Dear Oberoi,
Is this not coming under quackery
mm
===============
?Sarvadaman Oberoi wrote:
Remedy maker
-
Sarvadaman Oberoi
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:00 pm
Re: Remedy maker
Dear mm,
While I personally do feel that it is quackery, for legal reasons, in India, it may not be classified as such so long as homeopathic preparations (single, mixed) are used above the legally prescribed cut off potencies. Combinations are legally sold in India OTC by homeopathic pharmacies.
I have read The Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 in detail, and it nowhere bans combinations including Dr Reckewegs patented combos. The closest it comes to implying the views of some of us is "May the teachings of master Hahnemann inspire me and may I have the strength for fulfillment of my mission" but goes on to say " A practitioner of Homoeopathy shall use any drug prepared according to Homoeopathic principles and adopt other necessary measures as required.” which just about unravels the thread of the argument, in the Homoeopathic Practitioners (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics) Regulations, 1982 issued under Section 32 of the Act of 1973.
Of course the good homeopathic colleges in India teach that using combinations or patents is FORBIDDEN. Yet their research shows that 90 percent of their students resort to polypharmacy / mixopathy after repeated failures with the single remedy – reasons for which are mostly lack of mentoring and the loner approach where a homeopath is thrown into working alone from day one and can not pick up the finer aspects of diagnosis/ symptoms/ case taking and finding the similimum etc. The combination approach at least does something for a while before spoiling the case and spoiling the good name of homeopathy.
So while it is quackery in fact it is not quackery in law. And 90 percent of homeopaths is no laughing matter and we can not ignore it altogether.
Elsewhere there was criticism of double blind trials – CCRH is carrying out double blind trials with poor success for the same reasons as given by Irene. However a modified system could be developed or evolved. More about that could be seen at:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=82393&page=19
Regards.
Sarvadaman Oberoi
While I personally do feel that it is quackery, for legal reasons, in India, it may not be classified as such so long as homeopathic preparations (single, mixed) are used above the legally prescribed cut off potencies. Combinations are legally sold in India OTC by homeopathic pharmacies.
I have read The Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 in detail, and it nowhere bans combinations including Dr Reckewegs patented combos. The closest it comes to implying the views of some of us is "May the teachings of master Hahnemann inspire me and may I have the strength for fulfillment of my mission" but goes on to say " A practitioner of Homoeopathy shall use any drug prepared according to Homoeopathic principles and adopt other necessary measures as required.” which just about unravels the thread of the argument, in the Homoeopathic Practitioners (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics) Regulations, 1982 issued under Section 32 of the Act of 1973.
Of course the good homeopathic colleges in India teach that using combinations or patents is FORBIDDEN. Yet their research shows that 90 percent of their students resort to polypharmacy / mixopathy after repeated failures with the single remedy – reasons for which are mostly lack of mentoring and the loner approach where a homeopath is thrown into working alone from day one and can not pick up the finer aspects of diagnosis/ symptoms/ case taking and finding the similimum etc. The combination approach at least does something for a while before spoiling the case and spoiling the good name of homeopathy.
So while it is quackery in fact it is not quackery in law. And 90 percent of homeopaths is no laughing matter and we can not ignore it altogether.
Elsewhere there was criticism of double blind trials – CCRH is carrying out double blind trials with poor success for the same reasons as given by Irene. However a modified system could be developed or evolved. More about that could be seen at:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=82393&page=19
Regards.
Sarvadaman Oberoi
Re: Remedy maker
Dear Mr. Oberoi,
I am genuinely sorry for misunderstanding.
The word Quackery was meant for remedy maker,
obvious from the subject.
I did not target it for combos.
I myself use Dr. Reckeweg's etc.
I have nothing against combo, using them with discretion.
rgds,
MM
===========
Sarvadaman Oberoi wrote:
I am genuinely sorry for misunderstanding.
The word Quackery was meant for remedy maker,
obvious from the subject.
I did not target it for combos.
I myself use Dr. Reckeweg's etc.
I have nothing against combo, using them with discretion.
rgds,
MM
===========
Sarvadaman Oberoi wrote: