Serious mistakes in meta-analysis of homeopathic research

research5Vithoulkas G
International Academy of Classical Homeopathy, Alonissos, Greece

The article discussed the immanent problems of meta-analyses selecting a number of independent trials in homeopathy, within which, the purpose was to examine the effectiveness of homeopathic treatment. Our focus lied in clarifying that the complex effects of homeopathic treatment known from history and day-to-day practice have not been respected so far.

The examination of most of the homeopathic trials showed that studies rarely account for homeopathic principles, in order to assess the effectiveness of the treatment. The main flaw was that trials reflect the point of view that the treatment with a specific remedy could be administered in a particular disease. However, homeopathy aims to treat the whole person, rather than the diseases and each case has to be treated individually with an individualized remedy. Furthermore, the commonly known events during the course of homeopathic treatment, such as “initial aggravation” and “symptom-shift” were not considered in almost all the studies. Thus, only few trials were eligible for meta-analyses, if at all. These and other factors were discussed and certain homeopathic principles were suggested to be respected in further trials. It is expected, that a better understanding of homeopathic principles would provide guidelines for homeopathic research, which are more acceptable to both homeopathy and conventional medicine.

In conclusion, three points should be taken into consideration relating to trials that attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of homeopathy.

First, it is imperative that from the point of view of homeopathy, the above-mentioned principles should be discussed with expert homeopaths before researchers undertake the design of any homeopathic protocol.

Second, it would be helpful if medical journals invited more knowledgeable peer-reviewers who understand the principles of homeopathy.

Third, there is a need for at least one standardized protocol for clinical trials that will respect not only the state-of-the art parameters from conventional medicine but also the homeopathic principles.

Fourth, experience so far has shown that the therapeutic results in homeopathy vary according to the expertise of the practitioner. Therefore, if the objective is to validate the homeopathic therapeutic modality, the organizers of the trial have to pick the best possible prescribers existing in the field.

Only when these points are transposed and put into practice, the trials will be respected and accepted by both homeopathic practitioners and conventional medicine and can be eligible for meta-analysis.

Read full paper : http://www.medandlife.ro/general-articles/802-serious-mistakes-in-meta-analysis-of-homeopathic-research

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*