Use and efficacy of homeopathy in prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis

Abstract

Bovine mastitis is an important disease in dairy farming. As alternative therapy to antibiotics, whose use is seen as increasingly critical, farmer try to treat mastitis with homeopathy, for example. The present study examined i) whether homeopathic treatments for bovine mastitis can have positive treatment outcomes, ii) which treatments have been successful and under which conditions, iii) indications for future studies and applications for homeopathy to treat mastitis. 32 studies published to date have been evaluated. Assessment criteria and a rating score of 0 to 5 points were fixed for the appraisal. Healing and prophylaxis of mastitis were the primary focus to highlight the medication success and its framework for suitable mastitis therapy. The top eight studies of this quality ranking were subjected to differentiated evaluation. The selected studies showed a positive treatment outcome of homeopathy. Due to the homeopathic effect and the most used remedies in the selected studies, the medication should be chosen according to the homeopathic drug picture. With homeopathic drugs it was possible to reduce the antibiotic use by up to 75%. Some studies indicated that homeopathy might have a positive long-term effect. Furthermore, the results suggested a high self-healing ability in bovine mastitis.

Full text

Open Agriculture. 2019; 4: 203–212
1 Introduction
Bovine mastitis is a common disease in dairy farming,
which represents an economic, ecological and health
problem (Kruif et al. 2007). Mastitis is an inflammation
of the udder, which is divided into a subclinical and a
clinical form. Subclinical mastitis is characterized by an
increased content of somatic cells (>100,000 cells/ml) and/
or pathogens in the milk. It is usually treated at the end
of lactation with a combination of (long-term) antibiotics
and internal teat sealer (antibiotic drying off) (DVG 2012;
Wolter 2015; Molina et al. 2017). Clinical mastitis means
the presence of local and general symptoms together with
an increased cell count and pathogens in the milk (Winter
2009; DVG 2012). Depending on the severity of disease,
clinical mastitis is treated by antibiotics either local or
systemic (Hamann 2003; Tenhagen 2013). The antibiotic
use is seen as increasingly critical because of the rising
bacterial resistance (Wallmann 2016; Schulz-Stübner
2016). In organic and biodynamic farming, the use of
antibiotics is restricted by legal requirements; therefore,
the use of complementary medicine, for example
homeopathy is supported (European Union 2008).
Because of this, homeopathy is mainly used by ecological
and biodynamic farmers in animal husbandry (León et al.
2006; Gordon et al. 2012).
Homeopathy is based on three principles: the
similia principle, drug testing with healthy humans
and dilution of doses, which were developed by the
German doctor Samuel Hahnemann. According to
Hahnemann’s observations during drug testing, the simile
is able to initiate a healing, which causes symptoms in the
examination of healthy people, which are as similar as
possible to the symptoms of the patient (Similia similibus
curentur) (Braun 1995). Homeopathic remedies are
potentiated drugs of components of plants or minerals
for example, which effects are tested in drug trials on
healthy people. These results are transferred to veterinary
medicine, because there are rarely any homeopathic
drug tests on animals (Ekert 2013). The preparation of
homeopathic remedies consists of dilution and shaking
or trituration of the active substance with a carrier
https://doi.org/10.1515/opag-2019-0019
received September 28, 2018; accepted February 10, 2019
Abstract: Bovine mastitis is an important disease in dairy
farming. As alternative therapy to antibiotics, whose use is
seen as increasingly critical, farmer try to treat mastitis with
homeopathy, for example. The present study examined i)
whether homeopathic treatments for bovine mastitis can
have positive treatment outcomes, ii) which treatments
have been successful and under which conditions,
iii) indications for future studies and applications for
homeopathy to treat mastitis. 32 studies published to date
have been evaluated. Assessment criteria and a rating score
of 0 to 5 points were fixed for the appraisal. Healing and
prophylaxis of mastitis were the primary focus to highlight
the medication success and its framework for suitable
mastitis therapy. The top eight studies of this quality
ranking were subjected to differentiated evaluation. The
selected studies showed a positive treatment outcome of
homeopathy. Due to the homeopathic effect and the most
used remedies in the selected studies, the medication
should be chosen according to the homeopathic drug
picture. With homeopathic drugs it was possible to reduce
the antibiotic use by up to 75%. Some studies indicated
that homeopathy might have a positive long-term effect.
Furthermore, the results suggested a high self-healing
ability in bovine mastitis.
Keywords: homeopathy, dairy cow, complementary
veterinary medicine, antibiotics, clinical trials
Research Article
Johanna Zeise*, Jürgen Fritz
Use and efficacy of homeopathy in prevention and
treatment of bovine mastitis
*Corresponding author: Johanna Zeise, University of Bonn,
Agroecology and Organic Farming Group, Auf dem Hügel 6, 53121 Bonn,
Germany, at present: University of Kassel, Faculty of organic agricultural
sciences, Nordbahnhofstraße 1a, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany,
E-mail: johannazeise@web.de
Jürgen Fritz, University of Bonn, Agroecology and Organic Farming
Group, Siegaue 16, 53773 Hennef, Germany
Open Access. ©  Johanna Zeise, Jürgen Fritz, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution
. Public License.

