Homeopathy, Statistically, in Epidemics Through the Years

Homeopathy has repeatedly proven itself as an effective method of treatment for some of the worst epidemic diseases the world has ever seen.  Even so, homeopathy has been ruthlessly suppressed.  This suppression generally came about when homeopathic statistics have proven embarrassing to the medical communities of the day.  The same thing has been true, to a lesser extent, of herbal remedies and other alternative methods of treatment. In support of the foregoing claims, I am going to share with you one of the most fascinating articles on this topic that I have ever come across.  It is by Julian Winston.  Julian Winston must have been a fascinating man in many ways.  Before his death, Julian Winston was a world-renowned homeopath.  He wrote several books and many, many articles.  His website (still functioning) claims that his library included over 2,000 volumes on homeopathy.  He also had (his wife now has) over 4,000 vials of homeopathic remedies.  An autobiographical sketch that I read of his is both impressive and amusing.  I absolutely love brilliant people who don’t take themselves too seriously and, in addition, have a sense of humor.

Basic Format

This article by Julian Winston discusses research done, and statistics gathered, on various diseases in history.  I will be quoting the article exactly, in its entirety.  However, I will be emphasizing the statistics.  Statistics will be in bold type.  They will also be in the center immediately below the paragraph which contains them.  Please pay attention to these bolded and centered bits.  The statistics are positively amazing.  There will be subheadings – also in bold – for ease of reading. I have added comments of my own, also.  I couldn’t resist. In addition, there are occasional comments from other sources.  I will include these comments because I thought them relevant.  The comments and headings, not part of the original article as written by Julian Winston, will be blue.

The Article (by Julian Winston)

Some History of the Treatment of Epidemics with Homeopathy

The Success of Homeopathic Treatment

From its earliest days, homeopathy has been able to treat epidemic diseases with a substantial rate of success, especially when compared to conventional treatments of the day.  It was these successes that placed the practice of homeopathy so firmly in the consciousness of people worldwide.   (Could this success have led to the resentment displayed by the medical community over the years?) There is a story told about Joseph Pulte, one of the earliest homeopaths in Cincinnati. When he began his practice, many people were so angered by a homeopath being in town that they pelted his house with eggs. He was becoming discouraged enough to think of leaving. His wife said, “Joseph, do you believe in the truth of homeopathy?” He replied in the affirmative. “Then,” she said, “you will stay in Cincinnati.” Shortly after, when the cholera epidemic swept through the area, Pulte was able to boast of not having lost a single patient—and he was accepted enthusiastically into the community. In the epidemic of 1849, people crowded to his door and stood in the street because the waiting room was full.

Cholera – not a single patient lost!!

In 1900, Thomas Lindsley Bradford, MD, wrote a book called “The Logic of Figures” in which he collected all of the statistics he could find that would compare the conventional therapeutics with homeopathic ones. Many of the figures cited below are derived from Bradford’s work. One of the earliest tests of the homeopathic system was in the treatment of typhus fever (spread by lice) in an 1813 epidemic which followed the devastation of Napoleon’s army marching through Germany to attack Russia, followed by their retreat. When the epidemic came through Leipzig, as the army pulled back from the east, Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, was able to treat 180 cases of typhus– losing but two. This, at a time when the conventional treatments were having a mortality rate of over 30%.

1813 – Typhus Fever – mortality rates  Hahnemann,  homeopathy         1% Conventional Medicine             30% +

In 1830 as the cholera epidemic was reported coming from the east, Hahnemann was able to identify the stages of the illness and predict what remedies would be needed for which stages. When cholera finally struck Europe in 1831 the mortality rate (under conventional treatment) was between 40% (Imperial Council of Russia) to 80% (Osler’s Practice of Medicine). Out of five people who contracted cholera, two to four of them died under regular treatment. Dr. Quin, in London, reported the mortality in the ten homeopathic hospitals in 1831-32 as 9%; Dr. Roth, the physician to the king of Bavaria, reported that under homeopathic care the mortality was 7%; Admiral Mordoinow of the Imperial Russian Council reported 10% mortality under homeopathy; and Dr. Wild, allopathic editor of Dublin Quarterly Journal, reported in Austria, the allopathic mortality was 66% and the homeopathic mortality was 33% “and on account of this extraordinary result, the law interdicting the practice of homeopathy in Austria was repealed.”

Cholera statistics through most of Europe  1830 – 1831 Homeopathy         7% – 9% Conventional      40% – 80% (scary!)

Austrian Statistics as reported by the allopathic editor Homeopathy       33% Conventional      66%

Homeopathy continued to be effective in the treatment of epidemic cholera. In 1854 a cholera epidemic struck London. This was a historically important epidemic in that it was the first time the medical community was able to trace the outbreak to a source (a public water pump), and when the pump was closed, the epidemic soon ceased. The House of Commons asked for a report about the various methods of treating the epidemic. When the report was issued, the homeopathic figures were not included. The House of Lords asked for an explanation, and it was admitted that if the homeopathic figures were to be included in the report, it would “skew the results.”   The suppressed report revealed that under allopathic care the mortality was 59.2% while under homeopathic care the mortality was only 9%. (The bolding is mine – I didn’t want you to miss the suppression of results.)

Cholera, London 1854 (note the paragraph above, suppression of the results) Homeopathy       9.o % Conventional     59.2%

It is hard today to comprehend what kind of scourge such an epidemic was. As was seen in the later flu epidemic of 1918, one could be healthy in the morning and be dead by evening– it moved that rapidly. Many books were written about the homeopathic treatment of cholera during these times, among them: Cholera and its Homeopathic Treatment, F. Humphreys (1849); Homeopathic Treatment of Cholera, B.F. Joslin (1854); Homeopathic Domestic Treatment of Cholera, Biegler (1858); Epidemic Cholera, B. F. Joslin (1865); Asiatic Cholera, Jabez Dake (1886). The success of homeopathic treatment continued with the later cholera epidemics. In the Hamburg epidemic of 1892, allopathic mortality was 42%, homeopathic mortality was 15.5% During the 1850s, there were several epidemics of yellow fever in the southern states. This disease was eventually found to be transmitted by mosquito. Osler, says that the allopathic mortality from yellow fever was between 15-85%. Holcome, a homeopath, reported in 1853 a mortality of 6.43% in Natchez, and Dr. Davis, another homeopath in Natchez, reported 5.73%. In 1878 the mortality in New Orleans was 50% under allopathic care and 5.6% (in 1,945 cases in the same epidemic) with homeopathic care. The two best books on this topic were: Yellow Fever and its Homeopathic Treatment, Holcome, (1856), and The Efficacy of Crotalus Horridus in Yellow Fever, C. Neidhard, (1860).

Cholera, 1892 Homeopathy         15.5% Conventional           42%

Yellow Fever, 1850’s – Southern States Homeopathy                 5.6% – 6.4% Conventional lowest reported       15% highest reported     85%

Another epidemic disease which was treatable with homeopathy was diphtheria. Since the advent of widespread vaccination, it is a disease not often seen in our modern world. Diphtheria appeared periodically, and rarely had the same presentation. It was, therefore, very important for the practitioner to individualize the treatment in each specific case or generalized epidemic. A remedy which had been effective in treating it one year might not be the same remedy needed the next year. (Is this because, as homeopaths and many medical people believe, the little “critters” mutate under allopathic, drug programs?) In the records of three years of diphtheria in Broome County, NY from 1862 to 1864, there was a report of an 83.6% mortality rate among the allopaths and a 16.4% mortality rate among the homeopaths. (Bradford)

Broome County, New York Health Record  1852-1864 Homeopathic         16.4% Allopathic                83.6%

Perhaps the most recent use of homeopathy in a major epidemic was during the influenza pandemic of 1918. The Journal of the American Institute for Homeopathy, May 1921, had a long article about the use of homeopathy in the flu epidemic. Dr. T A McCann, from Dayton, Ohio reported that 24,000 cases of flu treated allopathically had a mortality rate of 28.2% while 26,000 cases of flu treated homeopathically had a mortality rate of 1.05%. This last figure was supported by Dean W.A. Pearson of Philadelphia (Hahnemann College) who collected 26,795 cases of flu treated with homeopathy with these results:

Influenza  1918 24,000 – 26,000 cases reported Homeopathic                   1% Conventional     very high

