Hi, I have a female relative who recieved herpes in March during her college spring break. She has had 1 outbreak since in April(now it's been 7 months outbreak free) At my local drug store I stumbled upon some homeopathy medicine. The name of it is HRPZ Drops. I looked at the ingredients and it has Herpes Zoster, Herpes I and II in it along with some other ingredients. She took it in April 1 time. You're suppose to put some drops in water and drink it. She did this and has not had an outbreak since. She is not on suppessant medicine either. I have done some research on the homeopathy theory and they think by giving your body a dose of the virus a little at a time it's able to see the virus and fight it off. Kinda like the flu shot. Could it be possible that her body was able to fight it off, and she doesn't have herpes anymore? If so, what test can she take to find out?

A homeopathy remedy claims to contain the herpes virus?? That's a new one on me.

My understanding of homeopathy is that it is based on the principle of "like cures like," using the *energy* of that substance. So it would make sense that within that logic, a form of the virus would be used to cure or at least treat the virus in a person.

Homeopathic remedies are solutions with the ingredient in question that has been diluted so many times that only the "energy" remains and virtually none of the actual substance. So perhaps the makers of this remedy your relative found had combined the base liquid (water or alcohol usually) with something that contained the herpes virus(es). (Sounds a bit gross, if you think about it. LOL) Then diluted the solution in the usual way so that only the "energy" remained. I'm theorising here; I've never heard of such a remedy.

So it's different from what a flu shot does. A flu shot injects you with actual antibodies. A homeopathic remedy operates on an "energy only" principle, and as such has typically been panned by traditional doctors.

If your relative becomes cured (no trace of the virus in her system), it will be a first. I doubt this would be the case, but she could take a blood test I guess. I don't know if that would accurately test it though, since a blood test measures antibodies which are an "after-the-fact" phenomenon and probably linger in your system forever. It wouldn't necessarily tell you if the virus has been destroyed at its source. I don't know if there's a way to measure that without going to a research lab for special testing (which would be very expensive IF she found someone willing to do it).

I would think a remedy like that would be more likely to treat an outbreak, rather than eradicate the virus altogether. It would be interesting to monitor any changes over time for her if she continues using this stuff. She might want to keep a record of when she uses the remedy, when she gets ANY symptoms, etc. However, I think it would be wise for her to still treat sexual encounters as risky for transmitting the virus, to be fair to her partner(s).

TheOneInFour

I keep reading about "cures" and I have heard of people who had herpes and do not have it anymore. I have tried to get in contact with one, but I received no reply to an email address posted on a message board over a year ago. Apparently, there are people who don't ever get outbreaks. Personally, I believe that it is possible right now to cure herpes, but what method I believe actually does the job I don't know. I've never read about the homeopathic cure but you've sparked my interest - I'll have to add this to my list of "Quests" for a cure, LOL.

I don't know that much about homeopathic medicine. That's why I didn't know it was "energy" and not the virus itself. If you look at the product it tells the ingredients. It say herpes zoster 12x,herpes I and II 12x. All I know is, we got it at our local drug store, she took it one time and has not had an outbreak since. It made since to me that her body sees this virus or "energy" and kills it. Is it unusual for people not taking supressent medicine to not have an outbreak in 7 months? If anyone else has info on this product or another one like it I would love to know. Thanks so much.

------------------


[This message has been edited by moderator2 (edited 01-04-2003).]

Originally posted by dazed and confused:
Is it unusual for people not taking supressent medicine to not have an outbreak in 7 months?

No, it's not unusual for someone to go for long periods of time without an outbreak, but every person's pattern of outbreaks, sets of triggers, etc. are different. If she wants to determine if the remedy is the cause of the reprieve, she could try going off it for a while and see if they come back. But it may not come back for a while and it can be very hard to know for sure. I was on antivirals for 1-2 years and I went without an OB for close to a year after I stopped them. Now they seem to have settled down to 3-6 per year and I take antivirals to speed healing.

So I suspect that anything that breaks the rhythm of your outbreaks could possibly disrupt it for a while even after you stop, but that doesn't mean your body doesn't have the virus anymore and it doesn't mean you're not shedding the virus without symptoms.

TheOneInFour

You see...she doesn't take it anymore. She just took it that one time in April. She doesn't take anything now.... not even the HRPZ drops. That's why I was wondering if this is unusual?

------------------

Originally posted by dazed and confused:
You see...she doesn't take it anymore. She just took it that one time in April. She doesn't take anything now.... not even the HRPZ drops. That's why I was wondering if this is unusual?

Oh, okay. It's still hard to say, especially since she only just recently contracted it. There hasn't been any time to see what her "normal" cycle and outbreak pattern would be.

I still doubt that it means she will never get an outbreak again or that the virus has become permanently dormant or even eradicated. I've known people with medical conditions far easier to deal with than herpes who were greatly helped by homeopathic treatment, but it took months or years of carefully working with a trained homeopath.

But it seems possible that this remedy might have a role in her lack of outbreaks (even if just temporarily). Sounds interesting. I'll keep an eye out for it.

TheOneInFour

(If you look at the product it tells the ingredients. It say herpes zoster 12x,herpes I and II 12x. All I know is, we got it at our local drug store, she took it one time and has not had an outbreak since.)

I would like to know what the product name is. I believe there are many things that can curb obs, I also think our government and FDA HAVE THE CURE! But there is so much money being made off the antivirus drugs that they will not let the drugs that really work out. You know when we were all given small pock vaccines way back when, you hardly ever heard about Herpes. Now they took it away from us and of our population has it. Now Our president wants congress to bring it out because of germ warfare and congress is trying to fight him on it. Why is that, Now I have already heard one member of this board say that it might be risky to take the small pocks shot but when it was mandatory for the shot to be given out I never heard any thing bad about it. All I am saying is there is great hope for any one having Herpes because there is a cure out there.

The product name is Professional Health Products ltd. I just want everyone to know I'm not saying this is a cure. I don't know that much about Homeopathy. And you're right (1 in 4) she has not had it that long to really know the pattern of outbreaks. Maybe she was one of the lucky ones that only have one outbreak. I wanted to let everyone know what we've tried and what's out there. Just trying to help.
Also, about the smallpox vaccine. I was also the one that looked up cold sores in my old mothers encyclopedia. It does say they used to treat herpes 1 with the smallpox vaccine. So I think there is alot we just don't know about vaccines and homeopathy. Especially homeopathy. If anyone has anymore info on this product, if they have used it or another one like it I would love to know. I believe we have to keep each other informed because the government or FDA isn't. United we stand divided we fall.
God Bless!




------------------


[This message has been edited by moderator2 (edited 01-04-2003).]

I have had obs for a strait two years now with out any time inbetween. I just need a brake in it all and I will be fine. Thanks for your help.

[This message has been edited by moderator2 (edited 01-04-2003).]

I have been treated by a certified classical homeopath for three years for ailments unrelated to herpes. However, my used-to-be almost monthly, intense genital outbreaks have dwindled down to two to three times a year outbreaks that are much less intense than they used to be, and I expect that the outbreaks will eventually totally disappear.

It is very important to be properly diagnosed by a homeopath - the nature of homeopathy makes it so that not everyone will take the same remedy for the same ailment. It sounds odd, but it's true. Also, the potencies are very important to prescribe correctly.

I urge anyone who is skeptical or interested to seek out a classical homeopath - ask for references of people they have treated and go talk to the homeopath. I think you'll find it an interesting and fruitful experience. I doubt that "over-the-counter" homeopathic remedies will give lasting results, just because the remedy is not chosen solely by your disease, but by many other things.

Check it out! It's cost-effective and it improves your whole body / mind / spirit instead of supressing the symptoms, costing you a bundle, and giving you side effects like "regular" medicines.

Good luck!

And for the counter-argument... ;-)

It's important to note that in the entire history of homeopathy there has never been any real data supporting its effectiveness -- not one study or lab analysis has confirmed that it works with any higher degree of frequency than pure chance.

The caveat here is that I'm trained in Western science and very much devoted to that discipline. I believe everything has a rational explanation -- even alternative medicine -- but I've yet to find any rational explanation for homeopathy other than vague mentions of "vibrations" and "energies" and mumbo-jumbo that is complete fiction. Most of my colleagues believe that any benefit is similar to placebo. I've been "treated" by multiple homeopathic physicians out of curiosity for very measurable conditions, and not once was I able to discover a noticeable medical benefit from the treatments. Homeopathic "remedies" are not controlled substances, therefore cannot contain enough of any substance to cause your body to create antibodies.

Naturopathic treatments and other alternative approaches -- the good ones -- are at least partially supported by lab data. It's important to note that homeopathy has failed every formal test it's been subjected to. If you'd like the skeptic's point-of-view presented in an easily digested format, The Skeptic's Dictionary has a great article: http://skepdic.com/homeo.html

Again, this is the opinion of a biologist, so you might consider me a hostile witness. ;-)

[This message has been edited by nebulonic (edited 08-30-2003).]

[This message has been edited by nebulonic (edited 08-31-2003).]

All very interesting.

The drops being discussed here also contain echinacea, lysine and croton, plus other stuff (it won't let me cut n paste, sadly). This company also sells Human Growth Hormone in homeopathic form - yikes(?!). Also 'Geopathic stress drops' which sppear to contain 'pathogenic radiation'. Hmmmmm.

I don't think there is magic going on here. And let's not knock the placebo effect. I'm all for it. I have not had an OB since starting OOO about 3 weeks ago. Ergo - it works!!! :-)

Re outbreak patterns: they are different for everyone. I first got H 10 years ago. Fairly regular OBs for about 18 months. Then - nothing for 6 years. Sadly, there was less awareness of asymptomatic shedding back then (actually, make that none at all...).

As a comparison, I used to get thrush really badly (sometimes at the same time as an OB), and tried many, many different things. Some of them appeared to work for a bit, and then boom, it came back. Not enough faith on my part? ;-)

I also tried homeopathy for an IBS-type thing - nothing.

If you're getting OBs like that, allforone, please go to the doctor and get some meds. It will not make you a Capitalist Running Dog!

However, you are not *entirely* out of the ballpark with the 'conspiracy' thing, only in that a similar thing happened with a cure for stomach ulcers. A cheap simple remedy somehow managed not to get promoted quite so much as the rest....

Also, AIUI, the formula for eg everlasting lightbulbs and non-laddering tights have been around, but it is not in companies' interests to reveal them. That I can believe.

But let's not get too excited about 'cures'.

Garnet

[This message has been edited by Garnetflower (edited 08-31-2003).]

Oh, the everlasting lightbulb thing has always totally chapped me. http://www.healthboards.com/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by nebulonic (edited 08-31-2003).]

OK. Maybe not 'everlasting', but long lasting anyway! :-)

Originally posted by nebulonic:
And for the counter-argument... ;-)

If you'd like the skeptic's point-of-view presented in an easily digested format, The Skeptic's Dictionary has a great article...

Nebulonic, I'm going to have to disagree that the Skeptic's dictionary presents a viewpoint that has any real objectivity at all (and therefore value). No, I haven't looked at the article (sorry, I'm rushed), but I do know that everything else I've ever looked at on their site is HIGHLY biased AGAINST the subject they're commenting on, especially if it is in any way controversial or involved in right-brain thinking or processing.

I have frankly become disgusted by them and have given up finding anything of value on their site. To me a sceptic is someone who takes an *objective* viewpoint. Anything I've ever found on their site is highly subjective, biased and often VERY inaccurate in their facts. They take HUGE liberties in presenting data in a very biased, negative way which is invariably used to dismiss any validity in their subject matter. To them it is black or white; right or wrong; there is no in-between where things have a degree or potential of validity. I would expect they treat homeopathy in the same way.

Anyone who knows me here knows I am one of the most cautious and sceptical people around (just ask Nonexist http://www.healthboards.com/ubb/wink.gif ) but I really have to say this site really makes me burn.

My 2 cents.

TheOneInFour

[This message has been edited by TheOneInFour (edited 08-31-2003).]

OneInFour -- You're usually so rational, but your post was so not! You can't discount an article without reading it. http://www.healthboards.com/ubb/smile.gif

I'm not a huge fan of the Skeptic's Dictionary either... but the article I referenced is an easily digestible, and quite rational, coutner-argument against homeopathy that highlights the fundamental contradictions in very clear, non-jargony terms. There's nothing there that made me wince, and it neatly summarizes the difficulty that virtually all scientists have with this modality.

I didn't discount the article, I discounted the website as a whole. Now that I've had a chance to look at the article (I explained I was rushed earlier), I stand by my opinion. The article is not the worst I've seen on the site, but it's still hardly what I would call an impartial treatment of the subject.

It starts with 3 quotes that all discount and dismiss any possible validity of homeopathy. They proceed to their summation in wording that at times is condescending and dismissive, never displaying any real open-mindedness. They don't disparage it with every single word, but they sure don't approach it with an open, unbiased mind IMO.

They demonstrate that they do not have the first understanding of the principles behind homeopathy, insisting on assessing it only against strict left-brain scientific principles that IMO do not always fit well with all systems, particularly right-brain oriented systems.

Just because I might not understand how something works, that doesn't mean I would or should disparage it or completely discount any possible validity. They do. My lack of understanding doesn't necessarily prove that something has no validity; it only means I can't explain it by the system of reasoning I'm approaching it with. They continually conclude that their lack of ability to explain it in their own terms proves absolute lack of validity. This strikes me as arrogant.

As far as I can tell, the Skeptic's Dictionary people are not sceptics in the true sense of the word (unbiased, impartial). Rather, they are debunkers determined to trash and discount any shred of validity or value in right-brain systems and conclude (using their own systems of left-brain assessment) that these systems are not worth any serious consideration. IMO their "scepticism" is more akin to "cynicism."

Their approach is not one of open exploration but that of negative explanation. They seem to be "sceptical" about everything except their own scepticism. Personally, I do not respect their approach as I find it heavily biased with a preconceived agenda.

Okay, there's my 2 more cents worth.

TheOneInFour

BTW, my own take on homeopathy? I've found it doesn't usually do much for me (occasionally but not always), but I know people whom I consider rational, grounded individuals who find it has helped them greatly and they swear by it. I suspect there are some people who can and do respond to a much subtler influence (which homeopathy is), and there are others (like myself) who respond better to something with a bit more brute force behind it. http://www.healthboards.com/ubb/smile.gif

The(Brutal)OneInFour http://www.healthboards.com/ubb/wink.gif