204 J. Zeise, J. Fritz
substance. According to homeopathic understanding, the
healing power contained in the drug are released through
mechanical processing and strengthened with each
potentiation step. According to homeopaths, non-material
potencies above dilution D23 (Avogadro’s number) act by
passing on the energetic information with the help of the
carrier substance (Braun 1995; Steingasser 2016).
Due to these characteristics of homeopathy, the
effectiveness of this complementary medical method is a
contentious issue in science. Homeopathy is criticised to be
a placebo effect (Shang et al. 2005). Linde et al. (1997) and
Ammon and Kösters (2016) claim that homeopathy has an
effect better than placebo. However, up to now research
studies demonstrate inconsistent results. An analysis of
peer-reviewed publications shows a homeopathic effect in
dairy cattle in nine studies compared to ten trials without
an effect (Doehring and Sundrum 2016). The authors of
several meta-analyses criticize the partly low and very
heterogeneous quality of the trials so that a generalizable
conclusion is not possible (Mathie et al. 2012; Mathie
and Clausen 2014; Mathie and Clausen 2015a; Mathie
and Clausen 2015b; Francoz et al. 2017). According to
Klocke and Fidelak (2010), the combination of herd
health management and environmental improvement
measures with the use of homeopathic remedies might be
a successful strategy to reduce the use of antibiotics.
The following research questions should be answered
in this study: Has homeopathy an effect in prevention
and treatment of bovine mastitis? If it has a better effect
than standard medication or placebo, which homeopathic
remedy can be recommended for bovine mastitis? Are
there indications for future studies and applications for
homeopathy to treat mastitis?
2 Methods
To answer the research questions, homeopathic studies
published to date (February, 2018) were collected by
literature and database searching of the online-library
of the Carstens Foundation, published meta-analyses
(Mathie et al. 2012; Mathie and Clausen 2014; Mathie and
Clausen 2015a; Mathie and Clausen 2015b; Doehring and
Sundrum 2016; Francoz et al. 2017), references of doctoral
theses about the topic of mastitis and homeopathy
(Fidelak 2003; Garbe 2003; Schlecht 2004; Röhrs 2005;
Walkenhorst 2006; Werner 2006; Notz 2011; Ebert 2016)
and online databases (NLM pubmed.de, orgprints.de,
researchgate.com).
All studies were considered, regardless of their year of
publication and internal validity (control group, blinding,
randomization). In order to get the most comprehensive
picture, the evaluation included peer-reviewed studies,
as well as non-peer-reviewed studies from publications,
conference papers, journals, pilot and practical studies
of preventive and therapeutic concepts of organic and
conventional livestock husbandry.
67 studies in English and German language from 1982
till 2016 were identified.
Studies which were inaccessible to the author due
to inadequate source information, limited time slot and
lack of procurement possibilities were not considered.
Duplicates and studies with less information about the
trial design or the homeopathic remedy were excluded, as
well as case studies on individual animals.
After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria,
32 studies could be used for evaluation. Assessment
criteria and a rating score of 0 to 5 points were fixed for
the appraisal (Table 1 and 2). The chosen criteria based
on scientific guidelines for medical research (EMEA 2000;
Hektoen 2002; Wein 2002; Arlt and Heuwieser 2011) and
the information given in the studies. General information
of the studies, the formal presentation of the results
(statistics, completeness) and internal validity were
recorded in Table 1.
Healing and prophylaxis of mastitis were the focus
to highlight the medication success and its framework
for suitable mastitis therapy. Due to this, the effect of
homeopathy was evaluated by several criteria (Table 2).
The success of healing and prevention were presented
in opposite ways by the proportion of cured animals or
number of incidences. For this reason, the assessment
criteria were divided (Table 2) into the self-healing
ability, the healing ratio of the trial groups and their
percentage difference to each other and the cure rate in
the homeopathic group for the treatment success. The
success of prevention was described by the mastitis
rate and the mastitis ratio of the test groups and their
percentage difference to each other. The rating score was
given concerned to complete information and relevance
for homeopathy and scientific research. For example, 5
points were given for complete information of the dosage
which contained the period, the repetition, the used
amount and the mode of application of the drug.
When comparing the studies, the very heterogeneous
qualitative and quantitative presentation of results made
the evaluation difficult and did not provide a consistent
definition of healing. Therefore, the highest results of the
treatment studies of one of the three levels of clinical,
bacteriological or complete cure were evaluated. This
applies to the four criteria ʹself-healing of placebo or
untreated groupʹ, ʹrelation of cure (RC)ʹ, ʹdifference RC:

