Download PDF
Homœopathic Links 2015; 28(01): 008-013
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1545256
Vaccination
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.

The Immunisation Dilemma—Part Four: A Comparison of Effectiveness

Isaac Golden
1   Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
20 March 2015 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This analysis aims to compare the evidence supporting the effectiveness of homoeoprophylaxis (HP) and vaccination. An examination of what constitutes acceptable evidence is first undertaken within the context of evidence-based medicine (EBM). This analysis considers the quality of evidence from a variety research methods, and conclusions are drawn about what mix of evidence is most reliable and useful for clinicians. Finally, evidence quantifying the effectiveness of vaccination and HP is then examined and a comparison made between the two. Practical conclusions are drawn.

Keywords

Evidence-based medicine - Systematic review - Effectiveness - Vaccination - Homoeoprophylaxis
 

  • References

  • 1 Belsey J. What Is Evidence-Based Medicine? 2nd ed. Available at: http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/painres/download/whatis/ebm.pdf . Accessed November 11, 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cochrane A. Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Eddy DM. Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. Practice policies—guidelines for methods. JAMA 1990; 263 (13) 1839-1841
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rosenberg W, Donald A. Evidence based medicine: an approach to clinical problem-solving. BMJ 1995; 310 (6987) 1122-1126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312 (7023) 71-72
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Julian DG. What is right and what is wrong about evidence-based medicine?. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003; 14 (9, Suppl): S2-S5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Darlenski RB, Neykov NV, Vlahov VD, Tsankov NK. Evidence-based medicine: facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol 2010; 28 (5) 553-557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N ; Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis?. BMJ 2014; 348: g3725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 The Cochrane Library. Available at: www.thecochranelibrary.com . Accessed November 11, 2014
    PubMed
  • 10 The Cochrane Review. Cochrane Bias Methods Group. Available at: //https://bmg.cochrane.org/addressing-reporting-biases . Accessed November 27, 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Edwards AM, Howell JBL, Stevens MT. Cochrane reviews: are they reliable?. BMJ 2001; 323: 829
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kliner M, Garner P. When trial authors write Cochrane Reviews: competing interests need to be better managed [editorial]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (9) ED000089
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Matthiessen PF, Bornhoft G , Eds. Homeopathy in Healthcare: Effectiveness, Appropriateness, Safety, Costs. Berlin Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 2011
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Centre for Outcomes Research and Education What is the difference between a “systematic review” and a “meta analysis”? Available at: http://www.researchcore.org/faq/answers.php?recID=5 . Accessed November 17, 2014
    PubMed
  • 15 Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L , et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 2005; 366 (9487) 726-732
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Cucherat M, Haugh MC, Gooch M, Boissel J-P ; Homeopathic Medicines Research Advisory Group. Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy. A meta-analysis of clinical trials. HMRAG. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000; 56 (1) 27-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ernst E, Pittler MH. Re-analysis of previous meta-analysis of clinical trials of homeopathy. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53 (11) 1188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hahn RG. Homeopathy: meta-analyses of pooled clinical data. Forsch Komplement Med 2013; 20 (5) 376-381
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Stamatakis E, Weiler R, Ioannidis JPA. Undue industry influences that distort healthcare research, strategy, expenditure and practice: a review. Eur J Clin Invest 2013; 43 (5) 469-475
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Press release, Cambridge, MA, September 30, 2013. JLME Issue on Institutional Corruption and the Pharmaceutical Industry. A special issue of the Journal of Law Medicine and Ethics. Available at: http://www.ethics.harvard.edu/lab/featured/325-jlme-symposium?layout=default#stay-informed . Accessed January 08, 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Walach H, Falkenberg T, Fønnebø V, Lewith G, Jonas WB. Circular instead of hierarchical: methodological principles for the evaluation of complex interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6: 29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 World Medical Association (WMA). Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, 2014. Available at: http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/ . Accessed November 27, 2014
    PubMed
  • 23 Hewitson L, Lopresti BJ, Stott C, Mason NS, Tomko J. Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: a pilot study. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Warsz) 2010; 70 (2) 147-164
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Plotkin SA. Correlates of protection induced by vaccination. Clin Vaccine Immunol 2010; 17 (7) 1055-1065
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 BMJ clinical evidence. What conclusions has Clinical Evidence drawn about what works, what doesn't based on randomised controlled trial evidence?. Clin Evid 2012; Available at: http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/x/set/static/cms/efficacy-categorisations.html . Accessed January 27, 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation. Australian Immunisation Handbook. 10th ed. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Puri A, Gupta VK, Chakravarti A, Mehra M. Measles vaccine efficacy evaluated by case reference technique. Indian Pediatr 2002; 39 (6) 556-560
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gupta SN, Vidya R, Gupta N, Gupte MD. Factors precipitating outbreaks of measles in district Kangra of North India: a case-control study. Int J Appl Basic Med Res 2011; 1 (1) 24-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Quinn HE. Pertussis control in Australia—the current state of play [Editorial]. Commun Dis Intell Q Rep 2014; 38 (3) E177-E178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Sheridan SL, Ware RS, Grimwood K, Lambert SB. Number and order of whole cell pertussis vaccines in infancy and disease protection. JAMA 2012; 308 (5) 454-456 [Erratum, JAMA 2012;308:1432.]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Courthouse News Service. June 27, 2012. Available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/06/27/47851.htm . Accessed November 20, 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Golden I, Bracho G. A re-evaluation of the effectiveness of homoeoprophylaxis against leptospirosis in Cuba in 2007 and 2008. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med 2014; 19 (3) 155-160
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Golden I. Homoeoprophylaxis from 1798 to 2012: evidence and the law of similars. Homeopathic Links 2012; 25: 287-291
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Teixeira MZ. Homeopathy: a preventive approach to medicine?. Int J High Dilution Res [online] 2009; 8 (29) 155-172 . Available at: http://www.feg.unesp.br/~ojs/index.php/ijhdr/article/view/360/407 . Accessed January 08, 2015
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Golden I. The philosophical and evidentiary basis of homoeopathic immunisation: a response to Teixeira. J Int High Dilution Research 2014; 13 (46) 45-53
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Golden I. The Complete Practitioners Manual of Homoeoprophylaxis. Gisborne, Victoria, Australia: Isaac Golden Publications; 2012. chap 5
    Google Scholar