers, Dr Stephan Baumgartner, wouldnot after all be attending. Why thismight have been distressing, goesback to what happened during thefirst HRI Conference in Barcelonain 2013 and one of the reasons I went to Rome in first place: inshort, the announcement of the dis-covery of a possible homeopathic‘field effect’.

Thus, it seems that when certainplant seedlings are stressed by poi-soning with arsenic, this can beameliorated using Arsenicumalbum in potency, compared topotentised and unpotentised water.But what else had been noticed wasthat the water-control seedlingswere also affected depending onhow far they were from the poten-tised Arsenicum album-treatedplants. In other words, the remedyappeared to be exerting a curative‘field effect’ that stretched somedistance from its point or seedlingof application, affecting others inits path.

FEATURE

17Homeopathy in practice Summer 2015

What has always interested me, however,is the fundamentalresearch side

Figure1:

The Roman Empire

at its greatest

extent under

Trajan, in 117 AD

Augury was the ancient Romanpractice of divining the future(that is, the will of the gods)from the flight of birds. It wasgenerally performed (known astaking the auspices) before anynew (usually belligerent) venturethe Roman state had decidedupon. We find remnants of thispractice today in words like‘auspicious’ and ‘inaugurate’. SPQR (= Senatus PopulusqueRomanus; Senate and People ofRome) was an inscription car-ried on all Roman eagle battlestandards.Stuka (= acronym for Sturz -kampfflugzeug, or ‘diving fight-ing aeroplane’) was a Germandive-bomber, much feared byarmies and civilians during theearly stages of WW2. Ironically,its wings looked like those of an inverted gull’s and, as itattacked, let out a terrifyinghigh-pitched scream, courtesy of the effect of airflow over itsdive brakes.

© e

n.w

ikip

edia

.org


The Roman Empire has always fas-cinated me – its rise; its fall; howsimilar, yet how different to ourmodern world it was, and how –for better or worse – many of itsideas, institutions, even technologystill survive in one form or another.In its heyday, it stretched from thePillars of Hercules in the west –modern Straits of Gibraltar – to the Euphrates and the Persian Gulf in the east. Its relevance will, I hope, become clearer as this article unfolds.

But, caveat emptor, dear reader!As with my previous reportage ofthe 1st HRI Research Conferencein Barcelona 2013 (Milgrom,2013), this one will be highly per-sonal and idiosyncratic, as mymain interest has always been infundamental research. The Latintitle of this piece (which means,‘Homeopathy! Where are yougoing?’) reflects my feelings during

and after the conference. As usual,however, I’m getting ahead ofmyself …

Of course, this being the secondHRI Conference, a question onmany minds was how it wouldcompare with the brilliantly suc-cessful first. One thing was certainhowever. When the current Romanpontiff, Pope Francis, decides to gowalkabout, the resulting congestionmeans that Rome grinds to a halt.Consequently, getting to the con -ference was the very opposite ofRoman efficiency. It took longer totravel the 31 km from Fiumicinoairport into Rome than it did to fly from Luton. Wish I’d taken thetrain …

I eventually pitched up at theconference hotel – the magnificentRadisson Blu, situated (it has to besaid) in one of the seedier parts oftown, next door to Rome’s mainrailway station, and a short ten

minutes forced march from theColiseum – only to find I hadsomehow forgotten to book myselfa room! Assumption, it is said, is the mother of all screw-ups. A moment’s panic (visions of sleep-ing rough on a station platform for two nights) but sorted quicklyenough, thanks to the magic of the Euro … So I missed the pre-conference knees-up (aka, wel -coming drinks) on the Thursdayevening, and a chance to catch upwith old friends prior to the hurly-burly of the conference proper.

‘Carpe diem!’ (‘Seize the day!’ –or, in this case, breakfast) Breakfast next morning could havebeen an augur of things to come.Perched on the top floor of ourconference hotel, the stunningopen-air dining facility (and swim-ming pool) also played host tosome particularly aggressive

FEATURE


Lionel has been a homeopath forover 16 years, training at thenow-defunctLondon College ofHomeo pathy, andthe Orion coursein advanced homeo -pathy. He worksfrom home now but has laboured at Nelson’s, Ains -worths, and an inte-grated dental prac-tice in London’sfashionable WestEnd. He has alsobeen a scientist(co-founding ananti-cancer biotechspin-out company)and a sciencewriter for over 30years and cameinto homeopathy to ‘find out how itworks’. Heading upthe Programme forAdvanced Homeo -pathic Research, hehas over 170 publi-cations in both thescientific and CAMacademic litera-tures on his ideas,including manyrebuttals of the so-called ‘sceptical’case against homeo -pathy. He wisheshe’d trained as amathematician, jazz/ concert pianist,and Ninja warrior.

‘Homoeopathia! Quo vadis?’ Rome, 5-7 June 2015:

The 2nd HRI International Conference on homeopathic research

by Lionel Milgrom PhD CChem FRSC LCH MARH

Praecursio: ‘Omnes viae Romam ducunt’(Introduction: ‘All roads lead to Rome’)

Rome: The Eternal City … and yes: once all roads did lead to it. A fit-ting venue, then, for a veritable homeopathic ‘horde’ to descend upon,bent on celebrating the HRI’s 2nd International Research Conference.And descend on Rome they did … from all corners of the Empire –sorry, world – they came: homeopathic researchers from all over Europe,Arabia, Africa, Australasia, India, the Americas (North and South), andfrom way beyond Rome’s old Eastern frontier in Mesopotamia, even farCathay sent an emissary of around 30 of Hong Kong’s finest.

As Pontifex Maximus, Il Papapresides not only over millions of Catholics worldwide but alsoover what’s left of the old RomanEmpire in the West, namelyVatican City. The title PontifexMaximus (‘great bridge builder’)refers to the miraculous powersof Roman concrete in, eg, settingunder water, and originated inancient Rome for the leading priestof the Republic, and later Empire.

P16-29.dh2.sw2.Milgrom.QXD_Layout 1 07/09/2015 16:50

Roman seagulls (identified by‘SPQR’ stamped on their wings).Take your eyes off your brecky fora second, and in they’d swoop,screaming like a gaggle of avianstukas, to snatch the lot. Consumedin one gulp while ruining what wasleft of the table, they would thencasually preen themselves in thepool, awaiting the next unsuspect-ing diner. Being the 75th anniver-sary of the Battle of Britain, yourcorrespondent stoutly defended hisbacon and eggs with a triple-A bar-rage of frantic arm waving, foullanguage (sic) and assorted cutlery …

And so the auguries proved cor-rect. During conference registrationthat first day, it was announcedthat one of the main speakers, Dr Stephan Baumgartner, wouldnot after all be attending. Why thismight have been distressing, goesback to what happened during thefirst HRI Conference in Barcelonain 2013 and one of the reasons I went to Rome in first place: inshort, the announcement of the dis-covery of a possible homeopathic‘field effect’.

Thus, it seems that when certainplant seedlings are stressed by poi-soning with arsenic, this can beameliorated using Arsenicumalbum in potency, compared topotentised and unpotentised water.But what else had been noticed wasthat the water-control seedlingswere also affected depending onhow far they were from the poten-tised Arsenicum album-treatedplants. In other words, the remedyappeared to be exerting a curative‘field effect’ that stretched somedistance from its point or seedlingof application, affecting others inits path.

FEATURE


What has always interested me, however,is the fundamentalresearch side

Figure1:

The Roman Empire

at its greatest

extent under

Trajan, in 117 AD

Augury was the ancient Romanpractice of divining the future(that is, the will of the gods)from the flight of birds. It wasgenerally performed (known astaking the auspices) before anynew (usually belligerent) venturethe Roman state had decidedupon. We find remnants of thispractice today in words like‘auspicious’ and ‘inaugurate’. SPQR (= Senatus PopulusqueRomanus; Senate and People ofRome) was an inscription car-ried on all Roman eagle battlestandards.Stuka (= acronym for Sturz -kampfflugzeug, or ‘diving fight-ing aeroplane’) was a Germandive-bomber, much feared byarmies and civilians during theearly stages of WW2. Ironically,its wings looked like those of an inverted gull’s and, as itattacked, let out a terrifyinghigh-pitched scream, courtesy of the effect of airflow over itsdive brakes.

© e

n.w

ikip

edia

.org


It could be argued that, if con-firmed, the discovery of such afield effect would be the homeo-pathic equivalent of physicists’ cur-rent Holy Grail: finding the longsought-after Higgs boson. Conse -quently, those of us interested inthis aspect of homeopathic researchwere ultra-keen to get the latestintel on field-effect progress overthe last two years. Sadly, though,this was not to be and, I have toadmit, it temporarily (and unfairly)clouded my judgement about howthis 2nd HRI conference mightshape up compared with the first.

You see, I was forgetting thatwhat the first HRI conference in2013 did so brilliantly was to openup homeopaths and the world tojust the sheer volume, variety andfun of homeopathic research. At thetime, I wrote that ‘I felt like a kidlet loose in a toyshop …’. But thestill-controversial nature of muchhomeopathic research (as viewedfrom within the conventional scien-tific / biopharma paradigm and‘establishment’) means that, for the time being at least, it is highlyunlikely to achieve the funding lev-els conventional science receives or(other than pejorative) media expo-sure. And whereas two years is usu-ally time enough to achieve results /arrive at conclusions in most con-ventional scientific research, it is somuch more difficult when it comesto homeopathy.

This isn’t just about the amountof funding for homeopathicresearch (minuscule compared tothat spent researching conventionaldrugs), but also has to do with itsintrinsic difficulty, especially whentrying to reproduce the results ofground-breaking experiments onultra-diluted substances, such asthose on the possible ‘field effect’.

So, if the first HRI conferencewas noted for the sheer volumeand variety of homeopathicresearch on offer, so the second(rather like the consolidation of theRoman Empire after Trajan) willperhaps be remembered more for the added certainty of resultsobtained so far, and less for theannouncement of new headline-grabbing discoveries. This mightalso explain the conference’s biasmore towards clinical studies andprovings – the ‘what’ if you like, of homeopathy, that the remediesactually do what they say on thebottle – rather than fundamentalresearch – the ‘why’ and ‘how’ our

medicines ‘work’. What has alwaysinterested me, however, is the fun-damental research side, so I makeno apologies for concentrating onthat here.

‘Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salu-tant!’ (‘Hail, Caesar! Those whoare about to die salute you!’)And so the first morning’s plenarysession (with almost the same titleas Barcelona 2013 – ‘HomeopathyResearch – State of Play and theWay Forward’) got underway with a round-up from ProfessorPaolo Bellavite and Dr Klaus vonAmmon. Anyone expecting the

huge global sweep taken at break-neck speed of Dr Peter Fisher’s(Clinical Director and Director ofResearch at the Royal LondonHospital for Integrated Medicine,nee, the Royal London Homeo -pathic Hospital) account at Barce -lona might have been disappointed.Prof Bellavite concentrated moreon his own and other’s research onbasic homeopathic principles usinganimal models (Bellavite et al, 2006).

Animal-based research is integralto conventional modern drug devel-opment, but extrapolating fromanimals to humans is problematic.Based on provings and clinical con-firmation of the Law of Similars in humans, homeopathy shouldescape this shortcoming. It doesn’t:homeo pathic and medical databasesindicate animal-based homeopathicresearch includes physical and psy-chological conditions which caninvolve procedures that cause mod-erate to severe suffering to experi-mental animals (Britton, 2003).

This time, however, there wasnone of the controversy over theuse of animals in homeopathicresearch that caused such a stir at Barcelona, even though at leastfive other research presentations in Rome used animal models. Inaddition, an argument that almostdeveloped later on in the Conference(concerning single remedy prescrib-ing vs. polypharmacy) was rapidlynipped in the bud by the Chair.Somehow, it seemed, the usualhomeopathic propensity for inter -necine strife (incidentally, one ofthe main factors that ultimatelydestroyed the Roman Empire –homeopaths, be warned!) had been efficiently filtered out.

Some might certainly think thatno bad thing. That said, one couldlegitimately ask whether the use ofanimals in homeopathic researchreally is about homeopathy, or is it simply about the effects of serialdilutions? While perhaps a debatefor the next HRI conference, to befair this second HRI conferencewas well sprinkled with talks onprovings, clinical research andhomeopathic methodology. So,note to the conference organisers:should the task for future confer-ences be to ensure that these differ-ent branches of research intohomeopathy continue to be seen as complementary and not inimicalto each other? Given the depth offeeling in some parts of the homeo-pathic community about the useand value of animal research, thismight prove difficult.

So, while not disputing one ofthe major cornerstones of homeo -pathy – that it is the whole clinicalpicture of the individual patientwhich needs to be taken into con-sideration – Prof Bellavite believesthe kind of animal-based basicresearch protocols used in conven-tional biomedical research, allowsthe actions of drugs, includinghomeopathic remedies, to be inves-tigated in rigorous and repro-ducible settings. If so, then ProfBellavite’s presentation threw up aninteresting suggestion concerninghow homeopathic remedies mightbe operating. This is based on thedifferences between what is knownin biochemistry as allosteric andorthosteric control of drug bindingsites, and it requires a bit of expla-nation (De Smet et al, 2014).

The current theory of drugaction proposes they bind to pro-teins on and in cell membranes.

FEATURE


The second HRI confer-ence will perhaps beremembered for theadded certainty ofresults obtained so far,and less for new headline-grabbing discoveries


These proteins are large flexiblemolecules that change their confor-mation as they interact with a vari-ety of substrates. The resultingconformational change is thoughtto act as a signal for various biological responses. However,there are several ways a substratecan interact with the protein toproduce, or indeed diminish aresponse (see Figure 2 above).

Figure 2 is a schematic represen-tation of a cellular receptor becom-ing activated by binding its orthos-teric ligand, thereby inducing alater response. Cellular receptorscan be targeted by means of ortho -steric inhibitors (above, left) orallosteric modulators (above,right). Orthosteric inhibitors con-tain two major types of molecules,namely (i) ligand traps, which pre-vent ligand binding to the receptoror (ii) competitive antagonists,which compete for the same bind-ing site on the receptor; bothinhibitors eliminate the entire laterresponse of the receptor. In contrast,

allosteric modulators can modifyreceptor function in various wayswhile still allowing the possibilityof orthosteric agonist binding: they can change the affinity of theortho steric ligand for the receptor(‘affinity modulators’), they caninduce a structural change in the

receptor that alters the cellularresponse upon orthosteric ligandbinding (‘efficacy modulators’), orthey can modify a later responseindependent of an orthosteric lig-and (‘allosteric agonists / inverseagonists’) (De Smet et al, 2014).

This is illustrated in more detailin the series of diagrams for theGPCR family of proteins in Figure3 below. These are trans-membraneproteins that sense molecules out-side the cell, then induce signaltransduction and, ultimately,responses inside.

Orthosteric agonists (chemicalsthat bind to receptors and acti -vate them to produce biologicalresponses) bind to the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), whichinduces a conformational changeresulting in activation of later sig-nalling. Positive allosteric modula-tors are ligands that bind to a dif-ferent site to the orthosteric ago-nist, so enhancing the latter’s affini-ty (cooperativity factor-a) and / or efficacy (modulation factor-b).Negative allosteric modulators, onthe other hand, are ligands thatdecrease the affinity (cooperativityfactor-a) and / or efficacy (modula-tion factor-b) of the orthostericagonist. Allosteric ligands that haveno effect on the affinity and / orefficacy mediated by the orthostericagonist are termed neutral allostericligands. The grey arrows denoteallosteric interaction of the modu-lator with the orthosteric ligand;black arrows denote allostericinteraction between the ligandbinding sites and the effector bind-ing site within the GPCR, resultingin later activation of signallingpathways (known as orthostericagonism) (Wootten et al, 2013).

FEATURE


Figure 2:

Orthosteric versus

allosteric receptor

mechanisms

Figure 3:

How allosteric

ligands influence

orthosteric

ligand function

Fred

erik

De

Smet

, Art

hur

Chri

stop

oulo

s &

Pet

er C

arm

elie

t

Den

ise

Woo

tten

, Art

hur

Chri

stop

oulo

s &

Pat

rick

M. S

exto

n


What Bellavite suggests is thathomeopathic remedies might workby exploiting the characteristic features of allosteric (as opposedto orthosteric) regulation. If so,then it becomes possible to explainhomeopathy along conventional scientific / pharmacological lines.Some might consider this a greatleap forward and a necessary andsufficient condition for homeopathyto become more generally accepted.

Personally, however, I have mydoubts as there could be problemswith the currently accepted modelof molecular signalling in cells –that substrates and their receptorsneed to be in direct physical con-tact to generate a biological res -ponse. This was first questioned by Professor Jacques Benveniste(Thomas et al, 2000) then rejected(Jonas et al, 2006), but has sinceresurfaced with ground-breakingwork on electro-magnetic sig-nalling from bacterial DNAsequences (Montagnier L et al,2009) and in other studies involv-ing the sense of smell (Franco et al,

2011). These suggest substratesand receptors are indeed interact-ing with each other, but throughspace (action at a distance – whichwould require some kind of fieldeffect …), and that they do nothave to be physically in contact forthe signal to be triggered. Needlessto say, Professor Benveniste’s nameis now NEVER mentioned in thiscontext …

Which brings us back to the second speaker of the first morn-ing, Dr Klaus von Ammon. Inattempting to explain the clinicallyobservable facts of homeopathy, he harked back to Hahnemann’sdescription of remedy action in theOrganon as ‘spirit-like’, which hetook to mean ‘non-material’. So,contrary to the notion of a bio-chemical, material mechanism forthe action of homeopathic reme-dies, Dr Ammon considers a more‘immaterial’ mode of action, basedon observations made during con-sultation. Certainly ideas of somekind of macro-quantum-styleentanglement between patient,

practitioner, and remedy might bethought to fall under such an over-arching account (see later). But ifthey were, Dr Ammon didn’t men-tion them. He seemed more pre-occupied with what he called ‘non-material application of potentisedsubstances’, mentioning in this

FEATURE


Balens

AD

The usual homeopathicpropensity forinternecine strife had been efficiently filtered out


category the works of ProfessorChristian Endler on the use ofpoten tised thyroxin on the develop-ment of tadpoles (more of thatlater); Professor Luc Montagnierand the absent Dr Stephan Baum -gartner on the putative homeopath-ic ‘field effect’, and ideas involving‘nanoparticles’ (that in fact poten -tisation past the ‘magic’ Avoga dro’snumber does NOT dilute a remedyout of material existence but, onthe contrary, some moleculesremain attached to tiny particles of silica removed from the glass-ware (Chikramane et al, 2012)).

Noting that there is still a longway to go in fully understandingall these effects, Dr Ammon woundup his talk with some meant-to-beinspirational quotes about truthand reason from various scientistsand philosophers, and a soliloquyon what we do NOT know aboutphysical fields, such as gravity andelectromagnetism.

Not that he is wrong about thislack of knowledge, for apart fromtheir felt physicality (attraction andrepulsion) and the way field effectsdecrease with distance (e.g. thestrength of gravitational and elec-tromagnetic fields fall off accordingto an inverse square law), under-standing what physical fields actu-ally are requires a knowledge ofsome very sophisticated mathemat-ics, and even then one is nowherenear comprehension. Pity poorhomeopaths trying to get theirheads around that lot, and explain-ing it to their patients!

In Dr Ammon’s post-talk Q&A,it was put to him that, while suchunderstanding of fields might belacking, at least we had someknow ledge of their effects over distance, for example the inversesquare law. Had any such advancesbeen made on the homeopathic‘field effect’ in the intervening twoyears since Barcelona? An unfairquestion perhaps because it shouldhave been directed at the absent Dr Baum gart ner, and Dr Ammonwas not equipped to answer it. Butit was skilfully ‘fielded’ (sic) by thesession’s chair and HRI ExecutiveDirector, Dr Alex Tournier, and onthat (for me) disappointing note,we broke for a well-earned cup of coffee.

‘Et gloriamur in tribulationibus’(‘Trials and tribulations’)Caffeine imbibed, we returned for the second plenary session on

clinical research. Four speakerspresented the results (some prelimi-nary) of randomised controlled tri-als of homeopathy in ADHD (India,Dr Sadanandan Gopinadhan);self-reported depression (UK andNorway, Petter Viksveen); a Kenya-based malaria treatment usingcomplex immunotherapy (Nether -lands, Dr Martien Brands, andfrom Canada, treatment of fatiguein children undergoing chemother-apy (David Brule). All the trialsshowed promising results withhomeopathy apparently showingsome effect beyond a placeboresponse but, as ever, more workneeds to be done.

Thus Dr Gopinadhan’s ADHDtrial was single-blinded and needsto be validated in a multicentredouble-blind RCT: Petter Viks -veen’s depression trial is ongoingand results still need to be present-ed, as is the case with MartienBrand’s malaria trial. David Brule’s

trial was a pilot study, which con-cluded that a future randomisedcontrolled trial using individualisedhomeopathy for post-chemotherapyfatigue reduction is not feasible forchildren with cancer. Although hefound a significant improvementover the study period (using Cadsulph and some phosphoric reme-dies), he is already consideringother study designs, such as usingan adult population and whetherroutine use of Cad sulph in thesecases is justified.

Lunch then ensued – thankfullywithout the morning patrol ofdive-bombing seagulls, who’d goneoff to ‘strafe’ other unsuspecting

FEATURE


tourists at the nearby Coliseum –and a chance to confer with col-leagues over that traditional Italiandelicacy, pasta; cooked, it has to besaid, perfectly al dente. But as iswell known, the fuller the belly(and pasta does fill the belly!), thelower the later level of conscious-ness, especially when it’s hot andsultry, which meant the afternoonsession on safety in homeopathyproved a little difficult for one ortwo snoozing delegates.

Rachel Roberts, HRI’s ChiefExecutive, tore into a now infa-mous 2012 systematic review byPosadzki et al (don’t be fooled bythe name: our ‘hugest fan and sup-porter’, Professor Edzard Ernst, is also on the paper … indeed, hewas its main instigator), whichclaimed to have identified 1159patients who had experienced mild-to-severe adverse effects, includingfour fatalities, from homeopathictreatment! So, there’s nothing inhomeopathic remedies, yet they cankill you! Where does our Edzardget off?

Perhaps ‘tore into’ isn’t quitecorrect as Rachel’s delivery wasmeasured (if now and then ever so slightly ironic) as befits a CEO.Nevertheless, her analysis of thepaper was damning, uncoveringpoor quality, and multiple flaws(including misreporting, inaccura-cies, and the inclusion of cases thatdid not involve homeopathy). Let’sjust say our Edzard and his teamwere being a tad economical withthe truth!

By delving deep into thePosadzki et al paper, Rachel andher team (including Alex Tournier,Kate Chatfield, Petter Viksveen,and Robert Mathie) found that, byusing a precise definition of whatconstitutes a homeopathic medicineand a WHO-UMC (Uppsala Moni -toring Centre) causality assessment(to establish if there is a causal link between an adverse event andhomeopathic treatment), homeo -pathy turns out to be – wait for it– extremely safe! And if it’s safe,then why not start using it morewidely? So next up was Dr PeterFisher who went on the offensivewith one of his whirlwind lectures,this time on how homeopathycould impact on public health.

He opened with an account ofour current state of chronic ill-health; multimorbidity (defined asthe co-occurrence of two or morechronic medical conditions in one

There is still a long way to go in fully understanding all these field effects


C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

BALENS - ARH - A5 Landscape v2GS.pdf 10/09/2013 18:20:11

What Bellavite suggests is thathomeopathic remedies might workby exploiting the characteristic features of allosteric (as opposedto orthosteric) regulation. If so,then it becomes possible to explainhomeopathy along conventional scientific / pharmacological lines.Some might consider this a greatleap forward and a necessary andsufficient condition for homeopathyto become more generally accepted.

Personally, however, I have mydoubts as there could be problemswith the currently accepted modelof molecular signalling in cells –that substrates and their receptorsneed to be in direct physical con-tact to generate a biological res -ponse. This was first questioned by Professor Jacques Benveniste(Thomas et al, 2000) then rejected(Jonas et al, 2006), but has sinceresurfaced with ground-breakingwork on electro-magnetic sig-nalling from bacterial DNAsequences (Montagnier L et al,2009) and in other studies involv-ing the sense of smell (Franco et al,

2011). These suggest substratesand receptors are indeed interact-ing with each other, but throughspace (action at a distance – whichwould require some kind of fieldeffect …), and that they do nothave to be physically in contact forthe signal to be triggered. Needlessto say, Professor Benveniste’s nameis now NEVER mentioned in thiscontext …

Which brings us back to the second speaker of the first morn-ing, Dr Klaus von Ammon. Inattempting to explain the clinicallyobservable facts of homeopathy, he harked back to Hahnemann’sdescription of remedy action in theOrganon as ‘spirit-like’, which hetook to mean ‘non-material’. So,contrary to the notion of a bio-chemical, material mechanism forthe action of homeopathic reme-dies, Dr Ammon considers a more‘immaterial’ mode of action, basedon observations made during con-sultation. Certainly ideas of somekind of macro-quantum-styleentanglement between patient,

practitioner, and remedy might bethought to fall under such an over-arching account (see later). But ifthey were, Dr Ammon didn’t men-tion them. He seemed more pre-occupied with what he called ‘non-material application of potentisedsubstances’, mentioning in this

FEATURE


Balens

AD

The usual homeopathicpropensity forinternecine strife had been efficiently filtered out


category the works of ProfessorChristian Endler on the use ofpoten tised thyroxin on the develop-ment of tadpoles (more of thatlater); Professor Luc Montagnierand the absent Dr Stephan Baum -gartner on the putative homeopath-ic ‘field effect’, and ideas involving‘nanoparticles’ (that in fact poten -tisation past the ‘magic’ Avoga dro’snumber does NOT dilute a remedyout of material existence but, onthe contrary, some moleculesremain attached to tiny particles of silica removed from the glass-ware (Chikramane et al, 2012)).

Noting that there is still a longway to go in fully understandingall these effects, Dr Ammon woundup his talk with some meant-to-beinspirational quotes about truthand reason from various scientistsand philosophers, and a soliloquyon what we do NOT know aboutphysical fields, such as gravity andelectromagnetism.

Not that he is wrong about thislack of knowledge, for apart fromtheir felt physicality (attraction andrepulsion) and the way field effectsdecrease with distance (e.g. thestrength of gravitational and elec-tromagnetic fields fall off accordingto an inverse square law), under-standing what physical fields actu-ally are requires a knowledge ofsome very sophisticated mathemat-ics, and even then one is nowherenear comprehension. Pity poorhomeopaths trying to get theirheads around that lot, and explain-ing it to their patients!

In Dr Ammon’s post-talk Q&A,it was put to him that, while suchunderstanding of fields might belacking, at least we had someknow ledge of their effects over distance, for example the inversesquare law. Had any such advancesbeen made on the homeopathic‘field effect’ in the intervening twoyears since Barcelona? An unfairquestion perhaps because it shouldhave been directed at the absent Dr Baum gart ner, and Dr Ammonwas not equipped to answer it. Butit was skilfully ‘fielded’ (sic) by thesession’s chair and HRI ExecutiveDirector, Dr Alex Tournier, and onthat (for me) disappointing note,we broke for a well-earned cup of coffee.

‘Et gloriamur in tribulationibus’(‘Trials and tribulations’)Caffeine imbibed, we returned for the second plenary session on

clinical research. Four speakerspresented the results (some prelimi-nary) of randomised controlled tri-als of homeopathy in ADHD (India,Dr Sadanandan Gopinadhan);self-reported depression (UK andNorway, Petter Viksveen); a Kenya-based malaria treatment usingcomplex immunotherapy (Nether -lands, Dr Martien Brands, andfrom Canada, treatment of fatiguein children undergoing chemother-apy (David Brule). All the trialsshowed promising results withhomeopathy apparently showingsome effect beyond a placeboresponse but, as ever, more workneeds to be done.

Thus Dr Gopinadhan’s ADHDtrial was single-blinded and needsto be validated in a multicentredouble-blind RCT: Petter Viks -veen’s depression trial is ongoingand results still need to be present-ed, as is the case with MartienBrand’s malaria trial. David Brule’s

trial was a pilot study, which con-cluded that a future randomisedcontrolled trial using individualisedhomeopathy for post-chemotherapyfatigue reduction is not feasible forchildren with cancer. Although hefound a significant improvementover the study period (using Cadsulph and some phosphoric reme-dies), he is already consideringother study designs, such as usingan adult population and whetherroutine use of Cad sulph in thesecases is justified.