Use and efficacy of homeopathy in prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis 205
Table 1: Assessment criteria with a rating score of 0 to 5 points: general information of the studies
Criteria  points  points  point  points
Number of animals >   -  <  No information
Definition of inclusion/
exclusion criteria
Inclusion and exclusion
criteria
Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria No information
Investigation period > month > –  month Up to  months/  weeks/
 days
No/imprecise
information
Homeopathy Remedy and potency Only remedy Only potency No information
Dosage Complete information  or  informations  information No information
Comprehensible drug
selection
Complete declaration
(reference to symptoms)
Partly (no reference to
symptoms)
No information
Criteria of success  point per criteria (e.g. cell count, bacteriology, California-Mastitis-Test) No information
Definition of cure  point per defined kind of healing (e.g. clinical cure, bacteriological cure) or defined
success of prevention; max.  points
No definition, no
information
Result presentation Complete statistical Numerical value Indication of results without
data
No information
Information of treatment
success
Complete in all groups In at least  group Wording without data No information
Control group Untreated Placebo Antibiotics or Internal Teat
sealer
No controlgroup
Blinding Triple Twice Single No blinding
Randomisation Yes (kind of randomisation:
+ point)
No randomisation
Table 2: Assessment criteria with a rating score of 0 to 5 points: effect of healing and prevention
Criteria  points  points  point  points
Treatment study
Self-healing of placebo or
untreated group
> %  – %  – % No information
Relation of cure (RC) Homeopathy
> Antibiotics
Homeopathy
> Placebo
Homeopathy
< Antibiotics
Homeopathy
< Placebo or no
control group
 points: Homeopathy = control group (antibiotics or placebo)
Difference RC: homeopathy
versus placebo or versus antibiotics
> %  – %  – % <  or no
information
Cure rate of homeopathy > %  – %  – % No cure
Prevention study
Mastitis rate of placebo
or untreated group
 – %  – % > % No information
Relation mastitis rate (MR) Homeopathy
< Internal
Teat sealer
Homeopathy
< Placebo
Homeopathy
> Internal
Teat sealer
Homeopathy
> Placebo
Difference MR: homeopathy vs. placebo or
vs. Internal Teat sealer
> %  –  %  – % <  or no
information
Mastitis rate of homeopathy  – %  – % > % No information

206 J. Zeise, J. Fritz
used nosode, a special homeopathic remedy which
consists of inactivated causal agents, was less efficient
than classical homeopathic remedies. During the eight-
week investigation period, an increase of healing rates
was recognizable in the homeopathic and the untreated
trial groups (Klocke et al. 2007). The trial results of Searcy
et al. (1995) showed significant differences between
homeopathy and placebo. Referring to the small number
of animals and a study period of only four weeks, the
results were interpreted cautiously positive by the authors.
Overall, there was below average success compared to
trial results of clinical mastitis.
3.3 Clinical mastitis
Homeopathic healing success varied between 14% and
87% (average 45%), antibiotics achieved an efficiency
of 0-83% (average 53%), both depending on the type
of cure and the examination date (Table 4, Figure 2).
The combined therapy of homeopathy and antibiotics
reached a cure rate up to 99,5%. Animals of the placebo
groups showed high (self-) healing rates up to 68%. Over
a longer investigation period, almost all studies showed
increasing cure rates in the homeopathic group and the
placebo and untreated control groups. There were similar
cure rates of all different trial groups in clinical and
cytological cure. In bacteriological cure, antibiotics were
almost 30% more efficient than homeopathy. This might
depend on the different temporal and substantial mode
of action and made a direct comparison more difficult.
homeopathy versus placebo or versus antibioticsʹ and
ʹcure rate of homeopathyʹ of the treatment studies.
The top eight studies of the quality ranking of Table
2 with a mean value ≥ 2.5 were subjected to differentiated
evaluation in detail with a focus on cure and prevention
of mastitis (Day 1986; Searcy et al. 1995; Merck 2004;
Varshney and Naresh 2005; Werner 2006; Klocke et al.
2007; Klocke et al. 2010; Ebert 2016) (Table 3 and 4). If
several studies had the same mean value, the higher
mean value of all assessment criteria (Table 1 and 2) was
decisive. Despite a low mean value, the study of Otto (1982)
was used as a further reference for comparison because of
its very good homeopathic cure rate of more than 80%.
Since the evaluation contained only one study with an
antibiotic trial group, three further studies (Garbe 2003;
Hektoen et al. 2004; Mueller 2004) were selected in order
to better compare the effect of antibiotic and homeopathic
therapy (Table 3 and 4).
Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related
to either human or animal use.
3 Results
3.1 Treatment studies
The cure of mastitis is separated into four stages to
evaluate the healing process (Table 4). Clinical cure
means that there are no signs of illness left and the milk
has a normal appearance. Cytological cure means that
there are no signs of illness and the milk contains less
than 100,000 cells/ml milk; a higher number of cells is
a sign of inflammation. Bacteriological cure means that
there are no signs of illness and no pathogens in the milk.
The complete cure combines the three previous levels of
cure (Merck 2004). The trial results based on 503 cows in
the homeopathic, 325 cows in the antibiotic, 260 cows in
the placebo and 40 cows in the untreated trial group. The
average time to control homeopathic effect was 24 days.
Over all levels of cure, homeopathy reached an efficiency
of 43% and the antibiotic therapy was almost 10% more
successful. One third of all affected udder quarters were
cured by placebo or without any medication.
3.2 Subclinical mastitis
With homeopathic therapy a moderate cure rate between
12 and 67% (mean value 28%) was achieved in two
studies of subclinical mastitis (Table 4, Figure 1). The
Table 3: Mean value of selected studies after applying the assess-
ment criteria
Author Mean value table  Mean value table
 and 
Klocke et al. () . .
Searcy et al. () . .
Ebert () . .
Day () . .
Varshney and Naresh () . .
Werner () . .
Klocke et al. () . .
Merck () . .
Hektoen et al. () . .
Garbe () . .
Mueller () . .
Otto () . .

