France LMHI Report 2010

Dr Philippe M. SERVAIS, NVP France

E-mail: servais[at]club-internet.fr

Paris, 23 April 2010


The organisation of the medicine in France is in full process of being restructured, which is really going to affect the future of homeopathy. Official health channels are already being organised. All doctors in France are obliged to subscribe. The "main wheel" of this organisation is the referent general practitioner. Each citizen has to refer to him. Obviously, the homeopath can become the referent practitioner but he must respect the functioning of the whole chain (which means: respecting the protocols of the scientific medicine!). It is therefore necessary for the trade medical society of homeopaths to either accept or refuse the official rules. It would be dangerous to refuse: the homeopathic medicine would be rejected and would run the risk of non—authorization.


As regards the situation of homeopathy in general, let me give you a small lesson in history: Homeopathy has a long tradition in France, starting with the arrival of _ Hahnemann in Paris where he stayed until his death. In the beginning, linked with the new and revolutionary medical semiology, the homeopathy could be _ integrated into the medical world. The ”French homeopathy" (pluralism or now so—called clinical homeopathy) was born from this integration (adaptation to the allopathic train of thought).

At the same time, since the middle of the 20th century, thanks to Pierre Schmidt and after him to Homoeopathia Europea, several work groups were created by the unicist (or classic) homeopaths. These groups, which stayed independent, turned away from the french Homeopathy. Up to not very long ago, there was a certain hostility between the two parties. A few years ago, the unicist groups got unified which led to the creation of the French Medical Federation of Classical Homeopathy. This federation has been affiliated to the ECH and the LMHI from the beginning. The representatives of both homeopathic communities (unicist and pluralist) worked together at the unification of the french homeopathic community. A common scientist society was created recently in order to have one voice to deal ‘ with the medical authorities.


As regards the education, the French National Institute of Homeopathy, accredited by the ECH, ensures an education (unicist) of high quality in the following two schools: INHF-Paris and Dauphiné-Savoie. The other french schools (pluralist, CHF, Bobigny etc.) do not yet respect the standard of quality which is necessary for the diploma recognised by the ECH and the LMHI. The number of unicist homeopaths in France is estimated at 500, even though only 247 are registered with the federation and only half of them really pay their fees. There are many more pluralists, which is partially due to the fact that the homeopathic laboratories propose a quick and easy training. In the unicist schools, we are starting to create "information links" in order to allow the pluralist to discover classic homeopathy. The decreasing tension gives us hope for the future.


As regards the research in homeopathy, the situation is equally encouraging. It is mainly due to the work of Dr Helene Renoux and her new provings, which she carries out according to the rules. The last one is Morpho gmsseiq menelaus occidemalis soon to be included into the Radar program. The clinical research is also very active in France. We are even amongst the leaders. The only problem is the language: our work is hardly known overseas because it is no translated into English. As a matter of fact, we have not enough time and no competent translators. We would like the international community to share our comprehension and our knowledge concerning the Materia Medica. As regards this subject, we realise that our requirements of quality are sometimes higher than those of our colleagues in other countries. The tendency at the moment (I have to say that we are worried) is wanting to find all the time new remedies not using the inductive classical method anymore but a deductive method which is going away from the principals of homeopathy · (table of Mendeleiev, classification of plants etc.). We think that this is very dangerous for the Homeopathy because one is trying to find "martingales" in order to facilitate the discovery of the correct remedy.

And finally, I would like to say a great thank you to my Californian colleagues for their welcome and the organisation of this fine congress.

Dr Philippe M. Servais