Lunch then ensued – thankfullywithout the morning patrol ofdive-bombing seagulls, who’d goneoff to ‘strafe’ other unsuspecting

FEATURE


tourists at the nearby Coliseum –and a chance to confer with col-leagues over that traditional Italiandelicacy, pasta; cooked, it has to besaid, perfectly al dente. But as iswell known, the fuller the belly(and pasta does fill the belly!), thelower the later level of conscious-ness, especially when it’s hot andsultry, which meant the afternoonsession on safety in homeopathyproved a little difficult for one ortwo snoozing delegates.

Rachel Roberts, HRI’s ChiefExecutive, tore into a now infa-mous 2012 systematic review byPosadzki et al (don’t be fooled bythe name: our ‘hugest fan and sup-porter’, Professor Edzard Ernst, is also on the paper … indeed, hewas its main instigator), whichclaimed to have identified 1159patients who had experienced mild-to-severe adverse effects, includingfour fatalities, from homeopathictreatment! So, there’s nothing inhomeopathic remedies, yet they cankill you! Where does our Edzardget off?

Perhaps ‘tore into’ isn’t quitecorrect as Rachel’s delivery wasmeasured (if now and then ever so slightly ironic) as befits a CEO.Nevertheless, her analysis of thepaper was damning, uncoveringpoor quality, and multiple flaws(including misreporting, inaccura-cies, and the inclusion of cases thatdid not involve homeopathy). Let’sjust say our Edzard and his teamwere being a tad economical withthe truth!

By delving deep into thePosadzki et al paper, Rachel andher team (including Alex Tournier,Kate Chatfield, Petter Viksveen,and Robert Mathie) found that, byusing a precise definition of whatconstitutes a homeopathic medicineand a WHO-UMC (Uppsala Moni -toring Centre) causality assessment(to establish if there is a causal link between an adverse event andhomeopathic treatment), homeo -pathy turns out to be – wait for it– extremely safe! And if it’s safe,then why not start using it morewidely? So next up was Dr PeterFisher who went on the offensivewith one of his whirlwind lectures,this time on how homeopathycould impact on public health.

He opened with an account ofour current state of chronic ill-health; multimorbidity (defined asthe co-occurrence of two or morechronic medical conditions in one

There is still a long way to go in fully understanding all these field effects


person) and the linked problems ofpolypharmacy, adverse drug reac-tions, plus antimicrobial resistancebeing some of the biggest problemsfacing the developed world. Thereis now evidence that integratinghomeopathy into primary carereduces prescriptions of potentiallyharmful medications in upper res-piratory infections (dealt with laterby Prof Jennifer Jacobs and PetraKlement) and musculoskeletal conditions. Also, homeopathy is proving to be a useful adjunc -tive treatment in the developingworld against malaria and drugresistant TB.

If only there had been a Guardianjournalist in the house to phone allthis stuff back to his or her newsdesk. Sadly, however, journalistswere conspicuous by their absence.Not even Edzard put in an appear-ance (as if …). So a take-homemessage from this conference mightbe that as an interconnected globalcommunity, and in as intelligent,coordinated and non-partisan fash-ion as possible, we really need tostart seriously pumping out thepositive news about homeopathy. As Dr Fisher put it:

If homeopathy is to realise theseopportunities to contribute to publichealth, a clear and focused strategyis required. Networks and collabora-tion must be developed; irresponsi-ble and speculative claims must beavoided (what could he mean …??!!Author). Instead we should concen-trate on well-established treatmentstrategies and explore the potentialof constitutional treatment in multi-morbidity, treating people as individ-uals with complex health problems,not as multiple diseases each to betreated with different and often mul-tiple drugs.

Amen to that! Though my guess isthat the push for this most likelywon’t come from the UK and prob-ably not even Europe (well, givenits current problems, Greece per-haps): it will most likely come fromthe developing world; India, Africa,South America and so on, placeswhere expensive drugs are less avail-able and homeopathy seems to bebetter valued (Milgrom et al, 2011).

The day finished with ProfessorJennifer Jacobs talking about a cou-ple of RCTs of homeopathy in child-hood respiratory illnesses, someposter talks, and then a well-watered(that is, with alcohol) poster sessionin the open air. I had two in the session, so was kept rather busy

explaining myself, and just aboutmanaged to shower and change intime for a slap-up meal in a Romanrestaurant (more pasta). And I’veonly barely managed to cover theevents of the first day! The nexttwo days followed a similar mix ofclinical and fundamental research(biased towards the former), so,what follows are what I consider tobe some of the standout momentsfrom the rest of the conference.

‘Alea iacta est’ (‘The die is cast’– reputedly spoken by JuliusCaesar when crossing theRubicon)The second day kicked off with asession on lab-based research andmechanisms of action. For me, themost interesting presentation – and biased as I am, arguably of the whole conference – came from Dr Steve Cartwright, a veteran of Barcelona and who, like me, is a chemist. He was following upwork he presented two years agoon the use of special dyes as molec-ular probes of ultra-diluted suc-cussed solutions.

These special dyes exhibit aproperty called solvatochromism,which means their colour dependson what solvent they are dissolvedin. Thus in polar solvents such aswater, they might be one colour,while in less polar solvents such

as acetone, they will be anothercolour (chem-toddler.com). Fromthe point of view of Steve’s work,this isn’t as important as the reasonwhy they exhibit this property.

It is because the molecules areinherently dipolar, that is, theyhave positive and negative chargesat their opposite ends (so they are called zwitterions), and thisdipolarity can change as the mole-cules absorb light energy photons;that is, they become excited (thesymbol ‘hv’ in Figure 4 representsthis absorption of a photon onexcitation).

FEATURE


Figure 4:

Zwitterions and

their interaction

with radiation

There is now evidencethat integrating homeo -pathy into primary carereduces prescriptions of potentially harmfulmedications in upperrespiratory infections


So, in Figure 4 (above), the topmolecule is dipolar in its restingstate, but loses it when it absorbs a photon. The bottom molecule,however, is non-dipolar in its rest-ing state but becomes dipolar (i.e. a zwitter ion) when it is excit-ed. The reason is that absorption of light energy leads to intra-molecular electron transfer (IET)which, in the case of the top mole-cule, cancels out the charges but, in the bottom molecule, generatesthem. The IET on excitation meansthese molecules behave as oscillat-ing dipoles.

What this also means is thatmolecules which are zwitterionic in their resting state tend to aggre-gate in solution (the positive andnegative charges on each moleculeattract their opposites on thosenearby, and so they are moreordered in solution) but this aggre-gation is disrupted when they areexcited. Molecules which are non-zwitterionic in their resting state,however, tend not to aggregate (aremore disordered), but will becomeordered in solution when they areexcited. And these effects can beobserved indirectly via these mole-cule’s UV / visible spectra: mole-cules like the top one have red-shifted spectra, while spectra formolecules like the bottom one areblue-shifted.

Thus far is standard chemistry.Now we come to the exciting bit.For what Dr Cartwright’s latestwork reveals is that homeopathicpotencies can change these red andblue shifts in a measurable wayand that these potency-inducedchanges are not dependent onwhich solvent the dyes are dis-solved in. Thus, whether aggrega-tion is enhanced or diminished bypotency, depends upon the pre-existing level of dye ordering insolution. Dyes that are excessivelyordered have their levels of orderreduced by potency, while dyes thatare excessively disordered havetheir level of order increased, andthese potency-induced changes canbe observed in their UV / visiblespectra. So, it appears somethingthat, according to sceptics, cannotpossibly have any effects, let alonea curative one (i.e. a substancewhose molecules are supposedlydiluted out of existence, waybeyond Avogadro’s number – inci-dentally, Dr Cartwright’s work wasperformed using Glycerol 50M!), is indeed observable, via its effecton surrounding substances. And ifsceptics have a problem acceptingthis, then ask them how sure arethey about our old friend the Higgs boson if it isn’t observedindirectly …

What all this suggests is that theIET feature of solvatochromic dyesappears to be essential for dye-potency interactions to take place;ordinary (non-solvatochromic)dyes show no change in their spec-tra in the presence of potencies.Most importantly, what Dr Cart -wright’s work suggests is that, asthe IET constitutes an oscillatingdipole, potencies in turn may alsobe oscillating dipoles and thatinteraction occurs through electronresonance. Also, because simi larresults are obtained regardless ofsolvent polarity, potencies appearto be interacting directly withthese dyes.

Dr Cartwright thinks if potenciesare indeed oscillating dipoles, thenit might even be possible to observethem directly via their fluorescence.Also, using the timescale of spec-troscopic changes seen with thesesolvatochromic dyes might providea means of differentiating betweenremedies, particularly if they arefast acting (e.g. Aconite) or slowacting remedies (for example,Alumina). Hopefully, we will nothave to wait until the next HRI

Conference to hear of Dr Cart -wright’s latest breakthrough.

‘Ipsa scientia potestas est’(‘Knowledge itself is power’)Simple as Dr Cartwright’s systemmight appear, his work highlights aproblem that dogs much of homeo-pathic research: reproducibility. It is the democratic principle bywhich scientists live and breathe,and like all democracies, this prin-ciple may well be – probably is –fundamentally flawed. For sciencemight indeed be ‘democratic’ but,historically, she has also provenherself a harsh, unforgiving, nar-row-minded dominatrix; the fate

of the late lamented ProfessorJacques Benveniste being a case inpoint (that some of his research hasin fact been reproduced, and thatthis has not been aired as vocifer-ously as his condemnation anddefenestration back in the 1980s, is nothing short of scandalous).

So it was good to listen toProfessor Christian Endler expoundonce again, updating earlier workon many different basic researchstudies of high homeopathic poten-cies that have been subjected tointernal (i.e. reproduced in thesame lab), multicenter, and inde-pendent repetition. Naturally, hementioned his own work on theuse of potentised Thyroxin to slowdown the metamorphosis of tad-poles into frogs, which has nowbeen reproduced many times(Weber et al, 2008).