Use and efficacy of homeopathy in prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis 207
the animals of the homeopathic group. The comparisons of
the cell counts were made nine month before medication
and nine month during homeopathic medication, but
not between homeopathy and placebo. The homeopathic
treated cows had a lower average somatic cell count per
month of 160,000 cell counts/ml compared to the period
before medication. This method of comparison made the
validity of the study more difficult. Good and meaningful
results could be achieved by a study of Klocke et al. (2010).
Homeopathy was compared to internal teat sealer, which
is normally used for cows at drying off. The proportion of
normal secreting quarters with a cell count below 100,000
cells/ml of all involved quarters 100 days post calving was
nearly equal in all trial groups (QSCC) (homeopathy 68%,
The effect of homeopathy compared to placebo was better
in all trials except for Ebert (2016). In complete cure the
healing success of homeopathy and antibiotics were
almost the same, in some cases homeopathy was better
than antibiotics. Homeopathy compared to placebo was -
partly significant - more effective.
3.4 Prevention studies
Two preventive studies were evaluated (Day 1986; Klocke
et al. 2010) (Data are not shown in detail). Day (1986) used
a combined nosode of five pathogens. 25% of the placebo-
controlled animals developed mastitis contrary to 2.5% of
Table 4: Cure rates of udder quarters (%)
Type of cure Clinical cure Cytological
cure
Bacteriological cure Complete cure Examination
date after
end of
medication
Trial group Hom Ab Pl U Hom Pl Hom Ab Pl U Hom Ab Pl U
Studies of subclinical mastitis
Searcy et al. ()  a bDay 
Klocke et al. () Hom 
Nos 
Hom 
Nos  a
 bHom 
Nos 
Hom 
Nos  a
 bDay 
Hom 
Nos 
Hom 
Nos 
 Hom 
Nos 
Hom 
Nos 
 Day 
Studies of clinical mastitis
Otto () , Day 

(,)
Day 
Garbe ()       Day -
Hektoen et al. ()          Day 
Merck () 
()
      a bDay 
       a bDay 
       a bDay 
Mueller ()     Day 
    Day 
Varshney and
Naresh ()
, , Day 
Werner () , b, a, b a bDay 
, , ,    Day 
 , ,    Day 
, , ,  a  bDay 
Ebert () ,
(,)

(,)

()
Day 

(,)

()

(,)
Day 
Abbreviations: Hom: Homeopathy; Nos: Nosode; Ab: Antibiotics; Pl: Placebo; U: Untreated
Note: The values in brackets correspond to the cure rates of combined homeopathic and antibiotic therapy. Differences between the values
per line and per cure marked by a different letter (a, b) are significant (P < 0.05).

