Taken to Court: Gathering the Reports

[Fran Sheffield]

Dear everyone,

Part 2 of the "court saga" has been posted. If the events are of
interest, you will find it at:
http://homeopathyplus.com.au/taken-to-c ... formation/

In the Resources and Events section toward the bottom of the post you
will find a link to a pdf called Homeoprophylaxis: Human Records,
Studies and Trials which has all the latest studies and research on
homeoprophylaxis. Hopefully it will be a useful resource.

--
Kind Regards,

Fran Sheffield

[Irene de Villiers]

Thanks VERY much Fran ! ! !
REPLY TO: only
--
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."

[Fran Sheffield]

Very welcome.

Kind Regards,

Fran Sheffield

[Ellen Madono]

Thank you Fran,

What is the difference between the standard remedies that are given for X historical pandemic or an epidemic, and the genius epidemicus that is given to a small community or family that would not protect people in general. What I mean is, if I had a case of scarlet fever I would not automatically give belladonna even though it worked for Hahnaman's epidemics and apparently on a much broader scale as well. The case would have to present symptoms of belladonna. In all the cases that you mentioned, did homeopaths select the genius epidemicus for that particular population?

If the answer to that question is yes, then the remedy would have to be prepared for mass distribution after the epidemic occurs.

I realize that you could easily prepare remedy for a 1000 people from one pellet, but this totally defies the common person's notion of a medicine. Vaccines are given months before the epidemic even occurs, so post-epidemic vaccine would sound very sketchy to most people I think. Probably a remedy kit with a hundred remedies would cover most epidemics.

Also, assurance that you have a competent homeopath available for local epidemics doesn't sound realistic in most developed economies dominated by drug companies. I am talking about current reality, not really whether the genius epidemicus works for epidemics.
Did you have to argue those points in court also?

Best,
Ellen Madono

[Fran Sheffield]

Hi Ellen,

You are right in thinking that Belladonna is not the automatic go-to remedy for Scarlet Fever (this is a mistake that was made during Hahnemann's time too). It's presentation changes between outbreaks and its virulence has also decreased over time. Belladonna is still useful sometimes but other remedies may be better indicated.

As for the choice of prophylactics used in the pdf - In some of the studies they chose the genus epidemicus and in others, it was the nosode of the disease.

In many of the reports it is not clear why they chose a particular remedy for prophylaxis. One would hope it was because of symptom similarity.

The genus epidemicus is the the best matching remedy according to symptom similarity from those already infected - it can be used for either treatment or prevention and not just in families or small communities but across large numbers of people.

Of course, it is only effective for each individual if their symptoms (or susceptibility to the disease) are similiar to the characteristic symptoms emerging from most of those infected as the epidemic develops.

It is not unusual for epidemics to have more than one genus epidemicus and there will always be individuals whose symptoms (or potential symptoms) are different to those of the group and who will need a different remedy to the genus epidemicus.

From my perspective, the most reliable way to offer prophylaxis is:
1. Ahead of a pending epidemic before the genus epidemicus for that remedy is known (as in the Cuban leptospirosis example), use the nosode if mass prophylaxis is necessary or desired.
2. Once the epidemic or outbreak is in progress, identify the genus epidemicus and then use it (or them) if mass prophylaxis is necessary or desired.
3. OR, offer individualised prophylaxis as determined by the person's constitutional needs and the symptoms of the emerging epidemic.

Number 3 is not possible when rapid mass prophylaxis is needed and as always requires a degree of accuracy and finesse.
While there is a tendency to think that the nosode will always be the best mass prophylactic, we do have some evidence that that may not necessarily be so.
The good news is, as can be seen by several of the reports in the pdf, any remedy that matches the symptoms makes a good genus epidemicus or prophylactic, nosode or not - and there can be multiple remedies for the one epidemic.
And one of the reasons why mass prophylaxis should be considered in some situations rather than the individualised treatment is that not only will it protect large groups quickly, it can also be used to break the back of the epidemic - stop the outbreak from spreading and infection passing to the unprotected.
For developing communities in which health resources are limited, this is vital. Dengue haemorrhagic fever for example requires ICU or high level management and these beds are rapidly taken during an epidemic with the result that others, from dengue or other causes, needlessly die. Cuba is one country that has been able to reduce the strain on its health resources by pro-actively protecting during a dengue outbreak.
And as a final comment, in some of the studies in the pdf a combination prophylactic was used but there is nothing to indicate that the combination provides better protection than the nosode or genus epidemicus. In fact the reverse is quite possibly true.
Kind Regards, Fran SheffieldOn 14/12/2013 5:51 AM, Ellen Madono wrote:

[Fran Sheffield]

Hi again,

I also meant to add that it is so important to get this information into the hands of people confronting these epidemics, along with the basic understanding of how to prepare a homeopathic remedy.

If people know how to do this then it will be possible for them to rapidly prepare their own prophylactics on the go, so to speak. It would not involve the mass distribution of pharmaceutically prepared remedies. The information and remedies could pass quickly from person to person, community to community.

And while we think this may only be relevant to less developed countries which frequently have to cope with epidemics without adequate health infrastructure, the day may come when we in more developed countries also need this knowledge. Epidemics travel fast and can catch any of us unprepared.
Kind Regards,

Fran Sheffield

[Ellen Madono]

Hi Fran,

I think that the unreliability of nosodes may argue for difficulty with homeopropolaxis as public-policy in developed countries.

You know Paul Herscu has a site gathering epidemic information. In his letters, he spends 4 letters describing why he is not a proponent of homeopropolaxis as public policy. He has experienced personal health problems because of over-vaccination and his own children are not vaccinated. Yet, because of the practical problems that I alluded to in my previous email (lack of hospitals, competent homeopaths, formal distribution networks, information gathering networks) he is not pro-homeopropolaxis. I think his arguement may hold water in a developed country. Especially in a country like the United States where homeopathy is not supported publicly, As an ND, he faces serious practical problems if he is expected to work with an uneducated unvaccinated public. Obviously if you look at his site he is working towards homeopropolaxis.

I am guessing that at court you weren't required to discuss the problems with implementation.

^^^^^^^
On another note, I am going to put Fran's information on my website. If others have a website I think it's a good idea to put the information up with a link.

Ellen Madono

[Sheri Nakken]

As an aside - Yet I referred someone to Herscu and Rothenberg and after treatment helped heal, she told them they could vaccinate now! Pretty much stopped my referrals to them.
Sheri

At 06:25 PM 12/13/2013, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases and Child Health
next classes start December 6 and 12

[Fran Sheffield]

The reliability of nosodes is one of the areas that needs more research ... as does the matter of potency. Evenso the studies show they are often effective.

From my perspective, their "unreliability" would not be their difficulty in developed countries as vaccines are already unreliable yet they have government support. The reason for lack of acceptance lies in another area.

In an affluent country such as the US there is no need for homeoprophylaxis to be madated as public policy - there are very few diseases to warrant it except possibly whooping cough in the young and meningococcal disease (meningitis). If the US and other western nations were troubled by malaria, dengue, chikungunya, leptospirosis and the like, then with knowledge, public policy should rapidly change - either that or people would hopefully vote with their feet.

As the judgement for our court case has not yet been handed down there is still not a lot I can say about it. In fact, not a lot could be said at court either. More will come in the future, though.
Kind Regards,

Fran Sheffield

[Irene de Villiers]

I agree wtih Fran, and will add my view from the practical experiecne of animal "epidemics".
A vethom sees animal epidemics all the time - for example the outbreak of something in a herd, flock, aviary, cattery, kennel, or wild animal conservation park.
These outbreaks can be triggered by animals travelling internationaly and/or with the military whose pets have few restritions if any, or just be endemic - or may be a mutation from another specioes (eg cat and dog parvo and corona viruses mutate back and forth, getting more virulent) . A new infection to an area can arrive in a susceptible population and cause a worse outbreak than it could in the place of origin.
So it is wise to use prophylaxis, usually from a nosode, but the experience is this:

The Law of Similars is always important.

A nosode from many years before, is always a LOT better than a recently made one which is too identical to whatever is doing the rounds. Bear this in mind if you wish to avoide the flu. In some cases it helps to combine SIMILAR nosodes into a new one, for example in cats, the nosode of three or four combined upper respiratory infections, (eg calici, herpes, chlamydia) will work better than a nosode from only one of them, regardless which one. This is especially so if one wants to ward off a FIFTH -( NEW) - upper respiratory issue.
I saw a typical case in South Africa where "Plane Flu" arrived and started causing cats to drop dead three months after arrivial, overnight, with almost no symptoms till the night before death. The same was happening in other countries where cats were being imported. Those cats with prevetion by URI 30C from 8 years prior, managed to beat the infection. Those getting current year remedy succumbed, hardly any kittens survived. It took time for the local vet university to figure out what was happening. It was being spread at Amsterdam Intl airport which was (and still is) a transit point where animals are kenneled between flights, rather than left in their crates.
[To give credit, the Airport woked hard to fix the problem, and it was soon under control.]
But the point is that the SIMILAR remedy was the best one both for prophylaxis AND for giving to new imports who had NO detectable symptoms - and to those with whom they had contact.
Xray of the chest showed the entire lung area was opaque. But you had to know to do xrays.
I had 19 cases in my own cattery, plus those cases sent to new homes before I knew there was a problem, thus spreading the epidemic. It was no joke, and finding a genus epidemicus never happened. It was controlled best with the old mixed URI nosode. Op was one option as the cats slept more than usual - that being the only clear symptom prior to a cough the night before death occurred. A few cats got that IN ADDITION.

Mostly when an animal epidemic happens (and it makes no differnece if it is a herd of 5000 or a cattery of 6), one looks for a genus epidemicus as soon as enough symptoms are known to do so, and any animal not responding to that, will need individual remedy selection.This is the besat way to do a mass approach, as it can be impossible to individually select a remedy for 5000 herd members, before the problem wipes them out.
First remedy selection, one uses all available symptoms from anyone in the group taken as if they are one animal, to find the remedy to start with.

Remember that even when allopaths use crude homeopathy - it has to be a SIMILAR remedy and not an identical one:
Cowpox is used against Smallpox. Smallpox will not work against smallpox.
TB vaccine works against leprosy (they are similar organisms) but TB is useless against TB.
Bordetella bronchiseptica (walking pneumonia or kennel cough in dogs, lethal silent pneumonia in cats or sheep) will help against Bordetella pertussis (whooping cough)..similar organisms. But do not try to use pertussis to prevent pertussis.

You CAN use an identical nosode for prevention if you use enough of a heavy duty protocol, but it always is better to use a SIMIALR nosode or remedy if one can be found - as it also can start treatment till a genus epidemicus can be found.

By the way:
Genius = very clever ...some organisms truly seem to have a genius for doing harm.
Genus = a category such as the category of remedy for an epidemic - genus eidemicus.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
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."