Page 3 of 4

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:49 am
by Theresa Partington
I quite agree, Dana. The pharmacies have had to agree to the selling of med pots with good grace but in the case of a newly produced remedy with all the costs fresh in the mind, it is asking a lot! In a profession where many (most?) do not make a lot of money those that do attract a lot of flack in spite of the fact that those same people are often the ones who contribute much. I don't use Ainsworths much but they do often stock small remedies, especially nosodes, that are not available elsewhere. There can't be much profit in these things when they are only asked for once every few years!
Having said that, I do use med pots myself (but have resisted machines) and I regularly criticise Sankaran for the proliferation of expensive and rather repetitive books! Very poor value for money in comparison with some others!
Of course we want to keep our charges down - my own practice has been largely amongst the less affluent section of the community and I like it that way. And we have inherited the (excellent) principle of not charging separately for remedies. Separating prescription from profit is essential if we are to have any credibility. I have considered keeping my prices down by the couple of quid the remedies (incl p&p) cost me and getting people to order direct from the pharmacy. But what happens then in an emergency if you have no remedies or if you have to keep represcribing between appointments? Most of my patients can pick up a remedy from me the same day - few could from a pharmacy.
It might help establish the true cost and value of remedies for patients,though, and help the pharmacies at the same time. With hundreds and hundreds of med pots in the cupboard I am hardly going to change now but wonder what others do/think.
I would also agree about Boiron's research and education record - Reckewegs do that, too, I believe and get little credit.
UK practitioners can get an Non Orthodox Practitioners Licence pretty cheaply and that enables them to use med pots for patients legally. They are not supposed to sell kits and packs on it, but many do. Something else I imagine the pharmacies get a bit fed up about when compliance with their own legal and professional obligations is so expensive.
Theresa
Dana wrote:

Re: Swine Fever "Profiteering "
Posted by: "Dana Ullman" dullman@igc.org
Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:24 pm (PDT)
Dear fellow appreciators of homeopathy...

First, separate from the issue on whether homeopathic doses of Swine
Flu will or will not be effective in preventing it are other legal and
ethical issues about dispensing it, as James desires, from a "medicating
potency."

It is interesting to note that James is upset that he cannot
purchase a medicating potency of the "Swine Flu" remedy from Ainsworth.
What will this remedy cost him? Probably around $15-$20 (10-13
pounds)...and then, he wants to be able to use this medicine to medicate
pellets for 10 or 20 or 100 or 200 patients? Personally, I would want ALL
of these people to be support homeopathic pharmacies...and local homeopaths.

I look forward to the day that those of us involved in homeopathy
will WANT our drug manufacturers to be successful...when they will actually
make reasonable profits so that they can use them to fund research and fund
educational programs.

I find it strange that Susan refers to Boiron as a "pseudo-pharma
company." They probably devote more money to homeopathic research than any
other company, and they support homeopathic organizations and various
educational programs. I certainly don't see significant financial support
for homeopathic research OR even for homeopathic organizations coming from
homeopaths.

As for legal issues, American homeopaths who use a "medicating
potency" to create separate bottles are committing a "federal felony" for
"manufacturing drugs without a drug manufacturing license." Doing so
creates potential problems for you...but even more important are the ethical
problems of not supporting homeopathic pharmacies.

We homeopaths are a strange lot. I sincerely hope that we can look
for ways to support homeopathic manufacturers, organizations, and
eduacational efforts rather than to condemn "profit-making." Because there
are NO (!) homeopathic manufacturers that are FLUSH with profit, condemning
the little profit that they make is a tad strange and is ultimately
counter-productive.

Finally, this weekend I attended a special memorial service to
MICHAEL QUINN, RPh, the founder of Hahnemann Labs. Hahnemann Labs'
medicines are much more expensive than other homeopathic pharmacies in the
US, and yet, I and many of the best homeopaths in the US buy a lot of
medicines from them because we want to support their efforts to create
quality medicines and to support their efforts to grow homeopathy. Let's
STOP always looking for the LOWEST prices for everything, and let's support
those companies and organizations that help to grow homeopathy...

Dana Ullman, MPH
Homeopathic Educational Services
2124 Kittredge St.
Berkeley, CA. 94704
(510)649-0294
(510)649-1955 (fax)
dullman@igc.org OR dana@homeopathic.com
http://www.homeopathic.com

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:04 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Just to offer a countering point of view, would we *want* the pharmacy
to be acting as both "judge and jury", deciding what substances can and
cannot be potentized or not? I for one would not! Cut them some
slack, Joy--their job is to make and sell remedies, not to determine
the course of homeopathy nor to educate the public (altho some of the
pharmacies make an admirable attempt at providing education too, and
bravo for that!).

Shannon

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:06 pm
by Shannon Nelson
In my limited experience, but also according to what I repeatedly read,
nosodes are not usually the most powerfully curative--better to
prescribe on *symptoms* (i.e. the organism *acting upon* the
physiology). I agree that refusing to release it seems small, and very
much counter to the spirit of homeopathic practice. Very sad. Again,
maybe not such a big problem in this particular case, but I wonder
whether they have any reasoning or defense to offer for their decision?

Shannon

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:25 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Dana, I think you've made a whole bunch of really excellent points!!!
Yep, remedies are so inexpensive anyway, and the pharmacies are so very
important. What *I* thought was being said, and what I reacted to, was
the Ainsworth's would not be sharing its nosode with other
*pharmacies*. That I would find blameworthy; declining to sell
medicating potency to individual customers seems rather ho-hum, tho...
??
Shannon

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:28 pm
by Joy Lucas
I beg to differ and that their job is a responsible one, i.e. being responsible for homeopathy, without the rx where would we be. producing potentised substances without a view to being proven is outside the box and this has contributed a great deal to the thinking of using potentised substances in a tautopathy manner as a substitute for homeopathy. i think it is a shame it has gone that way.

Joy

http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/homeopathystudy/

Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:51 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Could you guys please do this privately?

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:08 pm
by Sheri Nakken
Hi Susan
Why do you persist in these types of behaviors?
How do they help others with their healing?
How do they contribute love and respect to the planet?
Sheri

At 10:23 PM 4/27/2009, you wrote:
________________________________
------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases Reality
Next classes start April 22 & 23

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:21 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Well, you are asking a lot of them... Where shall they draw the line?
Should they make sure the purchaser is "qualified" to buy the remedy?
(In some cases of course they do have to do this.) Should they also
make sure the purchaser intends to use the remedy in an "approved" way,
and for an approved purpose? Since a remedy can't be proven until it's
made, should they refuse to sell what they've made until it's been
proven? And then should they check the quality of the proving before
agreeing to sell the remedy? I think that any community has different
parts and different members, who have different jobs. Bad news if
people try to do *other* people's jobs, and try to make decisions that
are not really within their sphere of understanding or influence... ?

Anyway it's moot, because the pharmacies *can't* police their remedies,
even if they wanted to!

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:23 pm
by healthinfo6
You're as phony as the conspiracy theories you promote. No wonder you welcomed Dave back!

Are you still selling those dungeon and dragon fantasy tours?

Susan

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Sheri Nakken wrote:

Re: Swine Fever Profiteering

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:31 pm
by Soroush Ebrahimi
Dear Colleagues
May I PLEASE request that you treat other members with politeness and care for their feelings as if they were sitting in front of you.
Let us stick to homeopathy and how we would use it in any given circumstances.
Rgds
Soroush
(as moderator)

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of healthinfo6
Sent: 28 April 2009 16:23
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Swine Fever "Profiteering "
You're as phony as the conspiracy theories you promote. No wonder you welcomed Dave back!

Are you still selling those dungeon and dragon fantasy tours?

Susan

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com , Sheri Nakken wrote: