was pc remedies
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:56 am
Hi Carole
This is an argument, usually used to promote complexes, that I have never really understood. The way we treat people and the time we typically take in the UK is a 'luxury' ? and if our patients were poorer we could do it much quicker?? If only. I don't deliberately drag things out and knowingly use inefficient prescribing methods just because both my patient and i can spare the time! I generally (not always) get better results if i put a bit more time into it.
People who work in these busy acutes clinics get very quick at the kind of prescribing required, I am sure. It's a skill. Nevertheless, if you can get 80% success rates on a first prescription you are doing very well, I'd say, however long you take. (Do you have the same success rates when practising in the UK or US? If you do and it takes longer, why do you think that is?) If a change of prescribing method or type of remedy is all that is needed to achieve these results there could be actually no moral justification for ever using anything else anywhere, or taking longer over a consultation, especially if the good results extend to chronic disease.
If you have been practising 20 years you must have heard of as many sure-fire quick routes to successful prescribing as I have. What happens to them? 5 years down the line they've gone and it is something else that is reaching the parts other methods/remedies can't reach. Each comes with its own miracle success stories, undoubtedly true ones, but unless they work as well for anyone using them as they do for the prescribers promoting them (which they generally don't) it seems to me they are examples of someone's healing ability combined with something that, at best, is another alternative for us to look at amongst the many.
bw
theresa
Carol wrote:
If we are practicing in a clinic in
a big city where we have the luxury of a 2 hour case taking and a
patient has the means to come back several times for ongoing tmt that
is one thing. However if we are faced with many sick patients who
have no means to fund their tmt or way to get to clinics and we have
only a few minutes per patient to find a useful medicine - as was the
case when I have worked in places like Indian villages and keynote
Pxing or GE was all there was time for - then it is possible for a
small number of homeopaths to make a significant contribution in
those circumstances. It won't work for everyone but as I said 80%
of a 100 is a lot of people in 2 hours....and I would still call that
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This is an argument, usually used to promote complexes, that I have never really understood. The way we treat people and the time we typically take in the UK is a 'luxury' ? and if our patients were poorer we could do it much quicker?? If only. I don't deliberately drag things out and knowingly use inefficient prescribing methods just because both my patient and i can spare the time! I generally (not always) get better results if i put a bit more time into it.
People who work in these busy acutes clinics get very quick at the kind of prescribing required, I am sure. It's a skill. Nevertheless, if you can get 80% success rates on a first prescription you are doing very well, I'd say, however long you take. (Do you have the same success rates when practising in the UK or US? If you do and it takes longer, why do you think that is?) If a change of prescribing method or type of remedy is all that is needed to achieve these results there could be actually no moral justification for ever using anything else anywhere, or taking longer over a consultation, especially if the good results extend to chronic disease.
If you have been practising 20 years you must have heard of as many sure-fire quick routes to successful prescribing as I have. What happens to them? 5 years down the line they've gone and it is something else that is reaching the parts other methods/remedies can't reach. Each comes with its own miracle success stories, undoubtedly true ones, but unless they work as well for anyone using them as they do for the prescribers promoting them (which they generally don't) it seems to me they are examples of someone's healing ability combined with something that, at best, is another alternative for us to look at amongst the many.
bw
theresa
Carol wrote:
If we are practicing in a clinic in
a big city where we have the luxury of a 2 hour case taking and a
patient has the means to come back several times for ongoing tmt that
is one thing. However if we are faced with many sick patients who
have no means to fund their tmt or way to get to clinics and we have
only a few minutes per patient to find a useful medicine - as was the
case when I have worked in places like Indian villages and keynote
Pxing or GE was all there was time for - then it is possible for a
small number of homeopaths to make a significant contribution in
those circumstances. It won't work for everyone but as I said 80%
of a 100 is a lot of people in 2 hours....and I would still call that
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]