Homöopathie Sammlung von Schlussfolgerungen aus Studien

[Godesberg]

CONCLUSION: The claim that homeopathic arnica is efficacious beyond a placebo effect is not supported by rigorous clinical trials.

DISCUSSION: The homeopathic combination therapy tested in this study did not significantly reduce the duration or severity of acute diarrhea in Honduran children.

Twenty-seven patients with chronic lichen simplex involving various parts of the body were treated. Hydrocotyle was prescribed to 21 patients in different potencies (6c, 30c, 200c, 1M, 10M), Thuja to three patients (1M, 10M), Graphites (6c), Kali bich (30c) and Sulphur (200c) to one patient each during 1 year study period. Only two patients showed complete improvement with Thuja and one with Graphites. In other cases, the response was limited to partial relief itching.

CONCLUSIONS: Though promising, the data were not strong enough to make a general recommendation to use Oscillococcinum for first-line treatment of influenza and influenza-like syndromes. Further research is warranted but the required sample sizes are large. Current evidence does not support a preventative effect of Oscillococcinum-like homeopathic medicines in influenza and influenza-like syndromes.

CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive search demonstrates that the evidence on the benefit of homeopathy in anxiety and anxiety disorders is limited.

CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study provides no evidence to support a therapeutic effect of individually selected homeopathic remedies in children with ADHD.

CONCLUSIONS: In this study there was no effect over placebo for self treatment with one of three self selected, ultramolecular homeopathic medicines in preventing childhood URTI.

CONCLUSION: Ultramolecular homeopathy had no observable clinical effects.

CONCLUSION: The effect of homeopathic treatment on mental symptoms of patients with generalized anxiety disorder did not differ from that of placebo.

CONCLUSIONS: This study provides no evidence that adjunctive homeopathic remedies, as prescribed by experienced homeopathic practitioners, are superior to placebo in improving the quality of life of children with mild to moderate asthma in addition to conventional treatment in primary care.

The results of this trial do not suggest that homeopathic arnica has an advantage over placebo in reducing postoperative pain, bruising and swelling in patients undergoing elective hand surgery

CONCLUSION: Homoeopathic immunotherapy is not effective in the treatment of patients with asthma.

CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that active homeopathy improves the symptoms of RA, over 3 months, in patients attending a routine clinic who are stabilized on NSAIDs or DMARDs.

There is no indication of a specific, or of a delayed effect of homeopathy.

CONCLUSION: This pilot study failed to find evidence that mercury 12C causes significantly more symptoms in healthy volunteers than placebo.

CONCLUSION: There is no indication that belladonna 30CH produces symptoms different from placebo or from no intervention. Symptoms of a homeopathic pathogenetic trial (HPT) are most likely chance fluctuations.

CONCLUSIONS: In this study, with this dosage, we did not observe any preventive effect of homeopathic Arnica CH5 on poststripping haematomas.

This pilot study does not demonstrate a clear proving reaction for Belladonna C30 versus placebo

It was concluded that "Tinnitus" could not be shown to be more effective than the matched placebo.

CONCLUSIONS: Statements and methods of alternative medicine--as far as they concern observable clinical phenomena--can be tested by scientific methods. When such tests yield negative results, as in the studies presented herein the particular method or statement should be abandoned. Otherwise one would run the risk of supporting superstition and quackery.

CONCLUSION: Homeopathic Arnica 30x is ineffective for muscle soreness following long-distance running.

CONCLUSION: The study did not find benefit of the homoeopathic remedy in DOMS.

Overall, there was no significant benefit over placebo of homoeopathic treatment.

We conclude that arnica in homoeopathic potency had no effect on postoperative recovery in the context of our study.

CONCLUSION: There was no apparent difference between the effects of homoeopathic therapy and placebo in children with common warts under the conditions of this study.

CONCLUSIONS--No positive evidence was found for efficacy of homoeopathic treatment on pain and other inflammatory events after an acute soft tissue and bone injury inflicted by a surgical intervention.

Group evaluation showed no clearcut differences.

CONCLUSION: The homeopathic treatment was no more effective than the placebo treatment of plantar warts.

There was no statistically significant difference between groups. Adverse effects were scarcely and comparably reported in both groups and did not require a change in therapy.

The effects of Rhus tox. 6X and placebo did not differ significantly.

Two physicians were involved in prescribing for the patients and there were no significant differences in the results which they obtained.

[Graf Zahl]

Bin immer wieder erstaunt, dass diese Wissenschaftler so wenig Ahnung haben, wie HÖ korrekt anzuwenden ist. Anders sind diese Ergebnisse nicht zu erklären.