Follow Homeopathic Family Medicine on Feedspot

Continue with Google
Continue with Facebook



In 2004, American physicians wrote over 28 million prescriptions for ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity syndrome) drugs, and by 2008 alone, this number increased substantially to over 39 million.  Despite these scary-high numbers of powerful psychiatric drugs prescribed for our children, the Washington Post reported on a large multi-center federally funded study that “confirmed there were zero long-term differences between children who were continuously medicated and those who were never medicated” (Vedantam, 2009).

Hyperactivity and its related syndromes (ADD: attention deficit disorder; and ADHD: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) has become Ameri­ca’s #1 childhood psychiatric ailment.  One of the common drugs to treat children with ADD and ADHD has been Ritalin, and its used has become so common that some people are calling it “vitamin R.”

It is initially surprising and confusing to learn that Ritalin is an amphetamine-like drug.  One would think that this type of drug would make hyperactive children even more hyperactive.  However, when Ritalin is prescribed to children who are already hyperactive, it tends to slow them down.  Ironically, the use of a drug that causes symptoms similar to those as those of the patient is actually the basic principle of homeopathic medicine (treating “likes with like”).

Ritalin and a select number of conventional drugs (including digitalis, nitroglycerin, colchicine, allergy shots, and vaccination) are all known to cause the various symptoms they are known to treat.  Despite this fact, none of these drugs are considered true “homeopathic medicines” because homeopaths use much smaller and safer doses of their medicines, plus a homeopathic medicine is individualized to the patient and the unique syndrome of whatever disease the sick person experiences.

Although Ritalin and other psychiatric drugs given to children with ADD or ADHD may provide short-term benefits, research to date has found that these drugs do not provide long-term benefits.  However, even scarier is the fact that even Newsweek noted, “There are no definitive long-studies to reassure parents that this stimulant isn’t causing some hidden havoc to their child.”  And many people today believe these drugs do create havoc.

The most common side effects of ADD/ADHD medication are restlessness, anxiety, tremors, headaches, allergic reactions, dizziness, abdominal discomfort, heart arrhythmia, increased blood pressure, and psychosis (including hallucination).  Children who take these drugs are also known to experience a reduced appetite, and in part as a result of this, some children experience a dramatic reduction in height.  When a drug can have such deleterious systematic effects as reducing a child’s height, one has to acknowledge that such drugs can create other significantly serious impacts on the lives of the children who take them.

Clearly, it makes sense for parents and doctors to explore and even exhaust safer methods of treating for ADD and ADHD before resorting to conventional drugs.  Homeopathic medicines provide one viable alternative, and several double-blind studies published in medical journals have confirmed good results and much safer treatment.  That said, it should be acknowledged that at present there has been only a handful of studies testing homeopathic medicines and not every study showed efficacy of treatment.  However, because some studies have shown benefits of homeopathic care and because these medicines are so safe, it is reasonable to consider homeopathic treatment before resorting to more risky therapeutic measures.

More research is certainly warranted.  In the meantime, readers will benefit from knowing that there are different ways that homeopathic medicine is practiced, and although one style of prescribing these natural medicines may be shown to be effective in one or more studies, these results do not necessarily mean that all methods of using homeopathic medicines are similarly effective.  Likewise, when a study shows no obvious benefits from one strategy to using these medicines, this does not necessarily disprove the entire system of homeopathy.

In other words, just because one antibiotic is not effective in treating an infection does not mean that another antibiotic won’t be effective.

The challenge that homeopathy presents is that it, like acupuncture, is largely dependent upon the clinician and his/her knowledge of their system of healing and his/her ability to find the individually chosen treatment for patients and their idiosyncratic ailment.  Despite the complexity of providing individualized homeopathic treatment, children will more likely benefit in the long run when their parents explore safer therapeutic measures.


A Study Comparing Homeopathic Treatment and Ritalin

Numerous studies testing Ritalin have found it to be effective in the short-term.  The question then becomes:  how does homeopathic treatment compare with it?

A study in Switzerland evaluated 115 children (92 boys, 23 girls) with an average age of 8.3 years at diagnosis of ADD/ADHD (Frei and Thurneysen, 2001).  The children were first treated with an individually chosen homeopathic medicine.  Children who did not improve sufficiently on homeopathy were changed to Ritalin and evaluated after 3 months.  After an average treatment time of 3.5 months, 75% of the children responded favorably to homeopathy, attaining an improvement rating of 73%.  22% of the children were treated with Ritalin and attained an improvement rating of 65%. 

The children were evaluated according to the Conners Global Index (CGI), which is the most respected scale that measures the degree of hyperactivity and attention deficit symptoms.  The children who responded to the homeopathic medicine experienced a 55% amelioration of the CGI, while the children who responded to Ritalin experienced a 48% lowering of the CGI.  Three children didn’t respond to homeopathy or Ritalin, and one child left the study before completion.  The researchers concluded that homeopathic treatment was comparable in its benefits to Ritalin…and homeopathic medicines simply do not have the side effects that Ritalin has.

Because this study was not placebo controlled, one does not know if the good results are from the homeopathic medicine or from the homeopathic interview (or a combination of them both).  In any case, this study showed that 75% of the children with ADD/ADHD benefited from the “package of care” provided by homeopaths, a better result than the “package of care” provided by conventional pediatricians.  Although skeptics of homeopathy insist that homeopathic medicines are placebos, these skeptics unwittingly suggest the metaphysical thesis that each homeopath is magically endowed with special healing powers, especially since most people who seek homeopathic treatment experience chronic problems for which long-term conventional medical treatment has not provided adequate resolution.


A Major Study Published in the “European Journal of Pediatrics”

Although the previous study was not double-blind or placebo controlled, this next study was both…and even more.  This next study included a sophisticated research design that included a “crossover” effect, that is, half of the patients begin with a placebo treatment, while the other half begin with a homeopathic treatment, and then, after 6 weeks, the groups each receive the other treatment (or placebo).  This sophisticated design therefore seeks to compare each child under homeopathic treatment with that same child under a placebo.

The famed European Journal of Pediatrics published an article that included two studies:  a clinical observation study followed by a randomized, double-blind trial.  These studies concluded that homeopathy has positive effects in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (Frei, Everts, von Ammon, et al, 2005). A total of 83 children aged 6-16 years, with ADHD diagnosed using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV criteria, were recruited.

Prior to the randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled crossover study, the children were treated with individually prescribed homeopathic medications. The 62 patients, who achieved an improvement of at least 50% in the Conners’ Global Index (CGI), participated in the trial. The responders were split into two groups and received either homeopathy for 6 weeks followed by placebo for 6 weeks (arm A), or vice-versa (arm B).

At the beginning of the trial and after each crossover period, parents reported the CGI and patients underwent neuropsychological testing. The CGI rating was evaluated again at the end of each crossover period and twice in long-term follow-up. At entry to the crossover trial, cognitive performance such as visual global perception, impulsivity and divided attention, had improved significantly under open label treatment (P<0.0001).  During the crossover trial, CGI parent-ratings were significantly lower (this means the child was “better”) under homeopathic treatment (average 1.67 points) than under placebo (P =0.0479).   Ultimately, the CGI and parent ratings showed a 37% and 63% improvement over the long-term observation period of 14 weeks (P<0.0001).  The teachers also found an improvement in the homeopathic treated group vs. placebo in the CGI by 28% and in the teachers’ rating scale by 37%.

An interesting feature of this study was that the homeopaths only met with each child once and carried out follow-up visits only with the child’s parents.  This strategy was to minimize contact the child’s contact with the homeopath in order to minimize possible psychological support from the clinician.


A Double-Blind Study Using a New Unconventional Style of Homeopathy

It should be freely acknowledged that not all studies verify the efficacy of homeopathic medicines.  Because the results of homeopathy are best evaluated when these medicines are individually selected to each patient, some clinicians are simply better and more accurate prescribers of these medicines.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted with 43 children between 6 and 12 years of age who met the DSM-IV criteria for ADHD (Jacobs, Williams, Girard, et al, 2005).  The 43 subjects were randomized to receive a homeopathic consultation and either an individualized homeopathic remedy or placebo. Patients were seen by homeopathic physicians every 6 weeks for 18 weeks.  In this pilot study, a new, unconventional style of homeopathy was practiced by the physicians, called “the Bombay method” (aka “the Sensation method”).

There were no statistically significant differences between homeopathic remedy and placebo groups on the primary or secondary outcome variables, including the Conner Global Index scale and various other scales.  However, there were statistically and clinically significant improvements in both groups on many of the outcome measures.

This pilot study provided no evidence to support a therapeutic effect of individually selected homeopathic remedies in children with ADHD. The researchers concluded that a therapeutic effect of the overall homeopathic package of care (the homeopathic encounter and homeopathic medicine) was beneficial and warranted further evaluation.

A Double-Blind Study Comparing Homeopathy and Placebo

John Lamont, PhD, a psychologist in Southern California, conducted a trial of 43 children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (Lamont, 1997).  He randomly assigned half of the children to receiving a placebo and the other half to homeopathic treatment. The researcher, the parents and the children did not know which child was given the homeopathic medicine or the placebo.

The evaluations of improvement were based on parent or caretaker ratings of ADHD behaviors.  A simple 5-point scale was used:  Much worse (-2); a little worse (-1); no change (0); a little better (+1); much better (+2).  Parents or caretakers were contacted by telephone 10 days after remedy/placebo taken and again after 2 months.

To avoid any potential influence from the homeopath, he had no further contact with children except during the initial testing and case-taking interview.  Even the medicine was not given directly to the patient by the homeopath but was sent via the mail.

All children in the experiment came from foster homes or from parents under the supervision of social workers.  The average age was 10, and there was a mixture of races:  47% Hispanic, 35% black, and 18% Caucasian.

The children were only accepted into the trial if they fit the specific criteria for ADHD, as determined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-IV).  Children who were on medication for ADHD could be accepted for the study but only if they had been on this medication for at least six weeks.  The latter condition was determined because Dr. Lamont didn’t consider it wise to admit children new to medication in the trial since it then could not be ascertained if improvement was the result of their conventional or homeopathic medicine.

Half of the children were given an individualized homeopathic medicine and half were given a placebo that resembled a homeopathic medicine for 10 days.  After this, the half that was given a placebo received an individualized homeopathic medicine.  Neither the chil­dren nor their parents were told that they might be given a placebo because the researcher did not want to influence the parent or the child with the knowledge that the second round of medicines would be the “real” ones.

Only the 200C potency of an individualized homeopathic medicine was used, based on the homeopath’s small pilot study of 15 patients in which a trend was observed that the 200C was more effective than 30C.

The mean improvement scores after 10 days were .35 for the placebo group and 1.00 for the homeopathically treated group (p=.05).  The greatest improvements were noticed by the third day, while a smaller number showed improvement after 10 days.

Children who were initially given a placebo were given a homeopathic prescription after 10 days and then compared with their earlier score.  The mean improvement scores were .35 for the placebo group and 1.13 after a homeopathic medicine was given (p=.02).

When parents reported that improvement from the treatment was not obvious, the homeopath prescribed a second or a third remedy.  When comparing the results after these remedies, improvement from the homeopathic group was 1.63 and from the placebo group was .35 (p=.01).

Besides the improvement 10 days after the homeopathic medicine, follow-up interviews observed that the majority of children treated homeopathically experienced sustained and increased improvement in their condition.  In total, after 2 months, 57% of children expe­rienced continued improvement; 24% showed improvement for several days or weeks follow­ing homeopathic treatment, but relapsed by the 2-month interview.  19% said that they only observed improvement while taking homeopathic treatment (one could guess that this im­provement was primarily from the placebo effect).

A second homeopathic remedy was given to 18 of 43 subjects, and 7 required a third remedy.  Phone calls were made 10 days after each remedy, and if it seemed that the remedy was not working, a different medicine would be prescribed.

Only three children were dropped from the trial, and this was the result of changes in dosage of anti-ADHD prescription after homeopathic treatment.

In summary, this study showed that the effects of the homeopathic medicine were rela­tively rapid (usually within 3 days) and a 2-month follow-up found that 57% of the children experienced sustained and increased improvement.


The Cochrane Collaboration Review

The Cochrane Collaboration is an internationally respected group of researchers who evaluate research.  In their review of homeopathic treatment of children with ADD/ADHD, they concluded, “There is currently little evidence for the efficacy of homeopathy for the treatment of ADHD” (Coulter and Dean, 2007).  It is important to note that they stated that there was “little evidence” not “no evidence” that homeopathic medicines have been shown to be effective in the treatment of children with ADD/ADHD.

Further, it should be noted that the Cochrane Collaboration maintains a very high standard for their definition of “efficacy,” and they commonly note that there is “little” or “no” evidence for various commonly used conventional medical treatments, despite the billions and billions of dollars spent on them by individuals, insurance companies, and governments.

The additional challenge to homeopathy and to homeopathic research is that various studies testing this system of medicine are often substantially different from each other, making it more difficult to evaluate them together.  Because of this, the Cochrane researchers recommended “more targeted research to test different treatment protocols.”

Because virtually no money is granted to homeopathic research by governments and because the “homeopathic industry” is so small in comparison to Big Pharma, there is considerably less research conducted with homeopathic medicines.

Still, the Cochrane Collaboration’s review of homeopathic research on children with ADD/ADHD rightly acknowledged the high quality research in some of the above studies (Frei, et al, 2005; Jacobs, et al 2006), and they acknowledged that various studies in homeopathy utilize different styles of homeopathic treatment.

Ultimately, both physicians AND parents need to be reminded of Hippocrates’ most famous dictum, “First, do not harm.”  Although Hippocrates directly this wisdom to physicians, it is certainly good advice for parents too.


