Rapid Responses to:

PAPERS: Per Lokken, Per Atle Straumsheim, Dag Tveiten, Per Skjelbred, and Christian Fredrik Borchgrevink Effect of homoeopathy on pain and other events after acute trauma: placebo controlled trial with bilateral oral surgery BMJ 1995; 310: 1439-1442 [Abstract] [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Flawed methodology leads to false results and conclusions

Simon Rabinovich   (4 December 1999)

Flawed methodology leads to false results and conclusions 4 December 1999
Simon Rabinovich, Homeopathic physician, Homeopathic Consulting Co. Toronto, Ontario, Canada Send response to journal: Re: Flawed methodology leads to false results and conclusions	I would like to discuss two points of provided article. Firstly, I must draw your attention to the methodology of giving homeopathic drugs "3 hours AFTER the surgery". Any experienced homeopath would tell us that according to homeopathic science any surgical intervention including extracting of teeth is a clear CONTRAINDICATION to homeopathic treatment, i.e. that treatment is doomed to be ineffective at all. The surgery stands in the row with such other contraindications to homeopathic treatment like excessive coffee drinking and consuming mint in any form including toothpaste using. Actually, if the researchers desired to see ANY effect of homeopathy they should have given homeopathic medications BEFORE the surgery. It is advisable also to repeat the treatment after the surgery although no sufficient evidence exists in all known clinical trials, however extensive clinical experience indicates clear benefits of such move. Secondly, the choice of homeopathic remedies and their dosage (potency) were, in my view, somehow inappropriate. The only homeopathic remedy that I would agree with giving to the patients in such circumstances was Arnica. Any "individualized homeopathic assessment" after such painful procedure would obviously lead to the almost similar "drug picture" as it was shown in your article and, accordingly, to the same drug - Arnica. Practically speaking, the results would have been remarkably better and indicating the obvious effectivness of homeopathic treatment if such remedy like Aconitum Nappelus was added to the treatment. The latter medicine is usually been prescribed in the cases of "great anxiety, mental shock and, sometimes, panic". It is also known to any experienced homeopath that Aconitum is one of "homeopathic pain- killers" (because the feeling of pain is the expression of CNS' condition). It is also known that Aconite demonstrates its extremely well effectiveness and works in almost every case, thus it is called the "universal" remedy just like Arnica. I presume, this attitude would have been totally denied by classical homeopaths you invited for participating in your trial. In conclusion, the use of correct homeopathic treatment in the case you presented would have been proved extremely effective, as it happened not once in the clinical experience of our clinic and number of dental surgeon's clinics in Toronto.