Homeopathy

October 22, 2005

Where in the world is your information documented? The web site you

referenced is just a story. There's not even a bibliography.

Irene de Villiers wrote:

> Physicists have already proved energy signatures exist, and homeopathy

> was proved to work a long time before you were born:-))

>

> More examples here:

> http://www.whale.to/v/winston.html

>

> Celeste wrote:

> > That's only if you believe that the " energy signature " exists. It has

> > never been recorded nor measured. Nor has homeopathy ever been proven

> > to work.

October 22, 2005

I've seen more than a handful of practicing homeopaths in Ohio,

California, and Hawaii over more than a few decades. I give most

things more chances than they probably deserve. If there are that many

malpracticing homeopaths then what's the point?

Where's the documented proof that homeopathy works? I'm not going to

just take your word for it.

Cordially,

Celeste

Irene de Villiers wrote:

> I sure hope you were not led astray by someone who thought they knew

> homeopathy but did not. Because it really does work, and it would be a

> pity if you were misled.

> To have homeopathy work, all that is needed is to properly repertorize

> the case, so as to very closely match the remedy to the client. If the

> remedy is not matched well (because the homeopath's training did not

> enable them to do so) then it will indeed not work.

>

> That like the fault of a bad doctor or a bad accountant - is the fault

> of the bad practitioner - and not the fault of homeopathy.

>

> Celeste wrote:

> > Homeopathy had never worked on me . . . not even a little bit. I tried

> > it several times over a period of many years

January 29, 2006

Electro Essence is not homeopathic, but is a " flower essence " similar

to the Bach Flower Remedies. I didn't want anyone to be turned off from

trying it if they were skeptical about homeopathy.

Lankes

- In , " johnlankes " <johnlankes@y...> wrote:

>

> I found a homeopathic product called Electro Essence that is supposed

> to neutralize the stress effects of EMF exposure. I've tried

something

> like this before, with no noticeable benefits. I don't think it was

> the same formulation though. Can be ordered in the U.S. for $11 a

> bottle plus shipping from Earth Spirits, phone no. 1-866-ESHERBS.

> Website is http://earthspirits-herbals.com

>

February 22, 2006

Hi Rhona,

i know someone (I'm sure she wouldn't mind me passing you her details

off list if you want) who has used homeopathy for several years for her

son (vaccine damaged) with very good results. We tried it for our son

some years ago and did the vaccine de-tox and then a bit of

constitutional homeopathy. It definitely had an effect on him (

especially the de-tox) but it seemed to send him backwards as well as

forwards too. I think I would give it a go again if I found the right

practitioner I trusted and knew a lot about autism. But has some

things (eg:- parasites) that i don't think homeopathy can't get rid of

(maybe I'm wrong!) and it didn't help his yeast so our money is with

biomed!

robert

>

> Hello all

> Does anyone have any experience of use of homeopathy, particularly

> vaccine reversal of DTP or mercury damage?

> Rhona

>

February 23, 2006

> >

> > Hello all

> > Does anyone have any experience of use of homeopathy,

particularly

> > vaccine reversal of DTP or mercury damage?

> > Rhona

> >

>

February 23, 2006

I was told by a homoepath that it's not good pracitice to use the nosodes (vaccine dilutions) as afirst line of treatment for vaccine damage.

Margaret

(H has stopped crying)

Re: homeopathy

> >> > Hello all> > Does anyone have any experience of use of homeopathy, particularly > > vaccine reversal of DTP or mercury damage? > > Rhona> >>__________ NOD32 1.1392 (20060202) Information __________This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com

July 19, 2006

Notan,

Thank you for the link to the Wikipedia article on Homeopathy. One could also spend the better part of the day reading all the references (88) at the end of the article. Whether one agrees or doesn't, with the points "conventional medicine" makes about Homeopathy, its very good reading.

In a message dated 7/20/2006 12:13:36 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, notan_ostrich@... writes:

Some of you may be wondering what Homeopathy is and how it is supposed to work. Here is a link to probably more information about Homeopathy than you ever wanted to know.From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Homeopathyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomeopathyThe part I find most fascinating is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy#The_Minimum_Dosenotan

July 20, 2006

What I find very interesting here though, is that we all know that Notan is very well-learned about this condition. Also that he is open-minded and ready to listen to any theories about homeopathy, etc. But it is alsoa fact that Notan recently had a myotomy. Tells you something important, don't you think? I hope that Notan will respond to this comment. cynmark24@... wrote: Notan, Thank you for the link to the Wikipedia article on Homeopathy. One could also spend the better part of the day reading all the references (88) at the end of the article. Whether one agrees or doesn't, with the points "conventional medicine" makes about Homeopathy, its very good reading. In a message dated 7/20/2006 12:13:36 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, notan_ostrich@... writes: Some of you may be wondering what Homeopathy is and how it is supposed to work. Here is a link to probably more information about Homeopathy than you ever wanted to know.From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Homeopathyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomeopathyThe part I find most fascinating is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy#The_Minimum_Dosenotan

The all-new goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.

July 21, 2006

Ann Higgs wrote:

What I find very interesting here though, is that

we all know that Notan is very well-learned about this condition.

Strange thing, my hat just popped off my head while reading that, and

now it won't fit.

Also that he is open-minded and ready to listen to

any theories about homeopathy, etc.

One of my favorite books is Hofstadter's _Godel, Escher, Bach_. One of

the wisest things I ever heard was my college freshmen psychology

professor saying on the fist day of class that he hoped that in ten

years we would know that what he was going to teach us was incorrect. I

am sure what I don't know is more interesting than what I do know. I

doubt everything. I believe there are things that are not approachable

by science. Does that make me open minded, or so broad minded I'm flat

headed?

But it is

alsoa fact that Notan recently had a myotomy.

Tells you

something important, don't you think?

It was about six years after I was first told I should have the

surgery. In that time I had no official treatments. I had ups and

downs. Some times it seemed like it was gone. Then it would return. I

was in a good time when I decided to reconsider surgery and talk to a

surgeon. I doubted the good time was really good for me. By the time I

got around to it and had a surgeon to consult I was in a down turn and

didn't want to see how far down it was leading. Even though I doubt

everything, the statistics for surgery were too good to ignore. For

many of the important issues of life there are no right answers. In my

case I believed surgery was then the best answer even if there is no

"right" answer.

I hope some day there will be a right answer for achalasia. I don't

think we are there yet. Some of the answers we are given are better

than some of the others. I suggest to people that they do their

homework before choosing their answers. Some of the choices they make,

make me wonder if they have done their homework. Also, people that try

to make an answer the right answer make me wonder if they did their

homework. You need to study more than one opinion to have the work

done. This is true in so many areas of life, yet people polarize over

competing false right answers, trying to make their's the right one.

I hope that Notan will respond to

this comment.

Did you get the comment you hoped for?

notan

July 21, 2006

wrote:

Whether one agrees or

doesn't, with the points "conventional medicine" makes about

Homeopathy, its very good reading.

Thanks for providing the comment, . Now I know that at least one

person read it. I find that contrast between systems helps to

understand both systems.

I was in the mountains of CO last week. Now I am getting into all the

mail I missed. Sorry about your situation. I wish I had something more

useful to say. I am sure your choices will be well founded even if none

of us has much advice to offer.

notan

March 8, 2008

There is lots of info that comes through the group. But the Miranda Castro book

will give you a good start. Also, try this link to Sheri's website

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm .

Fieldman

Homeopathy

I'm curious about Homeopathy...I don't really know much about it, and

I'm considering taking Sherri's classes on it, but don't really have

the money for it. Are there any basic articles that I can read that

explain what they are, where they come from, etc? I bought the book

that Sherri uses in her class (I'm eager to finally get it in the

mail!), but would like to find something very basic to explain it to

me.

As a little background on me, I come from a totally traditional (in

terms of medical views in the U.S.) family, but married an amazing guy

that has opened many doors for me. We had a homebirth a few months

ago with our first little boy and have decided not to vaccinate him or

even get him a social security number. I do feel, however, that

choosing not to follow the medical establishment requires me to become

more educated in terms of natural medicine. I am currently studying

(on my own) aromatherapy and herbal medicine and would like to learn

more about homeopathy.

Thanks!

July 26, 2008

Sure, Theresa, "homeopathy is not something to dabble in," but this is not the main reason why homeopathy is "successfully maligned."Homeopathy was actually BANNED [yes!], thanks to Rockefeller [himself treated by homeopathy, like the Queen of England and a whole bunch of well-known people *still are*] around 1914 because it was too successful [about 20% of the US physicians were homeopaths].A good article about this at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/johnston1.htmlHomeopathy, Economics, and Governmentby ston, MD, DHt[excerpt]>>Many efforts were used to advance the allopaths by discrediting, restricting and abolishing the Homeopaths. Typical were the laws passed in the early 1800’s to prevent any practitioners of medicine other than the allopaths from being able to go to court to collect non-payment of fees. In every case, these and other similar laws were unenforceable and extremely unpopular with the citizenry. All were repealed within a few years.Undaunted, the allopathic doctors then turned to their own medical societies rather than the legislative process to carry out their desire for effective restriction of Homeopathy. Allopaths granted themselves the right to restrict society membership, which was tantamount to licensing powers. Fines were levied against anyone practicing medicine without such a society membership. They had successfully usurped the power to control who could practice. Eventually even these fines were also rescinded due to unpopularity with the citizens.Pennsylvania and New York were the first states to forbid membership in the society by medical doctors who practiced Homeopathy. State medical society membership and representation in the AMA required that these societies purge themselves of any member Homeopaths. After 1847, all state societies did this, except Massachusetts. In addition, professional exchange, consultation and even conversation between allopaths and Homeopaths were banned. This ban on interaction between the two groups is a striking example of how a private organization, the AMA, could completely flout the public will, and take punitive action for something that was totally legal.All this speaks of the restraint of trade. All professions have used laws, licensing, legislation, unions and guilds to protect their own economic interests. Not surprisingly, the suppression of Homeopathy, then and continuing to this very day, is seeped with the same motives.None of the efforts at abolishing Homeopathy, including state society expulsion, were particularly effective until the turn of this century. Then, it wasn’t legislation or licensing that was responsible for the decline of Homeopathy. The infusion of large amounts of money from Carnegie and Rockefeller to the cause of allopathic medicine was instrumental in tipping the scales in its favor. It is ironic that Rockefeller, a beneficiary of Homeopathic treatment himself, should fund its demise.<<=========On Jul 26, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Theresa wrote:Yes - I will add a note to the issue of using homeopath. Our family works with a very skilled (also classical) homeopath. I tried to repertorize and discern remedies myself for many years - especially when we lived far from a good homeopath. I never was able to select the best remedy - in spite of reading a lot and following a casetaking very carefully.Often the best remedy isn't one that is the first that might come to mind (or in a do-it-yourself homeopathy book), but rather one that fits the totality of symptoms and which is specific to a very notable symptom.So my personal opinion is that homeopathy is not something to dabble in. If you want it to work, you have to work with someone who has lots of experience repertorizing and prescribing and following up - and then it WORKS.In fact, I think one of the reasons homeopathy is successfully maligned by the allopathic industry is because many people try to treat themselves homeopathically and get no results because they don't end up with the right remedies - and the allopaths take advantage of this - assuming it is an accurate portrait of the system.Again - - again - - my 2 cents.Thanks,t

July 26, 2008

No - I agree - I never would have said the " main reason, " I said -

" one of the reasons - " unfortunately, allopathy can come up with lots

of reasons to malign any system which they cannot control and/or which

is espoused by people who they cannot control!

Take the AMA's response to the Ricki Lake Birth documentary - - a huge

backlash that even mainstreamers are laughing at - an attempt to

" outlaw home birth. "

Best -

t

On Jul 26, 2008, at 8:17 PM, Viviane Lerner wrote:

> Sure, Theresa, " homeopathy is not something to dabble in, " but this

> is not the main reason why homeopathy is " successfully maligned. "

>

> Homeopathy was actually BANNED [yes!], thanks to Rockefeller

> [himself treated by homeopathy, like the Queen of England and a

> whole bunch of well-known people *still are*] around 1914 because it

> was too successful [about 20% of the US physicians were homeopaths].

