Homeoprophylaxis – A Proven Alternative to Vaccination
I prepared my first formal program of homeopathic remedies to prevent infectious diseases in 1986. In the following 20+ years, tens of thousands of Australian children have been immunized homeopathically – a method called homeoprophylaxis (HP) – using programs from myself as well as other practitioners across the country. The method itself is over 200 years old, and has considerable clinical and research experience to support its claims.
In 2004, I integrated 18 years of data collection from parents of children using my program with 4 years of doctoral research at Swinburne University in Melbourne. The purpose of this article is to share with you the findings of this and other research into the effectiveness and safety of HP.
Background
The use of HP was first described by Dr Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, in 1801. He used the remedy Belladonna 30 to successfully treat patients with the disease Scarlet Fever, but fortuitously found that the remedy also helped to prevent the disease. He then used HP to prevent such diseases as Cholera and Typhoid. In the decades following, many leading homeopaths used HP to prevent a variety of infectious diseases, mainly in acute epidemic situations.
The largest trial of the short-term use of HP was against an outbreak of Meningococcal disease in Brazil. The researchers gave 65,826 children the homeopathic remedy Meningococcinum. Another 23,539 were not protected. The effectiveness of HP after 6 months was 95%, and after a 12 months follow-up was 91%.
Whilst many homeopaths also use HP for long-term prevention (mainly in Australia and the Indian subcontinent), there had been very little formal statistical research into the long-term use of HP prior to 1985. The data I have collected since that time provides a useful guide as to the effectiveness and safety of long-term HP. It confirms that the findings regarding epidemic use also extend to long-term use, with an average effectiveness of around 90%, and a very high level of safety. These findings are presented below.
The Effectiveness of Homeoprophylaxis
As mentioned above, we have a considerable amount of clinical evidence showing that HP provides a high level of protection against targeted infectious diseases. This is supported by a small number of statistical trials which are summarized in Table 1 below. These show an average effectiveness of around 90%, which certainly is comparable to measures of vaccine effectiveness, which range from 70% to 99%, depending on the individual vaccine, and the type of trial used to measure efficacy (real-world experiences show lower rates than clinical trials).
These figures confirm that no method of disease prevention is ever 100% effective.
No statistical study is ever perfect, and of course the reliability of my data is open to question. So as part of my Swinburne research, I applied seven statistical tests to validate the long-term data I have been collecting since 1985. These are described in detail elsewhere, and they did show a high level of reliability. For example, my single figure measure of long-term HP effectiveness was 90.4%, with 95% confidence limits of 87.6% – 93.2% (i.e. it can be stated with 95% confidence that the efficacy lies between 87.6% AND 93.2%), a very strong result.
Table 1: The Effectiveness of HP – Statistical Trials in Humans
| Year | Researcher* | Numbers of Participants | Length of Survey | Effectiveness % | |
| 1907 | Eaton | 2,806 | < 1 year | 97.5 | |
| 1950 | Taylor-Smith | 82 (12 definitely exposed) | < 1 year | 100.0 | |
| 1963 | Gutman | 385 | < 1 year | 86.0 | |
| 1974 | Castro &Nogeira | HP 18,000 Not HP 6,340 |
3 months | 86.1 | |
| 1987 | English | 694 | 2 years | 87.0 – 91.5 | |
| 1987 | Fox | 61 | 5 years | 82.0 – 95.0 | |
| 1998 | Mroninski et al | HP 65,826 Not HP 23,539 |
6 months 12 months |
95.0 – 91.0 | |
| 1997 | Golden | 593 children
1,305 questionnaires |
10 years | 88.8 | |
| 2004 | Golden | 1,159 children 2,342 questionnaires |
15 years | 90.4 |
* References for these studies may be found in Vaccination and Homeoprophylaxis – A Review of Risks and Alternatives, 6th edition
So those in pharmaceutical medicine who state that there is no evidence supporting the effectiveness of HP are clearly wrong. It is not essential to rely only on randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide evidence, and in fact the findings of many RCTs are shown to be questionable over time (e.g. drugs such as Vioxx that were tested in RCTs, then later withdrawn from use because of side-effects not discovered or acknowledged during the RCTs).
