Human Growth Hormone (hGH)
Proving Report
Proving Report
Symptoms in the
language of the prover are organized in the traditional homeopathic format (as
found in Boericke) and selected according to the following criteria:
Proving Protocol
Clinical Trial Design
Homeopathic drug
provings are similar but not identical to Phase I clinical trials outlined in
the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) and the European Union (EU) guidelines for
clinical research. These guidelines have been used to design this trial.
Clinical Investigators
Proving Director -
David Riley, MD
Proving Supervisors - Sally Lenetsky, RN
Proving Coordinator - Anna Bell Romero
Methodology
Data Collecting -
Diary/journal format
Study Design - Double group (6X and 6C) with placebo run-in
Method of Binding - Double-Blind
Controls - Intra-individual controls, placebo run-in, placebo controls
Medications
The medication used in
this homeopathic drug proving was prepared by Dolisos in the United States
according to HPCUS guidelines.
Subject Populations
There were 50 subjects
in this homeopathic drug proving, 20 subjects received HGH in a 6X potency, 20
subjects received HGH in a 6C potency, and 10 subjects received a placebo. 50
subjects: 39 women and 11 men ranging in age from 23 to 56 years. 40 subjects
received verum, 10 received placebo. There were 4 dropouts from this
homeopathic drug proving.
Subject Inclusion Criteria - each subject
Subject Exclusion
Criteria
- each subject
General Drug Proving Outline
This homeopathic drug
proving was conducted between December 1998 and February 1999. Subjects were
recruited by advertisement. Subjects were included according to the above
criteria and signed an informed consent upon entry into the proving. They
attended at least two training sessions about homeopathy and a homeopathic drug
proving prior to being accepted into the homeopathic drug proving. Each subject
was given a copy of a previously conducted proving at the first training
session. A routine medical evaluation was performed on all accepted subjects.
This homeopathic drug proving lasted 7 weeks per subject.
Phase I was a one week pre-proving observation period which established the
baseline rhythm of each subject's daily life in a diary format. Phase II was a
two week placebo run-in phase. Phase III was a two week medication phase during
which subjects were randomized to one of three groups, 6X HGH, 6C HGH, or placebo.
Phase IV was a two week post-proving observation phase. This was a single
case-study with three types of control: an intra-individual control comparing
the pre-medication phase with medication phase, a placebo run-in control as the
first medication phase, and placebo controls during the second medication
phase.
Medication Adminstration
The homeopathic
medications were administered two weeks apart in a similar fashion. The first
administration of the medication was a placebo. The medication was administered
3 times daily until the subject developed symptoms or for seven days. They
continued keeping their journal throughout this phase of the clinical trial.
Each subject reported any potential symptoms to the proving director or
supervisors as soon as possible. After two weeks the subjects were given a
second medication administered in a similar fashion for seven days. The second
bottle was verum or placebo according to a randomized code known only by the
sponsor.
Symptom Collection and
Evaluation
Subjects noted symptoms
in their journals for the duration of the homeopathic drug proving and were in
regular contact with the proving director or supervisor. The symptoms
experienced after the administration of the medication were compared with the
baseline pre-proving observations and evaluated according to the criteria
mentioned at the beginning of this report. Symptoms experienced during the
randomization phase were excluded for a subject if they were the same symptoms
experienced during the placebo run-in phase. All subjects completed an exit
interview where each symptom experienced was reviewed again for additional
clarification. All symptoms were reviewed by the proving supervisors and the
proving director. Some subjects experienced a relief from chronically
experienced symptoms; these have been included in the final report. There were
no adverse effects noted at the time of the exit interview or during the
post-proving observation period.
Proving Time-line
|
Week |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
|
Initial
Interview |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inclusion/Exclusion
Criteria |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial
Evaluation |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject
Education |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phase
I: Pre-proving observation |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phase
II: Placebo run-in phase |
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phase
II: Medication/Placebo |
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
Data
collection in Journal |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
|
|
Phase
III: Exit Interview |
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
|
Phase
III: Post-proving observation |
|
|
|
|
|
x |
x |
|
Observation
for adverse effects |
|
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
Materia Medica - Human
Growth Hormone
Materia medicus (encyclopedia of drug effects) represents
the therapeutic indications for the tested drug as a result of the proving.
The essential characteristics (in bold) are defined as those
symptoms that occurred the most frequently in the provers.
Precise detailed toxicological studies have been conducted
for the majority of the modern drugs in use today, i.e., in practice, their
overdose effects are known. These effect could be compared to a homeopathic
"proving." Thus, according to homeopathic reasoning, it should be
possible to obtain therapeutic results using diluted, dynamized preparations of
these drugs in two situations: a) patients with symptoms similar to those
notoriously caused by the drug on healthy subjects, b) patients presenting such
symptoms as adverse effects of the drug administered at high doses.
Essential Characterisitcs
Many vivid dreams were
noted by a variety of provers. Mental concentration was noted to be improved.
In general there was a consistent observation in seven of the subjects of a
noticeable increase in their level of energy and in related areas of mental
concentration and strength. Appetites were usually increased (11 subjects) or
occasionally decreased. Nasal congestion. Ulcerations of the mouth. Cramping
pains in various parts of the body.
Mind
Vivid dreams.
Improvement in concentration. Colorful , vivid dreams. Strange dreams. Discontented,
impatient and irritable. Headaches.
Generalities
Energy increased (cured
symptom) as well as decrease in energy. Desires for a variety of foods and
flavors including salty, chocolate, sweets, and soups.
Head Pain
Headaches: worse in the temples and behind the
ears and also behind the eyes. Pain quality was like a band. Headaches worse on
the left side.
Eye
Irritation with
watering
Nose
Congestion with sneezing. Congestion alternating
with coryza.
Face
Tightness. Irritation.
Dryness.
Mouth
Apthae.
Throat
Irritation with
scratching and cough with phlegm.
Stomach
Increase in appetite
in 11 subjects as well as a decrease in two subjects. Increase in thirst.
Abdomen
Cramping in the lower
abdomen, worse on the left side.
Rectum
Constipation without a feeling of urging. Pain
in the rectum when urinating.
Stool
Sticky consistency.
Bladder
Pain in the rectum when
urinating.
Genitalia, Female
Uterine cramping. One case of return of normal menses
(cured symptom).
Chest
Cramping in the area of
the ribcage.
Back
Cramping.
Extremities/Extremity Pain
Cramping with pain
throughout the extremities, worse in the calves. Eruptions on the thighs.
Sleep
Restless or deep sleep