COMMENT INVITED

P R E V E N T I V E MEDICINE AND HOM(EOPATHY

By D~. P. N. PAI (Bombay)

HOMEOPATHIC remedies have been used for years as prophylactic agents in many Countries. But the potencies selected and the manner of employment have never been uniform, some prescribing a few doses of the very high attenuations, while others prefer medium potencies and weekly repetition over a few weeks, and so on. In view of this and because of the existence of natural immunity which may be below the minimum only in the lowest socio-eeonomic group, it is difficult to assess the efficacy of homceopathic prophylaxis as it has been practised so far.

"Simflia similibus" apparently cannot be employed in the same manner for both therapeutic and prophylactic purposes. Curing the sick, or in a sense immunizing the sick gradually against disease forces in a more or less constant environment as we do with our remedies, is obviously different from producing immunity in a healthy individual against infectious epidemic diseases where the change in the external environment is sudden. Those who need prophylaxis must be enabled to form the preventive factor and this is possible by the use of an agent capable of producing in a very short t ime an extremely mild disease similar to the one which is to be prevented.

In homceopathic therapeutics a well-selected remedy takes months or at times a couple of years to cure a chronic ailment, i.e. to enhance the pat ient 's reactive forces against the particular disease forces although the patient is or ought to be quite sensitive to the action.of the well selected remedy. Therefore when the aim is to immunize sensitive and non-sensitive people alike against an epidemic disease with a single remedy, the usual method adopted for t reatment would be ineffective.

I am intimately associated with a highly-qualified man who is also very much interested in Homceopathy. He is tall, fair, chilly, and has, for some years, been suffering from recurrent attacks of sinusitis, post-nasal catarrh and purpurie spots over the arms. He took Phos. 200, two doses daily for a month, and Phos. 1,000 similarly for another month. His colds persist, also the post-nasal catarrh, while the one inference tha t can be drawn from this example is tha t a person who was, to a certain extent, susceptible to the action of Phos. did neither develop any of the symptoms of Phos., nor did his existing symptoms subside. I t may be possible to cure him with Phos. 50M, CM, and some nosodes administered over a long period.

I took Syphil. 200 twice daily for 30 days and did not develop a single symptom of this nosode.

Another physician took Sil. 200 twice daily for 30 days without a single symptom of the remedy appearing during or after tha t period. However, the same gentleman, after taking Sulphur 200 morning and night for a week, suffered from severe itching all over the body with 5 a.m. aggravation and had to stop the experiment. These are the varied reactions to potentized remedies in high potencies from persons of the same profession living under almost similar environment. What then would be the effect of a few doses of Variolinum or Diphtherinum administered at various intervals in medium or high potencies to individuals with varying SUSceptibilities, especially when administered during

293 6

294 THE BRITISI:f HOM(EOPATHIC JOURNAL

an epidemic of smallpox or diphtheria? Pract ical ly no react ion has been seen by m a n y of us under the above circumstances. Most of our pa t ients have remained immune to epidemics through either their na tu ra l i m m u n i t y or previous vaccinations, ra ther t h a n as a result of our prophylact ic t rea tment .

A few years back, in Bombay, the child of a well-known homceopath suffered from a severe a t tack of smallpox, and the cook of another experienced homceo- pa th died of the same disease. Two of m y children did no t escape whooping cough, measles and later variola major and the same has happened in the families of six other homceopaths. Needless to say this happened in spite of homceopathic prophylaxis. There m a y be m a n y more similar cases which I am not aware of.

I n three cases of t e tanus with very mild lockjaw and history of nai l i n ju ry to the sole Hypericum 200, and later 1,000 given in repeated doses, did no t have a n y effect. These cases in fact developed the full picture of the disease and had to be t rea ted with some other remedies.

Coming back to Variolinum, if this remedy could a t all p reven t smallpox it should cer ta inly be capable of prevent ing or a t least minimizing reactions from smallpox vaccinat ion especially in cases of p r imary vaccinations. I n order to verify this fact children and adults were given Variolinum and later vaccin- a ted dur ing the smal lpox epidemic of 1961. One child in the series (No. 4) was no t vaccinated. The details and results of this exper iment are tabled below:

Serial -No.

1".

2.

3.

4.

Age and sex

8 months Male

8 months Female

1 year Male

2 years Male

Potency and frequency of Variolinum

used

One dose of 1,000 evel T week for 4 weeks

One dose of 1,000 every day for one week

6 doses of 200--one dose every 4th day

One dose of 30 ] every day for I a week,

200~3 doses i once every 4th day and then 1,000 2 doses once a week for 2 weeks---all given succes- sively

Interval between the last dose of

Variolinum and

vaccination

1 week

2 weeks

4 weeks

2 weeks

Type of Vaccination

Primary vaccination

Primary vaccination

Revaecination

Not vaccinated

Results

Very severe usual reactions with temp. ranging be- tween 100%104 ~

do.

High fever, gastro- enteritis and usual reactions lasted for a week

Developed variola major and re- covered after 17 days of homceo- pathie treatment

295

Serial No.

5.

6.

�9 7.

8. 2 weeks

9.

10,

11.

12.

Age and sex

3 years Male

4 years Male

4 years Male

5 years Female

6 years Male

38 years Male

40 years Female

Potency and frequency of Var~olinura

used

200---one dose every week for 4 weeks and later 1,000-one dose every week for 4 weeks

30--twice daffy for 2 weeks

30--twice daily for 2 weeks--one week's in terval - - 1,000 two doses--one day in a week for 4 weeks

6 doses of 200 - - twice daily for 3 days

3 doses of 6C every day for one week

3 doses of 1,000---one every day successively

3 doses of 200---one every day

Interval between the last dose of

Variolinum and

vaccination

2 weeks

3 weeks

4 weeks

4 days

3 days

1 day

1 week

Type of Vaccination

Primary vaccination

Primary vaccination

Primary

Primary

I Primary

Revaccina- tied

Revaceina- t ied

Usual actions

Results

severe re-

All the usual re. actions appeared and the child suffered from re- current boils for months soon aftra the reaction sub- sided. Thuja did not benefit the child at all

Usual reactions were not at all modified

Usual reactions

Mild reactions

Mild usual reactions

50 years Female

200---3 doses one on alter- nate day

Revaecina- tied

P R E V E N T I V E M E D I C I N E AND HOM(EOPATHY

Mild usual reactions

Severe reactions including rigors anc high fever for 4 days

All t h e c h i l d r e n d e s c r i b e d in t h e a b o v e t a b l e had a l w ay s b e e n u n d e r homceo- p a t h i e t r e a t m e n t a n d h a d n o t b e e n v a c c i n a t e d e a r h e r fo r f ea r o f r eac t i ons . T h e s e ch i l d r en h a v e b e e n se l ec t ed f r o m b e t t e r - c l a s s fami l i es l iv ing u n d e r v e r y g o o d h y g i e n i c e n v i r o n m e n t a n d t h e y a re all wel l n o u r i s h e d . I t t h e r e f o r e c a n n o t b e s a id t h a t a f e w doses o f Variolinum w h i c h t h e s e c h i l d r e n w e r e r ece iv ing in t h e

296 T I ~ E B R I T I S ] ~ H O M ( ~ O P A T t { I C J O U R N A L

previous years had effectively prevented smallpox, though other constitutional homceopathic t reatment might have maintained their general resistance.

No reactions whatsoever were noticed during or after the administration of Variolinum in any of these cases, whereas all of them, including an elderly lady (No. 12), developed moderate to severe reactions to vaccination in spite of prior t reatment with Variolinum.

The three elderly sisters of an allopath who had not been vaccinated for the past five years but who were taking Variolinum 200, just two doses in a year, were vaccinated last year after the administration of two doses of Variolinum 200. All developed severe reactions including rigors and fever. On the other hand four of my friends aged 30, 35, 38 and 39 who have been vaccinated every year had but minor reactions after revaeeination during the smallpox epidemic last year.

I know a few people who have escaped smallpox during every epidemic without, either revaccination or Variolinum for quite a number of years.

Thuja has been mentioned by some as a very effective preventive against smallpox. But I have seen five children aged 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9 getting severe at tacks of smallpox during the Bombay epidemic of 1956 in.spite of Thuja. I t is very unfortunate that three of them succumbed. By the way, I have also seen Morbil. failing to prevent measles in a number of children, whereas I have been observing three children aged 4, 6 and 7 who have so far defied measles with- out any type of prophylactic treatment.

I f Variolinum cannot prevent the usual reactions to vaccination, i.e. an extremely mild at tack of smallpox, it is difficult to comprehend in what way it would immunize an individual against smallpox itself, especially the way it has been used so far. This inference applies to all types of homceopathie prophy- lactic t reatment against all preventable diseases.

The action of the physiological dose of a remedy is the opposite of its action in an infinitesimal form. To excite bodily reaction to the extent of producing active immunity, either a sort of proving with low potencies, till perceptible reaction is established in every individual, or the administration of a physio- logical dose capable of bringing on such reaction prompt ly is necessary. The first method, ff at all possible, with very low potencies (see Case No. 9 of pr imary vaccination where the 6th potency was employed and the reactions were mild) is impracticable on a mass scale and at any rate impossible during an epidemic. The second method evidently cannot be other than the present universally adopted methods of immunization through vaccination and inoculation. The role of Homceopathy in this field is tha t of combating severe reactions from such vaccinations which are, in a sense, based on a slightly modified homceopathie principle of producing a disease in a healthy human being in order to prevent a similar disease, a n d high potencies obviously cannot be employed with certainty under this principle.

I t is possible to find out whether our remedies excite antibody formation by doing the necessary test before and after administration of the remedies and research on these lines would be useful.

I t is thus quite clear tha t until further research establishes the opt imum potency and frequency of repetition required to produce definite immunity to every preventable disease it would appear to be safer to follow the present methods of immunization at least in countries like India where generally hygienic conditions are not good and nutrition poor.