Dear Batakali,
There have been two significant studies testing fibromyalgia and homeopathic treatment. The first one was in 1989 by Dr. Peter Fisher published in the BMJ. This was a double-blind, placebo controlled trial with a cross-over. In 1989, fibromyalgia was called "fibrositis" (this word is used in its title). This trial only admitted those patients into the trial that fit ONE specific medicine, Rhus tox. Because they wanted to have this trial have a cross-over, they wanted to use a low potency dose (6C) because this lower dose tends to have more short-term benefits than long-term ones (though we homeopaths also know that these low potencies occasionally have long-term effects, but such are the exception to the rule)
The second trial was conducted at the University of Arizona by Iris Bell, MD, PhD and team. Below is a summary of this trial (taken from the ebook that I wrote on homeopathy and homeopathic research, available through www.homeopathic.com). This trial was NOT a cross-over trial. They used daily doses of LM potencies because these does are considered "low potencies." What is interesting in this trial is not simply the significant clinical benefits that individualized homeopathic treatment provided but also the different EEG brain wave activity that took place in the homeopathic patients as compared with those taking the placebo.

Excerpt from the chapter on Fibromyalgia from Dana's ebook:
In addition to this study, a more recent study published in the highly respected journal, Rheumatology (published by the British Society for Rheumatology) also found statistically significant results from homeopathic treatment. Researchers from the University of Arizona in collaboration with homeopaths conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with 62 fibromyalgia patients (Bell, Lewis, Brooks, et al., 2004). Patients were randomized to receive an oral daily dose of an individually chosen homeopathic medicine in LM potency (or a placebo). Patients were evaluated at baseline, 2 months, and 4 months.
The study found that 50% of patients given a homeopathic medicine experienced a 25% or greater improvement in tender point pain on examination, as compared to only 15% of those who were given a placebo experienced a similar degree of improvement (P=0.008). After 4 months, the homeopathic patients also rated the “helpfulness of the treatment� significantly greater than did those who were given a placebo (P=0.004). It is therefore not surprising that the study also showed that the average number of remedies recommended by the homeopaths was substantially higher to those in the placebo group as compared with the real treatment group.
One special additional feature of this trial was that the first dose of medicine was given by olfaction (by smell) and that both groups were monitored with EEG. The researchers found that there was a significant and identifiable difference in the EEG readings in patients who were given the real homeopathic medicine as compared to those given the placebo (Bell, Lewis, Schwartz, et al, 2004a). Each patient had three laboratory sessions, including at baseline, at 3 months, and at 6 months after initial treatment. The researchers found that the active treatment group experienced significant increases in the EEG relative alpha magnitude, while patients given a placebo experienced a decrease in this measurement (P=0.003).
The combined evidence of clinical improvement along with objective physiological response from the homeopathic medicine makes the results of this trial of additional significance.


Dana Ullman

The first study has been criticised in The Lancet on the basis that the conclusions were not supported by the data because of faulty analysis. I cannot find enough information to comment.



The second study did not show any significant differences until the differences were "adjusted" because of differences in characteristics between the remedy and placebo groups.

The differences in characteristics between the remedy and placebo groups were as follows:

In the homoeopathy group, 33% were on antihistamines, whereas in the placebo 0% were on antihistamines.
In the homoeopathy group, 12% exhibited depression, whereas in the placebo group 5% exhibited depression.
In the homoeopathy group, 7% exhibited anger/hostility, whereas in the placebo group 3% exhibited anger/hostility.
In the homoeopathy group, 98 patients exhibited joint pain, whereas in the placebo group 82 patients exhibited joint pain.

The way the outcome was adjusted for these characteristics seems hard to justify. For example, "regression to the mean" would suggest the adjustment should be made in the opposite direction.

In any case, even the adjusted differences are minor except for tender points (but, strangely, not the affective and sensor pain scores).

The authors recommend further trials employing larger number of patients for longer periods of time.



There is no data on the EEG so it is impossible to comment.