Abstract:
Drug proving is a fundamental aspect of homoeopathy, to determine the medicinal effects of substances on healthy individuals. Although homoeopathy focuses on subjective symptom collecting through drug proving, more integrated approaches are required in light of contemporary scientific breakthroughs. This article gives insight about the historical development of drug proving, its principles, advantages, and limitations. Modern scientific techniques, like phytochemical analysis, animal testing, clinical trials, and in vitro studies, must be incorporated to increase the reliability of drug proving. These methods provide understandings about the cellular and molecular physiological and biochemical impacts of homoeopathic drugs. By integrating empirical research with traditional homeopathic drug proving while preserving the core principles of the discipline, the field can move towards greater scientific credibility and effectiveness in clinical practice.
Keywords: Drug Proving, Phytochemical Analysis, Clinical Trials, In Vitro Studies, Animal Testing, Evidence-Based Medicine
Homoeopathy is a system of medicine formed by Dr Samuel Hahnemann based on the principle of similia similimbus curentur—like cures like. The principle was already advocated and used by others before Hahnemann. Hippocrates, father of medicine, noted that there are only 2 treatment methods: one is by using similar action and the other is by opposite action.
Hahnemann was not satisfied with the medicine of his time because the administration of medicine without any principles, usage of large dose of substances, torturous treatment practices which sucks the juice of the patient’s life. He felt such practices were inhuman, so he left his practice of medicine. Then while translating Cullen’s materia medica, he found malaria is cured by cinchona because of its astringent. But Hahnemann rejected the claim of Cullen, and he started experimenting on himself, which sowed a seed for the homoeopathic system of medicine and proving drugs on healthy human beings. Hahnemann was strongly influenced by Lord Bacon’s inductive logic (particulars to general) and he constructed the Homoeopathic law with a scientific base.
Homoeopathy has a unique way to ascertain the drug’s action (proving on a healthy human being), which makes it stand out. The proving on humans was first described by Albrecht von haller (§108 FN), but it was practically used and developed by Hahnemann. In the Essay on a new principle for ascertaining the curative power of drugs, Hahnemann described the flaws in various principles for collecting information about the drug action.
- Study based on chemistry: In 19th century, drug substances of plant origin were subjected to fire by the thought of getting knowledge about the curative power, but it was less conclusive because they got only charcoal and resinous matter as resultant. So, they denied the value of chemistry in search of medicinal power. Hahnemann claims that chemistry may be useful in cases of antidoting the poison and identifying the components in the drug substance but it cannot be taken solely for identifying the medicinal properties.
- Mixing drugs with blood: To ascertain medical power drug substances were mixed with blood in test tubes. This method is not conclusive because the drug what we administer through mouth will undergo lots of changes in digestive tract before it reaches blood. So, the action will be different in case of direct mixing with blood.
- Administering drugs to animals: The body of an animal is entirely different from that of a human. So, it cannot be taken as proper method of ascertaining medicinal power.
- Doctrine of signature: Depending upon the external appearance of the drug is not a reliable way.
- Botanical affinity: It may help to find the similarity of action of drugs across species or families, but it is unreliable because there are many examples where the action is exactly opposite or very different in the same family of plants.
After realising the flaws in all of these methods, Hahnemann proposed the most reliable and new way to acquire knowledge about the medicinal power, i.e., methodical experiments on human beings (drug proving).
Advantages of Drug Proving:
- Drug proving helps us to get pure, unaltered action of the drug substance on human beings.
- The symptoms that are collected during drug proving are mostly subjective, so it can be easy to match with the symptom in diseases.
- The drug substances are proven on human beings, so the reliability will be more.
Limitations of drug proving:
- Most of the provings were done on illiterate provers and non-medical provers.
- Lack of proving conducted on female provers.
- Lack of information about the mechanism of action.
Is drug proving on human beings only sufficient?
Even though the knowledge acquired from drug proving on healthy humans is the most reliable, the symptoms collected are mostly subjective. In the era of evidence-based medicine, it is necessary to know the action of a drug substance at the tissue level and functional level (physiological level). So, we have to adopt and accept the other method to acquire knowledge about the action of the drug.
- Phytochemical analysis: Phytochemistry is a study and technique of detection, extraction, separation, purification, identification, and quantification of active principles in a plant substance. It helps us to know the various compounds present in a drug. Each active principle present in a drug produces certain changes both structurally and functionally.
Eg-1. Abrotanum contains active principles like santonin, rutoside, etc. Santonin is effective against intestinal worms like Ascaris. Thus, it prevents worm infestation and improves absorption from intestine in case of marasmus. Rutoside is an anti-inflammatory agent which is effective in cases of rheumatoid arthritis.
Eg-2. Crataegus contains Hyperoside, which reduces the vascular inflammation, and procyanidin improve endothelial function by enhancing nitric oxide, which helps in vasodilation and in reducing blood pressure. Ursolic acid and oleanolic acid inhibit cholesterol biosynthesis and protect against atherosclerosis.
