Dear Sir,

This is discernable primarily with comparitive objective symptoms. Yet, here is where unbiased observation is of particular importance; Physical symptoms ,whether internal or external, are observable to the changes taking place,with the 'naked eye' or scientic technology; But the discernment that becomes questionable is that concerning the emotional/mental condition of the patient in mind.

If asking a patient ,"How they feel", renders an answer of improvement (comparitive subjective symptom), in the emotional/mental sphere, then how is one to know if this is the action of a remedy or otherwise.The answer lies again in the prescriber's unbiased understanding and ability to perceive into what is happening with the individual before him (before the prescription ). The unbiased prescriber will have an idea of what to expect (before the prescription), based upon what he/she objectively observes .

Since the prescriber is (supposively) following homeopathic principles, then he/she must have a conviction that homeopathy works (or they should not be prescribing); But this does not mean they are unbiased or that they are not steered incorrectly by the interpretation of what they see ,or better yet, what they want to see.

If the homeopathic prescriber is the 'key' point of any prescription, then all decisions (to find the correct prescription) must be clearly based upon something which is neither 'whim' nor 'fancie' ; it must be tangiblely applicable in terms of homeopathic characteristics (guiding symptoms). The 'true' precriber knows what he/she is basing his/her prescription upon; but the patient does not . So, when the patient returns with the statement "I feel much better!", the good homeopath intricately goes over 'piece by piece' to determine what is the truth of the matter .

Truthfully, your question is a question and challenge that each and every prescriber must over-come in order to reach the point of practicing 'good' homeopathy.This is our goal.

The truly good homeopath knows no 'placebo' effect ; it is just another guiding characteristic of the patient in view .

Dear Sir,

The above mentioned is homeopathy's scientific guideline (which I know you know); To seek anything more becomes subjective 'jibber'; if not only for mental stimulation. We best put our mentality to becoming unbiased.

The clear way, is to use your senses, hearing, smelling, vison, intelligence, and if not doing that, resort to allopathy, give placebo and homeopatic remedise in a double blind fashion, even if this dont fit homeopathy, it will show results in proovers, that are inquestionable, read Lancet!
If not satisfied with that either, just be a allopath, and dont fiddle with things(homeopathy) who go out of the borders, of a narrow minds comprehension.
If questions and uncertainty in a " homeopath" he rather evalute if he is a resource, or a damage, both to health and to homeopathy.
In a newbigenner, a uncertainty will alays exist, even if trained by the best, and if he dont take advice, but want to proove things himself ( thats a sign of a good homeopath, if he becomes it, and dont give up because his lack of stamina), use placebo in patients who is suspected of showing only psychological reactions to your tourough anamnesis metodes, and not reactions to the remedy, then you will get a clear answer.
So, in all, we did not misunderstand your intentions, or posting, this is indeed a scientific debate, even if you dont want to recognize it as so.If, your intentions are quite different than what you state.
To my experience, nothing ive ever have seen, has been more painfull than the plain thruth, and i do not excuse my use of it either.