Politics [was: skewed immune system

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi Luise,
Speaking for myself, I do "care", but don't know what to do about it,
and I'm betting that we're all more complacent than we ought to be,
because those that are no longer available from one country, can still
(as a rule) be gotten from another--but if things keep going as they
are, that will change.

So... What should we be *doing* about it?

My attempt at answer: Do whatever we can in support of "health
freedom" legislation, against CODEX, and in support of any homeopathy
(and "alternative" methods in general) organization, particularly those
that are politically involved. In the US, I know the NCH is active (to
the extent their limited funds permit, speaking of reasons to JOIN AND
SUPPORT!).

I'm lamentably under-informed about what specifically is being done.
Maybe it would be useful for people to share what they know about how
various homeopathy organizations, in various countries, are *involved*
in efforts to safeguard our position?

Shannon

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Shannon,
Getting interested to the extend that the question is discussed on the
lists might be a good start, wouldn't you think?

Indeed - leaving the question of "pure homeopathy" unresolved and not
fought for as irrelevant at this time. Endeavours to solve the
question and act upon it can come later. At this time the problem is
to keep homeopathy (whichever way defined) as part of alternative
medicine possible to practice - for MDs as well as non-MD's, for DV's
as well as for non veterinary homeopaths. And the most acute problem
to ensure this seems to be the availability of (highly)
diluted/potentized remedies, since this ist where the inimical forces
seem to be acting with most success.
particularly those
All those organizations seem to be more interested in fighting for a
privileged status of certain methods of homeopathy, thereby dividing
the people using these remedies into fractions, often inimical to each
other. I cannot e. g. imagine that in Australia the non-registered
homeopaths are overjoyed by the attempts of the Registration
Organisations to deny them the right to call themselves homeopaths
-jusdt to repeat what I haven been saying on the lists again and
again..

I agree but would rephrase it to: What kinds of efforts they are
involved in.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Shannon,

this seems to be specifically topical:
Indeed.

Actually answering Irene's post, where she said that sarcodes are now
hard get in the US if at all available made this issue float up to the
surface of my mind.

I tried to get sarcodes in Germany and only found that WALA Co. still
makes them (although certainly autoclaved and thereby at least
possibly no longer as effective as before. Wala's US outlet does not
have them. There is no mentioning on their site concerning their
shipping or non-shipping to the US. They are still available in German
pharmacies, both local and internet - but on googling I did not find
any non-German (internet) pharmacies carrying them or any sarcodes by
different manufacturers. (Perhaps googling in the US or other
countries would yield different results - you would have to try) I
also do not know whether those pharmacies could or would ship
worldwide (customs possibly involved?)

So it at least appeaars that your statement above:

"but if things keep going as they are, that will change".

May have to be amended to that things are chinging or have changed
already.

And there is the rub: for most of the people on the lists and those
represented by the organizations this is not very important, since
most of those homeopaths do not use sarcodes and rather infrequently
use nosodes - and most of those who do, still have them on hand.

But who would doubt that this is only the first step?

By the time we are really hit hard things may have come to a point
where it is too late (if it is not too late already).

As second step the European commssion (excuse me for not knowing the
exact name and not being very knowledgeable - in case of real interest
I could give the address of a homeopath in Germany who is) are taking
now is that they are "discussing" which probably means implementing a
regulation that herbs that have some adverse influence on allopathic
drugs will no longer be available. Anyone doubt that this also will
influence their availablity worldwide?

So the question of the sarcodes and nosodes very much seems to be
relevant to all!

What everyone can do: write to your suppliers of the remedies and
demand full disclosure on what is going on with this specific company.
Do they still manufacture nosodes/sarcodes. If so - have the original
substances (not the potencies themselves) been autoclaved before the
start the potentizing procedure. If they buy those substances: where
do they buy them - then get in touch with those companies.

We do not know whether such full information will help to change
anything. But we DO know withouth doubt that without such information
we cannot act.

Let me repeat and repeat again at nauseam: Ath this point in time the
most topical, the most relevant issue is our remedies. All the other
efforts, including those of Dr. Bhatia et al. are at best secondary.

The status of homeopathy is indeed important - but without our
remedies we cannot even uphold it, never mind raise it, by any effort
whatsoever.

It appears that Julian Winston on top of his other values was also a
good prophet. In one post years ago he said that he had in his
basement a radionics machine just in case that one day our remedies
would no longer be available.

