Interview of Dr. Jan Kersschot (Belgium) 

by Dr. Myron Schultz (SA)

June 2008

MS: You are a medical doctor in Belgium; what prompted you to study medicine?

JK: Fascination for the human body played a major role. I believed - and I still do - that the human body is the most wonderful creation there is. And the fact that my father was a physician also played a role. In fact, he was the one who introduced me to the medicine I practice now.

MS: Jan, then you became exposed to a number of other modalities. Why and how did this occur, and what were these modalities?

JK: During my medical studies, my father had patients going from Belgium to Germany for "special injections." He couldn't explain why these patients got better. They stopped for example asking him for their pain killers since they went to Germany. He was intrigued that these patients were willing to drive for an hour to get a ten-minute treatment. Most of these patients were afflicted with back problems who had no benefit from the usual approach in Belgium. As he was very busy with his family practice - which was conventional general practice - he sent me to Germany to follow a course in Freudenstadt about these German injections. That was September 1984. When I followed this course in Neuraltherapy given by Dr. Dosch, I immediately felt that this was a very interesting modality in medicine. I bought his book and wanted to check the results they were claiming during the course. I was also surprised that we hadn't heared about it in our training at University.

As soon as I completed my studies and started my own practice (my father had died a year earlier), I started to inject my patients as often as I could with these injection techniques. I also followed a course in mesotherapy in Belgium, given by Dr Ballesteros. In the beginning, it was hard to persuade patients to receive these injections. But following more training and visiting other neuraltherapists in Belgium like Dr. Wynants, Dr. Dejonghe and Dr. Mertens, gave me more confidence. They had had several decades of experience and showed me all their techniques in detail. The testimony of their patients was impressive. I knew I wanted to do the same. In Germany, I also discovered there were other ampoules available than procaine. These companies had had these ampoules for several decades and the representative of Heel at the medical congress in Baden-Baden claimed interesting results with these medications. He gave me some samples of Traumeel ampoules and asked me to let him know the results. I was surprised that my patients confirmed that they had better and longer-lasting results when I added these ampoules to the procaine or lidocaine.

MS: Jan, this is an interesting journey, but how did Biopuncture evolve out of this?

JK: Although I was sceptical about these ampoules because the box said "homeopathic", I wanted to stay open-minded and give it a try. My own patients would let me know if these products provided the desired results or not. When I noticed the benefits of the Traumeel in my own practice again and again, I started using other products as well, such as Zeel and Discus compositum. I used more and more biotherapeutics and fewer and fewer local anaesthetics. I started to combine these products with insights from trigger point therapy and prolotherapy, and developed new techniques and new strategies. I did so by incorporating the results of the many patients I saw in my private practice. As the technique started to become more successful, more and more patients came to me for the same treatment. They didn't come for me but for my injections.

When patients came to see me, they asked me to explain the therapy I practiced. When they asked me if it consisted of cortisone injections, I said, "No, I never inject cortisone." It was not Mesotherapy or Neuraltherapy either, because I injected mainly natural medications instead of conventional medication like procaine. In order to distinguish my technique from other injection techniques, I had to find another name. When Mr Van Brandt (who organised a medical meeting in Belgium) asked me to give a lecture at a medical congress, I used the term "Biopuncture" officially for the first time. That was in 1991. I presented my technique as an integration of several different techniques. It was described as "Biopuncture" because that term covered exactly what my technique is all about: local injections with biotherapeutics. It is a word which is understandable for doctors as well as the general public.

MS: After reading through your books, I see that the methodology of Biopuncture has changed, and thus it seems to be evolving?

JK: That's correct. In the beginning, Biopuncture was described as a combination of acupuncture and homeopathy. And in my first books (1995 and 2000), I also mentioned briefly injections into acupuncture points. Although I am not trained in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), some doctors who practiced this technique of injecting acupuncture points told me they were having success. And as these involved injections of biotherapeutics, we accepted that these techniques were described as Biopuncture. But later on, we decided not to consider acupuncture injections as Biopuncture any more. We discovered that some schools in Germany and Russia already had a description for that. These injections into acupuncture points were described as "Homeosineatry" (which is the combination of homeopathy and Chinese medicine developed by Dr. de La Fuye). So, in the 2004 book on Biopuncture (Biopuncture in General Practice), the acupuncture points were not mentioned. This step is also part of the strategy of Biopuncture to stay closer to conventional Western medicine. We do this by using the same language and the same terminology as conventional medicine. We rely only on conventional Western diagnosis, and not on Chinese diagnosis or homeopathic diagnosis.

More important for Biopuncture are the injection techniques we incorporated from other Western therapeutic modalities such as neural therapy, mesotherapy, trigger point therapy and prolotherapy. I took the best of each technique, left out the dangerous procedures or the products which show too many side effects, and brought them together into one therapy.

From neural therapy (Dr. Huneke, Dr Dosch) we took the segmental techniques and the injections around the peripheral nerves, but we didn't incorporate the deep injection techniques like the ganglion injections because these techniques can be quite dangerous. From mesotherapy (Dr Pistor) we took the regional injection techniques, but we replaced the conventional medication by antihomotoxic remedies. From prolotherapy (Dr Hackett, Dr Hemwall) we took the injections into ligaments and entheses, but we don't use phenol or sodium morrhuate because these products may produce severe adverse reactions. From trigger point therapy (Dr Travell) we incorporated the trigger point injections in myofascial trigger points but used biotherapeutics instead of local anaesthetics or dry needling. From conventional Western medicine, we took injections into bursae or into joints, but we replaced the cortisone by Traumeel or Zeel. So in a way, I combined the best of each approach to present to my patients and colleagues a technique which is both safe and effective. By sharing my experiences with other doctors and giving courses in, for example, Mexico and South Africa, I also learned a lot from my colleagues. And in the last few years, new techniques and new strategies have been appearing to make Biopuncture more effective. We also are working on standardised treatment protocols.

MS: So as I understand it, you are the true ‘father’ of Biopuncture?

JK: Yes, that's right. I introduced the word "Biopuncture" as a description of biotherapeutic injections - although the ampoules had already been used in Germany for several decades. But the Germans never thought of giving a specific name to these injections. They also describe in their books a lot of injections in the buttocks and arms - without the additional local effect. They also use them sometimes as oral vials instead of injections! They described in a few papers some joint injections and paravertebral injections, and some research was done in the field of joint  injections (e.g. double blind studies). Injections in trigger points and organ-related reflex zones are mentioned by a few authors, but they never really elaborated on that, unfortunately.  I also “improved” their products by combining these ampoules with other modalities such as myofascial trigger point injections and ligament injections. As far as I know, injection techniques like MPZ injections (muscular pain zone injections) with Spascupreel and reflex zone injections to influence the lymphatic system with very specific products like Lymphomyosot had never been described in the German textbooks before. What they did describe was using homeopathics into acupuncture points, and in the nineties they started giving courses in Germany on Homeosineatry. But almost nobody knows the word "homeosineatry". Biopuncture is a much more easy word to remember, both for doctors as well as for patients.

On the other hand, I didn't invent anything new. The ampoules were already available, and other techniques like trigger point injections had been around for several decades. What I did was combine them into a new cocktail. That's why those who do mesotherapy still use the word "mesotherapy" for their injections with biotherapeutics - although the original father of mesotherapy (the French physician Pistor)  specifically described it as injections with conventional medication and not with homeopathics or botanicals. That's why some use the word "biomesotherapy", but that word is also used in Australia to describe injections with sodium chloride into specific spots while giving the natural remedy orally - but that's not "real" Biopuncture either. So there is still some confusion around.

MS: Jan, are there other schools out there that are utilizing the name Biopuncture for courses they give, that have never had contact with you?

Well yes, that's what is happening now. Over the last ten years, my primary goal has been to bring the term "Biopuncture" into the medical field. And that is what is happening now in several countries where these ampoules are on the market. So I am proud that my term is used by other medical professionals, and that they help me spread the message. My major goal is that more doctors be trained in Biopuncture so that more patients can benefit from this technique. This is what has happened, for example, in Mexico and South Africa. And I hope to have local teachers in Biopuncture who have been trained by me who can then continue the training in Biopuncture according to the standardised protocols we are working on. In that way, we can present Biopuncture as a medical technique which is similar all over the world. Standardising the protocols also gives us more possibilities in doing research and designing more clinical trials.

But as I want to preserve the basic characteristics of Biopuncture as well, I have to keep an eye on those who use the term in a "wrong" way. Biopuncture can only performed by doctors who are licensed and trained to do so. I didn't intend that people would use the term "Biopuncture" in a different sense than I meant it. In the near future, I will contact these people and ask them to use the term properly. I am sure that in most cases they are even not aware of their mistake. They like the word and put it on their websites because it sounds nice. They copy parts of my books or lectures and put it on their websites, while changing a few words to make it "fit in" with their particular situation.

Part of this is my own fault, as I incorporated injections into acupuncture points in my first books. Another factor is that the situation differs from country to country. So I understand that therapists use the word Biopuncture when they should use "Homeosineatry" or possibly "Biomesotherapy." So, I will contact them and explain how things have evolved over the last ten years. Some of them maybe never have read my books or come to my courses. On the other hand, it is unavoidable that these things happen. What I think is important is that doctors realise that Biopuncture is an interesting option in today's medicine and that if they want more information or training, they can find the "real” Biopuncture described in my books and in the courses given by those who are approved by the International Academy of Biopuncture (www.biopuncture.info). You see, Myron, Biopuncture is now in its “adolescence” and is now very close to becoming an "adult" therapy.

MS: Jan, please explain why you see Biopuncture as a bridge between conventional medicine and natural medicine.

JK: When I started to teach Biopuncture to other doctors in Belgium (it is strictly illegal in Belgium for practioners who are not physicians to give these injections), I wanted to share my experiences with as many colleagues I could reach. In the beginning, most were already practicing homeopathy or acupuncture.

But I also wanted my technique to be acceptable to those doctors who didn't believe in homeopathy or acupuncture! That is why we used the term "micro doses" or “ultra-low doses” instead of homeopathics (because we don't inject dilutions beyond Avogadro's number). That's also one of the reasons why we deleted the acupuncture points after the second book. When we mention acupuncture points in textbooks about Biopuncture, it looks as though we rely on the theories about Yin and Yang and the five elements - and that may be unacceptable to many conventional doctors.

In Biopuncture, I also use the terminology of conventional medicine as much as I can (e.g. bursitis, tendonosis) and don't use any Eastern diagnostic methods as in TCM and Ayur Veda. Our diagnosis is based on a conventional diagnosis (which may include conventional blood samples, X-rays and scanners) and on conventional clinical testing (e.g. examination of the knee joint) and questioning the patient (how long has the pain been there? What makes it worse?). We don't rely on a homeopathic questionnaire as in Classical Homeopathy. We don't use the pulse diagnosis as in TCM. We don't explain Biopuncture with subtle energies flowing through meridians. Doctors who come to my courses only have to learn to refine their way of diagnosing the patient in order to choose the right product and to inject the right spots.

So, Biopuncture is a bridge between mainstream medicine and natural medicine because it has roots in both worlds. It is a modern medical technique for three reasons.  Firstly, it uses a conventional diagnosis. Secondly, the products are tested for safety and reliability. You know about all the tests on Traumeel and Zeel. And we need more of this research if Biopuncture wants to become an “adult” therapy. And, finally, the technique is performed with respect for the rules of orthodox medicine (e.g. sterile and safe injection techniques, disposable needles). We also respect the conventional treatment protocols as much as we can. That's why a lot of conventional doctors - even those who are not open to complementary medicine - still accept us in their territory.

Biopuncture can also be considered as natural medicine because these biotherapeutics show no major side effects. We never use cortisone. And the injections stimulate natural healing instead of suppressing symptoms. So that's why therapists who are sceptical about conventional physicians still accept Biopuncture in their territory. So it is a bridge between both worlds.

Dr. Myron Schultz is a pathology lecturer at Durban University, South-Africa