H1N1 Prevention for Animals

Since it now appears that both ferrets and one cat have contracted (what is believed to be) the H1N1 flu from sick human family members,

http://oregonvma.org/news/h1n1

 I’m looking for some flu prevention advice for these animals should someone in their household become sick with the flu.

Many of my friends and family and I have Influenzinum 200C on hand for prevention should we become exposed or begin to develop symptoms.  And in most cases, this is the ONLY remedy my not-so-homoepathically-literate friends have. 

Though this is a higher potency than I would like to use for an animal (generally speaking), couldn’t a very small watery dose of the Influenzinum 200C be safely used for cats, ferrets, and pigs?  How about birds?

Thanks for any advice.

Edward, thanks for the suggestion of further dilution in another cup or bottle of water – basically a type of split-dose dilution.  I hadn’t thought of that.

In this situation, it is likely that the genus epidemicus won’t be known.  And even if it were known, most people won’t have that remedy or ready access to it.

I’m not so concerned about whether or not Influenzinum will prevent illness altogether, but rather if it will attenuate or reduce in intensity any flu that does occur.  Though the idea of causing possible aggravation to a person or an animal is certainly an unsavory prospect, it is also likely that a family dealing with the flu is unlikely to pay much attention to the family cat until the animal needs prompt veterinary care.  At that point, the cat will be subjected to any number of orthodox treatments, none of which would win Hahnemann’s approval.     I’d rather see a homeopathic aggravation than an allopathic one.

You said:

“Where influenzinum may have an indiciation for use at the firsts signs of flu-like illness (to attenuate the disease?) this does not mean that it would be an effective preventative. Having tested this approach a little myself, it did fail everytime.”

I’m not sure what you mean.  Are you saying that Influenzinum failed to prevent illness even though it worked once symptoms developed?

Thanks very much for taking time to explain all this, Irene.  I have been following your posts over on one of the Yahoo groups but it is very helpful to have it all together here in one place.  I know it takes time to put information like this together, so thank you for that.

Good to know that potencies for animals are no different than for animals and birds!  I confess that out of necessity, I’ve used the same potency on a pet that I’d taken myself a few times and it worked just fine.  The only thing I did differently was reduce the size of the dose.

Sounds like those Fibonacci series remedies are a big hit!  Thanks for putting them to the test.  I’m sure Dr. Roz is thrilled to see them put to good use here in the USA.

I’m very hesitant to label any ‘flu-like illness’ as H1N1 unless there is a confirmed PCR test analysis to back it up, which isn’t done much because of time and expense involved.

This has been a crazy ‘flu season’ already with a lot of illness, but looking at the CDC ‘flu-like illness’ stats from the week ending November 21^st, most of these illnesses are not even any type of ‘flu’ at all!  They are something else entirely.  In all 10 regions of the country, only 11% - 47% are testing positive for any type of flu:

3 regions - under 20% testing positive for flu of any kind

3 regions  - under 30%.....

2 regions - under 40%.....

2 regions - under 50%.....

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/

I’m also advising people to be careful NOT to overuse any preventative remedy. 

As I posted elsewhere at Hpathy, I may have heard about a couple of cases of Influenzinum 200C 'provings' when taken for prevention.   It’s very difficult to say.  I guess that’s one of the pitfalls of homeoprophylaxis that I never thought much about:  Proving symptoms are likely to be the very same symptoms that the user is attempting to prevent.  Makes it difficult to determine where the symptoms are coming from. 

Thank you for your frank discussion and for citing part of Aphorism 141, Irene.  I’m sure there are those on this forum who would argue the point in that Aphorism.  I’m not one of them; as a layperson, I simply have not seen enough.  However, I certainly don’t discount my own homeopathic experiences, so I try not to discount the experiences of others, either.

I’m not sure I understand something….. other than preventative measures, you are saying that every person you have treated has either been seen and PCR tested by a physician, or PCR tested in a hospital?

As I’m sure you know, the ‘quick tests’ used in doctors’ offices are nearly worthless, though some docs still insist upon using those tests to ‘confirm’ cases.  That’s why I am curious.

In any event, I do know that your region of the country has had one of the highest incidences of genuine ‘flus’.  And it would be unfair of me to assume that your specific locale has the same incidence as the entire NW region (in the 40 – 47% range of illnesses actually PCR positive for some type of true ‘flu’); the percentage in Spokane certainly could be much higher than that. 

No, you did not give the impression that you ‘blindly’ selected any remedy over another.  No worries there.

**”What do you call overuse and upon what research is your advice on "overuse" based?”**

and

**”So then it is a benefit not a pitfall of homeoprophylaxis, to get symptoms.”**

and

**”Prophylaxis is by definition something use to PREVNT illness, which is taken by a HEALTHY individual.”**

Again, as a layperson, I rely upon the experiences of homeopaths.  You can read the warnings from homeopaths about homeoprophylaxis right on this Hpathy forum.  Some report adverse, long-standing problems from a single dose of an unneeded remedy.

As you mentioned, prophylaxis is generally taken by a “healthy individual”.  Many of the persons I am in contact with have chronic illnesses or conditions.  Is it known how this might affect the outcome of homeoprophylaxis? 

Thus, in my view, a conservative approach is best, especially for the inexperienced.  But it wouldn’t make sense to forego homeoprophylaxis altogether because of fear.  These are people most likely to relapse or develop lingering illness from a simple case of ‘the flu’ (or – God forbid – getting a flu shot)!

While Isaac Golden may get away with taking both Influenzinum and Oscillococcinum on a regular basis throughout the 2009-2010 flu season, there are many who will end up with proving symptoms if they do the same.  I. Golden is very experienced with preventative medicine and he’ll know what to do in a given situation.  The average person unfamiliar with homeopathy will not, as you mentioned yourself.

**”If the symptoms occur right after a dose of prophylaxis remedy then it is clear that is the cause and the remedy need to be stopped.”**

Ah, this gets to the heart of my confusion.  Proving symptoms within just a few hours would certainly make it easy.

But what can we conclude from someone with a chronic conditions who takes a 4^th weekly dose of Influenzinum 200C (one ‘configured’ for this flu season), then about a day later develops headache with nausea and vomiting, extreme weakness and fatigue along with general ill feeling?  Those are general flu symptoms and are also part of the Influenzinum picture.

(I suspect this one was a proving.)

What about a healthy person who takes their 5^th (or 6^th – he wasn’t sure) weekly dose of Influenzinum (from 1918 virus), then 2-3 days later suddenly develops diarrhea with profuse sweating, then nausea with vomiting, followed by a general unwell feeling and great weakness for 2-3 days?

(I suspect this was a case of gastroenteritis – ‘stomach flu’.)

It doesn’t help that I’m unable to find a formal ‘proving’ of Influenzinum, so details of the remedy picture are limited.  No Mentals, for instance (in my books).

The length of time elapsed from taking of the medicine to the onset of symptoms isn’t all that helpful either.  In formal provings, symptoms are noted for many days after the last dose of medicine for the simple reason that symptoms may still occur.

Thus, my confusion.

**”Obviously it takes MAN Y doses of remedy to cause a proving.”**

Surely you did not mean to say this, Irene?  The statement simply isn’t true, as written.  I not only know this from personal experience, I know it from reading the details of a few contemporary provings.  Provers may begin to experience symptoms even before they take any remedy!  Therefore, in one proving I read (Aurum-arsenicosum), the documentation of symptoms experienced by the provers commenced 5 days prior to the first dose of any remedy taken.

**”If a healthy person takes any remedy long enough they WILL get proving symptoms.”**

Now THAT we can certainly agree on!

What a ridiculous, arrogant reply.  I made it clear it was Isaac Golden's recommendation for flu homeoprophylaxis.