New Research into the Long-Term Effects
of Disease Prevention

2009 SEASON INFLUENZA RECOMMENDATIONS - click here to read

Parents are advised that the ground-breaking research into the use of natural, non toxic methods of immunisation begun in 1986, and extended in 2001, has been completed in 2004. The results of the research have been published and are now available. Please click here to visit the publication site.

The research has been undertaken by Dr Isaac Golden, one of Australia's most experienced homoeopathic practitioners and teachers. Isaac has been in practice since 1984. In 1990 he founded the Australasian College of Hahnemannian Homoeopathy which offers accredited correspondence courses in homoeopathy. He was President of the Victorian branch of the Australian Homoeopathic Association from 1992-1998, and in 1999 was awarded the Association's Distinguished Service Award. Isaac completed his Doctoral research at the Graduate School of Integrative Medicine at Swinburne University in Melbourne.

The research which has been completed comprised two parts:

1. A National Health Survey - this research studied 781 children between 5 and 10 years of age. Through a questionnaire completed by parents, measures of each child's general immune competence (using the diseases of asthma, chronic eczema, chronic ear infections, allergies and behavioural problems) were compared to the method of disease prevention which the child used, including vaccination, homoeopathy, general constitutional treatment, no method at all, or a combination of all of these. The relative safety and effectiveness of the different immunisation methods studied was then calculated.

2. A Twenty Year Clinical Study -using responses from parents whose children used Isaac's 5 year homoeoprophylactic program for disease prevention from 1985 to 2004. 2,342 responses have been collected, each one covering one year of a child's life. The effectiveness and safety of the homoeopathic option to vaccination is fully discussed, and the actual comments by parents are reported.

The purpose of this research has been threefold:

1. To provide parents with objective data on which to base what is often the most difficult health decision a parent must make - how to safely and effectively immunize their child.

2. To provide data on which health professionals can base their advice to parents.

3. To provide both State and Federal governments with data that shows that vaccination is not the only valid option to prevent targeted infectious diseases. In fact the doctoral thesis submitted by Isaac concluded that the best possible system would involve a dual system of immunisation, where parents were freely able to choose either vaccination or homoeoprophylaxis. Figures clearly showed that this would increase the national coverage against targeted diseases (increase herd immunity), and lower the national incidence of certain chronic illnesses, such as asthma and eczema, as well as reduce behavioural problems associated with vaccination.

For interested readers, the following article gives a summary of Isaac's research - enough to show readers whether they would like to pursue their study of the option further Click here to see the article (PDF, 32k).

Should we protect our children against infectious diseases? Isaac's work shows that protection against mild diseases is probably unnecessary, that protection against severe diseases is probably wise, but either way it should be the parent's decision what is best for their own child. Against serious diseases, such as meningococcal disease, the problem for many parents has been that whilst vaccination increases the level of protection, it also increases the risk of long-term chronic disease. Isaac shows how homoeopathic immunisation solves this dilemma by providing a comparable level of protection without any long-term health risks. Click here to see the choices you have. (PDF, 20k)

Interview with Dr Golden about his work with homoeopathic immunisation.Click this link to view: http://www.hpathy.com/interviews/isaacgolden.asp

International Research Demonstrating the Validity of Homoeoprophylaxis
Homoeoprophylaxis was first used by Dr Samuel Hahnemann in 1798 to prevent Scarlet Fever. It has been used in many countries since then to successfully immunise millions of people. This use has been well documented. However some question whether there is objective evidence that the method works (everyone agrees that it is non toxic). In recent years two pieces of evidence have emerged that will satisfy any objective person, although not of course people who have drawn conclusions based on conjecture, and refuse to study the material available.
1. 1998 Meningococcal Meningitis – Brazil - 65,826 children
2. 2007 (2008) Leptospirosis – Cuba – 2,308,562 ; (2,212,000) people