Closer to our present time, there were the polio epidemics in the mid-1950s. Dr. Alonzo Shadman, a homeopath in the Boston area, emphasized that until “actual paralysis” was observed, it was hard to distinguish the prodromal symptoms of polio from those of the common cold — and he treated many “summer colds” during the time. Were they incipient polio? No one can tell. (When treating homeopathically, remember, you treat what is presenting by giving the remedy that is most “similar”.  The treatment used would be unaffected by the “name” of the ailment). Dr. Francisco Eizayaga of Argentina, tells of a polio epidemic in Buenos Aires in 1957, where the symptoms of the epidemic resembled, in the very early stages, those of an oncoming cold. Lathyrus sativus appeared to be the remedy that most closely resembled those early symptoms. The homeopathic doctors and pharmacies prescribed Lathyrus sativus 30c as a prophylactic, and “thousands of doses” were distributed. “Nobody (given the homeopathic remedy) registered a case of contagion.” Eizayaga points out that in other epidemics of polio, Gelsemium sempervirens was the indicated remedy—emphasizing, again, the need for individualization in matching a remedy to the emerging symptoms. By treating the earliest symptoms properly, much suffering was avoided altogether.

Statistics for the 19th and 20th Centuries Only

Homeopathy was very effective in treating many of the epidemics during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Why the successes are not better known is a subject for conjecture. It could be that like the physician quoted below, some people would rather not acknowledge the ineffectiveness of the conventional therapeutics in certain circumstances nor do they like, for reasons of their own, to accept the efficacy and effectiveness of homeopathic remedies. One physician in a Pittsburgh hospital asked a nurse if she knew anything better than what he was doing because he was losing many cases. “Yes, Doctor, stop aspirin and go down to a homeopathic pharmacy, and get homeopathic remedies.” The Doctor replied: “But that is homeopathy.” She replied, “I know it, but the homeopathic doctors for whom I have nursed have not lost a single case.”  (According to Julian Winston, the foregoing quote was found in an article in the Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy.  The article was in the May 1921 issue.  It was cited in an article titled “Homeopathy in Influenza – a chorus of Fifty in Harmony by  W.A. Dewey, M.D.  Dr. Dewey attributed the quote to W.F. Edmundson, M.D. a Pittsburgh doctor.)

Homeopathic Statistics for the Last 100 Years

Julian Winston, the author of the above article, died in 2005.  Even so, as you can see from the article, there are few (only one) statistics from the last 100 years.  Why is that?  Why was Mr. Winston unable to include statistics closer to our own time?  Judging from this article, he seems like a rather thorough man to me.   To my mind, there are several factors at work here.

Homeopathy and the AMA

Homeopathy was driven out of the United States by the animosity of the American Medical Association.  Some historical accounts claim that the AMA was formed, originally, to deal with the threat posed to conventional medicine by homeopathic physicians.  At any rate, the practice of homeopathy became illegal.  Homeopathic physicians could not obtain a license through the quickly powerful AMA.  This, in spite of the fact that they obtained the same education as conventional medical doctors of the time.  They just included the study of homeopathy in their coursework.  As a result of the unfriendly environment, and general illegality, where would a statistician obtain homeopathic results for that time period?  There was, most likely, a strong grass-roots homeopathic movement for many years.  Certainly, these people would not have been publishing the results of their work, would they?

Accountability

As is always the case, when allopathic medicine “fails” it is assumed that “they did their very best.  Nobody else could have done better anyway, right?”.   The medical profession can lose a patient with what appears to be very little if any accountability.  What accountability there is will be to a closed panel of their peers.  On the other hand, if an herbalist or midwife “loses” a patient, or even fails to make a miraculous “cure”, it is big news.  There is a great likelihood that someone will be called to task.  There is every possibility that they will be fined or jailed!   As a result, accurate records can be either a blessing or a curse, depending on circumstances.   (No, this is not paranoia on my part!)  In the unfriendly environment of the past, records – when they existed at all – would not have been made readily available.

Suppression of Statistics?

If you look honestly at world history over the last 50+ years, you see that statistics on mortality rates for epidemic diseases are dreadful!  In Africa alone, whole tribes have been wiped out by one disease or another.  This happened in spite of vaccination and health care programs.  These nasty statistics concerning allopathic treatments are not easily come by.  When they are published, they are soundly, but not very credibly, denied.  If homeopathic remedies have achieved success, the reports are very sketchy.  They are also ridiculed in the press and by the medical community as a whole.

