A study using Sepia 200c given prophylactically postpartum to prevent anoestrus problems in the dairy cow

A trial of sepia 200

The effect of Sepia 200c on the reproductive performance of Friesian cross dairy cows was assessed in a controlled trial from September 1989 until August 1990. Overall reproductive performance was monitored monthly and pregnancy diagnosis and cyclical status was determined. The cows were randomly allocated to 4 groups, untreated controls, placebo controls, Sepia-treated 24 to 48 hours postpartum and Sepia-teated day 14 postpartum.

The trial was concluded in July 1990 when another treatment was employed to reduce declining herd reproductive status. Statistical analysis of the results was based on differences between the placebo control and the Sepia-treated, 24–48 hours postpartum, the pooled control groups and placebo control with Sepia day 14, and lastly the difference between the 2 Sepia-treated groups.

The highest rates of periparturient disease occurred in the Sepia-treated groups, the highest single incidence rate of periparturient disease risk (cysts) found in the cows in the Sepia 24 to 48 hours postpartum group. Sepia day 14 produced the largest percentage of cows seen in first oestrus (45%), the largest number of observed heats (60%) in the cows without periparturient disease risk factors or recurrent traits and the lowest total mean value days to oestrus post-treatment.

Sepia day 14 produced the largest percentage that held to first service, the lowest post-treatment period to first service, calving to conception interval, mean number of services and rectal examinations per conception, mean day calving interval and calving index. The results show that the effect of Sepia 200c administered to cows two weeks postpartum increased the numbers of cows observed in first oestrus, held to first service and lowered the calving to conception interval and calving index. The results of the Sepia day 14 postpartum group were also found to be compatible with the same group data reported in the previous study.

Randomised controlled trials of veterinary homeopathy: characterising the peer-reviewed research literature for systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Systematic review of the research evidence in veterinary homeopathy has never previously been carried out. This paper presents the search methods, together with categorised lists of retrieved records, that enable us to identify the literature that is acceptable for future systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in veterinary homeopathy.

METHODS

All randomised and controlled trials of homeopathic intervention (prophylaxis and/or treatment of disease, in any species except man) were appraised according to pre-specified criteria. The following databases were systematically searched from their inception up to and including March 2011: AMED; Carstens-Stiftung Homeopathic Veterinary Clinical Research (HomVetCR) database; CINAHL; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Embase; Hom-Inform; LILACS; PubMed; Science Citation Index; Scopus.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty records were retrieved; 38 satisfied the acceptance criteria (substantive report of a clinical treatment or prophylaxis trial in veterinary homeopathic medicine randomised and controlled and published in a peer-reviewed journal), and were thus eligible for future planned systematic review. Approximately half of the rejected records were theses. Seven species and 27 different species-specific medical conditions were represented in the 38 papers. Similar numbers of papers reported trials of treatment and prophylaxis (n=21 and n=17 respectively) and were controlled against placebo or other than placebo (n=18, n=20 respectively). Most research focused on non-individualised homeopathy (n=35 papers) compared with individualised homeopathy (n=3).

CONCLUSION

The results provide a complete and clarified view of the RCT literature in veterinary homeopathy. We will systematically review the 38 substantive peer-reviewed journal articles under the main headings: treatment trials; prophylaxis trials.

Homeopathic prescribing for chronic conditions in equine veterinary practice in the UK

Twelve Faculty of Homeopathy veterinarians recorded data systematically at 777 consecutive homeopathic appointments for horses over a period of 12 months. A spreadsheet enabled the recording of information, which included the date of appointment; horse and owner identity (anonymised); sex of horse; main medical problem treated; whether the condition was chronic or acute; whether the appointment was new or a follow-up; owner-assessed clinical outcome on a seven-point scale, ranging from -3 to +3, compared with the first appointment; homeopathic medicine(s) prescribed; and whether any conventional or other complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) was being used concurrently to treat the condition. Data from 289 horses comprised a total of 305 individual conditions identified as chronic in nature, of which 234 had a follow-up assessment. At the final appointment for chronic cases during the study period, 4.3 per cent were receiving conventional medication and 17.1 per cent were being given another CAM treatment in addition to homeopathy. The eight chronic conditions most frequently treated with homeopathy were: arthritis, headshaking, laminitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, sweet itch, dermatitis, sarcoidosis and Cushing's syndrome.

Outcomes from homeopathic prescribing in veterinary practice: a prospective, research-targeted, pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Targeted research development in veterinary homeopathy is properly informed by the systematic collection and analysis of relevant clinical data obtained by its practitioners. We organised a pilot data collection study, in which 8 Faculty of Homeopathy veterinarians collected practice-based clinical and outcomes data over a 6-month period.

METHODS

A specifically designed Excel spreadsheet enabled recording of consecutive clinical appointments under the following headings: date; identity of patient and owner (anonymised); age, sex and species of patient; medical condition/complaint treated; whether confirmed diagnosis, chronic or acute, new or follow-up case; owner-assessed outcome (7-point Likert scale: -3 to +3) compared with first appointment; homeopathic medicine/s prescribed; other medication/s for the condition/complaint. Spreadsheets were submitted monthly by e-mail to the project organisers for data checking, synthesis and analysis.

RESULTS

Practitioners submitted data regularly and punctually, and most data cells were completed. 767 individual patients were treated (547 dogs, 155 cats, 50 horses, 5 rabbits, 4 guinea-pigs, 2 birds, 2 goats, 1 cow, and 1 tortoise). Outcome from two or more homeopathic appointments per patient condition was obtained in 539 cases (79.8% showing improvement, 6.1% deterioration, 11.7% no change; outcome not recorded in 2.4% of follow-ups). Strongly positive outcomes (scores of +2 or +3) were achieved in: arthritis and epilepsy in dogs and, in smaller numbers, in atopic dermatitis, gingivitis and hyperthyroidism in cats.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic recording of data by veterinarians in clinical practice is feasible and capable of informing future research in veterinary homeopathy. A refined version of the spreadsheet can be used in larger-scale research-targeted veterinary data collection.

Effect of a Homeopathic complex on oestrus induction and hormonal profile in anoestrus cows

This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of a homeopathic complex in the management of true anoestrus in crossbred cows. Six anoestrus cows were treated with a homeopathic complex (Calcarea phosphorica 30c, Aletris farinosa 30c, Pulsatilla 30c, Aurum muriaticum natronatum 30c, Sepia 30c and Phosphorus 30c in equal proportion, 15 pills twice daily orally for 10 days). Six animals acted as control without any treatment. Treatment was 100% effective in inducing oestrus in anoestrus cows with mean interval of 27.5+/-5.3 days. All animals conceived and overall conception rate was 54.5% with 1.83 services per conception. In the homeopathic complex treated group, increased serum oestradiol concentration (20.88+/-5.60 to 27.80+/-7.28 pg/ml) was observed compared to the pretreatment (11.71+/-2.06 pg/ml) and control value (10.43+/-1.77 to 13.94+/-3.14 pg/ml). The homeopathic complex medicine may be effective and economical in the treatment of true anoestrus condition in cows.

Priorities and methods for developing the evidence profile of homeopathy Recommendations of the ECH General Assembly and XVIII Symposium of GIRI

To achieve scientific acceptance, homeopathy must investigate several questions: 1. The activity of very highly diluted preparations. The consensus of the meeting was that there is clear evidence of this. 2. The content of very highly diluted homeopathic preparations. More research is needed but evidence exists that a specific signal is present in homeopathic preparations. 3. A theoretical framework in which the effects of homeopathic diluted preparations can be explained. The 'Body Information Theory' is such a theory. 4. The clinical effectiveness of homeopathy. Because they avoid the placebo effect, animal studies are a priority. For human trials using Quality of Life questionnaires, studies on the activity, content and theoretical basis of homeopathic preparations were reviewed approximately 70% of cases; more in children showed improvement. Homeopathy reduced costs and allowed a better improvement in work-days lost compared with conventional practice. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) implicitly test the placebo hypothesis; RCTs have been performed and meta-analyses conclude that there is clear evidence of efficacy which cannot be attributed to placebo effect. Priorities depend on the audience. More research is needed especially regarding the content of homeopathic preparations and the transmission of information. Theoretical issues are also important to avoid incorrect design of research protocols. More effort should be dedicated to veterinary research. Clinical effects analysis in humans remains important. Many other questions should be prioritised, such as the potential of homeopathy to avoid invasive procedures in children and the long-term effects of homeopathy in preventing chronic complications.

Can biological activity be maintained at ultra-high dilution? An overview of homeopathy, evidence, and Bayesian philosophy

Forty percent of general practitioners in the Netherlands practice homeopathy. With over 100 homeopathic medical schools, homeopathy is practiced in India along with conventional Western medicine in government clinics. In Britain, 42% of general practitioners refer patients to homeopaths. Two recent meta-analyses of homeopathy both indicate that there is enough evidence to show that homeopathy has added effects over placebo. Against this evidence is a backdrop of considerable scientific scepticism. Homeopathic remedies are diluted substances--some are so diluted that statistically there are no molecules present to explain their proposed biological effects (ultra-high dilutions or UHDs). Without knowledge of the evidence, most scientists would reject UHD effects because of their intrinsic implausibility in the light of our current scientific understanding. The objective of this article is to critically review the major pieces of evidence on UHD effects and suggest how the scientific community should respond to its challenge. Such evidence has been conducted on a diverse range of assays--immunologic, physiological, behavioral, biochemical, and clinical in the form of trials of homeopathic remedies. Evidence of UHD effects has attracted the attention of physicists who have speculated on their physical mechanisms. Included is a critique of several experiments that form the Benveniste affair which was sparked by a publication in Nature that advocated the existence of UHD effects of anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) on human basophils, and is the paradigm example of how a controversial phenomenon can split the scientific community. It is argued that if the phenomenon was uncontroversial, the evidence suffices to show that UHD effects exist. However, given that the observations contradict well-established theory, normal science has to be abandoned and scientists need to decide for themselves what the likelihood of UHD effects are. Bayesian analysis describes how scientists ought rationally to change their prior beliefs in the light of evidence. Theories by Kuhn and Lakatos indicate that whether UHD effects are proved or not depends on the beliefs and behaviors of scientists in their communities. This article argues that there is as yet insufficient evidence to drive rational scientists to a consensus over UHD effects, even if they possessed knowledge of all the evidence. The difficulty in publishing high-quality UHD research in conventional journals prevents a fair assessment of UHD effects. Given that the existence of UHD effects would revolutionize science and medicine, and given the considerable empirical evidence of them, the philosophies of science tell us that possible UHD effects warrant serious investigation by conventional scientists and serious attention by scientific journals.