New Publication
Homeopathy in Intensive Care
and Emergency Medicine
Homeopathy First Magazine
Best Vitamin C Drink 
Learn More With Caralyn 


Homeopathy World Community

Creating Waves of Awareness

Can Homeopathy Address Contagious Disease? Do we even need a discussion about this topic? Didn't Dr Hahnemann bring the relationship between vital force, susceptibility, and contagious disease to the forefront of our understanding the nature of disease? 


Please comment below on the recent article posted in The Guardian that puts the British Homeopathic Association into an awkward position. 


Letter to Sir Mark Wolpert 2013

Published response in the British Medical Journal by Lionel Milgrom with full disclosure and resource list. 


This reprint is for educational purposed only:

Parents need to know homeopathy does not protect against measles, says MP

written by Sarah Boseley, health editor

Homeopathy group confirms there is no evidence that homeopathic 'vaccines' protect against contagious diseases


The GP and Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston is calling on homeopathy's governing bodies to make it clear to parents that their alternative remedies will not protect children from measles outbreaks.

Large numbers of children have not had the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine, largely because of the scare that followed the publication of research by Andrew Wakefield in the Lancet medical journal in 1998 that postulated a link between the jab and autism. The research was later discredited and Wakefield was struck off by the General Medical Council for fraud.

In Wollaston's constituency of Totnes, Devon, the concern generated by Wakefield lingers on and is part of the reason, she believes, for a general distrust of vaccines and a reliance on homeopathy – remedies that are almost entirely water.

About 70% of five-year-olds in Totnes were fully protected against measles last year, she said on her blog, compared with 94% of those in Brixham, just miles away.

"Some parents have an unshakeable belief that homeopathy boosts their child's immune system. They would rather put their faith in 'natural' methods, as they see it," she told the Guardian.

That belief can spread in communities and outside school gates, and those who accept the NHS advice to give their child the MMR vaccine start to feel pressured.

"Once it reaches a critical mass within a community, it takes on its own significance – you become an irresponsible parent if you are vaccinating," she said. "I think it is time to dump this term 'herd immunity'. The message, as I see it, is about community immunity. By vaccinating your child, you protect the child who cannot be vaccinated as they are too young or sickly."

Wollaston called on the governing bodies of homeopathy to tell parents that homeopathic "vaccines" and remedies would not protect against measles.

The British Homeopathic Association and Faculty of Homeopathy said they would do so. "There is no evidence to suggest homeopathic vaccinations can protect against contagious diseases. We recommend people seek out the conventional treatments," a spokesman said.

"I don't know where the parents in Totnes are getting their information from – it certainly is not us. There is no legal regulation of homeopathy in the UK and anyone can set themselves up as an expert. It is those people who tend to give us a bad name."

Philip Edmonds, chairman of the Society of Homeopaths said: "The Society does not endorse the use of homeopathic medicines as an alternative to vaccination for the prevention of serious infectious diseases and recommends that members of the public seek the advice of their GP, and/or relevant Department of Health guidelines, concerning vaccination and protection against disease."

There are currently about 700 cases and suspected cases of measles in Wales, the biggest outbreak since the triple jab was launched in 1988. An estimated 40,000 children in Wales have not had the MMR, and special catch-up NHS clinics have been held for two weekends in a row in the worst-affected Swansea area.

Some parents continue to seek out single vaccines, against NHS advice. The Children's Immunisation Centre, which runs six clinics in England and one in Swansea, said it was being inundated with calls from parents seeking a measles vaccine.

"The clinics are very, very busy," said manager Zoe Miller. "It has made people realise, crikey, we have not vaccinated our children. They need to do it before it spreads to their children."

Miller said staff advised parents to give their children all three vaccines at intervals, but the chain of private clinics has no mumps vaccine and has not had any for three years.

Outbreaks of mumps, sometimes known as the kissing disease, can occur among students starting university. Although serious complications are rare, they can include viral meningitis and swelling of the testicles or ovaries.

"Mumps isn't life-threatening," said Miller. The vaccine, she added "is apparently available in Singapore". The clinics say they are attempting to source a Jeryl Lynn strain of mumps vaccine to import, which they say is the safest strain.

However, the Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Authority, which licences vaccines in the UK, disagrees.

"The MHRA is not currently aware of any available single-component mumps vaccines for which there are no safety concerns," it said in a statement.

"In relation to the Children's Immunisation clinics, we have significant concerns over the quality of the mumps vaccine the clinic is attempting to supply."

The Department of Health's position is that there is no evidence to support the use of single vaccines or to suggest they are in any way safer than the MMR, which is supported by the World Health Organisation and other independent expert groups around the world. Giving children the single vaccine leaves them at risk of catching the other diseases in the intervals between jabs.


The Guardian

Views: 773

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Wonderful reference material showing the benefits of homeopathy on a grand scale in many countries for contagious disease. Thank you. 

It doesn't matter what we say about it, what proof we offer. The pharmaceutical industry does not want homoeopathy invading their precious vaccine territory. They could care less about the truth - it is purely about power and money.

We know the truth about it, and can only do what we do now - educate people. It is having an effect too. Here in Australia the number of children being vaccinated has dropped, and the parents choosing this option are the educated, wealthy parents who are involved in alternative health. The medical associations here have even mentioned homoeopathy specifically as being partly responsible. Apparently researching the subject and making informed choices is now considered a direct threat to the health of the community. They even have a derogatory term for these parents now - 'Baby Einsteins'. This is obviously an attack on the intelligence of such people, and I find it particularly offensive.

Even if they won't listen, we must speak out to get our message out to the masses. Why is it the MOST EDUCATED prefer natural methods and homeopathy? This mirrors the bullying attacks to NERDS in elementary through high schools by those less intellectual to understand and excel in school. We live in a world of domination and force, when we must resist and create a stronger version of ourselves. 

There is an old adage: the best form of defence is attack, and given the hysterical nature of much of the current debate that has followed the measles outbreak in Swansea, I'm not actually sure that debating the issue of prophylaxis at this moment in time is likely to benefit homoeopathy in any way.

We all know that Hahnemann himself mentioned prophylaxis for scarlatina and that several generations of homoeopaths have reported that certain remedies given to patients prior to particular diseases' season have reduced incidence. Of course the Cuban experience with Leptospirosis suggests rather the same. Since most users of this forum will have their personal views, and since we find a media unwilling to represent those views, why do we feel the urge to speak out now. Surely this exercise is little more than whistling in the dark.

Having once been a member of one of the registering organisations in the UK, I know full well how easy it is to hold to positions that are very difficult to defend in public and which can leave us open to being seen as little more than cranks. Since this is often the case, I see no point in helping do the media's job for it. In this same vein I don't find it particularly edifying seeing the usual kneejerk complaints over the BBC's reporting on issues such as the Swansea measles outbreak, especially when those complaining state before doing so that they know nobody will take any notice. If they know this, why bother? Why bother sowing seeds of unhappiness?

Rather than involving ourselves in a debate that is likely to be self defeating  I would prefer simply to ask the medical authorities whether they are prepared to put in writing that vaccination is without risk. Since all vaccines come with data sheets listing a whole range of health risks that may ensue following vaccination, I know they are unwilling to say this. Of course, the BBC and reporters writing for the Guardian and other newspapers are willing to trot out the untruth that 'vaccines are perfectly safe', and it was simply sleight of hand on the part of the Guardian that saw the issue of Swansea transformed into homoeopaths being little short of loonies. But rather than doing the Guardian's job for it and representing here a view that could be dangerous to homoeopathy as a profession, it seems far more sensible to me to focus on the weaknesses of vaccination.

My relatively brief membership of one UK registering organisation taught me that homoeopaths as a group tend to be highly susceptible to conspiracy theories and in some cases they may well be right.The treatment of Swansea's local newspaper that ran autism stories several years ago yet still advised parents to vaccinate, but which now is castigated and seemingly blamed in some news stories for the current 'epidemic', demonstrates that we now have a news media unwilling fairly to present the about the potential dangers to a significant minority of children of vaccination.  But whether this is the media simply following what it sees as a good story or whether it is something altogether more sinister, I wouldn't wish to speculate, but whatever the truth, I have no intention of doing their dirty work for them

Firstly, a decline in MMR vaccination had already occurred prior to the Wakefield hysteria.

This article is very revealing and also shows that parents are not being bamboozled by public health officials and their usual rhetoric about conventional vaccination.

That small group of idiotic media Skeptics have initiated a campaign of frivolous "advertising standards" complaints/attacks regarding nosodes in Canada, the UK and Australia in the last few months. In Canada they are encouraging their members to send complaints to Health Canada -- as if there was a conspiracy among Homeopaths to actively discourage the public from using vaccination as opposed to the reality of offering an alternative to patients who want one.

The reality of the matter is that susceptibility and exposure to disease are the key issues. Homeoprophylaxis was developed and successfully used by Hahnemann and others during epidemics and the historical record is quite clear on its effectiveness. Isaac Golden's work is a glowing example.

Mainstream medical research has not adequately addressed the issues of the shedding of vaccine virus strains actually contributing to the maintenance of epidemic diseases nor the potential for vaccines causing disease mutation.

If Philip Edmonds has been quoted correctly he is guilty of selling out the Homeopathic profession and has no business being the chairman of anything.


Ben Goldacre used to write for the Guardian, which tells you how much they're influenced by the skeptics. You're not going to get unbiased reporting from them. I think its time to get some media writing the positive side of homeo-prophylaxis.

The BHA I would hope had made other comments for the pro-side that were left out.

There needs to be a better voice. We don't have to be conclusive but there is in fact good research already.

But there needs to be more research but we have to turn the tides. 

I also think we have to go on the premise that homeo-prophylaxis is not the same as vaccination.

That it works differently, and that the prevention will be afforded to those getting treatment from qualified homeopaths, and not necessarily just through homeo-prophylaxis but through our success with chronic disease. Thus their comparisons of regional incidence isn't that relevant to homeopathy, except to say that homeopathy can be part of the solution and not the problem if people are vaccinating less and indeed incidence is climbing. 

This is an opportunity to take the stage, but it has to be supported by regulatory bodies. And what a great opportunity to start looking at homeo-prophylaxis in some sort of research capacity like Cuba only in a smaller capacity. 

It would also help us in knowing how to prescribe the nosodes. Its likely that the effect would last less time than a vaccination and we still have to somehow take individual susceptibility into account. Its important to demonstrate it as a solution not comparable to vaccines. And it needs to be good research, maybe government funding? Then maybe a more acceptable alternative will be born.

But we can't cowtow to the media or anyone else uninformed or those who are blown by the winds of the self-righteous ignorant skeptics.

Thank you for your lucid response and redirection toward the function of homeopathy in epidemic disease. It boggles the mind that the authorities of mainstream media, supposedly representing the scientific medical world, would say that "Natural Therapy" was bogus, and that people should not believe in what has been used for millennia and centuries to bring humanity to this time. Why should people not use the ancient wisdom, the knowledge about plants, animals, the planets and cycles of life? Why must all medical care be channeled only through a narrow double-blind study model, with their permission? Why do they disregard and negate the actual results of humans on the planet as illustrated in the list of experience and data listed above from Sue Young? 

Please lead us forward with the most successful method of teaching this information to the public, so they can use HEALTH FREEDOM to make their own choices. 

On another note, you will see continued pressure from legislative action to shut down our freedoms of choice and guardianship of our children. Case in point:

  • GOVERNMENT | S3134-2013: Provides treatment for sexually transmissible diseases to minors without a parent's or guardian's consent

If vaccinations do not work to protect from contagious disease, don't people deserve other options?

  • Data show that vaccinated children have two to five times more childhood diseases, illnesses, and allergies than unvaccinated children.

    Different surveys summarized

    The childhood diseases usually posed to respondents by the independent surveys involved asthma, reoccurring tonsillitis, chronic bronchitis, sinusitis, allergies, eczema, ear infections, diabetes, sleep disorders, bedwetting, dyslexia, migraines, hyperactivity, ADD, epilepsy, depression, and slower development of speech or motor skills.

    In 1992, a New Zealand group called the Immunization Awareness Society (IAS) surveyed 245 families with a total of 495 children. The children were divided with 226 vaccinated and 269 unvaccinated. Eighty-one families had both vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

    The differences were dramatic, with unvaccinated children showing far less incidence of common childhood ailments than vaccinated children (

    From a different survey in the South Island New Zealand city of Christchurch, among children born during or after 1977, none of the unvaccinated children had asthma events where nearly 25% of the vaccinated children were treated for asthma by age 10 (

    Many of the comments from non-vaccinating parents to for the ongoing Bachmair survey mentioned vaccination danger and developing true immunity naturally were concerns (

    A PhD immunologist who wrote the book Vaccine Illusion, Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych, has gone against the dogma of her medical training and background. She asserts that true immunity to any disease is not conferred by vaccines. Exposure to the disease, whether contracted or not, does (

    Perhaps the most informal grass-roots survey going on now is by Tim O'Shea, DC, author of Vaccination is Not Immunization. He simply has non-vaccinating parents email him with comparisons of their children's health to friends and families they know with vaccinated children. That and more is available on his site (

"Wollaston called on the governing bodies of homeopathy to tell parents that homeopathic "vaccines" and remedies would not protect against measles.
The British Homeopathic Association and Faculty of Homeopathy caved in and said they would do so. "There is no evidence to suggest homeopathic vaccinations can protect against contagious diseases. We recommend people  seek out the conventional treatments," a spokesman said."