Homeopathy Still Producing Results

In the rest of the world, particularly throughout Europe, homeopathy has never been illegal.  Homeopathy, in fact, remains in good standing.  Claims have been made that homeopathy is the second most prevalent medical treatment in the world.  Certainly, it is very common in a great many nations.  Statistics for the treatment of disease from these countries show that homeopathy is still “doing it’s job”.  Homeopathy is still improving lives. It is doing so without major side-effects and drug reactions.

Homeopathy in India Today

Homeopathy, in India, has always been accepted and in good standing.  In fact, homeopathy is considered mainstream and very effective.  This has been true for more than 150 years.  Recently, however, government intervention has restricted the practice of homeopathy to graduates of a very limited number of schools.  As a result, it has become increasingly difficult to get an appointment with a licensed homeopathic doctor.  In addition, the cost of treatment is more and more out of the reach of the common citizens of India.

A Comeback in the United States

Homeopathy made an amazing comeback in the United States during the last 30 years or so.  There are a great many homeopathic organizations, both on and offline, at this time.  These organizations write books and teach basic homeopathic principles.  In addition, they provide guidance and counsel to their students and to the general public.  Remedies are, for the most part, freely available for purchase.  Nevertheless, those of us who have followed the history of homeopathy – and alternative remedies in general – in the United States, continue to watch and worry.  Some of us have moved to energetic remedies such as Butterfly’s line of Blessed Waters.  These remedies work in much the same way as homeopathic remedies even though they are strictly energetic in nature.   If you understand the basic principles of homeopathy, you know that it is an energetic modality, as well.

Opposition?

Unfortunately, there seems, always to be opposition to successful alternative remedies and methods even today.  Oddly, one small threat came from a group of chiropractors not too long ago.  Their push was to have homeopathic remedies available, by a sort of prescription, from only duly those licensed in their profession.  Fortunately, this idea met with grassroots resistance.  The control of homeopathy by chiropractors was, subsequently, dropped, and the ability to purchase homeopathic remedies returned to normal.

For the Safety of the Public

As in India, regulations relating to homeopathy are promoting as “for the safety of the public”.  In reality, regulations will only keep this healing modality from aiding ordinary people with their health concerns.  Meanwhile, the interests of “conventional” physicians and the drug industry are in protection once again.

Regulations

While there are no regulations in the United States as yet, the atmosphere is less than friendly in some respects.  At this time, and for the past several years, Remedia Homeopathics of England and Scotland have established a policy of not shipping remedies to the United States at all.   Their website clearly states that remedies “cannot be shipped to the United State for legal reasons“.   They do not state what those reasons are.  This restriction applies to all remedies, as far as I can tell.   Homeopathic manufacturers residing in the United States do not seem to be limiting their stock or shipping policies, however.

The FDA and Homeopathy Today

Even though the FDA has specific jurisdiction to regulate homeopathic medicines, it has in the past chosen not to.  Recently the FDA proposed “risk-based” regulation of medicines labeled as homeopathic.  The FDA seeks to limit its proposed regulation to products that either do contain active ingredients that could potentially affect the human body, or that claim to contain active ingredients which could have a deleterious effect on the human body.   Another area of regulation will be products which the manufacturer claims will have a positive effect on a life-threatening or debilitating disease for which there is no scientific evidence.  Homeopathic products that do not fall in any of these three categories will not be affected by the proposed regulations so that they will continue to be available to the consuming public at a reasonable cost.

Homeopathic Prescribing and You

The great homeopathic physicians of the past spent years observing people, studying remedies and health issues to become good at their profession. In the years that I have been teaching homeopathic philosophy, I have seen an amazing phenomenon. Mothers (and fathers), tired of the standard medical model and the drugging of their children, are turning to homeopathy and other alternative modalities. They back up their knowledge with intuition and muscle testing skills. The results are an excellent, in-the-home, use of homeopathic remedies in improving the health of their families.  May this modality and these amazing remedies be available to us forever! I have written two other article on homeopathics.  Homeopathy – Basic Principles and Homeopathics – First Aid and Allergic Reactions.