Homeopathy – or where I lose some readers

There were two prompts for this post: a few headlines of articles regarding the possibility of homeopathy being banned or made illegal in the United Kingdom and a relatively recent Facebook friend add of a homeopath who saved my sanity some years back. More on that later. Now, I don’t like the idea of such a noble art, and one that is so powerful when used correctly, being banned so I felt I had to say something.

Many people I know and respect will likely think homeopathy is hokum at best or dangerous garbage at worse. No probs there, that’s quite logical, as it clear homeopathic remedies contain nothing physical that may promote health (or equally cause ill). There’s nothing in it, therefore it is at best a placebo the well-worn argument runs. And if the physical dimension is all you are concerned with, it all makes sense. Well done, have a cigar.

However, many of these same people also hold with and practice a number of different esoteric and ‘spiritual’ traditions which have the central motif and reality that something non-physical can impact upon and change the physical. Magic, in other words. You see where I am going with this – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander and wot all.

To be fair, I used to be sceptical (if not scoffing) about homeopathy. This was despite never having used it myself (strike one) and practicing a tradition (the Golden Dawn) that historically included some leading homeopaths in London (strike two). My not-quite youthful arrogance took a third and final strike when the mother of my child used homeopathy during her labour. In that highly charged, between the worlds and sacred space, I could see the effectiveness of the various remedies prescribed by her midwife and witness the immediate help they offered for her labour.

Proof with the ‘Pudding’

After the birth of my child I studied homeopathy a bit more and decided to see how it worked more. Now the first wonders I beheld were those of my child recovering their full health finally after a nasty bout of chicken pox. Of course, this could all be subjective involving placebos and expectations from parents etc.

However, during the teething phase of infancy I came to love homeopathy and my homeopath. Our child, as many do, suffered terribly from teething and would wake in the night screaming and crying in pain. They were prescribed Chamomilla 30c as a remedy, in liquid form. These, and I swear by all that is holy this is true, were the results.

  • Infant (sleeping next to our bed) wakes in night screaming.
  • Befuddled dad reaches for Chamomilla, holds infant administers a few drops among crying.
  • 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 – crying subsides
  • 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 – infant back to sleep!
  • Relieved dad collapses back, mum seldom woke at all.

How fucking glorious was that!?! Anyone who parented a night-teething baby would know what a miracle this was. Compare this with the results from Baby Panadol …

Of course, we can also invoke some form of expectation placebo effect here – but the results were still wonderful and saved my sanity, so even if it were ‘expectation placebo’, so what? Anyway, it was not any sort of expectation of results somehow being transferred from me to the screaming child (and hey, that possibility opens a whole new bag of worms).

I know this because by accident I once gave them Belladonna 30c, which was also by the bed for my partner. In this case NOTHING happened. The baby screamed on. I was confused, bordering on worrying. It had always worked before. It took me two minutes to finally check the bottle. Fortunately accidental dosage of homeopathic remedies is not poisonous and I administered the correct Chamomilla. Since they were already in lots of distress it took longer than ten seconds this time. It took 30. But I was still far ahead of those poor parents using paracetamol.

How It Work Then?

All of these, and many other instances, led me to investigate homeopathy further, and in summary I think it’s kinda like this:

Homeopathy, like a few other forms of ‘energy medicine’, works within a paradigm of physical and subtle bodies. It recognizes there are no actual physical molecules of Belladonna in its Belladonna remedy. OK. Got that? Cool.

So this means each and every laboratory test of homeopathic remedies are set up to fail. Because physical tests require something physical. We cannot get streptococcus bacteria in two test tubes, plonk penicillin in one and homeopathic sulphur in the other, compare and say, ‘see it doesn’t work!’ Of course it doesn’t work. It is not meant to work that way – all homeopathic remedies work only with the person.  We are not talking chemistry here but something just as wonderful 🙂

Instead homeopathy asserts there is an ‘energetic’ dimension linked to the physical remedy that may affect our subtle bodies and thereby help our own subtle bodies promote physical health. Our subtle bodies are affected by the ‘energy’ or signature of the Belladonna and the reactions there will cause us to heal ourselves. No outside chemicals involved. The physical Belladonna remedy we take is merely a carrier for this signature. There is no trickle down of ‘Belladonna’ from subtle to physical; only our own subtle body affects our physical and the remedy affects the subtle bodies alone. This is really important.

The whole concept of subtle bodies is the big break between orthodox scientific and homeopathic worldviews. But homeopathy at no time asserts its remedies directly affect the physical body. At all, at all. The planes are not confused. It has its own logic and supports physical intervention for the physical body while it addresses the non-physical to promote physical health. This is very important and I am sure homeopaths themselves laugh equally along with videos such as this:

Once we have established we cannot test homeopathy in a laboratory we have to include the human element. And here is where a little thing like human difference gets in the way of standard double-blind trials procedures. Since we are each very different folk (especially on the subtle body levels), the same ‘illness’, heck even the same infection caused by exposure to streptococcus, will manifest in many subtle ways. And each of us may require different homeopathic remedies and different potencies of that remedy to change the course of the illness. We may require a few different remedies, changing as we heal.

We cannot design a blind trial with one third of folk getting penicillin, one third a placebo and one third homeopathic sulphur. The penicillin will act chemically with the bacterium and ‘kill’ it in most of the people given it. But there is no guarantee sulphur would be the correct remedy for the people it is given to. Again, we can’t compare.

It is here I would say homeopathy is a much an art as it is a science. And skilled homeopaths practice an art tailored to their clients to produce the knowledge of what remedy is correct at that time. I would also venture to say that I suspect the inclusion of consciousness, conscious deduction and skill on behalf of the homeopath has something to do with the overall success also. This is a healing method that centres upon the higher dimensions of the person and the person healing themselves from those levels, so it seems to be consciousness would be an important part of the equation.

Like all things, I think we can only do so much on our own with store brought remedies and must consult a qualified homeopath for anything serious. I can do washers on leaky taps, but anything else I’m on the phone to the plumber. The same with our health. And really, I find it kinda strange that folk who attempt homeopathic healings themselves based on misleading ideas that are about and fail, discount the whole field. One may as well discount plumbing as a science.

A Merry and Quick Conclusion

So while folk like me are able to easily pull apart many of the objections to the idea of homeopathy being ‘false’ and while folk like me suffer less and sleep more than folk using conventional medicine, and while folk like me like the idea of people choosing their health methods for themselves, suggestions to ban homeopathy will always cause fiction. Of course, I am supportive of correctly trained and qualified homeopaths, clear in the areas of their art and not providing false or misleading claims and information. This is best produced by training and regulation not limiting and banning. OK. Thanks 🙂

4 comments

  1. asariah · January 29

    Hi Peregrin,

    I practice homeopathy as well as a number of other modalities and homeopathy is based upon concepts related to the work of Paracelsus, who likewise believed in the “minimum dose”. One thing I would mention though. Not all remedies are non-physical. Thus the popular British School of 3Xers. The dilution or titration of the dose depends upon the stigmatic expression of the illness (by the way Spagyric and Alchemical remedies depend on this concept as well…). Physical visible symptoms call for a physical dose of the remedy (not diluted past Avagadro’s number) and symptoms that do not express themselves visibly require a more spiritous remedy (highly diluted and more metaphysical). Also, Homeopathy is not based on subtle bodies but on the “Vigor Vitae” or “Vital Force” whose struggle with the pathogenic invading entity shows the stigmata of the illness through the suffering of the patient in all aspects of the patient’s being. It is likewise notable that some Homeopaths were also renowned Scientists. One even helped develop quantum concepts utilized in physics today. Homeopathic remedies also have shown themselves effective beyond placebo effect in studies. And there have been placebo double blind studies but not “funded” on a par with allopathic studies paid for by big pharma. It is the physical mechanism of action that is in question, not the effectiveness of the remedies. I would also note that in many ways Homeopathic “Provings” make more logical sense than studies based upon illness. There were also notable Homeopaths involved in the G.D. in areas beyond the U.K. Those things being said, thank you for bringing this topic to folk’s attention.

    ~A.

  2. Tasos · January 29

    Dear Peregrin,

    Having studied homeopathy myself and used it in the past (still do sometimes), i have to add the following. I will not discuss whether it works or not, because it does. Homeopathy works on the subtle bodies and through them on the physical body. Now there are a few reasons that double blind trials cannot be done with homeopathy. (By the way Hanneman, father of homeopathy, student of Paracelsus and Freemason, is the first person ever made double blind trials, That’s where “allopathic” medicine got it from). The first reason is that true homeopathic practice (and not key note prescribing) is heavily based on the interview the homeopath has with the client. The homeopath identifies the psychological and mental image of the patient with the mental image of one of the substances.(The mental and psychological image of a substance is made known through a procedure called “proving”). Now only then the “magic” works and the client get better on all levels. Therefore, two or more people with the same complain, can get different remedies and all of them get better. They need to get the remedy fitting exactly to their mental and psychological constitution. This makes it almost impossible to categorize groups for making double blind trials. The second reason is that since homeopathy works on subtle bodies, there is nothing tangible to measure, apart from results (i.e. relief of symptoms). And results greatly differ from client to client. Can we put magic in a double blind trial? I guess not. Does magic work? Sufficiently performed, i guess yes. Is is possible to make a group doing Sagittarius ritual and another group doing nothing and measure changes? Absolutely not. What are the changes that we will look for? In what state is “Sagittarius energy” in each participant in the first place etc etc… I believe the point is obvious. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to write about an art that i love and has been a great help for me an others on the path.

    In Light, Life, Love, Liberty
    Ichthys

    P.S. (Out of homeopathic curiosity, which members of the historical GD were homeopaths?)

  3. thefirstdark · March 8

    Reblogged this on The Darkness in the Light.

  4. asariah · March 8

    Berridge was probably the most well known of the GD Homeopaths.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s