Link of Pesticides to ADHD

An article on this subject would be remiss if it also did not mention and reference some extremely new and important research that has shown a strong connection between pesticide exposure in children to ADD/ADHD (Bouchard, Bellinger, Wright, et al, 2010).  Published in the famed journal, Pediatrics, this group of Harvard researchers and others showed that organophosphate exposure, at levels common among US children, may contribute to ADHD prevalence.

More specifically, using cross-sectional data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2000-2004) were available for 1139 children, who were representative of the general US population, the researchers found 190 children who met the criteria for ADHD.

Six concentrations of urinary dialkyl phosphate (DAP) were measured to determine body burden. The researchers uncovered the fact that one or more metabolites were detected in roughly 94% of the children tested.  A common chemical called dimethyl alkylphosphate (DMAP) was present in 64% of the children studied. The children with the highest concentrations, especially of DMAP, were twice as likely to have ADHD as those with undetectable levels.

Ultimately, a 10-fold increase (!) in urinary concentrations of organophosphate metabolites was associated with a 55 to 72% increase in the odds of ADHD, which means that children with a higher concentration of these chemicals were 55 to 72% more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD.

Organophosphate pesticides have been linked to neurodevelopmental issues in the past, including memory, concentration, and hyperactivity. Researchers have conducted similar studies on children regularly exposed to pesticides, like those living on or near commercial farms. This study was a first of its kind in that it did not isolate its research on children with a known exposure.

This new research did not investigate anything to do with homeopathy.  However, previous research in animals and humans who were exposed to environmental poisons has shown benefits from homeopathic medicines (Ullman, 2011).



Bouchard MF, Bellinger DC, Wright RO, Weisskopf MG. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and urinary metabolites of organophosphate pesticides. Pediatrics. 2010 Jun;125(6):e1270-7. Epub 2010 May 17.

Coulter M, Dean M. Homeopathy for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder or Hyperkinetic Disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17;(4).

Frei, H, Everts R, von Ammon K, Kaufmann F, Walther D, Hsu-Schmitz SF, Collenberg M, Fuhrer K, Hassink R, Steinlin M, Thurneysen A. Homeopathic treatment of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover trial. Eur J Pediatr., July 27,2005,164:758-767.

Frei, H, and Thurneysen, A. Treatment for Hyperactive Children: Homeopathy and Methylphenidate Compared in a Family Setting, British Homeopathic Journal, October 2001,90:183-188.

Jacob J, Williams AL, Girard C, Njike, VY, Katz D. Homeopathy for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Pilot Randomized-Controlled Trials. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 11, 5, 2005:799-806

Lamont, J., “Homeopathic Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder,” British Homeopathic Journal, Vol. 86, October, 1997, 196-200.

Ullman, D. Homeopathy for Radiation Poisoning. HuffingtonPost. 4/3/2011.

Vedantam S. Debate over Drugs for ADHD Reignites, Washington Post. March 27, 2009.



Judyth Reichenberg-Ullman, ND, MSW, and Robert Ullman, ND, Ritalin Free Kids: Safe and Effective Homeopathic Medicine for ADD and Other Behavioral and Learning Problems, Edmonds, WA: Picnic Point Press, 1996 (Note: The authors of this book are no relation to the author of this article).

Dana Ullman, MPH. Homeopathic Medicines for Children and Infants., New York: Jeremy Tarcher/Putnam, 1992.



, CCH, is one of America’s leading advocates for homeopathy. He has authored 10 books, including The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose HomeopathyHomeopathy A-ZHomeopathic Medicines for Children and InfantsDiscovering Homeopathy, and (the best-selling) 

  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Click on this link below to read blog!


This article originally appeared in HOMEOPATHY IN PRACTICE, Autumn-Winter, 2018, published by the Alliance of Registered Homeopaths: http://www.a-r-h.org/

The post “A Day in the Life” — Landmark conference ‘New Horizons in Water Science: Evidence for Homeopathy?’ appeared first on Homeopathic.com.

  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Our website is publishing this article by Judy Hoy because it is written by someone who has had 50 years of animal rehabilitation experience.  You will soon discover that Judy Hoy has had very impressive results in treating animals with a specific homeopathic cell salt medicine called Calcarea phosphorica (aka Calc phos) 30X  and with a mixture of all 12 homeopathic cell salt medicines called BioplasmaCalc phos 12X is also readily available!  Readers can obtain these homeopathic medicines from us by simply clicking on the links to these two great remedies.

This article discusses mitigating adverse health symptoms with Homeopathic Cell Salts or a combination of liquid saline electrolytes and Homeopathic Cell Salts combined.

