Minutus

Yes, I also would applaud anyone who is truly helping "the poor".
I hope they're conscientious about their handling of matters.

But the post that came (allegedly) from *this* web site is bizarre, don't
you agree? The "case" given was not remotely a homepathic case, and why
would a "helpline" be sending a case *here*, and if they were, why wouldn't
it at least be a *case*, and why wouldn't it come from a *person* not a
"Yahoo! Rapid Response" or whatever it said.

This is definitely not what it purports to be. What I'm wondering is what
it *is*, and what could or should be done about it.

Shannon
on 3/25/03 4:21 PM, gmccool2 at gmccool2@yahoo.com wrote:

Maybe, all this post is asking is how would a professional homoeopath proceed to treat someone who provided this information. What would be the next step? What would be your way of handling this case? It is a tough place to begin, with obvious structural and functional integrity in such a state, but surely there must be something a homoeopath can do?
Robyn

"Each progressive spirit is opposed by a thousand mediocre minds appointed to guard the past" (Maurice Maeterlinck)

I think you are bending over backward to give benefit of the doubt...
Doubtless a homeopath *could* help, if s/he were given a case to treat.
There's no case here. At least not by any approach I'm familiar with.

If this were Joe Smith, saying "My brother" this and that, it would be just
one more of an ongoing stream of folks who know nothing about homepathy,
sending in information which has nothing to do with homepathy, and asking
what remedy to take. There would be nothing odd about that.

What's odd about *this* is that it comes from an e-mail address called
"Homoeopathic Helpline", yet has nothing whatever to do with homeopathy.
With sole except of the question at the end, "What homeopathic-treatment
shall you prescribe?" If this *isn't* a scam, I surely hope someone lets me
know; it will be a real learning experience for me, and a cautionary lesson
not to trust the evidence of my senses too closely.

Cheers (she said glumly),
Shannon
on 3/25/03 5:16 PM, Robyn Foley at folco@tpg.com.au wrote:

I guess maybe I'm a bit paranoid, but I agree with everyone else on the list
who has "smelled a rat" in this message -- there was something bizarre about
it. The presentation had no homeopathic symptoms, and the way the question
was phrased almost sounded as if it was a test. The question occurred to me
when I read it whether someone was trying to set a trap so they could make
some malpractice accusation... In any case, someone should probably respond
(Ardavan?) by saying simply that the list is for discussion, and no one is
prescribing or practicing online through the list.

FWIW.... Rosemary