Minutus

Yes, but it really isn't a matter of "who would you refer" when we're
talking about how representative organizations portray homeopaths in the
media.

When you have an organization of MDs claiming to practice homeopathy--with a
fraction of the training and an allopathic mindset--claiming to be
legitimate, scientific, and "safe" while denouncing "lay practitioners" as
"dangerous", then something is definitely wrong. The media is led to seek
authoritative comment from the wrong group of practitioners, in my opinion.
And, once again, "medically/allopathically trained" "doctors" (or, closer to
home, naturopaths) are being given legitimacy where none may exist.
Remember the public does not know that MDs and NDs are not required to meet
any particular level of education or skill or comprehension in homeopathy:
their accreditations confer on them a kind of blanket legitimacy and
authority, and people who aren't aware will find them believeable despite
the reality of their inexperience or contempt.

The majority of practitioners of homeopathy are lay practitioners--many of
these well trained and accredited, and many also represented by
organizations who do not necessarily favour the "medically /allopathically
trained" over the Homeopathically trained. This is an important political
point for many reasons, but primarily for two reasons: the first of which
happens to be that we must be careful that we don't allow people who don't
understand what we do to define us; and the second being that most of the
lay practitioners out there who are doing the grunt work of educating
themselves and others and providing the example of homeopathic effectiveness
are women, who are often underrepresented and dismissed in their work, even
in homeopathy--where the contributions and strides they make in their work
are the foundation of homeopathy's resurgence and influence in the world
today.

We ought to be speaking out about this false legitimacy and this false
representation that is constantly sought out by the media, and promote
references to organizations which do, in fact, represent the vast majority
of Homeopaths in practice. There certainly are a lot of MDs and NDs who
practice homeopathy well, but chances are excellent that they wouldn't be
out there in the public sphere "trashing" homeopaths who aren't MDs or NDs
"like they are".

You're absolutely right, Fran, and I fell right into the trap--"lay"
practitioners is STILL used by conventional docs to refer to anyone without
conventional medical training. Technically, what you would call
"professional" homeopaths and what I've called "lay practitioners" fall into
the category made by the conventional medical practitioners.

The term exists in our literature, too, unfortunately: probably because so
many of the most widely published homeopaths of that time were
conventionally trained at some point.

Again, another reason why we (I!!) need to be careful not to let others who
don't know what we do define us.

Simon and Dr. Hahnemannian 2002,

I'm sorry I didn't actually receive your post in my mailbox, but I have read
Hahnemann's recommendations for homeopathic training. I know I made this
clear in my posts, but I didn't write to put down MDs who practice
homeopathy. I wrote to put down the tendency in the media to seek out
comments from MDs who claim to practice homeopathy, but are in fact never
trained in homeopathic medicine or practice allopathically with potentized
substances; these MDs often see professional homeopaths as competition and
"dangerous", and they will actively denounce professional homeopaths to the
media, and claim that professional homeopaths are not reliable because they
have no medical training (no conventional medical training).

The media are of course rewarded for helping these MDs establish their
"authority", and homeopathy itself then becomes defined by those who do not
practice it, and don't wish to know about it or further its acceptance in
the larger community.

As I wrote in my last post--there are many MDs and NDs who ARE well trained
homeopaths, and who do practice homeopathy "by the book", as it were.
You're not likely to find these doctors out there slamming other competent,
professional homeopaths who practice without conventional medical training.
Of course, there are a few--but they are, thankfully, rare. Most people who
really do practice homeopathy--whether they are MDs, NDs, or professional
qualified homeopaths just want to see homeopathy become more accepted so
that people can benefit from homeopathic medicine as it should be done.

yup

Simon
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please reply to
this email and then delete it. Please note that any views or opinions
presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of any other party or organisation

The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. The author accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this email.