Sir what I feel that it is the drawback and lack of knowledge of the HOMOEOPATH and not HOMOEOPATHY, that it don't work.There are gems if you go through the Organon of Medicine.This 'pathy is so vast that a man can spend his whole lifetime understanding it.

Hi Shannon,


On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Robert & Shannon Nelson wrote:

>
> Well, this turns on what one takes as the definition of "homeopathy".
> As per discussions on the lists, some people (myself included, tho I am
> not so extreme as some) feel that the term should mean (at least more
> or less) what its founder / inventor / discoverer--the person who
> coined the term--intended it to mean: one remedy at a time, chosen
> based on "like cures like", given in minimum dose (potentization being
> an added tool, rather than actually defining; which is interesting,
> because in popular usage, at least in many places, anything involving
> potentized substances is called "homeopathy", regardless of how the
> remedy is chosen or what the goal is or etc.
>
How would you define "minimum dose"?

Regards

Luise


--
One thought to all who, free from doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

For one thing I would define it as a goal rather than as a concrete
amount.
In my understanding that goal ties in with for e.g. Hahnemann's
injunction to repeat "as needed" rather than routinely (tho I realize
there are times when "routine" might be necessary and is often used in
any case), and with his original practice, when he still worked with
crude substances, of seeing just how *little* he could produce the
needed response with, and with e.g. water dosing.

There are so many variables involved in prescribing, and also so many
practical constraints, that IMO making too much out of determining some
"absolute minimum" would be both pointless and fruitless, but I think
it's clear that having this as a goal and principle does and should
shape certain areas of our practice. And to the extent that variants
of practice (by which I mean both different styles of homeopathic
practice and also different posology decisions by an individual
practitioner) discard or overlook that goal, that is exactly where
greater risks (aggravation, proving, suppression, etc.) come into play.

Does that work for you?
Shannon

On Nov 17, 2005, at 12:49 PM, Luise Kunkle wrote:

>
> Hi Shannon,
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Robert & Shannon Nelson wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, this turns on what one takes as the definition of "homeopathy".
>> As per discussions on the lists, some people (myself included, tho I
>> am
>> not so extreme as some) feel that the term should mean (at least more
>> or less) what its founder / inventor / discoverer--the person who
>> coined the term--intended it to mean: one remedy at a time, chosen
>> based on "like cures like", given in minimum dose (potentization being
>> an added tool, rather than actually defining; which is interesting,
>> because in popular usage, at least in many places, anything involving
>> potentized substances is called "homeopathy", regardless of how the
>> remedy is chosen or what the goal is or etc.
>>
> How would you define "minimum dose"?
>
> Regards
>
> Luise
>
>
> --
> One thought to all who, free from doubt,
> So definitely know what's true:
> 2 and 2 is 22 -
> and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
> ==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========
>

Not everything works for everyone, e.g. the same medicine works for some, and not for others. you got to find what works for you, and if it doesnt its not the right thing for you but still may be for someone else.

This is true for homeopathy as well as allopathy.

__________________
http://in.geocities.com/dr_nancy_malik/homoeopathy.html

It's dangerous of one single reason: side effects, and sometimes too severe resulting in death.

__________________
http://in.geocities.com/dr_nancy_malik/homoeopathy.html

Medicine is still medicine. The best thing for anyone is to be least put on medicines.

__________________
http://in.geocities.com/dr_nancy_malik/homoeopathy.html

A Chart Contrasting Allopathy with Homeopathy

__________________
http://in.geocities.com/dr_nancy_malik/homoeopathy.html

More on this subject:
"Most patients probably assume that when a doctor proposes to use an established treatment to conquer a disease he will be using a treatment which has been tested, examined and proven. But this is not the case. The savage truth is that most medical research is organised, paid for, commissioned or subsidised by the drug industry (and the food, tobacco and alcohol industries). This type of research is designed, quite simply, to find evidence showing a new product is of commercial value. The companies which commission such research are not terribly bothered about evidence; what they are looking for are conclusions which will enable them to sell their product. Drug company sponsored research is done more to get good reviews than to find out the truth."----Dr Vernon Coleman
"Doctors go to great lengths to disguise the fact that they are practising a black art rather than a science. The medical profession has created a 'pseudoscience' of mammoth proportions and today's doctors rely on a vast variety of instruments and tests and pieces of equipment with which to explain and dignify their interventions.

__________________
"Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein