Studies in homeopathy before 1991 showed homeopathy was more effective than a placebo on a 2 to 1 basis. Part II of our series will examine some more recent studies.
New set of trials done by the Swiss-UK review team showed homeopathy medicines to give the exact same effect as a placebo remedy. This study did have some trial issues and was considered by many not to be a properly conducted trial.
Our article will examine properly done homeopathy studies after 1991. All studies will not be included in this white paper but many of the larger and better conducted trials will be included.
Homeopathic Trials Below:
Placebo Effect Comparison With Homeopathy
A homeopathic study with 242 patients from the age 18 to 55 examined homeopathic effect on asthmatic people allergic to house dust. This trial was double blind and placebo controlled. The study showed homeopathy to be no better than a placebo. Some differences between the homeopathic group and placebo were present. However, this was not significant amount to change the trial results.
This trial was an effort to copy a favorable homeopathic study with allergies and asthma. The authors were not sure why the copied trial was failed. The first study was much smaller than the copied trial.
Another trial was done with 126 children to see if homeopathic remedies help kids with stomach ailments such as acute diarrhea. This study was randomized, double-blinded and placebo controlled with 116 children finishing the trial. The study found a difference between the placebo group and homeopathic group. The authors concluded homeopathy was better than a placebo for treating acute childhood diarrhea.
A trial with homeopathic arnica which examined whether this remedy can ease muscle soreness among long distance runners. 519 runners were in the trial with 400 people finishing the study. The study had a placebo group and homeopathic group. The study was randomized and double blinded. The authors showed no differences between the placebo group and the homeopathic group. The authors found arnica to have no effect on muscle soreness for long distance runners.
Six controlled clinical studies of meta analysis were done that indicate homeopathic remedies appear to be more effective than a placebo on rheumatic syndromes. There are not enough trails to draw a definite judgment about homeopathy and the trial conclusions were mixed.
Homeopathy’s most popular drug Oscillococcinum seems to show the most promise out all the other homeopathic remedies. Many large trials using this remedy seem to indicated a positive outcome for reducing the duration of the flu as compared to a placebo. Oscillococcinum results on flu prevention proved false. This remedy showed no signs of being able to prevent the flu.
Other successful trials on a smaller scale include perennial allergic rhinitis. The trials showed increased nasal flow as compared to the placebo. This was the fourth replication of this trial. It is noted the trial size was quite small.
In conclusion, more research needs to be done but some Homeopathic remedies are showing promising results in large double blinded placebo studies. Larger studies after 1991 showed approximately a 1 to 1 ratio of successful and not successful homeopathic trials.
Higher quality trials before 1991 show homeopathy working 2/3 of the time. A few of these studies have been replicated. Oscilloccoccinum was the only remedy were several researchers duplicated trials that were successful.
