Minutus

Much of the research I am thinking of is not against placebo (as you mentioned in your previous post) but against conventional prescriptions used for particular problems. You would find them interesting to read.
So we shouldn't measure a single remedy's effectiveness by how well an acute prescription resolves mastitis or a cold or diarrhoea without creating further problems.

You would have really enjoyed Luise Kunkle's comments on this list some years ago (I think she left because of the likes of you and me). I always remember Luise, when making a point about complexes, pointing out that they were the only 'homeopathy' that the bulk of the German population knew, that they were used extensively (much more so than we see in our country), that they had been prepared in the home by family members for generations because they worked, that each family or provider had their own special 'recipes', and that over the period of this extensive and widespread use, the German population was no less well than other groups. I guess the same could be said for the French.

On the occasions I have had French expats visit my clinic I have been boggled at the number of remedies they were taking at the same time and in alternation by practiitioners from their country. Do I agree with this? No, because I don't think it is homeopathy at its best - something I am keen to protect and pass on, but by the same token they didn't seem to be any the worse for wear for it. (And, if I allow myself a small flush of pleasure, I was awfully pleased when a number of times I prescribed a single remedy that dealt with their long-=standing problems that the 'best homeopath in France' had been working on for years.).
Yes, I can understand that this might surprise you but stranger things have happened.

Let me first address the issue of boundaries.
I just opened Boericke, Clarke and Vermeulen's repertories. For most of the remedies, there is a section called "Clinical".
There is probably the same section in many other textbooks under "useful for...."
That is one of the deepest roots of the this for that prescription. If those great homeopaths give us, the hoi polloi, clinical indications for the use of a remedy, who are we to contradict them.......and that is how the manufacturers and distributors of OTC explain and justify their indications as written on the bottles.
I think the difference with Clarke and Vermeulen is that neither would suggest that remedies be prescribed according to physicals or particulars alone. The other extreme of this are prescriptions only based on mental symptoms. Both ways mean the practitioner is working with one hand behind his or her back, refusing to take advantage of the whole symptom picture.

Logorrhea - it sounds messy and unpleasant!

Hi, Joe --

Yes, I think I've taken all that in and find that it agrees with me, except perhaps to note that tolerance is possible even when one knows little of the other, just as we expect is possible in relation to interethnic tolerance, which arises chiefly because we know and understand so little of others' cultures.

My only other quibble would be that a definition is not a description of unlimited length; it is rather a comprehensible substitute for the term defined, and should fit in the sentence it the defined word's place. That's why a definition of homoeopathy takes the form of a noun phrase, such as "a practice wherein..." or "a method of treating... that uses..." or "a system of treatment that..."

Cheers!

John
Let me first address the issue of boundaries.
I just opened Boericke, Clarke and Vermeulen's repertories. For most of the remedies, there is a section called "Clinical".
There is probably the same section in many other textbooks under "useful for...."
That is one of the deepest roots of the this for that prescription. If those great homeopaths give us, the hoi polloi, clinical indications for the use of a remedy, who are we to contradict them.......and that is how the manufacturers and distributors of OTC explain and justify their indications as written on the bottles.
Look at the Reckeweg formulas and the Homotoxicological formulas; they do not claim to be homeopathic, they have their own system of indications and prescriptions (and that seems to be OK with all of us) but when you read their texts, the choice of the remedies has been made based again on the classical homeopathic clinical indications as found in the books.
Same thing with the choice of potentised herbs in Homeobotanical Medicine (which does not claim to be homeopathy), with the addition of the herbal and traditional indications; again we are seeing here clinical, pathological indications, not individual prescription.
Knowing that going backwards is something very difficult, if not impossible, I suggest it would be simpler and more constructive to establish kind of new definitions, like for example:
"In every form of real medicine, the choice of approach and treatment is to be completely individualised, based on a personalised assessment of the health problems, their origins, causes, symptoms, signs and prognosis. Especially when choosing to treat through the methodology of Homeopathy, it is a basic criteria and a requirement that the choice of the remedy be based on the correspondence and similarity of the patient's suffering with the symptoms and signs induced during the assessment (proving) of the remedy. Although other therapeutic modalities do use successfully the remedies prepared according to the methodology of homeopathic pharmacy, those are dynamic, potentised substances but by definition not homeopathic as their prescription has not been made through the aforementioned correlation".
Although this says exactly what you have been defending, it is the wording that , IMO, would make it more palatable to everybody.......well maybe I am delusional, but it is worth a try.
Now the legal requirement: once again manufacturers and distributors are to bear the blame here. If a practitioner, of any profession that administers something to be ingested, either provides the bottle himself or a prescription to be filled by a pharmacy/health shop, the only legal requirement is to bear the name of the remedy, the name of the patient, the date and the indication either "take as prescribed by your practitioner" or the precise dosing if need be.
Understanding of homeopathy. The same way we tell our patients to ask their GPs and specialists to explain their prescriptions and tell about the side effects, we should tell our patients, as we have established a few months ago (your famous "ethical question" John....) exactly what we are doing and why; not that most of them really care according to my personal experience, but then again, a grassroot request for clarity would work a lot better than all the bickering of the world on lists.
And it is very simple: "I am going to give you the remedy R54. Is that homeopathy? No it is a remedy from the Reckeweg series, according to his understanding of medicine, that I find covers pretty well what we must do with you right now. Ah, OK then..."
Again, personal experience.........
Interdisciplinary tolerance.......it starts with knowledge of different disciplines and knowledge of own boundaries, not something I have been witnessing a lot recently coming from the white knights of pure and unadulterated homeopathy......
Joe, who did not realise he was suffering from logorrhea.......
 
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit my new website www.naturamedica.webs.com

I didn't mean to impugn the motives of every practitioner who uses them, Joe; just to say that the happy evidence is unhappily short -- but also to point out that that observation isn't all that germane to the topic of being able to know what method we're talking about.

John
Darn, I knew I should have shut my computer down and go for a walk.......
You are again putting in the same bag complexism and salesmanship.
Shortly: a real complex remedy is used for a short time, often as a symptomatic treatment for acutes or acute exacerbations of a chronic problem, when there is a real paucity of symptoms and especially characteristic modalities and concomitants, using as few remedies as possible in a way that covers the actual situation as completely as possible without internal contradictions.
I hope that clarifies a bit the waters.....
Joe.
 
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit my new website www.naturamedica.webs.com

Hi, Fran -
No doubt; and I've read some. The matter of depth and the long term remains worth considering.
I'm unsure of your intent in the first sentence, but yes, I accept all this, coming from a practitioner as careful as you are; and I've read and accept Luise's views on the general success of this hodgepodge as measured by patient satisfaction. But if you ask people in general whether their long-term health has been afflicted by their use of antibiotics, painkillers, vaccines, and occasional corticosteroids, they will almost universally -- even if they're in a wheelchair -- tell you that these things have done them only good. Only critical research can uncover the damage all of these drugs have done. So you can't reasonably expect the average, even fairly aware, Joe or Jo to have a clue as to the long-term result of his or her treatment by complexopathy, which will mostly be a more subtle matter than the destruction of the adrenal glands and the promotion of degenerative disorders.
No, I wasn't doubting that it "works". That surprises me not in the least. Any of us can make a wrongly prescribed single medicine "work" if that's what we're motivated to do. But if we never see beyond whether a medicine "works", then we'll never have a higher standard for satisfactory response than the allopathic one: cessation (at least for this week) of the symptom of interest, sans investigation of anything further.

Cheers!

John

Fran,
Much of what you say is wise.
However, there are a number of problems that exist.
One of the big ones with the dissemination of combos is that they are geared towards
non-homeopathic practitioners; ie, allopathic doctors and other types of practitioners.
The attitude is that classical homeopathy takes too much time to study and is too time
consuming in the practice. And they claim rapid, wonderful results with the combos.
I think these people, who have much legal credibility, will either argue against greater
training and practice requirements, or they will support the trashing of homeopathy if
they cannot make their hay off of it. We need to remember that many of them claim
to practice homeopathy simply in order to keep their patient base who want more and
more holistic treatment.
And then there is the differences between countries regarding the status of homeopathy.
I, obviously, speak from the experience of the USA.
It would seem that in a more accepting environment making a demand for classical
training/practice on all people using homeopathic remedies would make sense. This
would be akin to the requirement that people prescribing certain drugs need to be
licensed or approved to do so. Of course, there are many OTC drugs sold and many
of them are dangerous. Witness this past years revelation that cold medicines for kids
sold OTC are dangerous/useless. Or aspirin, as another OTC drug with serious health
dangers.
But we do not have an equitable or accepting environment and forces are mounting
worldwide to restrict homeopathy.
One would like to think that people seriously trained in homeopathy would use discretion
in using combos, if they do at all, taking into account the concerns you list.
But as in any professsion, we have practitioners of homeopathy that look for the easiest
way to do their practice. Despite any idealism on the issue, I don't think this problem will
ever be resolved without changing some core cultural values which become the underpinning
of choices that people make in their lives.
tanya

Logorrhea: only for those who are around the "sufferer"............. I pretty much enjoy the sound of my voice


I think the difference with Clarke and Vermeulen is that neither would suggest that remedies be prescribed according to physicals or particulars alone. The other extreme of this are prescriptions only based on mental symptoms. Both ways mean the practitioner is working with one hand behind his or her back, refusing to take advantage of the whole symptom picture.

Logorrhea - it sounds messy and unpleasant!
--
Kind regards,

Fran Sheffield
Homeopathy Plus! (Tutorials - Remedies - Immunisation)
http://www.homeopathyplus.com.au
Do No Harm Initiative (Free Information on Homeopathic Immunisation)
http://www.d-n-h.org
Homeopathy for Autism (Guidelines for Treatment - Search for Practitioners)
http://www.homeopathy4autism.com
Joe
 
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit my new website www.naturamedica.webs.com

Tanya said quoting Fran

The argument that classical homeopathy does take too much time (when you are expected to see 20- 30 patients a day and for some physicians 200 a day) can be valid. Many times the doctors are ordered by the insurance companies or their bosses to meet quotas of x amount of patients daily. They need swift results.

However, I am in charge of granting CEU's for the National Board of Homeopathic Examiners and in the recent past the Florida Homeopathic Medical Society.

I have attended many seminars put on by HEEL and Guna and other companies.

In some we had a doctor stand up and say that they did not need to know anything about homeopathy just follow the protocol and they would get good results.

I threatened to pull all of the CEU's and I never heard them say that again.

A few months later a different doctor who did not know of the above incident asked the physicians taking the class to talk of their background and modalities they used in their practices. (He was a classical homeopathic podiatrist) 100% of the attendees correctly said they were doing homotoxicology and many of them also said they did classical homeopathy. There was no prompting from me.

I had explained several times in the past for HEEL and Guna instructors to use the correct verbiage of homotoxicology since that is what they specialized in and reserve the word homeopathy for the classical homeopaths.

They have made a change at least in the Florida classes. If you are taking their seminars in other states and this differs please let me know off list.

Many of these doctors are taking classical homeopathy classes now because they wish to further their understanding of our great healing modality.

We still need to educate the public what we really are about ... I have a patient who told me their MD used homeopathy by telling them to eat oatmeal for breakfast. Perhaps that was a homeopathic for him but the doctor had no idea about remedies.

Frequently I see people talking about herbs and calling them homeopathic. This needs to stop!

Many of the doctors attending these seminars are looking to help their patients find deep and complete relief (not allowed to use the cure word in the USA if not an MD). Their hearts are in the right place and if they can be shown the benefits and how they can quickly get the case they are willing to learn classical homeopathy.

Perhaps a campaign to bring them into the fold instead of crucifying them for having other modalities ie MD, Chiropractic, Acupuncture, DVM, in their medical bag.

When we reject them for having gone to school and learning a skill and using it ... they will reject us with more vigor and especially attack the lay people with no license.

I'll continue to as much as I can to keep the modalities of homeopathy and homotoxicology separate to help end the confusion in patients.

As a group we can write letters to companies we see combining herbal products with remedies and calling it homeopathy.

Long Live Homeopathy,
Sunny

Fran,

Much of what you say is wise.

However, there are a number of problems that exist.
One of the big ones with the dissemination of combos is that they are geared towards
non-homeopathic practitioners; ie, allopathic doctors and other types of practitioners.
The attitude is that classical homeopathy takes too much time to study and is too time consuming in the practice. And they claim rapid, wonderful results with the combos.

I think these people, who have much legal credibility, will either argue against greater training and practice requirements, or they will support the trashing of homeopathy if they cannot make their hay off of it. We need to remember that many of them claim to practice homeopathy simply in order to keep their patient base who want more and more holistic treatment.
--
The finest compliment I can receive is a referral. Thank you for remembering me when your friends, family, and co-workers need homeopathic/acupuncture health care."
This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.

Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it.
Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
-- Chief Seattle
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "tamarque@..." wrote:

what is the difference between homeopathy and homotoxicology?
Thank you!
Maria
________________________________

From: sacredqi888
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, January 31, 2011 9:44:21 PM
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Just come across this !!!
Tanya said quoting Fran

The argument that classical homeopathy does take too much time (when you are expected to see 20- 30 patients a day and for some physicians 200 a day) can be valid. Many times the doctors are ordered by the insurance companies or their bosses to meet quotas of x amount of patients daily. They need swift results.

However, I am in charge of granting CEU's for the National Board of Homeopathic Examiners and in the recent past the Florida Homeopathic Medical Society.

I have attended many seminars put on by HEEL and Guna and other companies.

In some we had a doctor stand up and say that they did not need to know anything about homeopathy just follow the protocol and they would get good results.

I threatened to pull all of the CEU's and I never heard them say that again.

A few months later a different doctor who did not know of the above incident asked the physicians taking the class to talk of their background and modalities they used in their practices. (He was a classical homeopathic podiatrist) 100% of the attendees correctly said they were doing homotoxicology and many of them also said they did classical homeopathy. There was no prompting from me.

I had explained several times in the past for HEEL and Guna instructors to use the correct verbiage of homotoxicology since that is what they specialized in and reserve the word homeopathy for the classical homeopaths.

They have made a change at least in the Florida classes. If you are taking their seminars in other states and this differs please let me know off list.

Many of these doctors are taking classical homeopathy classes now because they wish to further their understanding of our great healing modality.

We still need to educate the public what we really are about ... I have a patient who told me their MD used homeopathy by telling them to eat oatmeal for breakfast. Perhaps that was a homeopathic for him but the doctor had no idea about remedies.

Frequently I see people talking about herbs and calling them homeopathic. This needs to stop!

Many of the doctors attending these seminars are looking to help their patients find deep and complete relief (not allowed to use the cure word in the USA if not an MD). Their hearts are in the right place and if they can be shown the benefits and how they can quickly get the case they are willing to learn classical homeopathy.

Perhaps a campaign to bring them into the fold instead of crucifying them for having other modalities ie MD, Chiropractic, Acupuncture, DVM, in their medical bag.

When we reject them for having gone to school and learning a skill and using it ... they will reject us with more vigor and especially attack the lay people with no license.

I'll continue to as much as I can to keep the modalities of homeopathy and homotoxicology separate to help end the confusion in patients.

As a group we can write letters to companies we see combining herbal products with remedies and calling it homeopathy.

Long Live Homeopathy,
Sunny

I think writing companies that misuse the term homeopathy would be good, but there
needs to be lots of them.
Also, write the FCC. I believe they are the agency responsible for 'truth' in advertising.
The companies are doing this purposely. They are trying capitalize on the pubic's
desire to do something differently