This topic discusses the raging Homeopathy debate. Hahnemann wrote books 200 years ago on a medical system that must have worked for him to have known so much about disease and how to cure it - he extended his own life to more than three times the life expectancy for someone born in 1755. His books are so rational and flawless, it is impossible to believe that this is anything other than a valid medical system.

Everyone feels they have the right to dismiss Homeopathy, though how could they know. They want Scientific proof but do not want to contribute to discussions on how to find that particular kind of proof.

I am not a homeopath, have no financial interest, just know that, after carefully studying his books, Hahnemann cured chronic diseases, considered incurable today, that affect millions in Britain and 10's of millions in the USA. I hope I can tempt Homeopath Albert into this debate.

Please ask any basic questions to get up to speed on this debate.
Tim K.

Originally posted by timokay
This topic discusses the raging Homeopathy debate. Hahnemann wrote books 200 years ago on a medical system that must have worked for him to have known so much about disease and how to cure it - he extended his own life to more than three times the life expectancy for someone born in 1755. Although he lived almost twice what is considered the average age for the period, you must remember that the “average” is affected by a very high infant and youth mortality rate caused by poor sanitation and infectious disease. Quite a number of people lived into there 80’s – Hahnemann was not necessarily unique in that respect.
His books are so rational and flawless, it is impossible to believe that this is anything other than a valid medical system.

Everyone feels they have the right to dismiss Homeopathy, though how could they know. They want Scientific proof but do not want to contribute to discussions on how to find that particular kind of proof.You find that proof by double-blind testing. This is truly the only good way to prove that a certain health care treatment is effective. I have not seen where the efficacy of homeopathy has been proven in this manner. You might kick off the discussion with why you believe his texts are “flawless”.

:m: Peace.

SOME DETAILS FROM ANOTHER POST OF MINE:

Just because something is difficult to prove, that doesn't mean Scientists should just turn their noses up at it. There is a Scientific problem to be solved, so it should be seriously addressed.

I refer to Classical Homeopathy.

The bizarre nature of its mechanism is astonishing, but it is still rational. A German doctor noticed that many substances prepared in the right way produce "symptom patterns" in people.
These medicines are acting, I firmly believe, on the Brain's Homeostatic Centre.

Dr Hahnemann simply threw over 1000 test substances at the Brain (using healthy people as subjects) and carefully recorded the responses, to understand the mechanism of this Homeostatic centre...and he actually solved the problem of disease by associating "specific symptom patterns" with "specific faults" in the Homeostatic centre.

He discovered a principle: how diseases behave when they exist simultaneously in a patient...one will always dominate, the other suspended. The brain has an instinctual memory of each disease type (i.e. what to do when signals from the immune system indicate such-and-such a disease). When diseases are of a very similar kind, the instinctual memory does not have the resolution to distinguish between them...can be fooled into thinking there is just one disease.

The patient is sick because the Homeostatic centre has a fault, and NOTHING to do with any disease agent (which has merely exposed the fault).

So, by selecting a medicine with exactly the same symptoms as that exhibited by the sick person, the Homeostatic Control system is fooled by the medicine, believing it to be the same disease as the natural disease, but stronger so it takes it over. But what it does in processing terms is completing the failed processing of that natural disease, forcing it past the fault and then everything resolves.

My point is, there is a Scientific problem to be solved here but no branch of Science claiming it. Will give some more details on how it works, if anyone interested. It's a mechanism that seems better understood by logicians than by anyone else. Tim

Its an art of curing founded on resemblances, allopathy is too a bit to weird a system.

Can you provide links so I can read more about it, my knowledge on this system is very minimal.

www.homeopathyhome.com (http://www.homeopathyhome.com)

Go to the reference library on the above site, i.e.,

http://www.homeopathyhome.com/reference/

and select: "Organon online".

The ORGANON of medicine written by Hahnemann (who founded Homeopathy) is the best place to start, though the best translation of it is not online.

Heavy going, so ask specific questions. Tim

Explain Classical Homeopathy, because from what I know it seems quit illogical and dubious. How can a poison diluted so many times that it will pass for distilled water do anything at all?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by timokay

... on the Brain's Homeostatic Centre.

He discovered a principle: how diseases behave when they exist simultaneously in a patient...one will always dominate, the other suspended.

The patient is sick because the Homeostatic centre has a fault, and NOTHING to do with any disease agent (which has merely exposed the fault).

{/QUOTE]

1, All ilnesses are psychosomatic then? Of course not.

2, Afraid not, people can and do suffer from multiple illnesses or diseases at the same time, and nothing is ever 'suspended'.

3, Psychosomatic illnesses again. So Lung cancer is all in the mind is it?

I think you need to explain yourself more clearly.

Hi Tim.

I'll first post some responses.

----------

Goofyfish, this is not true except for allopathy: You find that proof by double-blind testing. This is truly the only good way to prove that a certain health care treatment is effective.

What do homeopaths need with double-blind testing?

Those people have no Laws of Therapeutics and they lie to each other because allopathy is big business; whereas we do have those natural laws governing what we do, and we don't lie to our colleagues.

A whole series of erroneous assumptions underlie the notion that people have to be double-blinded, and they expose the fact that allopathic medicine is based upon nothing but erroneous assumptions that of course result in wrong conclusions in the form of ineffective therapies.

----------

I haven't yet found a website of Hahnemannian homeopathy, so I would rather not lend such support.

I posted at homeopathyhome.com, but that does not make it a Hahnemannian site.

----------

WellCookedFetus, that's what we'd like to know too.

That it does has been good enough for 213 years, but we have all wanted to know how that happens.

I have my favorite speculation/hypothesis, which is as an esoteric end involving the Ether and non-physical particles, and Tim has taken up championing the physical explanation. I think both are going to turn out as halves of a whole explanation, for physics is currently using 20(+) synonyms for and major manifestations of the Ether without accepting it, and there must be some understandable mechanism by which our medicines pass from physical substances into etheric drugs.

We are fishing for people with big heads for science who're well read and may know of findings that have gotten buried or who simply figure it out.

Water crystalization or polymerization at room temperature must be part of it, and Shiu Yin Lo seems to have captured photographs of this with an electron microscope.

We don't know how. How do you think that could happen since it obviously does?

----------

Phlogistian,

Please be careful with the word psychosomatic, for it is a word with no clear meaning and could just as easily mean psychic AND somatic.

Tim is relatively new to homeopathy, but I have been inside it for 25 years come the end of this year.

I think what he may have been meaning to emphasize is that causative agents of diseases, when they exist, which is rare, is just half of a puzzle; for the other half is an environment/organism that allows it to propagate.

Is that what you meant, Tim?

Welcome Hahnemannian,

I think the Placebo effect is far more likely then your theory. This explains also why it does not work in double blind testing, which by the way you have presented no evidence on why it is wrong in your Begging the Question fallacy.

No, in fact, the placebo effect is 100% impossible, because you cannot get a placebo effect from infants and children, animals or the unconscious, not to mention in vitro evidence.

Tim, post that site with the elaborate suggestion about water molecules acting as enzymes or something.

Really you have evidence on that? Was it compared to a control?

Water crystalization or polymerization at room temperature must be part of it, and Shiu Yin Lo seems to have captured photographs of this with an electron microscope.

Nanoscopic level this a quit possible do to random chance of molecular motion. Also many additives will catalysis the processes even at room temperature. Still without a reference I don’t know the details of what your talking about.

WellCookedFetus, Greetings!

What are you going to test about homeopathy and how?

Answer that and I will show you the erroneous assumptions involved in testing homeopathy within allopathic parameters.

I don't need a greetings, but thanks anyways.

Test if it works of course: have a disease, we test a homeopathy treatment on that disease as well a control and placebo to compare to, we gauge the results. This is how all allopathic or Logical medicine has been tested, this is the way science works by scientific method (hypothesis, verify, theorize), if your treatment can not be tested as such then it is not creditable scientifically, your treatment cannot be proven or disproved if it cannot be tested and verified, period.

Okay, here we have our first problem and one so far insurmountable because the allopathically minded fools insist their definition of diseases is valid even though it obviously isn't since they have no cures for any viral, chronic or psychiatric cases.

When people try to guage homeopathy on the basis of such ignorantly stupid and arguably assinine basic assumptions that are obviously totally wrong, no wonder they find nothing.

So tell me if you know what's wrong with the allopathic basis of pathology.

Then tell me why pathology has absolutely nothing to do with therapeutics and we quickly enter into insoluble problems, because 1) allopathy is obviously just self-admitted quackery and should be totally banned from human contact, just as Oliver Wendel Holmes said, and 2) they have all five basic assumptions about medicine totally wrong and thus also all of their conclusions (i.e., therapeutic procedures and results) understandably wrong and effete.

You cannot compare apples with oranges.

Moreover, there is a VERY central difference between pure sciences like homeopathy, physics and chemistry and those "studies of" (i.e., those "ologies") that merely apply scientific method, for that is totally meaningless if one engages scientific method with erroneous assumptions about health, disease, therapeutics, the nature of existence and the nature of the universe.

Again, how can homeopathy be tested in the allopathic way when their model is irrepairably broken and so arcaic and ignorant that it should be permanently banned from civilization as a capitol offense since people have the basic right to life, health and sanity, all of which allopathic medicine strips away?

Still, not only how but what are you going to test homeopathy in?

We have treatments and cures for viral, chronic and psychiatric diseases, you also left our bacterial and zoonotic infections. Though we do not have cures or a full understand of all of diseases we have learn and developed greatly over last few hundred years. Despite the fact Allopathic medicine had done so many great things from the extinction of small pox to organ transplants, from antibiotics to gene therapy, you calm its quackery, lies, erroneous and a fares of human history, without placing any evidence of your own in a blatant Begging the Question and Objective Ad Hominem fallacies.

By the way if the scientific method for testing is not adequate what is?

Originally posted by Hahnemannian
What do homeopaths need with double-blind testing?

Those people have no Laws of Therapeutics and they lie to each other because allopathy is big business; whereas we do have those natural laws governing what we do, and we don't lie to our colleagues.

A whole series of erroneous assumptions underlie the notion that people have to be double-blinded, and they expose the fact that allopathic medicine is based upon nothing but erroneous assumptions that of course result in wrong conclusions in the form of ineffective therapies.This claim is just pathetic. Double blind testing only indicates one thing; whether or not a treatment is effective. It doesn't have anything to do with what kind of treatment it is or how the treatment works. If homeopathy was really effective in treating disease, homoeopathists would welcome double blind studies.

WellCookedFetus, you said: We have treatments and cures for viral, chronic and psychiatric diseases, you also left our bacterial and zoonotic infections.

I didn't say treatments, I said cures; and there are absolutely no cures for any viral, chronic or psychiatric cases in allopathy.

Cutting someone's head off if they have a headache is a treatment, but cures are special and adhere to four natural laws which allopathy is intrinsically incapable of precipitating.

And I thus left out bacterial diseases because we will provisionally grant that they're cures even though they aren't.

Also, bacterial diseases are largely self-limited and do our organisms good by producing antibodies and thus some true immunity never provided by that insanity called vaccines.

But bacterial infections are perhaps only 1% of cases.

That therapeutic incompetent makes allopaths quacks, just as we have always said, so I don't know what the problem is.

WellCookedFetus, you then said: Though we do not have cures or a full understand of all of diseases we have learn and developed greatly over last few hundred years.

Understanding diseases in allopathic terms has NOTHING to do with curative therapeutics, only with pathology.

And if you want to claim knowledge of diseases by allopaths over several hundred years as if it is something important, explain why they still cannot cure and incredibly were still doing bloodletting as late as 1914 in the person of no less than Sir Wm. Osler, the man who ruled Rationalist allopathy from about 1880-1920 and who coined the term "scientific medicine" in the 1880s.

WellCookedFetus, you finally said: Despite the fact Allopathic medicine had done so many great things from the extinction of small pox to organ transplants, from antibiotics to gene therapy, you calm its quackery, lies, erroneous and a fares of human history, without placing any evidence of your own in a blatant Begging the Question and Objective Ad Hominem fallacies.
The extinction of smallpox is a lie, and the vaccines had absolutely nothing to do with its near disappearance.

Allopaths are skillful liars.

When it comes to the diseases for which they provide fools with vaccinations, they change the names of them to distort the statistics.

Monkeypox is clinically identical to smallpox, and it seems to be the missing figures.

-----------

Organ transplants are not part of medicine, they are surgical procedures, and they most certainly are not cures.

-----------

Antibiotics were an accidental discovery, so please do not hail such accidental discoveres by people who daily demonstrate that they are nothing but quacks and killers.

------------

Gene therepy will provide us nothing but another suppressively and disordering allopathic therapy, never cures because they will have nothing to do with cures, only predispositions.

------------

Without placing any evidence of our own before the world?

Get real!

That is a total lie.

Hahnemann fulfilled his part of the responsibilities of scientists when he provided all of the information necessary to apply homeopathy when he published the ORGANON OF MEDICINE.

It then became the responsibilities of others to test those findings.

That was in 1810.

So for 197 years scientists have been making that total lie and getting away with it.

Well, it just ain't true.

We have been telling you blokes how to do it since the beginning, remembering that you guys were doing bloodletting clear into 1914, but you have never once tested it.

That is an allopathic lie that we have never provided evidence.

Allopaths refuse to test it, and the evidence indicates that you refuse to do so because you all know that you and your system will go the way of the do do bird if you ever did.

----------

"blatant Begging the Question and Objective Ad Hominem fallacies"

If you need to speak Moon talk to impress someone else, find them, because the fact remains that you are foolishly supporting a system of medicine that's total self-admitted quackery due to it being a therapeutically incompetent system, and supporting members applying it that are self-admitted quacks.

That's just dumb.

Plus, they are guilty of mass murder, and you thereby become complicit in their crimes.

Is that really something you want to do?

Do you really want to join your allopathic buddies on the gallows when these societies finally listen to those fools tell us they are therapeutic incompetents, quacks, who of course cannot do anything but kill their patients?

Not too smart, pal.

I suggest you rethink that view.

----------

And I noticed that you ignored everything important that I said in that initial posting.

Very interesting.

Interesting. Mmmokay, this has gotten very broad with lots of accusations which do not really seem to pertain to the discussion.

Could we sum up?

The purpose of any medical treatment is to cure disease, or, failing that, to eliminate or alleviate the effects of the disease.

Now, to find out if some treatment does that, we seem to need to test it. This test seems to be the same no matter if the treatment is homeopatic, snake oil, or a product of the modern medical industry:

1) Find patients with the disease in question.
2) Apply treatment.
3) Find out if the patients got better.

Especially in stage #3 there are a number of caveats:
- Placebo effect (patients feel better without objectively being better)
- Reporting bias (Patients report feeling better to please the doctor, or the opposite)
- Interpretation bias (persons interpreting results may not be totally objective)

All these kinds of "noise" are effectively eliminated by the double-blind placebo control method. Neither patients nor testers know which patients had the substance under test till results are collected and interpreted.

Thus the double-blind test has nothing to do with HOW the treatment is supposed to function. It just shows the effect of the treatment, therefore, I do not understand how you can consider it irrelevant for homeopatic treatments, Hahnemannian. Perhaps you could explain?

Hans

Hahnemannian,

True we have nothing that stop virii we do have preventative measure such a vaccines, and ant-viral be we do have cures for many chronic or psychiatric diseases. Just because allopathic medicine is not perfect does not mean is not superior; please tell me how holistic medicine has cured the above at a high success rate.

A fallacy is a event in a arguement which is a failure of logic and is wrong.
Begging the Question fallacy
1. Claim A is made
2. Claim is true because it must be true.

for example:

Bill: "God must exist."
Jill: "How do you know."
Bill: "Because the Bible says so."
Jill: "Why should I believe the Bible?"
Bill: "Because the Bible was written by God."

or

H: Homeopathy is great,
F: why?
H: Because it is and I'll present no evidence on it.

Objective Ad Hominem fallacy:
1. Claim A is made
2. Person B attacks the nature of Claim A but provides no evidence against it.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

for example:
"Then tell me why pathology has absolutely nothing to do with therapeutics and we quickly enter into insoluble problems, because 1) allopathy is obviously just self-admitted quackery and should be totally banned from human contact, just as Oliver Wendel Holmes said, and 2) they have all five basic assumptions about medicine totally wrong and thus also all of their conclusions (i.e., therapeutic procedures and results) understandably wrong and effete."

But the biggest fallacy on this thread is the Burden of Proof fallacy, you see this thread is on homeopathy, how does homeopathy work? This is not “all the little flaws and oddities of allopathic medicine” thread. If you want I will make multiple post long counter arguments against your claims on allopathic medicine but I have a life and don’t have the time for that right now, but that’s not the problem the problem is you first need to explain to us how homeopathy works and how successful it is. The burden of proof here is on Homeopathy not allopathic medicine.

"Unlike smallpox, monkeypox causes swollen lymph nodes. The incubation period for monkeypox is about 12 days..."
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/monkeypox/factsheet.htm


http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/monkeypox/vaccineqa.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/monkeypox/factsheet2.htm



while similar, they are not the same.

monkey pox is also a genetically distinct species and is far less fatal then small pox, but that’s off topic the topic is the nature of Homeopathy.

MRC Hans,

Now, to find out if some treatment does that, we seem to need to test it. This test seems to be the same no matter if the treatment is homeopatic, snake oil, or a product of the modern medical industry:

1) Find patients with the disease in question.
2) Apply treatment.
3) Find out if the patients got better.

Especially in stage #3 there are a number of caveats:
- Placebo effect (patients feel better without objectively being better)
- Reporting bias (Patients report feeling better to please the doctor, or the opposite)
- Interpretation bias (persons interpreting results may not be totally objective)

All these kinds of "noise" are effectively eliminated by the double-blind placebo control method. Neither patients nor testers know which patients had the substance under test till results are collected and interpreted.


The main problem is the definition of the term "the disease".
In Homeopathy, the "disease" is not the disease-agent but a failure of "disease management" in the body, since this system should be able to overcome ALL disease, without symptoms. And there are a very large number of possibly faults in this system. So, how can there be a "control" starting point?

The control are people with similar symptoms or the same disease. We try to cure the disease in the experimental group with our treatment that we are testing. Depending on how the experimental group compares to the control we can determine if the treatment works, does nothing or is harmful.

Homeopathy is based of the body healing all problems, how do they deal with genetic diseases? The bodies natural state in these cases may even be fatal.

Mr Fetus,
Homeopathy is based of the body healing all problems, how do they deal with genetic diseases? The bodies natural state in these cases may even be fatal.


Anybody who makes it through early childhood could not possibly have a significant genetic disease fault in their "disease management".

Hahahha lets give classic example here: Thalassemia major (beta) life span without treatment average about 25 years, only treatment is blood transfusion and bone marrow transplants. The problem is 2 defective copies of hemoglobin beta gene (there are 4 copies total) explain to me how holistic medicine can cure this disease?

The control are people with similar symptoms or the same disease. We try to cure the disease in the experimental group with our treatment that we are testing.

CONTROL? That is still the devil of a problem. We are all genetically different, with the possibility of 1000's of subtle differences and weaknesses in our "disease management".

In homeopathy, the "patient" is treated, not the "disease agent" which may or may not be responsible for the symptom presentation in the patient. The DISEASE does not exist in homeopathy unless you mean the fault in the patient's disease management.

Dr Hahnemann once said, "There are no diseases, but sick people."

You said "similar symptoms", but in homeopathy, symptoms include every single kind of effect or manifestation of the illness..can run into 1000's for each patient, carefully gathered by the doctor before being matched to the most appropriate of nearly 3,000 tested Homeopathic medicines.

The medicine manipulates the fault in the patient's disease management such that it is able to use its many resources to overcome the disease (and it does have resources to eradicate ALL disease).

and that the probelm with homopathy many disease are in fact cause by a agent and it true the everyone is didfrent o ne indivdial level that way some treatment work on only some of the people. again i aks how does homopathy cure disease please give examples

see you tonight bye

Mr Fetus,

Re. Thalassemia major and other extremely rare genetic conditions that don't get you as a fetus or as a baby.

These are to be excluded from the ALL list. There are 100's of chronic conditions affecting many millions of people that Homeopathy CAN cure.

With Thal. major, Homeopathy could certainly help the patient by pushing the homeostatic processes as far as is possible. The long-term prospects with this treatment are unknown for these unfortunate people.

We should be focusing on the masses who CAN BE helped, where conventional medicine has failed.

so homeopathy is limited then? also what is the success rate of homeopathy, especial compared to allopathic medicine.

Mr Fetus,

Disease Management

(Instead of the Immune System, the term "Disease Management" (DM) will be used in this discussion because there is believed to be a centre in the Brain which works together with the immune system to manage diseases).

The Healthy person's DM has the resources to heal virtually all disease conditions, and do so even before symptoms present, with the person being completely unaware of the disease. In very rare circumstances, e.g., plague, the Healthy DM may become overwhelmed and symptoms present, temporarily. In this case, one remedy would likely be the the best choice for all those suffering, at least initially. (If complications occur in some of the patients, this is an indication of some weakness in DM.)

For the vast majority of diseases, which would normally be easily conquered by the Healthy DM, the disease agent itself is very rarely the problem to be addressed, but only highlights the kind of weakness in the patient's DM. That is why the Homeopath "treats the patient, not the disease agent", i.e., he is targeting the fault in DM rather than the disease agent itself. So, the "disease" IS the fault in the patient's DM, not the "disease agent".

When Hahnemann cured acute disease conditions, (i.e., where DM was overwhelmed or in a weakened state), he noted that there was often some other underlying weakness in the DM of certain patients. When such patients become infected with disease agents, due to an inherited condition, the disease is not properly managed and remains unresolved in the patient. Over the years, this inherited weakness causes the accumulation of unresolved diseases in the patient, who becomes a "chronic disease" patient. His condition usually declines over a period of years until death, unless he can be treated effectively.

The chronic disease patient shows a symptom pattern which reveals the nature of the most prominent of these diseases, which the doctor then treats Homeopathically. When this disease resolves through the disappearance of many of its symptoms, the doctor re-evaluates the totality of symptoms, and chooses the most appropriate medicine for these symptoms. This process of re-evaluation is repeated until the patient has fully recovered.

The treatment is like a "backing out", or reversal, of the accumulated diseases, one by one.

Because the choice of medicine depends on "totality of symptoms", which guide the doctor to the choice of medicine, it is as though the Brain Centre which produces the symptoms, can only process one disease at a time, starting with the most serious. When this disease is cured, the next most serious disease presents itself through its symptom pattern. So, although there may be several diseases in the body, the Brain Centre only reveals the most serious one at any one time.

The well-chosen Homeopathic medicine is guiding, or pushing, the body's own healing processes in the right way, compensating for the fault in the patient's DM. The result is COMPLETE healing, because the body already has the resources to resolve virtually all disease.

Normally, with Homeopathic medicines, it is not possible to hurry healing processes, but only to guide them to completion. But, Hahnemann found a way to accelerate the cure of many chronic diseases, so long as some skin symptom(s) remains visible (which is often the case in the chronic diseases he treated). He would simply give many more doses, and at more frequent intervals, of the well-chosen medicine and continue with these as long as the skin symptom(s) persists. This dramatically shortened the recovery time.
So, the chronic diseases are not the result of an infective agent but are a weakness of genetic origin. In a healthy person, DM has no problems in maintaining homeostasis, promptly extinguishing any disease - a system which evolved into its almost perfect state over many millions of years.

However, being perfect is not the rule of genetics - continuous genetic variation of individuals is essential for the species to adapt to environmental stresses, and many individuals are sacrificed for that overall goal. In all our cells are 40,000 genes, each having between 2 and 200 operational versions. The combination of genes we are dealt make us unique. The DNA of these genes is translated into proteins which make and manage the 4 trillion cells of our bodies and define who we are.

The variation of genes at each generation makes us all different in constitution; we are all genetic experiments to test our suitability to the world as it is today. This is measured by whether or not we pass our genes on to the next generation. People have chronic diseases of genetic origin because their "total genetic variations" have proceeded to a level at which some metabolic or physical process of the body, such as DM, is not fully functional, AND which cannot be fully compensated for by Homeostatic mechanisms. Such weaknesses or faults in DM are exposed by specific infectious agents, causing chronic diseases.

To heal diseases such as cancer or AIDS, spending billions researching the pathology is a complete waste of time and money. The body ALREADY has the resources to resolve virtually all disease - the fact that these diseases arose at all is a reflection of some weakness in the body's disease management...if the diseases do not resolve when the patient's lifestyle is improved and all exciting factors removed, then the problem must be of genetic origin, in DM, and can be compensated for. It may be a genetic defect in a single transmitter used by Disease Management, making it less efficient. If it were anything more serious than this, then the patient would not have survived beyond early childhood.

Homeopathic medicines compensate for this particular weakness in DM, making it fully functional again, and able to use all its resources to eliminate virtually all diseases. Correct management involves a cascade of activities in the body's control systems, according to instinctual memory instructions. NO Cancer drug will ever be effective unless it acts at the top of this hierarchy of healing processes, because otherwise it will be acting against these processes.

Mr Fetus,

so homeopathy is limited then? also what is the success rate of homeopathy, especial compared to allopathic medicine.



Hahnemann very rarely failed with any disease. If they were hours away from death he would likely fail. Success rate has never been considered because conventional medicine does not recognise Homeopathy...it is not a contender worthy of comparison. About 90 years ago, especially in the USA, Homeopathy became the victim of a witchhunt.

Virtually all the Homeopathy hospitals were shut down. 30 years before that, Homeopathy stood above conventional medicine.

That's history. The problem today is that there are now the means to properly establish Homeopathy's mechanism and then use it to help millions (10's of millions in the USA) with many common "incurable" chronic conditions such as MS, Fibromyalgia, CFS, IBS and many many more which Homeopathy knocks on the head.

It won't happen until there is a revolution. The dominant medical system and all its supporters will always prefer to maintain the current arrangement of suppressing Homeopathy...there is too much at stake. Homeopathic medicine are dirt cheap. Hahnemann always gave them freely to his patients...got himself run out of town twice...had to resettle his family in other cities...two of his children were murdered. He was putting the pharmacies out of business.

Mr Fetus,

and that the probelm with homopathy many disease are in fact cause by a agent and it true the everyone is didfrent o ne indivdial level that way some treatment work on only some of the people. again i aks how does homopathy cure disease please give examples

Yes, there IS a disease agent involved but the point is, what agent? All we have to go on are a collection of symptoms the patient has (unless we have deliberately infected him).

But, the body should have resolved the disease agent without symptoms even appearing, as would happen with 99.9% of the population, who get infected with all kinds of things every single day and are unaware of it because they are resolved without presentation of symptoms, standard practice.

And if we were to try to address "a specific known disease", even then we have a problem because if several people have THAT DISEASE, and produce symptoms as a result of it (due to a fault in DM), it does not mean that they will all present the same symptom pattern (although this will usually be the case in epidemics).

Homeopathy treats the particular fault in each particular patient's DM, never a disease agent (which only highlighted the problem).

I most cases the agent can actually be extracted (such a viral, bacterial, Zoonotic, ect) and identified empirically. Many infectious disease of the such are not in anyway easily immune to, they can and do out match the human immune system in the majority of the human populations. Stopping what’s causing the illness and your treat the person. tell me how the homeopathy treat a bacterial infection?

The reason why the idea behind homeopathy is so unlikely is the dilution process- effectively it is one drop of effective agent in a solar system worth of water.
the impurities in the water would be a quadrillion times more concentrated than the introduced effective agent, so the effects of the impurities should be more noticable.
some of these impurities will be effective agents themselves
especially if the solution is made in a homeopathic clinic.
(don't tell me the vessels and the buildings are clean- have they been sluiced out with a solar system worth of water?)
this means any homeopathic preparation is just as likely to contain a different effective agent against any other illness
as it is the one you want.
well, that's no good as a treatment- it is obviously utter complete nonsense. (sorry)


__________________
SF worldbuilding at
http://www.orionsarm.com/main.html

MRC Hans—

Everything you say here is wrong, and they all stem from the five basic assumptions of medicine that allopathy has totally wrong and is part of why they cannot cure:

[QUOTE]Now, to find out if some treatment does that, we seem to need to test it. This test seems to be the same no matter if the treatment is homeopatic, snake oil, or a product of the modern medical industry:

1) Find patients with the disease in question.
2) Apply treatment.
3) Find out if the patients got better. [/ QUOTE]

There is, indeed, only one test of curative therapeutic effects, but you obviously don't yet know it and instead invoke the allopathic model despite the fact that it's pointless/useless, ridiculous, ignorant and based upon some of the erroneous assumptions that surrounds and pervades allopathic medicine.

That test is against the Law of Similars in provings (prufung = "test or trial").

Your test doesn't accomplish anything but feed the evil allopathic death machine with fuel in the form of an endless accumulation of information they don’t know what to do with, so why do it in that way and feed that monster of unnecessary suffering and death?

The five basic assumptions of medicine are about health, disease, therapeutics, the nature of existence and the nature of the universe.

You've adopted/accepted an allopathic model, based on errors in those five basic subjects of medicine, that doesn't work and yet you want to sustain it.

Would you care to explain that?

Assuming you posted because you want to know where you are wrong in order to be able to defend your views, I cannot tell your views of health, the nature of existence or the nature of the universe from what you said, but your views of disease and therapeutics makes them all allopathic, and those are somewhat easy to explain.

To refer to “the disease” means that you believe diseases can be named such that it has something to do with therapeutics, but that is wrong.

It's a common mistake too, for most people are allopathically conditioned to such constructs, which is readily apparent in their terminology and reactions to words (hence, word-association tests) because those constructs cannot be defended either logically or experientially and that leaves them having been adopted only via brainwashing, conditioning, indoctrination or by what is also called “education,” because they all refer to accepting information from external sources by certain similar techniques of thought manipulation rather than one arriving at conclusions based upon sound assumptions tested both logically and experientially.

Specifically, diseases as diagnostic categories do not actually exist in the world, for they are a statistical abstraction based solely upon the symptoms that large numbers of people have in common, called the common symptoms, but all actual patients also have the all-important uncommon symptoms that solely lead to an unambiguous remedy diagnosis or prescription.

Hence, nobody has ONLY those common symptoms, so those disease-diagnostic categories do, indeed, have nothing to do anything that actually exists.

Allopaths cannot determine a remedy diagnosis (“to thoroughly know” something) because they don’t understand the nature of therapeutics since they are, in turn, stuck on the notion of mechanisms of diseases and drugs at the level of cellular biology, which erroneous assumptions exist because Rationalist allopathy developed out of and relies upon the natural sciences that indicate reductionism and mechanism are basic features of causes and effects.

These things are true as regards pathology, but they do not have anything to do with therapeutics, for another set of natural laws governs that as the four Laws of Therapeutics with the Law of Similars in the center.

It is incredible to us how scientists en masse can ignore these other natural laws when it is supposed to be what they're searching for intrinsic of being scientists.

Again, this notion of causes and effects in the mechanism of cells presupposes that causes of disease have something to do with therapeutics, but nobody can tell you why that's so, and they forget that causes are irrelevant once diseases make themselves manifest as system-wide disorders even if they appear to be local, for such local disorders cannot arise unless there is a system-wide breakdown in homeostasis that allows for ever-lowering homeostasis until death finally supervenes.

Stipulated, causes of diseases are relevant unless they take the position of sustaining causes, in which case their removal doesn't mitigate other than irritant causes at that stage.

A simple example is bunions and calouses from poorly fitting or structured shoes and/or jobs that keep one on their feet all day long.

Removal of a proximate cause can prevent diseases, and removal of a sustaining cause can allow a homeopathic prescription -- i.e., a medicine homeopathic to the case, in this usage not referring to homeopathic medicines in the generic sense, which of course can be used in an allopathic way according to mere disease names – to act properly since sustaining causes of disease are also disease agents and influences, just as are also proximate causes of diseases.

In the simple case of poorly fitting shoes or being on one’s feet all day long, these things can eventuate into disease states affecting one generally as well as locally/particularly, for they can be debilitating to the point of making walking tiresome to the person, not just painful to their feet.

Other examples easily exist to demonstrate that the allopathic mania about causes are fruitless and always will be pointless searches since the attributed causes of diseases discovered by allopaths down through history have always later on ended up being mere effects.

Moreover, given a proper understanding of the nature of existence and the nature of the universe, any cause of disease in the physical world, unless it be a pathogen (ignoring immune-system immaturity, dysfunction and full compromise) or something that’s avoidable (like well-fitting shoes and work not requiring one to be on their feet all day long), will always be an effect of cause at the Ætheric level of existence.

In short, causes of diseases can precipitate from either direction.

This is where allopathic Minds dissociate, for the mere mention of the Ether for some reason gets your back hairs up, despite the fact that Newton had no trouble with higher planes of existence since he coined the term ”Ætherial Medium.”

Here we enter into the fact that physicists, while historically being total mechanists inanely opposed to higher planes of being due to it smacking of religion (showing how little scientists understand religion as a series of illegitimate doctrines of legitimate religious philosophies) have inadvertently proven the existence of the Æther over the last 20 years and given us over twenty synonyms of it and major manifestations of the Ætheric Plane of existence or 2nd nutational octave of existence.

I shall first name some of the synonyms: virtual particles, tachyons, deltrons, the vacuum energy of empty space, quintessence from string theory, Einstein’s cosmological constant and DeBroglie’s subquantic medium; now some major manifestations of it: Chiu’s neutrino flux, H.C. Dudley’s neutrino sea, blackbody radiation and cosmic microwave background radiation.

I don’t carry around a list of them but wish I did at time like this, for there are lots more.

But I think that suffices for this posting for at least a week.


Tim and I are here looking for help to resolve a major mystery in homeopathy.

Our drugs should not have effect but do, and we want to know if a scientific mechanism can be discovered from people with big brains either being familiar with findings that have been shelved about water chemistry or simply because they spot the explanation.

Homeopathic pharmacology produces subAvogadrean drugs.

We call them ultramolecular drugs, and I call them etheric medicines.

These things should not have effects but do.

Tim and I have two opposite approaches to this enigma.

His is in search of the mechanism, likely involving electromagnetism and water chemistry.

My part of it is more esoteric since the result is subAvogadrean medicines that requires an explanation after the mechanism has been established, for that explanation is just speculation till we know something has happened that can be proven.

Anybody know of any lost or shelved literature on water chemistry or electromagnetism that could explain why vigorous shaking of serial dilutions could make homeopathic potencies medicinal?

This is a very old mystery.

I hope somebody here has some ideas.

We will hang out a while and answer whatever questions you have about homeopathy while hoping somebody knows something important we are unaware of.

Thank you.

WellCookedFetus says:

Hahnemannian,

True we have nothing that stop virii we do have preventative measure such a vaccines, and ant-viral be we do have cures for many chronic or psychiatric diseases. Just because allopathic medicine is not perfect does not mean is not superior; please tell me how holistic medicine has cured the above at a high success rate.


First of all, vaccines as a preventative are a lie, and they actually produce diseases not only immediately but long term.

Anti-viral drugs are a farse; there's no such thing yet.

And, I repeat, there are also no allopathic cures for any chronic or psychiatric cases, and this is not kept quiet about either; they merely get away with naming hundreds or perhaps even thousands of chronic diseases as "incurable" without telling us that they all are.

Next, homeopathy is the only holistic therapy, it is NOT part of the so-called "alternative therapies," for those are all part of what is traditionally classed as Empiricist allopathy, while modern is traditionally part of Rationalist allopathy.

You will discern this from Article 52 of the ORGANON OF MEDICINE (http://homeopathyhome.com/reference/organon/organon.html), and then take that fact to Harris Coulter's DIVIDED LEGACY, Vol. III, and realize that our historian seems to have not read that passage, for he insists as part of his thesis for that work and others that homeopathy IS part of the "Empirical medical tradition."

Not true.

That said, Hahnemannian homeopaths are surrounded by low-potency pseudo-homeopaths in the approximate ratio of 1:10,000 and by high-potency pseudo-homeopaths in the approximate ratio of 1:100.

Hahnemannian homeopathy has cured all diseases in exactly the same way: via the Law of Similars.

It is a natural law, and it seems to be part of the fabric of space from Creation for this very purpose.

You will find how in the ORGANON OF MEDICINE.

Key in on Article 153.

----------

Then you said:

the problem is you first need to explain to us how homeopathy works and how successful it is. The burden of proof here is on Homeopathy not allopathic medicine.

But that's already been done, and nearly 200 years ago too, in the ORGANON OF MEDICINE.

The fact that allopaths have not examined it and tested it is more than well known.

The subsequent evidence is all of our clinical verification of the method.

If you want to give us some of that multi-billions of dollars every year wasted on allopathic research, we'll see if it can be established via experimental science.

But I point out that homeopathy is applied science, not experimental science, and it is the actual SCIENCE OF MEDICINE due to its 10 Laws of Medicine, so there are very easy ways to prove homeopathy, the first being high-potency self-provings to establish the verity of homeopathic pharmacology.

Why have none of the people who have supposedly tested homeopathy NEVER engaged in this sole test of homeopathy?

River-wind says:

"Unlike smallpox, monkeypox causes swollen lymph nodes. The incubation period for monkeypox is about 12 days..."

I'm willing to provisionally accept that, for the source of the notion was Walene James's quoting of somebody else I don't presently recall.

The issue of smallpox is problematic for anti-vaccination arguments, but the fact is that epidemics come and go, and Thomas McKeown established with graphs from mortality tables in THE ROLE OF MEDICINE that vaccines are NOT responsible for the disappearance of any disease and, in fact, cause rises in their incidence.

The long-term issues of vaccines are seen in homeotherapeutics, for the time-element of Hering's Law of Cure well establishes that many cases have their origins in vaccines.

Vaccines are 100% evil, and we will not budge on this no matter how we may occassionally mess up our arguments as I did by attempting to explain the disappearance of smallpox to changing the name.

I will look into your references, and I will expect them to be accurate, but the fact remains that epidemics come and go and vaccines have never been established to be responsible for their disappearance.

WellCookedFetus says:

The control are people with similar symptoms or the same disease.

There's no such thing; nobody has ever had or will ever have the same symptoms or the same disease.

That is an allopathic falacy.

Even the relatively fixed diseases called childhood diseases vary with time in their common symptoms, but every case is forever unique due to its uncommon symptoms and the unique manifestations of them.

They just look similar.

I understand that allopathic Minds cannot conceive of this, but it is true, and Hahnemann was the first person who noticed this.

You will find that repeated several times in THE LESSER WRITINGS OF SAMUEL HAHNEMANN.

WellCookedFetus says:

Homeopathy is based of the body healing all problems, how do they deal with genetic diseases? The bodies natural state in these cases may even be fatal.

I failed to address that in an above quoting, but I thankfully see Tim addressed it a bit.

Genetic diseases are a modern term.

They assume that something is inevitable, but that's wrong.

Something triggers them, and we find that this something is the same as with all diseases.

Some shock appears to underlie these collapses in health, whereby a restored but lowered homeostatis sets the stage for the onset of progressively more serious illness or illnesses.

But genetic diseases are still just predispositions, not sentences of inevitability.

We have cured all diseases so far.

They change the names of them and obscure the picture, but we have still cured them all.

Any mere glance at Kent's REPERTORY will give one a hit of this, for those medicines do not enter the repertory under symptom rubrics unless at least three cures establish its connection.

http://homeoint.org/books/kentrep/index.htm

WellCookedFetus asks:

Hahahha lets give classic example here: Thalassemia major (beta) life span without treatment average about 25 years, only treatment is blood transfusion and bone marrow transplants. The problem is 2 defective copies of hemoglobin beta gene (there are 4 copies total) explain to me how holistic medicine can cure this disease?

You have not presented any homeopathic indications, just a name of a disease with its basic common symptoms.

The answer to the question is that we treat all diseases in the exact same way, and that appears to be sufficient for all cases.

You are ignoring the fact that a set of natural laws underlies homeotherapeutics, and they are the Laws of Medicine.

This is not a small thing.

WellCookedFetus asks:

again i aks how does homopathy cure disease please give examples

Okay, I'll post two good examples because I have them transcribed to floppy discs.

----------------

The first one is of diabetes cured in the Way-Back Machine:

"Diabetes Mellitis

"John F. Miller, M.D.

"THE [Cincinnati] MEDICAL ADVANCE, 1886

"republished

"THE HOMEOPATHIC HERITAGE [Delhi], Dec. 1983, pp. 579-81




"May 9, 1877, W_______, aged 55 years. Involuntary urination, on stooping or walking. Acrid leucorrhoea. Sandy sediment in urine. Pain in sacrum. Psoriasis palmaris. Pruritus vulva. Acidity; Flatulence. Vertigo on going down. Neuralgic pain from right side of neck up over the right ear and right eye down right side of nose. Frequent micturition. Pressure at epigastrium. Eructations; empty, weak feeling at pit of stomach. Ringing, singing, roaring in ears. Snapping in head; head light, dizzy on looking up. Pruritus better by application of cold water. Head confused. Eczematous eruption on vulva and about anus. Stinging nodules under the skin about pedunda. The above symptoms were partially relieved by Sulphur, Lycopodium, Sepia, etc., during almost four years. The patient had complained of thirst more or less during most of the time.

"March, 1881: The thirst increased and became constant and intense. The pruritus, that had been relieved somewhat at times, became very distressing preventing sleep. The eruption extended to above the pubes, down the thighs, and around nates; a raw, easily bleeding, denuded, burning surface. Frequent and profuse urination. Head hollow. Constipation; stools, small balls. The quantity of urine passed was about four quarts in 24 hours. Specific gravity 1040. The usual test found sugar in large quantity.

"April 5: The patient received Tarantula CM, one dose.

"April 19: Snapping in head. Thirst, less constant. Itching less, but still distressing. S.L. [i.e., Sacrum lactis or sugar/placebo.]

"May 10: Constipation; stools, like bullets. Urine, three quarts. Specific gravity 1034. Itching worse. Tarantula CM, 5 doses, one every night.

"May 17: Itching and thirst better. Urine two and one-half qt. Specific gravity 1028. S.L.

"June 7: Two quarts urine. Specific gravity 1028. Head, light. Thirst. Tarentula CM, 5 doses, one every night.

"June 21: Head, light. Itching intolerable. S.G. 1025. Urine passed 1½ quarts. S.L.

"Aug. 30: S.G. 1030. Headache and snapping in head. Thirst. Tarentula 5 doses.

"Oct. 12: Sp.G. 1033. Headache and snapping in head. Thirst. Tarantula 5 doses.

"Dec. 11: Thirst comes on at 10 A.M. Tarantula CM, 5 doses.

"Jan. 9, 1882: Tarantula CM, 5 doses.

"Jan. 19: Involuntary urination. Head, hollow. Thirst at 10 A.M. Tarentula CM, in water, every three hours until six doses are taken.

"Jan. 24: Head confounded, light. Uring [Urine] 1½ quarts. S.G. 1022.

"March 13, 1883 [next year]: Urine 2 quarts. S.G. 1022. Dribbling of urine on walking. No itching or thirst. S.L.

"May 28: Itching. Tarantula CM, one dose.

"Nov. 30: Pain in upper left arm and shoulder. Abdomen distended. Pain in occiput on awaking. Head, light. Snapping in head. Lyco. CM, one dose.

"Jan. 10, 1884: Abdomen enlarged, ascites. An allopathic physician diagnosed ovarian tumor and urged an immediate operation. Faint epigastrium. Head, light. Brown urine. Empty eructations. Phos. CM, one dose.

"June 24: Better, generally. S.L.

"Sep. 11: Red sand. Light head. Phos MM, one dose.

"Oct. 4: Red sand. Head light. Abdomen does not increase. S.L.

"Oct. 20: Urine brown. Head, light. Empty eructations. Phos. MM/1.

"Nov. 11: Weak epigastrium; red sand; brown urine. Phos. MM/1.

"Dec. 8: All symptoms better for a time; now same. Phos. MM/1.

"Jan. 9, 1885: Not so much ascites; other symptoms same. Phos. MM/1.

"June 10: The abdomen still somewhat enlarged. Has had no symptoms of diabetes for 2 years. The S.G. and quantity of urine normal. The pruritus and eczema all gone.

"This lady has had the care of a sick husband for the last three years, who died of cancer of the face a few weeks ago. The last six months of his distressing disease, she was his devoted nurse, attending to his wants day and night. Still there has been no return of the disease."

--------------

The next one is a contemporary case from about 20 years ago:


Homoeopathy and Herniated Lumbar Disks

by K.-H. Gypser

CLASSICAL HOMOEOPATHY QUARTERLY

Vol. 4 (1991), No. 1

Karl F. Haug Verlag (Publishers)



Summary
Two cases of herniated intervertebral disk diagnosed by means of computer topography (CAT scan) demonstrate the value of homoeopathic treatment even for this type of pathology. Both patients received Kali iodatum and Sepia. Aside from describing the process of repertorization in search of the simile, the author alludes briefly to the problem of the repetition of remedies.

Keywords
Herniated disk – Kali iodatum – Sepia – repetition of remedy



The practitioner often encounters herniated lumbar disks under the guise of sciatic- nerve pathology. Regular therapy usually prescribes heat treatment initially,* bed rest on a hard surface (with traction if indicated) and analgesic drugs as well as mild tranquilizers. After improvement sets in, massage, whirlpool and exercises designed for the spine are applied. Frequent recurrences or cauda-equina syndrome are considered indications for surgery.
The following case histories shall demonstrate that, contrary to the regular approach based on the methodology of the natural sciences bent on dealing with the causal connections [which can help us prevent such cases but have nothing to do with therapeutics], homoeopathy offers alternative treatment possibilities through the careful attention it pays to the patient's immediate disease phenomena [i.e., his/her symptoms,] which alone determine the remedy selection.

Case 1

The 38-year-old female patient, I.T., has been suffering from right-sided sciatica for the past five months. Periods of tolerable pain alternate with times of considerable suffering. There has been no indication of noticeable improvement, and the patient came to consult on 4 August 1986 during an episode of renewed exacerbation.
Her condition had been carefully diagnosed by a number of allopathic colleagues. The following results from computer tomography were available: segment L5/S1 showed evidence of a medio-lateral protrusion to the right with slight-to-moderate caudal compression. The therapeutic recommendations ranged from injections of analgesic drugs to three weeks of bed rest with traction and eventual surgical intervention. The patient, however, rejected these well-intentioned recommendations. She still remembered very well the extraordinary relief obtained for a number of chronic complaints when she was under the care of a skilled homoeopathic physician. This doctor is practicing at a great distance from her current residence. Her condition not permitting her to travel very far, she was nevertheless willing to give homoeopathy another chance by consulting closer to home.

The following symptoms had originally appeared after she slipped on the ice and fell:
Pain, extending from the lumbo-sacral area (where it is relatively mild), across the right buttock down to the right hollow of the knee and the region of the right inguinal region.
The pain is particularly severe at night, awakening the patient and forcing her to rise and walk about to get some relief.
In addition, the symptoms are aggravated by sneezing, sitting and lying.

Repeated solicitations to get her to relate any further complaints that might have occurred at the beginning or that might be present during the current attack brought forth no other symptoms.
The selection of the simile thus had to be made entirely on the spontaneous report. In the absence of any striking symptoms that might have weighed more heavily and could have been considered as leading symptoms, Kent's Repertory was consulted to determine what remedies corresponded to the greatest number of revealed symptoms. This procedure is warranted by a remark by Hahnemann, who stated that the appropriate remedy is the one that "covers the greatest number of the complaints at hand.”1)

Repertorization
Pain, lower limbs, sciatica, right (K1067): carb s., chel., chin s., coloc., dios., lach., lyc., phyt., plan., sep., tell.
Sciatica, < [worse or aggravated at] night (K 1067): arg n., ars., bell., cham., coff., coloc., ferr., ferr-ar., gels., gnaph., hyper., indg., iris, kali bi., kali i., led., merc., mez., nux v. pall., phyt., plb., puls., thus t, sep., staph., syph., tell., verat., zinc.
Sciatica, < lying (K 1068): coloc., fort., gnaph., kali-i., meny., nat m., ruts, sep., tell., valer.
Sciatica < sitting (K 1068): am m., berb., bry., coloc., dios., ferr., indg., iris, kali bi., kali i., lach., lyc., lyss., meny., merc., ruta., sep., staph., valer.
Sciatica < sneezing (K 1068): sep., tell.
Sciatica > [better or ameliorated by or while] walking (K 1069): agar., am m., caps., coc c., ferr., indg., kali-bi., kall i., kali p., lyc., ph-ac., rhus t., ruta, sep., syph., valer.
The most frequently represented remedies are: Colocynthis (4x), Ferrum (4x), Kali iodatum (4x), Sepia (6x) and Tellurium (4x).

Materia-medica Comparison
The work that has been most helpful to me when doing materia-medica comparisons for patients with sciatica is Hering’s Guiding Symptoms (Chapters "Neck and back" and "Lower limbs") in which the concept of “sciatica” stemming from clinical experience is frequently mentioned.

Colocynthis
"Violent…pains, from sacrum along course of sciatic nerve, behind great trochanter of r. leg, down as far as knee, can neither lie, sit nor walk…Ischias." (GS IV, p. 382)
“Pain passing down outside of I. leg...paroxysms < at nigh....Sciatica." (ibid.)
"Continuous drawing pains in r., also in l. hip; lying, sitting, standing and walking are all painful; she can find no comfortable position, especially at night and in bed; walking difficult.…Ischias." (ibid., p. 380)

Ferrum
"Remitting pains; < in night...by continued motion and walking about, pain gradually becomes milder….Sciatica" (GS V., p. 285)
“...tearing pains with violent stitching from the hip joint down as far as to the tibia and sole of foot...during the day, the pain does not allow him to step on it, but walking ameliorates it. It is worst in the evening after lying down, he must get up and walk about in order to alleviate the pain..." (RA II, p. 134, No. 209)

Kalium iodatum
“Pain > by walking and flexing leg; < from standing, sitting or lying in bed. Sciatica." (GS VI, p. 436)
“Tearing in r. thigh and knee, awakens him at night, < lying on affected side or back. Sciatica." (ibid.)
“Awakened at night at eleven, extremely painful tearing in the right thigh down to the knee, subsiding after lying on the good side; however, lying on the painful side and on the back was intolerable." (HT III, p. 49, No. 243)
“...pains in r. thigh and leg; a darting from [the] point where sciatic nerve leaves pelvis...to...heel; motion at first painful, is after a moment more bearable... < at night, not able to remain in bed; pain in thigh, leg and knee joint, excruciating when lying down, eliciting screams..." (GS VI, p. 435 436)

Sepia
"Severe tearing pains in l. thigh; along course of sciatic nerve, pain extending to calf of leg and toes, pain 3 to 5 am...she cannot remain in bed, gets up and walks about room sobbing.…Sciatica." (GS IX, p. 336)
"Severe tearing from the hip joint to the foot, at night, hindering sleep." (EN VIII, p. 643, No. 1717)
"Pains in hips and thighs, extending to near the knees." (ibid., p. 644, No. 1731)
"While sitting, the posterior thigh muscles are very painful." (CK V., p. 221, No. 1254)

Tellurium
"Pain in sacrum passing into r. thigh.…Sciatica." (GS X, p. 271)
"Sciatica of r. side; < when lying on affected side." (ibid.)

Selection of Remedy
Even though Colocynthis has several similar symptoms, it lacks the amelioration while walking. Contrary to the patient's complaints, the Colocynthis symptoms are aggravated from walking, as can be seen in the above-mentioned texts, but also in the following: "Pains in the lower extremities increase until noon, so as to be frequently troublesome in walking" (EN III, p. 498, No. 894). "Severe pain in r. leg, compelling him to lie quietly in one place; slightest attempt at motion causes great pain..." (GS IV, p. 382). "The right thigh is painful only on walking" (CK III, p. 172, No. 212). On the basis of these findings, Colocynthis was excluded from the selection.
Ferrum was also excluded, because it has only the aggravation at night and on lying down – which does not necessarily mean "while lying" – and the amelioration from walking. Tellurium, for which no references except those for right-sided sciatica and the aggravation while lying could be found, was also eliminated from the group under consideration. The stipulation "< when lying on affected side" furthermore speaks against the prescription of Tellurium.
Without the knowledge that Sepia had alleviated the patient’s complaints on previous occasions, the choice would have fallen on Kali iodatum. However [not knowing this], I let myself be swayed and gave one pellet of Sepia (Schmidt-Nagel).

