Overview of the current state of

the research in Homeopathy

Dr Alexander Tournier
BSc Cantab PhD LCHE RSHom
Aims

To show that science and homeopathy

are indeed compatible

To present evidence coming from
different fields of science

To present Homeopathy Research

Institute
Definition of ‘Science’

“Any system of knowledge that is concerned

with the physical world and its phenomena
and that entails unbiased observations and
systematic experimentation. ”

Encyclopaedia Britannica
Scientific discovery process

Observation
Science of
Homeopathy
Experimentation

Theories

Understanding
Unscientific argumentation

“Homeopathy does not work …

… because it cannot work”

is not scientific,

as it is not grounded in observation

Science of homeopathy
Hahnemann built homeopathy following a
rigorous scientific approach:

Experimentation
◦ Provings
◦ Clinical experience

Theories and concepts

◦ Law of similars
◦ Principle of dilution
◦ Concept of the vital force
 Different scientific approaches
Pharmaceutical model CAM model
Screening Practice

Mechanism Safety

Trials of efficacy Effectiveness

Effectiveness in practise Efficacy of components

Safety Mechanism of action

Adapted from Fonnebo etal BMC Med Res Meth 2007 11(7) 7
 Homeopathy: a new science
Number of scientific publications over the last 20 year

Adhami H.R. , S.Shamloo D., Mesgarpour B., H.Tehrani S.A.

“The trend of homeopathic articles indexed in pubmed and ISI” LMHI 2008
Scientific evidence in
Homeopathy

Materials sciences

Molecular and cellular systems

Animal studies

Human studies
 Evidence from Material Sciences

NMR evidence (5/5 Hi-Qt* pub)

Low temp thermoluminescence 

Raman and UV-Vis Spectroscopy 

Dielectric strength 

*Quality assessed using SAPEH scores, high-quality > 6

Review: C Witt etal J Alt Comp Med 2003 9:1, 113-32
Molecular and cellular systems

Enzymatic reactions (7/9 Hi-Qt* pub)

Cultured cells (5/9 Hi-Qt pub)

Basophil degranulation (8/11 Hi-Qt pub)

*Quality assessed using SAPEH scores, high-quality > 6

C Witt etal Comp Ther Med, 2007 15 128-38

Animal systems

One review in 1998 (no access)

One review in immunology in 2006

◦ Immunostimulation (16 pub)
◦ Immunoregulation, inflammatory processes (20 pub)

No systematic review in this area despite wide use

and high number of experiments

Effect of thyroxin on frog development 

 Human trials

134 RCT have been published
◦ 59 (44%) positive
◦ 67 (50%) neutral (small effect)
◦ 8 (6%) negative

23 systematic reviews
◦ 10 positive
◦ 8 non-conclusive
◦ 5 little or no evidence
P. Fisher ‘Research in Homoeopathy: Who needs it’ LMHI 2008
Human provings
or Human pathogenetic trials

Only one review up to 1995 

More recent trials are of higher quality

Need a review of the recent provings

Need more trials

 Human provings
A successful example
Associated p = 0.0002
14
Average number of Symptoms

Arsenicum specific symptoms

12
Nat-mur specific symptoms
10 Non-specific symptoms
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4 Arsenicum Nat-mur Placebo
group group group

Adapted from H. Möllinger

‘Homeopathic Drug Provings between historical and scientific demand’ LMHI 2008
 Meta-analyses
Kleijnen etal 1991 105 studies +
Boissel etal 1996 15 Hi-Qt studies +
Linde etal 1997* 89 studies +
Linde & Melchart 1998* 32 Hi-Qt studies +
Cucherat etal 2000* 16 Hi-Qt studies +
Shang etal 2005 8 (110) studies - (?)

*Included in UK DARE
(Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects)
Shang etal 2005 Meta-analysis

Conclusions based on comparison of 8
homeopathy vs. 6 conventional medicine trials, not
110 vs. 110

Criteria for selection of 8 high-quality trials were not

given and no references were given

Does not conform with QUOROM guidelines for

systematic reviews

Not classified as a systematic review by UK DARE

(Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects)
 Levels of evidence
Level I meta-analyses and/or systematic reviews

Level IIa multiple controlled, randomised experiments

Level IIb some controlled, randomised experiments

Level IIIa studies with multiple cohorts

Level IIIb some cohort studies
Level IV opinion of experts

From Michel van Wassenhoven LMHI 2008

Levels of evidence

Material sciences IIa+

(one systematic review)

Molecular and cellular IIa+

(one systematic review)

Animals IIIa / IIb

 Levels of evidence for human trials

I Overall (3/3 Hi-Qt meta-analyses)

Allergic rhinitis, post-operative ileus,
I rheumatoid arthritis,
protection from toxic substances
Asthma, fibrosis, influenza,
IIa muscular pain, otitis media, strains
ENT infections, side effect radiotherapy
Anxiety, ADHD, IBS, migraine,
IIb osteo-arthritis, PMS, Post-tonsillectiomy analgesia,
nausea during chemotherapy, septicaemia

Michel van Wassenhofen, ECH publication LMHI 2008

Conclusions

A lot of scientific evidence exists

However, a lot of it is still of low quality

Need more studies, esp. animal studies

Many questions remain

 Still need a lot of research

Homeopathy Research Institute

Aims:

◦ To perform and promote high-quality

scientific research in homeopathy

◦ To collate, clarify and disseminate the

existing scientific evidence in homeopathy
Homeopathy Research Institute
Scientific committee
Dr Alexander Tournier PhD
Clare Relton MSc
Dr Robert Mathie PhD
Dr Elizabeth Thompson BAOxon MBBS MRCP FFHom
Prof. Kate Thomas
Dr Lionel Milgrom PhD
Dr Mike Emmans Dean PhD
Dr Nagin Lad PhD
Dr Natasa Peric-Concha PhD
Dr Patti Bayliss MBChB FRCGP
Homeopathy Research Institute

Current projects
◦ Curated database of research articles

◦ National survey of homeopathy practice

◦ Scientific expertise for new research projects

◦ Homeopathy use in breast cancer patients

◦ Membership scheme
Thank you

For more information:

alextournier@homeoinst.org

www.homeopathyresearchinstitute.org