Key words
Adverse effects - Primary effects - Secondary effects - Rebound effects - Initial reactions - M. Z. Teixeira
This short paper forms part of an assignment I wrote for the MSc. Homeopathy
course at the University of Central Lancashire.
A Review
The discussion between homeopaths and scientific critics of homeopathy has just
gained a new quality. Before, this discussion was limited by:
versus:
By now, the debate centres on adverse effects of, or initial reactions to,
homeopathic medication.
A recent qualitative contribution to how homeopaths handle initial reactions to
homeopathic medication was made by Stub, Alræk and Salamonsen
[9]. Simultaneously, Posadzki, Alotaibi and
Ernst
[3] published a systematic review of 38 reports/1159
cases, treated homeopathically. They accused homeopathy of causing harm; being
responsible for certain adverse effects (AEs). Homeopathic AEs were detected in 30
of the reviewed reports.
The remaining eight reports refer to noxious effects produced through substitution of
conventional medication by homeopathy. This – questionably described as “indirect
AEs” – represents a serious therapeutic negligence. I think problems caused by this
form of therapeutic negligence will be solved by the ongoing efforts to medically
train homeopathic lay-practitioners as in the German model of
qualification-assessment by government and by providing robust homeopathic education
to both medical and nonmedical practitioners. It is absolutely necessary to know
what might happen to a patient after stopping conventional medication. Furthermore,
rebound-effects should never be underestimated!
As stated by Posadzki, Alotaibi and Ernst [3], 94.7 % of
the medications employed in the reviewed reports were administered in material
dilutions lower than C12/D24. Some cases were treated with highly poisonous
non-homeopathic mother-tinctures (Aconitum, Rhus toxicodendron). Classical
homeopaths beware of low material potencies as stated in § 276 of the Organon
[6].
Examples of Questionable Reviewing Procedures
Examples of Questionable Reviewing Procedures
Letʼs look at the first 30 reports. Four reports mention a fatal outcome from
homeopathic medication. In three of them, neither homeopathic nor conventional
medications are listed. The remaining case provides more information: male, 67 years
old, diabetes type II, medication with sulfonylurea (glimepiride); started
additional homeopathic treatment two weeks before the fatal outcome: acute
pancreatitis and necrosis of the pancreas head [1].
A literature search (Pubmed) results in various case reports: GPs expressing their
concern about sulfonylurea treatment, presenting cases of acute pancreatitis after
medication (e.g. [2], [5]). A
recently published RCT (Randomised Controlled Trial) also states some incidence
[7].
The inclusion of this fatal case in the review would have gained more weight if
sulfonylurea had never been observed to cause acute pancreatitis.
Another questionable case of homeopathic AEs: Geukensʼ treatment of an elderly
coal miner: imminent heart failure, cured by homeopathy. Some years later, the
patient developed bladder cancer and got radio-therapy, which successfully removed
the cancer, but he had still some symptoms which again were cured by homeopathy
[4]. Posadzki et al. turn the case around and declare
both pathologies as being caused by homeopathy. They omit that the patient was
taking carbamazepine for seizures following an injury of the head before commencing
homeopathic treatment, as stated by Geukens. Carbamazepine is known to cause
cardiovascular problems [8].
Concerning the bladder cancer: if a malignant illness could be attributed to any
medication in the past, where would this story end?
How could these details escape the attention of the publicationʼs peer reviewers?
Effects, Adverse and Rebound Effects
Effects, Adverse and Rebound Effects
The work of Marcus Zulián Teixeira
A promising aspect of the discussion on “adverse effects” is that homeopaths and
their critics finally encountered a platform where both are discussing the same
problem, but from different angles. Seen from the homeopathic philosophical
point of view the difference consists in the application of the principle of
similitude versus the principle of contraries: Conventional medicine uses the
“effects” of drugs – primary actions – based on the principle of contraries,
converting them into suppressive actions, and has to deal with “adverse/rebound
effects” (secondary and paradox reactions) systematically.
Homeopathy utilises “effectsʼ and “adverse effects” (primary actions of substance
and secondary reactions of the organism to the substance) based on the principle
that “like cures like”, attenuating both effects by potentising/dynamising
substances. It uses the primary and secondary actions to trigger the organismsʼ
self-healing mechanisms.
Teixeira investigates the effects, adverse effects and rebound effects of
conventional drugs basing his analysis on the homeopathic principle of
similitude. He published his findings concerning various classes of drugs, e.g.,
bisphosphonates [16], proton pump inhibitors [15], statins [14],
antidepressants [13], bronchodilators [12] and NSAIDs [11].
Interestingly, the more a drug develops its primary action of suppression on the
patient (“successful treatment” in conventional medicine), the higher the
probability of rebound/paradoxical effects:
“Drugs with stronger enantiopathic [palliative] effects suppress the primary
symptoms of the disease more intensely, triggering proportional greater
paradoxical reactions.”
[13]
.
Hahnemann
[6] lists some primary and secondary/paradoxical
(re)actions in § 59 of his Organon; e.g., the use of digitalis to slow
down a high pulse frequency, and the paradoxical reaction to this drug: an even
faster pulse than initially observed.
Teixeira makes his findings available through a website which contains the
homeopathic Materia Medica and a corresponding repertory of hundreds of
conventional drugs based on the adverse effects listings from the FDA [10].
Homeopathy can logically explain effects, adverse effects and rebound effects of
conventional drugs applying the Law of Similars. It also explains why rebound
effects of these drugs are of higher frequency in patients sensitive to a given
drug. The use of the Law of Similars makes conventional drugsʼ AEs available for
homeopathic treatment.