FEATURE


It appears somethingthat, according to scep-tics, cannot possiblyhave any effects, letalone a curative one, is indeed observable

© D

r St

eve

Cart

wri

ght


Professor Endler had earliershown that, when it comes to inter-nal repetitive studies, 69% report-ed effects comparable to that of theinitial study; 10% different effects,and 21% no effects. However,independently performed studiesreported 44% comparable effects;17% different effects, and 39%zero effects, suggesting either slightbias in internal repetition, or lackof familiarity with the original per-forming labs’ protocols by inde-pendent reproducers.

What this highlights is the exqui-site difficulty in performing lab-based homeopathic research, andthe latest data he reported merelyconfirms this. So the work of repe-tition is ongoing, although it isencouraging to see that, in themain, reproducibility is in homeo -pathy’s favour.

We come now to a subject that I am surprised I had not givenmore serious consideration to inthe past: at what level in the bodyare homeo pathic remedies work-ing? There had been talk that

homeopathic remedies could beworking at the genetic level, influ-encing the over-expression of genesof stressed organisms, e.g. plants.So it was a revelation to listen to Dr Giovanni Dinelli of theUniversity of Bologna deliver histalk on Different approaches tohomeopathic basic research.

One of the basic models used inlab-based homeopathic research isto ‘stress’ (that is, poison) wheatseedlings with arsenic and then see how germination is affected bypotentised Arsenicum (As2O3, 45x)(for a general introduction to thissubject, see positivehealth.com).The latter leads to a significantincrease in germination rate of thestressed seedlings, compared withcontrol. It turns out that after poi-soning with arsenic around 700genes are over-expressed, and thatpotentised Arsenicum leads to areduction in this over-expression,especially among the 59 signaltransduction genes.

Interestingly, a talk by Dr DeboraOlioso from the University of

Verona tended to bear out Dr Dinelli’s findings, using thatgood old homeopathic workhorse,Arnica montana. Her results (incollaboration with Prof Bellavite)indicate that different homeopath-ic dilutions of Arnica might wellbe working by modulating geneexpression of several cytokine and chemokine protein messen-ger molecules and their cellular receptor sites, that are ultimate-ly responsible for the body’s inflammatory processes (positive health.com; Bellavite et al, 2015).

Given that multimorbidity,polypharmacy, adverse drug reactions, and antimicrobialresistance are some of the biggesthealth problems currently facingthe developed world, the evidencefor homeopathy’s beneficialeffects operating at the cellularand genetic levels makes Dr PeterFisher’s pugnacious call for inte-gration of homeopathy into primary health care all that more urgent.

FEATURE


CHE

AD


‘Per ardua ad astra’ (‘Throughadversity to the stars’)The perhaps measured and reflec-tive tone of this second HRIConference made it fitting that the speaker to close the proceed-ings on the last day was Dr RobertMathie from the British Homeo -pathic Association.

While we might disagree on thevalue of the randomised controlledtrial (RCT) (Cartwright et al,2010), particularly when applied toCAM in general and homeopathyin particular (Milgrom, 2014), ithas to be said that, for better orworse, the RCT is still regarded by many as the ‘gold standard’ bywhich the efficacy of any therapeu-tic technique is judged. From thatstandpoint, there is no better per-son qualified to rigorously assessthe RCT evidence for homeopathy,and to pronounce judgement on its efficacy (Edzard Ernst, pleasetake note).

Back in 2013 at Barcelona, Dr Mathie presented work with aninternational team on developingmodel validity (MV) for homeo-pathic RCTs (MV tries to ensureconcordance between a studydesign and state of the art clinicalpractice for an intervention underinvestigation). After exhaustivelysearching the homeopathic litera-ture, only 32 RCTs of individu-alised homeopathy could be foundthat satisfied the strict inclusioncriteria for that study, 19 of whichwere of ‘acceptable’, 9 ‘uncertain’,and 4 of ‘inadequate’ MV (Mathieet al, 2015). In rounding off this2nd HRI Conference with his talkon ‘Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled trials of individualisedhomeopathic treatment’, Dr Mathieonce again did not disappoint.

Unusually, he began by giving us all the good news first; that thekey inference from his team’s lateststudy is that there are positiveresults from RCTs of individualisedhomeopathic treatment that arepotentially crucial in defending andpromoting homeopathy as a clini-cally effective therapy.

Although the evidence base fromRCTs of homeopathy might not be sufficient, Dr Mathie pointedout that most previous systematicreviews / meta-analyses on homeo -pathy have not properly explored:

• Study quality (including inter-nal validity and reliability ofevidence)

• Size of treatment effect (and thedifficulty in replication)

• Whether the literature exploredis peer- or non-peer reviewed

• Whether the homeopathy underreview is individualised or non-individualised (whether thewhole system of medicine isbeing explored or just the drug)

• The quality of the homeopathicintervention / outcome measure(model validity)

• Whether the trial is dealingwith homeopathic treatment or prophylaxis, and

• What medical conditions arebeing investigated.

So Dr Mathie and his team begantheir investigation with a hypothesis:

For the spectrum of medical condi-tions that have been researchedusing relevant RCTs, the main clinicaloutcome of individually prescribedhomeopathic medicines is distin-guishable from that of correspon-ding placebos.

In other words, individually pre-scribed homeopathic medicineshave specific effects.

Applying the same rigour as theearlier work, the impact of trialinternal validity (that is, risk of

bias) identified 12 trials (right sidewedge in Figure 5) that did nothave high risk of bias. Out of these12, there were 3 trials that satisfiedthe authors’ criteria for ‘reliableevidence’ (Mathie et al, 2014).Meta-analysis identified a small,statistically significant, odds ratiofor the N=22 overall and for justthe N=3 with reliable evidence.

Incorporating MV into the quali-ty appraisal of RCTs did not alterthe conclusion from this meta-analysis: individually prescribedhomeopathic medicines may havesmall, but specific treatment effectsbeyond placebo. As Dr Mathie saidat the end of his talk:

Our cautious positive conclusionreflects RCT evidence in individu-alised homeopathy across a spec-trum of medical conditions that tran-scends condition-based interpreta-tion. We need to take the emphasisof research evidence away from sin-gle medical conditions and direct ittowards patients’ individuality.

Epilogus: ‘Homoeopathia! Quo vadis?’ (Conclusion:‘Homeopathy! Where are yougoing?’)So how did this second HRIConference in Rome compare withthe first in Barcelona? That hasbeen a difficult call to make. Thefirst was noted by its sheer exuber-ance at the volume and variety ofhomeopathic research, plus the factthat this kind of conference wassomething new: the second seemsto have been a much more meas-ured affair – a taking stock if youlike – a consolidation on some ofthe advances announced in 2013.

This is perhaps entirely under-standable as, for reasons of lack offunding and negative media expo-sure, two years might be too shorta period to fully capitalise on newideas. In addition, planning and

FEATURE


Positive results from RCTs of individualisedhomeopathic treatmentare potentially crucial in defending and promoting homeopathy

Figure 5:

Risk of bias desig-

nation per RCT;

N=22 RCTs with

data extractable

for meta-analysis

Vibrant plenary

session (Dr Lionel

Milgrom)

© D

r R

ober

t M

ath

ie


Convert your Licentiate to a Degree in Homeopathy

The Centre for Homeopathic Education (CHE) is offeringqualified Homeopaths the opportunity to study on their one-

year conversion course leading to BSc (Hons) Homeopathy

The BSc (Hons) conversion course is part time and is heldover ten weekends between September 2015 and June 2016

at Regents College, Regents Park, London.

For more information please go to: www.CHEhomeopathy.comor email us at: [email protected]

Professor Endler had earliershown that, when it comes to inter-nal repetitive studies, 69% report-ed effects comparable to that of theinitial study; 10% different effects,and 21% no effects. However,independently performed studiesreported 44% comparable effects;17% different effects, and 39%zero effects, suggesting either slightbias in internal repetition, or lackof familiarity with the original per-forming labs’ protocols by inde-pendent reproducers.

What this highlights is the exqui-site difficulty in performing lab-based homeopathic research, andthe latest data he reported merelyconfirms this. So the work of repe-tition is ongoing, although it isencouraging to see that, in themain, reproducibility is in homeo -pathy’s favour.

We come now to a subject that I am surprised I had not givenmore serious consideration to inthe past: at what level in the bodyare homeo pathic remedies work-ing? There had been talk that

homeopathic remedies could beworking at the genetic level, influ-encing the over-expression of genesof stressed organisms, e.g. plants.So it was a revelation to listen to Dr Giovanni Dinelli of theUniversity of Bologna deliver histalk on Different approaches tohomeopathic basic research.

One of the basic models used inlab-based homeopathic research isto ‘stress’ (that is, poison) wheatseedlings with arsenic and then see how germination is affected bypotentised Arsenicum (As2O3, 45x)(for a general introduction to thissubject, see positivehealth.com).The latter leads to a significantincrease in germination rate of thestressed seedlings, compared withcontrol. It turns out that after poi-soning with arsenic around 700genes are over-expressed, and thatpotentised Arsenicum leads to areduction in this over-expression,especially among the 59 signaltransduction genes.

Interestingly, a talk by Dr DeboraOlioso from the University of

Verona tended to bear out Dr Dinelli’s findings, using thatgood old homeopathic workhorse,Arnica montana. Her results (incollaboration with Prof Bellavite)indicate that different homeopath-ic dilutions of Arnica might wellbe working by modulating geneexpression of several cytokine and chemokine protein messen-ger molecules and their cellular receptor sites, that are ultimate-ly responsible for the body’s inflammatory processes (positive health.com; Bellavite et al, 2015).

