Homoeopathica April 2000

The effect of homœopathic medicines on the development of a DNA virus that causes pock-like spots on membranes of embryonic chickens has been investigated.

A virus-rich preparation made from a disease-affected embryo plus homœopathic medicines potentised a few steps in water so they were alcohol-free was put in eggs that had been incubating 12 days.

The inoculated embryos were incubated at 37 C for 5 hours, then cut open and several samples of membrane removed and exam­ined to see how many, if any, lesions caused by Chicken Embryo Virus (CEV) were present.

Ten different remedies in 33 potencies were used: “Good” results are shown in Tables 1, “bad” results in Table 2 – because, inex­plicably, the remedies Variolinum and Ranunculus bulbosusstimulated the virus to create more lesions.

The experiment, by L. M. Singh, BVSc, MSc, PhD, and Girish Gupta, BSc and graduate homœopath, both of the virology division of the Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India, was reported by them in the British Homœopathic Journal of July 1985. Excerpts from this report follow:

Drugs

A total of 10 drugs in 33 centesimal potencies namely Typhoidinum 30, 200, 1000. Medorrhinum6, 30, 200, 1000, Hydrophobinum 30, 200, 1000, Anthraxinum 30, 200, 1000, Tuberculinum 6, 30, 200, 1000, CM, Nux vomica 30, 200, Malandrinum 200, 1000, Aconitum napellus 6, 30, 200, 1000, Ranunculus bulbosus 6, 30, 200, 1000, and Variolinum 30, 200, 1000 were evaluated against Chicken Embryo Virus (CEV) of fowls using chick embryos.

Results

Virus inhibiting property

The results of antiviral activity of homœopathic drugs against CEV of fowls shown in Table 1 clearly show that five drugs in their pot­encies (Typhoidinum 200, Hydrophobinum 1000,Tuberculinum 1000, Nux vomica 200 and Malandrinum 1000), completely inhibited viral lesions in the chorio-allantoic membranes of developing chick em­bryos when the virus and drugs were given together simultaneously, or even at different intervals post infection. Therefore, these drugs show very high antiviral activity.

Next in order of antiviral activity came Typhoidinum 1000, Medor­rhinum 6, 1000, Hydrophobinum30, Anthraxinum 200, 1000, Tuberculinum 6, 30, 200 and Malandrinum 200. The antiviral activity of these drugs ranged from 71% to 88.8%. Drugs with activity ranging from 40% to 62.5% wereAnthraxinum 30, Aconitum napellus 6, 200, 1000, Tuberculinum CM, Hydrophobinum 200 andMedorrhinum 200. Drugs with a low degree of anti-viral activity were only Aconitum napellus 30,Typhoidinum 30, and Medorrhinum 30; here the percentage inhibition ranged from 20% to 25%.

TABLE 1. Antiviral property of homœopathic drugs against Chicken Embryo Virus (CEV)

Drug	Potency (c)	Tissue samples collected	Samples showing lesions/without lesions	% inhibition
Typhoidinum	30	8	6/2	25
	200	8	0/8	100
	1000	8	1/7	87.5
Medorrhinum	6	9	2/7	77.7
	30	8	6/2	25
	200	8	3/5	62.5
	1000	8	1/7	87.5
Hydrophobinum	30	9	1/8	88.8
	200	10	4/6	60
	1000	8	8/0	100
Anthraxinum	30	10	6/4	40
	200	8	2/6	75
	1000	8	1/7	87.5
Tuberculinum	6	8	1/7	87.5
	30	8	1/7	87.5
	200	7	2/5	71
	1000	7	0/7	100
Nux vomica	30	8	6/2	25
	200	10	0/10	100
Malandrinum	200	8	2/6	75
	1000	8	0/8	100
Aconitum napellus 30		10	6/4	40
30		10	6/2	20
	200	10	4/6	60
	1000	10	4/6	60
CONTROL		10	10/0	0

 

1000 as potency = 1M. Five eggs incubated for control (virus but not homœopathic drug) and all potencies employed. Tissue samples were of chorio-allantoic membrane, sometimes more than one from each egg.

The results in Table 1 also show that homœopathic drugs in their different potencies act individually since no correlation exists between the potencies of drugs either from lower to higher or vice versa, with few exceptions. For instance, Typhoidinum in 30 potency inhibits virus growth up to 25%; in 200 potency it causes 100% inhibition, and in 1000 potency 87.5% inhibition. On the whole all the drugs tested demonstrated varying degrees of antiviral activity.
The antiviral actions of homœopathic drugs are immediate and such medicines are effective whether they are given before, simul­taneously, together or even at intervals of viral infection.

Virus enhancing property

The results presented in Table 2 show that drugs like Ranunculus bulbosus in 6, 30, 200, 1000 and Variolinum in 30, 200 and 1000 potencies enhanced viral lesions on CAM to the extent of a + to ++++ reaction.

The virus enhancing property of homœopathic drugs also seems to develop immediately after inoculation, like their inhibiting property.

TABLE 2. Virus enhancing property of homœopathic drugs against Chicken Embryo Virus (CEV)

Drug	Potency (c	Tissue samples collected	Samples showing lesions/without lesions	Degree of viral enhancement in each	% enhance­ment
Ranunculus	6	10	8/2	2 ++++	100
bulbosus				4 +++	75
				2 ++	50
	30	10	8/2	3 ++++	100
				4 +++	75
				1 ++	50
	200	10	10/0	4 ++++	100
				4 +++	75
				2 ++	50
	1000	10	10/0	4 ++++	100
				6 +++	75
Variolinum	30	10	8/2	4 ++++	100
				6 +++	75
				1 ++	50
	200	10	9/1	4 ++++	100
				4 +++	75
				1 ++	50
	1000	10	10/0	6 ++++	100
				3 +++	75
				1 ++	50
CONTROL		10	10/0	10 Less than 10%	1–10

 

A scale of + to ++++ was used to evaluate the number of viral lesions found on each sample; for example two of the 8 samples of Ranunculus 6c treated eggs had the maximum number of lesions seen in the experiment, the control samples (10 from 5 eggs) all had lesions but fewer than seen in any of the homœopathically-dosed ones so were rated + or less than +.

Discussion

An antiviral activity of homœopathic drugs against animal viruses is reported for the first time. From the overall findings of this com­munication it may be ascertained that the activity of homœopathic drugs could be of three types, an antiviral effect, enhanced virus replication, or no effect at all. The antiviral effects could be further grouped into drugs having a very high degree of antiviral effect (100% inhibition), drugs with a high degree of antiviral activity (71-88.8% inhibition), drugs with a moderate antiviral effect (40- 62.5% inhibition), and drugs with a low degree of activity (20-25% inhibition).
It may be worth noting that the virus inhibiting and virus enhancing properties of homœopathic drugs appear to develop immediately irrespective of whether drugs are given before, after, simultaneously or together with the virus. Both these properties of homœopathic drugs observed experimentally are in conformity with the clinical observations and also are in agreement with the findings of other Indian scientists, who also observed both these effects of homœopathic drugs against plant viruses like Tobacco Mosaic Virus and Papaya Mosaic Virus.

Since homœopathic drugs can inhibit plant viruses in local and systemic infections, increase resistance of plants if applied before, and increase the incubation period of plant viruses, besides being cheap and economical, plant virologists and pathologists have the option of using them as inhibitors of plant viruses in the absence of any other safe and suitable inhibitor. They further contemplate that homœopathic drugs will be of tremendous use in increasing agricultural production and as a plant protection measure for con­trolling phytopathogens.

As homœopathic medicines are non-toxic, non-poisonous to plants, animal and man, economical and easily acceptable and have already been proved on human beings, these drugs will find their direct and immediate use both in the prophylaxis and cure of viral infection of man and animals.
The antiviral effect of homœopathic drugs seems to be due to the production of some substances in the host. This has been learnt from the experiments in which cell free extract of homogenate of chorio-allantoic membrane prepared from drug inoculated chick embryos or allantoic fluid of such treated embryos after filtration, when inoculated simultaneously or together with the virus after 15 minutes of incubation at room temperature, caused a 50% reduc­tion in virus lesions. These reproducible results are additional proof of the antiviral efficacy of homœopathic drugs.

From the results shown in Table 1 it is evident that no definite correlation exists between different potencies of the same drug with regard to their virus inhibiting property. The individual potencies seem to show their antiviral effect individually. Such experimental observations are in conformity with the clinical observation of practising homœopaths the world over.

Since quite a good number of homœopathic drugs have been found to have marked antiviral effects, it may be worth while to scan all the homœopathic drugs in the materia medica for their antiviral properties against viruses infecting man and animals.

In conclusion it can definitely be said that finding the antiviral potentials of homœopathic drugs is the beginning of a new era in viral chemotherapy and holds great promise, as these drugs can be used directly against viral maladies.