Page 14 - Winter 21-22

LANGUAGE in
medicine, we have to make sure that the language we use is clear and unambiguous and can also be comprehended by those, who have less or no experience with homeopathy.
I am very optimistic about the future of homeopathy. The nature of this future will also depend on, how we communicate amongst us and with those who are less familiar with our medicine. By making sure our internal communication is clear and correct at all times, we help creating a culture that makes homeopathy multidisciplinary ready.
This does not stop us using a narrative for case presentation and discussion: the narrative is typical for homeopathic medicine. We have to make sure that what we say in the narrative is verifiable in one way or another. It is about setting the ‘terms or reference’ for our exchanges.
Points to consider are the following:
• When we mention medical matters, these have to be verifiable according to generally acceptable notions and terms, as much as this is
possible. If we disagree
with mainstream medical notions, we have to explain our disagreements clearly and refer as much
as we can to existing references of quality.
• When we make a prescription of a homeopathic medicine (or propose a prescription when a colleague asks for help), we have to be clear, why we make such a prescription or proposal. ‘Try this or try that’ or ‘I use this or that’ are not really acceptable to me. If we consider homeopathy to be a serious kind of scientific medicine, we have to, at all times, be clear why and how we prescribe or clearly explain (and reference as much as is possible) our proposals.
• When we want to indicate that a prescription or a type of approach helps or ‘works’, we have to be clear how much, how often or what we mean by that.
• I am not sure it is good to say that a patient ‘needs such or such a medicine’. This, to me, sound almost that we are the ‘knowing’. I think it would be better to say: the patient benefitted or is expected to benefit from a particular prescription (or other intervention).
• The term ‘energy medicine’ is also something I think we need to drop. It is not that because the patient finds life energy again after a good prescription, we have practiced ‘energy medicine’. We certainly, thanks to
our intervention, allow ‘hidden’ or
Edward de Beukelaer, UK
Dear All,
Following my intervention during the board meeting relating to the language we use as homeopaths to talk about medicine, present case and have discussions amongst us, I would like to make the following clarification.
The desire to make these observations came about after hearing a presentation by a very well renowned homeopath, who made a few medical statements that were incorrect and stated a few times that ‘it works’ without making clear the circumstances or condition in which ‘it works’ and what ‘it works’ means in relation to the improvement of patients: in short and long term, for acute or chronic conditions, etc.
It is my opinion that for homeopathy to progress in the future as a scientific medical practice (scientific both in homeopathic and modern medicine terms), which is ready to be integrated in a multidisciplinary medicine, where all techniques are respected for their value in
12