By Amber Currie, CCH, C.HP
At this point, you are likely familiar with the arguments in favor of vaccines as well as the augments against them. You may believe that vaccines are the only option to when dealing with the school system and international travel. But there is another choice.
Homeoprophylaxis, or “HP” as it is often called, is a gentle, non-toxic and evidence-based system used to stimulate strong immune system development and resistance to contagious diseases. HP is easy to use, non-invasive and easy to access through a local certified homeoprophylaxis supervisor.
While heated discussions on vaccinations rage in Washington, DC., the state house, and dinner tables around the country, few involve any mention of HP. Why is that?
HP has been a part of homeopathic medicine for 200 years. Governments in India, Cuba, and several South American countries have used HP with great success in prevention of contagious disease. However, HP was not developed as a formalized public health model for children until 1985, when Dr. Isaac Golden established his research model in Australia.
Golden published a 15-year study on HP involving thousands of children in 2004. The study tracked not only HP’s effectiveness when children were exposed to diseases such as whooping cough, measles, and others for which parents often vaccinate, he also studied 20 measures of the children’s overall health. In the US. the 501(c)3 non-profit Free and Healthy Children International is currently completing a similar four-year study of HP. Results are expected in 2018. (See chart below.)
Effectiveness of HP – Statistical Trials in Humans
Numbers of Participants
|Length of Survey||Effectiveness %|
|1907||Eaton||2,806||< 1 year||97.5|
|1950||Taylor-Smith||82 (12 definitely exposed)||< 1 year||100.0|
|1963||Gutman||385||< 1 year||86.0|
|1974||Castro &Nogeira||HP 18,000/Not HP 6,340||3 months||86.1|
|1987||English||694||2 years||87.0 – 91.5|
|1987||Fox||61||5 years||82.0 – 95.0|
|1998||Mroninski et al||HP 65,826/Not HP 23,539||6 months/12 months||95.0/91.0|
|2004||Golden||2,342 questionnaires||15 years||90.4|
|2008||Bracho||HP 2.3 million, Not HP 8.8 million people||12 months||84% reduction in disease incidence in treated areas, 22% increase in disease incidence in untreated population|
Homeoprophylaxis vs. Vaccines
You can see that Golden’s research found the average rate of protection was better than 90% in cases of known exposure to contagious disease. That result was similar to results of other studies done in the last 150 years. NO serious adverse reactions were reported from HP during the entire 15-year Golden study.
At least as important to parents and others considering HP, in 19 of the 20 possible measures of health, the study found vaccinated children were less healthy than other children, usually by a significant amount (the 1 measure favoring vaccination was not statistically significant). The most dramatic single finding was that vaccinated children have a 15 times greater chance of becoming asthmatic than children using HP, with P>99%, a highly statistically significant finding.
Golden reported: “Homeopaths can confidently say that HP provides a definite level of protection against targeted infectious diseases, which is not 100%, but which is comparable to that of vaccines.”
HP seems to offer the best of both worlds: disease resistance and strong overall health. However, it is important to know that homeoprophylaxis is not a one-to-one vaccine substitute. It works under a different mechanism of action and educates the immune system in a different way than vaccines do. Homeopaths and increasing numbers of parents think this is a very good thing.
One final note is that when Golden compared children using his HP program to those using other types of HP, both effectiveness and safety were lower in groups using other programs. Make sure to check the basis of your HP program before committing.