Dear Julian,
Does your book perchance contain a biography on Pierre Schmidt? Some
fellow students and I were trying to determine if Schmidt practiced
using primarily dry dosing or whether he used aqueous dilutions...or
both. Any information greatly appreciated!
Darla Palmer
________________________________
from
history
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
History of Homeopathy
-
Julian Winston
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: History of Homeopathy
>Dear Julian,
My book DOES have a bio of Schmidt, but it does not contain what you
are asking.
The info could come from those who knew Schmidt and studied with him.
Maybe someone of the list would know.
JW
My book DOES have a bio of Schmidt, but it does not contain what you
are asking.
The info could come from those who knew Schmidt and studied with him.
Maybe someone of the list would know.
JW
-
Paul Booyse
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: History of Homeopathy
Hi Julian,
I know he definitely used LM's, as Mary Whillier, a homeopath here in S.A.
gave me some LM's she had got from Pierre Schmidt's wife.
As to the dry dose, I am not sure.
Regards,
Paul
I know he definitely used LM's, as Mary Whillier, a homeopath here in S.A.
gave me some LM's she had got from Pierre Schmidt's wife.
As to the dry dose, I am not sure.
Regards,
Paul
-
Soroush Ebrahimi
- Moderator
- Posts: 4510
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 11:00 pm
Re: History of Homeopathy
Roger
If you study history you will find that if members of AMA even talked to a homeopath, they would be excluded and not be allowed to practise.
Then of course, as has been clearly the level tuition had homeopathic colleges left a great deal to desire.
Pls drop your ideas of nutrition being a major factor! This was happening before 1900 and there was plenty of home-cooking going on!
===
One of the places with high levels of homeopathic practise is in fact Iran where homeopathy is expanding rapidly.
Where as 20 years ago there were no homeopaths in Iran, there are now more 400 and great many practising in US and Canada. Some see 30-40 patients a day! And the practise is full with a waiting list!
The exams set by Iranian Homeopathic Association (IHA) are quite tough. Any one wishing to see an example of a past paper, please do let me know - but you must promise to attempt it and let me know how you got on.
Rgds
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 04 November 2014 15:39
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
That is the point I have made many times: the AMA was only a trade organization on the same level as a union. It set standards of training to eliminate homeopaths and other eclectic healers from acceptance. It set standards of practice that eliminated the use of homeopathy and threatened members if they even discussed homeopathy as an option.
It was a heavy handed, draconian assault on anything holistic and nothing has changed since except for the size, money and power
that the AMA has today.
It was always funded by the chemical industry.
t
Addressing diet and other maintaining causes *is* part of what homeopaths are trained to address, and it's strongly stressed in the Organon.
Another very interesting perspective on homeopathy's history is Harris Coulter's "Divided Legacy." It's a really interesting and readable book! And gives a rather fascinating history. For e.g., did you know that the AMA (American Medical Association) was formed specifically and precisely -- as lined out in their original documents of formation -- in order to protect the mainstream docs of the day, from "homeopaths and herbalists"?
Because, the good people, the patients, had noted that those "homeopaths and herbalists" were having more success. And also that fewer of their patients were dying -- FAR fewer. (The mainstream medicine of that day was arguably less brutal that today's, at least the bulk of it. But still…)
Roger, I really recommend that you give it a read. I think you won't be sorry!
Shannon
Well, I have a different take on it, and I am standing by my perspective. Given that I have been following the fortunes of homeopathy for so long, I see no reason why Julian Winston is any more of an expert than I am.
The day to day person to person transmission of enthusiasm for homeopathy is what should be examined. If homeopathy does not help a person, there is no way that that person is going to transmit any enthusiasm for it to someone else. Whether the real homeopathy is taught or a symptomatological homeopathy is taught in homeopathy schools won't make much difference if the patient is eating Twinkies and does not recover from diabetes after a treatment. The patient won't even know if his/her homeopath is doing constitutional homeopathy or not. And if you told the patient, he/she wouldn't give a rat's-rearend. All that they care about is whether it works or not.
And why did the schools stop teaching the correct homeopathy?
"there were a bunch who stopped the practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it" And why did they have no success with it. At least partly what I said. The tsunami of Twinkies hit homeopathy just as hard as it hit the rest of American society, and no one noticed. Homeopath tended to stop working in the face of a maintaining cause that no one paid any attention to.
And why did the happy patients not transmit their enthusiasm to others. I was told by an old Sufi guru lady to go to some guy named Fatheringham or something like that in a mall in south east San Francisco. It was so successful that I have been very enthusiastic about homeopathy for anyone who would listen.
Roger Bird
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:35:50 -0800
Subject: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
From Julian Winston, famous homeopathy historian (who died 9+ years
ago and miss im so!)
The decline in homeopathy in the USA was precipitated by many
factors. The major factor that I see was the complete failure on the
part of the homeopathic schools to teach *homeopathy*. They were,
almost to a school, teaching pure therapeutics (use this for that)
and not teaching any principles or structure. They were also teaching
allopathic therapeutics at the same time.
When those who graduated tried using the little they were taught
they, more often than not, met with failure, and fell back onto
allopathic therapeutics.
Yes... it was "mongrel" but in the sense that they had no sufficient
background and certainly mixed their therapeutics.
The only schools in the 1890s who were teaching *the method* were
Dunham and Hering in Chicago. BY the time it all started to go under
in the 1920s, those few who were interested in learning the *method*
attended the 6 week Post Graduate instruction from the American
Foundation. Most of the teachers (at the beginning) were graduates of
either Dunham, Hering, or Kent's Postgraduate School.
I am presently working on a database of American Homeopaths. In 1925,
the AIH published a director of homeopathic practitioners in the USA.
There were 8,720 names listed. Of the list, only 527 of the folks
trained prior to 1880-- the time when it all started downhill.
Another directory was issued in 1941. There were 6,937 names in
there. of them, only 3,500 remained from the 1925 listing. What
happened to the other 5,200? Certainly a number of them died, but not all.
My assumption is that they were poorly trained in homeopathy. They
got out of school between 1900 and 1924. They began practice. And by
the time 1941 rolled around, there were a bunch who stopped the
practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it, or found
no support network to help them.
Allen Sutherland graduated from Hahnenmann Philadelphia in 1925. He
had no success in his practice. At one point he met HA Roberts who
took him under wing and got him to go to the Postgrad course of the
AFH. If it wasn't for THAT meeting, Sutherland would have drifted
into allopathy.
George Nitsche graduated Hahnemann in 1938. He loved homeopathy. He
had some instruction from Calvin Knerr. But he had to do his
residency, and he went to a hospital in Minnesota. There he found no
one to talk to about homeopathy and no support. He put away his kit
(which I now have) and became an allopath.
It is a typical story.
THAT is what shut homeopathy down in the USA-- not the fighting
between the "highs" and the "lows" but poor education.
The piece of homeopathy that survived was kept alive by those who
WERE doing it-- Roberts, Grimmer, Hayes, Pulford, Green, Neiswander
(the elder), Rabe-- and they kept their patients happy. But when THAT
group died, there was almost nothing left. The supportive patients,
finding no one nearby, drifted into allopathy, or bought themselves
homeopathic kits and tried their best.
JW
If you study history you will find that if members of AMA even talked to a homeopath, they would be excluded and not be allowed to practise.
Then of course, as has been clearly the level tuition had homeopathic colleges left a great deal to desire.
Pls drop your ideas of nutrition being a major factor! This was happening before 1900 and there was plenty of home-cooking going on!
===
One of the places with high levels of homeopathic practise is in fact Iran where homeopathy is expanding rapidly.
Where as 20 years ago there were no homeopaths in Iran, there are now more 400 and great many practising in US and Canada. Some see 30-40 patients a day! And the practise is full with a waiting list!
The exams set by Iranian Homeopathic Association (IHA) are quite tough. Any one wishing to see an example of a past paper, please do let me know - but you must promise to attempt it and let me know how you got on.
Rgds
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 04 November 2014 15:39
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
That is the point I have made many times: the AMA was only a trade organization on the same level as a union. It set standards of training to eliminate homeopaths and other eclectic healers from acceptance. It set standards of practice that eliminated the use of homeopathy and threatened members if they even discussed homeopathy as an option.
It was a heavy handed, draconian assault on anything holistic and nothing has changed since except for the size, money and power
that the AMA has today.
It was always funded by the chemical industry.
t
Addressing diet and other maintaining causes *is* part of what homeopaths are trained to address, and it's strongly stressed in the Organon.
Another very interesting perspective on homeopathy's history is Harris Coulter's "Divided Legacy." It's a really interesting and readable book! And gives a rather fascinating history. For e.g., did you know that the AMA (American Medical Association) was formed specifically and precisely -- as lined out in their original documents of formation -- in order to protect the mainstream docs of the day, from "homeopaths and herbalists"?
Because, the good people, the patients, had noted that those "homeopaths and herbalists" were having more success. And also that fewer of their patients were dying -- FAR fewer. (The mainstream medicine of that day was arguably less brutal that today's, at least the bulk of it. But still…)
Roger, I really recommend that you give it a read. I think you won't be sorry!
Shannon
Well, I have a different take on it, and I am standing by my perspective. Given that I have been following the fortunes of homeopathy for so long, I see no reason why Julian Winston is any more of an expert than I am.
The day to day person to person transmission of enthusiasm for homeopathy is what should be examined. If homeopathy does not help a person, there is no way that that person is going to transmit any enthusiasm for it to someone else. Whether the real homeopathy is taught or a symptomatological homeopathy is taught in homeopathy schools won't make much difference if the patient is eating Twinkies and does not recover from diabetes after a treatment. The patient won't even know if his/her homeopath is doing constitutional homeopathy or not. And if you told the patient, he/she wouldn't give a rat's-rearend. All that they care about is whether it works or not.
And why did the schools stop teaching the correct homeopathy?
"there were a bunch who stopped the practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it" And why did they have no success with it. At least partly what I said. The tsunami of Twinkies hit homeopathy just as hard as it hit the rest of American society, and no one noticed. Homeopath tended to stop working in the face of a maintaining cause that no one paid any attention to.
And why did the happy patients not transmit their enthusiasm to others. I was told by an old Sufi guru lady to go to some guy named Fatheringham or something like that in a mall in south east San Francisco. It was so successful that I have been very enthusiastic about homeopathy for anyone who would listen.
Roger Bird
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:35:50 -0800
Subject: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
From Julian Winston, famous homeopathy historian (who died 9+ years
ago and miss im so!)
The decline in homeopathy in the USA was precipitated by many
factors. The major factor that I see was the complete failure on the
part of the homeopathic schools to teach *homeopathy*. They were,
almost to a school, teaching pure therapeutics (use this for that)
and not teaching any principles or structure. They were also teaching
allopathic therapeutics at the same time.
When those who graduated tried using the little they were taught
they, more often than not, met with failure, and fell back onto
allopathic therapeutics.
Yes... it was "mongrel" but in the sense that they had no sufficient
background and certainly mixed their therapeutics.
The only schools in the 1890s who were teaching *the method* were
Dunham and Hering in Chicago. BY the time it all started to go under
in the 1920s, those few who were interested in learning the *method*
attended the 6 week Post Graduate instruction from the American
Foundation. Most of the teachers (at the beginning) were graduates of
either Dunham, Hering, or Kent's Postgraduate School.
I am presently working on a database of American Homeopaths. In 1925,
the AIH published a director of homeopathic practitioners in the USA.
There were 8,720 names listed. Of the list, only 527 of the folks
trained prior to 1880-- the time when it all started downhill.
Another directory was issued in 1941. There were 6,937 names in
there. of them, only 3,500 remained from the 1925 listing. What
happened to the other 5,200? Certainly a number of them died, but not all.
My assumption is that they were poorly trained in homeopathy. They
got out of school between 1900 and 1924. They began practice. And by
the time 1941 rolled around, there were a bunch who stopped the
practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it, or found
no support network to help them.
Allen Sutherland graduated from Hahnenmann Philadelphia in 1925. He
had no success in his practice. At one point he met HA Roberts who
took him under wing and got him to go to the Postgrad course of the
AFH. If it wasn't for THAT meeting, Sutherland would have drifted
into allopathy.
George Nitsche graduated Hahnemann in 1938. He loved homeopathy. He
had some instruction from Calvin Knerr. But he had to do his
residency, and he went to a hospital in Minnesota. There he found no
one to talk to about homeopathy and no support. He put away his kit
(which I now have) and became an allopath.
It is a typical story.
THAT is what shut homeopathy down in the USA-- not the fighting
between the "highs" and the "lows" but poor education.
The piece of homeopathy that survived was kept alive by those who
WERE doing it-- Roberts, Grimmer, Hayes, Pulford, Green, Neiswander
(the elder), Rabe-- and they kept their patients happy. But when THAT
group died, there was almost nothing left. The supportive patients,
finding no one nearby, drifted into allopathy, or bought themselves
homeopathic kits and tried their best.
JW
Re: History of Homeopathy
Soroush,
I am well aware that the AMA has been out for blood since 1840, lying and revoking licenses if an MD even mentioned homeopathy, and probably worse. I read Divided Legacy decades ago.
But every single homeopathy patient (except perhaps the first few) became a homeopathy patient because someone else was enthusiastic about homeopathy, because that someone got results. When people stopped getting results, then they stopped telling other people about how great homeopathy is, and those other people stopped going to homeopaths.
I just think that you people, you homeopaths, are so insular and to calcified, that you can't handle a new idea.
Roger
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 16:53:20 +0000
Subject: RE: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy
Roger
If you study history you will find that if members of AMA even talked to a homeopath, they would be excluded and not be allowed to practise.
Then of course, as has been clearly the level tuition had homeopathic colleges left a great deal to desire.
Pls drop your ideas of nutrition being a major factor! This was happening before 1900 and there was plenty of home-cooking going on!
===
One of the places with high levels of homeopathic practise is in fact Iran where homeopathy is expanding rapidly.
Where as 20 years ago there were no homeopaths in Iran, there are now more 400 and great many practising in US and Canada. Some see 30-40 patients a day! And the practise is full with a waiting list!
The exams set by Iranian Homeopathic Association (IHA) are quite tough. Any one wishing to see an example of a past paper, please do let me know - but you must promise to attempt it and let me know how you got on.
Rgds
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 04 November 2014 15:39
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
That is the point I have made many times: the AMA was only a trade organization on the same level as a union. It set standards of training to eliminate homeopaths and other eclectic healers from acceptance. It set standards of practice that eliminated the use of homeopathy and threatened members if they even discussed homeopathy as an option.
It was a heavy handed, draconian assault on anything holistic and nothing has changed since except for the size, money and power
that the AMA has today.
It was always funded by the chemical industry.
t
Addressing diet and other maintaining causes *is* part of what homeopaths are trained to address, and it's strongly stressed in the Organon.
Another very interesting perspective on homeopathy's history is Harris Coulter's "Divided Legacy." It's a really interesting and readable book! And gives a rather fascinating history. For e.g., did you know that the AMA (American Medical Association) was formed specifically and precisely -- as lined out in their original documents of formation -- in order to protect the mainstream docs of the day, from "homeopaths and herbalists"?
Because, the good people, the patients, had noted that those "homeopaths and herbalists" were having more success. And also that fewer of their patients were dying -- FAR fewer. (The mainstream medicine of that day was arguably less brutal that today's, at least the bulk of it. But still…)
Roger, I really recommend that you give it a read. I think you won't be sorry!
Shannon
Well, I have a different take on it, and I am standing by my perspective. Given that I have been following the fortunes of homeopathy for so long, I see no reason why Julian Winston is any more of an expert than I am.
The day to day person to person transmission of enthusiasm for homeopathy is what should be examined. If homeopathy does not help a person, there is no way that that person is going to transmit any enthusiasm for it to someone else. Whether the real homeopathy is taught or a symptomatological homeopathy is taught in homeopathy schools won't make much difference if the patient is eating Twinkies and does not recover from diabetes after a treatment. The patient won't even know if his/her homeopath is doing constitutional homeopathy or not. And if you told the patient, he/she wouldn't give a rat's-rearend. All that they care about is whether it works or not.
And why did the schools stop teaching the correct homeopathy?
"there were a bunch who stopped the practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it" And why did they have no success with it. At least partly what I said. The tsunami of Twinkies hit homeopathy just as hard as it hit the rest of American society, and no one noticed. Homeopath tended to stop working in the face of a maintaining cause that no one paid any attention to.
And why did the happy patients not transmit their enthusiasm to others. I was told by an old Sufi guru lady to go to some guy named Fatheringham or something like that in a mall in south east San Francisco. It was so successful that I have been very enthusiastic about homeopathy for anyone who would listen.
Roger Bird
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:35:50 -0800
Subject: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
From Julian Winston, famous homeopathy historian (who died 9+ years
ago and miss im so!)
The decline in homeopathy in the USA was precipitated by many
factors. The major factor that I see was the complete failure on the
part of the homeopathic schools to teach *homeopathy*. They were,
almost to a school, teaching pure therapeutics (use this for that)
and not teaching any principles or structure. They were also teaching
allopathic therapeutics at the same time.
When those who graduated tried using the little they were taught
they, more often than not, met with failure, and fell back onto
allopathic therapeutics.
Yes... it was "mongrel" but in the sense that they had no sufficient
background and certainly mixed their therapeutics.
The only schools in the 1890s who were teaching *the method* were
Dunham and Hering in Chicago. BY the time it all started to go under
in the 1920s, those few who were interested in learning the *method*
attended the 6 week Post Graduate instruction from the American
Foundation. Most of the teachers (at the beginning) were graduates of
either Dunham, Hering, or Kent's Postgraduate School.
I am presently working on a database of American Homeopaths. In 1925,
the AIH published a director of homeopathic practitioners in the USA.
There were 8,720 names listed. Of the list, only 527 of the folks
trained prior to 1880-- the time when it all started downhill.
Another directory was issued in 1941. There were 6,937 names in
there. of them, only 3,500 remained from the 1925 listing. What
happened to the other 5,200? Certainly a number of them died, but not all.
My assumption is that they were poorly trained in homeopathy. They
got out of school between 1900 and 1924. They began practice. And by
the time 1941 rolled around, there were a bunch who stopped the
practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it, or found
no support network to help them.
Allen Sutherland graduated from Hahnenmann Philadelphia in 1925. He
had no success in his practice. At one point he met HA Roberts who
took him under wing and got him to go to the Postgrad course of the
AFH. If it wasn't for THAT meeting, Sutherland would have drifted
into allopathy.
George Nitsche graduated Hahnemann in 1938. He loved homeopathy. He
had some instruction from Calvin Knerr. But he had to do his
residency, and he went to a hospital in Minnesota. There he found no
one to talk to about homeopathy and no support. He put away his kit
(which I now have) and became an allopath.
It is a typical story.
THAT is what shut homeopathy down in the USA-- not the fighting
between the "highs" and the "lows" but poor education.
The piece of homeopathy that survived was kept alive by those who
WERE doing it-- Roberts, Grimmer, Hayes, Pulford, Green, Neiswander
(the elder), Rabe-- and they kept their patients happy. But when THAT
group died, there was almost nothing left. The supportive patients,
finding no one nearby, drifted into allopathy, or bought themselves
homeopathic kits and tried their best.
JW
I am well aware that the AMA has been out for blood since 1840, lying and revoking licenses if an MD even mentioned homeopathy, and probably worse. I read Divided Legacy decades ago.
But every single homeopathy patient (except perhaps the first few) became a homeopathy patient because someone else was enthusiastic about homeopathy, because that someone got results. When people stopped getting results, then they stopped telling other people about how great homeopathy is, and those other people stopped going to homeopaths.
I just think that you people, you homeopaths, are so insular and to calcified, that you can't handle a new idea.
Roger
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 16:53:20 +0000
Subject: RE: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy
Roger
If you study history you will find that if members of AMA even talked to a homeopath, they would be excluded and not be allowed to practise.
Then of course, as has been clearly the level tuition had homeopathic colleges left a great deal to desire.
Pls drop your ideas of nutrition being a major factor! This was happening before 1900 and there was plenty of home-cooking going on!
===
One of the places with high levels of homeopathic practise is in fact Iran where homeopathy is expanding rapidly.
Where as 20 years ago there were no homeopaths in Iran, there are now more 400 and great many practising in US and Canada. Some see 30-40 patients a day! And the practise is full with a waiting list!
The exams set by Iranian Homeopathic Association (IHA) are quite tough. Any one wishing to see an example of a past paper, please do let me know - but you must promise to attempt it and let me know how you got on.
Rgds
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 04 November 2014 15:39
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
That is the point I have made many times: the AMA was only a trade organization on the same level as a union. It set standards of training to eliminate homeopaths and other eclectic healers from acceptance. It set standards of practice that eliminated the use of homeopathy and threatened members if they even discussed homeopathy as an option.
It was a heavy handed, draconian assault on anything holistic and nothing has changed since except for the size, money and power
that the AMA has today.
It was always funded by the chemical industry.
t
Addressing diet and other maintaining causes *is* part of what homeopaths are trained to address, and it's strongly stressed in the Organon.
Another very interesting perspective on homeopathy's history is Harris Coulter's "Divided Legacy." It's a really interesting and readable book! And gives a rather fascinating history. For e.g., did you know that the AMA (American Medical Association) was formed specifically and precisely -- as lined out in their original documents of formation -- in order to protect the mainstream docs of the day, from "homeopaths and herbalists"?
Because, the good people, the patients, had noted that those "homeopaths and herbalists" were having more success. And also that fewer of their patients were dying -- FAR fewer. (The mainstream medicine of that day was arguably less brutal that today's, at least the bulk of it. But still…)
Roger, I really recommend that you give it a read. I think you won't be sorry!
Shannon
Well, I have a different take on it, and I am standing by my perspective. Given that I have been following the fortunes of homeopathy for so long, I see no reason why Julian Winston is any more of an expert than I am.
The day to day person to person transmission of enthusiasm for homeopathy is what should be examined. If homeopathy does not help a person, there is no way that that person is going to transmit any enthusiasm for it to someone else. Whether the real homeopathy is taught or a symptomatological homeopathy is taught in homeopathy schools won't make much difference if the patient is eating Twinkies and does not recover from diabetes after a treatment. The patient won't even know if his/her homeopath is doing constitutional homeopathy or not. And if you told the patient, he/she wouldn't give a rat's-rearend. All that they care about is whether it works or not.
And why did the schools stop teaching the correct homeopathy?
"there were a bunch who stopped the practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it" And why did they have no success with it. At least partly what I said. The tsunami of Twinkies hit homeopathy just as hard as it hit the rest of American society, and no one noticed. Homeopath tended to stop working in the face of a maintaining cause that no one paid any attention to.
And why did the happy patients not transmit their enthusiasm to others. I was told by an old Sufi guru lady to go to some guy named Fatheringham or something like that in a mall in south east San Francisco. It was so successful that I have been very enthusiastic about homeopathy for anyone who would listen.
Roger Bird
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:35:50 -0800
Subject: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy - Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
Decline of homeopathy from most knowledgeable person
From Julian Winston, famous homeopathy historian (who died 9+ years
ago and miss im so!)
The decline in homeopathy in the USA was precipitated by many
factors. The major factor that I see was the complete failure on the
part of the homeopathic schools to teach *homeopathy*. They were,
almost to a school, teaching pure therapeutics (use this for that)
and not teaching any principles or structure. They were also teaching
allopathic therapeutics at the same time.
When those who graduated tried using the little they were taught
they, more often than not, met with failure, and fell back onto
allopathic therapeutics.
Yes... it was "mongrel" but in the sense that they had no sufficient
background and certainly mixed their therapeutics.
The only schools in the 1890s who were teaching *the method* were
Dunham and Hering in Chicago. BY the time it all started to go under
in the 1920s, those few who were interested in learning the *method*
attended the 6 week Post Graduate instruction from the American
Foundation. Most of the teachers (at the beginning) were graduates of
either Dunham, Hering, or Kent's Postgraduate School.
I am presently working on a database of American Homeopaths. In 1925,
the AIH published a director of homeopathic practitioners in the USA.
There were 8,720 names listed. Of the list, only 527 of the folks
trained prior to 1880-- the time when it all started downhill.
Another directory was issued in 1941. There were 6,937 names in
there. of them, only 3,500 remained from the 1925 listing. What
happened to the other 5,200? Certainly a number of them died, but not all.
My assumption is that they were poorly trained in homeopathy. They
got out of school between 1900 and 1924. They began practice. And by
the time 1941 rolled around, there were a bunch who stopped the
practice of homeopathy because they had no success with it, or found
no support network to help them.
Allen Sutherland graduated from Hahnenmann Philadelphia in 1925. He
had no success in his practice. At one point he met HA Roberts who
took him under wing and got him to go to the Postgrad course of the
AFH. If it wasn't for THAT meeting, Sutherland would have drifted
into allopathy.
George Nitsche graduated Hahnemann in 1938. He loved homeopathy. He
had some instruction from Calvin Knerr. But he had to do his
residency, and he went to a hospital in Minnesota. There he found no
one to talk to about homeopathy and no support. He put away his kit
(which I now have) and became an allopath.
It is a typical story.
THAT is what shut homeopathy down in the USA-- not the fighting
between the "highs" and the "lows" but poor education.
