Positive Health Online

Abstract

TAYLOR and colleagues, University Department of Medicine, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, conducted a randomized controlled trial of homeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis .

Background

The authors set out to test the hypothesis that homeopathy is a placebo by examining its effect in patients with allergic rhinitis and so contest the evidence from three previous trials in this series.

Methodology

Randomized, double blind, placebo- controlled, parallel group, multicentre study. Fifty-one patients with perennial allergic rhinitis from four general practices and a hospital ear, nose, and throat outpatient department participated. Patients were randomly assigned to an oral 30c homoeopathic preparation of principal inhalant allergen or to placebo . Changes from baseline in nasal inspiratory peak flow and symptom visual analogue scale score over third and fourth weeks after randomization.

Results

Fifty patients completed the study. The homeopathy group had a significant objective improvement in nasal airflow compared with the placebo group (mean difference 19.8 l/min). Both groups reported improvement in symptoms, with patients taking homeopathy reporting more improvement in all but one of the centres, which had more patients with aggravations. On average no significant difference between the groups was seen on visual analogue scale scores. Initial aggravations of rhinitis symptoms were more common with homeopathy than placebo (7 (30%) v 2 (7%)). Addition of these results to those of three previous trials (n=253) showed a mean symptom reduction on visual analogue scores of 28% (10.9 mm) for homeopathy compared with 3% (1.1 mm) for placebo.

Conclusion

The objective results reinforce earlier evidence that homeopathic dilutions differ from placebo.

References

Taylor MA et al. Randomised controlled trial of homoeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial series. British Medical Journal 321 (7259): 471-6. Aug 2000.