The so called clinical researches of orthodox school do not apply to Homoeopathy, as homoeopathy is dynamic science and is based on the pathogenic researches and studies of medicines.
Homoeopathy is a distinct and scientific method of medicine and investigation of sickness. No system of medicine is based on infallible laws as Homoeopathy. Homoeopathy is unique method of prescription of medicine based on sound scientific time tested laws. These laws guide the practitioner for correct choice of medicine and cure of sickness in humans and aware him of the pitfalls involved.. The first law of homoeopathy states that similar diseases
are cured by similar medicines. It may be called the law of “similarity” Hahnemann, the founder of homoeopathy, propounded the basic law as such “simillia smibilus curantur”. The disease and medicine must be similar in every aspect to affect a cure. In other words, it may be said that the medicine can cure only that diseased conditions that it causes. What a medicine can not cause it can not cure at all. What a medicine can cause how can we judge that? For this purpose we have the method called “proving of medicines” a potentised medicine is given to group of persons and what effects it produces on healthy organism are recorded and called “symptoms” when a medicine is proved than the sensations, feelings and altered states of health and mind are recorded. These recorded statements of provers are compiled in a book called “materia medica”. So homoeopathy materia medica is not mere speculations and imaginations of writers rather it is very legitimate record of primary statements of provers in their own language. The quality of knowledge and information gathered from homoeopathic pathogenic trials also known as “provings”is fundamental for the growth and development of homoeopathy. When we see the similar conditions and symptoms in an ailing person than the knowledge of materia medica is employed to select the particular medicine for the patient. So the homeopathy is a beautiful art of employing the written knowledge of medicines to the sick person. Homeopathy is totally and absolutely individualization. The “individualization” is unique property of homoeopathic art of prescribing. There are no specific medicines for specific diseased conditions in homoeopathy. On the contrary the orthodox or conventional school of medicine is based on the rule of specific medicine.. If a person is suffering from fever than an antipyretic medicine is given to all persons, Irrespective of their psyche and symptoms. In homoeopathy the medicine is selected on the basis of individual traits, disposition, and personality characteristics and symptoms of disease
Tools and research methodology
The nature of two dominant schools of medicines: orthodox and homoeopathy is not only different but antagonistic as far as research is concerned. The tools of research are different of two schools. The dominant school of medicine applies its own tools and methodology to homoeopathy to judge the efficacy of homoeopathy. How can the tools of orthodox
research and methodology be applied to study and search of homoeopathy as both are fundamentally different and antagonistic? The allopathic medicines are crude drugs material substance, whereas there is no matter in homoeopathic medicines. The homoeopathic medicines are pure energy and there is no “iota of matter in them”. There nature is dynamic. Homoeopathy is not material science, it is dynamic science. Matter is lower form of life whereas energy is highest manifestation of life. What the orthodox practitioners call “clinical trials” or “clinical research” or “clinical research studies” are actually not applicable to homoeopathy. To judge the efficacy of homoeopathy in a particular diseased condition, they prescribe single medicine to all the persons or group. In the first instance the single medicine can not be given to all persons or a group. There are many medicines for any given diseased condition in homoeopathy. For instance there are hundred of medicines for vomiting or headache in homoeopathy. The orthodox researcher conducting research gives homoeopathic medicines as if these are material substance. How can be than expect spectacular results from such clinical researches. The crux of the matter is that allopathic researches and “clinical trials” do not apply to homeopathy. Homoeopathy is above board of their so called clinical researches. To judge the efficacy and effectiveness of a particular art, or Branch of science or subject we will have to apply the rules and laws of the same art and science of knowledge. The laws of science can not be applied to literature or aesthetics. To judge the efficacy and evaluate the homoeopathy we will have to apply the homoeopathic principles only. To claim and declare that homoeopathy does not work, using these studies or “clinical researches” as the basis is illogical and “egoistical ignorance” of fundamental principles of homoeopathic art of prescription. Most of these so called researchers are funded and managed by big pharma with presumptuous attitude towards ifficacy of homoeopathy. The touch stone or standard of homoeopathy is “pathogenic proving” and application of the knowledge of proving to the sick person. So claims of researchers based on these anti homeopathy researches, are nothing else than managed bundle of “damn lies”. If any agency with sincerity of purpose or open minded person wishes to evaluate and judge the efficacy of homoeopathy than homoeopathy should be prescribed in an epidemic diseases by calling conscientious homoeopaths to participate in these researches.. I am ready to become one member of such team to test the efficacy of homoeopathy.. Homoeopathy has “pathogenic trials” not “clinical trials” clinical trials have nothing to do with the growth development and effectiveness of homoeopathy.