Homeopathy 2022; 111(02): 105-112
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1733972
Original Research Article

Homeopathy for COVID-19 Prevention: Report of an Intervention at a Brazilian Service Sector Company

1   Escola de Homeopatia de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Walter Swain Canoas
1   Escola de Homeopatia de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Katya Aparecida Gonçalves Figueira
1   Escola de Homeopatia de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Giovani Bravin Peres
2   Research Center, Graduation Program in Environmental and Experimental Pathology, Universidade Paulista-UNIP, São Paulo, Brazil
› Author Affiliations


Background COVID-19 quickly became a serious public health problem worldwide, with serious economic and social repercussions. Homeopaths around the world have been studying to find a genus epidemicus (GE) medicine that might help in the prevention and treatment of this disease.

Objective To compare the incidence of COVID-19 between employees who received or did not receive a homeopathic GE medicine for disease prevention.

Methods Retrospective cohort analysis. The study population comprised all employees of a service sector company in São Paulo, Brazil, and followed up by the corporate Occupational Health department. Intervention consisted of administering Arsenicum album 30cH in a one-weekly dose. Primary outcome was incidence of COVID-19 during 3-months' follow-up (April to July, 2020).

Results We analyzed 1,642 of 1,703 employees without previous diagnosis of COVID-19 at onset of the study period: 53.34% of employees were referred to telework at home and did not receive intervention (Group 1, G1); 24.66% remained working on-premises in the state of São Paulo and received the intervention (Group 2, G2); 21.98% remained working on company premises in other states and did not receive intervention (Group 3, G3). Incidence rate of COVID-19 was respectively 13.35%, 0.74%, and 67.87% (p < 0.001). The odds ratio of being infected in (1) G3 versus G1 was 13.70 (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.21 to 18.39), (2) G3 versus G2 was 283.02 (95% CI, 88.98 to 900.18), and (3) G1 versus G2 was 20.66 (95% CI, 6.53 to 65.39).

Limitations The present is a retrospective analysis of a real-world experience. We could not ensure direct observed treatment, and neither could we control adherence to general prevention measures outside company premises.

Conclusion The incidence of COVID-19 was significantly lower amongst on-premises employees who received the GE medication in comparison to workers who did not receive the intervention (those either at other company premises or teleworking at home).

Publication History

Received: 08 February 2021

Accepted: 17 June 2021

Article published online:
19 October 2021

© 2021. Faculty of Homeopathy. This article is published by Thieme.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany