#cases in homeopathy

[drsauravarora]

Enhancing Homeopathy Through Quality Case Reports: Insights from Dr. Saurav Arora's Webinar

Recently, Dr. Saurav Arora, an internationally acclaimed medical homeopath, conducted a webinar titled “The Art of Writing Scientific Cases in Homeopathy“. This enlightening session, available on this channel, delved into the critical need for high-quality, evidence-based case reports in homeopathy. (Link – https://youtu.be/399HlkzIGAo ) ##The Importance of Good Case Reports There is a…

[dedoholistic]

Asthmatic Bronchitis in an 18- Month-Old Child

Maria Teresa De Donato, Ph.D. - Traditional Naturopath, Homeopath, Author

[fidicuswomen]

Call : +917997101303 | Whatsapp : https://wa.me/917997101505 | Website : https://fidicus.com

Best Homeopathy Treatment For Uterine Fibroids Cure Medicine Surgery | Gynaecology Women Female

In this video, we explore the disadvantages of conventional treatments for uterine fibroids, such as surgery, hormone therapy, and their potential side effects. We then discuss the advantages of homeopathy in treating uterine fibroids, including a natural, non-invasive approach with minimal side effects. Homeopathy offers personalized care to help manage symptoms, promote healing, and improve overall well-being. Watch to discover how homeopathy can be an effective alternative!

Dr. Bharadwaz | Gynaecology Women Female | Health & Fitness | Homeopathy, Medicine & Surgery | Clinical Research

#UterineFibroids #HomeopathyTreatment #NaturalHealing #FibroidRelief #alternativemedicine

#DrBharadwaz #Helseform #Fidicus #Clingenious

#ClingeniousHealth #HelseformFitness #FidicusHomeopathy #ClingeniousResearch

#Women #Gynaecology #Female

#Treatment #Cure #Prevent #Relieve #Medicine

#AlternativeTherapy #AdjuvantTherapy #AlternativeMedicine #AlternativeSystem

Speciality Clinic Fidicus Women highest success with homeopathy No Sideeffect | Permanent Result | Personal Care

[shettyhomeopathy]

Homeopathy treats challenging cases. It treats the person as a whole and not as parts.It believes in individualisation. It removes diseases from its roots. It increases the vitality of the patient and treats challenging cases

[pocket-deer-boy]

it's just a massive scam- see, because it's fucking nothing, people selling homeopathic medicine will often claim that for it to start working you just have to keep taking it. You have to be patient. You haven't been patient enough yet, buy some more. Or that sometimes the symptoms get worse before they get better. Which means you have to keep buying the medicine of course! And by the time the patient realizes the medicine doesn't do anything, it might be too late to consider conventional treatments (and in the case of the US, they've already forked over probably hundreds of dollars to nothing treatments, which means they're even less able to afford conventional treatments over the relatively cheaper homeopathic ones.)

almost worse than someone putting a single snide comment in a salient post you otherwise agree with: a post with good medical advice you know to be true where it slowly becomes clear that op also practises homeopathy or something

[ms-demeanor]

I understand that vaccines are proven to work and are a great advancement in our medicine, and also that homeopathic remedies don't work, but don't they work on the same principal? Why does one work and the other doesnt?

They do not work on the same principle.

I can see how vaccines look like a "like treats like" situation, but in homeopathy "like treats like" is a kind of magical thinking.

Let's take an example from Chicken Pox, a virus for which there is an effective vaccine and for which there is a common homeopathic treatment.

Chicken pox infects people once, and it is extremely rare to get a second case because once you have had it, your body forms persistent antibodies against the varicella-zoster virus. When I was a kid, they didn't have a vaccine for this, so kids mostly got chicken pox once and it ran around whole schools and that was it. It's a virus that is fairly minor in children, though it can cause dangerously high fevers. Adults who get chicken pox typically get much sicker than children who get it, and it can lead to permanent harms like infertility in adults who get it. Because it can be so dangerous, we don't want people to risk getting it, so we vaccinate.

The way the vaccine works is that it takes a weakened form of the virus and introduces that into the body of a person with a healthy immune system. The immune system responds and the person who got the vaccine may get some minor symptoms, like a headache or a slight fever, but it will be nowhere near as severe as getting actual chicken pox would be. Because the immune system was exposed to the virus and responded, it now has antibodies against the virus that recognize the virus and respond immediately before it can start replicating in the body. If a person who has either previously had chicken pox or who has been vaccinated against it is exposed to the chicken pox virus, their body uses those antibodies to react to the virus and protect against a systemic infection.

Are you familiar with Star Trek? It's kind of like the Borg. You can't use the same attack pattern against the Borg multiple times because if you do, they'll recognize the pattern and will be able to defend against it. The virus is the attacker, and your immune system is the Borg. It knows what it's looking for and won't let anything get through its defenses.

Homeopathic remedies don't seek to prevent illness or provoke an immune response, they seek to cancel out something that is happening in the body.

For chicken pox, which produces itchy red bumps, homeopaths use Rhus Tox - a dilution of poison ivy, a plant that causes itchy red bumps if you encounter it in nature. The Rhus Tox didn't cause the chicken pox, it's not given to prevent the virus, it's from a plant that is completely unrelated to the virus that happens to produce some of the same symptoms as the virus when you touch it.

They don't even think that the Rhus Tox will provoke an immune response from your body like actually touching poison ivy would, they're attempting to use an unrelated compound (that is so diluted that it isn't even present in the preparation) in place of your immune system to attack the itchy red bumps.

So I'm going to go over this in a few brief points:

Vaccines are preventative ONLY, they are not a treatment for illness or symptoms of an illness

Vaccines work by introducing your immune system to a partial, weakened, or dead virus so that your immune system can form antibodies against that virus and prevent that virus from replicating in your body when it is later exposed to a whole/strong/live virus.

Different vaccines have different levels of effectiveness and produce different lengths of immunity; this is for a number of reasons, but if you get a measles shot as a kid you may only ever need one booster, while you need a flu shot every year and a tetanus shot every decade. All of them work the same way, though: they show your immune system what a virus looks like so that your immune system can kill the virus.

That is why immune compromised people sometimes can't be vaccinated, or why vaccines don't work as well for them or may need higher doses or more boosters. Because they don't have a healthy immune system, weakened viruses like the ones in the chickenpox virus might be too strong for their immune system to fight, and even if it doesn't get them sick, their bodies may not be able to produce enough effective antibodies to protect them from the virus in the future. That's part of why it's important for as many people to be vaccinated as possible; the more people who are vaccinated, the harder it is for viruses to spread, and vulnerable people like immune compromised people or babies too young for vaccination won't be exposed to deadly viruses.

Homeopathy, on the other hand, aims to treat symptoms of an illness that a person is already experiencing.

Homeopathic treatments do not aim to provoke an immune response, they aim to cancel out a symptom with a cure.

Dilution is a very important part of homeopathy, with homeopaths claiming that the more diluted a preparation is the stronger it is. This is simply incorrect; I don't know how to make a more logical explanation of that, it is just wrong that less of a substance causes more of a response.

Homeopathy says "like treats like" and that may seem like using a vaccine with a weak virus to prevent infection from a strong virus, but their version of "like" is different - Rhus Tox (poison ivy) is supposed to be "like" chicken pox because both cause itching. Rhus tox is also supposed to treat PCOS, erectile dysfunction, uterine prolapse, sunken eyes, nausea, and backache. "Like" can have an extremely broad meaning in homeopathy, which should be cause for suspicion.

Here's a paper that compared the immune response of college students given homeopathic "vaccines" against a control group and against a group of students who were given standard medical vaccines. The control group and the homeopathic group both did not have an immune response in titer tests, while the vaccination group did have an immune response, demonstrating that they had protection from the vaccinated viruses. It's a pretty good demonstration both of how effective homeopathy is (not at all) as well as how to set up a fair and ethical study to look at the effectiveness of different kinds of treatments.

[spartanmemesmedical]

Can Ayush doctor (BAMS),Homeopathy,Naturopathy ,Dietician,Physiotherapy Doctors work in the UK. Useful courses and vacancies in UK

Hello everyone ,i hope you are doing good . well,the topic is about Ayush (BAMS),homeopathy,naturopathy ,physiotherapist ,dietician doctors work in the UK and Useful courses and vacancies in UK. so answer is yes ,definitely they can work in uk .but the position may same or different if you compare with your own country .so now the question is about how they can work and what they have to do for…

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

Im doing a project about disinformation (specifically pseudoscience) and I've found a great paper that is trying to define pseudoscience by one common characteristic.

"Boudry and Braeckman (2011) have distinguished between ‘immunizing strategies’ and ‘epistemic defense mechanisms’, documenting how these appear in various guises in practically every pseudoscience (the relationship with Popper’s “conventionalist stratagems” will be discussed in 4.1). Immunizing strategies are defined as generic arguments or tactics that serve to protect a belief system from critical scrutiny and adverse evidence, while defense mechanisms refer to the special cases in which the immunizing tactics form an integral part of the belief system itself. (...) In many pseudoscience, core concepts are either ambiguous and amenable to a range of interpretations, or they are retrospectively redefined whenever threatened with refutation. Such strategic vagueness is characteristic of creationism and Intelligent Design theory, astrology, Freudian psychoanalysis, graphology, homeopathy, and various forms of alternative medicine." - Diagnosing Pseudoscience – by Getting Rid of the Demarcation Problem, Maarten Boudry

I just thought it might be relevant in your fight against astrology/anti-science crowd. Science doesn't try to immunize itself against scrutiny, only pseudo-science does.

I want to be so clear here that I do pretty vigorously disagree with the notion that everyone working in the sciences is a noble intellectual who's always open to new data and loves being proven wrong. anyone can be a shithead and I never made the claim that every psychologist in the world is a beacon of perfect, unbiased research and is above reproach. of COURSE some scientists try to immunize themselves against scrutiny, for any number of reasons including biased ones because people in any field can be real shitheads who 100% let their own bigotries color their work. that of course includes psychologists, given that psychologists are human and therefore fallible.

my stance is not and has never been "psychology is superior to astrology because it's an academically unblemished field of study," it's "psychology is more credible than astrology because it's a.) a field of study that is at least held to some standards and b.) dedicated to studying something that demonstrably has an effect on human behavior, unlike planetary movements."

[rainbowsky]

I'm so torn. As a tennis fan and as a human I loathe Djokovic almost as much as I love Yibo. I desperately hope Yibo does not become friends on any level with that fool, or become infected with any of his fucked up ideas.

In case you are unaware, Novak Djokovic is an anti-science, passionate anti-vaxxer, who believes in homeopathy and a whole bunch of other really batshit things. For example he has told people that you can clean polluted food and water with the power of your emotions, and he became gluten free because a 'nutritionist' told him he was weaker when he was holding a slice of bread in his hand.

During COVID-19 he refused to get vaccinated and spread a lot of dangerous ideas that likely cost lives, and he himself personally infected a whole bunch of people. I can't stand that guy. He's the Gwyneth Paltrow of tennis.

I'm really glad that Yibo is having fun, and I'm glad that he is having an exciting experience, but I hate that he is being associated in any way with Djokovic.

[wiisagi-maiingan]

So just to be clear, and in case anyone truly did not know, anything that's labeled as "homeopathic" is a placebo. It's either water or sugar pills. This is not an exaggeration, that is literally what homeopathy is. It's not a natural remedy, it's not a form of traditional medicine, it's not something your ancestors practiced, it is a placebo.

[drsauravarora]

The Art of Writing Cases in Homeopathy Podcast

Listen to the excerpts of the talk on – Art of Writing Cases in Homeopathy by Dr Saurav Arora. This important topic discusses the need of writing the cases methodically so as to add a value to evidence based homeopathy.

[tuulikki]

Ooohhhhh my god I can't believe

Homeopathy? For real? You're telling me to take a pill/cream from the people who believe that water has a memory?

Just in case anyone needs a refresher on this bullshit:

Homeopathy is based on the law of similars (‘like cures like’) which states that a substance that causes specific symptoms in a healthy person can be used to treat those symptoms in a sick person. Remedies undergo a process called ‘potentization’ which describes stepwise dilution from the ‘mother tincture’ combined with ‘succession’ (vigorous shaking). The underlying assumption is that the more dilute a remedy the greater its potency, even though according to Avogadro's number, with potencies beyond 12C (12 centesimal dilutions) the chance of a single molecule remaining in the final solution tends to the infinitesimal.

TL;DR: If you were bitten by a snake, homeopathy would try to cure you by giving you the venom from the snake. But don't worry! They also believe that diluting the active ingredient makes it more potent!

"As world-renowned scientific skeptic James Randi put it: 'this would be tantamount to grinding a grain of rice into tiny particles, dissolving it in a sphere of water the size of our Solar System, and then repeating this process about 2 billion times.' One of the ways by which followers of homeopathy deal with such criticism is their claim that water retains a memory of the substance: even after it is gone its properties are embedded in the water molecules."

[demi-shoggoth]

2023 Reading Log, pt 13

I've been putting off writing this one for a while, because all of these books are... fine? I didn't feel very strongly about them any way, either positively or negatively. Plus, I've been strongly burnt out on writing in general, and it's been hard for me to push myself to even write little 100 word blurbs about books.

61. Strange Japanese Yokai by Kenji Murakami, translated by Zack Davisson. It’s rare that I get the opportunity to read a yokai book originally written in Japanese, seeing as I don’t speak the language, so I jumped on the chance to get a copy of this when I found out it existed. It’s cute, with cartoony artwork and little data file sidebars that remind me of a Scholastic book… except the content is far weirder than what American kids books contain. The theme of the yokai stories here is that a lot of yokai… kind of suck. The stories told about the big hitters, like oni, kappa, kitsune and tanuki, are about them being foolish or having easily exploited weaknesses, and a lot of the other stories are about gross or pathetic yokai more than scary or impressive ones. The book is overall charming, but a very quick read. More of a supplement to other yokai books than a one-stop shop.

62. Mythical Creatures of Maine by Christopher Packard. This is a bit of an odd duck, seeing as it combines multiple monster traditions (fearsome critters, cryptids and Native American lore) under the same set of covers. It’s a pretty typical A-Z monster book, with some good information about obscure fearsome critters and Wabanaki monsters. There are, however, two things about the book I actively dislike, that keep me from strongly recommending it. The art is terrible. The illustrations by Dan Kirchoff are done in a style I can only describe as “fake woodcuts with flat colors” and are ugly (and in some cases, difficult to decipher). The other is that most, but not all of the monsters, get little microfiction epigrams in the character of Burton Marlborough Packard, the author’s great-great grandfather who worked in the Maine lumberwoods. It’s a weird touch, especially since the epigrams are only a sentence or two, and are typically pretty pointless.

63. Mushrooms: A Natural and Cultural History by Nicholas P. Money. There have been a number of books about fungi for the educated lay audience that have been published in the last couple of years. This one doesn’t really stand out from the crowd. The photography is nice, and there’s some coverage of the history of mycology and some of the prominent people in the field. But the book isn’t very well organized, bouncing from one topic to another within the same paragraph, and there are a number of passages that feel more like rants (the chapter on culinary uses for mushrooms, for example).

64. The Lives of Beetles by Arthur V. Evans. This book serves as an introduction to entomology in general, and beetles in particular. It covers core topics like insect body plans, introduces cladistics and covers the evolution, ecology, behavior and conservation of beetles in broad strokes. These strokes feel particularly broad because there are a lot of beetles; much of the book covers groups on the levels of family, which makes it feel a little bit shallow. These are alternated with descriptions of individual species, and this is where the book shines, as it gives good information about both well known species and some pretty obscure ones. The real value of the book, to someone who has been around the entomological block as I have, is in its production values—this book is quite simply gorgeous, and there are lots of nice photos of many different species.

65. Hoax: A History of Deception by Ian Tattersall and Peter Névraumont. This book has an identity crisis. You would think, with a title like that, that the main topic would be about hoaxes and cons. Some of it is. Some of it is about people who believed what they were pushing, even if it wasn’t true (apocalypse prophecies, homeopathy). Some of it is about misconceptions in archaeology, even if nobody was intentionally lying (the Piltdown Man is an actual hoax. Mary Leakey misidentifying rocks as human artifacts isn’t). And the organization is frankly baffling—it’s arranged in chronological order for some part of a topic, regardless of how much of the chapter is actually about when it’s set. For example, a chapter on fixed games is set at 260 BCE, but spends more of its length talking about modern pro wrestling than gladiator matches. The book is a somewhat bizarre reading experience.

[prince-simon]

Hi I was reading one of your fanfics and I came across this bit "he felt trapped, and scared, and was reminded of the times this would happen to him as a child, touch starved but scared to be touched" and I have never related to anything more. Do you know what that is? I'm sorry I'm only asking because I hope you know more about it than i do as you included it. Is it normal? Sorry for bugging you, it's ok if you don't know. Also your fanfics are AMAZING and have brought me a LOT of comfort

hi friend! first of all, i totally had to go through my recent fics to figure out which one you're referring to hahaha

but okay. story time! (disclaimer: the story sounds very scary in the beginning, and i'd be lying if i said it was comfortable but i decided to tell the whole story to hopefully give you some comfort? so. content warning for a bit of medical talk and medical conditions and mental health stuff under the cut)

so this whole thing about wille's legs/body spasming when touched (unexpectedly) is actually taken from personal experience. i haven't always had it, not that i know of at least, but there was a point when i was maybe. 16? maybe a bit younger? where i got slight tremors in my legs and over one or two weeks it just got more intense so my parents set up an appointment with our family doctor who referred me to a neurologist where i got a brain scan and everything. bc i - and my parents - went to the worst case scenario which to me was like wondering if this was some form of parkinson's disease i was developing (the thing i remember most about this is that we waited in the neurologist's waiting room for four hours even though we had an appointment only to be in the actual office with the doctor for like. 5 minutes) my brain scans came back fine and i guess i was too young to fully pay attention or understand what the doctor was saying but he's a doctor so he went with the natural solution of prescribing me meds. i ended up taking beta blockers for idk how long which worked for a bit to suppress the symptoms before the tremors came back. the doctor upped the dosage and again. it worked for a bit but i and my parents were like. am i gonna have to take these for the rest of my life? what's going on? i didn't wanna do this so my mum suggested going more of a natural route so we tried homeopathy. that guy slowly weaned me off the meds and instead gave me a bit of therapy which. lo and behold. helped. again. for a bit. at least i didn't have the tremors frequently anymore

in hindsight, i now know that it's very likely a symptom of anxiety and overstimulation in moments where my whole body just gets overwhelmed - i've had social situations in which i had just socialised so much and was also just really tired where a close friend would touch me and i'd just start spasming and just generally when i'm in stressful situations it can happen. sometimes it happens when i'm driving and something unexpected happens which is a fucking grim time bc i kinda need my legs for driving lol

so uh yeah. this was a lot of rambling i'm sorry. but tldr; for me personally those tremors are anxiety related

i hope this helped! you're also always welcome to slide into my dm's if you wanna talk more about this/your own experiences

either way i'm glad my stories bring you comfort!

[ms-demeanor]

I hate to say that, but in defense of homeopathy:

A lot of medicine is value projection and/or placebo. We give kids sparkly bandaids on minor abrasions not to help the symptoms or risks of infection, but so that the kid feels cared for.

We sometimes take daily medication not because it helps or we think we need it, but because our grandma raves all about this new cure-all that fixed all her issues.

We overindulge in paracetamol and ibuprofen even in the cases it clearly doesn't work because we need to feel like we took something that will help.

Homeopathy that tries to replace standard treatment is evil. But there is value in having a readily available, socially valued, thing you take when feeling bad, that does absolutely nothing.

In the 20s they just did heroin instead, it wasn't better.

So there's this thing called informed consent that is kind of super duper important and the use of placebo to treat illness is a major violation of informed consent.

Everybody likes the gifset from the Birdcage with the Aspirin with the A and the S scraped off because it's cute and funny, but it's cute and funny in a movie; if a "medical professional" is giving you sugar pills because they don't actually know how to treat you and want to offer you comfort instead, they're saying "you're too fucking stupid to handle the fact that you're ill so I'm going to hold your hand for a moment and hope that makes you feel better."

Your attitude is both fatalistic and tremendously paternalistic, and people with complex illnesses and chronic pain deserve to be treated better than kids getting a sparkly bandaid and a pat on the head.

People overuse painkillers because they're in pain; NSAIDs have effects, even if they aren't treating the root cause of pain, and people often take them because even though they won't stop a spasm, they'll make it less painful for a few hours and if that's what you've got, that's what you take.

The huge, regular doses of ibuprofen I used to take to help my migraines when I didn't have health insurance didn't stop the migraines, but they made it so I could work. What DID help was getting medically diagnosed with celiac disease and no longer triggering my autoimmune disorder on a daily basis.

You know what wouldn't have helped? A sympathetic listener and a sugar pill. Or worse, yet another sympathetic listener telling me about some fucking lead-contaminated turmeric supplement that cured their granny's headaches.

Shit on the heroin cures all you want, they at least included a legitimate cough suppressant and had a mechanism of action more effective than a patronizing lecture about how we've all got to get on somehow, so we might as well pretend we feel better.

Fuck your shitty, shitty attitude. Sick people deserve better than you.

[lacefuneral]

thing that sucks about fibromyalgia is that it really only started to be taken seriously by doctors the last couple of years so there isn't much information about what treatments are effective and what aren't

so a lot of people lean into like. pseudo science bc they think it will fix their pain

which is frustrating because it's like. i want to know what is actually helping people. not some anti-vax person covering themselves in arnica montana (which is a poison at best and absolutely nothing at worse, which is the case of homeopathy) and guzzling laxatives (i shouldn't have to explain why is this an issue)

the scary thing too is seeing ppl on reddit say "no yeah my doctor just mixes me a special lotion with opiods and ketamine and gabapentin" or people saying they're taking all of these medications orally. ARE YOU INSANE.

other people are like "ya my routine is simple!" and then lists no less than 10 very expensive supplements

like. okay. i do take some supplements. i am intending on trying another. but like..... can we get some actual medical professionals running trials on fibro that don't rely on extremely addictive drugs? y'know, during a fucking opioid crisis. and stop having doctors shrug at their patients and say "idk maybe go for a swim? get stabbed with needles?"