Yeah, right, and some failing comedian said tonight the president of Hoveround has been indicted for the Boston Marathon bombing. Are they trying to be funny? What a load of thoughtless crap.

I'd turn in my membership card to the BHA, if I was a member. They ought to be sued for stupidity and be stripped of whatever phoney credentials they think they have.  All vaccinations are homeopathic, god dammit, any fool can see that point blank or from a mile off. The small pox vaccination was Hahnemann's inspiration to come out of the closet with homoeopathy, as the "vaccine" (vacca=cow, -ine=collectively) is the use of serum from cowpox, a bovine disease SIMILAR to smallpox that inoculates humans against smallpox, had already been known prior to Jenner's revealing the principal of immunizaton in 1796, no happenstance coincidence the same year Hahnemann announced homeopathy in Hufeland's Journal.

The practice of homeopathy is actually a refinement of the same principle that vaccination works on. In other words, vaccination is a crude form of homeopathy that replaced the use of variolation, which in England had been used since the 1600's, which was a crude from of isopathy, the actual serum of smallpox cut into the flesh with a knife to provide some protection, which it did. Washington used variolation on his troops during the War, and Lewis and Clark took the subsequent vaccine West with them to inoculate the Indians.

So stop rattling off this bullshit about "there is no evidence to suggest homeopathic vaccinations can protect against contagious diseases." Crude or refined, HOMEOPATHY IS THE ONLY PROTECTION AGAINST CONTAGIOUS DISEASES!

Emil von Behring, the first recipient of the Nobel prize for Medicine, considered to be the father of modern medicine,  the founder of the diptheria anti-toxin, said, “In spite of all scientific speculations and experiments regarding smallpox vaccination, Jenner’s discovery remained an erratic blocking medicine, till the biochemically thinking Pasteur, devoid of all medical classroom knowledge, traced the origin of this therapeutic block to a principle which cannot better be characterized than by Hahnemann’s word: homeopathic. Indeed, what else causes the epidemiological immunity in sheep, vaccinated against anthrax than the influence previously exerted by a virus, similar in character to that of the fatal anthrax virus? And by what technical term could we more appropriately speak of this influence, exerted by a similar virus than by Hahnemann’s word ‘homeopathy’? I am touching here upon a subject anathematized till very recently by medical penalty: but if I am to present these problems in historical illumination, dogmatic imprecations must not deter me.”
“Only the road of homeopathy led to my goal” Behring

I am also compelled to holler something else out here: By implication homeopathy is the study and practice of immunology. The three most notable scientists to have demonstrated homeopathy in vitro have all been IMMUNOLOGISTS! Behring, Benveniste and Montagnier were all renowned immunologists. Their biochemical tests of ultra dilutes, as used in homeopathic medicine, may have reasonably confounded their colleagues because of the posological improbabilities of dilution, but there is no reasonable argument against the immunological use of similitude, i.e "homeopathy" per se. And it should be further noted that the first and last of those three are Nobelists, and Benveniste was regarded by Montagnier as being "a modern Galileo," replicating Benveniste's physical demonstration of the ultra dilute as an emitter of electromagnetic radiation, establishing it as a kind of medical isotope and homeopathy as radiopharmacology! Montagnier also took Benveniste's discovery a step further, identifying the background radiation as the source of EM in the ultra dilute.

One last point. The law of similars is an EM principle and as such is ubiquitous in matter and has universal effects in ALL medicine. The differences between homeopaths and allopaths is that homeopaths know how to administer simillium individually and how to cut the dose .
John Benneth, PG Hom- London (Hons.)
PS: As always Sue Youngs references are amazing. What a tremendous resource she is.


There really is no point castigating others for having a different position on vaccination than you might have. The stance of the Faculty is perfectly understandable and were I in their position, it is likely that I would support the stance of favouring vaccination. As for other registering organisations, I leave their decisions to them.


It is a powerful, indeed a wonderful thing to be able to see ourselves as others see us, and something I find rather sad about homoeopaths in the UK is that many of us seem all too willing to allow ourselves to be portrayed as others wish to see us portrayed. Recent events regarding Swansea demonstrate how slanted the whole vaccination debate has become. In such situations as this, there really is little to be gained by putting one’s head over the parapet and shouting the odds, wherever we might do it. Most people who follow this forum will have their views on vaccination and in the absence of an open debate on the rights and wrongs of vaccination, there really is no point in criticising groups who have taken a different stance.


However, as some people here have already observed, many intelligent people are all too capable of making their own decisions on the issue of vaccination. The information is out there. Why do homoeopaths always think they should be the ones who must help others decide?


One thing that does concern me is that as ever, this debate is merely another kneejerk reaction to an agenda quite likely set elsewhere. Some of us will talk fighting talk and others will cite chapter and verse on matters of prophylaxis, but with most avenues in the media closed to us, what really is the point? Who are we trying to convince? Most certainly not the general public?


I have found that there is a strong streak of masochism in homoeopaths here in the UK. I find that rather sad. At this time, there are far more important issues such as gaining and keeping patients. I would argue that if we really have confidence in our case, we mustn’t feel the constant urge to be actively proclaiming it. Far better to have the confidence to let people make up their own minds.

As a mother of 2 unvaccinated daughters I do believe that homeopathy keeps children health and therefore they can go through the natural children diseases without major problems.  

I am not sure homeopathy can protect from having children diseases but as a mother that wasn't my intention, I wanted them to get them!   because they give immunity for life.  I used to bring my daughters to other people's houses whenever I heard there was an outbreak of a children's disease, to get infected!  

Now they are 23 and 30 years.  One of them mother and she has not vaccinated her baby child because as she says: I say that my sister and I are hardly ever ill and I see my colleages and their children being regularly ill and needing drugs while I have never in my life needed an antibiotic shot. 

Sue Young has provided this information as a response.

In 1885, William White published his opus, The Story of a great delusion in a series of matter-of-fact chapters[1], in which he documented the foundation and the operation of the Anti Compulsory Vaccination League in great detail. His book ends with a lengthy quote from James John Garth Wilkinson’s On Human Science, Good and Evil, and Its Works: And on Divine Revelation and Its Works and Sciences

‘… In the human body, whatever enters the blood, be it even the most bland food, the juice of the grape or the pomegranate, or the fine flour of wheat, be it oil, wine, or fig, is broken up first, and then led inwards through long avenues of introduction. The most innocent food goes in most easily and first. The police and surveillance for the rest are exceedingly great and  many. The senses electively appetise the fine food; it has to pass through their peremptory doors of liking and disliking; instructed doors of memory, association, imagination, reason, wisdom, religion, in adults. It is then attacked by digestive salivas, tests, examinations, and severe juices, and questioned to the uttermost in that degree, which corresponds to the former. It is strained through organ after organ; each a tribunal of more that social exactitude. It is absorbed by the finest systems of choice in pore and vessel, organic judgement sitting in every corner, and presiding over each inner doorway. It is submitted to glandular and lung purifications, and their furnaces of trials and eliminations. At last it is weighed in the balances, and minted by supreme nerve wisdoms; and only after all these processes is it admitted into the golden blood. This is of the best food, such as good and wise men eat. The worst food is made the best of by a constant passage through bodily mercies and mitigations – a no less sedulous through a penal process. This is physiology, and divine-human decency, and like a man’s life. Vaccination traverses and tramples upon all these safeguards and wisdoms; it goes direct to the blood, or worse still, to the lymph, and not with food; it puts poison, introduced by puncture, and that has no test applied to it, and can have no character given to it but that it is fivefold animal and human poison, at a blow into the very centre, thus otherwise by nature in the providence of God. This is blood assassination, and like a murder’s life…[2]

[1] James John Garth Wilkinson, On Human Science, Good and Evil, and Its Works: And on Divine Revel..., (James Spiers 1876, Lippincott Philadelphia 1876, reprinted by Kessinger Publications, 2010). 

[2] William White, The Story of a great delusion in a series of matter-of-fact chapters, (E.W. Allen, 1885). Page 594-595.

Sue Young RSHom, suyounghistories and avilian


HWC Partners



© 2019   Created by Debby Bruck.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...