Page 26 - Winter 18-19

IAVH President Edward de Beukelaer
Dear All,
My thinking with regards to medicine has changed quite a bit over time, for a great deal due to my education in homeopathy. Like most of you it started with some dissatisfaction with what conventional medicine had to offer... something was not right.
I sort of discovered homeopathy by accident. During my learning of homeopathy, I slowly started seeing what I had missed out on. This type of medicine made much more sense. It was also nicer and there was the prospect of being able to help so many more patients for so many more conditions. I suppose this sounds familiar.
Even though it took several years before I could use homeopathy successfully (well, with a certain level of success) there was no stopping my enthusiasm. This was the new way forward. I was going to be able to treat so many things so much better than before.
With discovering homeopathy came also the notion of suppression and the issue of chronic disease. Suddenly there was not only the (often ignored) possibility of side effects of medicines; there was also the possibility that every treatment, when not accurate, could cause more problems for the future. The homeopathic thinking about
24
health and disease changed my outlook on medicine. This lead initially to an improvement in my conventional practice but then also to the many questions we, in homeopathic circles, ask ourselves about conventional medicine.
It has taken many years before I could find some peace between practicing conventional medicine and hom’eopathy. I struggled wondering whether I was a bad homeopath because I still used conventional medicine at times.
reality and restrictions of daily practice, my own capabilities and also in relation to what my clients accept.
In the last few years many clients said they came to see me because I was a homeopath. These same clients did not necessary want me to use homeopathy: some of them only came to have their animals treated conventionally but preferred a homeopath to do so.
Professor Michael Frass from Vienna said that we should not say we practice conventional or homeopathic medicine but that we practice ... medicine.
This brings me to the point I would like to make. However much we may or may not like conventional medicine, it is part of ‘medicine’ and it has brought along many good things we homeopaths also need and can use.
It is more the way in which medicine is used that can be debatable than the type of medicine itself. This can be the case for all types of medicine.
From this comes my view of how the IAVH should portray itself. We should be a body for promoting homeopathy but never for criticising any other type of medicine. We should even not give the impression that as an organisation we are anti-‘something in medicine’.
That of course does not stop any of you putting energy and conviction, in private or other organisations, into pointing out some of the abuses in medicine. But that should never be the role of the IAVH.
Further, it is important that the IAVH finds its rightful place in ‘medicine’, just like any other medical organisation, looking for respect while respecting others.
It is not by criticising what others do that we are better, even when we have all the proof in the world that we are right. It is by showing what we can do and how we can cooperate that we shall be seen from our best side.
About 10 years ago I came to peace with this idea. In the end I can only do what is possible within the limits of the
However much we may or may not like conventional medicine, it is part of ‘medicine’ and it has brought along many good things we homeopaths also need and can use.