Drug Action of Nosodes Given in the Homeoprophylaxis Program – Kate Birch

Keywords: Dissimilar disease, Similar disease, Proving, Infectious disease process, Long-term health outcomes, Acute disease, Chronic disease, Miasm, Drug action.

Some people think that when you give a vaccine there should not be any observable immunological response. The CDC only references those responses that occur in the first 24-48 hours of injection but dismisses these as mild unwanted side effects. The common responses they report are fever, redness and swelling at sight of injection, sleepiness, and lack of appetite. Other ‘rare’ side effects they list include syncope, anaphylaxis, fever of 105°F, seizures and possible death, etc. They claim these responses are rare. They have no long-term health responses listed in any vaccine chart (for better or worse), nor publication of any long-term health analysis of vaccinated children correlating the health history of the child, number or type of vaccines given, or the age of the child. The only parameter that is ever monitored is whether a child produces antibodies and how many doses it takes to get antibodies. If antibodies are produced then we are satisfied that the vaccine has done its job and the child is now immune. There is no research investigating the cost to the overall health of the child as a result the artificially forced production of antibodies.

Parents are happy when they report that their child had no reaction to vaccines, as if somehow no immunological response in the face of multiple injected infectious agents was a good thing. Parents are instructed to give Tylenol to mitigate any reaction there might be so as to prevent the suffering of a fever or pain in the arm.

This paradigm has forgotten that in order for the immune system to develop a complete immunological response a fever must be initiated.

The normal prodrome for these vaccinated against diseases, if contracted naturally, is anywhere from 7 to 14 days. One would expect that if given a vaccine the immune system would need the same amount of time to respond and mount the appropriate response. If careful analysis of a child’s health after a vaccine was undertaken we would find that often 10 to 14 days after the vaccines the child will in fact develop a fever and discharge. This discharge is the best attempt for the infant’s immune system to rid itself of the vaccine material that has been injected into their bodies. This discharge can be eliminated though the stool, sweat, nose, or lung, or via the ear canal. Unfortunately, when the discharge goes through the ear this immunological elimination process is more often misdiagnosed as an ear infection. Seldom is this ear infection recognized as an immunological response to the vaccines that were given weeks before. More Tylenol and a ten day course of antibiotics are prescribed. Shortly after the antibiotics are completed the fever may come back in attempts to complete this immunological process. Or, in the case of infants, where the vaccine schedule is every two months, the next set of vaccines will be administered so now the immune system which still has not resolved the first vaccines has another set to contend with. If this process repeats itself over the first year of vaccines by the time the child gets the MMR vaccine their immune system is so sick and tired and overwhelmed it shuts down. Due to the nature of measles, if the immune system cannot eliminate the disease, it regresses to the brain causing inflammation and neurological symptoms: Autism.

Somewhere through all of this, the child is supposed to gain immunity and the production of antibodies. As the fevers are commonly suppressed, and the amount of antigen in the vaccines is reduced to a bare minimum, aluminum adjuvants are added to the vaccine so the body is forced to produce a short-lived allergic type antibody response. Because this response is short lived (1-10 years) the vaccine needs boosters to attain and maintain its ‘full effect.’ Now, not only do we have inflammation of the brain from the measles but the amount of compounded doses of aluminum per vaccine adds to the stupefaction. Concern over the long-term efficacy of vaccines has led to increasing the number of boosters without considering the long-term effects this schedule warrants. No one has looked at the implications of trying to force antibody responses in infant’s immune systems which are not able to make antibodies, yet normally rely on the general immune system response of a fever for protection. Concerns over efficacy of vaccines have not led anyone to question how many diseases a healthy immune system can reconcile at one time and that if the inefficacy of vaccines is not actually a problem of the vaccine, but rather, it is a problem of miscalculation of how the immune system actually works.

One would think that a public health care disease prevention program we would want to recognize both the short and long-term health outcomes of all procedures, and to evaluate the health of the child being given all these vaccines throughout their development. My clinical experience from the last 20 years has shown me an exponential increase in allergies, asthma, skin conditions, behavioral and developmental issues in children in direct correlation to the current method of vaccination.

