Shall We As Homeopaths Permit Vaccination Or Not? Part 2

Shall We As Homeopaths Permit Vaccination Or Not? Part One

Dr. S.S. Raza – One thing I want to know is what is the basis of homeopathic prophylaxis? In allopathic prophylaxis the basis is the antigen-antibody reaction and this is also proven in the laboratory. I want to know whether the prophylactic effect of our remedies has also been similarly proved in the laboratories or we are merely depending upon the statements like “Such and such remedy was given to a large no of patients and nobody got disease?”. Giants like Boenninghausen have stated that the homeopathic prophylactic remedy merely gives psychological satisfaction to the patient and that he is protected from the disease because of this. He has said that this mental satisfaction itself acts as a prophylactic. The idea is that if a person strongly believes that he is protected from a disease because of the medicine he has taken, he will not get the disease.

Dr. M.C. Batra – Then why should we give any particular medicine?. We may as well give any other medicine or even Sac lac.
Dr. J.N. Kanjilal – I doubt whether Boenninghausen has made such a statement. Can you kindly give me the reference? Even if Boenninghausen says that homeopathic prophylactic medicines only act through psychology, I cannot agree. But in fact, I do not think that Boenninghausen would have said that.
Dr. P. Sankaran - I have gone through the passage quoted by Dr. Raza. Boenninghausen says that although it has been proved that homeopathic prophylactics have prevented thousands of cases it must be considered that a certain state of mind also contributes to this prevention.
Dr. J.N. Kanjilal – Better read the actual passage.
Dr. P. Sankaran – (Reads from the book “Lesser writings”)
“In the beginning of the thirties in this century as well as in the epidemy of cholera now raging, it has been shown indubitably that nothing favors the spread of this more than the fear of it. Even the seemingly malignancy of this epidemy in the first period of its appearance (during which the usual allopathic treatment, generally more than half of the persons seized with it die, as also the fact that one case of it in a house is usually followed by several others, although the properly contagious nature of this disease may for many excellent reasons be doubted) may almost be solely explained by anxiety and terror caused by its appearance….”.
“Although the circumstance that thousands of men have through the use of these homeopathic prophylactics escaped cholera, as has been actually proved, does not incontestably prove that these afford an absolute protection, since it might have been that these very persons might have been the ones who would in any case not have been touched by the disease, nevertheless these facts speak at least very much for the probability of such a salutatory action, and it will be that much easier for homeopaths to preserve the necessary calm and fortitude. From this we would draw the fact that there are reasons for recommending these prophylactics to all those at least who find in them a comfort which they would not find in any other way.”
Dr. J.N. Kanjilal – That is quite different. By putting the matter in Boenninghausen`s mouth Dr. Raza really gave us a shock. Personally speaking, as a rule I never give any prophylactic homeopathic medicines. I always give sugar of milk and tell them that you will never get the disease. That generally serves the purpose.
Somebody – Suppose they get the infection?
Dr. P. Sankaran – Then we can always say that if he had not taken the prophylactic, the attack would have been much more virulent. (Laughter).
Dr. S.S. Raza – I thank Dr. Kanjilal for correcting me but by giving sac lac he also means the mental satisfaction as said by Dr. Boenninghausen and what I said was psychological satisfaction of the patient. This shows that the scientific mind of Dr. Boenninghausen had a doubt regarding prophylactic action of homeopathic medicine. But at the same time he has encouraged us to work on this line with expectation of mystery being solved one day. This is the interpretation of the statement I gave in the beginning that is why without properly proven medicine and its explanation, I may be reluctant to accept the claim of the general mass. On the other hand as a homeopath I think I should not permit vaccination. Repeated vaccination may change the personality and constitution of the person and ruin his health. This is not our viewpoint. This is the point of view of even modern doctors, modern immunologists.
In deciding this question whether to permit vaccination or not, we must remember that vaccination has more dangerous effects than good effects. Some of us asked whether by giving homeopathic prophylactics can we guarantee that the disease will be prevented. Here I may say that even in allopathy they cannot give such a guarantee by vaccination. Therefore we should tell the patients clearly that vaccination is not 100% effective. Considering its side effects it is not at all necessary. Principally we can not advise that for extinguishing fire, flood is required. Of course it has a legal implication because vaccination is legally compulsory but still we must have the guts to say “NO”.
The law about vaccination has changed in London. Now they do not consider vaccination necessary.
Dr. M.C. Batra – They have changed it as they do not find vaccinations necessary, because vaccination has fulfilled its function. Now actually the basic point or the moral is that vaccination is the means of fighting small pox. The next question is do you want to fight out small pox or do you want it to take its own sweet course? Do we want epidemics to come and we take them as acts of God and succumb to small pox rejecting the benefit of vaccination or do we want to fight against small pox epidemics with vaccination? Vaccinations have been successful in various countries and all over the world. You cannot close your eyes to this fact. On the other hand we have against it the fact that in certain percentage of cases, frequent vaccination produces Vaccinosis leading to some undesirable results. We have no doubt been able to remove many diseased conditions on the hypothesis that they are the results of frequent vaccinations or even a single bad vaccination.
A Participant – It is said that there are ill-effects in only 3% of the cases.
Dr. J.N. Kanjilal – I doubt this percentage and data.
Dr. M.C. Batra – I am not sure of this percentage but I am sure that the percentage affected by the vaccination is certainly less as compared with the percentage affected by the epidemic. It is conceded that it is not an ideal method of prevention but it is a necessary evil.
Dr. S.S. Raza – I was dealing with the ethical, medical and legal aspects of vaccination. On the ethical side we really oppose it. Medically if you read books on immunology you will know that the body develops its own immunity. This natural resistance only requires some help from us. Legally we must fight against vaccination laws.
Dr. M.C. Batra – If you do not allow vaccination what is the alternative you adopt?
Dr. S.S. Raza – I give Variolinum 1m.
Dr. Sankaran – Are you quite certain that with your Variolinum you have prevented small pox?
Dr. S.S. Raza – yes.
Dr. J. N. Kanjilal – No, we still require statistical data to prove this.
Dr. M.C. Batra – Do you think Dr. Raza that even primary vaccination is not necessary?
Dr. S.S. Raza – Yes, it is not necessary.
Dr. M.C. Batra – Let me know, Dr. Raza, to how many persons you must have distributed Variolinum to prevent small pox? I shall give you my number also. In all I must have distributed to 200 persons and I presume that they did not get the attack.
Dr. S.S. Raza – I have given this medicine to a group of people numbering 500.
Dr. Kasim Chimthanawala – Dr. Raza, if you read modern literature on immunology you will know that the efficacy of vaccines has been proved in the laboratory through antigen, antibody reaction. And it has been also proved that a specific vaccine produces an antibody reaction to a specific disease only. Last year Nagpur was extremely hot in summer. So I tried giving Nat-mur 6 to the people to prevent sun stroke. I had a control group of 400 persons to whom I gave only sac lac and to another group of 400 persons I gave Nat-mur 6 thrice a day for 7 days. I found that out of 400 persons who received Nat-mur 6 only one reported any trouble, while out of the control group 4 persons had symptoms of mild heat stroke. So I think Nat-mur 6 helped in affording protection against sunstroke. So my feeling is that homeopathic medicines do act as preventives but we must establish it through statistical data by different groups of physicians in a very systematic manner. Can you tell us Dr. Raza, whether Variolinum or any such remedy given to a person has produced specific antibodies against small pox? Until such studies have been done, I must say that your statement that such and such medicine can definitely prevent such and such disease is only a wishful thinking.
Dr. B.N. Paul – As regards preventive aspect I am afraid that in our field different people prescribe in different ways.
Some doctors give 200; some give a single dose and some give repeated doses. I think we should standardize this aspect. I personally repeat the medicine till there is some mild reaction in the patient. If you say that one dose of 10,000 will prevent the disease for life time, I cannot believe it, I have tried Puls in measles in several families including doctor`s family. Results were good.
Dr. P. Sankaran – I wish to mention here that I have been treating hundreds of children with their constitutional medicine and I have noticed that even if an epidemic of small pox or chicken pox or measles rages in those localities where these children were not affected, like island in the sea. So later on when the parents used to come to me and ask me, “There is a big epidemic in our locality. Please give some preventive for my child”, I used to say confidently that no preventive is required for that child which is under constitutional homeopathic treatment.
Dr. B.N. Paul – I had also the same opinion but unfortunately I saw a few children suffering from whooping cough, chicken pox and measles while their constitutional treatment was going on.
Dr. M.C. Batra – Agreed that a child who has been under a constitutional drug some time would have developed immunity against all types of possible infection including small pox. But this over confidence can let you down in a violent epidemic if your little patient is subjected suddenly to a violent exposure. If the little child has had all the time to build up his immunity even with constitutional treatment, an exposure, if violent, is likely to bring him down unless the constitutional immunity is reinforced with a prophylactic like Variolinum.
Dr. P.S. Kumta – Dr. Paul says that the medicines should be repeated till there is reaction. Does it mean that the drug should be proved on them?
Dr. B.N. Paul – Yes.
Dr. P.S. Kumta – It means we are producing the disease symptoms on them.
Dr. B.N. Paul – Yes, of course.
Dr. J.N. Kanjilal (Concluding remarks) – Now I want to place the whole thing on a different footing because the trend in which we are discussing will never result in anything. It cannot. Our business is to make the people immune to all sorts of infectious diseases, epidemics etc. Our business is only to make the people healthy. The real objective of the physician is not to make persons healthy but to maintain health, against so many odds. Without this, whatever else we do is useless. We should not mind social sanctions or legal sanctions. Social sanctions depend on the voters. What the technician says the elite believe and accept and what the elite say the govt. has to agree and make a legal sanction about it. But we as scientists are custodians of health and we should not be led away by such things. We should be guided only by the things that we get as facts. If we take the problem in that spirit I do not think we should be involved in these things. We have to see that what is the best way to maintain health and keep up the resistance. In this the proper regimen and diet and hygienic methods are basically necessary. If we can do that we need not bother. We need not bother for medicines because medicines mean creating a disease. Such a thing should not be a natural choice. But because we are not able to take natural measures we are forced to resort to supplement it with medicines because there are many factors beyond our control. Food is spoiled by fungus and to prevent this we add something (preservative) to the food and spoil the food.
To tell a lie is wrong but under certain circumstances we may have to tell a lie for a good cause. Killing a person is a crime but we have to kill some one if he attacks us. Killing becomes a pious thing, If this is done by legal sanction. So the introduction of a poison into the body is harmful but for a greater cause we may have to do it. But we must be sure what it is and what we are doing. Two questions have to be faced, viz., how much damage you are going to do for a greater good. You must be also sure what amount of damage you are doing and whether it is worth doing it. But I have a strong suspicion about all the statistical data presented. Some one said in vaccination only three percent of people have ill effects. My experience is diametrically opposite. If you come to my chamber I shall show you numerous cases of children suffering from bad effects of vaccination. I find that in some cases the similimum does not act because of the previous vaccination. But at the same time we cannot ignore statistics. Here we must sincerely admit our possibilities as well as our limitations. Even about the conclusions in immunology, I must say that what Hahnemann wrote still remains valid. The body is a changing medium and the attacking virus and bacteria are also changeable, so you cannot be always sure of anything. Each case has to be studied separately and prescribed for. Somebody was asking whether I can guarantee that our prophylactics are sure to act. The fact is that we cannot guarantee anything, even the cure of coryza. So we can tell the patient we cannot guarantee but there is likelihood that the disease will be prevented. Even as regards the eradication of small pox, we shall have to wait for 10 years to see that it does not recur. Regarding A.T. serum, if after every injury, A.T. serum is to be given, most of us would require A.T. serum everyday because we can get injury and ask whether they should take A.T. serum or not. As a rule I say ‘no’ with some exceptions depending on the matter of the injury and mental bent of the person. I am against pushing into the body any outside substance unnecessarily. At the same time, we cannot be dogmatic and say that Variolinum will surely prevent small pox because our homeopathic authorities have said so. I hate quoting authorities. Authorities are good as guide for certain methods but they are not necessarily inviolable. I have seen many cases of small pox occurring even after giving Variolinum. I used to give 2 doses of 200. Later on, I came to know that this method was wrong. I started giving the preventive medicines daily in 2 or 3 doses till the person gets some symptoms. This I learnt from experience. Our Variolinum was prepared from a particular strain of small pox but the virus may be much different. So if we want to be scientific in this matter we must find genus epidemicus. The problem of genus epidemicus before we can find the remedy. One good point is that people are naturally immune to the disease. Let me make it clear that I am not condemning vaccination. I am also aware that we do not have a very sure method. I was only pointing out the other side, the ill-effects of vaccination. With regard to the primary vaccination I tell the patient if you can withstand the social pressure than do not vaccinate. If you cannot withstand, then vaccinate the child and give an antidote which is indicated.
Ref – Indian Journal of Homeopathic Medicine Vol 13, No -2, April – June 1979.