Nosodes pt. 1
November 24, 2006 at 11:26 am #2822
Dr. Jeff FeinmanKeymaster
Here is some great info written by my friend and colleague Dr. Susan Beal:
Regarding the use of nosodes to “replace” conventional vaccinations, I
feel that there are a couple of points that need to be made.
Nosodes are classically used in healthy animals/people around the time
of exposure to the disease in question. The nosode serves to induce an
artificial medicinal disease in the patient, which replaces/fills the
susceptibility the animal may have to the naturally occurring disease.
The presence of the artificial disease induced by the nosode makes it
difficult/impossible for the naturally occurring disease to take hold of
the individual. It’s rather like the nosode filling the chink in the
armour through which the naturally occurring disease would have entered.
As such, nosodes are best used around the time of possible exposure
to/greatest susceptibility to the disease is question. Their ability to
protect the patient lasts as long as the artificial medicinal disease
induced by the nosode is maintained in the patient – typically days to
weeks rather than months to years per dose of nosode.
Exposure to nosodes does not create titer because they do not elicit
antigenic stimulation. There is also no evidence that maternal
antibodies interfere with the action of nosodes, since the mechanism of
action of nosodes is different than that of Ab/Ag response. However, the
absence of titer in the use of nosode does not mean that the patient is
not protected – provided the nosode has been used appropriately.
For example, it may be appropriate to use a parvo nosode around the time
and circumstance when the pup is most likely to be exposed to parvo.
Nosodes have been used in kennel situations in which there has been a
history of parvo outbreaks at a certain age. The nosode is administered
a week or so before the historical onset of the outbreak and continued
for several weeks after. The same can be said for the use of parvo
nosode in regional outbreaks and around other situations of potential
exposure (dog camps, shows, transport of groups of dogs,…)
I do not think that the single study, oft quoted and misquoted, using
parvo nosode and vaccine yielded results that can clearly be used to say
that nosodes do not work or that nosodes offer less protection than does
vaccination. I do think that if this particular study is going to be
discussed, then we need to have a copy of the material (experimental
protocol as well as results) in front of us before this study is further
misinterpreted or misrepresented.
Nosodes are not replacements for conventional vaccines per se,
especially when they are used with the mindset that nosodes act like
vaccines and/or are somehow safer than or better than vaccinations. The
same cautions should be exercised when using nosodes as when using
conventional immunizations – they are for use in healthy animals, there
is little or no evidence to support their rote repetition at interval,
and they can, and do, elicit adverse reactions in the recipient.
Much has been written about homeoprophylaxis. In some circumstances it
is appropriate to use nosodes, in others the genus epidemicus remedy (if
identifiable) is most appropriate. However, the rote use of nosodes is
not generally encouraged.
The forum ‘Homeopathic Treatment’ is closed to new topics and replies.