Parents Concerned about Vaccines Do Have Another Choice
Homoprophylaxis is the administration of specific natural medicines to induce in the patient protection against a particular disease. Using the principles of natural law it is possible to provide protection against the flu or any disease, including polio, tetanus, measles, etc. using homoprophylaxis. This is a completely minute amount of the actual disease material (called a nosode), except it is used in a non-toxic dose.
Potenization (dynamization) is the process of serial dilution and shaking with impact (succussion) that removes the negative effects of medicines while retaining their therapeutic benefit, which Dr. Hahnemann was trying to achieve in his work. Hahnemann, the father of homeopathy, in the Cure and Prevention of Scarlet Fever (1801), another extension of his Organon, introduced the use of homeopathic remedies for prophylaxis. He discovered that a specific remedy will act to prevent an infectious disease in the still healthy individuals, and that the same specific remedy will also treat those already infected with the disease. If someone has been vaccine-damaged it is possible to reverse it using homoprophylaxis sequentially, among other methods.
Homeoprophylaxis - A Fifteen-Year Clinical Study has been completed by Dr. Isaac Golden PhD, D.Hom. N.Dundefinedgt, B.Ec(Hon). Golden believes that homeoprophylaxis (HP) has a great deal to offer to parents. It can improve their children’s quality of life through fewer episodes of distressing disease, through using a method of disease prevention which has no toxic reactions.
The purpose of his report is to provide the homeopathic community with factual information about the efficacy and safety of his long-term HP program. Many different HP programs have been used by homeopaths over the last 200 years, but his results may be used as an objective benchmark against which to evaluate other programs.
Golden’s study is intended to show governments and public health authorities the potential value of an appropriate HP program as an option to conventional vaccinations. It also points out that the dual system of homeoprophylaxis and vaccination has the potential to both expand national coverage against targeted infectious diseases and reduce the incidence of childhood illnesses such as asthma and eczema and autism.
His report does not take issue with the opponents of HP within either the homeopathic or the pharmaceutical communities, nor with the risks and benefits of vaccination except as they directly compare to HP, nor does it discuss philosophical issues concerning HP, including the question of whether some diseases should be prevented at all.
I have patients and parents who vaccinate their children, some who use homoprophylaxis or vaccination, some who use the “wait for symptoms” approach, some who rely on constitutional prevention and some who do nothing at all. I would like to see parents protect their children against serious diseases without the fear involved with huge and toxic crude doses in conventional allopathic vaccines. My biggest concern is that parents will avoid vaccinating their children due to fear of potential damaging effects and that we may see a rise in some serious childhood diseases as a result. I would rather prevent pertussis (whooping cough) than wait to see the symptoms before I treat it.
But they all have my support. Once parents have been told of the options available then it becomes their decision as to how they want to treat and prevent infectious diseases in their own children.
|Note: Homoprophylaxis is the use of the similar substance to prevent disease, as in using the Measles nosode to prevent measles. Homeoprophylaxis is the use of a close similar substance to try to prevent the disease, like in the use of Pulsatilla to prevent measles. Golden’s study continues to be done using both homo- and homeo-prophylaxis, though he is not aware of that.
— Patricia Regalia DMH, DHHP, 2011.