News

Alternative Medicine is often used by the general public and some healthcare practitioners to refer to medical techniques which are not ...
Read More

Visit Us On Youtube

Statement on the IMPRO review which resulted in the EU voting not to spend any more money on research into Veterinary Homeopathy
Whereas this review by Doehring and Sundrum was thoughtful about research of homeopathy in a farm context in general, it has no additional value beyond that of the prior literature (Mathie and Clausen (2015a); Mathie and Clausen (2015b); Mathie and Clausen (2014)) in making any comments about the efficacy of homeopathy. More research is clearly required, as the authors recommend, but it seems a step too far for them to state, ‘replacing or reducing antibiotics with homeopathy currently cannot be recommended’. Hence, the contribution of this paper and the advice it offers to the reader and the EU needs to be questioned.”
 Robert Mathie

Latest ideas on how homeopathy might work

 

In response to ongoing skeptical activity against homeopathy we would like to highlight the following facts:

  • Only biased meta-analysis papers ‘prove’ that homeopathy has no clinical evidence (ref Prof Hahn: see http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3735/rr-110)
  • Homeopathy is popular and will therefore remain relevant (28% of population in the EU use homeopathy debate/essenhttps://www.hri-research.org/resources/homeopathy-the-tialevidence/use-of-homeopathy-across-the-world/   ).
  • ‘The sceptical person has an agenda, wants to prove somebody else is wrong and uses biased scientific methods’. (www. skepticalaboutskeptics.org)
  • The lack of a generally accepted explanation for the working of homeopathy is not different from the lack of understanding of so many modern medical procedures that have proven through trials to be effective. Being able to explain something before accepting that it exists is only a human wish. So many things prove to be real without being fully understood
  • The WHO promotes the introduction of traditional and alternative medicine into national medical programs. http://www.who.int/medicines/publications/traditional/trm_strategy14_23/en/
  • Official bodies are seeing through sceptical criticism (Switzerland, Australia, AVA).
  • There is a lack of research into homeopathy due to a lack of funding and lack of interest in the scientific community.
  • A Cochrane Review by El Dib et al. 2007 has to be mentioned, with 1016 systematic reviews on conventional therapies being investigated, with 44% positive, 7% negative results and 49% of the reviews reporting that the evidence did not support either benefit or harm.
  • Criticism of homeopathy is mostly delivered in soundbites. Those who would like to inform themselves see here : https://www.hri-research.org/resources/homeopathy-faqs/
  • Testimonials of clients can be found on the BAHVS website.
  • High quality scientific research papers are regularly being refused publication by editors of main stream scientific journals when they find out the subject of the paper is homeopathy. (Dixit Dr. Khuda-Bukhsh who has many papers published in his name: http://researchinhomeopathy.org/compendium-arkb/)
  • A French study showed that homeopathy in daily practice is as effective for a number of condition in human medicine for a 300% reduced use of medicines: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4495089/
  • Homeopathy is practiced by vets who work according to an accepted code of practice set by their national organisational body.
  • Clinical freedom is generally accepted: if this is curtailed where will it stop.
  • Vets decide to learn to use homeopathy to have at their disposal extra ways of helping their patients. The motivation is to improve outcomes for patients.

Homeopathy and conventional medicine may well have different views on how to treat the patient but it is in the interest of patients that we find the best ways to work together for the benefit of the patient.