Course of Treatment
As the course of treatment shows, the pain at night was somewhat relieved but, in general, no marked amelioration could be noted. On the contrary: eight days later, the patient reported the sensation as if the affected parts were inflamed, and lying on the affected right side had now also become painful.
Since Kali iodatum also covers this latest, newly occurring symptom, Kali-i. M, one pellet (Schmidt Nagel) was now administered and the mistake thus corrected. From that day on, the patient improved continuously, and within a few days she was able to tend to her daily chores. In the past approximately 4½ years, she has not had any recurrence of her problems.

Remarks
It is interesting to note in this that case the remedy covering all the symptoms used for the repertorization (Sepia) turned out not to be the simile. Thus, to rely exclusively on a purely numerical correspondence and to circumvent the materia-medica comparison can easily lead to failure.
It was furthermore noted that entries in Kent’s Repertory are frequently missing in our standard works such as Allen's Encyclopedia and Hering’s Guiding Symptoms. This naturally raises the question as to whether the above-mentioned sources are incomplete in this respect, or whether Kent’s Repertory contains mistakes made by him or one of the numerous precursors whose publications he incorporated in his work. It illustrates once more how important it is for the practitioner to consult a reliable materia medica, one that is based on the primary sources.

Case 2

The 32-year-old male patient, J.S., initially consulted in June 1988. He was suffering from a recurrence of the sciatica first experienced in 1982. The diagnosis of protrusion of disks L4/5 [is that accurate?] and L5/S1 with medio-lateral herniation had been established by a number of colleagues in private practice, as well as by CAT scan carried out by the orthopedic department in one of our university hospitals. Anti inflammatory and analgesic drugs had been prescribed and fango [mud packs and baths], massage and therapeutic exercise were applied, all to no avail. The complaints got continuously worse and surgical intervention was being contemplated. Having repeatedly heard unfavorable reports about such operations, the patient wished to avoid these drastic measures.

He presented the following symptoms:

Boring pains in the lumbo-sacral region, extending through the right leg into the heel;
< stooping;
< coughing;
< sneezing;
< in the morning after rising, > 1 1½ hours later;
< pressing at stool;
the modalities are especially pronounced here;
< sitting;
< lying, especially at night;
< walking [actually, that’s > walking; the published case report has a typographical error here shown by the repertorization saying so and instead listing the medicines found at > walking or better/amelioriated by walking rather than < walking, so we have corrected it as well as that mistaken page number there to 1066 rather than 1069];
awakens at night with stitching pain in lumbar region when turning in bed;
night sweats about neck and chest since the beginning of this recurrence.
Aside from an allergy to the sun and inflammation of the eyes in the spring, the patient appeared to have no further symptoms.

Repertorization
The repertorization was based on the clear modalities that characterized the situation and not on [rather than on] the "explainable" [or common, expected] aggravations from stooping, coughing, sneezing and pressing at stool that frequently accompany herniated-disk pathologies.
Sciatica > walking (K 1069, actually K 1066): agar., am m., coc c., ferr., indg., kali-bi., kali-i., kali p., lyc., ph-ac., rhus t., ruta, sep., syph., valer.
Sciatica < sitting (K 1068): Am-m. ferr., indg., kali bi., kali i., lyc., ruta., sep., valer., etc.
Sciatica < lying (K 1068): Ferr., kali-i., ruta, sep., valer., etc.

Materia-medica Comparison
Ferrum
"Remitting pains; < in night...by continued motion and walking about, pain gradually becomes milder.…Sciatica." (GS V, p. 285)
“…tearing pains with violent stitching from the hip joint down as far as to the tibia and sole of foot…during the day, the pain does not allow him to step on it, but walking ameliorates it. It is worst in the evening after lying down, he must get up and walk about in order to alleviate the pain..." (RA II, p. 134, No. 209)

Kali iodatum
"At night violent pain in the small of the back so that she could not lie quietly anywhere." (HT III, p. 48, No. 213)
"Violent pain In reply to: the small of the back all night long, like bruised, so that she did not know in what position to lie." (ibid., No. 215)
"Continuous pain in the small of the back, almost like bruised, especially while sitting in a stooped position." (ibid., No. 214)
"Frequent sharp stitching in the small of the back while sitting." (ibid., No. 217)
"Awakened at night at eleven, extremely painful tearing in the right thigh down to the knee, subsiding by lying on the good side; however, lying on the painful side and on the back was intolerable." (ibid., p. 49, No. 243)
“…pains in r. thigh and leg; a darting from point where sciatic nerve leaves pelvis...to...heel; motion at first painful, is after a moment more bearable... < at night, not able to remain in bed; pain in thigh, leg and knee joint, excruciating when lying down, eliciting screams..." (GS VI, p. 435 436)
"Pain > walking… < from...sitting or lying in bed. Sciatica.” (ibid., p. 436)
"Tearing in r. thigh and knee, awakens him at night, < lying on affected side or back. Sciatica." (ibid., p. 436)

Ruta
"Severe pressure in small of back... < by moving about..." (GS IX, p. 144)
"Stitches in small of back when sitting, stooping..." (ibid.)
"Sciatica; pain... < sitting or lying down." (ibid., p. 145)
"A digging [pain or sensation]...in the lumbar region, just above the small of the back, while sitting...[and] on walking, it continues for some time, gradually disappearing; it returns while standing still and while sitting." (EN VIII, p. 438, No. 244)

Sepia
"Back pain only while sitting, even when sitting only briefly." (CK V, p. 216, No. 1117)
"On stooping, suddenly severe pain in back..." (ibid., No. 1122)
"While sitting, the muscles in back of the thigh are very painful." (ibid., p.221, No. 7254)
"In small of back pain…by > by walking." GS IX, p. 334)
"Stitches in back when coughing." (ibid.)
"Throbbing in small of back...sitting...on turning in bed...a pain catches her there as if something were going to break." (ibid., p. 335)
"Pains in small of back...cannot lie on l. side or upon back..." (ibid.)
"Severe tearing pains in l. thigh; along course of sciatic nerve, pain extending to calf of leg and toes, pain 3 to 5 a.m.... she cannot remain in bed, gets up and walks about room sobbing.…Sciatica." (GS IX, p. 336)
"At night, cold sweat on chest, back and thighs." (CK V, p. 238, No. 1645)

Valeriana
“Violent drawing, darting, jerking pains in limbs... < sitting; > from motion; strained feeling in lumbar region; lumbago." (GS X, p. 388)
"Sciatica of r. side..." (ibid., p. 389)
"Intense pain in the left lumbar region above the hip...worse when standing, and especially when sitting, than when walking." (EN X, p. 66, No. 253)

Remedy Selection
Although Ferrum has the aggravation at night and while lying – but it lists it as "after lying down" – and the amelioration from walking, no other similarities to the patient's symptoms are recorded that would speak for it.
Valeriana must also be eliminated, since other than the modalities > walking and < sitting, it has no symptoms corresponding to the patient's complaints.
Ruta, however, can be looked at more closely: in addition to the amelioration from walking about, the aggravation while sitting and lying (although the original states "lying down"), it includes the aggravation of the pain in the small of the back on stooping. However, these correspondences cannot compete with those of Kali iodatum and Sepia.
Kali iodatum and Sepia both have > walking, < lying, < sitting. In addition, Sepia is characterized by pains in the small of the back on coughing, on turning around in bed and by night sweats on the chest. Contrary to Ruta (and Sepia), Kali iodatum has sciatica on the right side, which appeared to me to be more important than the more trivial aggravation from stooping.
The choice thus had to fall either on Kali iodatum or Sepia. Although Sepia seemed to be clearly indicated, I nevertheless had some doubts, since the Sepia back pains from coughing certainly are not unusual in patients with herniated disks and since the nightly sweats on the chest had been recorded by the prover as cold sweats and had also occurred on the back and thighs.
[paragraph] Although it did not completely cover the picture, Kali iodatum M, one pellet (Schmidt Nagel) was administered. If this prescription can be excused at all, it is because all the above factors had to be examined in great haste dictated by the lack of time on this particularly busy day in my practice.

Course of Treatment
The patient felt considerable relief in the days following the administration of the remedy, especially at night while lying. There was no longer any pain on pressing at stool. When the symptoms recurred without any noticeable modification two weeks later, Kali iodatum XM, one pellet (Schmidt Nagel) was given, but it produced no positive results.
Five days later, the condition had returned to that observed at the beginning of treatment and now, Sepia LM, one pellet (Schmidt Nagel) was prescribed. On the following day, the patient had a dramatic aggravation – to the point where he wept from the pains. It was not possible to evaluate the situation clearly since, against my recommendations, he had performed some labor that required stooping. Was this a case of primary aggravation, or had the disk pathology been exacerbated by the recent overexertion of the back?
In order to not neglect [correction of or to precipitate] any possible further damage, the patient was admitted to the neurological unit of a hospital where he was given the same analgesic drug he had received before starting homoeopathic treatment and which at that time had brought him minimal relief. However, at present it produced not the slightest relief within the expected time of action. On the basis of the previously diagnosed findings and the urgency of the situation, surgical intervention was scheduled for the following day; but the patient was by then completely free of pain! Greatly astounded and not quite believing in the belated effect of their drugs that had formerly brought the patient little relief and none on the previous day, the physicians encouraged him to “provoke” his pain by the appropriate motions so that the operation could take place as scheduled. [Medical ethics were called into question there.] However, the pain refused to return and the patient left the hospital unscathed and returned to work. To this day, he has remained free of pain despite the sometimes vigorous strain put on his back, which the remodeling of his home requires.

Remarks
It could be argued that this cure following an initial, primary aggravation was not a "pure" effect of Sepia. But the fact that the analgesic drug had been administered previously without satisfactory results speaks against this argument. After all, why should this medication have had a more favorable result at a time when the situation was considerably worse than on the previous occasions, and why would it have had such a beneficial effect after such an unusual lapse of time and of such permanent duration? Furthermore, analgesic drugs are at best capable of alleviating pain for short periods of time, but they are not known to be able to bring about a curative effect.
Considered in the light of the dogmas that have been established according to some remarks by Kent, the repetition of Kali iodatum after "only" two weeks might be considered an incorrect procedure. However, this whole contention collapses once we realize that what Kent has said about the duration of the effects of individual, one glass,** high-potency remedies of his scale was not meant to establish any laws but was based merely on observations he had made in his practice. His findings are to be understood as suggestions that never excluded exceptions. Let us not forget that Kent was making these pronouncements in his capacity as teacher of students at the Postgraduate School of Homoeopathics in Philadelphia, [i.e.,] that these students were already physicians who had become interested in homoeopathy. Consequently, they were beginners who needed such oversimplifications. According to Hahnemann and Kent, repetition must be guided solely by the patient’s condition.

Epilogue
These two cases were singled out for several reasons. First, they demonstrate that it is well worth while to attempt homoeopathic treatment in cases where regular physicians often recommend surgery. In addition, both patients presented in many respects a similar symptomatology which, in the final analysis, nevertheless [nonetheless] required different remedies. Furthermore, Kali iodatum was prescribed in both cases, and this fact might serve as an incentive to study this rarely used remedy. It is also timely to stop exclusively reporting cures achieved without complications, for we all encounter those in our practice. Such reporting might give beginners the impression that healing should always proceed in a perfect manner.
Some might have liked to see radiological confirmation of how (and if) the individual herniated disks had changed, since this would be cogent "proof" of the effectiveness of homoeopathy. However, even the regular physicians do not "prove" with X rays any healings herniated disks attained by conservative measures, but they are content with the mere clinical evidence of absence of complaints. From the standpoint of ethics, physicians are furthermore obligated to spare the patient any diagnostic procedures that would constitute additional physical or financial burdens.




Note
1) RA II, p. 37 cf. ORG VI, § 147

Bibliography
Allen, T.F. The Encyclopedia of Pure Materia Medica. I X. Philadelphia 1875 79. [EN]
Hahnemann, S. Die Chronischen Krankheiten, Bd. III. 2. Aufl. Dusseldorf 1837 (11828). [CK]
Hahmemann, S. Reine Arzneimittellehre. Bd. II. Nachdr. Ulm 1955 (31833). [RA]
Hartlaub, C.G.C. u. C.F. Tricks Reine Arzneimit- tellehre. Bd. III. Leipzig 1831.[HT]
Hering, C. The Guiding Symptoms of Our Materia Medica. Vol. I X. Philadelphia 1879 91. [GS]
Kent, J. T. Repertory of the Homoeopathic Mate ria Medica. 2nd Ind. Repr. Calcutta 1973 (11897 99). [K]


Klaus Henning Gypser, M.D., Wassenacher Str. 23, 5471 Glees, Federal Republic of Germany

(Translated from the German by Hela Michot Dietrich, Ph.D., D.Hom., State University of New York at Binghamton, USA)




Editor’s Notes

*I changed this passage because it didn’t make sense to me. It said, “Regular therapy usually prescribes initial heat treatment” but now says “…prescribes heat treatment initially.” It would have had to be hyphenated as “initial-heat treatment,” but I have no idea what that means. I therefore suspect he meant to say how I’ve changed it. Am trying to get with Dr. Gypser to check this, but it is left as changed in the meantime for the above reasons.

**What he calls “individual, one-glass, high-potency remedies” must refer to potencies out of the same bottle. I recommend changing that to: “individual, same-lot, same-manufacturer, high-potency remedies.”

-----------

Amazing or what?

WellCookedFetus asks:

so homeopathy is limited then? also what is the success rate of homeopathy, especial compared to allopathic medicine.

We have not yet found there to be any incurable diseases.

Tim, wow:

Hahnemann always gave them freely to his patients...got himself run out of town twice...had to resettle his family in other cities...two of his children were murdered. He was putting the pharmacies out of business.

Hahnemann was run out of EVERY place he settled, even before he pronounced about homeopathy, because he denounced all power structures.

But you are right that the main power structure that attacked Hahnemann and homeopathy the most is the same one in power today, for they rule and make profit at the expense of human health: the allopathic pharmaceutical companies.

They again will not be permitted to murder people at will, and we can see already that this tide is inevitable; homeopathy will come to its proper station in time without being able to be stopped, for we can see everywhere that people are sick of allopathic medicine and of being sick and seeing their loved ones die in allopathic hands a ghastly agonal, horrendously horrible, premature iatrogenic death after years of iatrogenic suffering.

It's now inevitable.

WellCookedFetus says:

Stopping what’s causing the illness and your treat the person. tell me how the homeopathy treat a bacterial infection?

That's not true.

Attacking a pathogen is NOT treating the person; in fact, that's ridiculous.

That quasi-militaristic approach of allopathy will only create diseases!

And I want to point out that allopathic exponents always key in on infectious diseases, where a cogent disease agent is involved.

They want to interject that approach of attacking an invading organism into chronic diseases and psychiatric cases, but that's 100% impossible, for the organism is essentially attacking itself via dysfunction in chronic and psychiatric cases.

Moreover, that notion of killing the pathogen ignores the environment of the organism that permits a pathogen to flourish.

Healthy organisms function properly and handle pathogens automatically.

------------

All diseases are treated the same way: you discern the uncommon symptoms and match up the medicine with that symptom similarity.

When done properly, which is extremely difficult, that will isolate out one medicine as more similar than any other.

The other ones of close similarity are called the simile, with which cases can be zig zagged to cure, but the one most similar medicine or simillimum ("thing most similar") permits us to gain total command over diseases.

It is about that simple.

Are you ready to read the ORGANON yet?

eburacum45 says:

well, that's no good as a treatment- it is obviously utter complete nonsense. (sorry)

Your mere opinion is meaningless and not a scientific statement.

A priori assumptions (meaning those from general principles or assumptions to particular facts or conclusions) have always been used against homeopathy, but they are NOT facts.

Please look into it and keep your mere opinions out of it since we are dealing with difficult mysteries in need of resolving that extend far beyond such initial doubts from mere theoretical speculations, even though they are understandable.

The medicines are today just as valid for the same symptoms as when initially introduced into the homeopathic materia medica, so your assertion is wrong.

Please do a high-potency self-proving and then form an opinion.

We want some help.

Now when some people propose incorrect theories about relativity in the Physics & Math forum, it's relatively harmless, but when we talk about medicine and homeopathy, it becomes much more dangerous.

I remember a court case in Alberta a few years ago about a young boy who had cancer. His parents decided to rely on homeopathy but child services wanted to force him to have chemotherapy. The case went all the way to the supreme court where the parents finally won. They went to Mexico to undertake their homeopathy and the boy finally died of his cancer. His death might have been preventable if only his parents had been a bit more responsible and had listend to their doctors.

All I am saying is that homeopathic therapies are dangerous. If you don't treat you illnesses and instead rely on homeopathy or crystals or whatever, you can die. There are enougth tragic deaths in our world today, we don't need the stupid and preventable deaths too.

Originally posted by Hahnemannian



We have not yet found there to be any incurable diseases. Some documentation of that would be nice. You could document some pople being cured of AIDS and liver cancer by homeopathic treatment, just for starters. No anecdotes, please ;)

Hans

Hans,

May I butt in Albert. The patient with aids will be carefully assessed for his/her total symptom pattern, and the appropriate H. medicine will be chosen. This medicine directs the healing processes in the right way to resolve the disease.

There are reports of many people in Africa who do not get AIDS at all...therefore the body's disease management system does has the potential to deal with it.

Mr Fetus,

Stopping what’s causing the illness and your treat the person. tell me how the homeopathy treat a bacterial infection?


Over many millions of years, the body has developed strategies to deal with all diseases - it HAD to. And they are supposed to work EVERY TIME without symptoms.

Homeopathy does not directly treat a bacterial infection, but it directs "disease management" at the highest level (in the brain) to the appropriate strategy for this problem....DM is at fault or overwhelmed and needs some guidance.

So, homeopathy treats a bacterial infection by directing DM.

Hahnemannian,

I sorry but I have a life and don't have the time to read through all those post, if you could summarize it or wait a couple of more days for my reply.

timokay,

Over billions of years infectious disease have learned to counter the immune system, they had to, infecting organisms and spreading from one critter to another is there only means of survival. The human immune system is nowhere near invincible, it fights back almost all of the time at its best performance and no treatment is going it enhance that. Vaccines teach the immune system what an infectious disease looks like ahead of time so the immune system will destroy it immediately, Antibiotics and antiviral kill or slow the reproduction of the infectious agent giving the immune system a better chance of finishing it off, allopathic medicine does not ignore the body it is still the most critical element.

WCF, how dare you try to impose requirements such as empirical evidence and repeatability on the proponents of Homeopathy?

Free of the tyranny of facts and evidence, like all religious true believers, they will believe what they want.

If Homeopathy were effective, it would have been proven to be so by now. But then come the conspiracy theories, etc.

Fetus,

The human immune system is nowhere near invincible, it fights back almost all of the time at its best performance and no treatment is going it enhance that.

Why do these bugs keep hitting the same people all the time?

what the flu, malaria, hepititis, mesles, ect hit the same people over and over again? Maybe that is not lacks of medical values but do to bad habits and poor living conditions?

Fetus,

I mean when several people are exposed to a given disease agent, it is the same ones each time that get the bad symptoms.

what do you mean, When other people get the flu, I get the flu everyone seem to get infected, some people have immunity already to that strain some don't.

Originally posted by timokay
Hans,

May I butt in Albert. The patient with aids will be carefully assessed for his/her total symptom pattern, and the appropriate H. medicine will be chosen. This medicine directs the healing processes in the right way to resolve the disease.

There are reports of many people in Africa who do not get AIDS at all...therefore the body's disease management system does has the potential to deal with it. Oh? Then why are they not being treated by the thousands? This is CRAP. People die from AIDS.

Yes, there seem to be some people who are immune to HIV. How is this an argument for H. ? We know pretty well how the immune system functions.

Hans

Hans,

Oh? Then why are they not being treated by the thousands? This is CRAP. People die from AIDS.

Yes, there seem to be some people who are immune to HIV. How is this an argument for H. ? We know pretty well how the immune system functions.


For a start, millions of people dying from aids could have been saved if the drug companies didn't want to make a mint from the dying.

HOW COULD THEY BE IMMUNE TO HIV? By magic? Because they have something in their constitution to combat it. Their body defences can deal with it. That is exactly how Homeopathy works - by mobilising the body defences to a level at which these diseases can be overcome.

Why are they not being treated by the thousands? Because Homeopathy is a suppressed medical system. You cannot even find Hahnemann's books on the shelf of any library in Britain...you can order them from a Library store, but they won't leave them on the shelf for anyone to discover them by chance.

Homeopathy is NOT ACCEPTED by the dominant medical system. PERIOD. NO REASON GIVEN. If you read the Organon of Medicine by Hahnemann you will see why...but the fact remains that Homeopathy works VERY well.

Hans,

In Homeopathy, SYMPTOMS are the tools of the trade. Conventional Medicine does not accept the "provings", where all symptoms associated with each drug are written down.

So, Homeopathy cannot be accepted, even if it does cure virtually all disease.

Please read this:

http://www.homeoint.org/cazalet/nash/symptom.htm

Link Above:
http://www.homeoint.org/cazalet/nash/symptom.htm

Originally posted by timokay
Hans,

For a start, millions of people dying from aids could have been saved if the drug companies didn't want to make a mint from the dying.

Ye olde "evil capitalists don't want it" answer. There is some thruth in it since the medical industry is very profit oriented (like all industries), however, what would keep governments of countries like South Africa from using homeopathic remedies?