Thus homeopaths can confidently say that HP provides a definite level of protection against targeted infectious diseases, which is not 100%, but which is comparable to that of vaccines.
The Safety of Homoeoprophylaxis
Homeopathic medicines are usually prepared using a series of dilutions and succussions (firm striking of the container holding the liquid remedy against a firm surface). The remedies are called “potencies” because at each stage they become energetically stronger. After the 12c potency, no molecules of the original substance remain, yet the remedy is energetically stronger. Pharmaceutical advocates cannot understand this, because their paradigm forces them to believe that as the number of molecules of a substance decreases in a medicine, the medicine becomes weaker. This is true if the kinetic energy of the succussion is not correctly applied, and a simple dilution only is prepared. But we are making much more than a simple dilution.
Doctors agree that homoeopathic potencies cannot be toxic, and so physical safety is not an issue. However, some homeopaths have expressed concerns over the years as to whether the long-term use of the remedies in my HP program is energetically safe. Many people who are not bound to the pharmaceutical paradigm understand that energy can produce real and tangible effects, and if misused can cause problems. One important part of my research at Swinburne was to check the long-term safety of HP.
This was done by examining 5 markers of overall wellbeing in children aged between 4 and 12 years of age – asthma, eczema, ear/hearing problems, allergies and behavioural problems. These were compared to a range of early childhood markers, including breastfeeding status, birthweight, APGAR scores, as well as to 4 possible immunization methods – vaccination, HP, general/constitutional prevention, and no prevention at all. That gave 20 (5 x 4) possible combinations of health conditions and immunization methods. The data was processed using Odds Ratios and Chi Squared Probability tests.
Once again, the full results are reported in detail elsewhere, but the main findings are as follows:
- In 19 of the 20 possible measures of health, vaccinated children were less healthy than other children, usually by a significant amount (the 1 measure favouring vaccination was not statistically significant). The most dramatic single finding was that vaccinated children have a 15 times greater chance of becoming asthmatic than children using HP, with P>99%, a highly statistically significant finding.
- Children using HP were generally at least as healthy (and often more healthy) as children who used constitutional/general immunization or no immunization at all. The HP group were not exclusively from people who were extremely health conscious. Regularly, parents using my HP program say that it is their first introduction to homeopathy and to natural medicine in general.
- Parental estimates of general well-being were very high in the HP group – at least as high as in other groups.
- Not all HP programs give consistent results. When comparing children using my HP program to those using other HP programs, the levels of both effectiveness and safety were lower in the group using other programs. So it is advisable to check the basis of a HP program before committing to it. Programs using daily doses of low potencies provide less effective long-term prevention than programs using infrequent doses of (appropriately selected) high potencies.
We may conclude from the parts of my data which were statistically significant (P?95%), that HP is associated with an improvement in general health, compared to other immunization methods (as well as no immunization at all), and that this figure is significantly better when compared to vaccinated children. Therefore we may conclude that the evidence suggests that the use of an appropriate long-term HP program does not lessen the health of children, and evidence suggests that it may in fact assist the maturation of the immune system by gently challenging the system in the first 5-6 years of life.
Concluding Comments
What began as a limited study 20 years ago has grown, for me, into an ongoing attempt to make parents, as well as health professionals, aware of the wonderful opportunity that homoeoprophylaxis offers to provide protection against target infectious diseases, without risking the long-term health of their children. It may be safely used by adults.
Not every infectious disease is a dire threat to a healthy infant. I personally don’t believe that immunization against every infectious disease is essential. But I do believe that the right to choose which diseases should be prevented should belong to the parents of each child. We can confidently say to parents that they can provide a high (but not complete) level of protection against targeted diseases, without risk, by using an appropriate HP program.
We can also say to those within the pharmaceutical industry who disparage HP as being untested and uncertain – take the time to study the facts available. Criticism without facts is the antithesis of the true scientific method, yet it is the response we continually get from pharmaceutical medicine when it comes to HP.
I concluded my doctoral thesis by saying that “a national immunization system, where both vaccination and HP were available to parents, would increase the national coverage against targeted infectious diseases, and reduce the incidence of some chronic health conditions, especially asthma”. The data is unambiguous, and it is time that those who run the health services of this country get serious about long-term health, and fully support the use of the best of what natural medicine in general, and homeopathic medicine in particular, has to offer.
Vaccines offer a level of protection against targeted infectious diseases, but involve a long-term risk that has never been adequately measured. Evidence shows that vaccination is a factor in the increase in asthma (and other chronic diseases) shown earlier. We can achieve a comparable level of protection, without this risk, by using an appropriate long-term HP program. It’s time that those parents who search for facts to inform themselves before vaccinating are encouraged, and not attacked by agents of the pharmaceutical industry. It’s time that parents are supported in their choice of immunization method, for the benefit of their own children and of the entire community.
Homeopathic Immunizations are now available in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Contact Little Mountain Homeopathy for more information.
References
Golden I. Homoeoprophylaxis – A Fifteen Year Clinical Study. 2004. Isaac Golden Publications. Daylesford.
Golden I. Homœoprophylaxis – A Practical and Philosophical Review. 2001. Isaac Golden Publications, Daylesford, Australia. 3rd edition.
Golden I. The Potential Value of Homœoprophylaxis in the Prevention of Infectious Diseases, and the Maintenance of General Health in Recipients. 2005. Swinburne University Press, Melbourne.
Golden I. Vaccination – A Homoeopathic Perspective. Nature & Health. Vol 7. No.3. Sept 1986, pages 67-70.
Golden I. Vaccination and Homoeoprophylaxis – A Review of Risks and Alternatives, 6th edition. 2005. Isaac Golden Publications. Daylesford.
Hahnemann S. The Cure and Prevention of Scarlet Fever. 1801. Republished in Lesser Writings. B Jain Publishers, New Delhi; pp. 369-385.
Mroninski C, Adriano E, Mattos G. Meningococcinum: Its protective effect against meningococcal disease. Homoeopathic Links Winter, 2001. Vol 14(4); pp. 230-4.
National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC). The Australian Immunisation Handbook, 8th Edition. 2003. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
About the Author…
Dr Isaac Golden has been in homeopathic practice since 1984. He has written 8 books on homeopathic topics and currently consults in Gisborne, Victoria. Since 1990, he has been Principal of the A.C.H.H., a correspondence college teaching homeopathy and has recently been appointed as Adjunct Professor of Homeopathy at the Australian College of Natural Medicine. He is a world authority on the use of homeoprophylaxis, and has completed the world’s largest long term trial of the method. He was awarded a PhD from Swinburne University in 2004 as a result of the research on HP he has undertaken over the last 20 years. Click here for further information about Dr Golden and his publications.


































I have been following swine flu in the news since the first outbreak in Mexico in the spring of 2009. There was and is what I perceive to be a lot of media hype around a disease that has so far killed far less people than regular influenza. The regular flu kills approx. 250,000 – 500,000 people each year worldwide. So far, the swine flu has only killed less than 2000 people since April.
Since there is no actual hard evidence that the swine flu is deadlier than the regular flu, my only guess about why it has been hyped so much in the media is the motivation of greed. The pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the flu vaccine stand to make billions of dollars from the swine vaccine alone. Scaremongering also increases the use of antiviral drugs once swine flu is diagnosed, since people have been led to think that the swine flu is a deadly and serious disease.
Many people opt for the flu shot, but since the flu shot is not effective, this is not the best decision. For example, with young children, the flu vaccine does not decrease influenza-related hospital visits, as published in the
Once you get a cold or flu, traditional pharmacies carry various cold and flu medications. These medications only suppress your symptoms, they don’t actually strengthen the immunity in any way. A
Lately there has been a lot of talk about the health benefits of Vitamin D. People do have a lot less colds and flus in the summer months, so I think there is some truth to this. A recent study published in the
The cleanse that I have found to be the cheapest and most effective is fasting. They say that the best time to fast is spring and summer months. Part of the reason for this is practical: your body temperature decreases when you are fasting. The only exception to this rule is when you actually get a cold or flu. I find that my recovery time from a cold or flu is a lot quicker when I am fasting. The body is able to heal itself quicker because the digestive organs are resting, they don’t have to digest food. Make sure that you drink plenty of water so that you stay hydrated! The science of fasting is called
I have also found the Schussler Cell Salts, also referred to as Tissue Salts, to be helpful with colds and flus, especially with my kids. Unlike herbal formulas, the cell salts taste great, kids will be begging you for more. In Canada, Hyland’s sells the cheapest brand. At the first stage of inflammation, use the Ferrum Phosphoricum cell salt. When the mucus becomes clear and profuse, use the Natrum Muriaticum cell salt. After the mucus becomes thicker and white, the Kali Muriaticum cell salt will help break up the secretions.
