Dr. Heike Jung
Why Combination Remedies Are NOT Beneficial
A lot of people buy homeopathic combination remedies because that’s what most pet stores sell these days. Combination remedies are several homeopathic remedies mixed together in one bottle. These combination remedies proclaim to treat diseases like allergies, anxiety, arthritis, diarrhea, urinary tract infections, and even cancer.
I’m glad homeopathy is gaining popularity, but I’m horrified at the availability of combination remedies, and here is why.
Professor George Vithoulkas (Alternative Noble Prize Winner) explains why combination remedies are NOT beneficial, and I will directly quote from his book, The Science of Homeopathy:
“One of the most fundamental principles of homeopathy is that of prescribing only one remedy at a time. This is such an obvious principle that it applies to every healing practice.
If more than one remedy or therapeutic technique is prescribed, any beneficial or adverse effects cannot possibly be evaluated with accuracy. There can be no way to decide which of the components of a combination has acted. In addition, no one can possibly predict the interactions which might occur between a combination of therapeutic influences. If a particular medicine acts in a particular manner when given singly, who can say what it might do after being altered in an unpredictable way by a combination?
Suppose a patient is given a combination of six different homeopathic remedies, and a definite deterioration ensues.
What is going on?
Is some kind of complex aggravation occurring?
Has one remedy produced a healing crisis while another is antidoting any previous progress which might have been made?
Is one remedy acting within a few days, while another is acting after a week?
Is the patient unusually sensitive to one particular substance? And if so, which substance is it?
If the aggravation is judged to be truly serious, how does one go about finding the next remedy that will save the patient?
Conversely, suppose a patient is given a combination of six remedies, and definite improvement occurs over a period of three months.
Which medicine produced the improvement?
If the improvement proves to be only temporary, how might a related follow-up remedy be chosen?
Suppose that an active remedy was given in a potency too low for permanent cure, how would one then decide which remedy to give in a higher potency?
There are even further questions. If remedies are proven in the context of separate, carefully conducted provings, what would happen if they are combined? No provings have ever been conducted on combination remedies so how can anyone predict what set of symptoms such combinations could cure?
The practice of giving combinations of remedies obviously violates all of the fundamental laws of homeopathy and common sense as well. Nevertheless, it is common practice in some parts of the world. Some homeopaths take a case, cannot see a medicine covering the totality of symptoms, and so they create a combination of medicines, each of which (according to their estimation) covers a fragment of the case. To make matters worse, it is common practice in such circles to mix potency levels as well, and even to give certain remedies at one time of day and others at other times of day.
The process of homeopathy is to find the remedy with the vibrational frequency most closely matching the resonant frequency of the defense mechanism of the patient. Combination prescribing, in this context, would be analogous to trying to create harmony by tuning six different radios to separate stations simultaneously in the hopes of creating a Symphony.
Such practice can only create complete chaos, and indeed some of the most pitiable cases in homeopathic practice are those who have undergone years of such chaotic treatment. The defense mechanism of such patients is so disturbed that it is often completely impossible to restore their health to even the level prior to such prescribing, let alone bring about cure.
More information about homeopathy can be found in “The Science of Homeopathy” by G. Vithoulkas