HOW COULD THEY BE IMMUNE TO HIV? By magic? Because they have something in their constitution to combat it. Their body defences can deal with it. That is exactly how Homeopathy works - by mobilising the body defences to a level at which these diseases can be overcome.

They became immune through their normal immunity system. The special thing about the HIV virus is that it is able to mutate so quickly that it overcomes most people's immune response system. Evidently, some have a system that is able to keep up. There is nothing wrong with the theory of a treatment that boosts the immune system, but you need to document that it works. And, this statement of yours seems to contradict Hahnemannian's claim that infectious agents are not the cause of disease.

Why are they not being treated by the thousands? Because Homeopathy is a suppressed medical system. You cannot even find Hahnemann's books on the shelf of any library in Britain...you can order them from a Library store, but they won't leave them on the shelf for anyone to discover them by chance.

This is nonsense. If there was a regimen with documented effect on a broad scale of diseases, it could not be suppressed. Actually, the medical industries would be crowding to get it. Just think of the earning potential!

Homeopathy is NOT ACCEPTED by the dominant medical system. PERIOD. NO REASON GIVEN. If you read the Organon of Medicine by Hahnemann you will see why...but the fact remains that Homeopathy works VERY well.

Homeopathy is not accepted by the medical profession because:

- The effect has not been documented

- The theory behind it does not make sense in the light of present knowledge of medicine and physics.

Please, please, point to DOCUMENTATION for your claim that homeopathy "works very well".

Hans

Hans,

... however, what would keep governments of countries like South Africa from using homeopathic remedies?


Homeopathy does not have worldwide acceptance...it is a suppressed medical system (though it was the FIRST successful medical system), beaten down by Medical Science for no good reason I can see. They give superficial reasons to please the general public. But what about all the sick people?


They became immune through their normal immunity system. The special thing about the HIV virus is that it is able to mutate so quickly that it overcomes most people's immune response system. Evidently, some have a system that is able to keep up. There is nothing wrong with the theory of a treatment that boosts the immune system, but you need to document that it works. And, this statement of yours seems to contradict Hahnemannian's claim that infectious agents are not the cause of disease.


Where is this claim, please?

"..but you need to document that it works."

There are 213 years of detailed documentation on Homeopathy.
This does not reside in the Scientific world, therefore it cannot be considered?

ME: You cannot even find Hahnemann's books on the shelf of any library in Britain...you can order them from a Library store, but they won't leave them on the shelf for anyone to discover them by chance.

YOU: This is nonsense. If there was a regimen with documented effect on a broad scale of diseases, it could not be suppressed. Actually, the medical industries would be crowding to get it. Just think of the earning potential!


Just the opposite. These medicines are dirt cheap to make. NOW! consider the earning potential, and therefore the "reverse" motivation.

There certainly IS ...a regimen with documented effect...FULL DOCUMENTATION going back 213 years.

Homeopathy is not accepted by the medical profession because:

- The effect has not been documented

- The theory behind it does not make sense in the light of present knowledge of medicine and physics.

Please, please, point to DOCUMENTATION for your claim that homeopathy "works very well".

I shall, but probably not as nearly as effectively as Albert, so I shall ask him to contribute.
Really, if you are interested, make the effort to read The Organon of Medicine by Hahnemann. I am writing a "Scientific-looking" version for people who might make the effort to understand this medical system. I have a degree in Physiology and Biochemistry, and made the effort myself.

Hans,

The three major works of Hahnemann are
1. Organon of Medicine, 2. Chronic Diseases, and 3.The Lesser Writings of Samuel Hahnemann. Here are the first two, though the translation of these online versions is not the best.

Refer to 6th Edition not 5th Edition. The Organon is divided into 291 numbered Articles (or Para's).

http://www.homeoint.org/books/hahorgan/

http://homeoint.org/books/hahchrdi/index.htm

Does that documentation compare to a control and placebo? The problem with homeopathy is that it claims (or those here claim) its cannot be tested allopathically, I it can not be tested logically then there is no proof that it works.

Fetus,

Good to see you out of your jar for a change.
Well, I'll be blowed! Shucks, I dunno...I'm getting lost with this stuff.

I have a Science degree, and I've studied Homeopathy in some detail for a Scientist. I can see no flaws whatsoever.

The big-wigs in power will not accept the "subjective" symptoms of Homeopathy. At the moment, I can only interpret Homeopathy as "to do with things beyond the Scientifically known immune system, at present".

The patients recover, remarkably so, but that is not enough for Science.

When Science's study of the immune system reaches the point of identifying unknown control substances the immune system uses to manage diseases, these should correlate in structure with the long-chained water-ethanol polymers of homeopathy, AND the specific symptom patterns associated with them.

I still think the Brain is the main component of this "unknown level" of immune system/disease control.

I am not yet at the point of translating this study into a formal Scientific double-blind placebo-controlled study. But, no Scientist has ever tested Hahnemannian Homeopathy - the only one I can vouch for, because that is as far as I have got.

No you don't understand what I’m getting at: show me evidence that it works, we don't need to know how or why just show us that it works. so far all you have provided is nothing. Just give us a case study of it working statically valid with control or placebo as well has 3rd party corroboration and we will have to believe no matter how crazy or scamy it sounds!

Originally posted by timokay
Hans,

Homeopathy does not have worldwide acceptance...it is a suppressed medical system (though it was the FIRST successful medical system), beaten down by Medical Science for no good reason I can see. They give superficial reasons to please the general public. But what about all the sick people?

Can't you see for yourself how naive that statement is? There are countries out there that depend on whitch doctors for part of their public health system. They would love a cheap super medicine. There are millions of medical practitioners all over the world who are dedicated to curing people and who dont give a d*mn about the establishment, don't you think some of them would blow the whistle?

Where is this claim, please?

Maybe I misunderstood him.

"..but you need to document that it works."

There are 213 years of detailed documentation on Homeopathy.
This does not reside in the Scientific world, therefore it cannot be considered?

And we all know the state of medical science 213 years ago :rolleyes: . Documentation means proof of efficiacy.

Just the opposite. These medicines are dirt cheap to make. NOW! consider the earning potential, and therefore the "reverse" motivation.

With very few exceptions, ALL medicines are dirt cheap to make. It is the research to secure efficiacy and to maintain product quality that costs. Belive me: The medical industry would make money on these products (if they worked).

There certainly IS ...a regimen with documented effect...FULL DOCUMENTATION going back 213 years.

Back with leaches and enemas, no doubt.
Honestly, present day medical establishment might be viewed as some closed clan, but just 100 years ago, there was no zillion dollar industry, no establishment. How come doctors and pharmacists back then, who composed and produced most drugs themselves, did not grasp this opportunity? How far are you willing to stretch your conspiracy theory??

I shall, but probably not as nearly as effectively as Albert, so I shall ask him to contribute.
Really, if you are interested, make the effort to read The Organon of Medicine by Hahnemann. I am writing a "Scientific-looking" version for people who might make the effort to understand this medical system. I have a degree in Physiology and Biochemistry, and made the effort myself.

"SCIENTIFIC-LOOKING"?????????? You just gave yourself away! There is no such thing as scientific-looking, except for frauds. Either it is scientific or it isn't, period.

If you have such degrees, I should not need to explain to you how a scientific study has to be designed.
[/B]

Hans

Originally posted by timokay
Hans,

The three major works of Hahnemann are
1. Organon of Medicine, 2. Chronic Diseases, and 3.The Lesser Writings of Samuel Hahnemann. Here are the first two, though the translation of these online versions is not the best.

Refer to 6th Edition not 5th Edition. The Organon is divided into 291 numbered Articles (or Para's).

http://www.homeoint.org/books/hahorgan/

http://homeoint.org/books/hahchrdi/index.htm No, sorry. I am not going to read through several books on your subject. And books written and published by proponents are not that interesting. Anything can be written in a book.

Where are the scientifically designed, peer-reviewed study reports?

Quite apart from the principle, I am wondering: The idea is to expose the patient to minute amounts of various substances, but the homeopathic dilution process actually dilutes the preparation to a point where there may not be a single atom of the active ingredient left in the sample. How is it supposed to have an effect, then?

Hans

Hans,

Please tell me which MRC you are a member of?
This issue is not something that can be sewn up in five minutes. It would help to know your field. By 213 years, I mean 213 years of accumulated evidence.

Fetus: Re. Scientific test evidence, I cannot give a simple answer at this stage because I am still working thru' large volumes of information. There's a big problem here.

Not only can it not work, but it cannot even work in the way that homeopathy proponents imagine;
the active ingredients are so diluted that there would not be a single molecule of the ingredient in an entire swimming pool of solution;
if there is one molecule of any other active ingredient that will surely have a much greater effect than the absent ingredient that has been removed by dilution.

Since these solutions are made in a homeopathic clinic, the solutions are very likely to contain one active ingredient or another as an impurity;
it may possibly be the one you are after, but the odds are against it.
Homeopathy seems to consist of treating people with randomly selected impurities in pure water- there is no other realistic way of looking at it.
I am sorry, but it is complete garbage.

eburacum45,

Imagine you are 40 years of age, but trapped in Kindergarten for the last 35 years, and the kids keep coming up to you and asking "What is the fourth letter of the alphabet?"..or the Fifth word, or sixth..sometimes seventh...how would you feel?

I am not a Homeopath, but beginning to know how they feel.

Everybody makes up their minds on Homeopathy with very slender knowledge indeed. I am not obliged to explain it to you or take part in the inevitable does/doesn't work debate.

If you ask me how the Homeopathic signal gets thru' I will provide some significant evidence, but I am under no obligation.

I KNOW Homeopathy is in every way as rigorous and rational as any Scientific discipline because I have studied it.
It is not up to the Homeopaths to prove it Scientifically.

There is a complicated problem here, but it will be solved soon.
There's a chalk and cheese difference between the two medical systems but that is only an obstacle to be overcome.

Originally posted by timokay
Hans,

Please tell me which MRC you are a member of?
This issue is not something that can be sewn up in five minutes. It would help to know your field. By 213 years, I mean 213 years of accumulated evidence.

Fetus: Re. Scientific test evidence, I cannot give a simple answer at this stage because I am still working thru' large volumes of information. There's a big problem here.

My MRC handle is an old combat flight simulator handle and not relevant for this. I use it because a lot of people know me by that handle.

If you do not mean 213 consecutive years, what DO you mean? 213 people for one year???

I agree there is a big problem here: Homepathy cannot be checked scientifically because it does not work. If it worked, it could be checked, simple as that.

Now for the techie question: How does a non-existent ingredient in water have an effect?

Hans

Funny chap, Hans. Not a Member of the Royal College of anything. Never mind.

I won't be explaining anything to you about Homeopathy because that is not why Albert and I are visiting this forum.

We're looking for people to contribute something to the resolution of the question.