208 J. Zeise, J. Fritz
internal teat sealer 70%, untreated control group 65%)
(Figure 3). Cows whose milk samples had a cell count
below 200,000 cells/ml at drying off, had a significant
mastitis protection in the homeopathic group 100 days
post calving compared to cows of the untreated group and
a better but non-significant effect compared to internal
teat sealer. The mastitis protection includes pathogen-
free milk samples and a cell count below 200,000 cells/
ml (CSCC) (homeopathy 91%, internal teat sealer 83%,
untreated control group 81%) (Figure 3). The limit of
Figure 1: Cure of subclinical mastitis as percentage in three trial groups. The sample size of each test group was: Homeopathy: Searcy et al.
(1995): 51 udder quarters (cytological cure); Klocke et al. (2007): 67 udder quarters (bacteriological cure, complete cure); Placebo: Searcy et
al. (1995): 52 udder quarters (cytological cure); Klocke et al. (2007): 58 udder quarters (bacteriological cure, complete cure); Unmedicated:
Klocke et al. (2007): 24 udder quarters (bacteriological cure, complete cure). Note: Due to less studies of subclinical mastitis, the bar of
cytological cure represents the results of Searcy et al. (1995) not as mean values. The bacteriological and complete cures show the results
(Klocke et al. 2007) as mean values with minimum and maximum values as lines, all in percentages. (Used data see table 4)
Figure 2: Cure of clinical mastitis as percentage mean value in four trial groups. Note: The bar chart of figure 2 shows the results of studies of
clinical mastitis (data see Table 4) in percentages as mean values and the minimum and maximum values as lines. The results shown in the
antibiotics group include the results of the three further studies mentioned above.

Use and efficacy of homeopathy in prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis 209
200,000 cells/ml was used because of manufacturer
recommendation that internal teat sealer should only be
used up to this limit to minimize the risk of clinical mastitis
during the dry period. 9% of the cows of the homeopathic
group and 11% of the cows treated with internal teat
sealer developed a clinical mastitis during the first 100
days post calving. The untreated group showed the lowest
incidence for clinical mastitis with 3% (Klocke et al. 2010).
According to homeopath, homeopathic remedies could
reactivate former illnesses (Braun 1995). This might be
an explanation that 9% of the cows of the homeopathic
group developed a clinical mastitis. The results indicated
that homeopathy might be an effective alternative to
internal teat sealer.
4 Discussion and conclusion
The analysed studies have been selected because of their
good healing results to find out under which conditions
homeopathy can have an effect. After evaluating the
scientific trials, it can be determined that the measure of
cure depended on the selected homeopathic remedy, the
pathogen, study conditions and individual conditions of
the farm. Homeopathy has shown in some studies that
it can have a better effect (partly significant) compared
to placebo. The criticism of homeopathy as a placebo
effect could be refuted by the results of these studies. The
achieved efficiency of antibiotics in these trials largely
coincides with the literature data on healing success
of clinical mastitis with a healing range of 14% to 96%
(Garbe 2003; Werner 2006). For mastitis incidence the
prophylactic effect of teat sealer as standard medication
in the dry period is stated by 3.5% in literature (Krömker
et al. 2014, cited in Kiesner et al. 2015) compared to 10.5%
in an untreated control group. This is opposed to the
results of Klocke et al. (2010) with a mastitis incidence of
11% by using internal teat sealer and 3% in the untreated
control group. In literature the self-healing ability during
lactation is stated by 30% and 50-70% for dry off cows
(Dorenkamp 2010). Together with the results of the cows
dried off untreated in the preventive study (Klocke et al.
2010), it could be questioned whether a therapeutic or
preventive medication is always necessary.
In conclusion it can be said that an effect was
recognizable in prophylactic and therapeutic application
of homeopathy in the selected trials. Due to the evaluated
trial results, the efficiency might be better in clinical than
in subclinical mastitis. This might be explained by missing
signs of illness of the cows in subclinical mastitis, which
impedes the correct choice of the homeopathic remedy.
No specific medication could be recommended for bovine
mastitis. Most used remedies, in 8 of 9 selected studies,
were Belladonna, Bryonia, Lachesis and Phytolacca. All
these four remedies referred to mastitis through their
homeopathic drug picture. Due to this, homeopathic
remedies should be used according to indication and
individual symptoms of the cow. This result supported
the citation of Hahnemann: “In every case of illness,
Figure 3: Prevention of mastitis in three trial groups compared between quarter somatic cell count (QSCC) and cow somatic cell count
(CSCC) (Data from: Klocke et al. 2010).

