I am scheduled to present an online presentation at a joint homeopathic conference this June. It is a conference, of course on homeopathic medicine and there will be a focus on how epidemics have been, and can now be, treated successfully with the homeopathic method. Those of you that have been following my posts on this topic, addressing the current epidemic, will understand what I am referring to. A recent post, Nux, To The Rescue, is a good demonstration of that in which a young woman is sick for 11 days and within minutes of the first dose of a homeopathic remedy is showing improvement. This is why homeopathy is remarkable and is worth giving attention to.
In this scheduled conference there are several speakers whose topic is the current epidemic and their experience in treating it. Useful information, what? So imagine the surprise that I get an email this morning from the organizers of the conference warning me (and the other speakers) to be careful what they say. Here is an extract from their message which shows what I am talking about —
“…the US Federal Trade Commission and other US Government Agencies have been restricting what can be communicated regarding the treatment or prevention of COVID-19 that do not comply with strict National Institute of Health policies. Consequently, we will need to be very careful about how we communicate during our presentations. We won’t be able to use terms like ‘treatment’ or ‘prevention’, ‘COVID-19’ or ‘coronavirus’.”
Do you understand the significance of this? It is telling us that a professional conference of medical doctors discussing an entirely legal system of medicine cannot say that they either “treat” or “prevent” the disease. Can you imagine the outrage if this was directed to an allopathic conference? That conventional doctors dealing with this virus disease cannot say they have treated it?
How could this come about? We can assume that the message coming from our government is communicating their disapproval of the homeopathic method. They don’t want us to say we are treating it as we will be lying. This is not new. At this point, we are seeing the playing out of allopathic medicine being a monopoly and opposed to all other competing systems. For homeopathy, this started quite some time ago.
Homeopathy was introduced to the US in the very early 1800s by Dr. Burch Gram who had trained in Germany. He treated fellow doctors and converted many of them. As well, the dramatic effectiveness of homeopathy treating epidemics brought many other doctors into the fold. Homeopathy grew steadily and by the middle 1800s, every state had a homeopathic medical school, and 25% of doctors now used this method. The situation changed in 1847. The doctors that had not embraced homeopathy, seeing its continuing development, started an organization to combat homeopathy as well as other forms of medicine such as herbalism, chiropractic, osteopathy, and such like.
From this point, there was continued aggressive movement towards homeopathy culminating in the medical schools having their funding taken away and having to close. The organization was so hostile to homeopathy that if any members even talked to a homeopathic practitioner they would be expelled from the organization. One fellow this happened to, who was expelled from the organization, had committed this serious offense of talking to a homeopathic practitioner — his wife.
What was this organization? It called itself the American Medical Association (AMA).
The result of this process was that allopathic medicine became a monopoly, a state which is actually not accepted in other areas such as industry. However, it has been maintained in medicine. “Wait,” you say “I can get other treatment if I want.” Yes, you can get herbal treatment, homeopathic treatment, etc. — if you are willing to pay out of pocket. They are not covered by insurance and therefore stay on the fringes of the medical system.
A related development has been the incredible growth and power of the drug industry. We are talking billions of dollars. In these days, it is often this industry behind the efforts to eliminate homeopathy. You can see why. It is not unusual that a person, or animal, can be cured with homeopathic treatment of a condition that otherwise would be incurable and require the continued use of medicines for decades. I know of people cured of such, usually incurable, conditions that the total medicinal cost for this cure was less than $10. There would, of course, be the charge of the practitioner but the medicine itself very cheap and also not needing to be continued.
Can you see why this would be a threat to the monopoly?
I can understand that some reading this may think I am exaggerating. Perhaps at some point, more information on the historical success of homeopathy in epidemics can be presented. At this point, I will mention one piece of evidence.
In the 1800s there were very severe, high mortality, epidemics in the US, diseases such as cholera, typhoid, or yellow fever. When the US populace saw the extraordinary results of homeopathic treatment, there was enough fervor to organize the erection of a monument to Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy. On June 21, 1900, a monument to Hahnemann was erected in Washington, DC, with the attendance of the president of the United States. It is about a 1/2 mile from the White House. It is on a traffic circle, Scott Circle, and is quite impressive to visit. A picture of it is attached here.
It is very large. If I were to be standing in front of it my head would reach the bottom of the chair Hahnemann is sitting on. When we reflect on this and realize very few doctors have monuments like this, you can get some sense of the impact homeopathy had on our culture at that time. Therefore, in closing, when you hear the criticisms of homeopathy and the denial of its effectiveness, realize where it is coming from. And remember that it has been this way since 1847.