| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3444714 | Annals of Epidemiology | 2010 | 10 Pages |
PurposeHomeopathy and Bach® Flower Remedies (BFRs), historically-related complementary healing modalities classified as prescription/nonprescription drugs and over-the-counter homeopathic nutritional supplements, respectively, are compared with respect to indications, dosage philosophies, associated procedures, reported outcomes, safety profiles, and the possible operation of the placebo effect.MethodsOriginal data and published research reports, including case studies, retrospective meta-analyses, and double-blind clinical trials are compiled and evaluated for both healing systems.ResultsHomeopathy and BFR therapy both feature highly diluted natural medicinal substances, flexible dosage schedules tailored to individual patients, and energy-based healing action. They differ with respect to practitioner training and certification, number and types of medicinal source materials, remedy combinations and applications, and potential toxicity or other side-effects.ConclusionsExtensive testing has produced mixed or equivocal results regarding the efficacy of both of these health care systems. While a variety of positive outcomes have been frequently recorded with Homoeopathy and BFR treatments, it is likely that the placebo effect operates to a significant extent in both approaches.
