re: diagnostic testing

[harridan37]

Rosemary;
I whole heartedly agree! The more knowledg of diagnostic testing
the better. This way when we are working hand in hand with MD's and
specialists - to better our patient - this knowledge is a great and
usefull tool which will enable us to become more specific in our
diagnosis and eventual treatment of the patient and the condition.

In my mind's eye -the more information provided to us in during the
diagnostic period the more our patients will benefit from a well
rounded and detailed course of investigation; leading to a protocol
of treatment which will most benefit the return to a healthy state
for the patient.
Karen DeNoble.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Rosemary C Hyde PhD"
wrote:
medical diagnostic knowledge and awareness for a homeopathic
practitioner. Our pre-certification requirements gave a nod to that
need -- the requirements for courses in Anatomy and Physiology,
Pathology, etc... However, there was no required course in medical
diagnosis, which, of course, should follow from Anatomy and
Physiology -- nor was such a course available for non-medical
students.
on-line education provider (PHAU -- are you there?). Such a course
by a master physician who's also a master homeopath, like Farokh
Master or Luc de Shepper or our own Dr. Roz, targeting especially
practicing homeopaths as postgraduate education would be most
useful. I have found in practice that the sharper my knowledge
becomes of the possible physiological processes, their causes and
prognoses, the better I can apply homeopathic knowledge accurately
in choosing a remedy.
discussion.
able to refer to the medical profession for tests/diagnoses etc (and
to a great extent you can do that here in the UK) but you do need
the knowledge yourself to know when to refer particularly if
patients are coming to you as a 'primary carer'. We also owe it to
our patients to have some idea of what their options are and what
the varying prognoses are with different therapies and we need to
know how to work intelligently with progressive pathology. It is
this perceived lack of knowledge ( far from universal, I am sure!)
that scares the law makers and some members of the public.
fortunately for me, if not the patient, their GP had also missed
them and fortunately for the patient I do encourage people to keep
in touch with GPs until they get a good allopathic diagnosis.My own
basic allopathic type diagnostic skills have been of considerable
use over the years to me and my patients - but I didn't learn them
in college or have them at the start of my career. I do know of
homeopaths, many beginners, who make quite a thing of discouraging
patients from going to the GP over what they might see as an
irritating but stubborn symptom, which is often, I now know, how
serious problems first manifest.
here, by recommending allopathic treatment for physical ailments
while concentrating on 'higher things'. This may be a way round but
we are really selling the potential of homeopathy short by doing
that. It is, however, what happens when practitioners are scared
themselves of pathology. The early homeopaths, many of whom were
medics, were confident ,prepared to take on anything, and did so
successfully. Personally I think we need more basic medical training
if we are to play in the main game and the only way we can do that
is to have longer, full time courses. (We cannot, as you say, afford
to know less homeopathy.) As our training is generally self funded
this isn't actually very easy. I believe they may have something
approaching this in India.........not sure.
physiology, and pathophysiology--and maybe even some extra in
biochemistry to give us some familiarity with "the medical
sciences", we're restricted, legally, from communicating a diagnosis
or requisitioning tests, and even, in many places, from conducting
limited physical exams. In Canada, we have a single payer health
care system which everyone funds via taxes: homeopathic physicians
should be able to direct their patients to go to their MDs and have
their MDs do what they are richly paid to do--examine, test, and
diagnose our patients so that "extra" information gives us a bit
more to go on. There is NO REASON for homeopaths to do what others
are already quite well paid to do. Nor is there any reason for us to
adopt and practice the biochemical model of medical philosophy. It
would be far more useful for us to know about the full harmful
effects of pharmaceutical drugs and how to decipher test results.
And all that information is very, very nice; however, if you can't
understand how to apply the law of similars or take a full case or
gauge the reaction to a remedy--don't bother doing homeopathy.
*********************