Minutus

If someone gets it to that point--where you can use it like an ATM and
get dramatic, effective healing--I for one think it would be marvelous!

And the (in the US) FDA, AMA and some other medical interests would no
doubt go to *any* lengths to eradicate it--as many say has already been
done numerous times with other "too-effective" therapies.

Is it possible that these machines do what's claimed? I have no idea.
I have no experience with any of these except the aforementioned
homeopathic software.

It (referring to a machine that can diagnose an perform treatment in a
single, automatic step) would be, very arguably, "not homeopathy" in
either the legal or the Hahnemannian sense, and would need to be
validated or disproved entirely separately from anything that applies
to us here. Personally I would LOVE to see this done, however, in the
present state of things, I can't imagine how that would happen. Even
if successful tests are run, the naysayers will either not (a) not read
about the trials at all ("It can't be true, therefore I won't bother to
look at the evidence"), or (b) even if reading apparently well done
work, will not *believe* any successful trials ("It can't be true, so
it isn't." Galileo learned all about that form of "science."), or (c)
will decide the studies are irrelevant because the practice / method
needs to be shut down for other (e.g. economic or political) reasons
("too successful" or unsuccessful--really it would make no difference
at all to this group, as our past experience here with Gimpy has so
glowingly illustrated, speaking of casting pearls before swine. Can
you tell this guy has got my goat? Sigh...)

Probably our best bet under the circumstances is to simply note that,
regardless of the (I would say inappropriate) usage of the word
"homeopathy" in the product description, it is not homeopathy (where's
the HPUS-and-Hahnemann defined "homeopathic remedy"? Where are the
provings? Where's the "symptom correspondence", like-cures-like,
minimum dose, or any of it?).

Do the machines work? In a better world there would be mechanisms in
place to *test* them, run by people with zero vested interest except in
the *truth*. Probably a rotating group of randomly selected people
would be a great idea, to make it harder for vested interests to poison
the process.

Shannon

Shannon,
I'm not sure, if I understand you right. But I think you are interested in working of such a mashine.
In the beginning of my homeopathic "life" (40 yrs ago) I became acquainted with a mashine called "Voll'sches Gerät" (mashine by Dr Voll; I dont know, if you know this name). You had a pad for the one hand and another for the other. Between both hands was the mashine and a "honeycomb" where you could put in remedies in ampuls.
You measured first without later within such a remedy.
When your first result of measurement was "wrong" (ill, whatever) the second result within the remedy should be okay, if you ask the right remedy.
My impression was:
1.) It is only speculation, if a result is declared as "ill" or "health" (nearly the same like 17 000 Leucos are ill - I normally have and I'm not ill). You dont know, what your are measuring.
2.) You dont know what you wish while therapy by mashine. What the mashine considers correct need not be health.
So I tried to test it (I was working as an assistent with a collegue, who was the owner). The next patients were tested for their results of being ill. I looked for the right hom remedy. We only worked with my rep-results. Continuesly measuring; continuesly writing incl the results of the mashine incl its proposals which I didnt know).
Those patients which became well we compared the remedies. 50 % had been okay, 50 % not, but the proposals had been a little similar.
For me it's not enough.
Afterwards I find out that's possible to fraud this mashine. I had caught a caugh (with all you want). We measured.
First m: I seemed to be very ill
Second m: I was totally okay (while measuring I repeated the sentence "I feel good, very good! I feel better and better!")
Do you know what the patient is thinking while measuring?
Me not.
That are my experiences.
Mashines are mashines. They can do a lot of work for us. Perhaps it's possible to transfer energie from one thing to another, like with a battery (preparing hom remedies?). But healing a complex human being - I doubt that with this state of technological knowlegde.
I fear dependence - from which mashine it doesnt matter
yours
Gisa

Thanks Gisa, what an interesting experience!!
My first introduction to (what was called) homeopathy was with one of
the Voll machines, but the practitioner wasn't aiming for one remedy,
but gave a fistful or so at a time. My results were not good; much
better years later, when I found a classical homeopath.

I don't understand some things tho--questions below:
What is a Leuco?
Can you rephrase that?
You're saying that you took and analyzed the case as usual--then tested
only among those remedies with the Voll machine, and recorded whether
the machine "approved" of your choice or not?

Then you gave your chosen remedy (not knowing whether or not the
machine had approved), and followed up later to see how the patients
had done.

When you say "50% had been okay", what do you mean...
Are you saying that the Voll machine was only about 50% accurate in
predicting whether or not the remedy would work as desired, or ?
What a neat experiment!

And there are such a variety of machines, which are claimed to do such
a variety of things...

I hear you on that.
Personally I'm fascinated by some of the technology being developed,
but this does seem to be a difficult time for anything--technological
or otherwise--that goes against the grain.

Thanks much for sharing that!
Shannon

Leuco = Leukocytes (white blood corpuscle)
Sh:
Can you rephrase that?
You're saying that you took and analyzed the case as usual--then tested only among those remedies with the Voll machine, and recorded whether the machine "approved" of your choice or not?
G:
I analyzed traditionally, the collegue tried to find out with test-packs of his supply of rem's, reducing to one remedy. I didn't know anything of his choise and results. After healing we compared the results.
Sh:
Then you gave your chosen remedy (not knowing whether or not the machine had approved), and followed up later to see how the patients had done.
G:
exactly
Sh:
When you say "50% had been okay", what do you mean...
G:
identical with my choice
Sh:
Are you saying that the Voll machine was only about 50% accurate in predicting whether or not the remedy would work as desired, or ?
G:
predict = ? = prophecy? (it would, if my latin is okay)
But I dont understand what you mean. We didnt try to heal with the mashine in these cases, offcourse not. It was my choice (I had learnd to work with homeopathy not the collegue). The mashine was his attempt to get in contact with this method. (Afterward I showed him how to manage)
Sh:
And there are such a variety of machines, which are claimed to do such a variety of things...
G: may be - but what do they messure? Skin resistance, what else?
Sh:
I hear you on that.
Personally I'm fascinated by some of the technology being developed, but this does seem to be a difficult time for anything--technological or otherwise--that goes against the grain.

G:
me too, but after 40 yrs medical "revolutions" I've become very, very cautious (?) / careful with such things. For example the sonographic m., where you can see the foetus in the uterus = sightseeingtour through the health of mother and child. Sonography kills fishes in ocean; what happens with the foetus who isn't bigger than such a fish? I've worked in a hospital where a man was attached to a lot of devices - half dead and after stopping the mashines totally dead...
If we think in this way we must have the feeling, that we have done it wrong when we become ill or are dying. That's terrible IMO
Gisa
(thanx for "going against the grain"; I'd totally forgotten )

Ah, so the machine's choices were in agreement with yours 50% of the
time--actually, I find that pretty impressive!
[...]
Yes, sometimes it takes a while--and perhaps some unfortunate
events--to get a real sense of "what works", and long-term effects.

)
Best wishes,
Shannon

I agree....lots of positive replies and information is needed! Overall
we have to stop responding to the details of the negative and trying
to debate/prove them wrong. This only creates further negativity and
entanglement. And there's really no point, 'they' know Homeopathy &
other natural systems work & why, but invent ways to chew at it and
get others fooled enough to believe.
Positive not only counteracts, but can turn it around.

Best,
Elizabeth
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Sue Boyle wrote: