The minimum standard in homeopathic training

[Feras Hakkak]

Dear Dr Shaddel,
I think the homoeopathic training course must be at least 4-5 years, "at least". During the course, the students must learn anatomy, physiology, pathology, embryology and other basic medical sciences as well as possible. It is very important for a medical practitioner of ay kind to know these things well. Also they have to study psychology and related subjects. Besides these, they have to know the roots of their sciece. So they must also study the history of medicine and history of homeopathy. The students should learn homeopathy from the base and then they whould gradually bcome familiar with the new methods. So they should strat with Hahnemann, and then maybe Boenninghausen, Hering, Kent, ..... and then come to the new masters like Vithoulkas, Sankaran, Mangialavori, etc. Also they must learn about the provings and to understand their materia medica, conduct at least one proving of a well-known remedy on themselves. Clinical practice is the other important issue which
must be emphasized during the training period. This practice must be supported by a lot of studying, awriting reports, etc. The students must learn homeopathic philosophy quite well, otherwise they will be lost in the jungle and will not know what to do, what to be cure, when to intervene, how to intervene, etc. Deep uderstanding of the meaning of cure and sicness, healing and suppression is extremely important and will be the compass of the pactitioners.
Having these points in mind, I think there is no place for 6-month homeopathic training courses for non-homeopaths. Such concise courses will not make homeopaths. Instead, with such superficial trainings we make pseudo-homeopaths who follow non-homeopathic methods and use potentized remedies to suppress the diseases of their patients.
Best regards,
Feras

"F. Shaddel" wrote:

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN]

Hi Feras,
Joining issue here.
You know how the Indian Homeo Education System works. It is a five
year term minimum for any graduation requisite to practice
Homeopathy.
Yet, the passers out are pitifully inadequate in their anatomy,
physiology etc and their Homeopathic knowledge. Most of them set up
(shop ?) clinics with an attached pharmacy which sell patents
gleefully. IF NOT ALL, a majority of them are polypharmacists. On
the other hand , I also know of a band of people, with no recognised
certificate or degree, are doing purely Hahnemannian work. All the
Indian students are required to memorize Allen keynotes, but if they
practice at least according to that, the healthcare scenario in
India would have been much better. Even the college OP departments
prescribe two or more remedies and for long periods and also ask the
patient to buy combinations from outside. 'Stodal' is a brand of
cough remedy no homeopathic doctor can live without. The patient
will ask the doc, when he gets a cold, " can I buy one stodal and
keep,? if a cough cough develops it will be helpful." Patient
conditioning is so thorough. Sometimes, I just keep quiet than to
break these patient's faith in them.
When someone ask me to suggest Hahnemannians, I am a terrible loss.
The only people I remember are Old guys. What are the colleges
doing ?
Regards
Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Feras Hakkak wrote:
years, "at least". During the course, the students must learn
anatomy, physiology, pathology, embryology and other basic medical
sciences as well as possible. It is very important for a medical
practitioner of ay kind to know these things well. Also they have to
study psychology and related subjects. Besides these, they have to
know the roots of their sciece. So they must also study the history
of medicine and history of homeopathy. The students should learn
homeopathy from the base and then they whould gradually bcome
familiar with the new methods. So they should strat with Hahnemann,
and then maybe Boenninghausen, Hering, Kent, ..... and then come to
the new masters like Vithoulkas, Sankaran, Mangialavori, etc. Also
they must learn about the provings and to understand their materia
medica, conduct at least one proving of a well-known remedy on
themselves. Clinical practice is the other important issue which
be supported by a lot of studying, awriting reports, etc. The
students must learn homeopathic philosophy quite well, otherwise
they will be lost in the jungle and will not know what to do, what
to be cure, when to intervene, how to intervene, etc. Deep
uderstanding of the meaning of cure and sicness, healing and
suppression is extremely important and will be the compass of the
pactitioners.
month homeopathic training courses for non-homeopaths. Such concise
courses will not make homeopaths. Instead, with such superficial
trainings we make pseudo-homeopaths who follow non-homeopathic
methods and use potentized remedies to suppress the diseases of
their patients.
with Shanon. Actually shanon has told exactly and nicely the best
reason for having such competition (IHMSC - www.ihmle.com). But
still the question is "what is that minimum standard?" Nobody has
answered it in Homeopathy till date. So the first step is to share
personal experiences in this regards. So lets change your question
and get one step back and request everybody to share their views
about the minimum standard for a Homeopathy practitioner in any
corner of world.