If we are to inject multiple disease agents into the blood stream of developing infant’s immune systems to elicit an immune system response, then we must be able to recognize the responses we are getting and determine if they are the desired responses.
In the practice of homeoprophylaxis (HP) it is normal and expected that a mild immunological response will occur within 24-48 hours of each dose given. This response should include a fever and discharge and present with symptoms like an acute manifestation of the disease in question. This immunological rehearsal process stimulated by HP is what educates the immune system and should not be suppressed by medication.

As there is no actual physical pathogen in the nosode there is nothing that needs to be physically disarmed by antibodies. As there is only energy in an HP Nosode, the symptoms produced are the body’s response to the disease; the body behaves ‘as if’ it has the disease for a short time but as there is no actual disease agent present these symptoms dissipate on their own. This immune system response is short lived and should not return or settle into any chronic condition unless there is an inherited weakness in the ability to produce a healthy immunological response. Through the proper education of the immune system towards acute disease processes with HP nosodes, infectious disease incidence goes down and the long-term health of the child remains intact or even better than previously as susceptibility to disease tendencies becomes lessened.

In 2008 I had the opportunity to meet Dr. Isaac Golden in Cuba at an international conference on homeoprophylaxis. There he presented some of his findings from his long-term study on homeoprophylaxis in Australia[1]. One of the charts he reviewed demonstrated that those child who had undergone HP were not only had lower incidences of allergies, asthma, skin conditions, ear nose and throat, and behavioral conditions than children who had been vaccinated, but that they were also healthier than those children who had been treated with constitutional homeopathy. I questioned deeply why and how the serial exposure to infectious disease agents, such as nosodes, could actually increase ones level of health.

Rooted in homeopathic philosophy is the concept of acute disease and chronic disease. According to Hahnemann acute disease is the valve for chronic disease. The sacrifice of discharge, through eruption, or otherwise, is what liberates the human organism from the propensity to chronic disease. Acute disease unresolved leads to a miasmatic condition which will progress deeper and deeper and slowly take over the body. Childhood diseases are intended by nature to help children liberate their constitutions from the inherited encumbrances of their parent’s ill-health. The eruptive process of chickenpox and measles liberates sycosis and syphilis. Accordingly, each acute process in the body helps to liberate the tendency towards chronic disease if the dose is sufficient, but not too strong as to overwhelm the system. The process of HP in a multiple disease program, as offered by Golden’s protocol and Free and Healthy Children International, offers multiple opportunities to rehearse acute infectious immunological processes so as to liberate chronic disease due to the mild nature of the homeopathic preparation of nosodes.

For the most part, the practice of homeoprophylaxis operates under the principles of dissimilar disease, much like the action of a proving[2]. These dissimilar disease reactions are as follows:
1. No reaction: The disease passes on through and there is no susceptibility to contracting the disease or nosodes state.
2. Suspension: There is susceptibility to the disease/nosode. The original disease state of the person will be suspended, while the acute disease response acts out, only to return later unchanged.
3. Comingled: The health of the person is insufficient to mount a response to throw off the disease/nosode. The new disease expression settles and remains unresolved in the body, in its organ of affinity, and comingles with the existing state of ill-health.

The response noted in #2 is the preferred response to homeoprophylaxis: You give an attenuated dose of an infectious agent; the immune system process initiated wakes up the elimination process of that infective agent. If there is susceptibility to the disease the remedy will wake up a set of symptoms much like a proving would. The difference being between a proving of a mineral or plant or other remedy source and that of an infectious agent is that in the body infectious disease acts as a catalyst for an elimination pathway through complete immune system response. Once this pathway has been opened, in order to complete the cycle, if the response stalls it is recommended that the dose be repeated until the cycle is complete. The normal cycle of infectious disease is chill, fever, discharge and sweat and then those symptoms particular to that elimination pathway that specific organism requires for it to be eliminated from the body. Ie: Whooping cough needs a cough with glary mucous, measles needs and eruption, cholera needs diarrhea. The miasmatic terrain upon which the infectious disease agent is given governs the ability to complete this cycle: Psora= Lack of reaction; Tubercular = Inflammation; Sycosis = Excess discharge; Syphilis = degeneration; Cancer = undifferentiated response. We can know that the susceptibility to the disease is fulfilled when upon repetition the nosode no longer produces an immunological response. If the eliminatory reaction of the body is not able to complete its response then this infectious disease agent can create its own miasmatic layer in the individual.

In some instances, an HP dose of an infectious agent may act homeopathically (curatively via similitude) to a latent miasmatic condition. In those instances the drug action is more like a homeopathic remedy and in so doing, through an aggravation period this action will liberate that deeper miasmatic condition.

What follows are a series of actual HP remedy reactions and interpretations. This analysis helps us to understand what the real short- and long-term effects of HP Nosodes on health are. (Except where noted all children are under my supervision).

1. Cloe: 1 year old, never vaccinated, about to take first HP nosode of Pertussin. Mother calls, as she is nervous to ask if she should give Tylenol before giving the nosode. I say ‘no we need the immune system to respond and not to suppress it.’ She calls the day after giving the nosode and says ‘nothing happened.’ I respond saying ‘this is normal not all children respond to all diseases.’ A few days later she emails to say that now the child is happier than she has ever been.

Interpretation: Drug action was similar; Dose was just right, no aggravation, only curative response: Improved level of being after exposure.

2. Rowan, age 7 (never had vaccinations), after the Pertussis 200C triple dose: Her mom said she complained of a bad stomach ache, was very irritable and cross with her mom (unusual), slept very fitfully the night after. All passed by the second day after. (HP Supervisor: Jan Dederick, CA)

Interpretation: Either, remedy action is dissimilar disease response #2; immune system response passed, no change of preexisting state, or, as stomach conditions and anger are not necessarily an aspect of the presentation of Whooping cough this might have been circumstantial and there was no actual action of the HP nosode.

3. Henry, 2.5 your old, no history of vaccines. Mother had given the first dose of Pertussin and he started coughing very shortly after. Mother did not call for two months during which time he had been coughing the whole time. She called on a Friday night on the way to the hospital as now the cough had gotten so severe he was gagging the throwing up with each coughing fit. Listening to his cough in the back ground in the car, indicated Corallium rubrum (machine-gun cough with mucous in the throat and red face with cough). She stopped by the remedy store and picked up some. She administered one dose before getting to the hospital. They checked and said he did not have whooping cough. Antibiotics were prescribed and they went home. Three more doses of Corallium rubrum were given that night (not the antibiotics). She called in the morning and the cough had completely resolved.

Interpretation: The nosode elicited proving symptoms that looked like whooping cough but nasal swab showed he did not have it: Dissimilar drug action #2. She should have called two months prior and we would have given another dose of the Pertussin to help complete the immune system reaction or treated with indicated remedy at the time if need be. However, if the Corallium rubrum, which was similar to the symptoms produced and cured was not given this would have become a chronic comingled disease state as of dissimilar disease response #3.

4. Lucy, age 10, history of some vaccines, and history of active whooping cough and pneumonia three times, years before. The mother had given multiple doses of Pertussin 30 when the whooping cough was active. Over time she developed a facial tic. Constitutional treatment was able to mitigate this condition, however it kept relapsing. The pertussis needed to be cleared with the full potency range of 30, 200, 1M and 10M Pertussin nosode, intercurrent with Tuberculinum and Carcinosin. When she started the HP program the doses of Pertussin 200C passed through with no immune response. The next remedy in the program, Pneumococcinum 200 single dose, was administered with no response but the triple dose given one month later led to high fever, cough, and the development of asthmatic like symptoms: Anxiousness, wheezing at night, < 1 am. Repeated doses of Pneumococcinum did not help the asthma. The asthma was treated with Arsenicum curatively. The following month repeated doses of Pneumococcinum no longer produced symptoms. A subsequent acute illness induced the asthma again where upon it responded promptly to Arsenicum again.

Interpretation: Cancerous and tubercular family history created a strong susceptibility in her for contracting both pneumonia and whooping cough, both of which she had not completely resolved and so they have comingled with her existing chronic state: Dissimilar disease response #3. Pertussin nosode helped through the active disease but relapse was there until the full scale of potency was given and the deeper miasmatic aspects were treated with Carcinosin and Tuberculinum. The Pneumococcinum woke up the latent condition of pneumonia from before and called forth of the need for Arsenicum on a constitutional level. The Pneumococcinum acted according to dissimilar disease #2, but it exposed her constitutional weakness. The Arsenicum acted according to the Law of Similars and actually may have addressed the pneumonia if it was given at the time when she first had it. Subsequent repeated doses of the Pneumococcinum, according to the dosing schedule on the HP program, produced no reaction, according to dissimilar disease action #1. This demonstrated that the susceptibility to pneumonia had been fulfilled.

5. Ole, 2 year old, never vaccinated. Had been sick for the first two years of his life with repeated ear infections. Symptoms were slow to develop and longer to recover. No fever came but both ears would fill with fluid and pus. The mother was eager to have him start HP but I suggested that we needed to treat constitutionally to improve his level of health so he could develop healthy immune response to the nosodes. Primarily, I saw the need for him to be able to develop a fever. Six months of treatment did help him develop a fever on multiple occasions, but now he had fevers with ear infections which still did not resolve on their own or with the help of the homeopathic remedies given. Finally tubes were installed so he and the parents could get some sleep. After this he cycled through a few more fevers and the ears were able to drain. Each time however, his body was producing excess mucous and it took a long time for him to recover. Homeopathy had not changed the propensity towards the ear drainage or his ability to rebound after an acute process. Finally we decided to start the program with Pneumococcinum 200C. After the first dose he slept for 4 hours and had the best night sleep ever. Any low level chronic discharge he had cleared in a few days. He was happy. It was the first time in months he was well. Repeated triple doses in two weeks had created some fever and nasal discharge, followed by quick resolution without ear drainage. Since then he has not had another ear infection and has been well (one year).

Interpretation: Pneumococcinum was homeopathic for his constitution and should have been given as a constitutional remedy earlier on. Accordingly we have fulfilled his susceptibility to pneumonia with this HP dosing method, not only preventing further infections but also improving his overall level of health.

6. Pearson, 3 year old, with previous vaccine history that produced severe ectopic disease in relation to the Hep B, DTaP, PCV, and Hib vaccines he received at 2 and 4 months of age. Family history of the father revealed chronic inflammatory and auto-immune disease. Child presents to my practice at one year of age with red hot swollen skin, severe eczema, high pitched shrieking, and undigested stools. Several remedies over the next year were given to sort out this immune system response induced by the vaccines: Apis, Sulphur, Graphites, Fragaria, Calcarea-carb, Hep A vaccine clearing, Carbo vegetabilis, Carcinosin etc. Constitutional treatment for one year for the most part cleared the skin issues so we set about starting with the HP program (a few rough patches here and there based on what foods he eats, he was still on a restricted diet). Parents wanted to start with measles nosode as there had been cases near where they lived. In the week after Morbillinum 200C was given his body started to swell, he had a high fever for several days and the skin become incredibly itchy. Apis was given as these symptoms looked like when he first came to me and as a week had passed since the Morbillinum was given I was wondering if this was really from the nosode, or if the nosode had just stirred in him a previous immune response even though he had not had the MMR vaccine. It seemed like a delayed response. Three days later a rash started to appear on top of the already swollen face and itchiness. Subsequent dosing with Morbillinum served to bring the rash out more with increased itching and swelling. Pulsatilla 200 was called upon and repeated daily. It helped with the mood and itching. The rash persisted for 9 days. The rash started to fade but he began to stutter. Stramonium 200 was given and the stuttering went away and the rash came back for 3-4 more days where upon it faded again but the stuttering did not reappear. A few weeks later the stuttering did come back. Stramonium was repeated a few more times and improved the stuttering. No more rash came with these next doses. Overall long term he seems happier, healthier and a huge improvement of speech and articulation of ideas came after this process. His skin is perfect.

Interpretation: The family history of auto-immune and inflammatory conditions opened the susceptibility to severe vaccine response. The tendency towards heightened histamine and anaphylaxis was excited by vaccines. In its natural course of evolution measles is not prone to producing anaphylaxis; however, as his immune system had created that response in relation to vaccines, the memory part of the immune system, in the face of the next infectious agent, would have a tendency to stimulate the same kind of infectious response engendered before. The year of constitutional work and vaccine clearing had prepared his immune system somewhat to move through this HP stimulated disease process. Most children who have a reaction to the Morbillinum will have a fever for one night and may produce a mild rash in the next days. His immune system needed the support of subsequent doses of Morbillinum and Pulsatilla to move through this immune response for two weeks. It looks like he produced the complete symptom picture of measles from the energetic stimulus of the nosode. He remained strong in the process but it took a long time to move through all the stages of the disease. Normally, if it was actual disease, the whole process should be resolved in 7 days from prodrome to completion. His process was about 20 days in all. Repeated dosing with the Morbillinum pushed the disease through to the rash but Pulsatilla was needed as it matched his symptoms (homeopathic). If he had been naturally exposed to measles without any treatment his body would have settled into the dissimilar disease state of #3 because of his prior infectious disease experiences (vaccine reactions). This was the same response he was having with the nosode induced disease state. When the rash started to recede and he started to stutter I could see the disease was moving to the brain and developing neurological symptoms. We know that when measles is suppressed it can go to the brain. The Stramonium brought the rash to the surface again liberating the brain (homeopathic action). Repeated doses of the Stramonium finished the disease process. Through the whole process he came out the other side healthier and more mentally and emotionally developed (curative response from measles (Morbillinum), liberating the constitutional health). The parents plan to see if he developed measles antibody titers. We are not sure if he would, seeing as he did not have the actual disease, only the HP stimulated response to the disease stimulus. Perhaps this extensive immune response was sufficient to produce titers? The drug action of Morbillinum here was curative to the anaphylaxis reactive mechanism set up in his system from the vaccines and treated a deeper level in him that was inherited from the father. His skin has been well ever since. Perhaps we need to treat the father with Morbillinum to see what will happen with his chronic disease.

Conclusions: When working with the immune system we must know the nature of the human response to the infectious agents given. This is true for the vaccine paradigm and also for homeoprophylaxis. While the majority of individuals taking HP remedies do have mild short-lived responses or no responses at all, these selected examples show that sometimes there are other things happening and bring to bear that one does not administer an infectious disease education program in a vacuum. This means that there is always a health history and susceptibility to the individual who is receiving the nosode. Care must be given to know what to expect and then react appropriately when things need to be managed.

If this same amount of care was deliberated upon when administering vaccines by the care givers responsive to that population, then perhaps we would not see so many children with compromised immune systems.

All HP Supervisors working under the umbrella of Free and Healthy Children International have been trained accordingly so that they can work with the parents and their children in relation to the applications of the HP program so that we can achieve the desired effect of improving children’s health rather than leaving them stricken with the immune system irregularities and unresolved infectious disease processes that the vaccine paradigm does.

[1] Golden, Dr. Isaac. “Homeoprophylaxis – A Fifteen Year Clinical Study: A Statistical Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Long-Term Homeoprophylaxis.” Isaac Golden Publications. Gisborne. Vic. 2004.

[2] Hahnemann, Samuel. “Organon of the Medical Art.” Ed.Wenda Brewster O’Reilly. Palo Alto: Birdcage, 1996.