About Herbs

Bottom Line: There is some evidence that homeopathy may benefit those with chronic conditions. It has not been shown to treat or prevent cancer.

Homeopathy, developed over 200 years ago, is based on the Law of Similars, or "like cures like." A patient experiencing a certain symptom is given a medicine containing low doses of plant extracts, animal extracts, or minerals that, when taken in normal amounts, usually cause that symptom. Such substances are diluted to one-tenth to one one-thousandth or less of their original strength (i.e., the same volume of medicine that once contained 1 mg of arnica would now contain 0.001 mg). Based on current scientific and medical knowledge, such a solution would be far too dilute to have any physiological effect, since it does not contain even a single molecule of the original substance. However, homeopathy continues to be popular in India and many European countries.
Several clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate benefits of homeopathy, but data are limited and results, inconclusive. More research is needed.

Over 100 clinical trials of homeopathic preparations have been conducted, with overall mixed results. Several studies show positive effects of homeopathic preparations, but there has been controversy as to whether these beneficial effects are truly a product of the medicine, or simply a placebo effect. A placebo effect is defined as an effect brought about by the patient's expectation that something will happen, or the "power of suggestion" (i.e., a person getting better from the psycho-somatic effects of believing that their homeopathic medicine will make them better, not from any activity of the medicine). One study reviewed 89 clinical trials and concluded that, statistically, the positive effects from homeopathy could not be attributed to the placebo effect alone. While another study covered 110 trials found homeopathic medicine is no better than placebo. This debate is far from settled.

Another problem that plagues most clinical trials of homeopathy is that they rely on subjective (reported by the patient), rather than objective (observed by the doctor), measures of effectiveness. Because inter-individual perception, memory, and reporting varies, subjective results are as a rule less reliable.

A clinical trial asked 253 healthy adult subjects to report clinical symptoms after being randomly assigned to take either a very dilute Belladonna treatment or placebo. Laboratory studies found no difference between the two substances. In addition, roughly the same number of people from each group exhibited 'tell-tale' signs of a homeopathic Belladonna treatment. Researchers conclude that very dilute homeopathic remedies have no observable clinical effects.

Homeopathic remedies are generally free of toxicity or side effects. However, cancer patients should be aware that homeopathy is not a substitute for mainstream care and delaying conventional care in pursuit of alternative treatments can be detrimental.

Homeopathic medicine, Homeopathic remedy

Homeopathy is a medical system developed by Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, a German physician, about 200 years ago. Promoted as a safer and more holistic approach to disease, it has remained especially popular in India and European countries. Practitioners select a highly dilute form of substance that would, if given in full strength to a healthy volunteer, cause the presenting symptoms of the patient. Many opponents argue that the benefits experienced by patients with homeopathic remedies are merely placebo effects.

Several studies have been conducted to evaluate homeopathic products. A randomized controlled trial of ultramolecular homeopathic formulations showed no observable effects ⁽¹⁸⁾ and a meta-analysis found the clinical effects to be placebo effects ⁽²⁰⁾. However, a systematic review of 25 randomized clinical trials indicated that the placebo effects were no larger than those observed in conventional medicine ⁽²²⁾. Further, data from an observational study of over 3,000 patients with chronic conditions such as headache and allergic rhinitis in adults, and atopic dermatitis and recurrent infections in children, showed improved quality of life associated with use of homeopathy with benefits persisting for 8 years ⁽²³⁾.

In vitro studies indicate effectiveness of ultra dilute homeopathic products against breast cancer cells ⁽²⁴⁾.
A randomized, double-blind clinical trial showed homeopathic medicine to be beneficial in treating dermatitis during radiotherapy in breast cancer patients ⁽¹⁹⁾. Another study reported that homeopathic treatment improved symptoms of xerostomia ⁽²¹⁾. Results from a small study suggest benefits of a homeopathic injection for relief of posttreatment pain in breast cancer patients ⁽²⁵⁾. Large scale studies are required.
There are no data to support the recent claims of a homeopathic smallpox vaccine.

The practice of homeopathy is governed by the Law of Similars, similia similibus curantur or "like cures like." Hahnemann and his followers observed that while certain plants, animals or minerals could cause specific symptoms when ingested by healthy individuals, the highly diluted form of the same substance could relieve similar symptoms in ailing patients. The dilution process involves adding a small amount of a plant, animal, or mineral substance to distilled water or another substrate, shaking vigorously, then diluting it ten, 100, or 1,000 times. The dilution and shaking process is repeated many times to "increase the potency of the medicine," although typically not a single molecule of the original substance remains. The laws of chemistry speak to the dilution limit beyond which all of the original substance is lost. The limit is termed Avogadro's number. Homeopaths indicate that the water retains a memory of the original substance. However, there is no basis for the idea that water has a memory.
^{(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)}

No pharmacokinetic studies have been performed with homeopathic preparations.

Mints, coffee, tea, chocolate, spicy foods.
⁽²⁾

None known

None known

Over 100 clinical trials of homeopathic preparations are published. Several report statistically significant effects of homeopathic preparations, but subjective endpoints are often used. A handful of meta-analyses and systematic reviews find insufficient evidence for the efficacy of homeopathy, although Linde et al (1997) conclude that its clinical effects cannot be completely attributed to placebo effect.
^{(6) (7) (8) (9) (12) (14) (15)}

Shang A, et al. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 2005;366:726-32.
A thorough literature search was done to identify 110 homeopathy and 110 conventional clinical trials that were similar in design. An analysis of the trials indicated that in both the groups smaller trials and those of lower quality showed beneficial effects from treatment in comparison to larger well-designed trials. The study concluded that there was very weak evidence of any clinical effects from homeopathic treatments as opposed to specific effects of conventional medicine. Therefore any clinical effects of homeopathy are attributed to placebo effects.

Brien S, Lewith G, Bryant T. Ultramolecular homeopathy has no observable clinical effects. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proving trial of Belladonna 30C. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;56:562-8.
253 healthy adult subjects were randomly assigned to receive either Belladonna 30C preparation or placebo. Subjects were given a proving questionnaire and asked to rate their symptoms. Only 29 subjects successfully proved -- had the symptoms traditionally corresponding to Belladonna homeopathic preparation. The group difference in provers was negligible. Researchers conclude that ultramolecular preparations have no observable clinical effects.