The Brazilian Experience
In 1998 there was an outbreak of meningococcal meningitis in a region of Brazil. Many doctors in that country are also homeopaths. There was no vaccine available at the time, so a group of doctors who worked in the region used the meningococcal Nosode to immunize 65,826 children. Another 23,539 children in the region were not immunized. The doctors followed the two groups for 12 months. After 6 months the efficacy of homeoprophylaxis was 95%, and after 12 months was 91%. A complete and statistically rigorous report was published in a leading peer reviewed Homeopathic journal, and is available for study (see reference following).
Mroninski C, Adriano E, Mattos G (2001) Meningococcinum: Its protective effect against meningococcal disease. Homoeopathic Links Winter Vol 14(4); pp. 230-4.

The Cuban Experience
In October and November 2007, three provinces of the eastern region of Cuba were affected by strong rainfalls causing widespread floods severe damage to sanitary and health systems. The risk of leptospirosis infection was raised extremely dangerous levels with about 2 million of people exposed to potentially contaminated water. The Finlay Institute (which manufactures vaccines for South America and Africa) prepared a leptospira nosode 200 CH using 4 circulating strains and following international quality standards. A multidisciplinary team travelled to the affected regions to conduct the massive administration of the nosode. Coordinated action with public health system infrastructures allowed the administration of a preventive treatment. Prevention consisted of two doses (7- 9 days apart) of the nosode to over 2.3 million of people (4.7 million doses). The coverage of the intervention rose up to 95% percent of total population of the three provinces at risk.

The epidemiology surveillance after the intervention showed a dramatic decrease of morbidity two weeks after and a reduction to zero mortality of hospitalized patient. The number of confirmed leptospirosis cases remains at low levels, and below the expected levels according with the trends and rain regimens. A reinforcing application of nearly 4,500,000 doses was given in 2008 after the hit of the hurricane IKE but using the nosode potentised to 10 MC. Strict epidemiologic surveillance was carried out on the targeted provinces. Up to date results are being prepared for publication in late 2009 (watch this space for more details)

This immunization program was undertaken by a Government Institute at a cost of around $400,000US. It indicates that the entire population of Australia could be homoeopathically immunised for around $10,000,000. This cost applies for any homeopathic immunization. In 2009, the Australian Government is preparing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to vaccinate most of the population against Swine Flu, when in fact most of this expenditure could be saved using homeopathic immunization against Swine Flu. But further more, the homeopathic option is non-toxic, and thus removes the risk of using a little tested vaccine. We know in America when mass swine flu vaccination was last used that people died from the vaccine and hundreds were permanently damaged, costing the American Government billions in compensation.

The most disappointing aspect of this issue is very simply that rigorous objective evidence exists supporting the efficacy of homoeoprophylaxis. This evidence has been prepared by medical practitioners and orthodox scientists. State and Federal health minsters in this country are kept from knowing this by their pharmaceutically-biased minders. Free debate is further stifled by orchestrated attacks from pharmaceutical support groups, on any media outlet that provides objective information about options. We do not live in a society where freedom of speech is encouraged, or where the only aim of health officials is to do what is best for the citizens of our country. The orthodox pharmaceutical line is dominant, to the detriment of our population.
It is a sad day when it takes the Government of a socialist country such as Cuba to break free from the financial tentacles of multinational pharmaceutical interest and be prepared to act in the best interests of their people. Democracies such as Australia should be leading the way in this regard. But our democracy is less robust than it should be, because the basis of any true democracy is freedom of speech, and that is something we can no longer take for granted in Australia.

I wish you the very best in your attempts to inform yourself, and to find the truth. You will get little help from orthodox authorities. One day I hope and pray that this will change, but in the meantime your best defence is your own intelligence, and preparedness to make your own decisions based on objective and unbiased information.

Isaac Golden may be contacted at either;
Postal: P.O. Box 695 , Gisborne, 3437.
Phone/Fax: (03) 5427 0880.
E-mail: admin@homstudy.net