Page 27 - Spring 19

In his article, Ivan Cavicchi [see English translation of the ’ effectiveness on all levels and achieve its rightful place,
...if/when we integrate into modern medicine and research on the efficacy of homeopathy follows, homeopathy will soon prove its effectiveness on all levels and achieve its rightful place...
homeopathy as long as the right approaches are followed. Now, I shall go to integrative medicine, where this letter started in a way. Integrative medicine has become a buzzword in medicine and I am using the term of this new movement to be able to slip the subject of homeopathy into the diary of the WVA (world Veterinary Association).
I therefore have adhered to the concept of differences between homeopathy and conventional medicine to do this.
Integrative medicine is seen as the combination of CAM and modern medicine. Some in the board were worried that by working under the banner of integrative medicine we risk reducing homeopathy to a complementary medicine only. I can see that argument but should we be worried? It seems logic to me that if/when we integrate into modern medicine and research on the efficacy of homeopathy follows, homeopathy will soon prove its
original article on pages 9-14 of this issue] so interestingly explained that medicine is not a perfect science in the way we think about chemistry or physics; medicine is a box of different sciences. We can use this argument to say that homeopathy should have its place in modern medicine. But then logically we also have to accept that there are sciences, which have their place in medicine, which will not necessarily make sense from a homeopathic scientific point of view.
I propose that we as individuals and in the IAVH should really have a good think about this: should we really see ourselves to be different from our colleagues? Is that going to help us and homeopathy forward? Further, even within ‘homeopathy’ there are variations in the way we practice just like colleagues in conventional medicine, who have different ways of practicing medicine. Medicine is a box of sciences....
OK, homeopathic medicine has a number of important advantages over the use of chemical medicines but sometimes the chemical medicines are really helpful too...
Of course, we are convinced that homeopathy is a far better approach compared to some of the things that happen in conventional medicine. Of course, we have a great advantage by being able to use homeopathy. We need to be convinced of the capabilities of homeopathy, otherwise we would not put in all the effort to learn and improve our personal competences in homeopathy. But we should also be convinced based on what we can achieve in a reliable way using homeopathy. We should not just prefer homeopathy because we are against some of the conventional medicine habits. In this sense it is important that we engage in research as part of evidence- based medicine. It is perfectly possible to do this for
where it can be complementary and/or standalone depending on the situation of each case. It will not be a revolution; it will be a process. We have to engage in this process.
I would propose that rather than being undignified about or try to battle some of the habits of conventional medicine, we should concentrate on positive messages about homeopathy and show how well it fits into modern medicine. We should be such good homeopaths that we can help patients, who are already under heavy medication, so we can fit into medicine as it is practiced today. This may be more difficult and not as perfect as we would like it to be. But we should adapt to the reality to help each patient that is presented to us as well as we can. I am convinced we should be doing this without worrying too much about what treatments patients received before their homeopathic treatment started.
Could it not be that by putting energy in focussing too much on previous/current treatments (even when we are right,) we take energy away from our homeopathic intervention?
Go and enjoy homeopathy. Edward
25