Homeopathy in Epidemics and Pandemics
Samuel Hahnemann, the father of Homeopathic medicine, gained great fame and notoriety in the early 1800’s due to his astounding success in treating cholera and typhus epidemics.
The first such epidemic was in 1813, when a typhus epidemic followed in the wake of Napoleon’s march through Germany to attack Russia – followed by his calamitous retreat. When the epidemic hit Leipzig, Hahnemann treated 180 people and lost only 2 (less than 1%) – Allopathic mortality rates were more than 30%.
With the present focus on pandemics, it is interesting to see how effective Homeopathy has been in the past.
Here is an article by Joette Calabrese
Compared to the age of civilization, we are mere “youngsters.” So, this first pandemic in generations somehow feels unprecedented. However, while the all-encompassing global reaction to COVID-19 has been unheard of, this is most assuredly not the first epidemic humanity has experienced.
For the last 200 years, homeopathy has met epidemics and even pandemics with impressive success. I addressed this in a chapter of my pictorial book, Homeopathy: A Brief History of an Expansive Medical Paradigm. Because we’re all living it now, I decided to republish this chapter here, for you:
Homeopathy’s ability is not restricted to headaches, runny noses and fevers. Homeopathy has the ability to combat the deadliest illnesses and has made such striking impacts as to warrant historical significance. Yet, we know interpretations, omissions and bias can skew history. Unfortunately for homeopathy, its contributions to the treatment of epidemic illnesses have been sorely ignored.
Amidst the awful devastations wrought by the Influenza Pandemic that tore through 1918 America, homeopathy emerged as a force for good! And that’s saying quite a lot, considering this pandemic — also known as the Spanish Flu — claimed 50 million people worldwide. That’s 34 million more lives than were lost during World War I.
This flu could kill its victim within a couple of hours or after a few short days when the sufferer suffocated to death from water-filled lungs. Young adults were the most susceptible to this ravaging force. But homeopathy came to the rescue, quite literally, when it was administered.
Consider this: a Philadelphia man by the name of Dean W.A. Pearson collected information on influenza cases treated by homeopathic physicians. Of the 26,795 cases, the mortality rate was only 1.05%, while the average allopathic school had a mortality rate of 30%!
A humble physician, Dr. T.A. McCann from Ohio, stated, “I have treated 1,000 cases of influenza. I have records to show my work. I have no losses. Please give all credit to homeopathy and none to the Scotch-Irish American!”
In Rhode Island, Dr. Dudley Williams reported not losing a single patient to influenza — not a single one! His mortality rate for pneumonia was 2.1%. This is astonishing when one considers that allopathic physicians, who treated primarily with aspirin and quinine, lost 60% of their pneumonia cases.
Another physician, this one from Chicago, Illinois, reported that in a plant manned with 8,000 workers, only one man died. The homeopathic
remedy, Gelsemium, was essentially the only remedy used. Aspirin, vaccines and other drugs were never administered.1
Powerful accounts. Powerful data.
Indeed, it’s futile to attribute these recoveries to a placebo effect. Thousands upon thousands were succumbing to a worldwide epidemic, yet the other thousands being treated with homeopathy were rising up from amidst the fallen.
When one tallies the success rate of homeopathy’s treatment during the Spanish Flu, it is regrettable it was not more widely used. With the unbelievable curative ability of this medicine, it could have spared the millions who died.
1 Julian Winston, The Faces of Homeopathy: An Illustrated History of the First 200 Years (New Zealand: Great Auk Publishing, 1999), 236-237.
The Author disclaims all liability for any loss or risk, personal or otherwise incurred as a consequence of use of any material in this article. This information is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
