If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
Dear Dr ____,
I do not find the article submitted by you objectionable in any way. The writer has tried to understand the homeopathic principles, explained them, and comes to the conclusion that it is unscientific and defies common sense. All homeopaths in fact agree to the above, that homeopathy is beyond science and defies the commonly believed ideas of physics, chemistry and medicine. There is no quarrel with this. But what baffles both homeopaths as well as its detractors is that homeopathy works. In a recent symposium on homeopathy held at Kolkata, India, the mainstream doctors, while criticising homeopathy, conceded that it does work. They also expressed concern that homeopathy, if accepted, would result in rewriting the texts of physics and chemistry. The last objection seemed to trouble them the most. They do not obviously want to start from zero once again. Homeopathy is more than just theory. The 290 odd principles of homeopathy and its application, as well as the nature of disease, stands untouched till today simply because no one has come up with anything to merit a change. Even modern day homeopaths like Dr George Vithoulkas marvels at the infallibility of the organon of medicine as elucidated by Hahnemann. This is in stark contrast with allopathy where the principles change each day. This results in a lot of consternation as the patients (the educated ones), come to the conclusion, at the end of each passing day, that what was performed on them the previous day is proved false the next. The resultant frustration can well be imagined. Sometimes we are forced to laugh as different studies bring out different results leaving us puzzled as to which to adopt. Hahnemann studied man in his complete form of existence, also conceded by the writer of your submitted article, and therefore came out with certain infallible rules. He rightly came to the conclusion that disease could not exist without a fertile ground which he termed miasm. And he then proceeded to attack the miasm and cure it so that disease would be both relieved and cured as the base on which it stood was destroyed. This approach has been advocated by mainstream doctors also, the earliest being Antoine Beuchamp MD, and is being increasing discussed amongst modern day doctors who are dealing with cancer and AIDS. Hahnemann also predicted the dynamics of disease. He could sense that disease proceeded from outward within and the body reacted by throwing it from within outwards. Thus we see that urine and faeces become full of disease matter as the disease products are thrown out. The skin also becomes active by throwing the toxins out in the form of skin ailments. Hahnemann also observed that the disease force gained tremendous encouragement if the external manifestations of disease was tinkered with instead of treating the underlying cause. He also percieved that the external disease states of syphillis or gonorrhoea devastated the body if the external symptoms were tackled allopathically. Mainstream doctors too have poercieved this and thus physicians and psychiatrists test the blood for VD when they come across symptoms that they think could have been caused by a case history of veneral diseases. This thus proves that sexual diseases do not go away entirely when the external lesions are destroyed. Hahneman's concept of the vital force is very similar to the prana shakti of the ayurveds and the chi or ki of chinese medicine. When the vital force is very strong allopathy can temporarily stave off the disease. But this action weakens the vital force as it goes against its natural flow. Repeated such attempts weakens the patient and he becomes more and more sick and his internal organs give up one by one leading to his ultimate death. It always amazes me when reductionist doctors who feel that all organs and parts of the body function independantly of each other report at the end that the patient has died of "multiple organ failure". As the writer points out, there is much to learn from homeopathy. I too advocate that instead of reading homeopathic texts cursorily with a motive to malign them, the physicians would do well to study them sincerely, apply them in practice and test the results. This has to be done by discarding the reductionist principles they hold in their mind. Homoeopathy acts as per homeopathic principles and not by allopathic tinkering. The same goes for the other holistic therapies also. There are many mainstream practitioners who have turned to holistic therapies in case of their own ailments, or for treating their family members and achieved results. In my own family too a distant grandmother was treated successfully of her paralysis by homeopathy despite being the mother of four doctors, one of whom heads the most popular govt medical college of Kolkata. This head too was relieved of her gyneacological problems by the eminent homeopath Dr