The piece of homeopathy that survived was kept alive by those who
WERE doing it-- Roberts, Grimmer, Hayes, Pulford, Green, Neiswander
(the elder), Rabe-- and they kept their patients happy. But when THAT
group died, there was almost nothing left. The supportive patients,
finding no one nearby, drifted into allopathy, or bought themselves
homeopathic kits and tried their best.
JW
-
Irene de Villiers
- Posts: 3237
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:00 pm
Re: History of Homeopathy
Not true.
Most people become homeopathy patients because western medicine messes them up and makes things worse, and they finally see that. By that point they will try anything ELSE.
The resltant success often is what makes a person become a homeopath also.
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
Most people become homeopathy patients because western medicine messes them up and makes things worse, and they finally see that. By that point they will try anything ELSE.
The resltant success often is what makes a person become a homeopath also.
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
Re: History of Homeopathy
But there are lots of people who are sick of western conventional medicine and they don't try homeopathy, until a friends says, "Hey, have you tried homeopathy!". Being sick of western conventional medicine does NOT give direction to people. It does not propel people automatically in the direction of homeopathy. It does not provide an introduction to homeopathy. Lots and lots of disgruntled people are lost in The Forest of Dr. Oz (sounds like a Broadway play). Many of those people have never heard of homeopathy. But if my sister says "Wow, homeopathy really worked wonders for me!", I am going to say, "What is homeopathy? Tell me more." But if my sister says, "I tried homeopathy. It didn't do a dang thing for me. It cost me a lot of money. And my scientist friends says that it is bunk", there is NO way that I am going to bother about it.
Roger
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 15:21:43 -0800
Subject: Re: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy
Not true.
Most people become homeopathy patients because western medicine messes them up and makes things worse, and they finally see that. By that point they will try anything ELSE.
The resltant success often is what makes a person become a homeopath also.
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
Roger
________________________________
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 15:21:43 -0800
Subject: Re: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy
Not true.
Most people become homeopathy patients because western medicine messes them up and makes things worse, and they finally see that. By that point they will try anything ELSE.
The resltant success often is what makes a person become a homeopath also.
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
Re: History of Homeopathy
I will review all of the "homeopaths" that I have gone to over the past 45 years to see if they said anything about diet.
1969 -- Dr. Fatheringham, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet. He didn't even say whether I should come back or not.
1970 -- Old 4 fingered guy on Telegraph Avenue, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet.
Early 1970's -- Dr. Roger Morrison. Not one word about diet. Dr. Morrison had a little write-up about what we should avoid before and after treatment, like strong smells, dental work, camphor, etc., but it did not include anything about any food. I was curious why only he mentioned dental work, camphor, etc, and no one else did.
Mid-1970's -- Dr. Robert Gorter. A truly great healer. He had plenty to say about food, but not in regard to his anthroposophical remedies, and nothing about carbs or wheat
1991 -- Guy using computer, also did traditional Chinese medicine. Not one word about diet.
2000 to present -- Dr. Mark Cooper, naturopathic doctor. Not one word about diet, and he should have known better.
2013 -- lady in Monument. Definitely new school homeopath. She is the only one who insisted upon a complete diet write-up.
I may have missed a few.
You could say that they were not all real homeopaths, but that is NOT what the customers see. The customers see "Homeopath". The first two were as real as they get, and they said absolutely nothing whatsoever about diet. 1991 was clearly not a certified homeopath, but he healed my wife of endometriosis (versus a radical hysterectomy recommended by the conventional medical moron). Mark Cooper, who I adore, should have known better. I had to figure it out all by myself. And only the lady in Monument, Colorado got it right.
So, I say that Irene and others here are living on a little island and aren't seeing even the whole of the homeopathic world, let alone the whole of the whole world. You'all are being defensive, but that is not what the customer cares about. The customer want results. You might personally be perfect with regard to your practice, but if homeopathy as a whole does not address the maintaining factors of a processed food diet and other maintaining factors, then you won't get as many good results as the homeopaths of 1950 got.
Roger Bird
1969 -- Dr. Fatheringham, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet. He didn't even say whether I should come back or not.
1970 -- Old 4 fingered guy on Telegraph Avenue, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet.
Early 1970's -- Dr. Roger Morrison. Not one word about diet. Dr. Morrison had a little write-up about what we should avoid before and after treatment, like strong smells, dental work, camphor, etc., but it did not include anything about any food. I was curious why only he mentioned dental work, camphor, etc, and no one else did.
Mid-1970's -- Dr. Robert Gorter. A truly great healer. He had plenty to say about food, but not in regard to his anthroposophical remedies, and nothing about carbs or wheat
1991 -- Guy using computer, also did traditional Chinese medicine. Not one word about diet.
2000 to present -- Dr. Mark Cooper, naturopathic doctor. Not one word about diet, and he should have known better.
2013 -- lady in Monument. Definitely new school homeopath. She is the only one who insisted upon a complete diet write-up.
I may have missed a few.
You could say that they were not all real homeopaths, but that is NOT what the customers see. The customers see "Homeopath". The first two were as real as they get, and they said absolutely nothing whatsoever about diet. 1991 was clearly not a certified homeopath, but he healed my wife of endometriosis (versus a radical hysterectomy recommended by the conventional medical moron). Mark Cooper, who I adore, should have known better. I had to figure it out all by myself. And only the lady in Monument, Colorado got it right.
So, I say that Irene and others here are living on a little island and aren't seeing even the whole of the homeopathic world, let alone the whole of the whole world. You'all are being defensive, but that is not what the customer cares about. The customer want results. You might personally be perfect with regard to your practice, but if homeopathy as a whole does not address the maintaining factors of a processed food diet and other maintaining factors, then you won't get as many good results as the homeopaths of 1950 got.
Roger Bird
-
Irene de Villiers
- Posts: 3237
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:00 pm
Re: History of Homeopathy
No I am being real.
Homeopathy runs in my family from way back. I learned it from a cousin who learned it from her dad, and he from his dad etc. I only recently managed to discover the genealogy line involved adn document it well, as my grandfather died when my dad was a child (which turned my dad off homeopathy - he figured a homeopath should have been able to heal his own burst appendix adn not died from it - so I learned homeopathy from a cousin).
I also run a school of advanced veterinary homepaty -
all the homeoaths just mentioned plus students of same -at all generations, start with diet.
Often the correct diet is all that is needed.
But most often it is at least an essential aspect.
Take the cheetahs I am working with currently. I was contacted when three of the eight cheetahs at a conservation center, died suddenly, and the other five were very ill. Diagnosis was FIP by the resident vet hence I was contacted (I do FIP research) . But one glance at the crummy autopsy (three photos, a paragraph of laziness and the word FIP) showed no FIP in sight IMO, and within a day my theory was that they had died of Copper deficiency - I sent my suggestions for tests and that was confirmed by the vet there. One caracul still died after that, the young lion survived, the five cheetahs survived though they are still ill and getting homeopathy. Two tigers gave birth to 2 cubs each but have no milk....all the gazelles are ill ....etc
Turns out there is a shortage of copper in the surrounding desert, so that the liver of prey animals fed from local sources had no copper where it would normally be expected. All animals got copper deficient diet...which is being remedied, a conference was called of conservation centers to address this now widespread issue, and human follow up is also being done, as there is no reason to assume humans in the desert area are exempt. Basially the cheetahs have not got much immune system to start with due to lack of genetic diversity - so they are the "canary in the mine" species for this Coper deficienecy.
My point - There is NO remedy that can substitute for the missing copper, nor provide it.
The nutrient MUST be provided.
You can add homepahty - such as lac deflor to restore the tiger mims' milk and aco to prevent tiger cub infections, and so forth - but all would be dead without the copper first being supplied.
So... nutrition in ANY health related case is not optional but essential.
In USA the average pet eats the worst rubbish (wheat gluten, soy protein and the like plus lots of carbs) or else the highest toxin load that can be devised (blueberries cranberries, tomatoes, anything full of toxic saponins, cyanoglycocides, phenolics and bioflavonoids that poison carnivores, destroy their kidney tissue and create struvite and immune compromise diseases - cancer has now taken over from kidney failure as leading cause of death since the toxic fruit, veg and herb craze started.).
There is no point starting a case anywhere else but with this so-calld "diet" forced onto them by well meaning but ignorant owners believing that whatever they see on some anonymous website on the internet is gospel.
There may need to be a remedy right away as well, but diet is on the top priority list, and usually on the maintaining cause if not THE cause, list.
Every vethom I know does that - and I make sure my students do that too.
I do not know any good homeopath who considers diet irrelevamt, in fact by definition, they are not good if they ignore it!
Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
Homeopathy runs in my family from way back. I learned it from a cousin who learned it from her dad, and he from his dad etc. I only recently managed to discover the genealogy line involved adn document it well, as my grandfather died when my dad was a child (which turned my dad off homeopathy - he figured a homeopath should have been able to heal his own burst appendix adn not died from it - so I learned homeopathy from a cousin).
I also run a school of advanced veterinary homepaty -
all the homeoaths just mentioned plus students of same -at all generations, start with diet.
Often the correct diet is all that is needed.
But most often it is at least an essential aspect.
Take the cheetahs I am working with currently. I was contacted when three of the eight cheetahs at a conservation center, died suddenly, and the other five were very ill. Diagnosis was FIP by the resident vet hence I was contacted (I do FIP research) . But one glance at the crummy autopsy (three photos, a paragraph of laziness and the word FIP) showed no FIP in sight IMO, and within a day my theory was that they had died of Copper deficiency - I sent my suggestions for tests and that was confirmed by the vet there. One caracul still died after that, the young lion survived, the five cheetahs survived though they are still ill and getting homeopathy. Two tigers gave birth to 2 cubs each but have no milk....all the gazelles are ill ....etc
Turns out there is a shortage of copper in the surrounding desert, so that the liver of prey animals fed from local sources had no copper where it would normally be expected. All animals got copper deficient diet...which is being remedied, a conference was called of conservation centers to address this now widespread issue, and human follow up is also being done, as there is no reason to assume humans in the desert area are exempt. Basially the cheetahs have not got much immune system to start with due to lack of genetic diversity - so they are the "canary in the mine" species for this Coper deficienecy.
My point - There is NO remedy that can substitute for the missing copper, nor provide it.
The nutrient MUST be provided.
You can add homepahty - such as lac deflor to restore the tiger mims' milk and aco to prevent tiger cub infections, and so forth - but all would be dead without the copper first being supplied.
So... nutrition in ANY health related case is not optional but essential.
In USA the average pet eats the worst rubbish (wheat gluten, soy protein and the like plus lots of carbs) or else the highest toxin load that can be devised (blueberries cranberries, tomatoes, anything full of toxic saponins, cyanoglycocides, phenolics and bioflavonoids that poison carnivores, destroy their kidney tissue and create struvite and immune compromise diseases - cancer has now taken over from kidney failure as leading cause of death since the toxic fruit, veg and herb craze started.).
There is no point starting a case anywhere else but with this so-calld "diet" forced onto them by well meaning but ignorant owners believing that whatever they see on some anonymous website on the internet is gospel.
There may need to be a remedy right away as well, but diet is on the top priority list, and usually on the maintaining cause if not THE cause, list.
Every vethom I know does that - and I make sure my students do that too.
I do not know any good homeopath who considers diet irrelevamt, in fact by definition, they are not good if they ignore it!
Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
Re: History of Homeopathy
Correction: I meant 1850, not 1950.
Roger
________________________________
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 19:13:15 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy
I will review all of the "homeopaths" that I have gone to over the past 45 years to see if they said anything about diet.
1969 -- Dr. Fatheringham, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet. He didn't even say whether I should come back or not.
1970 -- Old 4 fingered guy on Telegraph Avenue, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet.
Early 1970's -- Dr. Roger Morrison. Not one word about diet. Dr. Morrison had a little write-up about what we should avoid before and after treatment, like strong smells, dental work, camphor, etc., but it did not include anything about any food. I was curious why only he mentioned dental work, camphor, etc, and no one else did.
Mid-1970's -- Dr. Robert Gorter. A truly great healer. He had plenty to say about food, but not in regard to his anthroposophical remedies, and nothing about carbs or wheat
1991 -- Guy using computer, also did traditional Chinese medicine. Not one word about diet.
2000 to present -- Dr. Mark Cooper, naturopathic doctor. Not one word about diet, and he should have known better.
2013 -- lady in Monument. Definitely new school homeopath. She is the only one who insisted upon a complete diet write-up.
I may have missed a few.
You could say that they were not all real homeopaths, but that is NOT what the customers see. The customers see "Homeopath". The first two were as real as they get, and they said absolutely nothing whatsoever about diet. 1991 was clearly not a certified homeopath, but he healed my wife of endometriosis (versus a radical hysterectomy recommended by the conventional medical moron). Mark Cooper, who I adore, should have known better. I had to figure it out all by myself. And only the lady in Monument, Colorado got it right.
So, I say that Irene and others here are living on a little island and aren't seeing even the whole of the homeopathic world, let alone the whole of the whole world. You'all are being defensive, but that is not what the customer cares about. The customer want results. You might personally be perfect with regard to your practice, but if homeopathy as a whole does not address the maintaining factors of a processed food diet and other maintaining factors, then you won't get as many good results as the homeopaths of 1950 got.
Roger Bird
Roger
________________________________
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 19:13:15 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] History of Homeopathy
I will review all of the "homeopaths" that I have gone to over the past 45 years to see if they said anything about diet.
1969 -- Dr. Fatheringham, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet. He didn't even say whether I should come back or not.
1970 -- Old 4 fingered guy on Telegraph Avenue, old school real deal homeopath. Not one word about diet.
Early 1970's -- Dr. Roger Morrison. Not one word about diet. Dr. Morrison had a little write-up about what we should avoid before and after treatment, like strong smells, dental work, camphor, etc., but it did not include anything about any food. I was curious why only he mentioned dental work, camphor, etc, and no one else did.
Mid-1970's -- Dr. Robert Gorter. A truly great healer. He had plenty to say about food, but not in regard to his anthroposophical remedies, and nothing about carbs or wheat
1991 -- Guy using computer, also did traditional Chinese medicine. Not one word about diet.
2000 to present -- Dr. Mark Cooper, naturopathic doctor. Not one word about diet, and he should have known better.
2013 -- lady in Monument. Definitely new school homeopath. She is the only one who insisted upon a complete diet write-up.
I may have missed a few.
You could say that they were not all real homeopaths, but that is NOT what the customers see. The customers see "Homeopath". The first two were as real as they get, and they said absolutely nothing whatsoever about diet. 1991 was clearly not a certified homeopath, but he healed my wife of endometriosis (versus a radical hysterectomy recommended by the conventional medical moron). Mark Cooper, who I adore, should have known better. I had to figure it out all by myself. And only the lady in Monument, Colorado got it right.
So, I say that Irene and others here are living on a little island and aren't seeing even the whole of the homeopathic world, let alone the whole of the whole world. You'all are being defensive, but that is not what the customer cares about. The customer want results. You might personally be perfect with regard to your practice, but if homeopathy as a whole does not address the maintaining factors of a processed food diet and other maintaining factors, then you won't get as many good results as the homeopaths of 1950 got.
Roger Bird