Prejudice and fear

[Arlene Kellman, DO]

Dave,

Before replying to your question, I want to say that it's hard to focus
on clinical issues with all the accusations and counter-accusations
flying back and forth on the list. I don't even understand some aspects
of the discussion. For instance, what is an "ST"? Please answer that
off-list because I don't want to add new life to a dead topic. I do look
forward to getting back to why most of us presumably participate in this
list--to share information on homeopathy in a mutually respectful and
beneficial way.

Regarding prejudice and fear (outside this list!), I think conventional
medical practitioners feel threatened that people with less or just
different training may disagree with their treatment approach and lure
patients away. This is not just a financial concern, but often a genuine
concern for the patient's welfare. In other words, if an oncologist
truly believes that the only hope for a cancer patient is chemotherapy
and radiation and the patient opts for homeopathy instead, the
oncologist may feel that the patient is being duped and unknowingly
putting his or her life at risk. On the far end of this spectrum are our
beloved quackbusters, some of whom I believe think they are performing a
great service to humanity. In addition, most medical professionals are
very left-brained and when faced with such homeopathic concepts as "the
more dilute the solution, the stronger the potency," they can go no further.

This does not just apply to conventional health professionals. How many
of us were skeptical of homeopathy before we had a chance to experience
its power firsthand? I personally remember in my initial homeopathic
studies, coming across a graphic description of the source of the remedy
Medorrhinum. I was so horrified at the prospect of someone ingesting
such a substance, that I told a friend, "I will NEVER practice homeopathy!"

As for the patient in question, I referred him to a naturopathic
practitioner who planned to prescribe a homeopathic constitutional
remedy. On learning this, the patient's therapist (without talking to
me) told numerous other staff members that homeopathic remedies contain
alcohol and the patient (who was a recovering addict) was being put at
risk for a relapse. Before I even knew what had transpired, the whole
staff was in an uproar and my attempts to explain the misunderstanding
fell on deaf ears. I remember sitting in that staff meeting and feeling
the energy of a lynch mob. I could say nothing to change the tone.

Which is why I now want to gently and quietly introduce homeopathy to
the inpatient setting where I practice. The psychiatrists and primary
care practitioners have graciously given me the opportunity to do this.
In return, I agree to respect their concerns and limit the scope of this
project. My greatest hope is to be able to prescribe successfully for
enough patients to bring the right attention to bear.

Sincerely,
Arlene
And perhaps elaborate on case-in-point in the instance mentioned?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

Having been part of the conventional medicine world for 25 years, I'd
like to add some input here.

During our studies, we learn the function of the body in its most
intimate, examining each and every known enzymatic reaction that takes
place, all the different organs and their interconnections on a
macroscopic and microscopic level, etc,.... then same with pathology.
Once we graduate, the feeling is that we know everything there is to
know; the amount of knowledge is tremendous.......... so is the amount
of indoctrination as we are led to believe, no, to know, that our way is
the only way, all this with the sincere belief that it is for the good
of humankind.

It is certainly not easy to get out of this mould and it often takes
personal experience with healing through a non conventional approach to
start looking at it.
At the beginning it certainly clashes with what we are used to do,
especially because the language, the vocabulary is different (vital
force....). It takes books like "The emerging Science of Homeopathy,
Bellavite and Signori" to explain homeopathy through the lenses of
biology and biochemistry.

It is also a very difficult way on an individual point of view as at
some point you will have to change your practice and this implies huge
financial sacrifices not everybody is ready to make. It is also quite
unsettling, after so many years of study and specialisation and
practice, to realise there is a totally different world that has better
results than you: your ego takes a beating, believe me!!

So yes, there is a lot of fear and prejudice, rooted in lack of
knowledge and understanding. The best way to overcome it is by having
objective good results, not by futile arguments about theory.

For what it is worth.......

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".

[Jan Klüssendorf]

Hi,
I must confess, I don't know neither what ST means
So maybe someone could post it 'on list' because I guess there are more
people who are pussled.
Jan
PS: Arlene: great post !!

[Homoeopathy]

Hi Jan,
You wrote....
"I must confess, I don't know neither what ST means "


["Rudi was one of the first to introduce to North America a new,
advanced approach to homeopathy, "Sequential Therapy." ]

Homeopathy Online Issue 3
http://www.lyghtforce.com/HomeopathyOnline/issue3/

Anthony Gunterman