210 J. Zeise, J. Fritz
choose a remedy which can cause a similar disease as it
should heal!” (Hahnemann 1992). The comparison of the
effect of homeopathic and antibiotic therapy was limited
because of their different mode of action. In the combined
use of homeopathy and antibiotics it was possible to
reduce the antibiotic use by up to 75% (Merck 2004). This
was achieved by using homeopathy or a combination of
homeopathy and antibiotics if needed. The phenomena
indicated that homeopathy might have a long-term effect,
which could help to stabilize animal health. This was
recognisable the longer the investigation period lasted
on. Furthermore, the results suggested a high self-healing
ability in bovine mastitis. A further need for research on
the homeopathic effect, the application within the various
types of bovine mastitis and their self-healing ability is
emphasised. It is recommended to develop a study design
that considers the specific characteristics of homeopathy.
At last, due to the high rates of self-healing, it should be
examined which types of mastitis have a high self-healing
rate and which conditions are necessary for self-healing.
The results of the evaluation showed, that homeopathy
might be an alternative possibility to treat bovine mastitis
in organic and biodynamic agriculture depending on the
type of mastitis. A therapy of mastitis with homeopathic
remedies in combination with antibiotics if necessary, or
homeopathy in prevention might be a possible application.
Conflict of interest: Authors declare no conflict of
interest.
References
Ammon K. von, Kösters C., Methodological problems of randomised
double-blind trials in homeopathic research, In: Baumgartner
S., Behnke J., Frei-Erb M., Kösters C., Teut M., Torchetti L.,
Ammon K. von (Eds.), The current state of homeopathic
research, Scientific Society for Homeopathy (WissHom),
Köthen, 2016, 25-32
Arlt S., Heuwieser W., Training students to appraise the quality of
scientific literature, J Vet Med Educ, 2011, 38, 135-140, DOI:
10.3138/jvme.38.2.135
Braun A., Methodik der Homöopathie: Leitfaden für die Ärztekurse
in homöopathischer Medizin, 5th ed., Sonntag Verlag,
Stuttgart, 1995
Day C., Clinical trials in bovine mastitis – use of nosodes for
prevention, The British Homoeopathic Journal, 1986, 75, 11-14
Doehring C., Sundrum A., Efficacy of homeopathy in livestock
according to peer-reviewed publications from 1981 to 2014, Vet
Rec, 2016, 179, 628-641, DOI: 10.1136/vr.103779
Dorenkamp B., Eutergesundheit und Fruchtbarkeit, Milchrind, 2010,
4, 54–58
DVG [Deutsche Veterinärmedizinische Gesellschaft], Leitlinien
Bekämpfung der Mastitis des Rindes als Bestandsproblem,
Fachgruppe Milchhygiene, Arbeitsgruppe Sachverständigen-
ausschuss Subklinische Mastitis, Fehlings K., Hamann J.,
Klawonn W., Knappstein K., Mansfeld R., Wittkowski G., et al.
(Eds.), 5th ed., Verlag der DVG Service GmbH, Gießen, 2012
Ebert F., Randomisierte, placebo-kontrollierte Studie zur
Untersuchung der Effekte einer homöopathischen Mastitis-
therapie bei Milchkühen, PhD thesis, University of Berlin,
Berlin, Germany, 2016
Ekert G., Geschichtliche Entwicklung der Veterinärhomöopathie
von Hahnemann bis heute, Zeitschrift für Ganzheitliche
Tiermedizin, 2013, 27, 78-81, DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1328776
EMEA [The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal
Products], VICH Topic GL9, (GCP) Guideline on good clinical
practices, CVMP/VICH/595/98-FINAL, London, UK, 2000,
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/
Scientific_guideline/2009/10/WC500004343.pdf
European Union, Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008
of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the
implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on
organic production and labelling of organic products with
regard to organic production, labelling and control, 2008,
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/889/oj
Fidelak C., Zum Einsatz eines Prophylaxeprogrammes mit
Homöopathika in einem biologisch wirtschaftenden Milchvieh-
betrieb unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Fruchtbarkeit,
PhD thesis, University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2003
Francoz D., Wellemans V., Dupré J.P., Roy J.P., Labelle F., Lacasse
P., et al., Invited review: A systematic review and qualitative
analysis of treatments other than conventional antimicrobials
for clinical mastitis in dairy cows, J Dairy Sci, 2017, 100,
7751–7770, DOI: 10.3168/jds.2016-12512
Garbe S., Untersuchungen zur Verbesserung der Eutergesundheit
bei Milchkühen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des
Einsatzes von Homöopathika, PhD thesis, University of Berlin,
Berlin, Germany, 2003
Gordon P., Kohler S., Reist M., van den Borne B., Menéndez
González S., Doherr M., Baseline survey of health prophylaxis
and management practices on Swiss dairy farms, Schweizer
Archiv für Tierheilkunde, 2012, 154, 371–379, DOI:
10.1024/0036-7281/a000367
Hahnemann S., Organon der Heilkunst, Bearbeitet, heraus-
gegeben und mit einem Vorwort versehen von J. M. Schmidt,
Textkritische Ausgabe der von Samuel Hahnemann für die 6.
Auflage vorgesehenen Fassung, Haug Verlag, Heidelberg, 1992
Hamann J., Zum Erreger- und Entzündungsnachweis im Rahmen der
Mastitisdiagnostik – Befunderhebung und Konsequenzen für
Bekämpfungsmaßnahmen der bovinen Mastitis, Prakt Tierarzt,
2003, 84, 382-388
Hektoen L., Das Design von klinischen Studien zur Wirksamkeit von
Homöopathika am Beispiel der bovinen Mastitis, Zeitschrift für
Ganzheitliche Tiermedizin, 2002, 16, 52-55
Hektoen L., Larsen S., Odegaard S.A., Løken T., Comparison of
homeopathy, placebo and antibiotic treatment of clinical
mastitis in dairy cows - methodological issues and results from
a randomized-clinical trial, J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med,
2004, 51 439-446, DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0442.2004.00661.x
Klocke P., Ivemeyer S., Heil F., Walkenhorst M., Notz C., Treatment of
bovine subclinical mastitis with homeopathic remedies, In: U.
Niggli, C. Leifert, T. Alföldi, L. Lück, H. Willer (Eds.), Improving
Sustainability in Organic and Low Input Food Production

Use and efficacy of homeopathy in prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis 211
early lactation periods, Pesq. Vet. Bras, 2017, 37, 465-470, DOI:
10.1590/S0100-736X2017000500007
Mueller K., Comparison of homoeopathic and antibiotic treatment
of clinical mastitis, In: Proceedings of the British Mastitis
Conference (13th October 2004, Stoneleigh, UK), 2004, 113-115,
http://www.britishmastitisconference.org.uk/BMC2004Pro-
ceedings.pdf
Notz C., Homöopathische Studien zur Rindermastitis beim Trocken-
stellen und zum Abkalben, PhD thesis, University of Zürich,
Zürich, Switzerland, 2011
Otto H., Erfahrungen mit der homöopathischen Therapie akuter
parenchymatöser Mastitiden des Rindes, Tierarztl Umsch,
1982, 37, 732-734
Röhrs K., Grundlagen der homöopathischen Arzneimittelbilder in
der Veterinärmedizin - historische Wurzeln und derzeitige
Anwendung in der Praxis -am Beispiel von Arsenicum album,
Atropa belladonna, Lachesis muta, Strychnos nux vomica und
Pulsatilla pratensis, PhD thesis, University of Berlin, Berlin,
Germany, 2005
Searcy R., Reyes O., Guajardo G., Control of subclinical bovine
mastitis: Utilization of a homoeopathic combination, Br
Homeopath J., 1995, 84, 67-70
Shang A., Huwiler-Müntener K., Nartey L., Jüni P., Dörig S., Sterne
J.A.C., et al., Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo
effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of
homoeopathy and allopathy, The Lancet, 2005, 366, 726–732
Schlecht S., Auswirkungen einer prophylaktischen Verabreichung
der Präparate Carduus compositum®, Coenzyme
compositum®, Lachesis compositum® und Traumeel QP® auf
die Eutergesundheit von Milchkühen, PhD thesis, University of
Munich, Munich, Germany, 2004
Schulz-Stübner S., Geschichtliche Entwicklung und Public-Health-
Aspekte, In: Schulz-Stübner S., Dettenkofer M., Mattner
F., Meyer E., Mahlberg R. (Eds.), Multiresistente Erreger,
Diagnostik – Epidemiologie – Hygiene – Antibiotika –
„Stewardship“, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2016, 1-14
Steingasser H.M., Homöopathische Materia Medica für Veterinärme-
diziner, 5th ed., Maudrich Verlag, Wien, 2016
Tenhagen B.-A., Antibiotikaresistenz und Mastitistherapie, In:
Tierklinik für Fortpflanzung, Freie Universität Berlin (Ed.),
Eutergesundheit und Mastitis, 13. Modul der Weiterbildung
zum Fachtierarzt Rind, Mensch und Buch Verlag, Berlin, 2013,
34-37
Varshney J.P., Naresh R., Comparative efficacy of homeopathic and
allopathic systems of medicine in the management of clinical
mastitis of Indian dairy cows, Homeopathy, 2005, 94, 81-85
Walkenhorst M., Vergleich von homöopathischer mit antibiotischer
Laktationstherapie zur Behandlung von Mastitiden des Rindes,
PhD thesis, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland, 2006
Wallmann J., Veterinary antimicrobial sales, In: Federal Office
of Consumer Protection and Food Safety, Paul-Ehrlich-
Gesellschaft für Chemotherapie e.V. (Ed.), GERMAP 2015
– Report on the consumption of antimicrobials and the spread
of antimicrobial resistance in human and veterinary medicine
in Germany, Antiinfectives Intelligence, Rheinbach, 2016, 23-27
Wein C., Qualitätsaspekte klinischer Studien zur Homöopathie, KVC
Verlag, Essen, 2002
Werner C., Klinische Kontrollstudie zum Vergleich des homöopa-
thischen und chemotherapeutischen Behandlungsverfahren
bei der Therapie der akuten katarrhalischen Mastitis des
Systems, Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress of
the European Integrated Project Quality Low Input Food (QLIF)
(20-23 March 2007, Stuttgart, Germany), Research Institute of
Organic Agriculture FiBL, Frick, Switzerland, 2007, 351-355
Klocke P., Fidelak C., Homöopathische Konzepte in der Euterge-
sundheit, Lebendige Erde 3, 2010, 42-45
Klocke P., Ivemeyer S., Butler G., Maeschli A., Heil F., A randomized
controlled trial to compare the use of homeopathy and internal
Teat Sealers for the prevention of mastitis in organically
farmed dairy cows during the dry period and 100 days
post-calving, Homeopathy, 2010, 99, 90-98, DOI: 10.1016/j.
homp.2009.12.001
Krömker V., Grabowski N.Th., Friedrich J., New infection rate of
bovine mammary glands after application of an internal teat
seal at dry off, J Dairy Research, 2014, 81, 54-58, cited in:
Kiesner K., Knorr N., Zhang Y., Vollin O., Krömker V., Neuinfek-
tionsrate von bovinen Milchdrüsen nach der Applikation
eines bismuthsubnitrat-freien internen Zitzenversieglers
zum Trockenstellen, In: Deutsche Veterinärmedizinische
Gesellschaft e. V. (Ed.), Werkzeuge einer modernen
Eutergesundheit, Tagung der Arbeitsgruppe Sachverständi-
genausschuss Subklinische Mastitis der DVG-Fachgruppe
Milchhygiene, Verlag der DVG Service GmbH, Gießen, 2015,
105-109
Kruif A. de, Mansfeld R., Hoedemaker M., Tierärztliche Bestandesbe-
treuung beim Milchrind, 2nd ed., Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, 2007
León L., Nürnberg M., Andersson R., Naturheilverfahren auf Bioland-
und Demeter-Betrieben, Ökologie und Landbau, 2006, 140,
44-46
Linde K., Clausius N., Ramirez G., Melchart D., Eitel F., Hedges L.V.,
et al., Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects?
A metaanalysis of placebo-controlled trials, The Lancet, 1997,
350, 834–843
Mathie R. T., Hacke D., Clausen J., Randomised controlled trials
of veterinary homeopathy: Characterising the peer-reviewed
research literature for systematic review. Homeopathy, 2012,
101, 196–203, DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2012.05.009
Mathie R.T., Clausen J., Veterinary homeopathy. Systematic review
of medical conditions studied by randomised placebo-
controlled trials, Vet Rec, 2014, 175, 373–381, DOI: 10.1136/
vr.101767
Mathie R.T., Clausen J., Veterinary homeopathy, Meta-analysis of
randomised placebo-controlled trials, Homeopathy, 2015a, 104,
3–8, DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2014.11.001
Mathie R.T., Clausen J., Veterinary homeopathy, Systematic review of
medical conditions studied by randomised trials controlled by
other than placebo, BMC Vet Res, 2015b, 11, 236, DOI: 10.1186/
s12917-015-0542-2
Merck C.C., Etablierung der homöopathischen Mastitistherapie
in einem biologisch-dynamisch wirtschaftenden Milcher-
zeugerbetrieb unter Berücksichtigung ökologischer,
epidemiologischer und ökonomischer Gesichtspunkte,
Abschlussbericht zum Forschungsvorhaben 99UM032,
Tierklinik für Fortpflanzung, Fachbereich Veterinärmedizin,
Freie Universität Berlin, 2004, https://core.ac.uk/download/
pdf/10922807.pdf
Molina L.R., Costa H.N., Leão J.M., Malacco V.M.R., Facury Filho E.J.,
Carvalho A.U., et al., Efficacy of an internal teat seal associated
with a dry cow intramammary antibiotic for prevention of
intramammary infections in dairy cows during the dry and

212 J. Zeise, J. Fritz
Rindes, PhD thesis, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany,
2006
Winter P., Praktischer Leitfaden Mastitis, Vorgehen beim Einzeltier
und im Bestand, Parey Verlag, Stuttgart, 2009
Wolter W., Trockenstellen: Jede Kuh einzeln ins Visier nehmen,
topagrar, 2015, 7, R16-R20