Of all forms of complementary and alternative medicine,
homeopathy is one of the most, if not the
most controversial. Indeed, to bring up homeopathy with many medical doctors is
to invite an argument. However, an English translation of an interesting Swiss government report on homeopathy was just released, and I’m feeling punchy. This
report, which has been about 10 years in the making, found that homeopathy is
indeed both a clinically effective and cost-effective treatment for many
conditions, which subsequently paved the way for the Swiss government to
include homeopathic treatment in its publicly-funded national healthcare
system. Homeopathy, dismissed here in the United States, and currently under
attack in the United Kingdom, may have just scored a considerable victory.
While I could probably talk about homeopathy at length,
today I’m going to address a specific misconception about homeopathic practice.
Many of the most vocal opponents of homeopathy suggest that its use discourages
people from seeking ‘real’ medical care, and that the public is at risk of
serious disease and debility as a result. I’ve heard it suggested that
homeopaths allow massive infections to ravage their patients completely
unchecked, and that they also discourage patients from seeking care in cases of
advanced cancers.
Let me be the first to say that, as a naturopathic physician
who practices homeopathy regularly, I believe that these practices would be
completely irresponsible, and are anathema to my beliefs as a healthcare
practitioner. Far from an ‘either/or’ dichotomy in the practice of medicine,
naturopathic physicians embrace a ‘both/and’ philosophy. The naturopathic
approach is pragmatic, outcomes-oriented, and above all, patient-centered. The
mode of practice falsely ascribed to homeopathy is not the practice of
medicine, it’s the practice of dogmatism, and as I love to point out, ‘There’s
no room for dogma in medicine’.
In addition to my clinical practice, I’m actively involved
in the effort to pass a law that would license and regulate naturopathic
physicians in Maryland. One of the main arguments that we’ve been making in our
efforts is that licensing naturopathic physicians helps to increase access to
complementary healthcare practitioners that are trained in appropriate usage of
natural treatments. Properly trained naturopathic physicians understand both
the potential and limits of homeopathic medicine, and use homeopathic medicines
judiciously. If anything, the argument that some people practicing homeopathy
are irresponsible in their treatment is an argument in favor of establishing
licensing boards for naturopathic physicians, so that consumers are better able
to access care from well-trained practitioners.
Without going into an extensive discussion of homeopathy,
here are some of my thoughts on when homeopathy can be effective and when it
can’t.
Here are some situations in which homeopathy can be very
effective:
- Symptomatic chronic disease – When a patient has a clear
diagnosis and they are suffering greatly as a result of their symptoms,
homeopathy can be very effective in alleviating symptoms. It’s effect on labs
and imaging studies depends significantly from patient to patient, but the
symptoms can usually be alleviated.
- Functional problems – By this I primarily mean situations
in which the patient is symptomatic, but pathological changes that would lead
to a clear diagnosis haven’t occurred yet. Laboratory findings may be absent or
vague, but symptoms are clear and troubling to the patient. Homeopathy can help
alleviate these symptoms.
- Acute illness – When the body is acutely ill, it’s
actively trying to fight a virus or bacteria, but in the process, creates
symptoms, like fever, sore throat, cough, etc. Homeopathy allows the body to fight
more effectively, and above all, alleviates the suffering of the patient. As
always, this is subject to appropriate usage, and a well-trained naturopathic
physician knows when a patient just needs relief of symptoms to get over an
illness, and when the illness is more threatening.
There are two main categories of disease that homeopathy is
generally not effective against, but I’ll include three just to make the point:
- Asymptomatic chronic disease – Examples include high
cholesterol and atherosclerosis, diseases that are clearly present, but are
often completely silent until it’s too late. I’m going to say here that I don’t
think homeopathy is effective against these types of conditions – it may
provide relief from the angina that results from atherosclerosis, but it won’t
stop the narrowing of the arteries themselves. Fortunately, however,
naturopathic physicians are well-trained in a whole host of effective natural
treatments that can help manage things like high blood pressure, high
cholesterol, diabetes, etc.
- Cancer – I could make the argument that cancer fits into
the above category, but I’m listing it separately for emphasis. As with
atherosclerosis, homeopathy can’t cure the cancer itself. Homeopathy may
alleviate some of the symptoms associated with cancer, but cannot cure the
cancer itself. Cancer is a prime example of a condition that, no matter what
complementary treatments are being pursued, should be primarily managed by
conventional medicine.
- Anatomic or chromosomal anomalies – These are very rare, but they
encapsulate the point I’ve been making. Homeopathy can improve function around
the defect, but can’t fix the anatomic or chromosomal problem itself – if you look at the
previous examples, you’ll see that the thread running through it all is that
homeopathy can help the body function with the pathologic anatomy, but can’t
fix the anatomy itself.
If you’re a consumer and you made it this far, I
congratulate you, as this was somewhat more directed towards practitioners, and
want to give you consumers a take-home message. Let’s sum it up like this:
homeopathy is remarkably effective for a lot of conditions, but not everything,
and I gave some examples of some diseases where homeopathy can help and some
diseases it can’t. As with all acute and chronic diseases, it’s important to
seek out a licensed naturopathic physician, who can determine if homeopathy is
an appropriate treatment in your case.
I’m looking forward to reading the Swiss government report,
and when I’m able to get my hands on a copy, I’ll write a more complete
reaction. Stay tuned.
