When I first decided to retrain as a homeopath and told my friends, I was faced with very polar reactions, some so vitriolic that you would have thought I'd taken up witchcraft. Somewhere in the middle were the sceptics, who simply gave me a benign smile and nod as if I was completely wasting my time. But roll on several years, and this is the most satisfying and emotionally rewarding career I have ever had.
If, in countries such as Pakistan and India, homeopathy is not only mainstream, but the preferred healthcare system for most, why in the West are we so sceptical? Human nature for most people is to be sceptical, if not quite afraid, of what we don't know.
The history of "scientific" medicine
The USA is very influential in the Western world, and back in the early 20th century there was a small number of men who made such enormous wealth that, through their philanthropic efforts, they shaped all of society. Rockefeller was among these, and he focused his efforts on medicine, in part because he lost one of his close family members to ill health at a young age.
At that point in time most people could not afford to see a doctor and relied on the local herbalist, apothecary, or homeopath (who were also medical doctors) to help when they got ill. Doctors had the same social standing as any tradesperson, so it was a no more lucrative profession than any other and there were not many of them. Their practices remained relatively primitive, such as bloodletting, purging, and using medicines, like mercury, we now know to be poisonous. In fact, a woman in childbirth was more likely to die if attended by a doctor than a midwife, because of their practices (doctors didn't wash their hands or clean their instruments between patients, who were often suffering communicable diseases).
Rockefeller himself was a great supporter of homeopathy, like any person of wealth in that era, he was able to secure the best treatment. However, his son, who had taken over the Rockefeller empire, employed Frederick T Gates (no relation to Bill), a very gifted ex-clergyman, to manage his philanthropic efforts. In ploughing funds into Universities, to create medical schools designed to systematize and raise the standard of medicine, Gates deliberately excluded homeopathy. Not because it was ineffective, but because he couldn't get his head around this very different approach.
So as "scientific" medicine was developed within Universities, homeopathy was left out in the cold and no funds ploughed into its advancement. As pharmaceutical companies, with their billions in profits have evolved, this gap has only widened. And yet, despite this, all these years later homeopathy is still very much in the picture.
The parallels and differences in homeopathy
It's not widely known that homeopathy was actually developed by a very gifted medical doctor, in response to having become disillusioned at the medical practices of his day as he saw them weakening patients, and all too often sending them to an early grave. He observed that cinchona bark, the treatment for malaria, induced malarial symptoms when ingested by someone without malaria. Through experimentation (or science), he established that this was true of all substances, i.e. something that could cure symptoms in the sick, could induce those symptoms in the well.
He took this realisation, and just like any scientist, turned it on its head and experimented with various substances, on himself initially, and then over time on willing volunteers, such as other doctors in his friendship group. Through careful observation and documentation, they identified all of the symptoms that a substance could create, and then set about using those substances to cure those symptoms in their patients. Although that doesn't feel very ethical, it is completely scientific. In fact if you compare this approach to clinical trials, which would not be established for quite some time in the medical profession, you can see where "scientific medicine" may have got the idea from.
Unlike the "heroic" medical practices of that era, purging, bloodletting etc., this homeopathic practice provided a far gentler cure. So naturally it became popular, especially amongst the upper classes who could seek out, and afford, the best treatment.
A step too far for even the modern world
In developing his craft, Hahnemann was acutely aware that some of the substances he was using were in themselves toxic. He experimented with increasingly small dilutions, and eventually settled on a process of "sucussing", i.e. banging the vial several times on a hard bible, between each dilution, which seemed to result in the strengthening of the power of the remedy even though the dilution increased. It is this step that has the modern world declaring - "it is nothing but placebo" - rather than because it doesn't work (because we know it does).
For those of you in the UK old enough, you may remember a Panorama program that undertook an experiment to disprove homeopathy. They tried to measure whether there was any of the original substance left in a homeopathic remedy, and because they could detect none, concluded the effects must be in our head. Surely all it proved was that their science, at that time, was unable to detect anything? Today, we have an organisation, HRI-research.org, that focuses its efforts on identifying high quality evidence for homeopathy, through a range of methods including clinical trials, experimental research, observational studies, etc.
Homeopathy today
So where is the evidence behind homeopathy? Homeopaths are still using the same remedies they have been using for over 200 years, plus we discover new ones all the time. In addition to the original "clinical trials", known in the homeopathic world as provings, we have detailed clinical evidence stretching back over that time. So unlike modern medicine, we know the long-term effects of these homeopathic medicines, which never need to be withdrawn from market. And whereas in the Western world, where there is an increase in chronic conditions, especially neurological and cancer, where homeopathy is practiced, people become healthier over time. Our late Queen was a great advertisement for regular homeopathic use, working up until a couple of days before her death, and dying healthily at a ripe old age.
Across most of Europe homeopathy is widely available in most pharmacies, and people regularly use it alongside other healthcare products, it accounting for 5% of all pharmaceutical product spend. In Switzerland, the government undertook an extensive study of its efficacy, that resulted in it being supported by health insurance. In India and Brazil, it forms part of the national health service, with dedicated departments.
In the UK we have the National Health Service (NHS), which uses government funding so that we can offer healthcare equally to everyone, so most people never search outside that arena for a solution. From its inception in 1948 until fairly recently, there were four NHS hospitals staffed by medical doctors, also trained as homeopaths. Referrals to these hospitals was made for conditions for which modern medicine was unable to provide effective solutions, e.g., eczema, migraines, rheumatism etc. Despite recorded outcomes from the Bristol hospital over a 6-year period, following up over 6,000 patients, showing an improvement in 70% of cases and a life-changing improvement in 50%, these hospitals were closed down.
Modern medicine & homeopathy as a compliment
It's not that homeopathy doesn't work, or that its not scientific, it's just that it is based on a different approach than the medical system we, in the West, have grown used to. If you have a car accident, the best place for you is the Hospital emergency department, you wouldn't call a homeopath (well not straight away, although the humble Arnica Montana would help with shock and bruising). But there are many instances where going to a homeopath in the first instance might save you from a lot more intrusive conventional treatment down the line. Or, there are chronic conditions, such as eczema, that have no solution in conventional medicine other than short-term suppression. The point is to be open to both options.
I work at Ainsworths homeopathic pharmacy near the Harley Street district, which is renowned for its concentration of top medical consultants. These consultants often send their clients to us for complementary treatment, be it a surgery mix to speed up the post-surgery healing process, or in one case a homeopathic remedy to reverse the adverse effects of a strong Opioid that a client needed to continue taking for pain, but that had horrible side effects. The two are not mutually exclusive.
So if you have been struggling with ill health, whether you are already getting conventional treatment or not, consider exploring this alternative/complementary approach. You just might be surprised at what it can do for you.
I offer a free 15 minute consultation to discuss whether I think I can help your specific case.
Comments