Bholanath Chakroborty, attached to the President of India at that time. If the doctors can turn to holistic therapies while treating themselves and their own kith and kin, why do they not extend the same facilities to their patients, who go to them with great hope and pay them substantial amounts as fees and also look upon them as gods? I again reiterate that the doctors duty is to heal the patients and not advocate any particular mode of treatment. He should be well versed with all therapies and apply them as the situation demands. Experimentations can continue on the hapless rats and monkeys while the human beings are treated with fool proof methods of treatment. You will also notice that I have struck out the "this article is purely for educational purposes....the reader should consult a (allopathic) physician..." introduced by you from the end as I believe doctors should do what is right to avoid legal suits and not escape by such declarations. They have a long way to go before they can win back the trust of their patients. Any delay will permanently cut them off from the mainstream. They should therefore initiate reforms without any further ado. Regards, Jagannath. --- In @yahoogroups.com, "v..........." v..............@... wrote: I could not haqve said better than this article. Please read: http://www.tfn.net/HealthGazette/homeop.html The Health Gazette Homeopathy Introduction Homeopathy is a discipline that has been around for over 100 years. It was developed by Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, a German physician who was practicing medicine in the 18th century when bleeding and purging were widely used in mainstream medicine. At that time, homeopathy was warmly embraced by some U.S. practitioners as a more humane alternative. The practice of homeopathy is based on the law of similars. This means that what a substance can cause, it can cure. Dr. Hahnemann proposed that "like cures like." Basic Tenets The basic tenet of homeopathy is that disease can be cured by giving the patient minute amounts of a substance that can induce similar symptoms to the actual disease itself. This was felt to restore the patient's vital force. Dr. Hahnemann gave volunteers numerous different compounds and recorded the symptoms that these compounds caused in great detail. He then recorded this information in a book called 'Organon of Medicine' which is still used today to guide the homeopathic doctor in which treatment to use. This book has been used for years to treat numerous different ailments. The very compound that was used to cause a particular condition was used in extremely small doses to treat patients who presented with similar symptoms. These drugs were diluted so many times they actually would not contain any molecules of the actual substance that was initially diluted. Interestingly, Dr. Hahnemann claimed the potency actually increases as the drug becomes more and more dilute. The solution used to dilute the drug could be either water, alcohol or a combination of both. The process of repetitively diluting a drug is call potentiation. Each time a dilution takes place, the solution is vigorously shaken in order to evenly distribute the molecules in the solution. Homeopathic physicians will freely admit that their most potent medications do not contain any molecules of the initial drug that was diluted. The mechanism of action of this medicine has never been explained scientifically. There has been some speculation that the diluent supposedly remembers, or in some way fingerprints, the initial drug that was diluted. Another tenet of homeopathy is that you are treating the patient rather than a particular disease or organ system. The homeopathic medicine is given with hopes that the vital forces of the patient will be reestablished. In his book, 'Organon of Medicine', Hahnemann suggests that the essence of illness is a disorder in the vital forces. Because of this disorder, people are susceptible to different disease entities. By restoring the vital forces, the body is able to rid itself of the disease. Another tenet of homeopathy is that patients must allow enough time for the homeopathic remedy to work. They are to avoid caffeine or other medications that may interfere with treatment. The Problems With Homeopathy Homeopathy is not presently accepted by traditional medicine in the United States. Although there are a few health caregivers that subscribe to homeopathy, they are few and far between. One of the basic problems with homeopathy is that it was founded before the principles of modern science were developed. Homeopathy was developed before the dramatic advances of chemistry and physics in the 1900s. Dr. Hahnemann had no idea what the molecular structure of a substance was. Unfortunately, as science progressed, homeopathy did not attempt to incorporate any of the basic scientific principles into its basic tenets. Certainly, modern medicine treats numerous diseases with