Arsenicum album 6c homeopathic tablets

Objectives: In Part 1 of the review of physicochemical research performed on homeopathic preparations the authors identified relevant publications of sufficient reporting quality for further in-depth analysis. In this article, the authors analyze these publications to identify any empirical evidence for specific physicochemical properties of homeopathic preparations and to identify most promising experimental techniques for future studies. Methods: After an update of the literature search up to 2018, the authors analyzed all publications in terms of individual experiments. They extracted information regarding methodological criteria such as blinding, randomization, statistics, controls, sample preparation, and replications, as well as regarding experimental design and measurement methods applied. Scores were developed to identify experimental techniques with most reliable outcomes. Results: The publications analyzed described 203 experiments. Less than 25% used blinding and/or randomization, and about one third used adequate controls to identify specific effects of homeopathic preparations. The most promising techniques used so far are nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) relaxation, optical spectroscopy, and electrical impedance measurements. In these three areas, several sets of replicated high-quality experiments provide evidence for specific physicochemical properties of homeopathic preparations. Conclusions: The authors uncovered a number of promising experimental techniques that warrant replication to assess the reported physicochemical properties of homeopathic preparations compared with controls. They further discuss a range of experimental aspects that highlight the many factors that need to be taken into consideration when performing basic research into homeopathic potentization. For future experiments, the authors generally recommend using succussed (vigorously shaken) controls, or comparing different homeopathic preparations with each other to reliably identify any specific physicochemical properties.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Background COVID-19 is a recent major public health concern caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, with approximately 44.6 million COVID-19–positive cases and 530,000 deaths in India (as of February 1, 2023). The COVID-19 vaccination drive in India was initiated in January 2021; however, an effective preventive strategy with high efficacy and immunological safety remains elusive. Objective The aim of this study is to assess the immunogenic responses of Arsenicum album 30CH (AA30CH) as COVID-19 prophylaxis, including assessment of immunological markers, innate and acquired immune responses, COVID-19 symptoms, and its associated antibody responses. Methods This randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) will include two parallel comparator groups of AA30CH and placebo with an allocation ratio of 1:1 conducted in the Pathanamthitta district of Kerala, India. The placebo or AA30CH will be administered in three intervention schedules and blood samples will be collected before and after each of the intervention schedules. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 112 participants per arm (with an expected dropout of 20%) will be screened. Immunogenic responses will be evaluated by determining the antigen density and modulation in immunological markers and lymphocyte subsets CD3, CD4, CD8, CD24, CD27, CD38, CD4 interferon-γ, CD4 CD17, CD4 CD25 (activated T lymphocytes), T cells, B cells, dendritic cells (mature and immature), and natural killer cells on days 1, 5, 23,27, 45, 49, and 66. The innate and acquired immune responses will also be evaluated by a real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) array profiler (84-gene set) before and after the study interventions. The toxicity status of AA30CH in study participants will be evaluated through hepatic, renal, and hematological parameters and peripheral smears on days 1, 5, 23, 27, 45, 49, and 66. The number of participants developing COVID-19–like symptoms per National Centre for Disease Control guidelines and the number of participants testing positive for COVID-19 in RT-PCR during follow-ups in any of the three intervention schedules will be identified. Moreover, a subgroup analysis will be used to assess the COVID-19 antibody responses between vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. Results This RCT protocol has been approved by various committees and funded by the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of Ayush, Government of India. The project has been implemented in collaboration with the Department of Homoeopathy, Government of Kerala. The RCT was rolled out on January 25, 2023, and enrollment was completed April 3, 2023. The immunological assays will be conducted at the Department of Biotechnology-Translational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India. Conclusions This study will represent the first evaluation of the immunological efficacy and safety of AA30CH in an RCT, which may significantly impact the use of homeopathy as an evidence-based medicine approach. Trial Registration Clinical Trials Registry-India CTRI/2022/08/045089; https://tinyurl.com/mryrpkvk International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/48479

Abstract licence: CC BY

BackgroundNo systematic review has previously been carried out on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of veterinary homeopathy in which the control group was an intervention other than placebo (OTP). For eligible peer-reviewed RCTs, the objectives of this study were to assess the risk of bias (RoB) and to quantify the effect size of homeopathic intervention compared with an active comparator or with no treatment.MethodsOur systematic review approach complied fully with the PRISMA 2009 Checklist. Cochrane methods were applied to assess RoB and to derive effect size using standard meta-analysis methods. Based on a thorough and systematic literature search, the following key attributes of the published research were distinguished: individualised homeopathy (n = 1 RCT)/non-individualised homeopathy (n = 19); treatment (n = 14)/prophylaxis (n = 6); active controls (n = 18)/untreated controls (n = 2). The trials were highly diverse, representing 12 different medical conditions in 6 different species.ResultsNo trial had sufficiently low RoB to be judged as reliable evidence: 16 of the 20 RCTs had high RoB; the remaining four had uncertain RoB in several domains of assessment. For three trials with uncertain RoB and without overt vested interest, it was inconclusive whether homeopathy combined with conventional intervention was more or was less effective than conventional intervention alone for modulation of immune response in calves, or in the prophylaxis of cattle tick or of diarrhoea in piglets.ConclusionDue to the poor reliability of their data, OTP-controlled trials do not currently provide useful insight into the effectiveness of homeopathy in animals.

Abstract licence: CC BY