Originally posted by PeakiteBelgian & French doctors (at least) have been prescibing homeopathic medicine for decades. Perhaps they don't fit into your definition of the Western World? You're rubbish.
And orthodox medicine is?
If a technique is proven to work, it will be used by mainstream practicioners within the western world. If it isn't, well there is a good reason for not using it then.
Originally posted by hopscotchA lot of natural healers were burned as witches back in the day because established religions couldn't have women performing "miracles" of healing.
Hypothetical: I convince a fool that eating sand is going to help his flu get better. He eats sand. His flu gets better. He now eats sand every day and he hasn't the flu in years.
Is it the sand or the fool that is fighting the illness?
Now, hopscotch, when you don't agree/don't understand something, what do you do with it? That's right, you burn it. What else burns? No, not other things you don't understand, wood! Now, wood floats in water, etc, etc.
Burn the homeopath!!!!!
D
Originally posted by RagnorakI tried homeopathic medicine, went on a strict eating plan recommended by a homeopath for months (hell). Didn't work for me at all.
Now, hopscotch, when you don't agree/don't understand something, what do you do with it? That's right, you burn it. What else burns? No, not other things you don't understand, wood! Now, wood floats in water, etc, etc.
Burn the homeopath!!!!!
D
I understand the concept behind homeopathy and I'm not calling for the heads of its practitioners. In some rare cases homeopathy may actually work, but always requires a certain amount of belief from the patient.
Read this quote from the url I pasted on pg 1:
Homeopaths refer to "the Law of Infinitesimals" and the "Law of Similars" as grounds for using minute substances and for believing that like heals like, but these are not natural laws of science. If they are laws at all, they are metaphysical laws, i.e., beliefs about the nature of reality that would be impossible to test by empirical means.
Originally posted by hopscotchAll healing requires a certain amount of belief from the patient.
In some rare cases homeopathy may actually work, but always requires a certain amount of belief from the patient.
I consult a doctor who is qualified in both fields and prescribes one or the other type of medicine according to the case at hand. He's an expensive berk I tell ya.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageHorsecrap! Haven't you ever heard of double blind tests? If you contract scurvy , I can strap you to a bed against your will, give you vitamin shots and you'll get better whether you believe it or not. If I give you a placebo, you won't. That's the kind of medicine I prefer. It's based in chemestry and testable science, not spirits and dead chickens.
All healing requires a certain amount of belief from the patient.
Originally posted by PeakiteIf they find something that works but can't explain it then they will not use it.
And orthodox medicine is?
If a technique is proven to work, it will be used by mainstream practicioners within the western world. If it isn't, well there is a good reason for not using it then.
Homeopathic Medicine is a placebo much like faith healing. It works on the mind not on the body but the mind is a powerful thing. It works because if people think they will get better they often do even if you only give them a sugar pill or some water to drink. If you tell them and they belive it will help then it shall.
Originally posted by Moldy CrowI don't think they would come back next time they had a problem. Overall I agree with you though about chemestry. The problem is when you get something that isn't as understood as scurvy also some medical problems have a mental cause and positive thinking will help. Some people have more faith in things that don't work then science(Idiots). If they think it will help there is a chance it will.
Horsecrap! Haven't you ever heard of double blind tests? If you contract scurvy , I can strap you to a bed against your will, give you vitamin shots and you'll get better whether you believe it or not. If I give you a placebo, you won't. That's the kind of medicine I prefer. It's based in chemestry and testable science, not spirits and dead chickens.
Originally posted by hopscotchThat's like saying that apples are bad because you once ate one and got sick. Traditional medicine very often doesn't work either (and if you are unlucky, not only will it not work, but it will also give you some nasty side effects). I could give you several examples just from my own life. That doesn't mean I won't use traditional medicine anymore. But there's still a lot of guesswork involved both in traditional and in alternative medicine.
I tried homeopathic medicine, went on a strict eating plan recommended by a homeopath for months (hell). Didn't work for me at all.
In Germany (I don't know the Norwegian system well enough to know if this is also the case here), many doctors with a traditional medical education do additional studies in alternative medicine. At the university where I studied music therapy, medicine students can specialize in traditional Chinese or anthroposophical medicine. I believe it widens their horizon, and it gives them alternatives in cases in which traditional Western medicine doesn't work. In alternative medicine, there's also more focus on the whole person, which I believe to be very important. If I had a choice, I would probably prefer a doctor who uses both traditional and alternative medicine to one who uses only one of them.
Originally posted by NordlysWell sure, it's good to study everything, just so you know what's out there and what your options are. I don't think anyone said that ALL alternative remedies are bad. On the other hand, I asked my doctor about homeopathic remedies and here's how he explained them...
That's like saying that apples are bad because you once ate one and got sick. Traditional medicine very often doesn't work either (and if you are unlucky, not only will it not work, but it will also give you some nasty side effects). I could give you several examples just from my own life. That doesn't mean I won't use traditional medicine anymore. But there ...[text shortened]... tor who uses both traditional and alternative medicine to one who uses only one of them.
The "law" of similars, on which homeopathic medicine is based, states that small amounts of something that would normally give you a certain reaction (e.g. nausea), can actually be used to cure you of that same condition. Kind of like the way ritalin (a stimulent) is used to treat hyperactive kids. Ok, I can see how this might work in certain cases. On the other hand, it doesn't work in ALL cases, so I'd hardly call it a a scientific law, the way the hippieopaths do.
