Wednesday, 21 December 2011

Healthy Medicine (7) Patient Choice

"If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." 
Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson, a powerful advocate of personal liberty, knew over 200 years ago that patient choice is one of the most important elements of human rights. He would undoubtedly be upset by what is happening in the USA today - with government and health authorities trying to impose conventional drugs and vaccines on people who would rather not have them. He would also be opposed to a UK NHS that in many (most) areas of the country is imposing a conventional, drug-based medical monopoly on its patients.

This is particularly so when a growing, and now substantial part of the population, is looking for safer, more effective, drug-free solutions to their health problems. The reason is not just the failure of conventional medicine to deliver health. It is the growing awareness that homeopathy, and indeed, other natural therapies, provide them with just this - safe and effective therapy for a range of illnesses and ailments.

So here are just a few of the articles about homeopathy that can be found on the internet - but not, of course, in the national media. Nor, regrettably, will you hear about any of this within our NHS.

* Homeopathy and skin conditions

* Homeopathy and itching

* Homeopathy, smoking, and other addictions

* Homeopathy and heartburn

* Homeopathy and Breast Pain

* Homeopathy and Endometriosis

* Homeopathy and Genital Warts

* Homeopathy and Diabetes

* Homeopathy and Nightmares, Night-Terrors

* Homeopathy and Ulcerative Colitis

* Homeopathy and Fatigue (Tiredness)

* Homeopathy for anger and mortification

As one great Indian politician and statesman once said:

Homeopathy cures a greater percentage of cases than any other method of treatment. Homeopathy is the latest and most refined method of treating patients economically and non-violently.
                                                                                                                            - Mahatma Gandhi

Tuesday, 13 December 2011

Homeopathy Heals (3) Ill? Allow homeopathy to help!

If you are ill, and it does not matter how the illness has been diagnosed, homeopathy can help you. This article explains how it does so - by treating the individual, and his/her symptoms rather than a conventionally diagnosed 'disease'. 

All that is necessary is to find a remedy that matches your symptoms, and it will work. Sometime, in 'first-aid' situations, this can be quite simple - it is something you can try for yourself. In more complex illness the patient will need the expertise of a homeopath.

In this week's 'Homeopathy Heals' I am drawing attention to a series of internet articles that demonstrate the wide range of illnesses that homeopathy can heal!

Vertigo (dizziness). Some simple remedies suggested for common types of vertigo.

Headaches. Several remedy suggestions, with short remedy pictures, in this article

Tetanus. Always have some Ledum around, in case of cuts and grazes.

Chicken Pox. Some sensible non-drug strategies for coping with this illness. Carbo Veg is a homeopathic remedy that can be used when suffering from chicken pox - see a homeopath if it does not ease the condition.

Croup. Some major remedies, with symptom pictures, suggested here.

Nausea and Motion Sickness. Several first-aid remedy suggestions here, with brief symptom pictures.

Sleep disorders. Remedy suggestions here, and remedy descriptions.

Cystitis (bladder infections). Several remedies suggested here, but consult a homeopath if it persists, or is a regular occurance.

Genital Warts.

Gout. Four remedies suggested here - but if condition is chronic, it is advisable to consult a homeopath.

Fibromyalgia. An article by a homeopath who has researched the condition, and treated many cases.

Angina. Not an illness for homeopathic self-prescribing, but some sensible non-drug suggestions and alternative remedies and strategies to cope with the condition.

Heart Problems. Look at this article and video to see what can be achieved

Homeopathy is becoming increasingly popular as many people are now looking for 'non-drug' alternatives to conventional medicine, dominated as it is by Big Pharma drugs.

Monday, 5 December 2011

Healthy Medicine (6) Homeopathy just keeps on being successful

Homeopathy is effective - according to an exhaustive Swiss Federal study conducted over the last 6 years. The full report, in English, is yet to be published, but the summary shows it to be a very positive report for Homeopathy, and will ensure that Swiss patients continue to have access to homeopathy through their State Health Insurance scheme. The ARH plans to report more fully on this in its next edition of its journal, 'Homeopathy in Practice', but it's conclusion can hardly be clearer.

“... we have established that there is sufficient supporting evidence for the pre-clinical (experimental) as well as clinical effects of homeopathy, and that in absolute terms, as well as when compared to conventional therapies, it offers a safe and cost-effective treatment.”

For those people who have used homeopathy this will come as no surprise. But it is good news for the homeopathic community, which has been under attack from the vested interests of Big Pharma for so long now. And evidence for the efficacy of homeopathy continue to appear on the internet.

Despite constant attacks on the NHS Homeopathy Hospital's in the UK, they continue to flourish - where they are allowed to do so, of course. This is a recent report on the progress being made in the Glasgow hospital. It is clear that despite attempts by the ConMed dominated NHS, patients who use these services value having the choice of homeopathy for their personal treatment.

Indeed, tales of the efficacy and safety of homeopathy continue to appear on the internet (but not regrettably in our mainstream media, of course!)

Have a look, for instance, at Angie's story, her battle with chronic infections, and the cure she found with homeopathy.

Or this remarkable story, of a filmmaker who contracted MRSA, was treated by ConMed without effect (the condition actually got seriously worse); and who was eventually cured by homeopathy - right in front of his cameras!

More generally, the efficacy of homeopathy for flu is discussed in this article. Quite rightly it looks at one of the main reasons a growing number of people are looking for safer, and more effective alternatives to vaccination, and the poisons, like mercury and aluminium, they contain. Vitamin D is also offered as a better alternative.

The popularity of Homeopathy in India just escalates, and really is quite remarkable. This article shows how Sri Lanka is now trying to use India's success to spread the message to its people. This is, of course, what happens in countries that seek good medical outcomes for its patients, and are not held hostage by large, influential and profitable drug companies.

Homeopathy is a very attractive therapy in many parts of the world, not only because Big Pharma interests are not as strong, but because it is a less expensive (as well as a more effective). For instance, this article describes some work currently being done in Ghana, and outlines several cases that have been managed with homeopathy.

And homeopathy is also proving helpful in some parts of the world that has to deal with problems ConMed has no answer to, and where there is no profit for them doing so. Following the incredible success of homeopathy with Leptospirosis in Cuba, the treatment of Dengue Fever with homeopathy is now showing quite amazing results.

Homeopathy is a very simple therapy, and a very responsive one. The principle of treating 'like with like' means that it can quickly turn its hand to even the most uncommon of diseases. For instance, not many of us know what 'chikungunya' is! But clearly homeopathy can treat is successfully!

What all this means is that alongside the growing failure of Big Pharma and its drug treatments,

Friday, 2 December 2011

So Homeopathy Does Work!

A Swiss Report, which thoroughly investigated the effectiveness of homeopathy, has now been published. The summary of this report is available in English, and it makes good "I told you so" reading for everyone connected with the homeopathy community.

And, indeed, it makes very bad reading for the homeopathy denialists, who have been attacking homeopathy so vehemently and gratuitously for so long through Europe!

The full HTA report will be published in English soon, but the summary shows that it covers three main considerations:
* Effectiveness (looking not just at RCTs, but other evidence more appropriate for homeopathy)
* Appropriateness (looking at the demand and need, as well as the safety of homeopathy
* Cost effectiveness

As far as effectiveness is concerned, the report, over 300 pages long, exhaustively reviews the scientific literature in homeopathy, summarising 22 reviews, 20 of which show 'positive' results for homeopathy. Karin Mont, Chair of ARH, has this to say about these sections of the report:
"The report is balanced in its description of the underlying principles of homeopathy. It stresses the wealth of empirical evidence acquired in clinical practice over two hundred years, which confirms homeopathy to be an effective system of medicine, and it highlights the essential principle of individualisation. 

As far as appropriateness is concerned, the report states that homeopathy training was of high standing, that there was an internationally agreed regulation in the manufacture of homeopathy remedies, and that there was a high degree of safety in homeopathic practice in Switzerland. It also said that homeopathy produced few adverse reactions, and were free from toxic side-effects.

And as far as cost-effectiveness was concerned, the report, whilst concluding there was insufficient data, but the studies available indicated that homeopathy was cost efficient to deliver, could reduce dependence on expensive conventional drugs, and by increasing general wellbeing, could reduce the number of days lost to sickness.

This report comes at the end of a long process, which began in 1999, when it was agreed that 5 Natural Medical Therapies should be included in the Swiss Health Insurance Scheme. In 2005, the Swiss government decided to end this, and sought to suppress the report, but this led to a popular reaction, and a petition that delivered over 145,000 signatories. For more information on this struggle, click here.

It is clear that the conventional medical establishment does not want to 'share' treatment with natural therapies; and certainly it does not want to be subject to comparisons with them. But at last it does seem likely that this report will ensure that it has to do so.

Tuesday, 15 November 2011

Healthy Medicine (4)

Homeopathy - its time is coming! So states Amy Lansky, PhD., in this lovely article. If you are new to homeopathy, or if you are looking for a safer, more effective medical therapy, you should read it. And it is hard to disagree with her argument that 'energy' medicine, and homeopathy in particular, is the medicine of the near future. If the 19th century saw its birth and development, and the 20th century saw it being overshadowed by the promise of the emerging 'scientific' medicine, the 21st century is proving that so-called 'scientific' or conventional medicine (ConMed) has little to offer patients, who are now, in increasing numbers, looking a real, effective alternative.

And as the Faculty of Homeopathy argues, homeopathy is not only far safer that ConMed, it is also less expensive. This article refers to a French government report that found that the total cost per patient receiving homeopathic treatment was 15% less than the cost of conventional treatment.

I must say that I would dispute this figure, as it is probably far higher. As a practising homeopath, I have always found that homeopathy was a difficult business. A patient walks through the door, you treat him, or her, and he, or she, gets better. End of business! ConMed treatments don't make people better in that permanent way; often patients are told they have to take drugs for the rest of their lives, their ailments and diseases carry on, ameliorated, but not cured. And with the disease-inducing-effects of Big Pharma drugs, conventional medicine has, in time, even more illness and disease to treat and pay for.

Yet talking a individuals being 'cured' of disease does not go down well with those who criticise homeopathy - the homeopathy deniers. They are dismissed as 'anecdotes'; their testimony is not 'scientific'. They forget that these people, myself included, are patients, who were once ill, but are now better. And being well is what all patients want. So let's look at a few more 'anecdotes'!

This is one - who states that "after about 18 weeks of being on homeopathy my life went from being almost unbearable to the best I have ever known". Note that she says that homeopathy was 'a bit pricey' - but remember that she clearly paid for her treatment, and did not have it on the NHS. We tend to compare 'free' health treatment on the NHS with paying for homeopathy privately. And homeopathy denialists are keen that patients should be refused the choice of having homeopathy paid for by the NHS.

Here are two cases of 'retained placenta' - cured by the homeopathy remedy, Sepia.

And here, a single patient suffering from obesity, and much else, treated with Calcarea.

And here, a case of a young boy with facial tics, again treated with Calcarea.

But of course, anecdotes don't remain as such after a significant number of people have been known to be cured. They becomes statistics - people who know the value of homeopathy. So altogether, these 'anecdotes' now mean, according to the British Homeopathic Association, that some 15% of the UK population currently use homeopathy. And as this article explains, part of the anecdotal evidence now includes celebrities such as Paul McCartney, David Beckham, Twiggy, Roger Daltrey, Susan Hampshire, Tina Turner, Louise Jameson, Gaby Roslin, Jude Law, Sade Frost, Nadia Sawalha, Richard Branson, Debra Stephenson, Meera Syal, and of course the Queen, and many of the Royal Family.

And where homeopathy is used, high levels of patient satisfaction are usually reported. This is a study emanating from Germany, but I wonder how many of you know about a pilot project undertaken in 2008 by the Department of Health, and the NHS, in Northern Ireland. This, too, showed great support from patients, and considerable benefits for the NHS. These included, amongst others, a reduction in drugs expenditure, an alleviation of GP and hospital workload, and savings accruing from reduced sick leave. What happened as a result? Nothing! There are clearly people in the NHS and the Department of Health who don't want you to know just how good homeopathy is! I cannot even find anything about the pilot study on their website! However, I have a copy of the PDF report - and if anyone emails me I will forward a copy to them.

Yet everywhere homeopathy is under attack. Why? The underlying reason is that the ConMed Establishment wants to retain its monopoly within the NHS. But Big Pharma drugs are failing, and failing badly. And like most wounded animals, it attacks those it is most fearful of - and homeopathy fits this bill. As Harvey Bigelsen, MD, says:

"What is common among the (CAM) professions ... is that they cost far less than drugs, surgery, imaging, and laboratory tests. The AMA, through its state medical boards, in conjunction with the FDA and other local, state, and federal agencies, keeps a close eye on these practitioners in case they might claim to "cure," "diagnose," "treat," or "prescribe." Each profession noted has, at one time or another, experienced relentless legal pursuit. Any non-drug sold in this country must follow strict rules about labeling to avoid suggesting any "medical" or "health" benefit. 

Only ConMed can do this - and they signally fail to do so. So their attacks are not undertaken from a position of strength, but a position of weakness. Big Pharma companies, and their apologists may have a lot of wealth and influence. But they have no ability to 'treat' or 'cure' illness. Homeopathy does.

Steve Scrutton
Director, Alliance of Registered Homeopath

Note. The articles contained in this blog do not necessarily reflect the views of the ARH.

Monday, 7 November 2011

Healthy Medicine (3)

Welcome to this weekly newsletter - if you have not already subscribed, or if you want a weekly email reminder of publication, please do so now.

Why is homeopathy increasingly popular? Well, there are many reason. The core reason is that homeopathy is both safe to use, and (with the right remedy) effective with any ailment or disease. In fact, an increasing number of people are buying over-the-counter remedies, as this article shows. And this brings in a third reason - homeopathy is not expensive.

Homeopathy cures where Allopathy fails. Are you being treated with conventional medicine, have been for years, and you are no better? Many people turn to homeopathy at this point of their lives.....

Homeopathy is helpful for a whole range of conditions - read these articles

Homeopathy and the treatment of women during Menopause. Look at this article, to see why homeopathy is both safer, and more effective than conventional treatment - especially HRT treatment.

Homeopathy and Bedwetting. This article explains the background to the problem, and provides information on some of the remedies that can be used for the condition.

And for incontinence more generally, a wider approach can be found here.

Homeopathy and Claustrophobia.

Homeopathy and Influenza (flu).

Homeopathy and Epilepsy - a personal story.

Homeopathy, digestion and constipation. Another personal story.

And some practical thoughts on practising homeopathy with animals.

Blockages in Homeopathy. Have you ever wondered why homeopathic remedies do not always work? The concept of 'blockage' is widely discussed within the homeopathic community, and is usefully explained in this article.

And finally, an interview with two of homeopathy's living greats - first, Robin Murphy. And second, Miranda Castro (and in particular the cream she uses for scars and keloids). Find out in these two articles just what learning, expertise, experience and thought goes into the homeopathy profession.

Is there a homeopath living near you? Go to this link if you want to find a professional registered homeopath who practices near you.

Steve Scrutton
Director, Alliance of Registered Homeopaths

Please note that the view expressed in the articles featured are not necessarily the views of ARH.

Monday, 31 October 2011

Healthy Medicine (2)

Homeopathy - so safe - so effective - so inexpensive. It is a gift! And contained herein, our weekly newsletter gives some examples as to why this is.

Here is why one nurse decided to become a homeopath. Her story can be repeated many times over; and it all has to do with the discovery that homeopathy is, indeed, a gift.

The Royal Families of Europe, especially the UK family, have certainly appreciated the gift of homeopathy. This article shows how Royalty throughout Europe have benefitted, and the conditions they have been treated for.

And so, if would appear, do the people of India. George Vithoulkas describes here the stunning growth of homeopathy on this sub-continent.

Homeopathy really is timeless, and without limit - as this article suggests. Something of the history of homeopathy here.

Homeopathy and the treatment of Illness

Rhinitis - and how to cope with it. There are URLs to 4 different sites that deal with the subject here.

Alopecia and baldness. Usually we are told, or we assume, that nothing can be done for this condition. But there are remedies that can help, as this article suggests - and describes some of the remedies.

If you suffer from insomnia, you don't be tired all the time. This article suggests how homeopathy might help, including some useful remedy descriptions.

Homeopathy and your eyes. There are 10 remedy descriptions in this useful article.

Sciatica and Homeopathy relief. Sciatica can be very painful, and whilst ConMed can only offer temporary pain relief, homeopathy offers so much more than this.

Homeopathy is very safe. And it is possible to take a remedy if the description of that remedy appears to closely match your symptoms. But despite this it is always better to refer yourself to a qualified homeopath so that the selection of remedy to match your condtion can be made more accurately.
If you are looking for a homeopath who lives near you click on this page to do a search.

Some Homeopathy Remedies

The use, and over-use of Arnica. Arnica is perhaps the most well-known remedy available through homeopathy. It's value in bruising, trauma and shock, have been known for over 200 years. Click here for another view.

Oscillocochinum - a remedy for flu. This is the remedy I, and my family, take to ward off flu during the winter period. It is an excellent remedy.

And gardeners, how about this remedy - for your plants? The remedy Silica has many uses both for plants, and the soils they grow in. I recently brought an Olive tree back to life after our hard winter - with Carbo Veg - so I know how effective homeopathy is with plants.

Steve Scrutton

The inclusion of articles in this newsletter does not mean that the contents necessarily reflect the policy of the ARH.

Thursday, 27 October 2011

Healthy Medicine (1)

First of all, my apologies to the hundreds of people who have subscribed to Homeopathy Post, over the last 4-5 months. The host site proved to be extremely unreliable in picking up the articles that I highlighted for publication, and last week, it failed to pick up any of the 25-30 articles I had selected. This is our new host website, and you can subscribe to this forum by clicking on 'Join this site' to the right of this text.

This is the first of what will be a weekly selection of articles from the internet about what is happening within the wonder world of homeopathy.

Homeopathy and the Quantum World
Homeopathy has been under attack by a group of people who call themselves 'skeptics', but who we call 'denialists'' - because they do nothing but deny the safety and effectiveness of homeopathy. This article is the experience on one 'convert' to homeopathy, and his view of the denialists. It is an excellent article and I recommend that you read it.

The Rejection of Alternative Medicine is 'unscientific'
But don't worry about attacks on homeopathy. This article tells why ConMed is attacking all non-drug therapies - without any scientific backing. As it says, "the mainstream medical establishment's rejection of alternative healing flies in the face of hundreds, or even thousands of years of history, but it also flies in the face of good science".

Peter Hain - a homeopathy supporter
A remarkable politician, who discovered homeopathy when his son had eczema. ConMed treatment did not work. Homeopathy did. Peter Hain commissioned a project on homeopathy when he was Northern Ireland Secretary. It was a remarkably successful project. Doctors liked it. Patients liked it. And the report is now collecting dust in the Department of Health.

The long term impact of homeopathy treatment
ConMed drug treatment lasts just a few hours before having to take another noxious pill. So what are the long-term effects of homeopathy? This study finds that 'disease severity decreased significantly'; and that 'physical and mental quality of life scores also increased significantly.

Homeopathy and Weight Loss (Obesity)
An article looking at the reasons for obesity, and detailing some remedies that can be helpful for patients who want to lose weight.

Homeopathy worked for me. A case of Sciatica
Watch this video, describing how homeopathy cured a case of Sciatica. This is one of a series of short videos on U-Tube on this theme.

And click here if you would like to see a wider appraisal of how homeopathy can help to treat Sciatica.

Homeopathy and Constipation
Natural remedies for constipation can be found in this article.

Homeopathy works for animals (and farmers) too
Farmers who use homeopathy for their animals have resented remarks, fairly ignorant but quite predictable remarks, made by MPs and others, about a grant to investigate the value of homeopathy in the treatment of animals. Note, their opposition is about trials to assess how effective homeopathy is - so these MPs, and other homeopathy denialists, are not sufficiently open-minded to want to know the truth!

Homeopathy for farms, gardens and plants
And homeopathy works for plants too. The author of this book advised me about an Olive Tree I had in my garden that appeared to have died; and after a dose of Carbo Veg, it is alive and kicking still.

The uses of Saccharum Officinale.
Not the most common remedy - but read about its value in treating Hypoglycaemia, ADHD, Obesity, and much else.

Steve Scrutton
Media Director
Alliance of Registered Homeopaths

Wednesday, 19 October 2011

Are Homeopaths Health Professionals?

The critics of homeopathy don't think that homeopaths are medical experts. There are two reasons I am making this statement, and probably two responses (at least) to it.

The first reason concerns my complaint to the BBC about their awful Newsnight programme, broadcast on 4th January, 2011. It was a hatchet job on Homeopathy. Whilst pursuing that complaint it became clear to me that the BBC were using as part of their defence 'the weight of medical expertise' which, they said, approved of the programme content. My argument - that the medical debate had two sides, and that the BBC were using 'experts' from one side, met with deaf ears. Homeopaths were not medical experts. They did not have to balance 'our' views with the views of all the ConMed organisations that weighed in against homeopathic prophylaxis - because we were not experts.

The second reason is my current, ongoing skirmish with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The websites of many homeopaths breached the CAP Code because homeopaths, it has been decided, are not health professionals! Here is the gist of what the CAP Code says:

Marketers must not discourage essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought. For example, they must not offer specific advice on, diagnosis of or treatment for such conditions unless that advice, diagnosis or treatment is conducted under the supervision of a suitably qualified health professional. Accurate and responsible general information about such conditions may, however, be offered.

Health professionals will be deemed suitably qualified only if they can provide suitable credentials; for example, evidence of: relevant professional expertise or qualifications; systems for regular review of members’ skills and competencies and suitable professional indemnity insurance covering all services provided; accreditation by a professional or regulatory body that has systems for dealing with complaints and taking disciplinary action and has registration based on minimum standards for training and qualifications.

And ASA, in their wisdom, is excluding homeopaths from this august body of Health Professionals!

So how should homeopaths respond? Clearly, we have to insist that we do have relevant professional expertise and qualifications, etc., because, quite simply, we do have them! If we allow this attack on our professionalism, our training, our qualifications to continue unopposed, we can continue to expect to be attacked when we say we can treat illness, cure disease, and keep people healthy.

Homeopathy must also respond more forcefully. The time when spokespersons can go on television and say that homeopathic prophylaxis is not recommended has to come to an end. Not only do we, as homeopaths, regularly treat illness, cure disease, and keep people healthy - we can do it (and have done it for over 200 years) more successfully than conventional medical professionals. Compared with anything ConMed practitioners can offer, our remedies are safer, more effective, and less expensive for patients.

If the constant, largely ignorant criticism of homeopathy over the past few year is going to achieve anything, it will be to demonstrate that the homeopathy profession has to stand up for itself, and not just defend what we are doing, but proclaim it from the mountain-tops!

Steve Scrutton
Professional Homeopath
Director, ARH

Tuesday, 20 September 2011

Homeopathy - a case of Alzheimer's Disease

This is a case sent in by Sanket Taldevkar - for which many thanks. It concerns a patient with Alzheimer’s disease. Obviously, this disease is now running, out of control, at epidemic levels, and perhaps homeopathy does not see, or treat, as many people with this awful disease as it should. After all, most people with Alzheimer's don't seek treatment for themselves; and too often it is dismissed as being a 'disease of old age', for which nothing can be done. This case suggests otherwise.

Name: XYZ. Age: 59/ Female

Patient was brought to clinic by relatives; pt was very quiet, no eye to eye contact constantly looking down with no expression on her face

Information from her son : pt is not able to remember anything since last two years, she does not recollects the last event, always sits quietly, don’t like to mix with people, don’t like to talk with any one. One must ask several times to her for simple thing then after some time she hardly gives any response, does not ask anything for her own, she didn’t ask for food or water to any one since last three months, since last two months she doesn’t realize that she passed urine or stool.

Pathological history:
1] 5 year back there was pain and swelling in her right knee aspiration was done and some steroidal preparations was injected in knee
2] After one year she was diagnosed as HYPERTENSIVE patient [still on anti-hypertensive medicine]
3] Since one year she develops ALZHEIMER’S symptoms

Clinical examination to test grade of Alzheimer was done
1] Identification of objects: pen / pencil / paper was given but she didn’t identify any object
2] Asking to repeat: no response
3] Recalling same objects: no response
4] Sentence writing: no response
5] Copy design: no response
[Note: we ask each question at least five time]

Brain CT: mild atrophy frontal lobe with tiny degenerated areas

Case taking: [as pt is not talking to any one since one year we try to get this case on observation and history given by the relatives]

Observation: on asking questions she didn’t answer very quickly, I have to ask question several time and she hardly gave any answer, no eye to eye contact and no expression on her face,
Question we asked: What is your name?
What is your problem?
What you like?
What you don’t like? And so on, but her answer was “NOTHING’’ only one word NOTHING

Rubrics taken from complete rep. 

KALI-BROM -30 one dose was given

F/O : AFTER 15 DAYS no change

F/O : AFTER 15 DAYS no change

After two days relatives brought her to clinic saying she having watery stool, and fever since one day, swelling on her face blood pressure 140/110 HIGHER THAN HER NORMAL WHICH IS 130 /100

F/O: AFTER 15 DAYS: swelling reduced, no fever, no watery stool, blood pressure 130/90 she got control over her urine and stool, this time she looking up eye to eye contact was there

Clinic test:
Identification of objects pen/pencil/ paper she identifies paper and got confused with pen and pencil
Repetition same she identify paper
Recalling objects same objects: poor response
Sentence writing: poor response but she tried
Copy design: poor response but she tried

F/O: AFTER SEVEN DAYS: relatives said she was weeping since 3days on asking why she is weeping her son said sister in law said some bad about her, [note : this is first time she is weeping after one year, she started reacting to surrounding, weeping is a kind of emotional reaction, it indicates pt is responding to others physical as well as emotional level]
Total control over urine and stool
She now recalls name of her family member it takes time but she started recalling
Dullness and slow ness is there in her activity

F/O : AFTER ONE MONTH : she started asking for things which she want, though it is slight difficult for her to recollect the name of any objects she want
Appetite : slight increase

F/O AFTER ONE MONTH: now she is talking with family member and others, this time she said I am having pain in my right knee [ first time she express her discomfort , it means she can sense her body and express it , it means she started to feel herself as an individual which is most important sign of life ]
On examination : swelling on right knee
Blood pressure 130/90
Appetite: increased
Stool: normal
Urine: normal


F/O AFTER TWO DAYS: swelling reduced, all vitals are in normal range
Still on homeopathic medicine.

Homeopathy for Livestock

"Homeopathy at Wellie Level" is a group for farmers. It began when a group of farmers, homoeopaths and homeopathic vets realised they had a common concern about the lack of support offered to farmers who want to use homoeopathy on their farm.

They decided the best support was a basic, properly constructed, teaching course that would introduce the farmer to the subject as a whole, giving the student the building blocks of knowledge and confidence. After this they decided to offer what they called "lego days" when students could return to discuss specific problems and advance their understanding of this complex and fascinating subject.

For more information, look at their website, In particular, have a look at the 'testimonials' left by farmers who have found homeopathy to be helpful to their business, and of course, their livestock.

Homeopathy for animals is, of course, an important area for the development of homeopathy. Animals don't lie (not that anyone treated successfully with homeopathy needs to 'lie' - but our detractors often accuse us of doing so) and when homeopathic remedies overcome sickness and disease in farm animals, the impact cannot be explained away as 'placebo'.

And for farmers, of course, it gives them access to an entirely safe, very inexpensive, and highly effective method of treating their animals.

Is this why GPs cannot tell the truth?

Oliver Dowding is a good friend to ARH. He has taught us much about what homeopathy can do for farm animals, based on his own personal experiences. In this piece, Oliver takes up the case of Dr Sarah Myhill, who has been pursued and prosecuted by the General Medical Council for over 10 years now. The story is interesting because it might provide a clue to why our GPs don't tell us the truth about Big Pharma drugs - not many would volunteer to go through this kind of persecution! It would seem, as Dr Andrew Wakefield can also testify, that doctors are not supposed, and not allowed to 'break ranks' over the conventional medical consensus. So they continue to provide an unknowing public with dangerous, and often useless drugs and vaccines, to avoid this type of harassment from the Medical Establishment

"In my opinion the GMC are a nasty bunch. They seem to specialise in bully boy tactics, and hounding people with whom they choose to take a philosophical disagreement. Sometimes, it seems as though the opposition and the vitriol with which they fight people has been stoked and reinforced by ammunition provided by others who may have a greater financial interest in the case than the GMC themselves, per se.

The GMC has been pursuing her since 2001, following an anonymous complaint, they decided to investigate Dr Sarah Myhill. She is a GP practicing in Shropshire. They were unhappy about various aspects of her practice, and treatments she was offering. They have subjected her to 7 "Fitness to Practice Hearings" in that time. Each has cost an enormous amount of human energy, and financial outlay. It would be easy for some people to feel browbeaten and to give in. Not Sarah! 

She has stood up and resisted the bully-boys, being perfectly convinced of the rightness of her case

On the day when the GMC dismissed the case, they also failed to release or to substantiate the charges against Dr Myhill. 

I find it highly amusing that during the whole saga, the GMC became fixated about a "Mrs Rosemary Hogg". She was cited in one of the complaints which the GMC put to Dr Myhill, in which they accused her of breaking sanctions imposed by the GMC in tending to a pregnant female, Rosemary Hogg, during childbirth last November. Entertainingly the GMC accusers never realise that Rosemary is in fact Dr. Myhill's pet pig!  

The following comes from her press release after the charges were all dropped.

"Dr. Myhill has observed that “the GMC has been incompetently prosecuting me since 2001. In doing so it has broken its own procedures and the laws of the land. Allegations against me have been vexatious, inconsequential and often untrue. The GMC is a dysfunctional organisation, not fit for purpose”.  Sources close to the GMC say that this has been an orchestrated witch hunt against Dr. Myhill and that the GMC will be deeply embarrassed by their most recent incompetent handling of her case. Indeed embarrassment might not be the GMC’s only problem because, after a recent Freedom Of Information request, it has transpired that, even only considering the most recent action against Dr Myhill alone, the GMC has spent £62,751.60 on solicitors’ fees and other external costs. In addition the GMC’s own internal legal team has clocked up 147 fruitless hours on this most recent case, with the investigation team being unable to disclose its hours!

Dr. Myhill is a private GP with a special interest in treating ME. Indeed she has over 20 years experience in this field and has treated many thousands of patients. She believes she has been targeted by the GMC because she treats ME as a physical, rather than a psychological disorder. The most recent investigation of her was triggered in June 2009, shortly after Dr. Myhill published a scientific paper showing that ME was associated with mitochondrial failure (Ref: Int J Clin Exp Med (2009) 2, 

In its prosecution, the GMC has contravened the 1983 Medical Act by failing to inform Dr. Myhill what charges she faced until after her fourth IOP Hearing.

In addition, the GMC has contravened the 1998 Data Protection Act by taking patients’ private and confidential NHS medical records without patient knowledge or consent and without informing the patient. This appears to be routine procedure for the GMC – it has no respect for patient confidentiality. At one of Dr Myhill’s public hearings the GMC released so much patient information into the public arena that a seriously ill patient at the centre of one of the complaints could easily be identified. 

Neither this patient nor the patient’s family had complained about Dr Myhill and throughout the investigation process, their wishes regarding anonymity were flagrantly disregarded by the GMC. This loss of anonymity caused much distress to the patient and family, distress that was only made worse when malicious and obscene comments were made about the patient on the public forums of the Bad Science website.

By contrast, Dr. Myhill has consistently refused to use the patient’s notes in her defence because permission to use those notes had not been granted by the patient and family in an attempt to protect anonymity. As a result of this disparity in available evidence, Dr. Myhill was denied a fair trial.

In its prosecution the GMC also broke Human Rights legislation. There was no proper separation of prosecution and adjudication teams, Dr. Myhill did not know what charges she faced, the GMC refused to consider the facts given to them by Dr. Myhill and they unquestionably accepted vexatious and untrue allegations from unqualified members of the public and doctors. Indeed at her third Interim Orders Panel Hearing in October 2010, Dr. Myhill told the General Medical Council it was acting like a kangaroo court. She was immediately suspended from the practise of medicine because, she was told, “she lacked respect for her disciplinary body”, i.e. the GMC. At her December 2010 hearing the GMC presented Dr Myhill with yet another anonymous complaint from a member of the public reporting that Dr Myhill had acted outside her area of expertise by delivering babies at home. The GMC had not realised this was a spoof featuring Dr Myhill’s pet pig Rosemary who had indeed delivered 10 healthy piglets that week. It was clear that the GMC had not taken even the most basic investigatory steps, involving merely clicking on a weblink which would have revealed all, before presenting this information before a full session of the Interim Orders Panel. In such circumstances is it any wonder that respect begins to ebb away?

Dr. Myhill has written to the GMC President Professor Peter Rubin to inform him that he was overseeing the activities of a dysfunctional organisation, but he never replied to her letter.
The Trustees of the GMC were similarly informed of all the above issues on two occasions, but again there was no response.

Dr. Myhill formally complained to the GMC about the incompetence and dishonesty of six of its officers, but none of her concerns were addressed. One of these officers briefed an expert witness describing Dr. Myhill as “a male consultant anaesthetic”. One would think it would be difficult to construct a sentence with four untruths in three words, but in this the GMC has at least succeeded.

No patient has ever complained to the General Medical Council about Dr. Myhill. All complaints have emanated either from other doctors who do not agree with her nutritional approach to medicine and her approach to treating ME, or from anonymous members of the public who do not concur with Dr Myhill’s opinions which, along with an online book, have been made freely available on her website. As Stephen Fry wrote in his latest autobiography such bloggers “grow up to become trawlers on the internet site and specialise in posting barbarous mean, abusive, look at me anonymous comments….. Such swine specialise in second guessing the motives of those who are brave enough to commit to the risk of making fools of themselves in public and they are a blight on the face of the earth”. Dr. Myhill said “it is not for the GMC to judge whether one doctor’s opinion is better than another. My opinions, which are evidence based from the scientific literature, have been central to the recovery of thousands of ME patients. In its summing up of my case, the GMC states that I have substantially improved the health of 70% of ME sufferers. This is considerably better than the results of the now discredited regimes of graded exercise therapy and cognitive behaviour therapy. Clearly ME is a physical disorder requiring physical treatment”.

Despite prosecuting Dr. Myhill for ten years, a necessarily stressful and time consuming business, the GMC remain unrepentant. It appears that the GMC has no inclination to correct its ways, or to try to restore Dr. Myhill’s professional reputation. The GMC was similarly heavily criticised by Dame Janet Smith in her report on the Shipman enquiry. Some years later she commented that the GMC was “like a leopard – it never changes its spots”. Dr. Myhill is calling for a full enquiry into GMC incompetence, law breaking and misfeasance in public office. The GMC is the oldest regulatory body in the world and is showing all the symptoms of an advanced senile dementia.

Friday, 19 August 2011

NHS. No Choice for Marjorie!

We are rightly proud of our health service. The principles of the 1947 NHS Act still apply, in the most part, that any citizen, when sick, will have access to health treatment - regardless of his or her ability to pay.

But is everyone getting access to the type of treatment they want?

All the main political parties now parade ‘patient choice’ as an important objective for the future of the NHS. The previous Labour government, in its White Paper, (“Our Health, Our Care, Our Say: a new direction for community services. January 2006)” confirmed this. Patricia Hewitt, Health Secretary at the time, stated this:

“(more) people (are) wanting a different approach to services, looking for real choices, more local care, taking greater control over their health, supported to remain independent wherever possible”.

The new coalition Government’s White Paper, “Equity and Excellence: liberating the NHS. July 2010” says this:

“We want the principle of "shared decision making" to become the norm: no decision about me without me. International evidence shows that involving patients in their care and treatment improves their health outcomes, boosts their satisfaction with services received, and increases not just their knowledge and understanding of their health status but also their adherence to a chosen treatment. It can also bring significant reductions in cost, as highlighted in the Wanless Report, and in evidence from various programmes to improve the management of long-term health conditions.

Yet is this anywhere near close to reality within the NHS?

Marjorie Titchen is 93 years old. She lives in Bournemouth, where she continues to run a small hotel. She says that she will retire when she is 100 years old! By this time she will have paid taxes for over 80 years, so she has certainly paid her dues, and her entitlement to health treatment should surely be unquestioned.

Yet despite this she has been fighting now for several years for treatment for her osteoarthritis. But the Bournemouth and Poole PCT has refused to consider it. Why? Because Marjorie wants to see a homeopath, and the PCT insists that they will allow her access only to conventional treatment.

Marjorie refuses to accept conventional treatment, and her arthritis is getting worse. She says she has heard too much about the ‘adverse reactions’ to drugs, and does not want to go down that route.

Even her GP supports her, and has referred her for homeopathy treatment - but still the PCT remains unmoved. She has made representations, and formal complaints; she had written to the Department of Health; she has talked to her MP; she has highlighted her case in the local media. All to no avail.

The PCT refuses to budge on its paternalistic belief that it knows best. Their primary defense appears to be that there is ‘no evidence’ that homeopathy is effective in treating osteoarthritis.

Wrong, says Marjorie! She developed osteoarthritis over 12 years ago, and was referred to homeopathic treatment by the PCT at that time. This relieved her pain, and for several years she was pain free. So as she says, she is living proof of the effectiveness of homeopathy.

Wrong, says the Alliance of Registered Homeopaths, referring to the research that has been carried out into arthritis that shows it can be effective in the treatment of the disease.

This includes research that found homeopathy provided a level of pain-relief superior to a conventional drug, used as a control. This research, carried out in 1998, also found that homeopathy produced ‘no adverse reactions’.

