combination remedy legality / Asclepius in the Balance 1 Asclepius - the Circus Clown
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:22 am
Eric-
I agree with you whole heartedly. No one can claim that a
particular way of prescribing is correct or not. Of course organon
is there as a final arbiter but but there are people who want to
advance homeopathy by claiming that they are only continuing
Hahnemann's legacy and that hahnemann is the beginning and not the
end. And this includes the so called classical homeopaths "we know
and respect" ( including Drs.Sankaran). The problem is the argument
that is good for the goose is good for the gander as well. So now
any departure from Hahnemann's way is defensible as "New age" and
modern. I know the power of the minimum dose and sigle remedy. As
mentioned that is the way I practice. Mostly. At the same time I
also want for myself and others the independence to practise and
prescribe the way we want. After all there is a wide range in
Homeopathic practice. There are people who consider diff. potencies
of the same medicine as different medicines altogether,
'
Your point on the economic viability of pharmacies is well taken. I
made the same argument last week. Pharmacies cannot survive if only
doctors can prescribe homeo medicines and there can be no
combinations. In fact this will take Homeopathy away from common
people and will allow only "Ivory tower" our system. If combination
medicines are so bad then truth will out one day and that way of
practising homeopathy will die a natural death, If it survives then
it might mean there is a need for some such thing.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Eric Leventhal Arthen
wrote:
exactly....
to
keep
and
another
combination
been
be
remedy by a
counter
problematic
uninformed use
remedies
for many
may be,
enough to
information
shoot
make
use.
the
of "protection"
of the
think they
were to
still would
I agree with you whole heartedly. No one can claim that a
particular way of prescribing is correct or not. Of course organon
is there as a final arbiter but but there are people who want to
advance homeopathy by claiming that they are only continuing
Hahnemann's legacy and that hahnemann is the beginning and not the
end. And this includes the so called classical homeopaths "we know
and respect" ( including Drs.Sankaran). The problem is the argument
that is good for the goose is good for the gander as well. So now
any departure from Hahnemann's way is defensible as "New age" and
modern. I know the power of the minimum dose and sigle remedy. As
mentioned that is the way I practice. Mostly. At the same time I
also want for myself and others the independence to practise and
prescribe the way we want. After all there is a wide range in
Homeopathic practice. There are people who consider diff. potencies
of the same medicine as different medicines altogether,
'
Your point on the economic viability of pharmacies is well taken. I
made the same argument last week. Pharmacies cannot survive if only
doctors can prescribe homeo medicines and there can be no
combinations. In fact this will take Homeopathy away from common
people and will allow only "Ivory tower" our system. If combination
medicines are so bad then truth will out one day and that way of
practising homeopathy will die a natural death, If it survives then
it might mean there is a need for some such thing.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Eric Leventhal Arthen
wrote:
exactly....
to
keep
and
another
combination
been
be
remedy by a
counter
problematic
uninformed use
remedies
for many
may be,
enough to
information
shoot
make
use.
the
of "protection"
of the
think they
were to
still would