[F. Shaddel]

Dear Venkat
Thanks for your brave comment. It is the reality of current Homeopathy practicing in the same country which I was talking about. However we have to remark the presence of a lot of grate and real Homeopaths (Maybe more than any other countries) in India and Asia. The international problem of Homeopathy is not having a proper system for evaluating the knowledge and practical competency of Homeopathic practitioners.
What is the solution for this?
Kind Regards
Shaddel

"J.venkatasubramanian" wrote:
Hi Feras,
Joining issue here.
You know how the Indian Homeo Education System works. It is a five
year term minimum for any graduation requisite to practice
Homeopathy.
Yet, the passers out are pitifully inadequate in their anatomy,
physiology etc and their Homeopathic knowledge. Most of them set up
(shop ?) clinics with an attached pharmacy which sell patents
gleefully. IF NOT ALL, a majority of them are polypharmacists. On
the other hand , I also know of a band of people, with no recognised
certificate or degree, are doing purely Hahnemannian work. All the
Indian students are required to memorize Allen keynotes, but if they
practice at least according to that, the healthcare scenario in
India would have been much better. Even the college OP departments
prescribe two or more remedies and for long periods and also ask the
patient to buy combinations from outside. 'Stodal' is a brand of
cough remedy no homeopathic doctor can live without. The patient
will ask the doc, when he gets a cold, " can I buy one stodal and
keep,? if a cough cough develops it will be helpful." Patient
conditioning is so thorough. Sometimes, I just keep quiet than to
break these patient's faith in them.

When someone ask me to suggest Hahnemannians, I am a terrible loss.
The only people I remember are Old guys. What are the colleges
doing ?
Regards
Venkat

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Feras Hakkak wrote:
years, "at least". During the course, the students must learn
anatomy, physiology, pathology, embryology and other basic medical
sciences as well as possible. It is very important for a medical
practitioner of ay kind to know these things well. Also they have to
study psychology and related subjects. Besides these, they have to
know the roots of their sciece. So they must also study the history
of medicine and history of homeopathy. The students should learn
homeopathy from the base and then they whould gradually bcome
familiar with the new methods. So they should strat with Hahnemann,
and then maybe Boenninghausen, Hering, Kent, ..... and then come to
the new masters like Vithoulkas, Sankaran, Mangialavori, etc. Also
they must learn about the provings and to understand their materia
medica, conduct at least one proving of a well-known remedy on
themselves. Clinical practice is the other important issue which
be supported by a lot of studying, awriting reports, etc. The
students must learn homeopathic philosophy quite well, otherwise
they will be lost in the jungle and will not know what to do, what
to be cure, when to intervene, how to intervene, etc. Deep
uderstanding of the meaning of cure and sicness, healing and
suppression is extremely important and will be the compass of the
pactitioners.
month homeopathic training courses for non-homeopaths. Such concise
courses will not make homeopaths. Instead, with such superficial
trainings we make pseudo-homeopaths who follow non-homeopathic
methods and use potentized remedies to suppress the diseases of
their patients.
with Shanon. Actually shanon has told exactly and nicely the best
reason for having such competition (IHMSC - www.ihmle.com). But
still the question is "what is that minimum standard?" Nobody has
answered it in Homeopathy till date. So the first step is to share
personal experiences in this regards. So lets change your question
and get one step back and request everybody to share their views
about the minimum standard for a Homeopathy practitioner in any
corner of world.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN]

Dear Shaddel,

The great ones you talked about - ask them and they might tell you
how they swam against the current. When every other guy was seeing
fifty patients per day, how these ones had to slog it out to make up
at least ten. the problem is that students with no aptitude enter
the system and this spoils the whole scenario. May be I am wrong.
It is not against those who 'also'want to do homeopathy. But a class
should have at least 50% of students who love homeopathy. The Indian
scenario is a perplexing mix- the bright, the hobbyists, the time
passers,and the also rans. Imagine how the situation will be when
everyone of them sit for practice! Though the market decides, there
is that 'value' for the one that prescribes for three times a day
and that too colourful bottles from 'reputed' companies. This
carries them for some time. But this time(when you collectively add
that of all such guys) is enough to kill any good Classical guy.

Regards
Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "F. Shaddel" wrote:
Homeopathy practicing in the same country which I was talking about.
However we have to remark the presence of a lot of grate and real
Homeopaths (Maybe more than any other countries) in India and Asia.
The international problem of Homeopathy is not having a proper
system for evaluating the knowledge and practical competency of
Homeopathic practitioners.
up
recognised
they
the
loss.
to
history
Hahnemann,
to
must
concise

[Shannon Nelson]

Mmmm, Feras, I want to take your course!!!!! )
But would like to (partially) disagree about this:
I feel that short courses can be very useful if properly done.
IMO (and IME) that short course will emphaslze:
- (not to be *taught* first, but I will list it first) homeopathic
treatment of certain types of acutes and traumas, to be used with self
and family. Part of this training would include knowing when you must
*not* wait to try remedies (unless you're doing so while you wait for
an ambulance, or while you wait for a doctor to see you, etc.). IMO
and IME a little training can let a person do a *lot* of good in
certain circumstances.
- Teaching the broad strokes of the history of homeopathy, including
both "what is homeopathy", history of Hahnemann "versus" drug
therapies; including homeopathy's well-documented past successes in
e.g. epidemics.
- Teaching about the differences between "acute care" and "chronic
care" with homeopathy, giving an understanding and appreciation of the
*difference* between the two, and of why chronic care is a whole
different thing, requiring a much deeper training.
Cheers,
Shannon

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Irene de Villiers]

In my view it is wrong to measure the *length* of training - and correct
to measure the *result* of training.
Many roads lead to Rome - and it is shooting ourselves in the foot to
measure time:-)

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."

[Feras Hakkak]

Dear Shannon

The benefits you mention for short homeopathy courses for non-homeopaths are quite right. The point is we must stress that such courses will not make homeopaths, and the students will not be able to practice "homeopathy" with this short training. The students should understand what the course is meant for and what they will be able to do after the course. If we put anything in its proper place, we will never have problems.
Best wishes
Feras
Robert & Shannon Nelson wrote:
Mmmm, Feras, I want to take your course!!!!! )
But would like to (partially) disagree about this:
I feel that short courses can be very useful if properly done.
IMO (and IME) that short course will emphaslze:
- (not to be *taught* first, but I will list it first) homeopathic
treatment of certain types of acutes and traumas, to be used with self
and family. Part of this training would include knowing when you must
*not* wait to try remedies (unless you're doing so while you wait for
an ambulance, or while you wait for a doctor to see you, etc.). IMO
and IME a little training can let a person do a *lot* of good in
certain circumstances.
- Teaching the broad strokes of the history of homeopathy, including
both "what is homeopathy", history of Hahnemann "versus" drug
therapies; including homeopathy's well-documented past successes in
e.g. epidemics.
- Teaching about the differences between "acute care" and "chronic
care" with homeopathy, giving an understanding and appreciation of the
*difference* between the two, and of why chronic care is a whole
different thing, requiring a much deeper training.
Cheers,
Shannon
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]