Listed in Issue 43


HOCHSTRASSER and MATTMANN, (No affiliation provided) investigated 2 fundamental questions, the first regarding the usefulness and adequacy of the questionnaires and case report forms available in mainstream clinical research when attempting to evaluate 2 dissimilar therapeutic systems such as mainstream medicine and homoeopathy. The second question concerned the comparability of the 2 populations of patients in terms of individual personality characteristics, as well as regarding the progress of the pregnancies and the course of the deliveries under the 2 systems of care and control.




A study of this kind is feasible in principle, but is very demanding and time consuming. In addition the study clearly showed that the instruments presently available in mainstream medicine do not cover essential aspects of homoeopathy and therefore, impede a comparison of the 2 therapeutic systems. In the homoeopathic group, the frequency of situations requiring a Caesarean was remarkably low; however, the number of cases was too small to draw qualifying conclusions.



Hochstrasser B and Mattmann P. Mainstream medicine versus complementary medicine (homeopathic) intervention: a critical methodology study of care in pregnancy. Forschende Komplementarmedizin 6(1): 20-2 Feb 1999. 

ICAN 2024 Skyscraper

Scientific and Medical Network 2

Cycle Around the World for Charity 2023

Climb Mount Kilimanjaro Charity 2023

top of the page