Veterinary Homoeopathy – a pragmatic
approach
Article for ARH Journal March 2009 by Tony Pinkus, homoeopathic pharmacist

A high level of demand
Did you know that as many people use homoeopathy to treat their animals as themselves? Thisamazing fact is borne of my experience at Ainsworths, where, over 25 years I have observed, how
we consistently receive an equal number of calls for both veterinary and human medicine.
Furthermore, this ratio holds true for both the initial experience of homoeopathy as well as the continued use of remedies and the attitude of clients new to homoeopathy is almost identicalirrespective of the nature of patient. First time callers ask the same questions and require the same
degree of reassurance and support whether the remedy is for a human or animal. The maindifference relating to the nature of pathology being discussed and the client’s attitude toward
funding its resolution. The latter arising from our indoctrinated belief that medicine should be free
(under the NHS), whereas animal treatment is exclusively in the private domain. Ironically, thisindoctrination is so strong that the same caller will make some huge financial sacrifice to save a pet
yet resent spending even a small amount on their own health. I appreciate that we are a nation of
pet-lovers but sometimes this is taken to extremes.
The main reasons for choosing homoeopathy given by novitiates to veterinary homoeopathy are as
follows: An perception that it is equally, or more effective than allopathy
 Absence of side effects and drug residues
 Economical; considerably cheaper than the conventional veterinary route
This reassuring demand for animal remedies provides excellent support for the promotion andwidespread acceptance of homoeopathy, it also counters the prejudice that it is merely all in ourmind, or a placebo response. Although we have a tendency to anthropomorphize animals, especiallyour pets, in reality they do not possess what humans refer to as free will. An animal is guided bynature, like a train is guided by its tracks, instinct and the pack ensures security and governs it’s lifein the absence of an ability to choose. By contrast, we humans possess a mind with the free will tomake choices and override our animal instinct, or not as the case may be. When out of control weare described as behaving ‘like animals’, which is disrespectful to nature as there is certainly nosurvival value in hooliganism.

Veterinary Homoeopathy – same as human?
Homoeopathy, as the reader will be aware, transcends the illusion inherent within allopathy of animaginary separation of disease into mental, physical and emotional compartments resulting in a pill
for every ill. For the discovery of a simillimum requires an integrated, holistic approach. The verysame process and remedies are applicable to veterinary homoeopathy. This may appear tocontradict the absence of ‘a mind’ mentioned above, until we consider the real difference between
animals and humans is the free will to choose the pattern of behaviour being exhibited. Although
you may not know what an animal is thinking, you can observe the effects of its ‘mind’ in more
physical ways. Sankaran’s method is beautifully appropriate for animals, as mind symptoms are
manifest in every aspect of the physical pathology which becomes a more reliable indicator thanimagining what the animal is thinking. Consider, for example, how you might use non-verbal clues todifferentiate between Bryonia, Ledum and Rhus tox for a stiff paw and you will realise how this is not
so difficult as it may at first appear.
The principles of homoeopathic veterinary treatment are essentially the same as those for humans.
However, since animals cannot describe their symptoms in words, the indications for the choice of a
remedy must be gleaned more by careful observation. Indeed, the inability to verbally protest is themain reason animal treatment is so enshrined by law – to protect the innocent from the ignorant.

Legal issues
Other articles in this journal may deal with the legal issues of homoeopaths treating animals, as such
I will not dwell on this here, save to mention that, under recent legislation, the only person who canlegally supply a veterinary homoeopathic medicine is a responsible qualified persons (RQP). The
term RQP is used to encompass the three qualified persons who can supply POM-VPS and NFAVPS medicines, i.e, a Veterinary Surgeon registered with the Royal College of Veterinary
Surgeons (RCVS), a Pharmacist registered with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPSGB/NI) anda Suitably Qualified Person registered with the Animal Medicines Training Regulatory Authority(AMTRA). Clearly, unless you fall under one of these three categories, you may find yourself insome difficulty if you treat or dispense remedies to animals. The main concern is in making adiagnosis and offering to provide treatment, whereas providing unsolicited advice alone on aprescription for an existing diagnosis from a vet is less honorous. It was always generally
accepted that only a vet, in whose care the animal is placed, or the animal’s owner may treat
the animal. Old ploys, like buying the animal from the owner for a penny before and selling itback after treatment, may not entirely protect you from culpability if things do not go well. It isfar better to protect yourself from an unsatisfactory outcome by clarifying your limits andresponsibilities before indulging in this field.

Early History of Veterinary Homoeopathy
In circa 1813, in Leipzig, Hahnemann lectured on the use of homeopathy in animals (at the LeipzigerÖkonomischen Gesellschaft, of which he was a member). The manuscript for this lecture is held in
the Universitätsbibliothek, Leipzig. He stated that the principles and application in animals werebroadly similar to those in humans. Veterinary homeopathy has developed ever since.
Boenninghausen and Lux were early proponents. In more recent times, in the UK, homeopathy foranimals was kept alive, somewhat paradoxically, by the vets of the PDSA. This animal charity
acknowledged its great benefits and was undoubtedly also swayed by the great economy of its use,when compared to expensive drugs. This state of affairs has more or less ceased, now, since so few
vets, relatively, are trained in and understand homoeopathy.
Johann Joseph Wilhelm Lux (1773 – 1849) had contact with Hahnemann, while in Leipzig. Both weremembers of the Leipziger Ökonomischen Gesellschaft, to which Hahnemann gave the first lecture on
the homeopathic treatment of animals. He was part of the historic continuity of veterinary
homeopathy, from 1813 but later branched into ‘isopathy’. Clemens Maria Franz Baron vonBoenninghausen (1785 – 1864) the German baron, lawyer and agriculturalist, also had contact with
Hahnemann and later went on to become one of the major contributors to the homoeopathic
literature. His enthusiasm for the subject arose from his own homoeopathic cure, in 1827, from a
serious chronic disease (purulent tuberculosis), from which his doctors gave him no hope ofrecovery. He used homoeopathy on animals and, in fact, homoeopathically treated the animals on
his own vast Westphalian estate. An early advocate of high potencies, he conducted a successful

prospective trial of 200C in domestic animals and livestock, reasoning that veterinary homeopathy
was a good way to demonstrate that it was not a placebo.
The veterinary practice of homoeopathy has therefore existed since Hahnemann, in recent years it
has emerged from the shadows and appears to be growing exponentially, expanding in as many
directions as there are animal species and unresolved problems. From our experience at Ainsworths
we are aware of tens of thousands of clients who use it for their pets and 5000 farms who have usedhomoeopathy for cattle, sheep, pigs, and chickens. In the UK there are some 150 vets practisinghomoeopathy and over one third of these have qualified to the Faculty Homeopathy’s MFHomVetlevel. Their interest is maintained by the British Association of Homoeopathic Veterinary Surgeons(BAHVS) which publishes a journal, provides quarterly updates in the Faculty’s Journal and holds a
biannual conference on alternate years with the Faculty. I have witnessed this conference growing
from a small meeting of 20 vets, to a large international gathering of over a 100 vets which this year
meets to discuss the topic of cancer with a list of well known speakers.

Recent use of homoeopathy with animals
Over the years I have encountered remedies being used for a bemusing number of species including;
alpacas, bats, bees, caribou, cats, chickens, cattle, deer, dogs, fish, goats, horses, llamas, mice, pigs,
rats, sheep, and snakes. With demand from such a broad species range come new challenges for thehomoeopath, perhaps the most important of which is whether to treat the animal at all? Either fromthe medico-legal perspective above or by determining whether the condition is actually a natural
species trait and not a disease. For example canine phantom pregnancy is perfectly normal packbehaviour in the wild but may be misinterpreted as a pathological disturbance in the suburbs,
likewise persistent calling in cats is highly irritating to humans but necessary for feline procreation.
Overlooking species traits and behaviours may easily lead one to mistreat the animal or suppress
hormonal cycles through lack of knowledge. It is therefore imperative to have a vet, with goodexperience of the species involved, to diagnose the condition before venturing further.
One of the more interesting questions is how to physically administer the dose to the animal patient
and this becomes a real challenge when there is more than one! How, for example, do you treat
thousands of salmon in a fish farm at sea? Or 600 sheep on a Welsh mountainside? A million
chickens in a factory farm? 7000 cattle in an Iranian desert? A herd of caribou on the Arctic circle?
These mind-bending requests require knowledge of the species traits as well as good negotiation
skills and common sense!
Some of the more common requests are:












Alternatives to vaccination in cats and dogs
Tartar in cats and dogs
Promoting calling in cats
Kidney problems in cats
Sarcoids and laminitis in horses
Ringworm in cattle
Foot problems in cattle
Mastitis in cows
Scours and coughs in calves
Orf in sheep
Feather pecking in chickens
Scours in pigs

There is a broad spread of demand for homoeopathy, ranging from every household pet to a wide
range of commercial farming applications. With only 150 vets spread around the UK, and only three
who practice part time in London, to deal with this large demand it is hardly surprising we receive somany calls on the subject.

Homoeopathy with Cattle – Prevention and treatment
The most practical use of homoeopathy is actually in the prevention of predictable disease. This iswhere homoeopathy comes into its own and leaves conventional approaches far behind.
Notwithstanding the obvious benefit in treatment, Homoeoprophylaxis, especially with nosodes, isemerging as the most pragmatic approach to solving hitherto impossible problems. Principally
because it is effective, economically viable, and easy to administer to large herds or flocks. Having to
wait for the problem to arise before treating it is an impediment to farmers. Vaccination is used inmany circumstances but it is expensive, time-consuming and counter-productive in some cases bycomparison with a routine dose of a nosode in a water trough. For example vaccination against Orf
in sheep is a common often magnifies the spread of viral infection the following year according tomany shepherds.
My interest in assisting the grass root use of homoeopathy has led me to having worked closely withcattle farmers for many years. Farmers are very practical, down to earth people who simply want aneffective solution to a common problem and do not want to be flummoxed with arcane theories or
be told, at least initially, that each animal needs to be treated as an individual. Its best to keep one’s
feet firmly on the ground in this territory as demonstrated by the following account from Edward
Thomas, Esq which appeared in The Homoeopathic World 1882 and which, coincidentally, I
discovered exactly 127 yrs later to the day it was signed on 23rd Feb this year.

Arsenicum in Purulent Ophthalmia
Edward Thomas, Esq., 1882 The Homoeopathic World vol xvii p 165
I was consulted early last August by Mr Abraham Darlington, of Great Barrow, near Chester,
respecting his cattle, eight of which, out of a stock of twenty-eight, were “going blind.” I went out tosee them, and found the symptoms as follows:1. Some appeared to be suffering from intense irritation of the parts about the eye, as shownby a continual scratching of those parts with their hind feet; but there was no inflammation
to be seen either on the eyes or the margins of the lids
2. In two cases the blood vessels were injected and there was considerable watery discharge
running down the cheeks, as in a furrow.
3. In each of two others one eye presented a glassy appearance, swollen and out of shape, andthe animals were blind with that eye.
4. The eyes of two others were swollen out of all shape; and the colour that of dark mahogany,with dark greenish spots; while from the pupils raw-looking pieces of flesh, something like aminiature tongue, protruded.
The only history of this epidemic (or endemic) attack I could get was that the farmer’s stock
pastured on fields through which ran a foul brook, carrying some of the drainage of a small town
some two miles distant. Another farmer’s cattle also fed on similar pasture and his also wereattacked, but with these I had nothing to do. I have just heard (February 1882) that the otherfarmer’s stock are still suffering, though still under regular veterinary attendance.

I found on inquiry that the first three or four days after each animal was seized it drooped, lost
appetite, and if in milk the quantity was greatly lessened, After about the fourth day, appetite etc.,
returned.
Some thirty years’ experience in homoeopathic “treatment”, both of bipeds andquadrupeds, has taught me the value of Arsenicum, Hepar, and Merc Corr. In such cases; and aftersome consideration I decided to try Arsenicum.
My farmer was busy beginning his regular harvest work, and had not the accommodation to
separate the ailing ones from the others, so I determined that the whole of them should bephysicked , which was done as follows:Arsenicum 2, ten drops in a tablespoonful of water, was given to each animal twice a day (ofcourse a quart mixture was made at a time), and a lotion made with 1 oz. of Liquor Arsenicalis, B.P.,
in a gallon of water was also applied externally, a 1 o.z. indiarubber syringe being used for the
purpose.
I heard nothing for four or five weeks, when my friend called in one day to “pay the damage”
for medicine etc., and to say the whole stock had take the complaint, that all had recovered, andnone were blind, quite contrary to our fears and expectations.
This is an instructive case, as a cure with one remedy, and I trust the experience so obtained
may be of use to some of the many readers of the Homoeopathic World. Feb 23rd 1882
Attitudes have changed little and the case above highlights salient points that are no lesstrue today than when first written by Mr Thomas in 1882.
1. Farmers want to use homoeopathy because conventional drugs often fail to resolve theirveterinary problems
2. The problems they present are common, affecting more than one farm.
3. Farmers seek a new approach but they do not want to spend more time using a novel
system
4. Farmers new to homoeopathy are reticent to treat animals on an individual basis because
they are too busy
5. Homoeopaths have to pander to the farmer’s reticence in order to allow the farmer toexperience the benefit of homoeopathy
6. There is usually a genus epidemicus remedy for a given current disease
7. The homoeopath needs to find a simple and acceptable way for the farmer to deliver the
remedy to his cattle
8. Farmers are delighted by the amazing response they get from homoeopathy
9. Farmers learn the practical benefits of homoeopathy quickly
In addition to the above
1. Homoeopathy is cheaper for farmers than conventional medicine
2. Homoeopathy has no side effects
3. Homoeopathic remedies do not create drug residues which prevent, or cause expensive
delays in, the sale of milk or meat.
4. The remedy may change over early, middle and later stages of an acute disease.
In a subsequent report on the treatment of Milk Fever in cattle, to The Homoeopathic World in thesame year, Mr Thomas concludes:- “There are no cases in which the proof of the efficacy of thesmall dose, when selected according to the homoeopathic doctrine, is so incontrovertible as in the“puir dumb beasts,” who can neither exercise faith nor have any prejudice.
My initial foray into this area began by assisting farmers who were keen to treat acute cases ofbovine mastitis in amongst cows of their herd. Invariably the conversation began with the farmer

