Minutus

Speaking from my experience, Joe, the prosecution lays claims according to the laws of the country (not the regulations of associations) and then draws homeopathy under the big "medicine" umbrella to show that medicine does not accept the plausibility of homeopathy for whatever the charge is about.

The folly of the SoH (and other associations who have adopted these types of positions) is that the prosecution and court are now in the powerful position of being able to show that a peak body, with official recognition, doesn't agree with whatever the homeopath was charged with, and so, case over. The homeopath, only doing what a homeopath has always done, is fatally wounded in court by his or her own association - which then goes on to set a precedence for future court cases re homeopaths and homoepathy in court. This last sentence is very important for homeopaths everywhere to understand.

And not trying to speak in place of what UK homeopaths might say, I think the only immunity UK homeopaths will have from the ARH stance is that their own association will not deregister them for something the SoH will, and presumably, homeopaths not able to obtain registration with the SoH because of how they practice in this matter, can with the ARH - which presumably has less official recognition even though it is the association trying to protect our practices.

Fran.

I thought so, thanks.

Joe.

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.

"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"

www.naturamedica.co.nz

For what it's worth, associations and members / registrants have to be aware that they are vulnerable to a "grooming" process.

It is highly flattering for some associations and representatives to be invited to "work with" the regulators on the management and regulation of homeopathy.

This usually results regulation that sells homeopathy and homeopaths out rather than regulation that benefits homeopathy and homeopaths. Those sitting on these committees seem to be groomed so they can no longer see it.

Homeopaths have to know what their associations are agreeing to and what this may mean further down the track. We are quite naive in this area.

Fran.

Steve , The Society of Homeopaths is already a part of the PSA!!!!
Rochelle
Rochelle Marsden MSc RSHom MNWCH AAMET

Southport Homeopathic Practice

Registered Homeopath and EFT (Cert. Advanced) Practitioner, Matrix Reimprinting Practitioner

www.southporthomeopathy.co.uk

https://www.facebook.com/southporthomeopathicpractice



I am on a register accredited by the Professional Standards Authority (PSA)

Here too but the law is at fault.
There is no way that the medical associations should have any business messing about with a totally separate profession about which they know nothing, and whioch their medical schools do not even teach., They ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO SAY BOO TO A GOOSE ABOUT HOMEOPATHY. (OOps my caploc got hit sorry)

The mistake is in allowing homeopathy to be under the medical umbrella - especially as the reason it is there, is NOT for medical reasons but for reasons of squashing competiton for dollars from homeopathy.
In USA there is a Federal Constitutional law that disallows this suppresson of an area of business including medicine, for thepurpose of preventing competition.
Two cases in USA set precedent: But each professio has to take it th rough the supreme court to et their profession separated out and remived from under the umbrella.
In USA so far, two groups have achieved this:
The chiropractors have done so and won in Supreme court, and have total separation. They are no longer under the Medical Association umbrella, and also by law they may not be discriminated agaist for being chiroproactors doing what chiropractors do, as oposed to Medical association members.
The tooth whiteners have done so. They are out from under the Dental Associatio umbrella which SUpreme court ruled, was only due to dentists not wanting competition from tooth whiteners who were not dentists.
Homeopathy NEEDS to do the same, and get out friom under an umbrella where they more clearly do not belong.
Clearly the medical associatons are NOT promoting homeopahty and are only tryg to suppress them as competition.
Unlike the dental associato - which at east teaches tooth whitening - the medical associatos do NOT teach homepahty and are in NO positio to regulate it or squash it as compoetition - at least under US Constitutional law - which disallows collusion to exclude competition.
So this is NOT about whether homeopathy works or not according to a competing profession iwho knows nothig about it.....This is really about WHY the medical profession wants it under their umbrella.
If they want it under theor umbrella for the wrong reasons - THAT is what needs to change.
The population in a "free" contry can decide for themse;ves whetyer they want to see a tooth whitener or a dentis - and whetehr tjey want to see a vet or a veteriary h omeopath -= and whether they want to see a chiropractor or a homepath or a doctor.
This is NOT for medical associations to decide.
Nobody voted them queen or president.
So let's not fight the wrong war.
The medical associations must be gloating at their success in duping so many into thinking this has to do with whether homeopathy works per the medical association.

Funny but plumbers do not argue that electrition work is inappropiate by plumbiung rules. It would be laughed out of court as that is ridiculous - the one profession fails to teach the other one and can have no umbrella to cover profits from it.
DO not lose sight of the ball. It is a financial one.
We have been fighting the wrong fight.It is not about homeopahtyl
It is about competition to squash homepathy as competition. We need to start fighting THAT.
There is already precedent for winning THAT way.
(Which is likely why the WA supreme court denied me permisson to go to their Appeal Court with that very argument. They denied me with no reason given - they do not have to give one. I had too little money to fight that blockage to obtai justice, and so they have got away with blocking me. But THIS is the direction to go. Medical associatons CANNOT win that way and they know it.)
Does UK law not have a similar legal precedent or constitutional right that applies?
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."