From: David Lubkin (lubkin@unreasonable.com)
Date: Tue Aug 03 1999 - 22:09:12 MDT
VAA22611
Sender: owner-extropians@extropy.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: extropians@extropy.com
Since besides Technotranscendence (Daniel Ust)'s public posting, I
received several private messages expressing interest in
homeopathy, I will elaborate. I will cite scientific studies in another
posting. First, I want to explain some of the procedure. (There are
hundreds of textbooks, so I'm skipping a lot.)
Homeopaths have a well-developed theory of medicine. I think it is
similar to epicycles in astronomy or Newtonian physics -- the best
explanation at the time for observed results, ultimately to be
superceded when a better theory comes along. In what I write
below, I'm using their explanations, in their terminology. When I
have personal experience with something, I say so.
Homeopaths "prove" a substance by carefully documenting all effects
shown by giving a large dose to healthy subjects, including subjective
changes in mental or emotional state. A remedy is prepared by
mixing the substance with distilled water, and progressively diluting
it. This is called "potentizing". Between each dilution step, the mixture
must be vigorously shaken. If it is not, the remedy has no effect.
Counter-intuitively, the more times the remedy has been diluted, the
more potent it is.
In many people the remedy has no effect if it is taken within half an
hour of eating, if you touch it, X-ray it, or eat or drink something strong
(menthol, camphor, mint, coffee) while under homeopathic treatment.
In the homeopathic view of physiology, each of us has a fundamental
body type. On top of that, every time we have any trauma that doesn't
heal properly or an ailment is suppressed, another layer is built on.
And there are common pathways -- suppressed symptoms manifest
themselves later on as a predictable something more serious. Like
taking cortisone often leads to asthma later.
When you see a homeopath, he asks you dozens of questions. There is
not one remedy for headaches -- there are hundreds. And if you don't
take the right one, it won't work. So just going to a pharmacy and
getting something labelled "headache" won't work. The homeopath
is looking for a pattern of symptoms that closely resembles the
toxicological pattern identified during the proving of a remedy. You are
given a diluted version of something that causes the same symptoms.
In practice, when your head aches, you don't want to be sitting with a
Materia Medica and Repertory trying to find the right remedy. So I
use homeopathy for problems where I can stand waiting for the right
answer and I'm not satisfied with the allopathic alternative.
Now, not every pattern is hard to match. In some cases, there's an
obvious first choice. If you have a skin rash, Rhus Toxicodendron
(poison ivy) is worth a try.
There are about 1000 remedies in use, but a home kit of 50 (for $80)
covers most of what people commonly need. I will take 6 old favorites
on a trip.
With high-potency remedies, the patient may feel worse before getting
better, as previously suppressed symptoms are re-experienced and
healed. This difference between a low-potency and high-potency
remedy, which is commonly seen, should not occur under Lee Daniel
Crocker's theory of the world.
In my view, each of the schools of medicine that has some legitimacy
(like Chinese traditional medicine, acupuncture, allopathic medicine,
homeopathy, and chiropractic) has a part of the picture. I can't wait
we've built an integrated theory of biologic functioning that
encompasses each system's insights. It's happening slowly,
hampered especially by conventional medicine's perennial assumption
that they have all the answers and no one else does.
I see a naturopath sometimes. He has the equivalent of regular
medical school training, plus extra training in a dozen alternate
therapies. Mine specializes in homeopathy, nutrition, and herbal
medicine. (I also have a regular MD that I see as needed.)
What do I like? He asks me about all aspects of my physical, mental,
and emotional state. I am an active participant in my diagnosis and
treatment. He freely admits when he is stumped. He readily refers
me to another practitioner (MD, chiropractor, ...) when they are better
suited for my condition.
For example, he says pneumonia can be treated homeopathically but
it's very tricky. You have to take the right remedies at the right times.
He'd rather send you to a regular MD and then treat you afterwards
for the damage done to your intestinal flora by the broad-spectrum
antibiotics.
>For the record, I've tried a few of them myself. I found one for allergies
>seemed to work quite well (I think it was Naturapathic brand stuff) the
>_first_ time I used it, but proved ineffective later on. (Now, I stick to
>vitamin B5, which works just fine for me as long as I take a sufficiently
>high dose.)
The remedy stopped working because the pattern changed, and you
needed to switch to another remedy. (It may have changed because you
healed the outermost layer, and exposed the problem below it.)
I hope you are taking the B5 along with the rest of the B complex. You
can cause metabolic imbalances if you don't. I used to have bad
allergies myself. When I take 4+ grams of vitamin C daily, I don't sneeze
at all, no matter how high the pollen count is.
-- David Lubkin.
______________________________________________________________________________
lubkin@unreasonable.com || Unreasonable Software, Inc. || www.unreasonable.com
a trademark of USI:
> > > > > B e u n r e a s o n a b l e .
______________________________________________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:39 MST