Dear colleagues, dear friends and dear viewers, it is a great pleasure and an honour to welcome you today to this conversation with Dr Dario Spinedi, one of the most respected figures in contemporary classical homeopathy and particularly in the field of homeopathy.
Dr Spinedi was born in 1950 and studied medicine at the University of Zurich between 1975 and 1981 and from 1977 to 1992. He studied homeopathy under the guidance of Dr Jost Künzli. Since 1992 he has conducted international seminars in many countries, among them Germany, Italy, Russia, India and Greece.
In 1993 he founded the School of Classical Homeopathy in Lucarno, Switzerland and since 1997 he has been the Founder and Director of Clinica Dr Spinedi in Orselina, where a team of eight homeopathic doctors works mainly with cancer patients.
Since 2000 he has collaborated with doctor Pareek in Agra, India through seminars and online clinical exchanges. He has also presented at numerous international legal congresses, including those held in Berlin, Vienna, Budapest, Sorrento, Leipzig and so on. Among his publications are three German language seminar volumes on cancer treatment in homeopathy and an Italian book, L’Omeopatia in Oncologia.
So thank you Dr. Dario Spinedi for accepting this invitation. It is truly a joy and a privilege to have with us today you, my mentor for the last 25 years.
My first question is, how did you first come into contact with homeopathy and which experiences most influenced this story?
Dr. Dario Spinedi
Dr. Spinedi: I want to share a poignant case because it has fostered in me not only great respect but also immense trust and love to my teacher Dr. Jost Künzli von Fimmelsberg. My final conversion to homeopathy occurred when my wife, 45 years ago, developed sepsis after a complicated birth with caesarean section and a fever of 106 degrees Fahrenheit. The entire gynecological team immediately suggested administering cortisone and a combination of three antibiotics.
In desperation I called my teacher Dr. Jost Künzli for advice. It was late at night but luckily for me he answered. His short response I remember: “Take your wife home, don’t give her any medication and wait for the symptoms, then keep me informed.”
And what do I do with a little one? He said, feed her at her mother’s breast when she’s angry. I said: “But my wife is at most unconscious”. Don’t be afraid, the baby drinks on her own. I said: “The doctors want to use lamps because she’s jaundiced.” No need, he said, give her Chamomile 200 and leave her in the window light, that’s enough.
After communicating my decision to the gynecologist, I found myself facing the medical council who looked at me as if I were a criminal in court. The situation was indeed a bit extreme. They gave me the usual form to sign which emphasized that all responsibility fell on my shoulders if anything happened to my wife—and the doctors were clear that the worst would happen. The professor told me that he would do everything he could to have my medical license revoked if their predictions came true.
But my trust in Dr. Künzli had grown so much in the meantime that I signed without hesitation and with the help of a neighbor, we lifted my wife with severe chills and fever onto a chair and carried her home. The neighbor’s wife held all the drainage bottles from her birth scar in one hand. And now that I was alone with my seriously ill wife in our small apartment, what was I supposed to do? I had to observe the symptoms, but which ones? God came to my aid.
Over time I noticed that my wife began coughing every time I entered the room where she was lying. When I went out, she stopped coughing. When I entered the room, she coughed again. As soon as I confirmed this observation, I called Dr. Kinzli who was waiting for my call at home. He advised me to give one pellet of phosphorus C30. I later discovered in Kent’s repertory the rubric “coughs whenever a person enters the room” with only one remedy, precisely phosphorus.
The moral of the story was that the next day my wife no longer had a fever. After two days, I removed all the drainage tubes from the wound, and on the third day, the small metal clips that closed the wound. The hospital was greatly surprised when my wife called on the third day to ask when she could return the drainage bottles. A woman who had given birth on the same day as my wife and experienced the same complication, called us four weeks later, desperate and crying because despite receiving cortisone and three antibiotics, she still felt very ill.
I was now ready to follow my teacher Dr. Künzli wherever he directed me to go. This was the greatest gift I have received in my life to meet a master like him.
Could you briefly share one or two clinical cases that you consider particularly significant in this regard?
Dr. Spinedi: We have patients who refuse allopathic treatment if it is too drastic and who have been ill, who are helped with homeopathy. For example, a 20-year-old girl with a very painful tibial osteosarcoma cured with Arsenicum album alone, because she had the desire during the night to kill her husband.
She was newly married and loved her husband, but during the night, she felt the impulse to kill him. This young woman didn’t desire chemotherapy and amputation of the leg because she was in a religious group refusing blood transfusions. After a year, the sarcoma disappeared with the only treatment Arsenicum album in Q potencies. There was a follow-up of 20 years.
Or a professor of radiology from Germany with pancreatic cancer who didn’t want to have chemotherapy and the operation was cured with Phosphorus, Hydrastis, and Lycopodium without other therapies. Many cases of planned amputations avoided thanks to parallel homeopathic treatment.
For example, a three-year-old boy whose arm was planned to be amputated for humeral osteosarcoma and lung metastasis while undergoing chemotherapy. Under chemotherapy came the metastasis in the lungs. The family was opposed to the amputation. Instead of the amputation, the doctors operated only on the tumor. The only treatment, according to protocol, was chemotherapy.
The humerus received an extendable endoprothesis in the area where the tumor had been removed. The prosthesis can be adjusted to the rate of the boy’s growth. After an observation period of five years, the boy is very well. Clinically, there are no visible signs of a recurrence of the disease.
Not quite secondary, I would point to the fact that the child still has its arm. It was not amputated. This boy was treated only with homeopathy after a short time of chemotherapy. With great joy, he is enjoying climbing and playing football. Several times throughout my years of practice, I was permitted to witness patients preserving organs or limbs because they defended themselves against an amputation with the support of homeopathic medicine.
Or a 20-year-old girl with capsular sarcoma of the left shoulder and brachial plexus infiltration. The patient refused the arm amputation proposed by the allopathic medicine and was healed with the help of homeopathy together with radiotherapy. Under chemotherapy, the sarcoma had grown.
Or a 50-year-old woman whose larynx was supposed to be removed because of a larynx cancer. She refused treatment and was treated with homeopathy and radiation therapy and was cured.
Or a glioblastoma multiforme in a 14-year-old boy treated by chemotherapy and then only by homeopathy. Complete health, time of observation 15 years. The survival of glioblastoma multiforme is an average of one year. All cases have a follow-up of 15-20 years. Many other cases.
But if I think of the many children treated with homeopathy who are now in their 30s, there have been no relapses of the tumor and they have not suffered the negative effects of radiotherapy and chemotherapy that doctors had predicted.
I think of a child who came from Germany in 1998, 28 years ago, with sarcoma of the pelvis, treated with operation, radiation, and chemotherapy. After six months, the tumor relapsed and rapidly grew back to 0.5 liters of volume. Few children survived this.
He underwent an operation, chemotherapy, radiotherapy a second time. And the doctor predicted to the parent that he would develop a colitis and a growth restriction. The child was treated with phosphorus and other remedies. He suffered none of the side effects. Today he is a strong young man.
And turning to clinical practice, how is the patient guided throughout the entire therapeutic journey?
Dr. Spinedi: Now I want to speak a little about our clinic, the clinical problems. We start by saying that I read the interview with Dr. Wurster, my student at the clinical center in Santa Cruz, and they won’t repeat what he explained so well. However, I want to emphasize a few points I consider important.
We are now seven doctors with an allopathic specialization and a diploma in classical homeopathy working together. The clinical approach is like unraveling the tangle. There are often multifactorial cases where different remedies are indicated and administered in a correct sequence.
First, we have to treat the main complaints, pain, bleeding, etc. Then maybe the side effects of chemo and radiotherapy. Sometimes we have to give an organotropic remedy or an anti-miasmatic remedy. Finally, the patient’s constitutional remedy.
Q-potencies, the last discovery of Hahnemann in Paris, are the potencies we use in the clinic because we can give them daily together with chemo and radiotherapy. These potencies are wonderful for clinical work because of the daily control of the reactions after administration of the remedy.
The problems we have with Q-potencies is that they must be performed as Hahnemann indicates in the Organon. Starting from the C3, from the third iteration, the granules must be the size of a poppy seed, that is 100 globules with a weight of almost 6.5 centigrams. If I look carefully, I notice that often not all conditions are respected by the factories producing Q-potencies.
If the potencies are not produced this way, we cannot observe the very important reactions after Q-potencies described in the organon 6 edition by Hahnemann. The second problem is the reaction after taking Q-potencies. After 30 years of clinical experience, we have realized that we have been able to confirm what Hahnemann writes in the organon about these potencies, but that they require almost daily supervision.
Often, we don’t notice early worsening, that is the patient’s symptoms worsen after just a few doses of the remedy. If we are not careful, we risk changing the remedy instead of stopping the remedy and repeating less frequently, and so we lose track. For example, a patient with Arsenicum album for a gangrene, who had an early aggravation after two doses. We stopped the remedy and the gangrene was cured without any other remedy. She didn’t have to be amputated.
Or new symptoms appear lasting only one or two days and then disappearing. Symptoms that may be indicating the prescribed remedy was not correct. For example, a patient with breast cancer, the remedy Phosphorus helped the patient greatly, but after two or three days, it produced new symptoms (only her right foot became cold).
After two days, the symptoms disappeared, but we continued with Phosphorus, which then worsens the patient. And later we remembered the symptoms that appeared for only two days, which indicated Conium. Few homeopaths know precisely the observations Hahnemann described in the Organon, in the paragraph about the Q potencies.
That’s why, at the World Congress in Seville, Spain in 2025, I brought a paper concerning our 30-year experience using Q potencies, along with all the possible errors that can be made. Homeopathy is wonderful because it can adapt to local and social conditions. If you study the history of homeopathic oncology, you will see that with social and environmental and medical advances, the homeopathic approach has also changed.
Just think of how the advent of radiotherapy and chemotherapy changed the way we approach cancer patients. We see patients who consult us in advanced stages of cancer, where we must first treat the adverse effects of chemotherapy and radiotherapy or other drugs.
See paragraph 38 of the Organon, which tells us that the stronger disease suppresses the weaker one. The disease caused by chemotherapy and radiation is often the strongest and must be treated first. We often improve their quality of life.
The great advantage of our work is a very exact initial case taking, which allows us to determine right from the start what the best remedy is for the first emergency, using the organotropic remedies, the constitutional remedy, or possibly anti-miasmatic remedies. Example: radiation-induced disease, then tumor disease remedy, then again radiation-induced disease, and so on.
The challenge we face is to withdraw from homeopathic therapy as quickly as possible before its negative effects take over. Q potencies, thanks to their highly informative reactions, indicate whether the prescribed remedy is correct or not, whether the dosage is too strong or too weak, or whether another remedy is indicated.
How did your experience with Indian homeopathic medicine influence your working method?
Dr. Spinedi: Indian medicine faces some important problems. There’s a very high number of patients, 100-200 patients are already waiting in the morning. We have very serious diseases, the poverty, many patients have not undergone chemotherapy and radiation therapy. The great lesson is approaching serious diseases without the support of expensive allopathic drugs.
The great experience that has resulted from this approach, we have seen in Agra by Dr. Pareek, a case of post-nasal cancer cured with the remedy Carbo animalis indicated by a terrible odor coming from the nose. This observation made in Agra, in India, helped us resolve a similar case in our clinic. A patient with a nasopharyngeal carcinoma in 2008, she received three weeks of chemotherapy and 32 sessions of radiation therapy. In 2012, she developed a recurrence.
In April of 2016, she’s six years old and seeks our help at the Clinica Santa Croce. She presents with a carcinoma of the retropharynx with cervical metastasis, infiltration of the ethmoid and the sphenoid bones and very strong neurologic pains in spite of morphine and three different pain killers. The odor coming from her nose was beyond endurance.
Before the patient had been sent home without any open hope for cure, I remember the case of the carcinoma of the sinus of Dr. Pareek in Agra and recommended to my colleague to give Belladonna 200 for the pains and afterwards Carbo animalis and Q-potencies.
Belladonna helped greatly for her pain. She was able to discontinue all pain medication. After one week of treatment with Carbo animalis, a large piece of stinking tissue fell from her nose. We were able to dismiss her from the Clinica Santa Croce after two weeks, free of pains, drug free and in very good general condition.
She continues to take Carbo animalis and Q-potencies. The integration of Dr. Pareek’s work, especially in severe kidney diseases, severe liver diseases, incurable cases of cancer, sees a case of variation with Carbo animalis.
After 50 years of experience in the treatment of serious diseases, what are the things you have come to understand as truly essential in clinical practice? Are there, on the other hand, approaches that over time you have learned to consider less useful?
Dr. Spinedi: We must not abandon Hahnemann’s guidelines described in the Organon of the Healing Art, the first volume of the Chronic Diseases. If we don’t study thoroughly the development of homeopathy along the clear lines of Hahnemann through Kent, Pierre Schmidt and Künzli, homeopathy risks getting lost in a maze of fantasies.
If we have been able to continue our clinic for 30 years, treating very seriously ill patients, we owe it largely to the teaching which we received from Künzli, my teacher, who gathered the experience of Hahnemann, Kent and Pierre Schmidt and tested them in the crucible of experience for 40 years, giving us, his students, a sense of his pure teaching that they call classical homeopathy.
How feasible and concrete do you consider collaboration between homeopathy and conventional medicine?
Dr. Spinedi: I think homeopathy should follow its own path with its own teaching, its own hospitals, its own diplomas and not chase at all costs recognition from conventional medicine, which is completely different from homeopathic medicine.
We should take into account the fact that the body is an energetic entity guided by the law of chaos and quantum physics. In traditional medicine, we still work with Newton’s principles, thus treating individual organs and not the whole person. Therefore, conventional medicines have so many side effects.
How do you see the future of homeopathy in the treatment of oncological diseases?
Dr. Spinedi: Considering the widespread prevalence of cancer, the suffering of these patients and the immense cost of these therapies, I can say that homeopathy will play an increasingly important role in supporting these patients, as demonstrated by a study conducted by the University of Freiburg in Breisgau, cited by Dr. Wurster in his interview made by your journal. Homeopathy is also a prophylactic medicine par excellence.
In Ticino, where I’m working, there is a silent collaboration between oncologists and homeopaths. I’ve realized that patients treated with homeopathy experience far fewer side effects from conventional cancer therapy, and subsequently have a better quality of life and better prognosis too. Thank you very much for the opportunity to express these thoughts of mine.
Dr. Spinedi, thank you very much from all of us, for sharing your precious experience, your reflections and your lifelong dedication to homeopathy and to the care of patients. It has been a true honor to listen to your insights and clinical wisdom.