expressing his predicament “ I always use Phytolacca for these cases but it doesn’t work anymore”.
The main reference source at the time was a book on the homoeopathic treatment of cows by the
grandfather of British homoeopathy, George Macleod. George, as all who knew him, was a terse
Scotsman with a big heart and a keen eye. He never wore a watch because, as he told me “I stopthem”. His books are of a similar vein, concise and to the point such that the novice finds them hard
to comprehend. The content is all relevant but George assumed his reader had more of a working
knowledge of homoeopathy than they usually do. Unfortunately this is not often the case and has
led me to co-writing a series of smaller introductory guides for the homoeopathic treatment of
sheep, cats, dogs, cattle, and horses. These self-help guides published by Ainsworths have beenpurchased by tens of thousands of animal owners whose feedback has been both encouraging andheart-warming.
The predicament, I realised was due to a poor working knowledge of practical homoeopathy,
meeting a wall of indistinguishable remedies. In the context of a self-help book on veterinary
treatment, the most cynical difference between one written by a vet and a pharmacist is that the vet
is trawling for clients and the pharmacist wants to sell remedies! The vet seeks to inform the reader,
but need not go the extra mile and assist them to the choice of remedy and potency, because that’s
his job. I personally believe in spoon-feeding the client because it’s the simplest way to ensure thathe or she has the opportunity to learn the most from his or her experience. My experience is that
this does work in practice, a good response is joyful and a poor result always leads one to question
how they went wrong and discover the true answer.
In the Phytolacca situation above, the cause of the problem was not the failure of the remedy, it was
the failure to understand why the wrong remedy had been chosen. George had listed some fifteen
remedies for treatment of mastitis in his book and given descriptions of each in relation topathology. All absolutely relevant, however, on reading them I realized the farmer’s dilemma, they
all covered the pathology and each seemed to fit somewhere or other. The fact is that in acutedisease an overlapping change of the symptom picture, as it progresses through sequential stages, isdifficult to comprehend unless you include a timeline. Without such it is utterly confusing to thenovitiate, who inevitably resorts to a random approach and often left wondering why homoeopathy
is only partially successful.
Then I recalled the advice given by a dear friend and homoeopath, Edward Roth, about how thenatural progression of infection was embraced by homoeopathy and unwisely ignored by modern
medicine. Inflammation, suppuration and induration were accepted principles of old school
medicine and still taught to medical students, but the import of the third of these three stages,
induration, was ignored in practice. Since homoeopathy embraces reality it appreciates theimportance of time and space. As homoeopaths we accept the vitality of the organism and how
symptoms change both objectively and subjectively with vivid descriptions of how this occurs and isaffected temporally and spatially. Each consultation provides a snapshot of a moving film, thechronological sequence of events that led to the story so far and the foresight to know how the story
will unfold. It is therefore imperative to bring the three stages of the cycle of healing together inorder to make any sense of assisting a cure.
To emphasize this let us examine what happens in a simple acute infection like a boil. A boil may
begin very rapidly as a painful red swelling, sensitive to touch and heat conforming to the classicalBelladonna picture. In this early acute stage of inflammation the body is rallying to the area andbeginning to fight the infection at a local level. Unless Belladonna is received the body moves on to
the next stage of infection - suppuration. In order to localise the infection and prevent sepsis
invading the body, the area must be sealed off and scar tissue gradually begins to form within the
structures beneath the surface as the immune system conducts a local war with bacteria and slowlyfinds a route to discharge the resultant pus. At this stage, perhaps a day or two after the initial
symptoms arose, the picture has changed subtly. The pain and inflammation remain but thesensitivity changes from heat to cold, some hardness has begun and the boil starts the process ofdischarge. At this stage the picture more resembles Hepar sulph and here we encounter a beautiful
unfurling of our story. For not only has the remedy changed, but the potency required becomes animportant issue. Hepar sulph possesses both an anti-inflammatory and suppurative action, theformer being much faster than the latter, for it takes time for a material change to channel out thepus. The anti-inflammatory response to Hepar sulph can be observed in a matter of minutes andhence the potency administered becomes a very real issue. The higher the potency the greater the
stimulus and the faster the anti-inflammatory response precedes. The lower the potency the slower
the response and the greater the suppurative action proceeds expelling pus. This is criticalinformation because aborting suppuration with a high potency of Hepar sulph endangers the bodyby suppressing the natural immune response and allowing infection to travel outside of the area of
localization. A few days later on and the acute pain has subsided leaving a hardened massdischarging pus as we experience the stage of induration corresponding to Silica.
A great deal of practical information about the acute use of homoeopathy can be learned from thismundane experience, particularly the order and potency of the remedies concerned. Silica andHepar sulph complement each others action but also antidote one another according to Clarke’s
Relationship of Remedies. From the above the reason for this is obvious and can be used to ouradvantage. The most important lesson is how to apply the timeline in a practical way to the greatest
effect. We all appreciate that each of our three remedies above need be given at a precise time andthat giving any of the remedies out chronological sequence will only delay or obstruct a cure. Thus
giving Belladonna when Hepar sulph was required will hopefully do nothing and giving Hepar sulph
or Silica at the onset will appear to do nothing for several days until the pathology moves into theremedy picture.
The importance of this basic information for the farmer wishing to treat a mastitic cow cannot be
over-emphasized. The presentation of the information is very simple and the practical guidelinesthat ensue from the above provide a simple yet effective approach to dealing with many forms ofacute pathology as well as providing a greater appreciation for the wonders of homoeopathy as apractical therapy.
I translate this very simply into three ‘Windows of Opportunity’, at which you have the chance totreat with corresponding remedies. These are a beginning, middle and later stage of infection, eachof which fits perfectly into the farmer or herdsman’s experience of common infection for mastitis
and other infections. In the case of bovine mastitis these stages are relatively easy to observe anddiscuss, as the prognosis is comparable to the case of the boil above. In an investigation into theprevention of bovine mastitis with homoeopathy by Sprangler the various stages are described as
Mastitis katarrhalis acuta, Mastitis katarrhalis chronic, Mastitis acuta gravis and Mastitis subclinicalaseptica. This Swiss trial ran into difficulty because of poor husbandry, according to my conversation
with the author. Unfortunately, the cows on many of the Swiss farms involved were tended sopoorly that their udders were dangling in cow shit presenting a maintaining cause for infection.

Returning to our list of 15 remedies in George’s book, we can now separate these into one or moreof the three windows of opportunity. By so doing we reduce the confusion and immediately lessen
the chance of miss-prescribing. Furthermore, by distributing remedies into these stages we candifferentiate a single remedy required within each stage and then discover new information linking
pathology and infection. In the case of mastitis in Stage One; acute inflammation, we know that
Belladonna, Bryonia and Urtica are the prime suspects, narrowing the acute sudden onset choice ofa remedy. Although in practice the three are often combined as a remedy for very acute cases,
these three remedies are now easy to differentiate within this first group. Belladonna has very
sudden onset, whilst Bryonia occurs slowly with more hardness. Belladonna and Bryonia are both
associated with the typical early stage of a Staphlococcocal or Streptococcal mastitic infection
whereas Urtica is associated with an E. Coli infection in which the milk flow is affected. Suddenly ourperplexing, random list changes into a practical approach every farmer can easily employ.
Frequently a busy farmer will miss the first stage because it advances to stage two before he spots
the problem. In the Second Stage the cow progresses from an acute inflamed quarter, to one thathas a knotty hardness and yields flecks or pus in the milk. In addition a commonly reported featureof this stage is an associated stiffness of the hindquarters. Phytolacca and Conium are the primary
remedies implicated and the farmer is now in a position to choose from these. Nature assists us at
every stage and it transpires that Phytolacca is related to the Staphlococcocal or Streptococcal
mastitic infection and continues from where Belladonna and Bryonia started whereas Conium isassociated with an E. Coli infection in which the milk flow is affected and follows on from Urtica.
In stage three the remedy list includes Calc fluor and Silica as we progress from acute infection to aquarter hardened with scar tissue and discharging foul clots. At this point in the pathology theremedy is obviously working more slowly at promoting discharge and then resolving scar tissue toreturn the quarter to full activity. With antibiotic therapy it is common for a heavily fibrosed quarterto become either blind or only partially capable of lactation but usually this is not the case when the
farmer uses the remedies above.
Mastitis is the principle source of loss on a dairy farm, with each incidence costing the UK farmer
currently £220 (source: Dairy Farmer magazine and Farmer’s Weekly). The main loss is fromdiscarded milk, which has to be voided for three days after the cow is treated with an intramammary
tube, parenteral antibiotics or steroids. The discard period can be twice this period if the farm is an
Organic Milk supplier.
An Indian study by Varshney and Naresh, conducted to demonstrate the efficacy and comparative
cost-effectiveness of homoeopathy and antibiotic therapy for bovine mastitis, concluded that thehomoeopathic combination used was both effective and considerably cheaper than conventional
treatment. The cows with mastitis were selected from the Indian Veterinary Research Institute andprivate dairy farms and all were between their 2nd and 6th lactation and not suffering any otherclinical illness at the time of the study. The presence of inflammatory signs in the udder (heat, pain,
swelling and oedema), asymmetry of shape and size of quarter; and physical changes in milk (flakes,
clots, discoloration, consistency and CMT score) were the criteria for inclusion in the study. Cases ofsubclinical mastitis were excluded. In this trial 96 mastitic quarters (67 non-fibrosed and 29 fibrosed)
were treated with a homoeopathic combination of Phytolacca 200, Calc fluor 200, Silica 30,
Belladonna 30, Bryonia 30, Arnica 30, Conium 30 and Ipecacuanha 30. Another 96 quarters withacute mastitis (non-fibrosed) were treated with different antibiotics (administeredbyintramammary and/or parenteral routes). The trial included a design to test the comparative efficacy
and cost effectiveness of two different dosage regimes of the same homoeopathic medicine. It
transpired that giving 10 pills four times daily was more both more efficacious and cheaper thangiving 15 pills twice daily in either a chronic fibrosed or acute non-fibrosed case of mastitis (seeTable 1) . In comparison to conventional treatment the overall effectiveness of the homoeopathic
combination medicine in treatment of acute non-fibrosed mastitis was 86% with a mean recovery
period of 7.7 days (range 3-28), and the total cost of therapy was 21.4 Rupees (€0.39, $3.28). The
corresponding cure rate for the antibiotic group was 59.2% with a mean recovery period of 4.5 days
(range 2-15) and an average cost of 149.2 Rupees (€2.69, $3.28) see Table 2.

TABLE 1

TABLE2

Ideally a farmer wants to prevent mastitis rather than rely on treatment alone, especially as
antibiotics resistance and failure is rife.

A clinical trial conducted on a Mexican dairy farm, in which 26 animals were divided into two
homogenous groups of thirteen cows each, pairing for clinical mastitis status, milk production, age
and number of lactations. Animals and treatments were assigned to each group according to asystematic randomized method. The treatment group received a combination remedy of Phosphorus
200, Phytolacca 200 and Conium 200, and the placebo group received a mixture of alcohol and water
as a control. Monthly milk production was carefully recorded for each animal, as were results of the
California Milk Test (CMT) performed on each of the four quarters of each cow’s udder. The CMT is astandard qualitative method used by the dairy industry to give the farmer a means of predicting
subclinical mastitis by assessing the likelihood of mastitic infection in any one quarter of a cow. The
CMT uses a non-ionic detergent (sodium alkyl-sulphonate) to disintegrate milk cells, resulting in acell conglomerate of gelatinous appearance. The larger the conglomerate (degree of reaction), thegreater the number of cells. The results are converted to an equivalence of the somatic cell count(SCC) based on the degree of reaction. Although this test is subjective, dependent on the criteria of
the person conducting the test, standardization is relatively simple, rendering it a popular test,
widely used by dairy farmers around the world. In this Mexican study the test was always performedby the same person.
The results showed that the proportion of affected quarters, according to CMT, was 32% in thetreatment group and 68% in the placebo group. The odds ratio of the difference demonstrate thatanimals receiving placebo presented 4.5 (1.78 – 11.73) times more subclinical mastitis than thosereceiving homoeopathic treatment (p<0.05). Average milk production in the treated group did not
differ significantly from that of the control group (p>0.05). This study confirms previous observationsof the benefit the homoeopathic method can provide in disease control in animal populations.

