Page 2 of 3

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 3:34 pm
by Irene de Villiers
My thought exactly :-)

Read Organon APh 141 including footnotes.
Homeoprophylaxis uses that princiuple - namely that use of remedies in a HEALTHY person can only make them more robust and more resistant to disease.
It is NOT toxic when used by a healthy person.
(Homeoprophylaxis stops short of proving symptoms - they are not needed for it to be effective.)
It IS a problem if a mismatched remedy is used by an UNhealthy person.

Prophylaxis is both safe and efficatious when used by a healthy person - anone healthy enough to do a proving is healthy enough for prophylaxis.

Dr Isaac Golden also proved it effivcatious and safe in studies.

It has been used in animals for prophylaxis since Hahnemann's time as well.

Namaste,
Irene

--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.Furryboots.info
(Info on Feline health, genetics, nutrition & homeopathy)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 4:35 pm
by Cathy Lemmon
I will do my best to keep this short.
To begin with, I am open to discussing homeoprophylaxis, pros and cons. But I will only choose to do so when there is a congenial atmosphere, not a condemning one full of personal attacks.
Because you have directly attacked me on this list, Sheri—something I would not do to anyone, no matter how starkly I may disagree with him or her—I will be direct with you as well. Is it hard to tell emotion being shared via email, as you told me? Indeed, sometimes it is quite clear when emotions are shared in black-and-white email. I think you are quite aware of this. What I shared with you in a private email I expected would remain as such, yet you chose to share much of what I wrote with everyone here on this list. (Will what was shared in other private emails we’ve shared also be unethically shared in front of thousands like this? Heaven only knows.) Again, something I would not do to anyone, no matter how starkly I may disagree, nor how “duty bound” I may feel. We do not agree, as far as homeoprophylaxis. Why does this need to be a personal vendetta against me on your part? It is beyond reason to think that tearing someone else down can build you or what you stand for up.
In spite of what you say, Sheri, you do not “know” me. Nor am I “duty bound” to share with you my homeopathic credentials. Why did I not finish the courses I began “under” you? (Semantics can be a very trivial thing.) I do not need to explain this to you—you got your monies from me, did you not? It’s been more than ten years, Sheri. A lot can and does transpire in that span of time. I will simply say that I very quickly realized homeopathy was something I had to pursue more seriously. So I began looking into options for me to pursue to give me a more solid foundation in classical homeopathy.
Beyond that is nobody’s business. No one else here on this list is asked to present their credentials. And I certainly will not volunteer mine, except to those whom I know I must. Indeed, the “CHP” after my name equates to having achieved certification in homeoprophylaxis. But the hours listed on the website you shared in your last email attacking me represent only a fraction of the hours I have spent studying homeopathy.
Leave this alone. I will discuss nothing further with you, Sheri, if you continue these personal attacks against me.
I know of and have met and studied with many classically trained homeopaths who also use homeoprophylaxis. Their understanding of Hahnemann and the Organon is solid. Do not question this because I have said it. Look at who they are and what they’ve done.
As I have said many times, I am not asking everyone to accept homeoprophylaxis. I will very readily discuss it further— in a congenial atmosphere, not a personally condemning one. I have reached the conclusions I have about this from not only my own personal research, but from looking at and evaluating results. I know what Hahnemann has said. I also continue to wonder what Hahnemann might have done had he lived another even thirty years. How many more editions of the Organon might he have written? What would he do if he were alive today and saw the horrific assault happening to society as a result of vaccines alone? Just to mention a few studies out there: What about the fact that, in Cuba alone where “HP” was used for leptospirosis in 2007/08, the disease recurrence has gone and stayed down and the health of the entire nation is showing improvement? Not saying this to be a direct result of HP. But I feel it warrants further study. What about the randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study done in Brazil in 2011 using the Influenzinum nosode that showed that those who did not take this nosode were three times more likely to contract the flu? What about Japanese encephalitis in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, where 20 million children were treated homeoprophylactically and the disease incidence was dramatically reduced? The Indian government subsequently acknowledged the efficacy of homeopathy in the field of prevention with epidemics. And several Indian states that followed the approach Andhra Pradesh used had very similar results.
In light of the epidemic and genus epidemicus argument, please take heed to what Dr. Joe has shared. To know that “HP” can and does work, but to lay this aside, therewith allowing people to sicken and even die while waiting to determine a genus epidemicus—is this truly ethical? Especially knowing that there is evidence of health improving in general in areas where HP has been and is being used, which in and of itself warrants further study. (Again, consider what Isaac Golden shared, regarding incidences of asthma, eczema, ear and hearing conditions, allergies, and behavioral disorders in comparative groups [ref. Table 6.9, pg 92 of his Complete Practitioner’s Manual of Homeoprophylaxis]. )
Should homeoprophylaxis go by a different title, as Will Taylor has suggested? Perhaps. I, for one, would be up for ideas. This is what this approach has been called for years. In Germany it is known as homöopathische Prophylaxe—the English name is nothing new. It should not be thought of as “homeopathic vaccination”. As I have said before, this is misleading at best. I would be quite open to discussing a different title for it further.
What there is is a great misunderstanding of homeopathic prophylaxis. Many people who see it draw immediate conclusions about what it is and do not study it further. Unfortunately, among these are also those who draw negative conclusions about it and then refuse to allow themselves to study it objectively any further.
There is much with HP that warrants further objective study. There is also much that warrants being considered further for what it is doing. Again, I, personally, am not propagating any “fear of disease” in the presentations I make—nor do I know of any other homeopath teaching about or practising HP who does. I teach how disease has always been a necessary part of life and that the body is strengthened as it overcomes such. Once again, I am not calling for every homeopathic practitioner to practise HP. I am simply hoping a better understanding of HP will develop so that there can be support of those who utilize this from within the homeopathic community.
This is all I will say here if negativity continues. I am too busy with my family, my farm, my practise, and this worldwide conference to continue in that light. If productive discussion happens, however, I will happily do what I can to contribute to this.
In health!
- Cathy Lemmon, BA, CHP

List Owner, Homeopathy-and-SN

(http://groups.yahoo.com )
Co-Director and Organizer, Homeoprophylaxis: A Worldwide Choice

www.HPWorldwideChoice.com
Saupere Aude! (Dare to know!)

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 4:50 pm
by Irene de Villiers
One does not need to be a homeopath to read a good study involving a comparison of HP and vaccines.
You are just being rude!
Sure it does.
When there are statistically significant numbers involved so that the rate of illness is a fixed percetage - and then with HP it is zero instead, then yes one can say the remedy prevented the illness.
Homeoprophylaxis DOES follow homeopathic principles.
Do you take lessons in how to be rude or does it come naturally?
Are you suiggesting that using a remedy in a proving is not part of homeopatyA?
After all there are no symptoms to cure?
And there is no individualization when remedies arte proved
Therefore by your logic, provings are not homeopathic and no proving information or knowledge shoud be used in homeopathy or by anyoe who is or is not a homeopath?
This also is not followed in provings of remedies. Oh dear, it fails the Sheri test. Proving must not be homeopathy.
SO how does homeopathy work without the knowlegde gained from provings Sheri?

Or are provings an exception to your view of everuthing having symptoms?
Homeoprophylaxis USES the knowledge of provings.
It is only if you deny the knowledge and experience touted by Hahnemann of provings, that you can also deny prophylaxis as valid homeopathically BASED on the docmneted benefots of provings.

After all what is prophylaxis, but a proving exercise, stopping short of symptoms or stopping if any are seen.
You cannot throw out prophylkaxis witout thowing out provings as a valid aspect of homeopathy.

Are you advocating that we throw out everything that provings have taught Hahnemann?
According to Hahnemann:

Let it not be imagined that such slight indispositions caused by taking medicines for the purpose of proving them can be in the main injurious to the health. Experience shows on the contrary, that the organism of the prover becomes, by these frequent attacks on his health, all the more expert in repelling all external influences inimical to his frame and all artificial and natural morbific noxious agents, and becomes more hardened to resist everything of an injurious character, by means of these moderate experiments on his own person with medicines. His health becomes more unalterable; he becomes more robust, as all experience shows.

No better proof is needed that a person in ordinary health can safely take multiple doses of a remedy and WILL experience unalterable resistance to anythg injurious and instead has robust health.
Indeed this principle DOES break any ideas that a vaccine is needed.
In addition it does not matter how many remedies are "proved' or used in HP, they will improve the health. So there is safety in doing this per Hahnemann - whether the HP remedies are chosen logically or randomly.
Her states no limit in the selection of proving (or HP) remedies. On the contrary he seems to encourage as many be used as possible.

My personal research is that there is ONE remedy associated with the genetic trait set (ICT) of an individual. ANd using THAT remedy will obviate the need for many prophylaxis remedies.
However in the meantime the words here of Hahnmann prove that homeoprophylaxis can only improve the health.
Whether you call it proving or homeoprophylaxis is a moot point.

