Vithoulkas G
International Academy of Classical Homeopathy, Alonissos, Greece.
J Med Life. 2017 Jan-Mar;10(1):47-49.
The article discussed the immanent problems of meta-analyses selecting a number of independent trials in homeopathy, within which, the purpose was to examine the effectiveness of homeopathic treatment. Our focus lied in clarifying that the complex effects of homeopathic treatment known from history and day-to-day practice have not been respected so far. The examination of most of the homeopathic trials showed that studies rarely account for homeopathic principles, in order to assess the effectiveness of the treatment. The main flaw was that trials reflect the point of view that the treatment with a specific remedy could be administered in a particular disease. However, homeopathy aims to treat the whole person, rather than the diseases and each case has to be treated individually with an individualized remedy. Furthermore, the commonly known events during the course of homeopathic treatment, such as "initial aggravation" and "symptom-shift" were not considered in almost all the studies. Thus, only few trials were eligible for meta-analyses, if at all. These and other factors were discussed and certain homeopathic principles were suggested to be respected in further trials. It is expected, that a better understanding of homeopathic principles would provide guidelines for homeopathic research, which are more acceptable to both homeopathy and conventional medicine.
这篇文章讨论了顺势疗法中荟萃分析选择多项独立试验时存在的内在问题，其目的是检验顺势疗法治疗的有效性。我们关注的重点在于阐明，顺势疗法在历史和日常实践中已知的复杂效果至今未得到重视。对大多数顺势疗法试验的审查表明，为评估治疗效果，研究很少考虑顺势疗法原则。主要缺陷在于，试验反映出这样一种观点，即特定药物的治疗可用于特定疾病。然而，顺势疗法旨在治疗整个人，而非疾病，每个病例都必须用个体化药物进行个体化治疗。此外，几乎所有研究都未考虑顺势疗法治疗过程中常见的事件，如“初始病情加重”和“症状转移”。因此，即便有符合条件的试验，也很少能用于荟萃分析。文章讨论了这些及其他因素，并建议在进一步试验中遵循某些顺势疗法原则。预计，对顺势疗法原则的更好理解将为顺势疗法研究提供指导方针，这对顺势疗法和传统医学而言都更易接受。
