[H] Research
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:44 am
Hi Jeff,
Just for the record:
Gaby (only 1 'b' )!
I think we should be careful to use sentences like
Personal opinions, or even well-educated guesses should be
differentiated from what is regarded as a *fact*, and even the latter is
often only a 'preliminary fact' in the development of knowledge.
To talk about homoeopathy working with the immune system is an
assumption. To maintain you can't have one without the other is a
personal opinion, which you are entitled to have of course, but it is
not backed up by homoeopathic theory, text-books, writings or
experiences.
May be we will learn more about the mechanisms of homoeopathy during the
next years, but it may also take decades (or more?).
This sort of research is interesting because of several points:
- cell lines are usully not prone to a placebo effect from the view of
conventional medicine
- cancer and the like is still a field where conventional medicine
doesn't always have the catchy recommendations 'do this for that - and
that's it'.
So there is still a need for research, an admittance of seeing limits in
therapy, of feeling helpless perhaps....and only where theere is a need
to look for other options the scientific field will further investigate.
The recent publications about Sabal-s and prostate cancer cell lines
may also lead into this direction.
From the classical point of view not really a homoeopathic approach, but
conventional medicine really often doesn't differentiate, as long as a
homoeopathically prepared remedy is involved.
If a remedy is in given a 6C or higher for many people (scientists
included), that's homoeopathy: they have no idea what is isopathic
approach, what is 'recipe medicine', what differentiate Schüssler's cell
salts (though potentized remedies they are) from homoeopathy, and why
complex preparations aren't homoeopathic either, even if it's written on
the label.
Time and efforts are needed first to understand the principle.
Best,
Gaby
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gaby Rottler,
Germany
rottler@curantur.de
http://www.curantur.de
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just for the record:
Gaby (only 1 'b' )!
I think we should be careful to use sentences like
Personal opinions, or even well-educated guesses should be
differentiated from what is regarded as a *fact*, and even the latter is
often only a 'preliminary fact' in the development of knowledge.
To talk about homoeopathy working with the immune system is an
assumption. To maintain you can't have one without the other is a
personal opinion, which you are entitled to have of course, but it is
not backed up by homoeopathic theory, text-books, writings or
experiences.
May be we will learn more about the mechanisms of homoeopathy during the
next years, but it may also take decades (or more?).
This sort of research is interesting because of several points:
- cell lines are usully not prone to a placebo effect from the view of
conventional medicine
- cancer and the like is still a field where conventional medicine
doesn't always have the catchy recommendations 'do this for that - and
that's it'.
So there is still a need for research, an admittance of seeing limits in
therapy, of feeling helpless perhaps....and only where theere is a need
to look for other options the scientific field will further investigate.
The recent publications about Sabal-s and prostate cancer cell lines
may also lead into this direction.
From the classical point of view not really a homoeopathic approach, but
conventional medicine really often doesn't differentiate, as long as a
homoeopathically prepared remedy is involved.
If a remedy is in given a 6C or higher for many people (scientists
included), that's homoeopathy: they have no idea what is isopathic
approach, what is 'recipe medicine', what differentiate Schüssler's cell
salts (though potentized remedies they are) from homoeopathy, and why
complex preparations aren't homoeopathic either, even if it's written on
the label.
Time and efforts are needed first to understand the principle.
Best,
Gaby
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gaby Rottler,
Germany
rottler@curantur.de
http://www.curantur.de
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~