Homeoprophylaxis

Parents concerned about vaccines do have another choice

Homoprophylaxis is the administration of specific natural
medicines to induce in the patient protection against a
particular disease. Using the principles of natural law it is
possible to provide protection against the flu or any disease,
including polio, tetanus, measles, etc. using
homoprophylaxis. This is a completely minute amount of the
actual disease material (called a nosode), except it is used in
a non-toxic dose.

Potenization (dynamization) is the process of serial dilution
and shaking with impact (succussion) that removes the
negative effects of medicines while retaining their therapeutic
benefit, which Dr. Hahnemann was trying to achieve in his
work. Hahnemann, the father of homeopathy, in the Cure
and Prevention of Scarlet Fever (1801), another extension of
his Organon, introduced the use of homeopathic remedies
for prophylaxis. He discovered that a specific remedy will act
to prevent an infectious disease in the still healthy
individuals, and that the same specific remedy will also treat
those already infected with the disease. If someone has
been vaccine-damaged it is possible to reverse it using
homoprophylaxis sequentially, among other methods.

Homeoprophylaxis - A Fifteen-Year Clinical Study has been
completed by Dr. Isaac Golden PhD, D.Hom.
N.Dundefinedgt, B.Ec(Hon). Golden believes that

homeoprophylaxis (HP) has a great deal to offer to parents.
It can improve their childrenʼs quality of life through fewer
episodes of distressing disease, through using a method of
disease prevention which has no toxic reactions.

The purpose of his report is to provide the homeopathic
community with factual information about the efficacy and
safety of his long-term HP program. Many different HP
programs have been used by homeopaths over the last 200
years, but his results may be used as an objective
benchmark against which to evaluate other programs.

Goldenʼs study is intended to show governments and public
health authorities the potential value of an appropriate HP
program as an option to conventional vaccinations. It also
points out that the dual system of homeoprophylaxis and
vaccination has the potential to both expand national
coverage against targeted infectious diseases and reduce
the incidence of childhood illnesses such as asthma and
eczema and autism.

His report does not take issue with the opponents of HP
within either the homeopathic or the pharmaceutical
communities, nor with the risks and benefits of vaccination
except as they directly compare to HP, nor does it discuss
philosophical issues concerning HP, including the question
of whether some diseases should be prevented at all.

I have patients and parents who vaccinate their children,
some who use homoprophylaxis or homeoprophylaxis, some
who use the “wait for symptoms” approach, some who rely
on constitutional prevention and some who do nothing at all.

I would like to see parents protect their children against
serious diseases without the fear involved with huge and
toxic crude doses in conventional allopathic vaccines. My
biggest concern is that parents will avoid vaccinating their
children due to fear of potential damaging effects and that
we may see a rise in some serious childhood diseases as a
result. I would rather prevent pertussis (whooping cough)
than wait to see the symptoms before I treat it.

But they all have my support. Once parents have been told
of the options available then it becomes their decision as to
how they want to treat and prevent infectious diseases in
their own children.

Note: Homoprophylaxis is the use of the similar
substance to prevent disease, as in using the Measles
nosode to prevent measles. Homeoprophylaxis is the
use of a close similar substance to try to prevent the
disease, like in the use of Pulsatilla to prevent measles.
Goldenʼs study continues to be done using both homo-
and homeo-prophylaxis, though he is not aware of that.

— Patricia Regalia DMH, DHHP,

!