So, they take this ingredient, carefully selected based on the "law" of similars, and put a tiny bit in a gigantic vat of water (or some other solution). This huge vat is then mixed up to incorporate the active ingredient. Then, they take a tiny drop of that and add it it another huge vat of water, mix it up and repeat the process several times. This is where the "law" of infinitesimals comes in. The hippieopaths believe that after dozens of dilutions, the resulting solution will still retain some of the "energy" (or spirit) of the first drop that was placed in the first vat of water.
That last, heavily diluted vat of water is divided up and packaged and sold to unsuspecting hippies in northern california. The problem is, the vast majority of this "medicine" contains NONE of the active ingredient--no chemical traces whatsoever. So, essentially, you're buying water. If, by some lucky chance, the batch you buy has some of the original active ingredient, it's present in such a small amount that it can hardly have any noticable effect on the body.
There you go. Now please tell me how any rational person can call this science? I call it a HUGE scam.
Originally posted by hopscotchI was told once by a doctor that there was nothing wrong with me, about an hour before I needed an emergency lifesaving operation.
I tried homeopathic medicine, went on a strict eating plan recommended by a homeopath for months (hell). Didn't work for me at all.
[/i]
There are pros and cons on each side, choose your path, maybe we'll wave to you from the other side of the river.
Originally posted by rbmorrisTry telling 1 and a quarter billion indians that homeopathy is rubbish.
There you go. Now please tell me how any rational person can call this science? I call it a HUGE scam.
I don't understand this attitude from some people. Your doctor is trained in a certain type of medicine. His type of medicine is trained to be sceptical of things that they don't understand: ie: its not "science", so its crap.
You base your opinion, a very strong one at that, on what 1 person trained to view the subject with disdain says to you?
To put it another way, a food engineer (ie: a person who chemically engineers synthetic flavours and food additives) is going to scoff at you if you tell them that their work causes kids to go crazy (hyper, attention deficit) and causes cancer. Even if presented with the evidence, they still won't believe it. Because they have been conditioned to believe that what they are doing is good. If you had just spent 30 years of your life working on something, would you easily accept that your work had been ultimately to the detriment of humanity?
And also, you seem to be assuming that we are at the pinnacle of scientific achievement at the moment, and that science is always right. Remember that people thinking like you also believed that they, as scientists were always right a hundred years ago. They were convinced that epileptics were mental patients. Were they right? Is your doctor?
BTW: I'm still sceptical about homeopathy, and in no way am I saying that it definately works. I just don't believe we should be so quick to write off traditional forms of medicine just because science tells us to. Remember, pharma companies commission experiments to backup what they want to say/achieve.
D
Originally posted by Will EverittI'm a spiritual healer and find this comment very outdated. Many of my patients come to me, and many get better, after having tried many other things. My question is this:
[b]
Homeopathic Medicine is a placebo much like faith healing./b]
If a patient has such strong faith in a system of healing so as to get better from it when all else has failed, why leave it until last? Why spend time and money on other approaches when this 'belief', that you say the patient needs, is so strongly held for my approach and not the others?
And I only ask a fee when the patient gets better, at their discretion.
Oh, and I'm vegan, so refuse to kill chickens under any circumstances.
Originally posted by hopscotchI'm not sure why a homeopath was advising you on nutrition? Sounds like he may have been a holistic healer.
I tried homeopathic medicine, went on a strict eating plan recommended by a homeopath for months (hell). Didn't work for me at all.
I understand the concept behind homeopathy and I'm not calling for the heads of its practitioners. In some rare cases homeopathy may actually work, but always requires a certain amount of belief from the patient.
Read th ...[text shortened]... liefs about the nature of reality that would be impossible to test by empirical means.[/i]
I don't know what you were trying to treat, but eating very well can never have an adverse effect on you, long term. I presume the pure science advocates amongst you will deride this as well, but there are ways of curing cancer through very strict diets. Multiple cases of this have been documented. Science laughs at the claims, but then what is science, but observing quantifiable cases? Of course, you're going to have to have a lot of mental believe to achieve it, but can't the same be said of chemo? If I started a round of treatment thinking that I had no chance, chances are the treatment wouldn't work.
By writing off homeopathy as not scientifically provable and therefore not true, then you are doing the exact same thing as christians who write off the theory of evolution. This comment is aimed more at rb that at you, hop.
D
Originally posted by Will EverittI believe the area of science that both you and Moldy are trying to talk about would be biology, and not chemistry.
I don't think they would come back next time they had a problem. Overall I agree with you though about chemestry. The problem is when you get something that isn't as understood as scurvy also some medical problems have a mental cause and positive thinking will help. Some people have more faith in things that don't work then science(Idiots). If they think it will help there is a chance it will.
BTW: if you're going to call people idiots, would you mind making sense when you do.
D
Originally posted by RagnorakThousands of such cases boasted by the macrobiotic approach to living. Worth doing, maybe not obsessively, but a step in the right direction for many people.
I presume the pure science advocates amongst you will deride this as well, but there are ways of curing cancer through very strict diets.