#her skin condition is specifically based on arsenic poisoning which was one of the most common makeup issues then | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

biophytopharm · 6 years ago

Text

Homeopathy: what is it?

homeopathy: What is it?

Homeopathy A unique therapeutic technique still proving very controversial, homeopathy is practiced all over the world, by doctors, dentists, and veterinarians as well as by naturopaths, chiropractors, practitioners of Ayurvedic medicine, and several other health professionals. However, in Quebec, only the professional homeopath has a complete training that assures his competence in the use of the fundamental principles of homeopathy. Created in the early nineteenth century by Samuel Hahnemann, it is essentially based on: The law of similarity. Similia similibus curentur, the like cures the like. This principle, which goes back to Hippocrates, says that a substance that causes a group of symptoms in a healthy person can cure a sick person with the same group of symptoms. It is this principle that gave its name to homeopathy, the Greek words homeo and pathos meaning respectively "similar" and "illness or suffering". Law of individualization. In homeopathy, we treat the sick individual and not the disease to do this we look for the most idiosyncratic symptoms in a person taking into account all the aspects that characterize, physical, physiological, mental, psychic, heredity etc. We need a global picture of the unique symptoms of the individual. The process of high dilutions. The homeopathic theory claims that the dilution and the "dynamization" of a remedy can potentiate its curative effects. The homeopathic remedies are diluted several times in water or in a mixture of water and alcohol, to the point where there is usually no chemical trace of the molecules that made up the original substance. Between successive dilutions, the remedy is administered a series of tremors (called succussions in the jargon of homeopaths) in order to "energize" it. This boosting would be absolutely essential to the effectiveness of the product. Neither of these foundations has so far received the consent of the scientific community. The law of similarity is opposed to the classical medical approach which, to fight the disease, is based on drugs whose purpose is to eliminate the symptoms or to destroy the aggressors. For example, a drug that causes fever when the patient's temperature is considered too high, an antibiotic that destroys the bacteria responsible for an infection, an antacid to counteract gastric hyperacidity, a hypotensive to correct high blood pressure. etc. This is called "allopathy", also meaning "different". As for the process of high dilutions, it goes against the current of modern pharmacology which is based on the biological activity of specific molecules. From the chemist's point of view, any therapeutic effect is attributable to specific molecules. In the majority of homeopathic preparations, these molecules are no longer found. As for the law of individualization, in allopathic official medicine we do not consider that the body reacts as a whole, rather we focus on the function of each element separately. It's a more mechanical approach. Homeopathy is a holistic medicine. Therefore, it is not surprising that the subject has caused in the past - and still causes - very heated debate among scientists. Despite this, homeopathic remedies have been used to treat patients for 200 years and there is no indication that the popularity of this therapy is declining, either for the health professionals who use it or for the patients who receive it. The homeopathic method Homeopathy is based on the premise that the body has the strength to generate a natural healing process. From this premise, Hahnemann argued that it was more important to find ways to stimulate the natural healing process inherent in any living organism than to know the specific pathogen or name of the disease. In this way, the homeopath tries to discover all the symptoms of the patient in order to trigger or support the corresponding healing process. The practitioner will, therefore, seek to know when and how the symptoms appear, which amplifies or decreases their intensity, the times they appear, the actions that exacerbate or relieve them, etc. Thus, 2 patients suffering from the same disease in the sense of classical medicine could be prescribed different homeopathic remedies because their mode of reaction differs or their specific symptoms are not the same. They could have the same "cold" (same virus), but not the same nasal discharge, for example. Homeopaths now have computer databases. The dilutions A homeopathic preparation labeled 6X denotes a remedy in which the original extract has been diluted (usually in a mixture of water and alcohol) in a proportion of 10 to 1 (hence the X). This is called a low dilution or a decimal dilution. At each step (6 in this case), the mixture will have been boosted by printing 100 shakes. There are also percent dilutions (100 to 1 at each dilution) which are designated C, and "millesimal" dilutions with the letter M (1000 to 1). These last two types of preparation constitute high dilutions. We often see the letter H (for Hahnemann) contiguous to the symbols X, C or M (for example, 30CH). This identifies the Hahnemannian dilutions we have just described. Some dilutions are prepared using a slightly different procedure developed by another Hahnemann contemporary homeopath, Dr. Korsakov. Korsakovian dilutions are usually identified by a K. In homeopathy, it is believed that remedies prepared in high dilution are more potent than those prepared in low dilution. They are used by professional homeopaths and more rarely used over the counter or in complexes intended directly to the public. Once the extract is diluted, it is presented in the form of tablets, granules (small soluble balls, whose base is usually sucrose, which is allowed to melt under the tongue) or solutions that take a few drops to that time. For topical uses, there are also homeopathic products in the form of lotions or ointments. Some preparations, such as skin creams, are said to be homeopathic in that they respect the principle of similarity (similar cures the like), but they are not necessarily diluted. They may contain, for example, mother tinctures of plants prepared according to a method specific to homeopathy. What are we diluting? The stem products used to make homeopathic medicines may be of plant, animal or mineral origin. Sometimes the relationship between the product and the condition being treated seems quite logical. Apis mellifica - diluted bee venom - is used to treat insect bites or other conditions that give similar reactions. Similarly, the Essential oil of a plant, Arnica montana, which was traditionally used to treat bruises and sprains, found a similar use in homeopathy. On the other hand, in other cases, the relationship is more amazing. Thus, the venom of the viper Lachesis mutus is used against certain disorders of the menopause; and Arsenicum album (derived from arsenic, a very toxic heavy metal) is recommended against certain skin diseases and various types of colds. It should also be noted that Oscillococcinum, a "flu-breaker" and one of the best-selling homeopathic medicines, is made from a maceration of liver and duck heart. It works, yes or no? Opinions on this subject are radically different. Scientists, researchers, clinicians, doctors, health professionals, experts from international agencies say things totally opposite, "unstoppable" evidence to support. It would be either a scandalous absurdity or an extremely promising approach that would prove itself every day to millions of people and would be more and more solidly documented. Who to believe? Without pretending to make an exhaustive presentation, here are the main arguments of both sides as well as the most recent hypotheses that attempt to explain the alleged effects of homeopathy. Homeopathy is based on absurd concepts that have not changed for 150 years. The very high dilutions make sure that there is not a trace of the original product in the final product. According to classical science, the latter could not, therefore, have any specific therapeutic action. Renowned researcher Edzard Ernst, director of the Complementary Medicine Group at Exeter University in England (who was originally trained in homeopathy) is convinced of this. In an editorial entitled Should we keep an open mind about homeopathy? 1 published in 2009 in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine, he says that homeopathy is not based on science, but rather on " faith "and on outdated and absurd metaphysical concepts. Homeopathy would be an affront to modern science, just like astrology, perpetual motion, alchemy or Elvis apparitions! According to Ernst, "Opening oneself to believe in homeopathy goes beyond the tolerable limits of open-mindedness. We should start from the premise that homeopathy can not work and that any positive data can come only from publication bias or experimental error until proven otherwise. (...) By opening the door to irrational forms of medicine alongside evidence-based medicine, the public is deceived and its mind poisoned. " Open to amazing explanations, but still scientists. Proponents of homeopathy retort that their opponents are fighting an ideological rather than a scientific struggle. They readily admit that the action of highly diluted products does not come from a specific action of the original molecules. But they maintain that it is contrary to scientific thought to assert that there can be no other possible explanation. Moreover, more and more experiments would prove those very highly diluted products have a clear biological action (see, below, High dilutions: scientifically measurable effects). Another recent, and at least surprising, a hypothesis that explains the effectiveness of homeopathy, as well as the difficulty of evaluating it by double-blind tests, is that of patient-practitioner-remedy intrication. According to her, there would be real "links" between the patient, the practitioner and the remedy! The term entanglement comes from quantum mechanics. It describes the phenomenon by which two particles, once entangled, have "links" that make any change in one immediately implies the same change in the other, regardless of the distance between them. A similar process could occur in the relationship between the patient, the practitioner and the remedy. No serious study would have proven beyond doubt that homeopathy would be more effective than placebo. Here we are witnessing another formidable battle of specialists. In both camps, doctors, and researchers of high caliber. In both camps, serious scientific publications downright contradictory. Two examples. In 2005, the Lancet, one of the most respected medical journals in the world, published a systematic review5 that was widely reported in the media. The researchers compared studies evaluating homeopathic medicines to as many studies for allopathic (conventional) drugs. Among all these studies, they retained only those of the highest quality and including the most subjects: 8 for homeopathy and 6 for allopathy. From these studies, they concluded that the effects of homeopathy could, at best, only be due to the placebo effect. On the basis of this systematic review, the Lancet published a devastating editorial entitled The End of Homeopathy. The editorial team mentioned that "the results of the systematic review are not surprising. What is surprising is that the debate continues despite 150 years of adverse results. (...) The politically correct attitude of laissez-faire towards homeopathy has lasted too long, but a light is finally coming. (...) The debate between homeopathy and allopathy fueled by biased reports and selective analyzes should stop, as should all research on homeopathy. " Second example. Published in 2010, a large study commissioned by the UK Parliament once again concluded that the action of homeopathy was due only to the placebo effect. The researchers recommended that homeopathy is no longer reimbursed by the state. Here are some excerpts from the report. "Randomized clinical trials are the best way to determine if there is a cause and effect relationship between a treatment and a result. " "Although several studies have found that homeopathic remedies in many cases provide a great deal of user satisfaction, this does not prove their clinical efficacy. The high satisfaction rate could be attributable to a strong placebo effect reinforced by the following 3 factors: Homeopaths would mainly treat conditions that tend to be self-limiting (such as the common cold) or particularly sensitive to the placebo effect. Individuals treated with homeopathy would deliberately choose this therapy and would probably give it more confidence from the start. Homeopathic consultations are usually long, empathic, and warm, and physicians with a warmer attitude have been shown to have better clinical outcomes than those who are more formal. "According to our research, the concept of ultra-dilution that water could retain the imprint of a previously dissolved substance is not scientifically plausible. " The responses of homeopathic advocates to these 2 publications Bad faith researchers? These publications have, of course, provoked an outcry from homeopathic advocates, whether they be doctors, practitioners or researchers. With regard to the Lancet study, they accused the editorial team and the magazine of bias and not being objective. They pointed out that judging all homeopathy on the basis of 8 studies was grossly against the scientific method. In addition, there was no mention of the studies in question. Four months later, the Lancet provided the list of studies. Proponents of homeopathy said that 3 other studies, which met the research criteria of the study perfectly, had been omitted. And if we included them, the results clearly tended to favor the effectiveness of homeopathy. The methodology of conventional studies is not adapted to homeopathy. According to his supporters, random clinical studies do not do justice to the particular functioning of homeopathy. Indeed, in homeopathy, we do not treat a single symptom in isolation, but rather the whole person. In addition, attempting to isolate the patient-practitioner relationship to test only the drug goes against the clinical reality of a homeopathic treatment and could disrupt the results. The placebo effect does not explain everything. They also argue that in many cases the effect of homeopathy cannot be explained solely by the placebo effect. Thus, even if they are relatively few in number, quality randomized clinical studies indicate that homeopathy has, in some cases, significantly greater effects than placebo (see Therapeutic Applications). This is the conclusion reached by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine at the US National Institutes of Health: "Most reviews of homeopathy studies conclude that there is very few evidence of its effectiveness in treating specific conditions. In addition, a lot of research has important gaps. However, some observational studies, some randomized clinical trials, and laboratory researchers show that homeopathic remedies have real positive effects and well-defined physical and chemical properties. " Thus, as one researcher has pointed out, 10 it is sufficient to discover a single black swan so that it is no longer possible to say that ALL swans are white. Similarly, if we discover even one effect that is not due to placebo, it becomes impossible to say that ALL homeopathy results are due to the placebo effect. High dilutions: scientifically measurable effects. Many researchers have looked at the specific biological effects of homeopathy. They found that highly diluted preparations can cause measurable biological effects on plants, animals or isolated cells in the laboratory. For example, a homeopathic preparation of arsenic has made it possible to increase the germination rate of wheat grains previously contaminated with true arsenic, as if they had been "cured" of their contamination. This would respect both the principle of similarity and high dilutions. As another example, researchers in a double-blind experiment measured significant differences between electroencephalograms of patients with fibromyalgia who took a homeopathic product or placebo. Two special issues of the journal Homeopathy, published in 2009 and 2010, have been devoted to this theme and report a great deal of research on the biological effects of homeopathy. (The full content of the second issue is available online for free, see Books, etc.) On the other hand, several laboratory experiments using calorimetry, thermoluminescence or optical emissions have demonstrated that it is possible to differentiate between pure water and ultra-dilute solutions (which, according to classical chemistry, should no longer contain only water). Other experiments have differentiated two homeopathic solutions. Cancer cells destroyed in vitro Finally, a study published in 2010 by the MD Anderson Cancer Center, one of the most reputable cancer treatment centers in the United States, found that 4 different homeopathic preparations could destroy breast cancer cells in a targeted way (by cytotoxicity). The action of 2 of them was similar to that of paclitaxel (Taxol), the product most used in chemotherapy against breast cancer. In addition, one of the four drugs consisted of ultra-diluted cancerous tissue extracts, in accordance with the principles of similarity and high dilution of homeopathy. The authors concluded that the homeopathic remedies evaluated in their study (and already used against breast cancer in a clinic in India) seem promising from a preventive and therapeutic point of view. This justifies, according to them, to continue the research. Hypotheses of explanations of Homeopathy There is growing evidence that water can actually retain the footprint of a previously dissolved substance, even if the underlying mechanisms are not yet well understood. In 3 special issues of Homeopathy, published in 2007, 2009 and 2010, researchers presented the results of many experimental studies that could explain how highly diluted and "dynamized" products could produce measurable biological effects. Among these, we find: The "restructuring" of water molecules that contain the same chemical elements (H2O) but are structured differently. The influence of silica from glass containers in which water is shaken. Silica could positively "contaminate" the product, as in the case of semiconductor doping. The formation of nano-bullies and singular nanoparticles during succussions. The creation of long-lived electrical and electromagnetic phenomena in water molecules. Non-uniform dispersion and agglomeration of diluted products. In one of the articles in the 2007 special issue, The Memory of Water: An Overview, the author, a researcher in applied science, states that "there are several rational explanations that can demonstrate why water actually displays different properties based on its past history. In fact, they are so blatant that one wonders how such a controversy persists around the "memory of water". Finally, in the main editorial of the same magazine, the author states: "There is still a lot of work to be done, but we can say one thing with certainty: it is absolutely wrong to claim that homeopathy is impossible under the pretext that the "water memory" would be impossible. " Why so much passion? Many supporters of homeopathy accuse their opponents of acting with almost religious fervor. They accuse them of dogmatically refusing the slightest possibility that hypotheses that go beyond physics or classical chemistry may explain the effects of homeopathy. Following the release of the study on the in vitro destruction of breast cancer cells by the MD Anderson Cancer Center in February 2010 (see above), renowned cancer expert Ralph Moss had the following reflection: 22 MD Anderson Center, which conducted the study, was ranked the United States' best cancer hospital by the US News and World Report28. It will be particularly interesting to see if professional skeptics will, as usual, try to discredit the study. I hope that it will be a turning point and that conventional science will finally be forced to reassess its rigid opposition to this disconcerting but fascinating mode of treatment. " Finally, the reaction of the skeptics was not so virulent, although some still tried to discredit the study. They mentioned that the alcohol used to dilute the preparations could be responsible for cell death and that, as the laboratory experiments were not double-blind, the study lost all credibility. In a special issue of the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine devoted to homeopathy, on the occasion of Hahnemann's 250th birthday, the publisher wondered: "Why is it so difficult to open up to homeopathy? The reasons we propose are complex and profound. They come as much from reason as from psychology as well as the search for intellectual and spiritual "comfort". Homeopathy, perhaps more than any other discipline, causes reactions of a rare intensity as much to its antagonists as to its protagonists. Probably because the principles that underlie homeopathy absolutely defy the vision of nature and the biomolecular paradigm that currently prevail and that are a general consensus. " Homeopathy is an alternative system of medicine invented by a Germany physician, Samuel Hahnemann in the 18th century. Homeopathy is based on the principle, ‘Similia Simlibus Curentur or Let likes be cured by likes’ means a substance which can produce a symptom of a disease in a healthy person can cure that symptom of a disease in a sick individual with minute doses.

BENEFITS

1. Singles remedies are indicated as only one remedy can be most similar to that condition of a given patient 2. The medicines are given in small doses as the dynamic action of the medicine can be roused by small doses and these doses cannot produce any organic changes 3. Homeopathy medicines are natural and prepared from small quantities of herbs, minerals, and animal products 4. Homeopathy gives a rapid, gentle and permanent cure 5. The use of these medicines can even avoid surgeries 6. These medicines are proved only on healthy human beings, not on animals 7. No side effects due to minute doses 8. Homeopathy improves general resistance power while curing the symptoms 9. Homeopathy reduces the chances of getting the infectious diseases as it strengthens the immune system of a person 10. Homeopathy depends on individualization as treatment depends on symptoms but on diseases 11. Homeopathic medicines are safe to administer as they have any chemical action but act by stimulating the body’s own defense mechanism 12. Homeopathic medicines are dispensed in the form of sweet sugar pills, that’s why children readily agrees to take this medicines 13. Homeopathic medicines are effective in both acute and chronic diseases. In chronic cases where irreversible structural changes have taken place helps in palliation and in acute cases it brings complete restoration of health 14. Homeopathic medicines are usually very cheap than other systems of medicines 15. Homeopathic cure follows Herring’s laws of cure – cure takes from a. above downwards b. within outwards c. more important organ to less important organ 16. Homeopathy considers the complaints of a patient in totality not mere collection of body parts. So, it treats the person as a whole 17. These medicines are harmless can be used in pregnancy and newborns 18. Unlike the digestive system, these medicines do not disturb the digestive system nor immune system 19. A homeopathic cure is long lasting 20. Homeopathic medicines are not addictive Finally, Homeopathic medicines are safe to take for a permanent and long-lasting cure without any adverse effects as ‘ HEALTH IS WEALTH ’ Read the full article

#homeopathy

2 notes · View notes

labbennett861-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Hollywood Stars Like Exhibiting Super Butt Video

Coming from qualified military and majestic labels, our company now journey ideal to the various other conclusion from the range, and also dive down right into the seamless gutter. In his publication Super Squats: How to Gain 30 Pounds of Muscle in 6 Weeks, Randall J. Strossen, Ph.D. lays out a extremely helpful however astonishingly simple course that are going to absolutely load a ridiculous quantity of meat on practically any person's bone tissues. Since you understand the beneﬁt from considering that little of additional attempt, you should inquire on your own a question ..." Just what can I carry out today and also on a daily basis with a little much more initiative to move me to the champ degree in my ﬁeld?" You must realize someone will definitely be actually the champion in your decided on undertaking.

Additional pure olive oil is specifically vivid in the phenolic antioxidants and also squalene Messenger-assistant.info and also oleic acid, thereby providing substantial protection from skin, boob as well as digestive tract cancer cells, coronary heart problem as well as getting older through preventing oxidative stress and anxiety. The tourism administrative agency from the country has actually made the best setting for visitors to find delight in the recuperation therapy from an Ayurveda massage while overlooking the incredible elegance of beautiful top quality seashores. Whereas most big-name tremendously Political action committees associated with this year's vote-casting have actually gathered amount of money from prosperous mega-donors to spend on marketing and also organizing in critical swing conditions, United States's Future generation is attempting to leader a brand-new design of grassroots donor-based advocacy. Yet it ends effectively, as Frank and also his wife (which gets delivered later on) become the very first master as well as queen from Narnia, as well as Strawberry is actually given the capability to chat, at that point wings, as well as his label altered to Fledge.

While continued use the phrase could lead folks to believe that this is in truth the taxonomic name from a genuine pussy-cat, there is certainly that this refers to a pussy-cat crossbreed that is unusual, distinctive, and also unique.

Mary - Because of its level of popularity, this title has actually handled to rack up a suitable number of evil possessors, featuring Queen Mary I (aka Bloody Mary), that was actually recognized for her too much Protestant punishments, and Mary Anne Cotton (also known as the Poisonous substance Mistress), one more English female recognized for poisoning as numerous as 20 individuals along with arsenic. Then he will taken several of the blood stream, which oozed coming from the animal's windows and aspersed his own body from it. As an additional preventative measure, Arnold had taken ground from around the casket as well as consumed this. This would, he felt, quit him coming from ever before ending up being a creature ofthe night themselves. The inquiry of keeping her last name or switch over to her spouses' arises when a girl obtains hesitation a lady is a separate legal entity as well as appreciates level playing fields at the same level with males like the right to pep talk, right to live anywhere else in a country, to proclaim any kind of religious beliefs, to select an employment of her option, to result in offspring inning accordance with her will and also satisfaction. There are four ready your youngster to pick from: Alpha Stock Lickety Letter Hunt, Surprise Reds Poetry Activity, Super Whys Tale Saving idea and also the spelling video game I will definitely pay attention to, Princess or queen Prestos Wands-Up Writing.

0 notes

sherristockman · 7 years ago

Link

Chuck Norris Sues for MRI Dye Injuring His Wife Dr. Mercola By Dr. Mercola Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an imaging study that allows your physician to see detailed pictures of your organs and tissues. Raymond Damadian invented the machine and performed the first total body image in 1977.1 This process has been called the one of the greatest medical breakthroughs of the 20th century. The MRI machine uses a large magnet, radio waves and a computer to take detailed cross-sectional pictures of your internal organs and tissues.2 The scanner looks like a tube with a table that enables you to slide into the tunnel of the machine to gather data. Unlike CT scans or X-rays that use ionizing radiation known to damage DNA, the MRI uses magnetic fields. Images from an MRI give physicians better information about abnormalities, tumors, cysts and specific organ problems with your heart, liver, uterus, kidneys and other organs. In some instances, your physician may want an enhanced MRI, one using contrast agents to improve the clarity of the images produced. In one of every three MRIs with contrast, the agent used is gadolinium.3 What Is Gadolinium? This is a chemical contrast medium or dye that is injected to enhance the quality of the images. Gadolinium is bonded to a chelating agent that is intended to reduce the toxicity of the chemical to your body as gadolinium is a dangerous heavy metal known to cause neurological damage. There are several products that include gadolinium, called gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCA).4 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released guidelines on the use of GBCAs5 as they began an investigation into the potential health effects from brain deposits of the heavy metal. The FDA acknowledged that repeated use of GBCAs may result in gadolinium deposits in your brain and other tissues but has not determined if there are any adverse health effects from these deposits. To reduce accumulation, the FDA recommends health care professionals limit use to circumstances where additional information garnered by the use of gadolinium is absolutely necessary.6 In response, institutional review boards responsible for the safety of patients in clinical trials or research studies developed consent forms that include a list of known risks, such as kidney damage and brain accumulation, with boxed warnings not to exceed recommended dosages.7 Johns Hopkins Office of Human Subject Research acknowledges specific challenges when using enhanced MRI imaging with GBCA as "there is potential severe toxicity related to a diagnostic procedure with no direct therapeutic value."8 GBCAs are sold under several different names based on the chelating agent to which they are bound and the drug company that developed them. These include: Ablavar Dotarem Eovist Gadavist Magnevist MultiHance Omniscan OptiMARK ProHance Physiological Issues Associated With Heavy Metal Toxicity Heavy metals are naturally occurring elements with a high atomic weight and a density five times that of water.9 They are widely distributed throughout the environment from industrial, agricultural, medical and technical pollution. Heavy metal toxicity has documented potential for serious health consequences, including kidney, neurological, cardiovascular, skeletal and endocrine damage.10 While your body requires small amounts of some metals, such as zinc, manganese, iron and copper, high amounts of these and environmental pollutants is dangerous.11 Metals that are most commonly associated with poisoning are arsenic, lead, mercury and cadmium, which are also the heavy metals most commonly found in environmental pollution. Symptoms of heavy metal poisoning vary based on the organ systems affected. Scientists have found that heavy metals also increase oxidative stress secondary to free radical formation.12 The health risks associated with heavy metal toxicity have proven to be a major health threat, especially those that do not have a biological role, as they often remain present in plants and animals. Testing for heavy metal toxicity includes blood, urine and hair and nail analysis for cumulative exposure. Symptoms of accumulation of gadolinium will be related to the organ systems affected and may include nausea, vomiting, central nervous system dysfunction,13headache and gastrointestinal disturbances.14 Chuck Norris Focuses Attention on Heavy Metal Risks After Enhanced MRI After undergoing three MRIs with GBCAs to evaluate her rheumatoid arthritis, Gena O'Kelley, the wife of American film icon Chuck Norris,15 began experiencing severe physical symptoms that began with a burning sensation in her skin. She described it as if there was acid burning her skin, slowly covering her body.16 She reports that she visited the emergency room five or six nights in a row, while doctors ran multiple tests for ALS, MS, cancer and Parkinson's disease. However, it was O'Kelley who made the connection between her burning skin, contracted arm and cognitive issues and the multiple MRIs she had undergone. She told Full Measure:17 "When we got to the hospital in Houston this last time, and I'm so bad and I said, listen, I am sober enough in my thinking right now, because I had such brain issues going on, I said I'm only going to be able to tell you this one time and I need you to listen to me very closely. I have been poisoned with gadolinium or by gadolinium and we don't have much time to figure out how to get this out of my body or I am going to die." After five months of treatment in China and then in a clinic in Nevada, O'Kelley was able to return home to her seven children for continued treatment by a physician in Houston. Norris shared their tax return records documenting $2 million over three years in uninsured medical expenses to help O'Kelley return to health. Now Norris is suing 11 medical companies for the part they played in not warning the couple and others of the dangers of using a GBCA for MRI contrast.18 O'Kelley suffered confusion, muscle spasms, kidney damage and muscle wasting from a heavy metal contrast agent her doctors told her would be cleared from her body within hours after the MRI. The couple's attorney, Todd Walburg, told CBS News,19 "We have clients who have been misdiagnosed with Lyme disease, ALS, and then they've eventually ruled all those things out and the culprit remaining is the gadolinium." Although the FDA has been aware of a strong association between gadolinium and kidney damage since 2006,20 and are aware GBCAs may deposit in organ and brain tissue,21 the agency insists the contrast dye is safe for use22 but states it will continue to assess safety. Norris states their intention is to draw attention to the problem and hopefully help others who suffer from the physical effects of the contrast agent. Gadolinium Linked to Several Health Problems In a comprehensive review of previous studies, researchers evaluated the effects of gadolinium and found that although the heavy metal was bound to chelating agents designed to help the chemical be eliminated from the body, gadolinium was found deposited in organs, bone and brain tissue.23 Their findings contradict statements from the FDA and pharmaceutical companies that only those with previous history of kidney damage may experience tissue deposits. Lead author and toxicologist Dr. Stacy Branch said:24 "Given the ever-growing toxicological and gadolinium tissue retention data, it is vital that the FDA promptly leads efforts, including retrospective and prospective clinical studies, to better define the connection between GBCA-exposure and adverse health events. This is needed to guide the choice of preventive methods, achieve accurate diagnoses, implement effective treatment approaches, and spark research for the design of safer contrast agents and imaging protocols." These results were supported in a recent study from Case Western University, where researchers found gadolinium deposits in brain tissue of people who underwent more than one MRI with GBCA.25 The challenge faced by patients is that the symptoms they experience from the GBCA often result in the recommendation for another MRI with contrast to diagnose the problem. Repeated doses increase the risk for further health damage. It seems ludicrous to imagine that deposits of heavy metal in your bone, brain and organs would not cause cognitive problems or other health damage, but that is exactly what the FDA is saying, as they acknowledge gadolinium is deposited but state they have no evidence these deposits are dangerous to your health.26 Recent research has also shown GBCA more easily passes the blood brain barrier in individuals who have neurological disease such as MS, stroke or a brain tumor.27 However, these neurological conditions are often a reason an MRI with GBCA is ordered, increasing the risk for further neurological damage to these individuals. Support Your Body's Efforts to Eliminate Heavy Metal It is vital you carefully review the recommendation to undergo an enhanced MRI with your physician and get a second opinion if you aren't completely satisfied. It is important to remember that you are the one who will experience the consequences of GBCA use and not your physician, radiologist or the FDA. If an MRI with contrast is absolutely necessary, there are several steps you can take that may help reduce gadolinium deposits and help your body detoxify. Many of these steps will also help detoxify your body of other heavy metals and improve your overall health. Remember, if you do experience symptoms, a second MRI with contrast will only intensify the problem and not diagnose the issue. Seek out the care of an integrative medicine physician who can help guide your efforts to detoxify and consider the following steps:28,29 Optimize your gut microbiome When your gut is functioning optimally without inflammation or leaking, toxins may be eliminated through your liver and gastrointestinal (GI) tract, which reduces the toxic load on your kidneys. Eliminate foods that commonly cause inflammation in your gut, such as wheat, refined sugar and corn. Reduce your carbohydrate intake to 50 grams or less per day and eat fermented foods to help colonize your gut with beneficial bacteria. Add bone broth to your nutritional plan to help heal a leaky gut. Optimize your nutrition Healthy omega-3 fats, zinc and selenium help support your body during detoxification. Drink enough fresh, pure water so your urine is a light straw color to support your kidneys. Eat foods high in fiber to feed your beneficial bacteria. Broccoli, kale, garlic and onions support your liver during detoxification and add fiber to your diet. Eat more fermented foods Traditionally fermented food usually contains at least one cruciferous vegetable. Studies have now shown these vegetables are high in sulforaphane that protects your cells from inflammation30 and promotes healing and protection of the blood-brain barrier.31 Diatomaceous earth Diatomaceous earth develops from fossilized shells of freshwater diatoms. It is found in large quantities across the earth. However, in order to use it on yourself or your pets it must be food grade. Nonfood grade is used in swimming pool filters and as an insecticide in around nonfood plants. Food grade diatomaceous earth binds heavy metals and other toxins in your GI tract, gently helping them pass out of your body.32 According to the Weston A. Price Foundation, you may dissolve less than 1 teaspoon for every 100 pounds of body weight in a glass of fresh, pure water and drink just before bed. Over a period of weeks or months, gradually increase this amount to nearly 1 tablespoon. This gradual increase will help reduce any GI discomforts. Used this way, the metal binding capacity is unlikely to hinder the absorption of other needed minerals, such as calcium, magnesium or zinc that are consumed during the day. Sauna Sweating in a sauna may help eliminate heavy metals and other toxins such as BPA.33 Anytime you use a sauna, carefully clean the area where you are seated as toxins that were eliminated from the previous use could be absorbed as your pores open and you begin to sweat. Green team Cilantro and chlorella have long been used to help detoxify from heavy metals.34 Cilantro mobilizes toxins from your tissues, often faster than your body can eliminate them. Chlorella helps to bind the metals and improve elimination, thus reducing the possibility of experiencing the effects of retoxification when heavy metals have been mobilized but not removed. Chelation The Lighthouse Project Gadolinium Toxicity35 gathers information from individuals who have been poisoned by gadolinium and the treatments they have used. While chelation seems to be a logical choice, when used alone they have no record of individuals experiencing a complete remission of symptoms, so be sure to implement a more comprehensive, holistic plan. Medical chelation is a process where a chemical agent is administered that binds to the metal, making it a stable compound that can be excreted. Chemical agents can be administered orally, through an IV or rectally.

#VitalityPath

0 notes

biophytopharm · 7 years ago

Text

Homeopathy: what is it?

homeopathy: What is it?

Homeopathy: what is it?

A unique therapeutic technique still proving very controversial, homeopathy is practiced all over the world, by doctors, dentists, and veterinarians as well as by naturopaths, chiropractors, practitioners of Ayurvedic medicine, and several other health professionals. However, in Quebec, only the professional homeopath has a complete training that assures his competence in the use of the fundamental principles of homeopathy.

Created in the early nineteenth century by Samuel Hahnemann, it is essentially based on:

The law of similarity. Similia similibus curentur, the like cures the like. This principle, which goes back to Hippocrates, says that a substance that causes a group of symptoms in a healthy person can cure a sick person with the same group of symptoms. It is this principle that gave its name to homeopathy, the Greek words homeo and pathos meaning respectively “similar” and “illness or suffering”. Law of individualization. In homeopathy, we treat the sick individual and not the disease to do this we look for the most idiosyncratic symptoms in a person taking into account all the aspects that characterize, physical, physiological, mental, psychic, heredity etc. We need a global picture of the unique symptoms of the individual. The process of high dilutions. The homeopathic theory claims that the dilution and the “dynamization” of a remedy can potentiate its curative effects. The homeopathic remedies are diluted several times in water or in a mixture of water and alcohol, to the point where there is usually no chemical trace of the molecules that made up the original substance. Between successive dilutions, the remedy is administered a series of tremors (called succussions in the jargon of homeopaths) in order to “energize” it. This boosting would be absolutely essential to the effectiveness of the product. Neither of these foundations has so far received the consent of the scientific community. The law of similarity is opposed to the classical medical approach which, to fight the disease, is based on drugs whose purpose is to eliminate the symptoms or to destroy the aggressors. For example, a drug that causes fever when the patient’s temperature is considered too high, an antibiotic that destroys the bacteria responsible for an infection, an antacid to counteract gastric hyperacidity, a hypotensive to correct high blood pressure. etc. This is called “allopathy”, also meaning “different”.

As for the process of high dilutions, it goes against the current of modern pharmacology which is based on the biological activity of specific molecules. From the chemist’s point of view, any therapeutic effect is attributable to specific molecules. In the majority of homeopathic preparations, these molecules are no longer found.

As for the law of individualization, in allopathic official medicine we do not consider that the body reacts as a whole, rather we focus on the function of each element separately. It’s a more mechanical approach. Homeopathy is a holistic medicine.

Therefore, it is not surprising that the subject has caused in the past – and still causes – very heated debate among scientists. Despite this, homeopathic remedies have been used to treat patients for 200 years and there is no indication that the popularity of this therapy is declining, either for the health professionals who use it or for the patients who receive it.

The homeopathic method

Homeopathy is based on the premise that the body has the strength to generate a natural healing process. From this premise, Hahnemann argued that it was more important to find ways to stimulate the natural healing process inherent in any living organism than to know the specific pathogen or name of the disease.

In this way, the homeopath tries to discover all the symptoms of the patient in order to trigger or support the corresponding healing process. The practitioner will therefore seek to know when and how the symptoms appear, which amplifies or decreases their intensity, the times they appear, the actions that exacerbate or relieve them, etc.

Thus, 2 patients suffering from the same disease in the sense of classical medicine could be prescribed different homeopathic remedies because their mode of reaction differs or their specific symptoms are not the same. They could have the same “cold” (same virus), but not the same nasal discharge, for example. Homeopaths now have computer databases.

The dilutions

A homeopathic preparation labeled 6X denotes a remedy in which the original extract has been diluted (usually in a mixture of water and alcohol) in a proportion of 10 to 1 (hence the X). This is called a low dilution or a decimal dilution. At each step (6 in this case), the mixture will have been boosted by printing 100 shakes. There are also percent dilutions (100 to 1 at each dilution) which are designated C, and “millesimal” dilutions with the letter M (1000 to 1). These last two types of preparation constitute high dilutions.

We often see the letter H (for Hahnemann) contiguous to the symbols X, C or M (for example, 30CH). This identifies the Hahnemannian dilutions we have just described. Some dilutions are prepared using a slightly different procedure developed by another Hahnemann contemporary homeopath, Dr. Korsakov. Korsakovian dilutions are usually identified by a K.

In homeopathy, it is believed that remedies prepared in high dilution are more potent than those prepared in low dilution. They are used by professional homeopaths and more rarely used over the counter or in complexes intended directly to the public. Once the extract is diluted, it is presented in the form of tablets, granules (small soluble balls, whose base is usually sucrose, which is allowed to melt under the tongue) or solutions that take a few drops to that time. For topical uses, there are also homeopathic products in the form of lotions or ointments. Some preparations, such as skin creams, are said to be homeopathic in that they respect the principle of similarity (similar cures the like), but they are not necessarily diluted. They may contain, for example, mother tinctures of plants prepared according to a method specific to homeopathy.

What are we diluting?

The stem products used to make homeopathic medicines may be of plant, animal or mineral origin. Sometimes the relationship between the product and the condition being treated seems quite logical. Apis mellifica – diluted bee venom – is used to treat insect bites or other conditions that give similar reactions. Similarly, the oil of a plant, Arnica montana, which was traditionally used to treat bruises and sprains, found a similar use in homeopathy.

On the other hand, in other cases, the relationship is more amazing. Thus, the venom of the viper Lachesis mutus is used against certain disorders of the menopause; and Arsenicum album (derived from arsenic, a very toxic heavy metal) is recommended against certain skin diseases and various types of colds.

It should also be noted that Oscillococcinum, a “flu-breaker” and one of the best-selling homeopathic medicines, is made from a maceration of liver and duck heart.

It works, yes or no?

Opinions on this subject are radically different. Scientists, researchers, clinicians, doctors, health professionals, experts from international agencies say things totally opposite, “unstoppable” evidence to support. It would be either a scandalous absurdity or an extremely promising approach that would prove itself every day to millions of people and would be more and more solidly documented. Who to believe?

Without pretending to make an exhaustive presentation, here are the main arguments of both sides as well as the most recent hypotheses that attempt to explain the alleged effects of homeopathy.

Homeopathy is based on absurd concepts that have not changed for 150 years. The very high dilutions make sure that there is not a trace of the original product in the final product. According to classical science, the latter could not, therefore, have any specific therapeutic action. Renowned researcher Edzard Ernst, director of the Complementary Medicine Group at Exeter University in England (who was originally trained in homeopathy) is convinced of this. In an editorial entitled Should we keep an open mind about homeopathy? 1 published in 2009 in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine, he says that homeopathy is not based on science, but rather on ” faith “and on outdated and absurd metaphysical concepts. Homeopathy would be an affront to modern science, just like astrology, perpetual motion, alchemy or Elvis apparitions!

According to Ernst, “Opening oneself to believe in homeopathy goes beyond the tolerable limits of open-mindedness. We should start from the premise that homeopathy can not work and that any positive data can come only from publication bias or experimental error until proven otherwise. (…) By opening the door to irrational forms of medicine alongside evidence-based medicine, the public is deceived and its mind poisoned. ”

Open to amazing explanations, but still scientists.

Proponents of homeopathy retort that their opponents are fighting an ideological rather than a scientific struggle. They readily admit that the action of highly diluted products does not come from a specific action of the original molecules. But they maintain that it is contrary to scientific thought to assert that there can be no other possible explanation. Moreover, more and more experiments would prove those very highly diluted products have a clear biological action (see, below, High dilutions: scientifically measurable effects).

Another recent, and at least surprising, hypothesis that explains the effectiveness of homeopathy, as well as the difficulty of evaluating it by double-blind tests, is that of patient-practitioner-remedy intrication . According to her, there would be real “links” between the patient, the practitioner and the remedy! The term entanglement comes from quantum mechanics. It describes the phenomenon by which two particles, once entangled, have “links” that make any change in one immediately implies the same change in the other, regardless of the distance between them. A similar process could occur in the relationship between the patient, the practitioner and the remedy.

No serious study would have proven beyond doubt that homeopathy would be more effective than placebo. Here we are witnessing another formidable battle of specialists. In both camps, doctors, and researchers of high caliber. In both camps, serious scientific publications downright contradictory. Two examples.

In 2005, the Lancet, one of the most respected medical journals in the world, published a systematic review5 that was widely reported in the media. The researchers compared studies evaluating homeopathic medicines to as many studies for allopathic (conventional) drugs. Among all these studies, they retained only those of the highest quality and including the most subjects: 8 for homeopathy and 6 for allopathy.

From these studies, they concluded that the effects of homeopathy could, at best, only be due to the placebo effect. On the basis of this systematic review, the Lancet published a devastating editorial entitled The End of Homeopathy. The editorial team mentioned that “the results of the systematic review are not surprising. What is surprising is that the debate continues despite 150 years of adverse results. (…) The politically correct attitude of laissez-faire towards homeopathy has lasted too long, but light is finally coming. (…) The debate between homeopathy and allopathy fueled by biased reports and selective analyzes should stop, as should all research on homeopathy. ”

Second example. Published in 2010, a large study commissioned by the UK Parliament once again concluded that the action of homeopathy was due only to the placebo effect. The researchers recommended that homeopathy be no longer reimbursed by the state.

Here are some excerpts from the report.

“Randomized clinical trials are the best way to determine if there is a cause and effect relationship between a treatment and a result. ”

“Although several studies have found that homeopathic remedies in many cases provide a great deal of user satisfaction, this does not prove their clinical efficacy. The high satisfaction rate could be attributable to a strong placebo effect reinforced by the following 3 factors:

Homeopaths would mainly treat conditions that tend to be self-limiting (such as the common cold) or particularly sensitive to the placebo effect. Individuals treated with homeopathy would deliberately choose this therapy and would probably give it more confidence from the start. Homeopathic consultations are usually long, empathic, and warm, and physicians with a warmer attitude have been shown to have better clinical outcomes than those who are more formal. ” “According to our research, the concept of ultra-dilution that water could retain the imprint of a previously dissolved substance is not scientifically plausible. ”

The responses of homeopathic advocates to these 2 publications

Bad faith researchers? These publications have, of course, provoked an outcry from homeopathic advocates, whether they be doctors, practitioners or researchers. With regard to the Lancet study, they accused the editorial team and the magazine of bias and not being objective. They pointed out that judging all homeopathy on the basis of 8 studies was grossly against the scientific method. In addition, there was no mention of the studies in question. Four months later, the Lancet provided the list of studies. Proponents of homeopathy said that 3 other studies, which met the research criteria of the study perfectly, had been omitted. And if we included them, the results clearly tended to favor the effectiveness of homeopathy.

The methodology of conventional studies is not adapted to homeopathy. According to his supporters, random clinical studies do not do justice to the particular functioning of homeopathy. Indeed, in homeopathy, we do not treat a single symptom in isolation, but rather the whole person. In addition, attempting to isolate the patient-practitioner relationship to test only the drug goes against the clinical reality of a homeopathic treatment and could disrupt the results.

The placebo effect does not explain everything.

They also argue that in many cases the effect of homeopathy cannot be explained solely by the placebo effect. Thus, even if they are relatively few in number, quality randomized clinical studies indicate that homeopathy has, in some cases, significantly greater effects than placebo (see Therapeutic Applications).

This is the conclusion reached by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine at the US National Institutes of Health: “Most reviews of homeopathy studies conclude that there is very few evidence of its effectiveness in treating specific conditions. In addition, a lot of research has important gaps. However, some observational studies, some randomized clinical trials, and laboratory researchers show that homeopathic remedies have real positive effects and well-defined physical and chemical properties. ”

Thus, as one researcher has pointed out, 10 it is sufficient to discover a single black swan so that it is no longer possible to say that ALL swans are white. Similarly, if we discover even one effect that is not due to placebo, it becomes impossible to say that ALL homeopathy results are due to the placebo effect.

High dilutions: scientifically measurable effects.

Many researchers have looked at the specific biological effects of homeopathy. They found that highly diluted preparations can cause measurable biological effects on plants, animals or isolated cells in the laboratory. For example, a homeopathic preparation of arsenic has made it possible to increase the germination rate of wheat grains previously contaminated with true arsenic, as if they had been “cured” of their contamination. This would respect both the principle of similarity and high dilutions. As another example, researchers in a double-blind experiment measured significant differences between electroencephalograms of patients with fibromyalgia who took a homeopathic product or placebo.

Two special issues of the journal Homeopathy, published in 2009 and 2010, have been devoted to this theme and report a great deal of research on the biological effects of homeopathy. (The full content of the second issue is available online for free, see Books, etc.)

On the other hand, several laboratory experiments using calorimetry, thermoluminescence or optical emissions have demonstrated that it is possible to differentiate between pure water and ultra-dilute solutions (which, according to classical chemistry, should no longer contain only water). Other experiments have differentiated two homeopathic solutions.

Cancer cells destroyed in vitro

Finally, a study published in 2010 by the MD Anderson Cancer Center, one of the most reputable cancer treatment centers in the United States, found that 4 different homeopathic preparations could destroy breast cancer cells in a targeted way (by cytotoxicity). The action of 2 of them was similar to that of paclitaxel (Taxol), the product most used in chemotherapy against breast cancer. In addition, one of the four drugs consisted of ultra-diluted cancerous tissue extracts, in accordance with the principles of similarity and high dilution of homeopathy. The authors concluded that the homeopathic remedies evaluated in their study (and already used against breast cancer in a clinic in India) seem promising from a preventive and therapeutic point of view. This justifies, according to them, to continue the research.

Hypotheses of explanations

There is growing evidence that water can actually retain the footprint of a previously dissolved substance, even if the underlying mechanisms are not yet well understood. In 3 special issues of Homeopathy, published in 2007, 2009 and 2010, researchers presented the results of many experimental studies that could explain how highly diluted and “dynamized” products could produce measurable biological effects. Among these, we find:

The “restructuring” of water molecules that contain the same chemical elements (H2O) but are structured differently. The influence of silica from glass containers in which water is shaken. Silica could positively “contaminate” the product, as in the case of semiconductor doping. The formation of nano-bulles and singular nanoparticles during succussions. The creation of long-lived electrical and electromagnetic phenomena in water molecules. Non-uniform dispersion and agglomeration of diluted products. In one of the articles in the 2007 special issue, The Memory of Water: An Overview, the author, a researcher in applied science, states that “there are several rational explanations that can demonstrate why water actually displays different properties based on its past history. In fact, they are so blatant that one wonders how such a controversy persists around the “memory of water”.

Finally, in the main editorial of the same magazine, the author states: “There is still a lot of work to be done, but we can say one thing with certainty: it is absolutely wrong to claim that homeopathy is impossible under the pretext that the “water memory” would be impossible. ”

Why so much passion?

Many supporters of homeopathy accuse their opponents of acting with almost religious fervor. They accuse them of dogmatically refusing the slightest possibility that hypotheses that go beyond physics or classical chemistry may explain the effects of homeopathy.

Following the release of the study on the in vitro destruction of breast cancer cells by the MD Anderson Cancer Center in February 2010 (see above), renowned cancer expert Ralph Moss had the following reflection: 22 MD Anderson Center, which conducted the study, was ranked the United States’ best cancer hospital by the US News and World Report28. It will be particularly interesting to see if professional skeptics will, as usual, try to discredit the study. I hope that it will be a turning point and that conventional science will finally be forced to reassess its rigid opposition to this disconcerting but fascinating mode of treatment. ”

Finally, the reaction of the skeptics was not so virulent, although some still tried to discredit the study. They mentioned that the alcohol used to dilute the preparations could be responsible for cell death and that, as the laboratory experiments were not double blind, the study lost all credibility.

In a special issue of the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine devoted to homeopathy, on the occasion of Hahnemann’s 250th birthday, the publisher wondered: “Why is it so difficult to open up to homeopathy? The reasons we propose are complex and profound. They come as much from reason as from psychology as well as the search for intellectual and spiritual “comfort”. Homeopathy, perhaps more than any other discipline, causes reactions of a rare intensity as much to its antagonists as to its protagonists. Probably because the principles that underlie homeopathy absolutely defy the vision of nature and the biomolecular paradigm that currently prevail and that are a general consensus. “

The post Homeopathy: what is it? appeared first on BIOPHYTOPHARM.

from WordPress https://biophytopharm.com/homeopathy-what-is-it/ via IFTTT

#biophytopharm #essential oi #phytotherapy #aromatotherapy

0 notes