While this may be one way out - would it serve to raise our
credibility to the non-homeopathic world if your remedies were made by
such a machine?;-)

Regards

Luise

--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Fran Sheffield]

Hi Luise,

I think there is a misunderstanding you have re the Australian situation.
There is no "excluded" non-registered group of homeopaths - that situation existed prior to the standards but they have done away with that. Anyone who has the skills and knowledge to be a homeopath is, or can be, registered. IF there are any unregistered homeopaths, it is by their choice - not because of exclusion. There is no division or "fractions" now as there used to be - things are much better for both practitioners and the public.

Protection for the title of homeopath would make it even better for the public. This would stop those who know little about homeopathy dispensing potencies for chronic disease management to an unsuspecting public, as they currently do. Those who fall into this category are SOME naturopaths, kinesiologists, chiropractors, osteopaths, doctors and so on. These practitioners may be highly skilled in their own area of expertise but they do not have the necessary training to homeopathically manage chronic disease in unwell people.

Would you like your very sick friend, child, or parent to be treated with a hundred different potencies and almost as many remedies in the one complex by one of these people, in the mistaken belief that it was the best of homeopathic treatment? A belief that was marketed to them by a pharmaceutical company? This, among other things, is what is happening. If you do not care about standards that define practitioner or practice, then this is what you prepare your loved ones for.
--

Kind regards,

Fran Sheffield
Homeopathy Plus! (Information - Education - Treatment)
http://www.homeopathyplus.com.au
Do No Harm Initiative (Homeopathic Immunisation)
http://www.d-n-h.org

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Fran,

You are misunderstanding my goals.

I think that all your points below are very important questions.

However, I also do think that the most important issue
AT THIS POINT is:

a:
that ALL the people who prescribe (highly) diluted
potentized remedies should be fighting together for those remedies to
remain available, and remain available for all including non MD's
(which would per difinition include self-prescribers)

b: that any policy preventing all the above being in the same boat is
harmful and may turn out fatal for all, including even the most
competent homeopaths. I am almost sure that in Australia, as in most
places of the world most, of those people are not members of the
Accociations but are those that are considered incompetent, including
the self-prescribers - and also including MD's.
Common sense should tell us that insisting on calling them incompetent
and non-homeopaths (if they consider themselves homeopaths) will not
get them into the same boat with us. At best they'll remain outside,
at worst they will be inimical.

You say below:

Fran:

" Anyone who has the skills and knowledge to be a homeopath is, or
can be, registered. IF there are any unregistered homeopaths, it is
by their choice - not because of exclusion."

Luise:

For one thing: It is the registration body that determines
whether a person has those skills and that knowledge. For another,
they may have reasons of their own not to apply. They may be
self-prescribers. ...

No matter who is right on the issue whether they should able to call
themselves homeopaths or whether people should self-prescribe - those
people who do should be in the group fighting for the remedies.

As to your last paragraphs below I can only repeat: all these
considerations will only be valid as long as the remedies are
available and available without prescription.

So in the context I was discussing, i.e. the danger to our remedies,
the relevant questions are:

1. Does such danger exist?

In order to determine this, homeopaths should try and get information.
There has been no publicity on it anywhere. The relevant European
commission has e. g. snuck in the regulations "for autoclaving nosodes
and sarcodes before processing (diluting/potentizing)" them without
any publicity whatsoever. Most European companies have, because of
this regulation and extra efforts involved, stopped making nosodes and
sarcodes. They also did not publicise this, (even pharmacies and MD's
or naturopaths/homeopaths did not get informed/do not know about it)
and are very reluctant to come up with information when asked. One has
to keep pushing and re-phrasing to get anything out of them - and even
then they keep their replies as non-committal as possible.

2.

Will the European commission stop at this point?

As I explained, it appears they keep on going. Their next efforts
being relevant more to the herbalists and to the public who use herbs
(mostly teas and/or mother tinctures)

3.

If such danger exist - is it relevant only for Europe or is it
relevant globally?

Well, each one of the non-European homeopath resp. their associations
have to make up their own minds about that.

In order to do that they need more information - e. g. where do the
drug compnies/suppliers outside Europe get their supplies resp. their
stock for diluting/potentizing.

By which question we are back to point 1.

Regards

Luise
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Fran Sheffield wrote:
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========