Good point, Hans. I'll keep that in mind.

Snoopy

P.S. Carol, sit! Stay!

This has raised some good points.

Some people do come to this board wanting a remedy suggestion and if it is an acute condition I don't see anything wrong in doing that. After all they could go to their nearest health shop and ask the person behind the counter or self prescribe,
Chronic conditions are obviously different and it's brilliant that some homeopaths are able to take these patients on through their websites.

What I have never understood is why Homeopaths don't make more of the Professional section of this site? It would seem alot more 'Professional' to take their discussions out of the public eye in this way,
I must admit if I was someone coming to this board with no knowledge or experience of Homeopathy looking for a remedy for my ingrown toenail (if I had one !) I would be totally put off by some of the posts.

hello hoppitt,
i think the expectations of questionners vs. what we can responsibly do for them here is part of a broader problem brought about by the pharmacies who produce over-the-counter ranges of homoeopathic remedies eg boots, neals yard, ainsworths, weleda. even if pharmacists kept them *behind the pharmacy counter it would send out a different message. have you seen the easy-to-use flip-chart in boots that directs people which remedy to buy for each complaint they have?

the most responsible pharmacies do not do this eg. freemans has no over-the-counter range, and helios only produces a kit which at least includes a small materia medica for acutes relating to the enclosed remedies.

the problem also arises from all the homoeopathy self-help books now available, which contribute to the public illusion that homoeopathic self-prescribing is safe and straightforward.

If I may add to the above, that anyone seriously interested in homeopathy would take care not to dabble and thus cast a negative image on this science/art.
It would serve well if remedy suggestions were followed by reasoning as to why one came to that prescription (I believe that was asked in another thread too) and IMHO it should also be accompanied by the prescribers true qualifications - i.e. student, practitioner, layperson etc. so that the person seeking help can discern better.
It is paramount that anyone prescribing here has full awareness that at the other end is a living person who might take the prescribed remedy, hence there is RESPONSIBILITY to be taken, even through the anonymous internet.
There are desperate people at the other end seeking true help and homeopathy just isn't: "Let's try this one first and if it doesn't work the next remedy that came up on the computer".

Claudia

[ 26 May 2002, 17:45: Message edited by: ClaudiaRosemarin ]

Hi Anna
Love the tiger-very ferocious- not like you ??

I agree that the way remedies are available OTC is worrying but as it is impossible to 'uninvent' this situation then I think it is up to the Homeopathic profession to try and educate people.(like running classes etc)
As most of the population just seem to want a 'quick fix' to their ailments- we have alot of work to do !!

Hi Claudia
Your points too are very valid- no one should dabble. Unfortunately many people are under the illusion that complementary /alternative therapies are safe and can do no harm because it is 'natural'.
It would be great if people always gave their reasons for suggesting remedies (or arguments against) But I think discussion between professionals at this level should take place on the professional section and not on the public BB.

What do you think ???

Hi Hoppitt,
When I mean reasoning to explain a prescription, I don't mean a lengthy discussion, which indeed would be better off in the professional section. Instead, I mean just a word or two why one choses the remedy. More importantly I find it nothing but honest, if a word was lost to describe who the prescriber is, so that the patient can see whether a student, a layperson or a practitioner is making the suggestion. (Of course this can sometimes be checked in the profile, but not every person seeking help is computer savvy and aware that such information could be found there)

Personally, I find prescribing over the net a very "iffy" sort of thing. It could be helpful for somebody who lives totally far out in the woods and has absolutely no access to a homeopath, but I feel the limitations to objective observation over the net are just too great an obstacle.
Very dangerous indeed, I find the typing in of some rubrics into a repertorizing program and then taking the list of remedies and going down that list, suggesting one remedy after the other. That just isn't real homeopathy and I have a suspicion that this is being practised here more often than not.
Claudia

I would be very offended and bored if you took all these discussions where the rest of us dummies couldn't participate. And I disagree witht the emphasis that some of you are putting on not self-prescribing from reading a few books, taking a few classes..(which have been around for the last 30 years)or taking some advice on this board. I mean how many people have come on this board in the last 4 or 5 years...hey, look at my member number...and said I took that apis after the bee stung me and now my face has swollen up to the size of a basketball and they're giving me 6 months to live. I wouldn't discourage self-prescribing for minor ailments. How do you think most people got into this field or people eventually got around to going to see a homeopath in the first place. If a person is relatively healthy...they can even "screw" around with remedies and they are not going to end of on your list of patients with undescribable problems and on the list of a "messed up case". Afterall, this is the age of taking responsibility for our health problems. Don't put yourselves unwittingly in the same position that Dr.s have taken: all power resting in their hands.

That said, I have a personal message for snoopy:

Woof...woof...arf...arf.

When one considers the limited number of participants on this board, I think the membership quota is more indicative of the number of people who looked and left than anything else...would someone with a negative experience even bother to report back here...most likely they wouldn't even know their 'new' symptoms were a result of the remedy(s) they took if they were new to homeopathy...I like the idea of people posting their qualification when giving advice on remedies...
I agree that an experience with an acute treatment opens the door of homeopathy to people...the problem is, as many people are turned away when the miracle doesn't happen because the remedy was wrong , or they DO connect their 'getting worse' on taking a remedy and don't understand aggravation/proving... anyone who is willing to state that homeopathy can be taken randomly without risk at any dilution has either very little experience,is incredibly unobservant or very very lucky...the consequences of a 'wrong' remedy aren't always tomorrow....that new deeper disease months down the road just might be the result of suppression by un-homeopathy.... Denise...2nd year "A" student of 'classical homeopathy' with the SCHOOL OF HOMEOPATHY,DEVON (along with 4+ years of supervised case management and prescribing for my family and farm)

Hallo to all
May I introduce a responsibility scale?

One end is occupied by those who treat unknown diseases with unknown medicines in the hope, the patient does not come back with the same thing again or even get worse, or suffer homeopathic aggravation. The other end is occupied by these, who treat known diseases with known medicines, who know what will happen after the remedy is applied and look forward to seeing the patient back in a much improved condition.
The former seem to me those sort of people who throw stones into the dark, hoping that they don’t come back,
the latter are these, who only give a remedy after being convinced, that it is the appropriate one for this very case of disease in the given circumstances, applied in exactly the right potency, strength, interval.

For the latter, this necessitates:
firstly to become fully acquainted with the homeopathic principals and rules, secondly a good working knowledge of the Materia Medica Pura and
thirdly: a thorough investigation, to gather all the relevant data to differentiate the one remedy against the others, which will be the truly curative one.
Fourthly: Trustworthy suppliers of medicines.

whereas for the former all of this is rather prohibitive and confusing and only complicating things.

The latter, being fully aware of the responsibility arising from his/her decisions, make sure to capacitate themselves to fulfil this high responsibility, whereas for the former responsibility is rather an obstacle, as it would mean diligent study in the case of homeopathy. If things go wrong, then, its easier for the former to lay the blame onto someone else than to realize and remove his/ her own shortcomings.

It is up to every practitioner, student, salesman, pharmacist, where to position themselves on the responsibility scale, and everyone making contributions to this board does so automatically by means of posting his/ her views in terms of viability.

It is up to the patient to make an informed choice whom to entrust their health and future.

I, personally, given the choice, would go for the latter.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath
homeopathy study guide: http://www.homeopathyworldcommunity....hy-study-guide

just to bring the thread back to the original topic
this lnink may be of interest
http://www.mercola.com/2002/may/29/c...ox_vaccine.htm