So what is happening here? Mrs Titchen wants to access homeopathic treatment. Her GP supports her. Her homeopath is willing to treat her, as he did, successfully, several years ago. Homeopathic treatment is not expensive, indeed, it is less expensive than the conventional treatment she is being offered.

Yet the PCT still sees fit to make the purely bureaucratic decision to deny her the treatment she is asking for.

The NHS is dominated by conventional medicine, and it has become a monopoly. The bureaucrats in charge of PCTs in most areas don’t want to consider homeopathic treatment because they don’t want us to breach their monopoly. They also don’t want to allow homeopathy to prove more effective in the treatment of diseases, such as arthritis, than the favour medicine - in which, of course, they have a personal vested interest.

Government policy on patient choice is a mess. It talks about ‘patient choice’ but what it allows to happen within the NHS runs contrary to this objective. When the Department of Health is asked to comment on this kind of situation, it says that the decision rests at the local level, with the local PCT, which has to take ‘local needs’ into consideration. No doubt this is part of their laudable policy to devolve NHS power from the centre to local areas. But devolving power from London to local PCTs it acts against patient choice, as can be seen in Marjorie Titchen’s case.

The Bournemouth and Poole PCT, and its bureacracy has decided not to offer Mrs Titchen homeopathy. It know better than Marjories, her GP, and her homeopath. Such a decision is anathema ‘patient choice’, and all patients looking for drug-free treatment are certainly not getting the medicine of their choice.

And the only person who is suffering, literally, is Marjorie............

Monday, 25 July 2011

Animals, Homeopathy and ASA

Many thanks for Oliver Dowding for these thoughts on homeopathy, and the assault it is currently receiving from the vested interests of conventional medicine.

Oliver is not a homeopathy. He is a former farmer who discovered that homeopathy helped his livestock, and treated them successfully for many years with homeopathy.

"Homeopathy is regularly confronted by cynics, sceptics, regulators and goodness knows who-else, trying to deny the efficacy of homoeopathy, and insisting that it be regulated in a manner which emasculates all its benefits.

Now, we find that the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have decided that qualified homoeopaths are now no longer permitted to explain how homoeopathy works. Furthermore, they're not allowed to publish evidence on their websites, provided by their own patients, because of new regulations and bureaucracy. No matter that these patients have actually benefitted from homeopathy, and are well again. It seems ludicrous that homoeopath are not allowed to explain how they perceive homoeopathy to work.

There are many forms of medicine, and medications, and treatments, and operations performed on people which by their very nature are exploratory and poorly understood. Whilst the precise mechanism by which homoeopathy operates may not be fully understood, yet, the reality of its efficacy is well appreciated by many.

To me it defies logic that people who claim to be 'educated' scientists can deny the results gained when homoeopathy is used to treat huge animals, such as farm animals and others.

Rather than deny its validity, surely it should be a question of investigating why it worked rather than trying to find reasons why shouldn't have worked?

Therefore, it seems totally logical to allow the homoeopath to offer an opinion to the patient. I'd be fairly certain that the vast majority of doctors couldn't explain how a particular drug that they are about to offer the patient actually worked. They do not understand the mode of operation, simply that giving drug "A" seems to be successful in treating condition "X", etc.

I also find it frustrating that a homoeopath can no longer advertise what conditions they are able to treat. This applies equally to a veterinary surgeon using homoeopathy for livestock. Why should this be?

I appreciate that it's impossible for any homoeopath to be definitive about everything they treat, because in reality many conditions have variants. However, I cannot see why it would be wrong for them to be able to explain the typical conditions they treat. It's a simple matter of fact that if you've used remedy "X" to treat condition "Y" and seen positive results that you should be allowed to report those.

Naturally, I appreciate that there are many people who might be unscrupulous and place bogus testimonials on websites or in literature. However, as long as they have a verifiable source for that, and can back up their claims, I see no problem in such testimonials being allowed. Indeed, it ought to be obligatory as that's the only way that the intended patient can see that there is a positive potential.

I fail to see why somebody who has improved health following a visit (or perhaps succession of visits) to a homoeopath cannot report how things have changed for them. I've met many people who have had great success following homoeopathic consultation.

One that always stands out is an arch critic of homoeopathy, who following many years enduring a persistent cough, or more pertinently his family had had to endure for many years, agreed to visit a homoeopath as every conventional option possible had failed to yield any benefit. Within the week the cough had gone, and has never returned, much to his consternation and chagrin. However, I did give him credit for being prepared to admit this.

That this kind of restraint is now being imposed by ASA is felt by many to be dispiriting. Why is homeopathy being targeted in this way? I suggest that it’s partly because it is cheap and effective. It is therefore easy to suggest that those trying to regulate or denigrate homoeopathy are part of an orchestrated campaign by those from within the pharmaceutical industry, who perhaps feel that their commercial fiefdom is under threat.

However, in my opinion that's exactly what it is, a campaign and/or a vendetta. Furthermore, despite there being many conventional doctors, veterinary surgeons and others trained conventionally, who subsequently have undertaken additional training and become qualified in human or animal homoeopathy, it still amazes me how closed-minded so many of the conventional doctors and veterinary surgeons can be.

I've personally received much vilification when explaining my many positive experiences over 15 years with dairy cattle being treated predominantly by homoeopathy. This criticism comes in many cases from people who've been involved in medicine for a lifetime. I've met these accusations and dismissals both in private, at public meetings and even in media encounters. I'm not sure whether those trying to criticise me feel personally threatened, or that I might in some way be questioning their professional capability in some way, but what disturbs me is their unwillingness to allow somebody else who has a differing opinion from themselves and the differing way of treating illness to voice their opinions and suggestions.

I thought science was all about investigation and discovery. It has made me sad to see how many so-called scientists (which of course include doctors et al) appear to have such a closed mind. In this world in which we live we need every resource we can find, not least in the parts of the world where money is not available to afford the more expensive medicine that we've become used to in the West. There are a great many people, in countries such as India, and I'm talking tens of millions, who are routinely benefiting from being treated by homoeopaths. The suffering these people would endure without homoeopathy is unimaginable.

Furthermore, I find it disconcerting that whenever I've raised the subject with government, the NHS, and others charged with improving the health and welfare for the population, my offers have been either politely declined, or more usually ignored. When that happens, it does little more than to confirm suspicions of an agenda that is anti-alternative medicine, and specifically anti-homoeopathy.

For example, I've tried to interest the BBC, through their farming unit, to take up the subject of how homoeopathy is being used so successfully on many farms. The organisation which offers training to farmers to use homoeopathy, HAWL ( was in 2010 voted the third best in the category "livestock adviser of the year" at the Farmers Weekly annual awards. The Farmers Weekly can safely be considered very conservative, and not naturally friendly to alternative options - especially given the revenue it needs to earn from advertisers, the largest of which are almost invariably the large pharmaceutical, chemical and fertiliser companies.

When the journalist who runs the 'Farming Today' program, with whom I spoke at a conference in early 2010, expressed surprise that you could use homoeopathy on animals, I suggested she consider making a feature of this. Repeated enquiries via e-mail and letter have been ignored completely. The reason for this remains a mystery to me, as I thought journalism was about reporting everything, not selectively censoring things, which appears to be what's happening in parts of the BBC, not least with regard homoeopathy. This is disappointing to say the least.

The end result of all this is that we must not give up our campaigning because were not getting heard. We must work harder, and shout louder so that our voice cannot be ignored. Our experiences need to be gathered together, and presented coherently. We cannot be allowed to be squashed.

Long live homoeopathy!

Tuesday, 19 July 2011

Patient Choice in NHS Healthcare - after PCTs

Thanks to Timothy McCaw for this blog on the subject of 'patient choice'.
I may be behind the curve, as they say, but in case I am not, the following may be of interest.
This week I represented our local Rural Parish Council at a talk given by South Somerset Together to maybe 60 RPC reps to update us on the so-called Sustainable Community Strategy for South Somerset - “to lead and and improve the delivery of services…" - that will meet the social, economic, environmental, educational, health and safety needs of all the communities in S. Somerset.
Two interesting things: 

1. The plans for setting up a Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) combining Somerset and Devon, Plymouth and Torbay to bring together local businesses to jump start greater job creation, productivity, and improve infrastructure – eg broadband, road, rail, housing – across this new “mega county”. LEPs are being pushed by the Coalition Govt right across the UK I understand.

2. The changes to the administration of the NHS at local level.

Dr Harry Yoxall, Secretary of the Local Medical Committee for Somerset gave a talk 
“Working together to make us Healthier” 
in place of Dr Ian Phillips of Wincanton (whom I believe is a 'homeopathophobe' - see later)

Dr Yoxall said he was involved in something called 'Interim GP Commissioning Consultation'. He reminded us of the recent scrapping of 2 layers of NHS management – the Strategic Health Authorities and the PCTs. In their place would come the NHS Commissioning Boards.

Within each county there will be a number of Doctors “Federations”, each of which will have on it representatives from the Drs practices in part of the county. Each Federation will have a delegated budget from which NHS services will be provided for their particular patch. The Federation would be able to say, for example, in respect of some aspect of care “Is there a charity in my patch which would have the resources to be able deliver (a certain service)”.

He felt that there would be “huge opportunities for the voluntary sector”. 

Dr Yoxall was only giving a broad brush outline, and not saying anything contentious, but what was implicit was that The Commissioning Board (made up entirely by doctors?), influenced by the Drs Federations, would be the gatekeepers over what medical services were available under the NHS in the future. Given the views of the Dr for whom Dr Yoxall substituted, this could mean that homeopathy under the NHS in Somerset is going to struggle. 

The reason I say this is that Dr Iain Phillips’s son went public in May this year in the local website, 'The Wincanton Window', just before I gave a free talk on 'Homeopathy for the Family', stating 

No, no, no, no. Please do not spend your precious money on homeopathy. It has no mainstream scientific evidence supporting it at all and it has never passed a legitimate double blind trial…….the objection to homeopathy …. is that homeopathy is complete rubbish.” 

When I responded with a lengthy putdown to Dr Phillips’s son, his father waded in with 

“Where is the statistically significant, placebo controlled, peer reviewed evidence in reputable journals?” followed by his son again, “Quite. I do wish Mr MacCaw would name even a single such piece of peer-reviewed journal evidence instead of giving a myriad of links and assertions about how effective it is. ….Shame on you for offering a first aid course which proposes using water to cure ailments. I really hope no one is taken in by this".

I prefaced my second reply with the comment ... "with advance apologies for the length of this comment... necessitated by the need to encourage the Phillips's not to make untrue assertions, and to learn to integrate their approach to medical healthcare with with those of other historically effective therapies". 

I am not giving that response here, suffice to say that it effectively silenced the yabbering of the Phillips' clan. (The exchange can be seen at

It is this person, with his views, who may well become one of the new gatekeepers to the healthcare options to which the public have access under the NHS!

This all points up how important it is for complementary therapists to get to understand how the new system will work and work out how the new gatekeepers can be challenged where appropriate.

One obvious way is that complementary therapists, as patients themselves of their local GP practice, should think about getting a place on that practice’s Patients Participation Group (or keep in close communication with and brief a sympathetic contact on such a group) in order to try and ensure that local GPs do not arbitrarily veto certain elements of complementary healthcare even though their patients are requesting it. If the GPs persist in their veto, then this could be publicised in local magazines and websites, such as the one I mentioned, to bring sufficient pressure to force a change of such a practice, or at least make it the subject of public debate to the possible embarrassment of the practice. As my exchange showed, GPs sometimes don’t know what they are talking about!

If pressure from patients doesn’t work, then our associations could consider asking Government for an Ombudsman to scrutinize the Commissioning Boards’ and Federations’ (monopolising) practices.

Monday, 11 July 2011

Announcing a New Homeopathy Newspaper

The mainstream media refuse to tell people about homeopathy; so we have decided to do it ourselves!

The first edition of the new weekly newspaper, "ARH. Homeopathy in Practice", will be launched this Friday, 15th July 2011 Each and every week it will contain news and information about what is happening in the world of homeopathy throughout the world. Each feature will have a short description, and should you want to read it in full it will be fully hyperlinked.

The weekly newspaper will be published at the following:

Please go to this link, now, to take out a free subscription. This will remind you by email when each new edition is published.

Friday, 1 July 2011

Homeopathy Research

On 17th May 2011, MP David Tredinnick sponsored a reception at the House of Commons for the Homeopathy Research Institute. The event focused on placing homeopathy research on the national agenda, as a important and necessary field of scientific enquiry. The event was attended by over 150 guests, including MPs, Peers, academics, representatives of the homeopathic profession, as well as conventional healthcare providers from the NHS.

The HRI were launching a fundraising appeal for £2 million by 2013, which will be dedicated to funding key scientific research into homeopathy.