>

> A good article about this at http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/johnston1.html

> Homeopathy, Economics, and Government

>

> by ston, MD, DHt

>

> [excerpt]>>Many efforts were used to advance the allopaths by

> discrediting, restricting and abolishing the Homeopaths. Typical

> were the laws passed in the early 1800’s to prevent any

> practitioners of medicine other than the allopaths from being able

> to go to court to collect non-payment of fees. In every case, these

> and other similar laws were unenforceable and extremely unpopular

> with the citizenry. All were repealed within a few years.

>

> Undaunted, the allopathic doctors then turned to their own medical

> societies rather than the legislative process to carry out their

> desire for effective restriction of Homeopathy. Allopaths granted

> themselves the right to restrict society membership, which was

> tantamount to licensing powers. Fines were levied against anyone

> practicing medicine without such a society membership. They had

> successfully usurped the power to control who could practice.

> Eventually even these fines were also rescinded due to unpopularity

> with the citizens.

>

> Pennsylvania and New York were the first states to forbid membership

> in the society by medical doctors who practiced Homeopathy. State

> medical society membership and representation in the AMA required

> that these societies purge themselves of any member Homeopaths.

> After 1847, all state societies did this, except Massachusetts. In

> addition, professional exchange, consultation and even conversation

> between allopaths and Homeopaths were banned. This ban on

> interaction between the two groups is a striking example of how a

> private organization, the AMA, could completely flout the public

> will, and take punitive action for something that was totally legal.

>

> All this speaks of the restraint of trade. All professions have used

> laws, licensing, legislation, unions and guilds to protect their own

> economic interests. Not surprisingly, the suppression of Homeopathy,

> then and continuing to this very day, is seeped with the same motives.

>

> None of the efforts at abolishing Homeopathy, including state

> society expulsion, were particularly effective until the turn of

> this century. Then, it wasn’t legislation or licensing that was

> responsible for the decline of Homeopathy. The infusion of large

> amounts of money from Carnegie and Rockefeller to the cause of

> allopathic medicine was instrumental in tipping the scales in its

> favor. It is ironic that Rockefeller, a beneficiary of Homeopathic

> treatment himself, should fund its demise.<<

>

> =========

>> On Jul 26, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Theresa wrote:

>

>> Yes - I will add a note to the issue of using homeopath. Our family

>> works with a very skilled (also classical) homeopath. I tried to

>> repertorize and discern remedies myself for many years - especially

>> when we lived far from a good homeopath. I never was able to select

>> the best remedy - in spite of reading a lot and following a

>> casetaking

>> very carefully.

>>

>> Often the best remedy isn't one that is the first that might come to

>> mind (or in a do-it-yourself homeopathy book), but rather one that

>> fits the totality of symptoms and which is specific to a very notable

>> symptom.

>>

>> So my personal opinion is that homeopathy is not something to dabble

>> in. If you want it to work, you have to work with someone who has

>> lots of experience repertorizing and prescribing and following up -

>> and then it WORKS.

>>

>> In fact, I think one of the reasons homeopathy is successfully

>> maligned by the allopathic industry is because many people try to

>> treat themselves homeopathically and get no results because they

>> don't

>> end up with the right remedies - and the allopaths take advantage of

>> this - assuming it is an accurate portrait of the system.

>>

>> Again - - again - - my 2 cents.

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>> t

>>

>

July 26, 2008

True Viviane....and a book I recommend:

Dana Ullman

My new book, The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and

Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy (North Atlantic Books, 2007)

includes many amazing stories about the use of and/or advocacy for

homeopathic medicine from many of the most respected cultural heroes

of the past 200 years. Even I was surprised to uncover specific

stories from 11 American presidents, seven popes, JD Rockefeller,

Kettering, and innumerable literary greats, sports superstars,

corporate leaders and philanthropists, clergy and spiritual leaders,

women's rights leaders, monarchs from all over the world, and many of

the most esteemed physicians and scientists of our time.

One of the most amazing stories came from the life of Darwin.

Because so many of Darwin's personal letters have been maintained and

are now available online, there is a veritable treasure-trove of

information about his life, illnesses, and his medical treatment. What

will be described....

Can be found on: http://www.homeopathic.com/

It's getting a lot of attention.

Take care

Liz

>

> > Yes - I will add a note to the issue of using homeopath. Our family

> > works with a very skilled (also classical) homeopath. I tried to

> > repertorize and discern remedies myself for many years - especially

> > when we lived far from a good homeopath. I never was able to select

> > the best remedy - in spite of reading a lot and following a casetaking

> > very carefully.

> >

> > Often the best remedy isn't one that is the first that might come to

> > mind (or in a do-it-yourself homeopathy book), but rather one that

> > fits the totality of symptoms and which is specific to a very notable

> > symptom.

> >

> > So my personal opinion is that homeopathy is not something to dabble

> > in. If you want it to work, you have to work with someone who has

> > lots of experience repertorizing and prescribing and following up -

> > and then it WORKS.

> >

> > In fact, I think one of the reasons homeopathy is successfully

> > maligned by the allopathic industry is because many people try to

> > treat themselves homeopathically and get no results because they don't

> > end up with the right remedies - and the allopaths take advantage of

> > this - assuming it is an accurate portrait of the system.

> >

> > Again - - again - - my 2 cents.

> >

> > Thanks,

> >

> > t

> >

>

October 2, 2008

There is a book " Safe uses of Cortisol " by Jefferies ..

At least I think that's the title and author..been years since I read it.

For anyone interested, he made homeopathy make sense. Really.

From: Gordon Swobe <gts_2000@...>

Subject: Homeopathy

Longevity

Date: Wednesday, October 1, 2008, 6:42 PM

Homeopathy makes no scientific sense whatsoever, but I consider that somewhat

beside the point.

I don't believe in homeopathy, but neither do I disbelieve in it. Perhaps

homeopathy works. Perhaps our conventional models do not map well to reality. At

least I cannot rule out the possibility.

But where can one find credible evidence to support the homeopathy hypothesis?

The homeopaths must consider themselves unfortunate that they have never found a

way to prove to the world that homeopathy works. It seems they can do no better

than to publish questionable papers in special little journals edited by and for

their fellow homeopaths. I consider that dubious accomplishment analogous to

getting a paper about astrology published in a journal for astrologists, or to

getting a paper about UFOs published in a magazine for UFO believers.

A lot of people believe in homeopathy, but then a lot of people believe in

astrology and UFOs, too.

Lots of people believe lots of strange things for no good reason. Too bad.

-gts

February 6, 2011

Roni,

You wrote:

> I didn't realize that you were talking about actually removing ALL the

> molecules....

At the time when Hahnemann developed homeopathy, no one knew that

atoms existed, certainly not . His most commonly recommended

dilution, what he called 30C [(10^-2)^30], was in principle a 10^-60

concentration of the original toxin that seemed to cause similar

symptoms to the disease being treated. In his terminology, high dilution

actually potentiated the medical effects, rather than reducing them, so

he recommended repeated dilution and vigorous shaking, which he called

" succussion. " The logic in picking a toxin to dilute is really

sympathetic magic, since there is often no mechanical connection with

the disease whatsoever, only a similarity of symptoms.

On average, a 30C dilution would need to be given two billion times per

second to six billion people for four billion years to deliver a single

molecule. That makes even our national debt seem insignificant. I

understand that a modern homeopathic flu treatment called

Oscillococcinum uses a 200C dilution of duck liver [(10^-2)^200]. That

is one part in 10^400. At least you would be unlikely to catch H5N1

(bird flu) from that dilution.

A few modern homeopaths use dilutions less than 30C, but their

explanation is really a poor extrapolation of pathology or

misunderstanding of the immune system. Those sticking to the original

formulations explain the effects as due to a mysterious vital force

based on a spirit interpretation of disease. This is shamanism disguised

as pseudoscience.

Chuck

February 6, 2011

As I said, I was under the impression that there were some molecules left.

However, I also stated in another post that I was not a proponent of homeopathy,

and was amazed that a homeopathic sinus congestion otc preparation has seemed to

help. As a matter of fact, I didn't even realize it was homeopathic until there

was a discussion on this board about natural alternatives to decongestants and

antihistamines.

<>Roni

Immortality exists!

It's called knowledge!

Just because something isn't seen

doesn't mean it's not there<>