Something else that has been most helpful for myself and my family during cold and flu season have been the homeopathic colour remedies, first potentized by American homeopath
About a month and a half ago, I wrote about and gave evidence as to why the
The current cover story in The Atlantic Magazine,
In 1998 the French Society of Homeopathy conducted a survey of 23 homeopathic doctors concerning their use of Influenzinum as a flu preventative. The survey included use of Influenzinum over a 10 year period (1987-1998) in 458 patients. Results of the survey were remarkable. In approximately 90 percent of the cases no instances of the flu occurred when Influenzinum was used preventively.


Right now, the swine flu vaccine is being distributed to the Canadian and US population. Of first priority to receive the shot are pregnant women and young children, both considered to be high risk groups for the H1N1 flu. I strongly believe that
There are many reasons for extreme caution. The testing of the vaccine was fast-tracked, so there are absolutely no long-term studies done on its safety. Also most disturbing are the list of toxic ingredients in the vaccine: squalene, thimerosal, and aluminum salts.
Squalene is an adjuvant added to the swine flu vaccine in order to enhance its immune-stimulating properties. A study done on rats in 2000 published in the
Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative in the swine flu vaccine. A few weeks ago Washington state issued a
Doctors, pharmacists, and the mainstream press assure us that thimerosal is not harmful but one recent study begs to differ. A study done by UBC professor Dr. Chris Shaw published in the June 2009 edition of
Lastly there is yet another heavy metal in the swine flu vaccine: aluminum hydroxide. Most people have stopped using aluminum pots and pans because it is well known that aluminum is linked to brain damage. In April 2009 a study was published in the
There is a lot of hype surrounding the swine flu, fueled by the mainstream media, doctors and the medical establishment. The motivation for this hype is profits, since pharmaceutical companies and doctors make money from swine flu immunizations. They are not concerned about pregnant women and children, they’re only concerned with their own pocketbooks.
There have been 5 deaths linked to the swine flu vaccine in Sweden, according to the Swedish paper
There have been
Canadians may be thinking “that’s unfortunate for the Swedes but our swine flu vaccine is safe.” Wrong. 
Panvax is licensed for use in Australia and the United States but is unlicensed here in Canada, according to
Neomycin
Beta-Propiolactone
There are non-toxic options for strengthening the immunity during pregnancy. Constitutional homeopathy is the best way to strengthen the immunity. Homeopathy is also useful for morning sickness, lower back pain, urinary tract infections, depression, mood swings, constipation, indigestion, insomnia, yeast infections and more.
Then I would like to interview you! Looking for anybody who has experienced severe side effects after taking the swine flu vaccine. Particularly looking for people living in the Vancouver area. Please post here or email info@littlemountainhomeopathy.com so we can set up an interview via email, Skype or MSN. Preferably I want to post real names and pictures so people know this is for real.
In September of 2009 I wrote an introductory article in the Georgia Straight newspaper about the 








Dosage: Give the indicated remedy every half hour for three doses. If there is no change in the patient’s condition, you have picked the wrong remedy. Once the patient’s condition improves, decrease dosage to 3 times per day until recovery. Use a 30C potency. For serious cases of the flu, consult a classical homeopath in your area.
I have also found that Hyland’s brand Ferrum Phosphoricum cell salts are useful to bring down a fever. For high fevers, give once every 15 minutes to half hour until the fever starts going down. Thereafter, give 3-4 times per day until the fever dissipates. To get rid of runny mucus, give Natrum Muriaticum cell salts. For tougher, thicker mucus, give Kali Muriaticum cell salts. The Nat Mur and Kali Mur cell salts can be taken 3-4 times per day.



