Namaste,
Irene

--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.Furryboots.info
(Info on Feline health, genetics, nutrition & homeopathy)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 5:35 pm
by Irene de Villiers
I do not think we need to make a semantics storm in a teacup here about homeoprophylaxis.
Homeopathy is used in the prevention of disease, in many ways, only one of which is the use of genus epidemicus in epidemics.
Homeoprophylaxis simply is the overall category name of any kind of disease prevention using homeopathy.

It can be multiple participation in provings,
it can be use of genus epidemicus,
it can be use of a nosode
or use of a tautopathic remedy,
or of an ICT remedy
or a specific remedy for a specific purpose (eg pyrogenium for preventing pypmetra after parturition in multiple births, or Aconitum napellus to prevent an acute infection after being exposed, or for animals at shows, or for crops after unseasonal rain to prevent mold)
or of a constitutional remedy
or any use of a homeopathic remedy for prevention of ill health of any kind.
ALL are homeopathy approaches to prevent illness i.e. homeoprophylaxis of some kind.

The common factor is use of homeopathy (in a person/herd/crop/forest) not already ill, to prevent a matter of ill health.
By definition that is "homeoprophylaxis".

Perhaps a qualifier can be added where needed to differentiate:
..epidemic use of genus epidemicus can be "epidemic homeoprophylaxis"
And there can be "ICT homeoprophylaxis"
etc.

Allopathic disease prevention is also by varied methods.
Vaccination is not the only way people are mutilated in the name of illness prevention :-)

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.Furryboots.info
(Info on Feline health, genetics, nutrition & homeopathy)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 5:49 pm
by Roger B
Who decides who is a homeopath? You might answer something like X decides who is a homeopath, and I will ask, who decides that X is qualified to decide who is a homeopath.

I am not a homeopath. I am a philosopher, and I decided that it was so. (:->) Who among you decides otherwise?

Professional organizations and so-called professionalism has been a catastrophe for healing in the medical and dental professions.

Roger Bird
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 07:50:24 -0700
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: International Homeoprophylaxis ("HP") Conference - Dallas

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 8:39 pm
by Maria Bohle
Hello Roger,

Who decides who is a homeopath? That is a good question.

Perhaps the Homeopathic Symposium that was formulated in Belgium in 2009, where homeopaths from all over Europe, Australia, New Zealand, USA, and Canada ( I believe India was also represented) got together and expressed their opinion regarding the necessary education needed to be a professional homeopath? The finalized document went to the USA where homeopaths from a variety of professional organizations in the USA and Canada used that as a template to put together the Standards and Competencies for Homeopathic Education in North America. This was posted on the Accreditation Commission for Homeopathic Education (ACHENA) website for public comment and adopted by that board last year.
The above organizations were comprised of homeopaths working towards standardization of homeopathic education world wide. USA standards are quite similar most countries including India, Europe,and the surrounding areas as well as much of South America, I believe.

I learned in Chemistry that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction! Isn't that one of the laws of Chemistry? What makes us think that homeopathic medicine is any different and exempt from those laws.

As a rule, due to the extreme dilution and succussion that goes into each remedy, they are pretty safe substances, but not always. I have cause a few pretty bad reactions in people in my time (not often, thank goodness. but some side effects were not very pleasant).

Remedies are not toys and they are not games nor are they comfortable grounds for non homeopaths to play with. I have had a few students totally derail themselves playing with remedies - a few of them quit studying as they frightened themselves too much, or caused themselves some not so nice reactions.

Best to leave the remedies to people who have at least had some good education in homeopathic medicine.

Warmly, Mariar
________________________________

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Thu May 21, 2015 2:47 am
by Irene de Villiers
No but it is a law of physics.
In chemistry it does not work too well as many reactions lose energy or need it added - and the energy is not considered a chemical reaction component.
In physics the energy is accounted for as well as the physical components, in the development of this law.

--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.Furryboots.info
(Info on Feline health, genetics, nutrition & homeopathy)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Thu May 21, 2015 10:54 am
by Roger B
I have very few answers, just hopefully thoughtful questions. I guess that is why I fancy myself a philosopher.

The last time that homeopathy worked for me in any significant degree was the early 1990's, which was almost 25 years ago. The person who selected the remedy could not be called a homeopathy by any stretch of the imagination; he admitted that he wasn't and that he was just selecting the remedy from the computer matrix. My wife's endometriosis evaporated, we had two wonderful children (despite the con med's recommendation of a radical hysterectomy), and the rest will be history when my son becomes president of the United States. (:->) Just a datapoint to be considered.

Professional organizations can become very oppressive and harmful, as the AMA and the ADA have proven.

Roger Bird
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 14:39:22 -0400
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: International Homeoprophylaxis ("HP") Conference - Dallas
Hello Roger,

Who decides who is a homeopath? That is a good question.

Perhaps the Homeopathic Symposium that was formulated in Belgium in 2009, where homeopaths from all over Europe, Australia, New Zealand, USA, and Canada ( I believe India was also represented) got together and expressed their opinion regarding the necessary education needed to be a professional homeopath? The finalized document went to the USA where homeopaths from a variety of professional organizations in the USA and Canada used that as a template to put together the Standards and Competencies for Homeopathic Education in North America. This was posted on the Accreditation Commission for Homeopathic Education (ACHENA) website for public comment and adopted by that board last year.
The above organizations were comprised of homeopaths working towards standardization of homeopathic education world wide. USA standards are quite similar most countries including India, Europe,and the surrounding areas as well as much of South America, I believe.

I learned in Chemistry that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction! Isn't that one of the laws of Chemistry? What makes us think that homeopathic medicine is any different and exempt from those laws.

As a rule, due to the extreme dilution and succussion that goes into each remedy, they are pretty safe substances, but not always. I have cause a few pretty bad reactions in people in my time (not often, thank goodness. but some side effects were not very pleasant).

Remedies are not toys and they are not games nor are they comfortable grounds for non homeopaths to play with. I have had a few students totally derail themselves playing with remedies - a few of them quit studying as they frightened themselves too much, or caused themselves some not so nice reactions.

Best to leave the remedies to people who have at least had some good education in homeopathic medicine.

Warmly, Mariar
________________________________

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Thu May 21, 2015 2:32 pm
by Maria Bohle
Roger, you may very well be correct that professional organizations can be harmful, after all we have the AMA - we have to agree that there will always be the good an organization can provide as well as the people who use that organization for self enrichment.

From my side of the fence, I have a good sized school that teaches people to become professional homeopaths, I have seen people take a course decide themselves to be fully trained and go out there and start practicing with very little knowledge or understanding of homeopathy at all. We can argue that perhaps they are doing some good work, but alas many times the mistakes and omissions have caused mixed up cases and eventually people losing faith in homeopathy.

All 'we' we being homeopaths involved in teaching, helping to regulate the profession and many people trying to further the professionalism of homeopathy want to do is to put some minimum standards into effect. Will that guarantee great homeopaths who are not self serving or prescribing from the hip? Of course not, but it will ensure that potential homeopaths have been exposed to the correct training that will give them the best chance of being effective.

When I started as a homeopath, I had no clue whatever I was getting myself into. I was told I could practice after taking 'one' course in homeopathy and I believed that (for awhile), but I needed so much more training so I went back to my books and studied, my life has been dedicated to trying to give our students the tools necessary to be capable, competent and effective homeopaths.

No one and nothing is perfect. But 'weekend wonder' homeopaths - people without much training or credentials can really do some damage. Yes, they can!
It might be pretty rare - for instance give a 4 year old child a handgun and chances are that child will not be able to load, aim, fire and hit a target ---- but are any of us going to take that kind of chance? Because there really is a possibility that someone could be injured. Same with homeopathic medicine - chances are pretty good that a not properly trained person will cause no harm....... however it is not impossible.

In my opinion, better a well trained person using homeopathy than someone who really does not know what they are doing.

Warmly, Maria
________________________________
________________________________

Re: International Homeoprophylaxis (HP) Conference - Dallas

Posted: Thu May 21, 2015 5:12 pm
by Irene de Villiers
and FDA and laws by presidents to protect drug company profits, and state officials who are above the law, and the AVMA and CVA and ADA (dental and diabetes) and on and on - all organizations (not educators)
Is there?
That is debatable.
They have a vested interest in self-agrandizement and profiteering.
I agree with the need to be properly trained.
But I see no organizations doing a good job of stipulating who has what level of credential, in an objective but knowledgeable fashion.
At least not in USA.

For example here the AVMA decides who may use homeopathy, but not one of their vet schools teaches it.
And here one veterinarian with NO homepathy training or credential, has set up a "certification" of "homeopathic veterinarians" provided they pass his 5 weekend course (it used to be 3 then 4, now 5 weekends) at a spa where he gives seminars for a large fee.

What's needed is an AGREED definition of what needs to be known, to be called a homeopath.
For example in the animal area, vets need a DVM degree.
Homeopaths should need a D.Vet.Hom degree (which is not obtainable in 5 weekends).
I wish that was true.
It is not.
There is a lot of separate exam setting that does not make sense, done by peple who are not knowledgeable enough to produce a sensible set of criteria - and a lot of money gubbing with no explanation as to what is done with the very cushy fees for doing nothing.

Money should be paid for the training - period.
An overseeing body should ensure that each school indeed trains the required material.
This will not fleece-line a lot of pockets but is what we really need.
We do not need separate exams after a degreee has been completed at the proper quality level.
The schools are in a MUCH better position to do the testing, throghout the degree course, than a few females asking for memory capabilities and CPR as is currently being promoted most UNsuitably and expensively.

Different schools will naturally have better ot worse quality of training, but a basic information set can be imposed and the reputations of the scools can stand on their own just as Harvard, Oxford, Rhodes and other degrees stand on their own with no need of external exams.
Have a degree designation such as D.I.Hom, or D.Vet.Hom to deem someone a professional homeopath.
We do not have a dangerous field like allopathy and do not need an AMA or AVMA or FDA to tell us what constitutes a homeopath.
(All three of those put together could not find a homepathic remedy for a bruise anyway).
Nothing will guarantee that any more than it does with doctors, vets or plumbers.
All the more reason NOT to add an organization above the school degree level, for homeopaths to deal with.
SO long as each homeopathy degree has stipulated minimum subject matter, the degree is all that is needed - plus a body to check that the SCHOOLS (not the graduates) do include the required material in theor courses.
The graduates get a degree, end of story. That makes them professional homeopaths.
NO inappropriate memory test is needed after that. The SCHOOL (yours an mine for example) will set exams that they can be proud of, as to the quality of their graduates, ensuring the prescribed material is covered.
THAT makes for healthy competition, aas currently happens between uiniversities (not money grubbing by a separate group with ideas that do not set well in any school worth their salt.)
Except that has changed to suit the desires and income of a few women with a memory test on specific remedies.
That DOWNGRADES your school significantly as that is no way to test the mettle of any homeopath.
The individual university system is a good one and does not require additional exams.
THAT is what we need.
It caters for differences between schools while covering the basic requjirements for a degree.

Homeopathy does not have the kind of litigation and malpractice risks and death rate that cause the western medicine practitioers to need further controlling systems. We shojd NOT be copying a rotten system. The independent university degree system is a good one, we should copy that. It allows for the individual choices made by different schools and it shoud do thatl. For example my school teaches aqueous Fibonacci potencies and only the theory of LMs. THat is not so in your school (unless it just changed).
Your school emphasizes memorizing of remedy material - leadign to trying to fit a remedy to a patient.
Mine emphasizes study of patient symptoms, genetic traits and illness predisposition features - leading to looking for patieint symptoms in the repertory to lead to a remedy.
The approaches arer different, and allow for the two schools to follow their preferred aproach to homeopahtu.
But both cover the basics of the Organon, and Hahnemann's other writings (I presume, though I can only speak for my own school here) its principles and application.

The point is that is is IMPORTANT for schopols NOT to all teach the same way but to each do the best tghey know how, in their own individualizes way, whilst covering/including the basics of Homeopathy as per Hahnemann.
HOW that is covered is individual. THAT it is covered is essential.

This is how good universities operate.
They all offer degrees in various faculties - chemistry, engineering, physics etc.
So should we.
WE shoud certify the homeopathy school - not the homeopaths.
Homeopaths are automatically certified if they have the degree from a certified school's degree program.
There is no need for recertification every year.

It is not like medicine where new drugs coe out daly and must be studied as to how they kill and main people.
We dont have that kind of profession.
What Hahnemann knew 200 yrs ago, will work fine today.
That is not so in the constantly changing chemical warfare medicine that doctors and vets practice.

Homeopaths shoud be qualified according to the minimum controling approach that is applicable, and the medical profession ones are NOT applicable.
We indeed have steps of progress and new information and research in homeopathy, and can decide as we go along what new items to include, or what to leave as school options - but unlike other professions the basic principles of practice are set and not a fly by night thing that needs annual certification. ONE degree credential is plenty.

Anyone using homeopathy should be required to inform their client of what kind of training they have.
That includes lay homeopaths without a degree.
It would be reasonable to suggest that those with a degree should have their work reimbnursed by medical insurance.

Namaste,
Irene

--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.Furryboots.info
(Info on Feline health, genetics, nutrition & homeopathy)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."