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://www.google.com/profiles/Dr.NancyMalik

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

__________________
http://www.google.com/profiles/Dr.NancyMalik

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

__________________
http://www.google.com/profiles/Dr.NancyMalik

A Chart Contrasting Allopathy with Homeopathy

__________________
http://www.google.com/profiles/Dr.NancyMalik

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

Alliance for Human Research Protection - Cloning Scam: Dr. Gerald Schatten's Hand in Bogus Paper Detailed //bogus research by allopathy journals
Alliance for Human Research Protection - US Gov Pesticide Exposure Experiments: Target Children--$970 per child - Wash Post //the bad research by allopathy
Merck Committed Scientific Fraud in Delays, Distortions of Vytorin Drug Trial (opinion) by Mike Adams the Health Ranger // bogus research by allopathy
Widespread Ghostwriting of Drug Trials Means "Scientific" Credibility of Pharmaceutical Industry is a Sham by Mike Adams the Health Ranger //the bad research by pharma companies
A Listing of the Twenty-One Fabricated Studies by Dr. Scott Reuben by Mike Adams the Health Ranger //list of 21 fabricated studies
The false gods of scientific medicine revealed: It's a cult, not a science by Mike Adams the Health Ranger //allopathy is cult
The truth about medical journals, and how drug companies exert heavy influence over published scientific articles //truth behind medical journal
Scientific medical journals like JAMA fail basic credibility standards; medical journals become increasingly irrelevant by Mike Adams the Health Ranger //JAMA lacks credibility

__________________
http://www.google.com/profiles/Dr.NancyMalik

Newton, a Saint in either the Hermetic or Rosicrucian Brotherhood and the Father of Classical Physics, got it mostly right. John Dalton, a Saint in the Rosicrucian Brotherhood and the Father of Chemistry, got it mostly right. Max Planck, the Father of Quantum Physics and therefore also of Particle and Theoretical Physics, got it mostly right. Galileo, a Saint in the Brahmic Brotherhood and the guy who broke the back of the God-damned Pauline Church by proving that Pythagoras' heliocentric solar system was correct, got it mostly right. Amos Comenius, a Saint in the Rosicrucian Brotherhood and the Father of Education, got it mostly right. Shakespeare, an Hermetic Saint and the Father of English, got it mostly right. Nicola Tesla, probably a Saint in the Rosicrucian Brotherhood and the Father of Alternating-Current (AC) Electricity and thus also of Technology and the guy who gave us the 20th century, got it mostly right. It's a very long list of historical figures who were actual Saints, but that's the generous small list of things of competing importance to the contributions of Hahnemann -- generous because Hahnemann rediscovered how to cure. How important is that?

Actually, it's a very small list of things of even remotely competing importance to the contributions of Hahnemann, and that list is about it. I meant that many historical figures were legitimate Saints. Defined in crudest or most-succinct form, First-Degree Saints (there being 12 grades) are just 0.6944% (1/144th) of the way to human perfection but have attained, in a dual requirement, both controlled astral clairvoyance and the brain state of mystic awareness as one of four inviolate and seven ideal requirements for actual Sainthood, about which no religion knows anything. The former essentially means that they can telepathically communicate and thus can see and converse with dead people and perceive the Astral Plane of existence, and the latter means they can consciously incorporate their Egoic memories (i.e., those from their 2000-3000 previous lives) into their brain memory. The decimal figure is so precise because that degree of knowledge is diagramically represented as an equilateral triangle. Second-Degree Sainthood forms a larger equilateral triangle of four the size of First-Degree Saints, the second rank of that triangle being three of them, one inverted in the middle. It goes like that in expanding triangles until there are 12 ranks and thus 144 smaller triangles constituting Mastership of Human Existence, or simply human perfection. Hence the precision to four decimal points. The three sides of those theoretical triangles representing human nature are mentality, ideality and practicality. Sciento-philosophic balance is thus another of those four inviolate requirements, and it's probably the first one to arise because everything else depends upon it. In short, that's legitimate Sainthood.

Hahnemann, who was probably a Saint in the Hermetic Brotherhood but most certainly was at least a proto-Saint, also got it mostly right. What more do you want?

That statement is also simply untrue, though, for all Hahnemannians adore, admire and treasure the writings of all other Hahnemannians, period. Ask me why. Because we love Truth, and we're the only ones who ever say it in medicine. That's therefore a lot of excellent literature that people who hold such ignorant views instantly show total ignorance of. For instance, Adolph Lippe, the most proficient prescriber of all time, had a very big pencil but didn't make any mistakes about homeopathy that I've yet discovered. Who is not amazed? Constantine Hering, the Father of American Homeopathy and a contemporary and colleague of Lippe, had an even bigger pencil but only made a few mistakes. So what! Other than Lippe, we all have, even Hahnemann. Therefore, how much literature constitutes the writings of Hahnemannian homeopathy; i.e., how long is the bookshelf?

The people who make those kinds of statements have no idea about that or anything else about homeopathy. How can scientists form opinions about homeopathy without any knowlledge of it? We don't know, but we do know that they thereby prove they're not scientists. (Link: BRAINWASHING, to be posted.) The people who make such assinine statements simply can't identify legitimate homeopaths, so the morons say yada yada without any awareness of the tragic fact that there are low-potency and high-potency pseudo homeopaths. In fact, they'll all say, "What?" Right, Jethro, opinions without knowledge works in allopathic medicine and in Hell but not in my world, so shut up! Axiomatically, all (emphasis) of their definitions are wrong. What's wrong with this picture? People make statements about medicine but with absolutely all (emphasis) of their fundamental premises about medicine, including definitions, totally wrong? I'm sure that works in a black hole but not in my world.

It simply happens that Hahnemann first said many of the things of importance in homeopathy because he's the guy who finally untied the Gordian knot of therapeutics, which unravelled into what's today called homeopathy but was spagyric medicine from the 5th through 17th centuries, Hermetic medicine throughout Egyptian history and was an unknown named form of it throughout the ancient Rama Empire of India. Just like all of those other guys and a great many more, Hahnemann got most of it right, said most of it first and often best. Only bozos don't realize this, so what do we care about what such ignoramouses say, anyway? Neither should anyone else, either. I'll bet their fish talk to them. It's of the same value as anything that comes from allopaths, so people who make those kinds of ignorant remarks deserve none of our attention since they're among the walking dead who simply don't deserve this planet ever again -- and good riddance!

Finally, the correct word there should be "demigod." Obviously, Imhotep was an Hermetic physician, and that means he was a homeopath in the Way Back Machine. He's known as the Egyptian God of Medicine, but he was a man. Hence, he was a demigod. Watch this.

Here's what we call Hahnemann's "Eulogy to Eumenes" from pages 202-03 of THE LESSER WRITINGS (link: http://books.google.com/books?id=YwT...=2&ct=result):

My footnote to those passages reads as follows:

Hogwash! My favorite way of saying that is: Wrongo, daddyo! These people know nothing about homeopathy! Link: Homoeopathic Hospital?, posting #23.

Say it right. Homeopathy was created by God and was put into the very fabric of space at Creation for us to eventually discern the natural laws specific to medicine, which are driven and ordered by yet unknown fundamental forces of nature specific to life forces (correctly, specific to the etheric energy pattern of both patients and medicines) and which create the actual Science of Medicine now called homeopathy. That's how natural laws exist; i.e., the fundamental forces of nature drive and order them as universe-wide absolutes, they've existed since the beginning of time, and God therefore created them. Also, it is as old as civilization, which hyper-reliable arcane archives number at 78,000 years. In actuality, compared to the pitiful nature of the sciences as now understood -- emphasizing that we still only know 10% of human physiology after more than 70 years of aggressive work in molecular biology, the figure remaining the same the entire time, too, for the window keeps getting bigger the more we learn -- homeopathy is 25th-century medicine. It will also obviously be the system of medicine in the Kingdom of God on Earth, scheduled to begin one way or the other in November 2998.

How's that?

God bless!

__________________
Albert, also Hahnemannian444B