Q&A – Banerji Protocol

Question: I was speaking with my classical homeopath yesterday about the Banerji Protocol, and he was saying that remedies can suppress disease, especially in higher doses than 30C. He says that this form of homeopathy is more like allopathic medicine and can have unwanted side effects that may show years later or even just create energetic disharmony within the person. I so appreciate all that you teach to moms to help them care for their families and empower them. I have had positive experiences with what you have shared and want to continue to learn from you, and I am now confused by what he said. Could you please speak to this in hopes of clearing up some of this confusion?

Answer: Ask your homeopath if he uses Arnica for old head injuries or after surgery or if he uses Belladonna for strep infections. How about Arsenicum for dysentery? Ledum for bites? If so, he’s using a protocol that is not strictly classical.

If we classical homeopaths are honest, we will admit that protocols are a part of every practice. A number of types of protocols have been developed over the years and are used by many homeopaths, especially for treatment of acute illness and injuries.

The Banerjis have simply applied 130 years of this kind of thinking to all pathology. That’s four generations of homeopathic knowledge, passed down from fathers to sons. Today, the Banerji Clinic is staffed by medical doctors who are also homeopaths and who use modern technology to diagnose illness.

Perhaps the most striking difference about the Banerji Protocol is the scope of the information they have gathered and the application of computer technology to store and categorize the information.

Remember, each doctor at the Banerji Clinic sees 100 patients per day, and there are 10 doctors. That means that 1,000 patients are seen daily, 6 days per week, for a total of 6,000 per week. In the clinic’s data-collecting rooms, eight computers continually collate and compile all these cases. This is said to be the busiest medical clinic in the world, and the amount of data they have succeeded in gathering is staggering.

From this vast collection of data, they have discovered that certain protocols are successful for 80% of the population. They also have developed secondary and tertiary protocols to cover the additional 20%.

Can any classical homeopath in the U.S. or Europe even come close to that kind of experience and subsequent data?

In the time I have been using the Banerji Protocols in my own practice, I have seen amazing results, with long-term chronic issues resolved much more quickly than anything I had previously achieved. As far as I’m concerned, data and reproducible results trump speculation.

As for the other concerns raised by your homeopath, while the Banerji Protocols do offer the simplicity of allopathic medicine, in my experience, they do not create “side effects” as drugs do. Remember that homeopathy works with your body to evoke natural healing and restore the body to balance. Drugs create side effects because they work against the body.

And long-term effects? The Banerji family has been studying these protocols for 130 years with no evidence of long-term problems emerging. I have witnessed with my own eyes the throngs of patients (including the President and First Lady of India and the Queen of Bhutan) who enter the research center and clinic seeking (and finding!) relief from all types of illness. I find it hard to believe that these people would be waiting in line for hours to attend a clinic if that clinic did not produce results.

If we want to put homeopathy on the map, we need to concentrate on sharing the hard, cold facts. Is the patient improved? Is the improvement sustained and are the results reproducible? This is what will help homeopathy achieve the status it once knew.

I hope your homeopath will do some research into the Banerji Protocols. He might find that his results could skyrocket!