Many different remedy approaches have been used to treat and prevent mastitis but the mosteffective and simplest method is the use of nosodes in the water trough. A farmer can simply add
the remedy to his cow’s water and observe a huge diminution in the conventionally recorded
indicator of subclinical mastitis, the Somatic Cell Count. The graph below demonstrates the results
recorded over a three week period when a farmer new homoeopathy decided to adopt thisapproach. His erstwhile use of antibiotics had failed to resolve a huge mastitic problem in whichmost of his 123 lactating cows were ailing with SCC counts above 200,000. After medicating histroughs with a mastitis nosode we supplied (in this case UDDER HEALTH and UDDER CARE) he
recorded a 117% change in healthy cows over the most prevalent seasonal period for the problem
without making any other changes to his husbandry.

cows
90
80
70
60
50

Before (19/12/95)

40

After (13/1/96)

30
20
10
0
below 250

250-400

400-600>600

Somatic Cell Count bands

Other studies have been conducted with other bovine problems including three papers by
Willaimson et al on the prevention of anoestrus using Sepia 200 and a paper by Kayne and Rafferty
on the use of Arsenicum for calf scours.
Farmers are now in a very fortunate position as regards homoeopathic education and support. Apartfrom our excellent little book, The Herdsmans Guide, they have access to one day courses run by
OMSCo, the Organic Milk Supplier’s Cooperative and a four day Homoeopathy at Wellie Level
course. The 26 Organic Dairy farms that existed when I began have swelled to over 500 and Organic
milk is now available in every supermarket. Let us hope that people learn to appreciate that if
homoeopathy is good enough for their animals it is surely good enough for them!
Conclusion
As we encounter unwarranted criticism, from the media and certain scientific bodies, it is valuable tonote how advances in veterinary homoeopathic medicine are providing a way forward.
Demonstrating the results of animal treatment and prevention is a very real means of promoting thewidespread use of homoeopathy.

References
Edward Thomas, Esq., 1882 The Homoeopathic World vol xvii p 165
Hansford P, Pinkus T, The Herdsmans Guide, Ainsworths
Johnson Geoff, Homeopathy in Farm Animals, BAHVS 2006 p18
Kayne S, Rafferty A., The use of Arsenicum album 30c to complement conventional treatment of
neonatal diarrhoea (‘scours’) in calves British Homoeopathic Journal October 1994, Vol 83, No 4, pp
202-204
R. Searcy, MPVM, O. Reyes, MC, G. Guajardo, MD Control of subclinical bovine mastitis, utilizationof a homoeopathic combination British Homoeopathic Journal April 1995, Vol. 84, pp. 67-70
Sprangler J. Testing the effectiveness of antibiotic and homeopathic medication in the frame of herdreorganisation of subclinical mastitis in milk cows. British Homeopathic Journal (2000) 89, Suppl 1
S62
Varshney JP and Naresh R., Comparative efficacy of homeopathic and allopathic systems of
medicine in the management of clinical mastitis of Indian dairy cows. Homeopathy (2005) 84, 81-85
Williamson A.V., Mackie W.L., Crawford W.J. and Rennie B., A study using Sepia 200c given
prophylactically postpartum to prevent anoestrus problems in the dairy cow. British Homoeopathic
Journal July 1991, Vol. 80, pp. 149-156
Williamson A.V., Mackie W.L., Crawford W.J. and Rennie B., A trial of Sepia 200, Prevention ofanoestrus problems in dairy cows. British Homoeopathic Journal January 1995, Vol. 84, pp. 14-20
Williamson A.V., Mackie W.L., Crawford W.J. and Rennie B., A study model with initial findings
using Sepia 200c given prophylactically to prevent anoestrus problems in the dairy cow. British
Homoeopathic Journal July 1990, Vol, 79, pp. 132-134