Authored by Judy Hoy, 2858 Pheasant Lane, Stevensville, Montana
©2017 by Judy Hoy. All rights reserved.

While treating small animals in spring 1998, a series of fortunate discoveries made it possible for me to devise a formula that has worked well to help birds and animals recover from injuries, broken bones, chemical exposures, and even certain developmental/birth defects. I have written the following to address the positive effects of using Homeopathic Cell Salts alone or in combination with regular liquid saline electrolytes (Lactated Ringer’s Solution®, Pedialyte®, or  other liquid saline electrolytes) in all vertebrate species, including humans.

The positive effects of cell salts and/or the saline electrolyte/cell salt combination were directly observed on treated young animals, which prompted me to try these on myself, with very good results.   Others, who have used the cell salts or the cell salt/saline electrolyte combination on themselves or on animals in rehabilitation, livestock, pets or children have reported excellent results, so I am sharing these observations in hopes of helping animals of all kinds.

After treating both birds and mammals with the homeopathic product
Hyland’s Bioplasma®, I discovered its 12 cell salts significantly increased the
cell stimulating effect of the commonly used Lactated Ringer’s Solution®,
Pedialyte®, or other liquid electrolytes. The cell salts appear to increase the
negative charge inside an animal’s cells, so seem to be electrolytes in pill
form and thus help restore or maintain the body’s bioelectricity. This enables
the cells to uptake the positively charged minerals needed for normal cellular
processes. Since discovering this advantageous synergy, I always give a tablet
of Bioplasma, and usually a tablet of Hyland’s Calc. Phos. 30X® at the same
time I give or take a liquid saline electrolyte solution.

Several brands of liquid electrolytes are available in pharmacies, grocery
stores, or health food stores. Most liquid electrolytes contain water, sodium
chloride, sodium bicarbonate, potassium chloride, and sugar. My husband
found a recipe used by the United Nations for the dry ingredients added to
water to make electrolytes for dehydrated children. I modified the United
Nations recipe by leaving out the sugar and adding one tablet each of
Bioplasma and Calc. Phos. 30X to make an electrolyte combination that
works much better than normal electrolytes. Sugar is added to the
commercially made electrolyte solutions like Lactated Ringer’s Solution®
and Pedialyte® to stimulate cells to uptake the minerals and water more
quickly. Bioplasma does what sugar is supposed to do and, most importantly,
appears to stimulate cells to transport minerals and water across cell
membranes much more quickly and effectively than sugar, especially if the
sugar fails to do what it is supposed to do, which it often does.

To make the modified United Nations electrolyte formula, I thoroughly mix
the following dry ingredients in a bowl and store them in a closed container:
— one part regular salt (sodium chloride)
— two parts baking soda (sodium bicarbonate)
— one part potassium chloride

Straight potassium chloride can be purchased at health food stores. I use the
salt substitute Morton’s No Salt®, which is mainly potassium chloride and is
easy to find near table salt in grocery stores.

I dissolve one-eighth teaspoon of the dry mixture in eight ounces of water
whenever I need liquid electrolytes for animals in my care, or for me. I always
take, give or dissolve one tablet each of Bioplasma and Calc. Phos. 30X in the
liquid to take the place of sugar in what will be referred to as the “electrolyte
combination” in the rest of this document. Do not take or give the modified
sugarless United Nations recipe for electrolytes without taking or giving at
least the tablet of Bioplasma immediately prior to or at the same time.

Sugar is not particularly good for some birds, such as owls, hawks and other
raptors. If the bird or mammal needs carbohydrates, I give it a drop of a
commercial supplement called Nutrical® the second time I give them the
“electrolyte combination,” about 35 minutes after the first administration. This
ensures they are hydrated enough to be able to digest the carbohydrate
supplement. The Nutrical® can be mixed with the “electrolyte combination”
for treatment of emaciated wild or domestic mammals or birds, but not for
humans, of course. Most veterinary clinics and drug stores carry this or similar
products. Nutrical® is designed to stimulate the digestive system of the animal
to begin working and provides the vitamins and energy necessary for
digestion; it can also stimulate the appetite in animals who refuse to eat.

My hypothesis as to why cell salts significantly expedite cell hydration is that
liquid electrolytes are able to hydrate cells faster when the twelve cell salts are
present to enhance the intercellular electrical activity, promoting faster
transport of minerals and other nutrients into the cells. Stimulating cells to
utilize calcium is especially important for proper cellular function by the
brain, muscles and digestive organs. Thus, administering the cell salts, Calc.
Phos. 30X and Bioplasma, appears to observably benefit digestive processes
and other cellular functions dependent on calcium being readily available to
all the cells that need it. The two cell salt tablets may be mixed with any
electrolyte solution, put into a milk formula after warming it, mixed in food,
or placed directly in the mouth of the person or animal being treated.

