A reply to another ridiculous anti-Homeopathy article.... this time by Dominic Lawson

 Oh dear, if there is any consistency with the anti-homeopath brigade it is the demonstration that they have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to Homeopathy. By all means, criticise, condemn, reject, but at least do so from a basis of some knowledge and not propaganda, conjecture, fevered imaginings which just make you look foolish.

For one thing, Diana was hardly the 'sharpest knife in the block' and you would know that. She recommended a cranial osteopath and you took your child along without researching that particular methodology - which to most people who know something about both 'cranial' work and osteopathy would be a ridiculous choice for your daughter's condition - and then were disappointed. One presumes, having been 'forced' into it by your friend Diana, you did not ridicule her for her suggestion?

Not only can we surmise that you are not a great believer in 'alternative' or Traditional Medicine, you are a dedicated convert to Allopathy and therefore highly prejudiced against anything other than allopathy. Which makes your opinions highly subjective and bigoted.

And yes, you got one thing right, Hahnemann was horrified by the medical practices of the time which was no doubt impetus to him, as a qualified doctor and pharmacist, to pursue other ways to help and heal. But that is the only thing you get right.

You then go on to make the ludicrous claim regarding psora - a confection of your own prejudice and fantasy rather than any description remotely approximating what Hahnemann believed. But the real teachings are perhaps too complex for you to absorb and certainly too complex to detail here. Anyone who is interested can read quite easily a correct interpretation of both psora and miasms.

You then go on to make another ridiculous statement that he sought to find the substance which allegedly caused a particular type of disorder - nope. Completely wrong. Homeopathy does not treat disorders - it treats individuals. Remedies are chosen based on 'like' symptoms - symptoms by the way which range across the physiological, psychological, emotional, spiritual, circumstantial and physical.

You then go on to describe the process of making remedies in a way which yet again demonstrates ignorance. The goal was 'potentization' - a concept which Quantum Physics can relate too perhaps more readily than mainstream science, but a concept which is, for the moment, outside the materialistic/mechanistic paradigm of science/medicine. Hahnemann has however written quite extensively on how he came to develop the process of succussion or potentization if you wish to understand.

Homeopaths do not believe that the most effective remedy is one in which no longer a single molecule of the active ingredient remains because homeopathy is not a system like Allopathy which is sourced in the material. What you really mean to say is that science/medicine rejects Homeopathy because it cannot find any remaining molecules. That is different. Homeopaths do not think in terms of molecules.

As to water having a 'memory' there is increasing evidence even in some areas of science that water has the capacity to retain information and information is how Hahnemann himself would have described what happens, as opposed to memory. But of course, retained information is in essence, memory.

You then say that it is this 'memory' which cures the sufferer, again demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of Homeopathy and its methodology. The remedies do not cure; the body cures. The remedy triggers the body to re-balance, thereby healing and curing. Even Homeopaths have not reached agreement on the theories which exist as to how this might happen. But happen it does.

The sarcastic comment regarding 'memory' merely reveals prejudice and ignorance. Anyone, with any understanding of the process undergone to produce remedies would know that the reference to 'bladders' and the like is merely a bit of silliness sourced in egregious ignorance and arrogance.

And you keep doing it - the idea that you can destroy or triumph over something by absorbing its essence has nothing to do with Homeopathy. One could in fact find this attitude more often in the realms of science/medicine. Lots of battling, triumph, contests of will, enemies, destruction etc., going on there.

Your description of a Homeopathic Consultation is embarrassing because it demonstrates your complete ignorance. Not only do you know nothing about Homeopathy from research, clearly not done, you have never had a Homeopathic Consultation.

The consistency of the Homeopathic naysaysers is unbroken - ignorance about Homeopathy as a methodology; ignorance about the production and prescription of remedies; ignorance about homeopathic consultations - well, ignorance really, fullstop.

As to the Homeopath you found online - give her a miss. I would not do a telephone consultation with an Allopathic doctor, although in that system it probably would not make much difference and may be the way of the future, but a professional Homeopath would not consult in this way because to prescribe accurately the patient must be in front of you. There is so much which is observed at a physical level, as there is with Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the complexity of Homeopathy is so great, it is not possible to consult adequately over a phone or even online.

