Minutus

Oh come on, don't be so naive. The pharmacies were doing very well
thank you with single remedies that had been proven or had substantial
clinical evidence to warrant them being produced. It is only in the
latter years that they have jumped on the band wagon of realising how
much money they can make out of potentising any substance, whether it
be jungle juice, zebra poo or bull poo for that matter without it
having a proving. I personally think this has contributed to a lot of
wishy washy thinking in homeopathy, i.e. anything goes sort of
approach.

As yet, until combo rx have been proven we don't know if we need them
or not. Same goes for any other rx if it hasn't been proven.

Joy
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If we can stick to the matter in question without wandering off into
the land of anticombo rants, I had the impression not so long ago that
some purely homeopathic pharmacies in the UK weren't actually doing
that well.
I concede it was heresay, but there we are, it was something I had
heard.
Nonetheless, no one is going to turn away business even if they are
doing well, although I will say that helios have been known to stick to
their guns and refuse to sell High LMs as a first purchase - I
suspect they have restrictions on the higher potencies too, but i don't
know. Having met John Morgan I was impressed by his dedication and
sincerity, so unless you have some horror stories to relate I will
stick to my good impressions of Helios.

When it comes to naivity, I think the belief that what the pharmacies
are prepared to potentise has any measurable effect on the general
understanding of homeopathy, falls into that category.

Simon

Whether they are doing well or not the fact that they just can't help
themselves by selling 'remedies', i.e. potentised substances that
haven't been proved (but to the uninformed who is going to know whether
they have been or not) is bad practice as far as sincerity goes but
excellent practice for business! The same with putting date stamps on
the remedies - although now a legal requirement, it doesn't half boost
sales!

John is a lovely person but this doesn't mean to say you can't see wood
for trees. Anyone can buy anything from the homeopathic pharmacies. I
think they could at least offer information as to whether each
potentised substance has had a formal homeopathic proving or not, with
some kind of symbol, at least then the public would have some idea of
what they were getting into.

And if I had more time I would argue your last point to the full but
we've been over this before and I'm rushing off to give my pet hamster
some potentised straw.
Joy
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Perhaps then you should petition Helios and the other pharmacies on
these very points then. Have you done so?

I cannot see the virtue in banning the sales of all remedies save those
with a full and orthodox proving. There have been many cures from
remedies not so proved, even if some were later proved. You know
perfectly well that it is not exclusively remedies that have undergone
a correct proving that are nonetheless often effectively prescribed
(and on a single dose basis). . If you want to exclude all remedies
from your practice except those that have been correctly proved then
that is your prerogative, but to expect everyone else to do the same is
unreasonable. The idea that the availability should be restricted to
only those thoroughly and traditionally proved, smacks of autocracy.
Not an approach known for its ability to induce cooperation or to
educate and inform.

Re: your Hamster, did you prescribe the potentised straw because he was
looking baleful?;-)

Simon

Joy, interesting comment: "As yet, until combo rx have been proven we don't know if we need them
or not. Same goes for any other rx if it hasn't been proven."

I agree.

Hahnemann, for instance, was certainly experimenting with combos when he created Hepar sulph. Then, of course, he proved it as a single combined substance.

Likewise the mineral salts. Likewise Sanicula and some of the other "water" remedies that already include combinations of several minerals. They've been proven as single substances, but their therapeutic action derives from their combined content.

I wonder, therefore, if other combinations have significant clinical usage and should be proved? Maybe some of the "combos" actually make some sense and should be investigated?? Just another potential way of looking at things.

Combinations happen naturally in the plant or animal world as well as in the mineral kingdom. For instance (an American phenomenon that I understand Europeans don't have to contend with at every walk in the woods) poison ivy-- Rhus-?-- generally grows in the same area as jewelweed, which is its natural antidote. There are likewise many instances where certain birds and insects need specific plants or other animals, each needing the other for survival. We are not accustomed to think that such natural combinations may present therapeutic opportunities, but I suspect that's only because we tend to think in reductionist, "scientific" terms. Certainly, the healing knowledge of various native peoples uses combinations of plant or animal substances for healing.

I'm not supporting the marketing of unproven "combo remedies" - just remarking that perhaps, instead of considering them with horror, we might wonder if some may deserve our attention to see if they actually offer something unique as a combination -- especially if the combination already occurs naturally.

) Rosemary
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If a 'combo' is proved, it ceases to be a combo and becomes a single remedy!



Rgds
Soroush

yes

As I said we have been through all this before. If a rx hasn't been
proved then you have no sx picture to go on, so how can you prescribe
it except on a whim?
I am not an unreasonable person, just a so called classical homeopath
who has high standards.
Well then, lets educate and inform through "I did it my way"
methodology, chuck the Organon out of the window and throw a party.

No, but he's called called Jack!

best wishes, Joy
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I would be surprised if Carc ., tub etc. were proved before their first
successful use, not one is suggesting it is a good idea to prescribe on
a whim, but there is such a thing an informed decision
Your comments about chucking the organon etc are just petulant and
silly.
Simon

I agree with your posts on this issue Simon-

Whatever obtains in UK, at least in India many pharmacies depend on
the sale of combinations - homeo and biochemic for their survival and
success. In India where mostly medicines are dispensed and not
prescribed, a full set of common medicines in dilutions can be
acquired for about $100-150. Since these are dilutions, this is
probably enough for about 5 years. How is a pharmacy supposed to make
money out of this? Combos have been in Homeopathy pharmacies from
time immemorial... B&T used to make so many combinations at least by
the turn of the previous century... and homeopathy still survived and
revived despite this and I do not think the general public were hood-
winked because of combinations...

And why should not unproven remedies be prepared by the pharmacy? We
do not have any guidelines as to what constitutes a proven medicine,
Are meditative and dream provings- provings or not? There are
homeopaths who select medicines by dowsing, astrology, blood types,
periodic table etc. etc. and they do not need provings for their
medicinal selections even for well proven remedies. We have not done
anything as a profession to control and regulate what is homeopathic
practice, who can do it, what are the standards etc. If the pharmacy
people turn around and say "Physician Heal thyself" they have a point
there and I would agree with them. It is imperative that we clean our
stable before pointing fingers and policing others. If some one is
serious enough for trying out a new remedy they would go ahead and
prepare it themselves... i have done it many times... so why not have
it done by a pharmacy...

100 + years of combos have not obliterated Homeopathy and if it gives
out now and gets ready to chuck out the organon and party with the
public -it is not because of the pharmacies...
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Simon King wrote:
first
prescribe on
to
party.
recommendation
any
the
special,
change
receive a

I also find it interesting that those who build fences around what is
and isn't acceptable in homeopathy, paradoxically make exceptions
provided it suits them: ( i.e. exceptions with appended riders that do
make it OK after all, but only if everyone follows this new set of
rules made up by them) Sounds pretty arbitrary and inconsistent to me.

e.g. Joy's stance on only using fully proved remedies and only strictly
classically prescribing, all the while participating in speculations
about remedies use based to their position on the elemental table.
(an excerpt from just such a post - "we can do a lot of deductive
research if we are
really really sure that an individual's simillimum lies within a
certain range of rx, relying mainly on the group identity both
laterally and longitudinally and if we are that convinced we just have
to prescribe.")

I have no problem with investigating any angle to gain understanding of
a remedy but do find those that argue vehemently for one set of rules
for all, totally unconvincing when they rail against one differing
method while tacitly accepting another.
Simon