The bird or mammal can be offered food appropriate for its age and species as
soon as it is hydrated enough to digest it. For birds, the “electrolyte
combination” may be added to the food or given instead of water at each
feeding until the bird has completely recovered and is eating normally. The
electrolyte solution may be given to mammal young between milk formula
feedings, but there must be at least an hour between the liquid electrolytes and
a milk feeding. Giving milk and liquid electrolytes at the same time to a young
mammal, including human newborns, thus diluting the milk, can cause it to
form a toxin in a newborn’s stomach and make it ill or even cause mortality.

Never dilute milk with water or anything else when using a milk formula
for feeding. Usually after a baby mammal is drinking and digesting milk, it no
longer needs the liquid electrolytes, but the two cell salt tablets should be
dissolved in the warmed milk formula just prior to each feeding to keep the
digestive system and all other cells working at optimum levels.
I have also found, for young mammals who are vomiting or have diarrhea,
that giving one tablet each of Calc. Phos. 30X (6X works well also) and
Bioplasma every two hours, while frequently giving small amounts of
commercial liquid electrolytes or the “electrolyte combination” of the two cell
salts dissolved in the modified United Nations recipe. Milk should not be fed
to mammal young who are vomiting. They can be fed milk when the vomiting
stops, beginning with a small amount every two or three hours. I give both
cell salts to young animals at least three times a day until birds have fledged
or mammals are weaned, promoting good digestion, strong bones and normal
keratin development in the feathers or hair.

To help an adult mammal recover from illness, diarrhea, or vomiting, I give as
much as the animal will drink of the “electrolyte combination” every three
hours. With tame domestic animals, the cell salt tablets can be placed directly
into the animal’s mouth. The “electrolyte combination” usually alleviates
vomiting and diarrhea within a few hours. It is best to continue giving both
cell salt tablets every three hours until a dehydrated animal has completely
recovered from its adverse symptoms including starvation, vomiting, or
diarrhea. If it doesn’t recover within two days, the animal should be seen by a
veterinarian to determine the cause of the symptoms.

Giving the cell salt tablets in the formula to bottle fed young ones three or
more times a day is easily accomplished because newborn mammals should be
fed every three or four hours anyway. Birds heal quickly and sleep at night;
therefore, giving the two cell salt tablets in their food every three hours during
the day seems to work well for any bird with a broken bone or for young birds
with digestive problems or underdeveloped bones. Hatchlings of fast-growing,
larger birds like grouse, chickens, turkeys, or waterfowl should be fed a high
protein game bird starter with at least 30% protein to provide essential
nutrients. If they are also given one tablet each of Calc. Phos. 30X and
Bioplasma in their drinking water morning and night to help their cells utilize
minerals and other nutrients, the young birds usually have no bone, joint or
digestive problems.

One of the 12 cell salts in Bioplasma is Calc. Phos. 3X, which stimulates cells
needing calcium, to more efficiently access the calcium available in the blood
stream. Some important cells that must have adequate amounts of calcium to
function optimally are brain, muscle, digestive system, and bone cells.
Hyland’s Calc. Phos.® (calcarea phosphorica) is sold in several strengths: 3X,
6X, and 30X being the most common. I have found that the cell stimulating
effects of Calc. Phos. 30X last longer and are more effective than the Calc.
Phos. 3X that is in Bioplasma or the Calc. Phos. 6X. The positive effects
produced by Calc. Phos. 30X appears to last close to 6 hours. The positive
effects of Calc. Phos. 6X and Bioplasma appear to last approximately 3 hours.

For example, a broken bone on an injured animal, which has been given the
two homeopathic cell salts, Bioplasma, and Calc. Phos. 30X, will heal in half
the time the bone heals without the cell salts. If the animal is given 6X
instead, the bone heals in two-thirds the normal healing time, a measurable
difference of several days. On most humans, if just Calc. Phos. 30X is given
or taken three times a day while the healing is in progress, broken bones are
completely healed in about three weeks.

It is not surprising that I have found animals with broken bones heal faster
when they are given both homeopathic tablets every three or four hours, even
though Calc. Phos. 30X alone promotes fast bone healing. This is likely
because Bioplasma stimulates uptake of other important minerals necessary
for bone growth. Recovery has been fastest on young animals when both Calc.
Phos. 30X and Bioplasma are taken or given three or four times daily. If given
at least morning and night, faster recovery than what is suggested by medical
professionals has been consistently achieved in most animals, including older
humans. For example, broken bones on three women were completely healed
in three weeks when they took Calc. Phos 30X and Bioplasma during
recovery. All three doctors told his patient it would take at least six weeks for
their bones to heal. They were astounded when the broken bone on their
patient was completely healed in half that time. Broken bones in wildlife
given Calc. Phos. 30X consistently heal in half the time it took prior to using
the cell salts.

The “electrolyte combination” works well on other adverse health problems,
promoting faster recovery from illnesses and digestive problems because
having adequate mineral levels, and normal bioelectricity in the cells, helps
the immune and digestive systems to function more efficiently. Symptoms
related to improper calcium utilization in animals (humans are animals) of all
ages include short-term memory difficulties, digestion problems, improper
calcium deposits, bone loss or broken bones, joint pain, muscle pain, acid
reflux, lactose intolerance, and in newborns, underdeveloped bones,
contracted tendons, weak ankles, disrupted bone growth, hair loss or
underdevelopment of hair, feather loss or underdevelopment of feathers and
others. All of those symptoms have been mitigated on many animals by
giving the “electrolyte combination” or in cases of bone and joint problems,
just the Bioplasma and Calc. Phos. 30X.

Many new studies have shown the herbicide glyphosate (found in Roundup®)
causes facial and other malformations in vertebrates, including fish,
amphibians, birds, and mammals. Most importantly, developmental
malformations in human newborns, especially of the head and face, were
shown to occur in areas with high glyphosate use. High levels of glyphosate
on harvested seeds used for human and animal food result in 80% of tested
processed food sold for human or pet consumption contain biologically
significant levels of glyphosate. Grain products in livestock, poultry, and
rodent feed have also been found to contain various amounts of glyphosate, a
patented mineral chelator. It is likely that exposure to glyphosate during
development is at least partly responsible for the disrupted bone development
on newborns.

Many health problems wildlife rehabbers have remedied in newborns with the
two cell salt tablets alone or the “combination electrolyte” solution appear to
be caused by adverse epigenetic changes during development. The new
patterns of gene expression are regulated by cellular material called the
epigenome. (The prefix, epi-, means above.) The epigenome sits on top of the
genome and just outside of it. These epigenetic “marks” or “switches” on the
genome tell the genes when to turn on or off and dictate the strength of gene

Environmental factors, such as nutrition, radiation, and chemical exposure,
influence gene expression during the development of a young animal.
Exposures to radiation and hormone-disrupting, mineral-chelating chemicals,
including many illegal drugs and numerous pesticides, have increased
significantly in the last 20 years. A combination of the resulting mineral
deficiencies and thyroid hormone disruption appear to be seriously altering
important hormonal functions on developing vertebrate young. Epigenetic
changes can be passed to the next generation, and then passed on again by
those young who survive to reproduce. Even though these changes can be
passed on for several generations, the actual DNA of the genes is not affected.
In other words, they are changes in gene activity that do not involve
alterations to the genetic code. Adverse epigenetic changes to individual
organisms represent a biological response to an environmental factor or
factors. An example of a relatively new epigenetic change in animal young
that has become increasingly common over the last 20 years is disrupted
development of facial bones and the heart in newborns of many bird and
mammal species, including newborn children.

Underdeveloped premaxillary bones in grazing animals (upper jaw in other
mammals and reptiles, or the bone of the upper mandible on birds) and
underdeveloped lower jaw are examples of gene/s for the specific affected
facial bone/s either being turned off too quickly or having too little
expression, likely in addition to mineral deficiencies, resulting in
underdeveloped facial bones. Giving the homeopathic cell salt Calc. Phos.
30X appears to cause the gene to switch back on, or at least somehow
stimulates the affected facial bone or bones to begin growing again and grow
to what is dictated to be normal by the individual’s DNA.

Several goat owners have told me that Nubian goats have a genetic defect,
which often causes them to be born with an underbite. I gave Calc. Phos. 30X
and Bioplasma to my Nubian goats, who were born with underdeveloped
facial bones, resulting in either under or over bite. The cell salts successfully
stimulated the underdeveloped bones to grow to normal size in all 12 of the
affected goat kids and on all other newborn animals I tried it on that had
underdeveloped facial bones. If an underdeveloped bone can be stimulated to
grow to normal with an electrolyte, the disrupted bone development would
have to be caused by an epigenetic change, not a genetic defect. The bone is
clearly genetically programmed to be normal in length for the breed and sex
of the animal or it would be completely impossible to stimulate it to grow to
normal with electrolytes.

An underdeveloped lower jaw resulting in overbite, is far less common in
mammals, and is extremely rare in birds. However, human newborns are
reported to have an increasing prevalence of underdeveloped lower jaw and
chin. Both types of birth defects have been connected to exposure to certain
toxins, particularly herbicides, such as glyphosate, organochlorine compounds
such as 2,4-D and Dicamba, Picloram and others known to disrupt mineral
uptake by the cells. The resulting deficits, especially of calcium, manganese
and other minerals, can disrupt fetal thyroid hormone functions, resulting in
fetal hypothyroidism. In addition, sufficient manganese is absolutely essential
for normal calcium metabolism and bone growth. Consequently, mineral
deficiencies and the resulting fetal hypothyroidism can cause a wide range of
birth defects in developing young, including premature birth, heart defects,
male reproductive malformations, immune system damage, a wide range of
bone and joint problems and weak blood vessels.

Many health problems in young animals that wildlife rehabbers have been
able to remedy with the “electrolyte combination” or just the Calc. Phos. 30X
and Bioplasma tablets placed in the mouth or in their food, are the result of
quite devastating epigenetic changes. We have successfully caused a range of
developmental problems to grow to be normal or close to normal, including
underbite and overbite, crooked legs and toes, contracted tendons, disrupted
feather or hair development, disrupted digestion, and others. Sometimes the
animal’s cells do not respond to this treatment because it does not work on
every individual. Fortunately those who have used this method to help
themselves or animals in their care have had far more successes than failures.

Properly hydrated cells work much better than dehydrated ones. When I am
ill, I drink a glass of water containing 1/8 teaspoon of the dry United Nations
electrolyte formula mixture, and take one tablet each of Bioplasma and Calc.
Phos. 30X first thing in the morning and every four hours after that. I have
found no greater effect on animals or myself by administering two or more
tablets of the cell salts at a time than with just one of each. I hardly ever get
sick, but if I do, I am usually fine after about six hours.

Younger people have reported that taking cell salts twice a day, morning and
evening, is enough to keep them feeling healthy and energetic. Being over 75,
I take the two kinds of cell salt tablets three or four times every day, and drink
plenty of water or other fluids during the day. I have found the electrolyte
combination helps me feel well and pain free, but it may not work as
effectively on others. It depends on the ability of a person’s body to alleviate
what is causing their adverse health issues. The cell salts themselves do not
“cure” anything. Cell salts are electrolytes, not drugs. However, properly
functioning cells can cure illnesses.

When working or playing strenuously, drinking the “electrolyte combination”
every three hours the day before and then during the high activity period
appears to result in less soreness and a higher and longer lasting energy level.
It is important to drink adequate water in addition to the electrolytes. People
who are hiking have reported an observable positive effect when drinking the
“electrolyte combination” two or three times a day. Show horses given the
“electrolyte combination” to drink, before, during, and for at least a day after a
show, have had the same positive results, with high energy levels and less
muscle soreness. This would likely work on racehorses.

I know of several people who have taken the “electrolyte combination” four
times a day for several days prior to and right after having surgery. They
recovered more rapidly from surgery, had little to no pain, and healed more
quickly than people who had the same surgery but didn’t take the “electrolyte
combination.” This even occurred for elderly patients. Such fast recovery
from injuries suggests that, besides promoting rapid hydration of the cells, the
“electrolyte combination” or the cell salts alone likely help stimulate the
immune system to work at optimum levels. Animals with injuries recover
much more quickly and antibiotics appear to work more effectively when the
“electrolyte combination” or just the two cell salts are given to the injured
individual. Adult humans can drink the “electrolyte combination” at least
twice a day and plain water the rest of the time. For other adult mammals, a
tablespoon of the United Nations electrolyte formula can be dissolved in a
five gallon pail of drinking water with cell salt tablets added or placed directly
in the animal’s mouth.

Taking the “electrolyte combination” has worked well to quickly alleviate
symptoms on people who have hypersensitive reactions to perfumes or
pesticides. Exposure to such toxins can cause coughing, headache, and
swelling and reddening of the face and eyes. Exposed individuals may also
experience a red rash, burning eyes, nausea, and disorientation.

The reason certain symptoms tend to recur on some individuals is usually
because of their greater sensitivity to toxic chemical combinations in the air,
which is now literally an airborne chemical soup. All life is continuously
exposed by ingestion, inhalation, and skin contact, but some individuals are
much more sensitive to it than others. According to studies, approximately
37% of the adult human population in the U.S. experiences Multiple Chemical
Sensitivity. The majority of chemically sensitive people (about 70%) are

Before and after they are born, young animals, including children, can be
much more seriously..

  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Separate tags by commas
To access this feature, please upgrade your account.
Start your free month
Free Preview