Given that multimorbidity,polypharmacy, adverse drug reactions, and antimicrobialresistance are some of the biggesthealth problems currently facingthe developed world, the evidencefor homeopathy’s beneficialeffects operating at the cellularand genetic levels makes Dr PeterFisher’s pugnacious call for inte-gration of homeopathy into primary health care all that more urgent.

FEATURE


CHE

AD


‘Per ardua ad astra’ (‘Throughadversity to the stars’)The perhaps measured and reflec-tive tone of this second HRIConference made it fitting that the speaker to close the proceed-ings on the last day was Dr RobertMathie from the British Homeo -pathic Association.

While we might disagree on thevalue of the randomised controlledtrial (RCT) (Cartwright et al,2010), particularly when applied toCAM in general and homeopathyin particular (Milgrom, 2014), ithas to be said that, for better orworse, the RCT is still regarded by many as the ‘gold standard’ bywhich the efficacy of any therapeu-tic technique is judged. From thatstandpoint, there is no better per-son qualified to rigorously assessthe RCT evidence for homeopathy,and to pronounce judgement on its efficacy (Edzard Ernst, pleasetake note).

Back in 2013 at Barcelona, Dr Mathie presented work with aninternational team on developingmodel validity (MV) for homeo-pathic RCTs (MV tries to ensureconcordance between a studydesign and state of the art clinicalpractice for an intervention underinvestigation). After exhaustivelysearching the homeopathic litera-ture, only 32 RCTs of individu-alised homeopathy could be foundthat satisfied the strict inclusioncriteria for that study, 19 of whichwere of ‘acceptable’, 9 ‘uncertain’,and 4 of ‘inadequate’ MV (Mathieet al, 2015). In rounding off this2nd HRI Conference with his talkon ‘Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled trials of individualisedhomeopathic treatment’, Dr Mathieonce again did not disappoint.

Unusually, he began by giving us all the good news first; that thekey inference from his team’s lateststudy is that there are positiveresults from RCTs of individualisedhomeopathic treatment that arepotentially crucial in defending andpromoting homeopathy as a clini-cally effective therapy.

Although the evidence base fromRCTs of homeopathy might not be sufficient, Dr Mathie pointedout that most previous systematicreviews / meta-analyses on homeo -pathy have not properly explored:

• Study quality (including inter-nal validity and reliability ofevidence)

• Size of treatment effect (and thedifficulty in replication)

• Whether the literature exploredis peer- or non-peer reviewed

• Whether the homeopathy underreview is individualised or non-individualised (whether thewhole system of medicine isbeing explored or just the drug)

• The quality of the homeopathicintervention / outcome measure(model validity)

• Whether the trial is dealingwith homeopathic treatment or prophylaxis, and

• What medical conditions arebeing investigated.

So Dr Mathie and his team begantheir investigation with a hypothesis:

For the spectrum of medical condi-tions that have been researchedusing relevant RCTs, the main clinicaloutcome of individually prescribedhomeopathic medicines is distin-guishable from that of correspon-ding placebos.

In other words, individually pre-scribed homeopathic medicineshave specific effects.

Applying the same rigour as theearlier work, the impact of trialinternal validity (that is, risk of

bias) identified 12 trials (right sidewedge in Figure 5) that did nothave high risk of bias. Out of these12, there were 3 trials that satisfiedthe authors’ criteria for ‘reliableevidence’ (Mathie et al, 2014).Meta-analysis identified a small,statistically significant, odds ratiofor the N=22 overall and for justthe N=3 with reliable evidence.

Incorporating MV into the quali-ty appraisal of RCTs did not alterthe conclusion from this meta-analysis: individually prescribedhomeopathic medicines may havesmall, but specific treatment effectsbeyond placebo. As Dr Mathie saidat the end of his talk:

Our cautious positive conclusionreflects RCT evidence in individu-alised homeopathy across a spec-trum of medical conditions that tran-scends condition-based interpreta-tion. We need to take the emphasisof research evidence away from sin-gle medical conditions and direct ittowards patients’ individuality.

Epilogus: ‘Homoeopathia! Quo vadis?’ (Conclusion:‘Homeopathy! Where are yougoing?’)So how did this second HRIConference in Rome compare withthe first in Barcelona? That hasbeen a difficult call to make. Thefirst was noted by its sheer exuber-ance at the volume and variety ofhomeopathic research, plus the factthat this kind of conference wassomething new: the second seemsto have been a much more meas-ured affair – a taking stock if youlike – a consolidation on some ofthe advances announced in 2013.

This is perhaps entirely under-standable as, for reasons of lack offunding and negative media expo-sure, two years might be too shorta period to fully capitalise on newideas. In addition, planning and

FEATURE


Positive results from RCTs of individualisedhomeopathic treatmentare potentially crucial in defending and promoting homeopathy

Figure 5:

Risk of bias desig-

nation per RCT;

N=22 RCTs with

data extractable

for meta-analysis

Vibrant plenary

session (Dr Lionel

Milgrom)

© D

r R

ober

t M

ath

ie


running trials, especially in such a controversial field as homeo -pathy, takes much time and effort.So perhaps it was too much to ex -pect, two years on, Rome to beper haps as ‘boisterous’ as Barcelona.That said, there were for me somestandout moments. To recap:

• Work on the use of solvato -chromic dyes as molecularprobes of ultra-diluted solutionshas certainly come on apaceand has the potential to providea simple approach to the meas-urement of potencies in thefuture.

• When strictures almost astough as a Greek EU bailoutare applied to RCTs of individ-ualised homeopathy, it stillcomes back with a small, yetmeasurably positive effectabove and beyond placebo.Also, in the main, homeopathyexperiments have a reasonablygood record on reproducibility.

• At the molecular level, itappears homeopathic remediesinteract with allosteric protein

receptor sites (so modulatingcellular signalling processes),and also affect the over-expression of genes in stressed /poisoned organisms.

These three sets of observationsshould give so-called ‘sceptics’something to chew on – hopefullythey’ll choke on them! Moreimportantly, they strengthen theargument (and urgency) thathomeo pathy should be better inte-grated into conventional health-care, especially at a time whenthere is a growing crisis of multi-morbidity, polypharmacy, adversedrug reactions, antimicrobial resist-ance, and mounting cost. My guessis that it will be the developingworld that will lead on this.

On the downside though, it wasdisappointing we did not hearmore in Rome about the possible‘field effect’ that so energisedBarcelona, or for that matter Dr Iris Bell’s nanoparticles. Both of these areas have intriguingfuture possibilities for explaininghow homeopathy might ‘work’.

I know: like our earlier hungryRoman seagulls, the sceptics arecircling to attack yet again. There -fore confidence in our own experi-mental findings, it could be argued,at this time will be of more vitalimportance to our defence thanfinding anything as fabulous as a homeopathic equivalent of the

FEATURE


4H

AD

Confidence in our ownexperimental findingswill be of more vitalimportance than findinga homeopathic equivalentof the Higgs boson


Higgs boson. Still, curmudgeonthat I am, it would have been niceto have heard more about that‘field effect’. Hopefully, we’ll hearmore of these developments soon,if not at the next HRI Conference.

So, homeopathy, where ARE yougoing? If Barcelona announced thefirst step in a journey of 10,000miles, Rome could be seen more likea rest to take stock, consolidate,and see how far we have come …and how far there is still to go. Butnigglingly, there’s something else.

Readers might have noted thatalmost everyone referred to in thispiece is either Dr this or Professorthat and so on. Where were the‘normal’ homeopaths, you mightask, and how were they represented

in Rome? Of course, it depends on what you mean by ‘normal’, but let’s assume I’m talking about non-medical, that is, professionalhomeo paths. Well, there weren’t all that many around, which isn’tthat surprising as conferences arecostly and unless you are an invitedkeynote speaker, richer than Crassus(see box on this page), or have anacademic position with grants thatcover your expenses, the chancesare you won’t be able to afford it(fortunately, I was the grateful recip-ient of a Manchester Homeo pathicClinic bursary which provided thenecessary funds: thank you MHC!).

We must also remember that UK-style professional homeopathy is a rare beast, especially in most of

Europe (where it is necessary to be medically qualified to practisehomeopathy), so that the majorityof attendees were likely to be med-ical homeopaths. However, the vet-erinary side of homeopathy waslacking this time, and any potentialconflict over the use of animals inhomeopathic research, or indeedthe usual internecine squabblingover, for example, single remedyversus polypharmacy prescribing,was rapidly squashed. We were allfriends in Rome, and the demise ofits classical Republic then Empirewas not going to be mirrored byhomeopathic civil trouble andstrife! Even so, Rome did have thefeel of a homeopathy researchers’‘club’ in the making.

What we’re really talking abouthere is the perennial divide bet weenthe two streams of homeo pathy –professional and medical – and(hateful though it might be to bringup yet again, especially when we areall trying to be so ecumenical), one– admittedly jaundiced – way oflooking at this conference was thatwhat it really represented is homeo -pathy’s increasing ‘scientification’.

Are professional homeopaths trying to help their patients whilescratching a living really all thatbothered whether potencies can bemeasured using UV / visible spec-troscopy; that rigorous analysis ofthe RCT data shows homeopathyhas a small but significant effectbeyond placebo, or that remediesmight be working at the cell signalling and genetic levels? They

FEATURE


Not the ancient Greek kingCroesus, but Marcus LiciniusCrassus (115-53 BC), richestman in Roman history – if notall history – who made his for-tune via property speculationfrom citizens who had fallenfoul of his mentor, dictatorLucius Cornelius Sulla. A suc-cessful politician and general (hedefeated Spartacus), Crassus waspart of the First Triumviratewith Julius Caesar and GnaeusPompey Magnus (Pompey theGreat), and so was instrumentalin transforming the RomanRepublic into the Empire. Afterhe was killed at the Battle ofCarrhae fighting Rome’s long-standing enemy, the ParthianEmpire (from NE Iran), Caesarand Pompey fell out: the rest, asthey say, is history.

Welcome

Reception,

Piazza Navona

Opening ceremony:

From left: Simon

Wilkinson-Blake

(HRI), Dr Alexander

Tournier (HRI),

Rachel Roberts


HOMEOPATHYAWARENESS WEEKIS ON THE MOVE –SAVE THE DATE!

UK Homeopathy Awareness Week (HAW) is moving so wecan celebrate Samuel Hahnemann’s birthday alongside WorldHomeopathy Awareness Week.

4Homeopathy is planning a special HAW campaign for 2016based on the outcomes from our March 2015 one-day event.

Watch this space!

10 - 16 April

recalculation of data on effects of diluted thyroxin’, Int J HighDilution Res; 11(38): 3-18: c; Harrer B (2013) ‘Replication ofan experiment on extremely dilutedthyroxin and highland amphib-ians’, Homeopathy; 102: 25-30: d; Oberbaum M (2013) ‘Highlandamphibians and high potencies: a 20 year metamorphosis’, Homeo -pathy; 102: 1-2.http://www.positivehealth.com/arti-cle/homeopathy/dna-gene-expres-sion-and-safety-of-homeopathic-and-new-homeopathic-remedies.[Accessed 15th July 2015]Bellavite P. et al (2015) ‘Cell sensi-tivity, non-linearity, and inverseeffects’, Homeopathy; 104(2): 139-160 a; Cartwright N and Munro E(2010) ‘The limitations of ran-domised controlled trials in pre-dicting effectiveness’, Journal ofEvaluation in Clinical Practice; 16:260-266: b; Holmes D et al (2006)‘Deconstructing the evidence-baseddiscourse in health sciences: truth,power, and fascism’, Int J Evid

Based Health; 4: 180-6: c; SmithGCS & Pell JP (2003) ‘ParachuteUse to Prevent Death and MajorTrauma Related to GravitationalChallenge: Systematic Review ofRCTs’, BMJ; 327: 1459-1451: d; Rawlins M (2008) ‘DeTestimonio. Harveian Orationdelivered to the Royal College ofPhysicians’, Lancet; 372: 2152-2161. Milgrom LR (2014) ‘“Living iseasy with eyes closed …” Onblinded RCTs and specific andnon-specific effects of complextherapeutic interventions’, Eur JInteg Med; 6: 552-559. Mathie RT et al (2015) ‘Modelvalidity of randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualisedhomeopathic treatment’, Homeo -pathy; 104(3): 164-169Mathie RT et al (2014) ‘Random -ised placebo-controlled trials ofindividualised homeopathic treat-ment: systematic review and meta-analysis’, Systematic Rev.; 3: 142.http://oolong.co.uk/causality.htm[Accessed 15th July 2015]

a; Walach H (2005) ‘Generalisedentanglement: a new theoreticalmodel for understanding the effectsof complementary and alternativemedicine’, J Altern ComplementMed; 11: 549-559: b; Milgrom LR(2005) ‘Are randomised controlledtrials (RCTs) redundant for testingthe efficacy of homeopathy? A cri-tique of RCT methodology fromthe theoretical standpoint ofpatient-practitioner-remedy (PPR)entanglement’, J Altern Comple -ment Med; 11: 831-8: c; MilgromLR (2007) ‘Journeys in the countryof the blind: entanglement theoryand the effects of blinding on trialsof homeopathy and homeopathicprovings’, eCAM; 4(1): 7-16: d; Milgrom LR (2012) ‘Towards a topological description of thetherapeutic process. Part 2:Practitioner and patient perspec-tives of the “journey to cure”’, J Altern Comple ment Med; 18: 187-199.

Lionel Milgrom can be contactedat [email protected].

FEATURE


ARH Conference

AD


might but, fascinating as all this stuffis, who is it really for? Who ulti-mately are we trying to convince?And are we getting too concernedabout what ‘others’ think about us?(Witness Dr Peter Fisher’s comment:‘… irresponsible and speculativeclaims must be avoided’.)

Irritating as it might seem, wehave to remember we live in the‘real’ world, and that world is gov-erned by rules of ‘evidence’ basedon tried and tested notions of causeand effect – something, admittedly,that entanglement in modern quan-tum theory questions (oolong.co.uk),and ideas of which are being usedto illustrate the therapeutic process(Walach, 2005), so it should comeas no surprise when the claims wemake as homeopaths come underscrutiny. However much we mighthold up cured cases as evidence, at the end of the day they willalways be considered ‘anecdotal’when there is no accepted molecu-lar ‘mechanism’ as to how homeo -pathic remedies might work, andwhen the claims we make are notsubjected to the ‘rigors’ of theRCT, no matter how fault-ridden,biased, or imperfect that tarnished‘gold standard’ might be (Cart -wright et al, 2010; Milgrom, 2014).

But perhaps I am being just a tadtoo harsh. Enough of the solilo-quising already! I found the venueexcellent – it’s Rome after all, withthe Coliseum, the Forum, and over2000 years of history a mere 10-minute walk away; what’s not tolike?! And the atmosphere, the‘craic’, the ‘gemütlichkeit’, meetingup with old friends and makingnew ones, was inspiring, so muchso, it’s given me a new entangle-ment idea to play with over thecoming months. And ultimately,isn’t that what conferences are sup-posed to be about? Ideas? Ave atvale! (Hail and farewell!)

Agnoscere (Acknowledgement)I am deeply indebted to the Man -chester Homeopathic Clinic for a bursary to attend the second HRIConference in Rome and presenttwo posters on my research. I amalso grateful to Drs Steve Cartwrightand Robert Mathie for permission to use their material in this article.

‘Redde Caesari quae suntCaesaris’ (‘Render unto Caesarthat which is Caesar’s’) ReferencesMilgrom L (2013). ‘Homeopathy

research at Barcelona’, Homeo -pathy in Practice, Autumn 2013,15-23 Bellavite P et al (2006) ‘Immuno -logy and homeopathy. 3. Experi -mental studies in animals’, EvidBased Complement Alternat Med.;3(2): 171-186.Britton D (2013) ‘Animal experi-ments in homeopathy research:more harm than good?’, Homeo -pathic Links; 26(4): 268-272.Posadzki et al (2012) ‘Adverseeffects of of homeopathy: a systematic review of published casereports and case series’, Int J ClinPract 66(12): 1178-1188

a; De Smet et al (2014) ‘Allosterictargeting of receptor tyrosinekinases’, Nature Biotechnology2014; 32: 1113-1120: b; WoottenD et al (2013) ‘Emerging para-digms in GPCR allostery: implica-tions for drug discovery’, NatureReviews Drug Discovery; 12: 630-644. a; Thomas, Y et al (2000)‘Activation of Human Eutrophilsby Electronically TransmittedPhorbol-Myristate Acetate’,Medical Hypotheses; 54: 33-39: b; Jonas WB et al (2006) ‘Can spe-cific biological signals be digi-tised?’, The FASEB Journal; 20(1):23-28: c; Montagnier L. et al(2009) ‘Electromagnetic signals areproduced by aqueous nanostruc-tures derived from bacterial DNAsequences’, Interdiscip Sci ComputLife Sci; 1: 81-90.

a; Franco MI, et al (2011) ‘Mole -cular vibration-sensing componentin Drosophilia melano gaster olfac-tion’, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA;108(9): 3797-3802: b; Gane S, et al(2013) ‘Molecular Vibration-Sensing Component in HumanOlfaction’, PLoS ONE; 8(1):e55780: c; Wilkinson N (2013)‘Quantum mechanics stinks. Lifefrom a Wellcome Trust perspec-tive’, Wellcome Trust (13thFebruary 2013).(Online:http://blog.wellcome.ac.uk/2013/02/13/quantum-mechanics-stinks/) d; Blackwell G (2013)‘Good Vibrations: The quantummechanics of homeopathy’,Homoeopathic Links Winter 2013;26: 262-267: e; Brookes JC et al(2012) ‘The swipe-card model ofodorant recognition’, Sensors;12(11): 15709-49 a; Chikramane PS, et al (2012)‘Why extreme dilutions reach non-zero asymptotes: A nanoparticlehypothesis based on froth flota-tion’. Langmuir; 28: 15864-15895:b; Bell IR, et al (2013) ‘Testing thenanoparticle-allostatic cross-adap-tation-sensitization model forhomeopathic remedy effects’,Homeopathy; 102: 66-81.Posadzki P. et al (2012) ‘Adverseeffects of homeopathy: a systematicreview of published case reportsand case series’, Int J Clin Pract;66(12): 1178-1188. a; Beauvais FA (2013) ‘Quantum-like model of homeopathy clinicaltrials: importance of in situ ran-domization and unblinding’,Homeopathy; 102: 106-113: b;Almirantis Y. ‘Homeopathy at theedge between tradition and modernscience: remedies as carriers ofSignificance’, Homeopathy2013;102: 114-122Milgrom LR, Ringo MR, andWehrstein K (2012) ‘Emergingeconomies need for cheap, efficienthealth care makes Western anti-homeopathy rhetoric irrelevant:observations from the CanadianHomeopathy Conference, October,2011’, J Altern Comp Med; 18(7):1-4. http://www.chem-toddler.com/solutions-and-solubility/solva-tochromism.html [Accessed 15thJuly 2015]a; Weber S. et al (2008) ‘The effectof homeopathically-prepared thy-roxin on highland frogs: influenceof electromagnetic fields’, Homeo -pathy; 97(1): 3-9: b; Kiefer P. et al(2012) ‘Lowland amphibian –

FEATURE


Who ultimately are we trying to convince?And are we getting tooconcerned about what‘others’ think about us?


recalculation of data on effects of diluted thyroxin’, Int J HighDilution Res; 11(38): 3-18: c; Harrer B (2013) ‘Replication ofan experiment on extremely dilutedthyroxin and highland amphib-ians’, Homeopathy; 102: 25-30: d; Oberbaum M (2013) ‘Highlandamphibians and high potencies: a 20 year metamorphosis’, Homeo -pathy; 102: 1-2.http://www.positivehealth.com/arti-cle/homeopathy/dna-gene-expres-sion-and-safety-of-homeopathic-and-new-homeopathic-remedies.[Accessed 15th July 2015]Bellavite P. et al (2015) ‘Cell sensi-tivity, non-linearity, and inverseeffects’, Homeopathy; 104(2): 139-160 a; Cartwright N and Munro E(2010) ‘The limitations of ran-domised controlled trials in pre-dicting effectiveness’, Journal ofEvaluation in Clinical Practice; 16:260-266: b; Holmes D et al (2006)‘Deconstructing the evidence-baseddiscourse in health sciences: truth,power, and fascism’, Int J Evid

Based Health; 4: 180-6: c; SmithGCS & Pell JP (2003) ‘ParachuteUse to Prevent Death and MajorTrauma Related to GravitationalChallenge: Systematic Review ofRCTs’, BMJ; 327: 1459-1451: d; Rawlins M (2008) ‘DeTestimonio. Harveian Orationdelivered to the Royal College ofPhysicians’, Lancet; 372: 2152-2161. Milgrom LR (2014) ‘“Living iseasy with eyes closed …” Onblinded RCTs and specific andnon-specific effects of complextherapeutic interventions’, Eur JInteg Med; 6: 552-559. Mathie RT et al (2015) ‘Modelvalidity of randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualisedhomeopathic treatment’, Homeo -pathy; 104(3): 164-169Mathie RT et al (2014) ‘Random -ised placebo-controlled trials ofindividualised homeopathic treat-ment: systematic review and meta-analysis’, Systematic Rev.; 3: 142.http://oolong.co.uk/causality.htm[Accessed 15th July 2015]

a; Walach H (2005) ‘Generalisedentanglement: a new theoreticalmodel for understanding the effectsof complementary and alternativemedicine’, J Altern ComplementMed; 11: 549-559: b; Milgrom LR(2005) ‘Are randomised controlledtrials (RCTs) redundant for testingthe efficacy of homeopathy? A cri-tique of RCT methodology fromthe theoretical standpoint ofpatient-practitioner-remedy (PPR)entanglement’, J Altern Comple -ment Med; 11: 831-8: c; MilgromLR (2007) ‘Journeys in the countryof the blind: entanglement theoryand the effects of blinding on trialsof homeopathy and homeopathicprovings’, eCAM; 4(1): 7-16: d; Milgrom LR (2012) ‘Towards a topological description of thetherapeutic process. Part 2:Practitioner and patient perspec-tives of the “journey to cure”’, J Altern Comple ment Med; 18: 187-199.

Lionel Milgrom can be contactedat [email protected].

FEATURE


ARH Conference

AD


might but, fascinating as all this stuffis, who is it really for? Who ulti-mately are we trying to convince?And are we getting too concernedabout what ‘others’ think about us?(Witness Dr Peter Fisher’s comment:‘… irresponsible and speculativeclaims must be avoided’.)

Irritating as it might seem, wehave to remember we live in the‘real’ world, and that world is gov-erned by rules of ‘evidence’ basedon tried and tested notions of causeand effect – something, admittedly,that entanglement in modern quan-tum theory questions (oolong.co.uk),and ideas of which are being usedto illustrate the therapeutic process(Walach, 2005), so it should comeas no surprise when the claims wemake as homeopaths come underscrutiny. However much we mighthold up cured cases as evidence, at the end of the day they willalways be considered ‘anecdotal’when there is no accepted molecu-lar ‘mechanism’ as to how homeo -pathic remedies might work, andwhen the claims we make are notsubjected to the ‘rigors’ of theRCT, no matter how fault-ridden,biased, or imperfect that tarnished‘gold standard’ might be (Cart -wright et al, 2010; Milgrom, 2014).

But perhaps I am being just a tadtoo harsh. Enough of the solilo-quising already! I found the venueexcellent – it’s Rome after all, withthe Coliseum, the Forum, and over2000 years of history a mere 10-minute walk away; what’s not tolike?! And the atmosphere, the‘craic’, the ‘gemütlichkeit’, meetingup with old friends and makingnew ones, was inspiring, so muchso, it’s given me a new entangle-ment idea to play with over thecoming months. And ultimately,isn’t that what conferences are sup-posed to be about? Ideas? Ave atvale! (Hail and farewell!)

Agnoscere (Acknowledgement)I am deeply indebted to the Man -chester Homeopathic Clinic for a bursary to attend the second HRIConference in Rome and presenttwo posters on my research. I amalso grateful to Drs Steve Cartwrightand Robert Mathie for permission to use their material in this article.

‘Redde Caesari quae suntCaesaris’ (‘Render unto Caesarthat which is Caesar’s’) ReferencesMilgrom L (2013). ‘Homeopathy

research at Barcelona’, Homeo -pathy in Practice, Autumn 2013,15-23 Bellavite P et al (2006) ‘Immuno -logy and homeopathy. 3. Experi -mental studies in animals’, EvidBased Complement Alternat Med.;3(2): 171-186.Britton D (2013) ‘Animal experi-ments in homeopathy research:more harm than good?’, Homeo -pathic Links; 26(4): 268-272.Posadzki et al (2012) ‘Adverseeffects of of homeopathy: a systematic review of published casereports and case series’, Int J ClinPract 66(12): 1178-1188

a; De Smet et al (2014) ‘Allosterictargeting of receptor tyrosinekinases’, Nature Biotechnology2014; 32: 1113-1120: b; WoottenD et al (2013) ‘Emerging para-digms in GPCR allostery: implica-tions for drug discovery’, NatureReviews Drug Discovery; 12: 630-644. a; Thomas, Y et al (2000)‘Activation of Human Eutrophilsby Electronically TransmittedPhorbol-Myristate Acetate’,Medical Hypotheses; 54: 33-39: b; Jonas WB et al (2006) ‘Can spe-cific biological signals be digi-tised?’, The FASEB Journal; 20(1):23-28: c; Montagnier L. et al(2009) ‘Electromagnetic signals areproduced by aqueous nanostruc-tures derived from bacterial DNAsequences’, Interdiscip Sci ComputLife Sci; 1: 81-90.

a; Franco MI, et al (2011) ‘Mole -cular vibration-sensing componentin Drosophilia melano gaster olfac-tion’, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA;108(9): 3797-3802: b; Gane S, et al(2013) ‘Molecular Vibration-Sensing Component in HumanOlfaction’, PLoS ONE; 8(1):e55780: c; Wilkinson N (2013)‘Quantum mechanics stinks. Lifefrom a Wellcome Trust perspec-tive’, Wellcome Trust (13thFebruary 2013).(Online:http://blog.wellcome.ac.uk/2013/02/13/quantum-mechanics-stinks/) d; Blackwell G (2013)‘Good Vibrations: The quantummechanics of homeopathy’,Homoeopathic Links Winter 2013;26: 262-267: e; Brookes JC et al(2012) ‘The swipe-card model ofodorant recognition’, Sensors;12(11): 15709-49 a; Chikramane PS, et al (2012)‘Why extreme dilutions reach non-zero asymptotes: A nanoparticlehypothesis based on froth flota-tion’. Langmuir; 28: 15864-15895:b; Bell IR, et al (2013) ‘Testing thenanoparticle-allostatic cross-adap-tation-sensitization model forhomeopathic remedy effects’,Homeopathy; 102: 66-81.Posadzki P. et al (2012) ‘Adverseeffects of homeopathy: a systematicreview of published case reportsand case series’, Int J Clin Pract;66(12): 1178-1188. a; Beauvais FA (2013) ‘Quantum-like model of homeopathy clinicaltrials: importance of in situ ran-domization and unblinding’,Homeopathy; 102: 106-113: b;Almirantis Y. ‘Homeopathy at theedge between tradition and modernscience: remedies as carriers ofSignificance’, Homeopathy2013;102: 114-122Milgrom LR, Ringo MR, andWehrstein K (2012) ‘Emergingeconomies need for cheap, efficienthealth care makes Western anti-homeopathy rhetoric irrelevant:observations from the CanadianHomeopathy Conference, October,2011’, J Altern Comp Med; 18(7):1-4. http://www.chem-toddler.com/solutions-and-solubility/solva-tochromism.html [Accessed 15thJuly 2015]a; Weber S. et al (2008) ‘The effectof homeopathically-prepared thy-roxin on highland frogs: influenceof electromagnetic fields’, Homeo -pathy; 97(1): 3-9: b; Kiefer P. et al(2012) ‘Lowland amphibian –

FEATURE


Who ultimately are we trying to convince?And are we getting tooconcerned about what‘others’ think about us?


An important date for your diary!

The ARH is 15 years old in 2016.

The theme is ‘Milestones’.

Let’s celebrate together!

More details to follow soon.

Saturday, 14 May 2016

Join us at the St Mary Abbots Centre,London, for our Conference and AGM.

‘homoeopathia! quo vadis?’s3.amazonaws.com/presspublisher-do/upload/318/hri...cathay sent an...

Documents