The phytochemical study of a drug helps in identifying the compounds and their action and helps in correlating the symptoms of homoeopathic materia medica. It also helps in the construction of new materia medica with a scientific basis.
- Testing on animals: Even though there are a lot of differences in both anatomy and physiology between humans and animals, there are some similarities at the gene level and tissue level. Many animals, especially mammals like mice and rats, share significant genetic and physiological similarities with humans. The mice share genetic homology of 98% with human. Zebrafish are a popular alternative for other animal models because they share genetic homology >70% and high genetic homology of genes implicated in human diseases (>80%).
Homoeopathic materia medica lack objective symptoms and pathological changes. Animal testing helps in identifying the mechanism of action, mutagenicity, and pathological changes in tissue and organ level.
III. Clinical trials: The proving of drugs on sick individuals is not advocated in homoeopathy. But the testing of medicines in diseased individuals helps to assess the effectiveness of medicine in a particular disease.
- In vitro studies: It refers to experimentation using a whole, living organism that is often substituted by low-cost in vitro experiments. It aims at describing the effects of experimental variables on the organism’s constituent part (e.g., organs, tissues, cell culture, or cellular components) in a controlled environment outside the organism (test tubes, petri dishes).
Is the theory of vital force applicable in the case of in vitro?
- 9 states, “In the healthy condition of man, the spiritual vital force (autocracy), the dynamis that animates the material body (organism), rules with unbounded sway, and retains all the parts of the organism in admirable, harmonious, vital operation, as regards both sensations and functions, so that our indwelling, reason-gifted mind can freely employ this living, healthy instrument for the higher purposes of our existence.”
Let’s consider the vital force in cellular level. A cell is the structural and functional unit of life. The cell has the cell organelles (nucleus, cytoplasm, mitochondria, ribosome, golgi bodies, lysosome). The vital force governs and coordinates the activities of organelles like mitochondria (energy production), ribosomes (protein synthesis), endoplasmic reticulum (protein and lipid synthesis), Golgi apparatus (protein modification and transport), and lysosomes (waste removal). The vital force maintains the harmonious functioning of all the cell organelles for the higher purpose existence of life.
The levels of organisation of the human body are as follows:
Cells > Tissues > Organs > Organ System > Organism
So, according to inductive logic (drawing conclusions by going from the particulars to the general), things which are applicable for the cells in particular will be applicable for the organism in general.
The weakness of this type of study is the uncertainty that the effects observed at the cell level would occur in the real world of the complex living organism. So, it can be taken as a tool for identifying the action but not as a conclusive result.
Conclusion:
Hahnemann criticised the old school that they didn’t advance the principle since Asclepius. Now it has been more than 200 years of homoeopathy; we are in high time to update the principles and advance with new methods. All the new method Unfortunately, a small minority within homoeopathy resists new ideas and refuses to accept any modifications. If Hahnemann were alive today, he would be the first to condemn such narrow-mindedness. He dedicated his life to seeking truth through careful observation and experimentation, constantly refining his views based on new evidence. Homoeopathy must follow him by welcoming new research and advancements. Only by continuing to explore, question, and refine homoeopathic practices can the field reach its full potential.
References:
- Hahnemann S. Organon of Medicine. 6th edition. B. Jain Publishers (P) Ltd.; 1849.
- Hahnemann, S., & Dudgeon, R. E. (2015). Lesser writings of Samuel Hahnemann. New Delhi: B. Jain.
- in Vitro Studies – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com website: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/in-vitro-studies
- Simon Quanbin Han. (2006). Phytochemical Analysis. Phytochemical Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1002/(issn)1099-1565
- Ekiert, H., Knut, E., Świątkowska, J., Klin, P., Rzepiela, A., Tomczyk, M., & Szopa, A. (2021). Artemisia abrotanum L. (Southern Wormwood)—History, Current Knowledge on the Chemistry, Biological Activity, Traditional Use and Possible New Pharmaceutical and Cosmetological Applications. Molecules, 26(9), 2503.
- Phu Cao-Ngoc, Leclercq, L., Rossi, J.-C., Desvignes, I., Hertzog, J., Anne-Sylvie Fabiano-Tixier, … Cottet, H. (2019). Optimizing Water-Based Extraction of Bioactive Principles of Hawthorn: From Experimental Laboratory Research to Homemade Preparations. 24(23), 4420–4420.
About the Author:
Dr Ragul S
PG Scholar
Department of organon of medicine and Homoeopathic Philosophy
Father Muller Homoeopathic medical College
Mangalore, Karnataka
Acknowledgment:
- Dr Jacintha Monteiro MD (Hom)
HOD
Department of Organon & Homoeopathic Philosophy
Father Muller Homoeopathic Medical College
Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka
- Dr Ranjan C Britto
Professor
Department of Organon & Homoeopathic Philosophy
Father Muller Homoeopathic Medical College
Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka
