Some history of the treatment of epidemics with homeopathy
June 20, 2006
by
Julian Winston
From its earliest
days, homeopathy has been able to treat epidemic diseases with a substantial
rate of success, when compared to conventional treatments. It was these
successes that placed the practice of homeopathy so firmly in the consciousness
of people world-wide.
There is a story
told about Joseph Pulte, one of the earliest homeopaths in Cincinnati.
When he began his practice, many people were so angered by a homeopath
being in town that they pelted the house with eggs. He was becoming discouraged
enough to think of leaving. His wife said, "Joseph, do you believe in the
truth of homeopathy?" He replied in the affirmative. "Then," she said, "you
will stay in Cincinnati."
Shortly after, when
the Cholera epidemic swept through, Pulte was able to boast of not having
lost a single patient-- and he was accepted into the community. In the
Epidemic of 1849, people crowded to his door and stood in the street because
the waiting room was full.
In 1900, Thomas Lindsley
Bradford, MD, wrote a book called "The Logic of Figures" in which he collected
the statistics he could find that would compare the conventional therapeutics
with homeopathic ones. Many of the figures cited below are derived from
Bradford's work.
One of the earliest
tests of the homeopathic system was in the treatment of Typhus Fever (spread
by lice) in an 1813 an epidemic which followed the devastation of Napoleon's
army marching through Germany to attack Russia, followed by their retreat.
When the epidemic came through Leipzig as the army pulled back from the
east, Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, was able to treat 180
cases of Typhus-- losing but two. This, at a time when the conventional
treatments were having a mortality rate of over 30%.
In 1830 as the cholera
epidemic was reported coming from the east, Hahnemann was able to identify
the stages of the illness, and predict what remedies would be needed for
which stages. When Cholera finally struck Europe in 1831 the mortality
rate (under conventional treatment) was between 40% (Imperial Council of
Russia) to 80% (Osler's Practice of Medicine). Out of five people who contracted
Cholera, two to four of them died under regular treatment. Dr. Quin, in
London, reported the mortality in the ten homeopathic hospitals in 1831-32
as 9%; Dr. Roth, physician to the king of Bavaria, reported that under
homeopathic care the mortality was 7%; Admiral Mordoinow of the Imperial
Russian Council reported 10% mortality under homeopathy; and Dr. Wild,
Allopathic editor of Dublin Quarterly Journal, reported in Austria, the
Allopathic mortality was 66% and the homeopathic mortality was 33% "and
on account of this extraordinary result, the law interdicting the practice
of Homeopathy in Austria was repealed."
Homeopathy continued
to be effective in the treatment of Epidemic Cholera. In 1854 a Cholera
Epidemic struck London. This was a historically important epidemic in that
it was the first time the medical community was able to trace the outbreak
to a source (a public water pump), and when the pump was closed, the epidemic
soon ceased.
The House of Commons
asked for a report about the various methods of treating the epidemic.
When the report was issued, the homeopathic figures were not included.
The House of Lords asked for an explanation, and it was admitted that if
the homeopathic figures were to be included in the report, it would "skew
the results." The suppressed report revealed that under allopathic care
the mortality was 59.2% while under homeopathic care the mortality was
only 9%. It is hard today to comprehend what kind of scourge such an epidemic
was. As was seen in the later Flu Epidemic of 1918, one could be healthy
in the morning and be dead by evening-- it moved that rapidly. Many books
were written about the Homeopathic treatment of Cholera during these times,
among them: Cholera and its Homeopathic treatment, F. Humphreys (1849);
Homeopathic Treatment of Cholera, B. F. Joslin (1854); Homeopathic Domestic
Treatment of Cholera, Biegler (1858); Epidemic Cholera, B. F. Joslin (1885);
Asiatic Cholera, Jabez Dake (1886).
The success of homeopathic treatment continued
with the later cholera epidemics. In the Hamburg epidemic of 1892, allopathic
mortality was 42%, homeopathic mortality was 15.5%
During the 1850s,
there were several epidemics of Yellow Fever in the southern states. This
disease was eventually found to be transmitted by mosquito. Osler, says
that the allopathic mortality from Yellow Fever is between 15-85%. Holcome,
a homeopath, reported in 1853 a mortality of 6.43% in Natchez, and Dr.
Davis, another homeopath in Natchez, reported 5.73%. In 1878 the mortality
in New Orleans was 50% under allopathic care, and 5.6% (in 1,945 cases
in the same epidemic) with homeopathic care.
The two best books
on this topic were: Yellow Fever and its Homeopathic Treatment, Holcome,
(1856) and The Efficacy of Crotalus Horridus in Yellow Fever, C. Neidhard,
(1860).
Another epidemic
disease which was treatable with homeopathy was Diphtheria. Since the advent
of widespread vaccination, it is a disease not often seen in our modern
world. Diphtheria appeared periodically, and rarely had the same presentation.
It was, therefore, very important for the practitioner to individualize
the treatment in each specific case or generalized epidemic. A remedy which
had been effective in treating it one year might not be the same remedy
needed the next year.
In the records of
three years of Diphtheria in Broome County, NY from 1862 to 1864, there
was a report of an 83.6% mortality rate among the allopaths and a 16.4%
mortality rate among the Homeopaths. (Bradford)
Perhaps the most
recent use of homeopathy in a major epidemic was during the Influenza Pandemic
of 1918. The Journal of the American Institute for Homeopathy, May, 1921,
had a long article about the use of homeopathy in the flu epidemic. Dr.
T A McCann, from Dayton, Ohio reported that 24,000 cases of flu treated
allopathically had a mortality rate of 28.2% while 26,000 cases of flu
treated homeopathically had a mortality rate of 1.05%. This last figure
was supported by Dean W.A. Pearson of Philadelphia (Hahnemann College)
who collected 26,795 cases of flu treated with homeopathy with the above
result.
The most common remedy
used was Gelsemium, with occasional cases needing Bryonia and Eupatorium reported.
Dr. Herbert A. Roberts from Derby, CT, said that 30 physicians in Connecticut
responded to his request for data. They reported 6,602 cases with 55 deaths,
which is less than 1%. Dr. Roberts was working as a physician on a troop
ship during WWI. He had 81 cases of flu on the way over to Europe. He reported, "All
recovered and were landed. Every man received homeopathic treatment. One
ship lost 31 on the way."
Closer to our present
time, there were the Polio epidemics in the mid-1950s. Dr. Alonzo Shadman,
a homeopath in the Boston area, emphasized that until *actual paralysis*
was observed, it was hard to distinguish the prodromal symptoms of Polio
from those of the common cold-- and he treated many "summer colds" during
the time. Were they incipient polio? No one can tell.
Dr. Francisco Eizayaga
or Argentina, tells of a polio epidemic in Buenos Aires in 1957, where
the symptoms of the epidemic resembled those of the remedy Lathyrus sativa.
The homeopathic doctors and pharmacies prescribed Lathyrus 30c as a prophylactic,
and "thousands of doses" were distributed. "Nobody registered a case of
contagion." Eizayaga points out that in other epidemics of polio, Gelsemium
was the indicated remedy-- emphasizing, again, the need for individualization.
Homeopathy has been
very effective in treating many of the epidemics during the 19th and early
20th centuries. Why the successes are not better known is a subject for
conjecture. It could be that, like the physician quoted below, most would
rather not see the ineffectiveness of the conventional therapeutics nor
accept the efficacy of homeopathy.