Divina,

can I make it clear, yet again, that participation in a discussion here, (in this case in reply to the question 'what do you think about new interpretaions of Silicea?'), does not automaticaly mean that I am slagging, bashing or trashing anybody. Please note that I've not said anything derogatory about the character or personality of either gentleman. Neither am I telling anyone what choices they should make.

We are free, at least that is my expectation, to question the validity of any work here, without being accused of bad intention, of being the enemy, or indeed of ignoring the suffering of our patients, or of being one who is afraid of being seen as biased...or whatever else you might assume; I am certainly not afraid of any of the above.

The fact that certain work is speculative is not an attack.

However I accept that I have no power over your thought process, what you say & assume.
Equaly I know that I have not power to change peoples relationships, enviroments and circumstances, with homeopathic remedies. (Although I am very willing & able to talk such problems through in an attempt to help in any way I can.)
When the allopaths medicate on the grounds of circumstancial problems, we are the first to observe the ludicrious nature of this act. Granted the drugs are very different, but the mistake would seem to be ironicaly similar.

The conscience of each of us, as well as our study, experience, influences; is the ultimate decider in how we practice. If you are genuinely interested in how mine works in relation to homeopathy, I stick to the principles, treat disease, & respect the life choices of my patients as being their own.

Louise
ps...I don't wear a hat.