But you found someone who fitted your belief system as we tend to do. I doubt however that you would reject Allopathy just because there are charlatan medicos aplenty out there. Double standards.

Then again, you took your daughter to someone without adequate research so your research into Homeopathy is not likely to be comprehensive and Linda would have been good enough for your purposes.

As for the placebo - all medical treatments have placebo and nocebo effects. Research, the sort you like, has shown that patients who were told they were having knee surgery but did not, were healed and in better shape than those who had the actual surgery. Ditto for some heart procedures.

And yes, the mind is a powerful factor but given that Homeopathy is very effective with animals and babies and small children, it is pretty clear that it heals in the absence not only of belief, but of consciousness. Actually, many of those who become converts to Homeopathy have tried it out of desperation because Allopathy failed them, and often actively disbelieve in it but have nothing to lose and then find themselves healing or cured....nothing placebo about that.

There are some interesting questions in regard to the Homeopathy debate. Why are those opposed so inclined to mock and ridicule, as if that were an argument, and why are they singularly so ill-informed? Why are those opposed so 'angry' about it all when Homeopathy heals and does no harm for billions around the world and has done so for two centuries? And why is there particular rage and hatred in the UK in ways just not found in other nations?

Homeopathy is the fastest growing medical methodology in the world and in recent years has been taken up by Indian doctors, both Allopathic and Ayurvedic, and the Indian Government to levels unequalled since the 19th century when all Homeopaths were also Allopathic doctors. As they still are in France.

A medical treatment which heals and does no harm, particularly now that the third biggest killer is iatrogenic - doctor or medical induced - is cheap to produce and prescribe and remedies are enduring with Homeopathic Remedies 100 years old used and found effective, should be welcomed as Allopathic health costs rise to crushing levels.

And it is being embraced, except in the UK where a fanatical movement has arisen to 'set the world to rights.' All very odd and, at the end of the day, with little impact on Homeopathy around the world.

 One of the difficulties with Homeopathy is that it is incredibly complex as a methodology, both to learn and to practice and yet too often attempts are made to describe it in simplistic ways. No-one would presume to do this with Allopathy, or what we call modern medicine.

Much of the bad press which Homeopathy gets is because it is not regulated enough as a system and not understood well enough by many, including some Homeopaths.

Just as there is no comparison between the astrology column in the newspaper and professional astrologer, so there is no comparison between buying an over-the-counter remedy and self-prescribing as opposed to seeing a qualified professional Homeopath. To my mind, both the astrology column and the over-the-counter remedies are useless and do the profession no good service - not to mention the reader or purchaser.

It is not correct to say that Homeopathy is more successful with minor diseases or conditions. And this is not the premise upon which Homeopathy is founded anyway. The fact is that Homeopathy can cure any disease but, like Allopathy, it is not always successful. The difference is however that Homeopathy does no harm and Allopathy often does a great deal of harm. Iatrogenic, doctor or medical-induced is now the third biggest killer.

There are two areas where Allopathic or modern medicine excels - in crisis situations and reconstructive surgery. Beyond those two areas it is largely ineffective, maintaining more than curing, disease, dysfunction and chronic illness.

In the best of worlds all medical methodologies would work together and this is what is happening with the new field of Integrative Medicine - the way of the future. The strength of Homeopathy is in keeping people well by taking account of small symptoms and early signs of dis-ease and not suppressing the symptoms as Allopathy does, which drives the dis-ease deeper, and prescribing remedies which help the body to re-balance and in the doing, to heal.

But where there is a crisis, or a need for immediate and temporary intervention, Allopathy is the way to go. Ditto for reconstructive surgery. Many surgical procedures are interventionist and unnecessary and do more harm than good. However, Homeopathy can work well with surgical procedures to minimise any damage done and to aid the healing process.

Modern science is pretty much about drug or cut. Homeopathy can also work alongside prescribed drugs to trigger a healing process which can remove the need for the drug completely.

Vaccines are a potential minefield of medical disaster and Homeopathy offers non-harmful ways to protect the body or to repair damage done by vaccination.

Medical treatments do not need to be and should not be, either/or.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-can-you-tell-the-difference-between-homeopaths-and-witch-doctors-479741.html