medication and the mechanism of action is unknown, even though the treatment is successful. The problem with homeopathy is that it is totally unscientific and it runs counter to the basic laws of chemistry, physics and common sense. Studies of Homeopathy There have been numerous studies that have attempted to prove or disprove the effectiveness of homeopathy. One such study by C. Hill and F. Doyon was a review of randomized trials of homeopathy. This was published in 1990. The review covers 40 published randomized trials in which the results of homeopathy treatment were compared to those of standard treatment, placebo, or no treatment at all. Most of the studies were double blinded. This means that neither the patient nor the physician knew if the patient was getting a placebo, a conventional treatment, or a homeopathic remedy. The authors concluded that the results do not provide acceptable evidence that homeopathic treatments are effective. Another study was performed on 175 children with frequently recurring upper respiratory tract infections. Approximately half were given homeopathic medicines and the other half were given a placebo. The children were followed for 1 year to see if there was a decrease in the number of colds, tonsillectomies, adenoidectomies, and the necessity of antibiotic therapy. The authors concluded that homeopathic medicines seemed to add little to careful counseling of children with recurrent upper respiratory tract infections. There was no significant difference in reducing the daily burden of symptoms, use of antibiotics, or the need for adenoidectomy and tonsillectomy. Interestingly, both groups had a decrease in the amount of antibiotic usage as well as surgery. This was explained on the basis of education of both groups concerning when to seek medical care, as well as just basic counseling on upper respiratory infections. Conclusions Homeopathy has no scientific basis whatsoever, and the concept of potentiation by dilutions is absurd when modern basic scientific principles are considered. The argument has been made that homeopathy works by some, yet unexplained, mechanism. This certainly could be true, but it would be easier to accept if clinical trials could consistently show a difference between homeopathy and placebo. On the other hand, homeopathy does have some good principles that I believe modern medicine could benefit from. The first is that given time, most disease processes will resolve spontaneously without treatment. This is certainly true of colds and viral infections. Please refer to the article "The Truth About Viruses" previously reported in the Health Gazette. Homeopathic doctors believe that antibiotics are harmful and, indeed, sometimes they are. Our society as a whole would be better off if we would avoid the tendency to put everyone on antibiotics for simple colds. Homeopathy also attempts to treat the whole patient rather than a specific disease. I believe that many times physicians have a tendency to focus on the disease or malfunctioning organ rather than listening to the patient and considering other factors that may be involved. Fortunately, residency programs are actually emphasizing a more holistic approach to the patient than was advocated in the past. Although, science is an integral part of modern medicine, the art of medicine is still exceedingly important. References # 1. Dooley TR. Homeopathy: Beyond Flat Earth Medicine. Timing Publications, 4095 Jackdaw Street, San Diego, CA 92103. # 2. Walach H. Does a highly diluted homeopathic drug act as a placebo in healthy volunteers? Experimental study of Belladonna 30C in double-blind crossover design-a pilot study. J Psychosom Res 1993 Dec;37(8):851-60. # 3. Hill C; Doyon F. Review of randomized trials of homeopathy. # Rev Epidemo Dante Publique 1990:38(2):139-47. # 4. Jarvis WT. Quackery: a national scandal. Clin Chem 1992 Aug;38 (8b Pt 2):1574-86. # 5. Perez CB: Tomsko PL. Homeopathy and the treatment of mental illness in the 19th century. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1994 Oct:45 (10):1030-3. # 6. De Lange de Klerk ES, et al. Effect of homeopathic medicines on daily burden of symptoms in children with recurrent upper respiratory tract infections. BMJ 1994 Nov 19;309(6965):1329-32. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
wrote in message oups.com... Dear Dr ____, I do not find the article submitted by you objectionable in any way. The writer has tried to understand the homeopathic principles, explained them, and comes to the conclusion that it is unscientific and defies common sense. All homeopaths in fact agree to the above, that homeopathy is beyond science and defies the commonly believed ideas of physics, chemistry and medicine. There is no quarrel with this. But what baffles both homeopaths as well as its detractors is that homeopathy works. It doesn't work. If I am wrong, please provide evidence that it works. In a recent symposium on homeopathy held at Kolkata, India, the mainstream doctors, while criticising homeopathy, conceded that it does work. They also expressed concern that homeopathy, if accepted, would result in rewriting the texts of physics and chemistry. The last objection seemed to trouble them the most. They do not obviously want to start from zero once again. Homeopathy is more than just theory. The 290 odd principles of homeopathy and its application, as well as the nature of disease, stands untouched till today simply because no one has come up with anything to merit a change. I will agree that it's principles are odd. Even modern day homeopaths like Dr George Vithoulkas marvels at the infallibility of the organon of medicine as elucidated by Hahnemann. Nothing is infallible. This is in stark contrast with allopathy where the principles change each day. The principles of medicine are still based on science, not conjecture, like homeopathy's. This results in a lot of consternation as the patients (the educated ones), come to the conclusion, at the end of each passing day, that what was performed on them the previous day is proved false the next. Wrong, what this means is that each passing day, our understanding of our bodies and of medicine grows each day, resulting in better treatments, like the improving cure rate for cancers, especially pediatric cancers. The resultant frustration can well be imagined. Sometimes we are forced to laugh as different studies bring out different results leaving us puzzled as to which to adopt. As if the human body were so simple that you can understand it in one study. Hahnemann studied man in his complete form of existence, also conceded by the writer of your submitted article, and therefore came out with certain infallible rules. He rightly came to the conclusion that disease could not exist without a fertile ground which he termed miasm. His complete existance? Did he study man in India or Native America? Did he study the effects of AIDS on man? How about of war? Sorry, but homeopathy is religion, not science or medicine. rest of garbage deleted Jeff |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
"Jeff" wrote in message nk.net... It doesn't work. If I am wrong, please provide evidence that it works. LOL. We even have a bunch of allopaths doing it here with their own hospital. "In the records of three years of Diphtheria in Broome County, NY from 1862 to 1864, there was a report of an 83.6% mortality rate among the allopaths and a 16.4% mortality rate among the Homeopaths. (Bradford)."---Julian Winston "When the (1813 typhus) epidemic came through Leipzig as the army pulled back from the east, Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, was able to treat 180 cases of Typhus-- losing but two. This, at a time when the conventional treatments were having a mortality rate of over 30%....When Cholera finally struck Europe in 1831 the mortality rate (under conventional treatment) was between 40% (Imperial Council of Russia)to 80% (Osler's Practice of Medicine). Out of five people who contracted Cholera, two to four of them died under regular treatment.Dr. Quin, in London, reported the mortality in the ten homeopathic hospitals in 1831-32 as 9%.... In 1854 a Cholera Epidemic struck London. This was a historically important epidemic in that it was the first time the medical community was able to trace the outbreak to a source (a public water pump), and when the pump was closed, the epidemic soon ceased. The House of Commons asked for a report about the various methods of treating the epidemic. When the report was issued, the homeopathic figures were not included. The House of Lords asked for an explanation, and it was admitted that if the homeopathic figures were to be included in the report, it would "skew the results." The suppressed report revealed that under allopathic care the mortality was 59.2% while under homeopathic care the mortality was only 9%."--Julian Winston "During the 1850s, there were several epidemics of Yellow Fever in the southern states. This disease was eventually found to be transmitted by mosquito. Osler, says that the allopathic mortality from Yellow Fever is between 15-85%. Holcome, a homeopath, reported in 1853 a mortality of 6.43% in Natchez, and Dr. Davis, another homeopath in Natchez, reported 5.73%. In 1878 the mortality in New Orleans was 50% under allopathic care, and 5.6% (in 1,945 cases in the same epidemic) with homeopathic care."---Julian Winston "The Journal of the American Institute for Homeopathy, May, 1921, had a long article about the use of homeopathy in the flu epidemic. Dr. T A McCann, from Dayton, Ohio reported that 24,000 cases of flu treated allopathically had a mortality rate of 28.2% while 26,000 cases of flu treated homeopathically had a mortality rate of 1.05%. This last figure was supported by Dean W.A. Pearson of Philadelphia (Hahnemann College) who collected 26,795 cases of flu treated with homeopathy with the above result..... Dr. Herbert A. Roberts from Derby, CT, said that 30 physicians in Connecticut responded to his request for data. They reported 6,602 cases with 55 deaths, which is less than 1%. Dr. Roberts was working as a physician on a troop ship during WWI. He had 81 cases of flu on the way over to Europe. He reported, "All recovered and were landed. Every man received homeopathic treatment. One ship lost 31 on the way."---Julian Winston "What appears to emerge from the study is: a) Nosodes can effectively stop, in its tracks, an outbreak of a highly transmissible disease (viz kennel cough). b) That it does so, in this case, more effectively than the presently available vaccines. c) That vaccination impairs the ability of the animal to respond to the nosode."--Christoper Day, MA, Vet.M.B., M.R.C.VS. Vet.F.F.Hom (What Vets Don't Tell you about Vaccination, p 238 by Catherine O'Driscol) "John Saxton MRCVS VetMFHom presented a paper in 1991 describing the use of the canine distemper nosode in disease control...The results showed that, of dogs kept in the kennes for 8 days, 11.67% showed clinical signs of distemper on the 5th day prior to the introduction of nosodes, dropping to 4.36% after the nosodes were introduced. Where the entire kennel population was taken into account...the incidence of distemper dropped from 8.05% to 2.81% afetr the introduction of nosodes."---(What Vets Don't Tell you about Vaccination, p 240 by Catherine O'Driscol) "Homeopathy is wholly capable of satisfying the therapeutic demands of this age better than any other system or school of medicine."-----Dr. Charles Menninger M.D., Founder Menninger Clinic "Homeopathy .... cures a larger percentage of cases than any other method of treatment and is beyond doubt safer and more economical and most complete medical science." Mahatama Gandhi "effective natural remedies that have no side effects" Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D. Professor U. of Illinois Medical School and best-selling author "Homeopathy is the safest and more reliable approach to ailments and has withstood the assaults of established medical practice for over 100 years."----Yehudi Menuhin, World famous violinist "The introduction of homeopathy forced the old school doctor to stir around and learn something of a rational nature about his business. You may honestly feel grateful that homeopathy survived the attempts of allopaths (the orthodox physicians to destroy it."----Mark Twain "There have been two great revelations in my life: The first was bepop, the second was homeopathy."----Dizzy Gillespie, great jazz musician |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
John, you misspelled "hokeyopathy".
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
"Vaccine-man" wrote in message ups.com... John, you misspelled "hokeyopathy". Sorry--Allopathy. How's that? Another way is --pHARMa |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
"john" wrote in message ... "Jeff" wrote in message nk.net... It doesn't work. If I am wrong, please provide evidence that it works. LOL. We even have a bunch of allopaths doing it here with their own hospital. "In the records of three years of Diphtheria in Broome County, NY from 1862 to 1864, there was a report of an 83.6% mortality rate among the allopaths and a 16.4% mortality rate among the Homeopaths. (Bradford)."---Julian Winston Death rate for patients with cancer treated by homeopaths: 100% Death rate for patietns with cancer treated by allopaths: 50%, about 25% for kids with cancer. Allopaths learn from experience and the experience of others. Homeopaths learn how to charge for diluting water. Jeff "When the (1813 typhus) epidemic came through Leipzig as the army pulled back from the east, Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, was able to treat 180 cases of Typhus-- losing but two. This, at a time when the conventional treatments were having a mortality rate of over 30%....When Cholera finally struck Europe in 1831 the mortality rate (under conventional treatment) was between 40% (Imperial Council of Russia)to 80% (Osler's Practice of Medicine). Out of five people who contracted Cholera, two to four of them died under regular treatment.Dr. Quin, in London, reported the mortality in the ten homeopathic hospitals in 1831-32 as 9%.... In 1854 a Cholera Epidemic struck London. This was a historically important epidemic in that it was the first time the medical community was able to trace the outbreak to a source (a public water pump), and when the pump was closed, the epidemic soon ceased. The House of Commons asked for a report about the various methods of treating the epidemic. When the report was issued, the homeopathic figures were not included. The House of Lords asked for an explanation, and it was admitted that if the homeopathic figures were to be included in the report, it would "skew the results." The suppressed report revealed that under allopathic care the mortality was 59.2% while under homeopathic care the mortality was only 9%."--Julian Winston "During the 1850s, there were several epidemics of Yellow Fever in the southern states. This disease was eventually found to be transmitted by mosquito. Osler, says that the allopathic mortality from Yellow Fever is between 15-85%. Holcome, a homeopath, reported in 1853 a mortality of 6.43% in Natchez, and Dr. Davis, another homeopath in Natchez, reported 5.73%. In 1878 the mortality in New Orleans was 50% under allopathic care, and 5.6% (in 1,945 cases in the same epidemic) with homeopathic care."---Julian Winston "The Journal of the American Institute for Homeopathy, May, 1921, had a long article about the use of homeopathy in the flu epidemic. Dr. T A McCann, from Dayton, Ohio reported that 24,000 cases of flu treated allopathically had a mortality rate of 28.2% while 26,000 cases of flu treated homeopathically had a mortality rate of 1.05%. This last figure was supported by Dean W.A. Pearson of Philadelphia (Hahnemann College) who collected 26,795 cases of flu treated with homeopathy with the above result..... Dr. Herbert A. Roberts from Derby, CT, said that 30 physicians in Connecticut responded to his request for data. They reported 6,602 cases with 55 deaths, which is less than 1%. Dr. Roberts was working as a physician on a troop ship during WWI. He had 81 cases of flu on the way over to Europe. He reported, "All recovered and were landed. Every man received homeopathic treatment. One ship lost 31 on the way."---Julian Winston "What appears to emerge from the study is: a) Nosodes can effectively stop, in its tracks, an outbreak of a highly transmissible disease (viz kennel cough). b) That it does so, in this case, more effectively than the presently available vaccines. c) That vaccination impairs the ability of the animal to respond to the nosode."--Christoper Day, MA, Vet.M.B., M.R.C.VS. Vet.F.F.Hom (What Vets Don't Tell you about Vaccination, p 238 by Catherine O'Driscol) "John Saxton MRCVS VetMFHom presented a paper in 1991 describing the use of the canine distemper nosode in disease control...The results showed that, of dogs kept in the kennes for 8 days, 11.67% showed clinical signs of distemper on the 5th day prior to the introduction of nosodes, dropping to 4.36% after the nosodes were introduced. Where the entire kennel population was taken into account...the incidence of distemper dropped from 8.05% to 2.81% afetr the introduction of nosodes."---(What Vets Don't Tell you about Vaccination, p 240 by Catherine O'Driscol) "Homeopathy is wholly capable of satisfying the therapeutic demands of this age better than any other system or school of medicine."-----Dr. Charles Menninger M.D., Founder Menninger Clinic "Homeopathy .... cures a larger percentage of cases than any other method of treatment and is beyond doubt safer and more economical and most complete medical science." Mahatama Gandhi "effective natural remedies that have no side effects" Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D. Professor U. of Illinois Medical School and best-selling author "Homeopathy is the safest and more reliable approach to ailments and has withstood the assaults of established medical practice for over 100 years."----Yehudi Menuhin, World famous violinist "The introduction of homeopathy forced the old school doctor to stir around and learn something of a rational nature about his business. You may honestly feel grateful that homeopathy survived the attempts of allopaths (the orthodox physicians to destroy it."----Mark Twain "There have been two great revelations in my life: The first was bepop, the second was homeopathy."----Dizzy Gillespie, great jazz musician |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
Death rate for patients with cancer treated by homeopaths: 100% Death rate for patietns with cancer treated by allopaths: 50%, about 25% for kids with cancer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Why alternative cancer treatments are so effective? http://www.outsmartyourcancer.com/Mo...eArticle_1.pdf The scientific basis behind alternative cancer treatments http://www.outsmartyourcancer.com/Mo...geArticle2.pdf |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Homeopathy vs allopathy.
Death rate for patients with cancer treated by homeopaths: 100% Death rate for patietns with cancer treated by allopaths: 50%, about 25% for kids with cancer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Why alternative cancer treatments are so effective? http://www.outsmartyourcancer.com/Mo...eArticle_1.pdf The scientific basis behind alternative cancer treatments http://www.outsmartyourcancer.com/Mo...geArticle2.pdf |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wikipedia controlled by Allopaths | john | Kids Health | 64 | July 22nd 06 11:00 PM |
Homeopathy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a pilot,randomized-controlled trial. | Mark Probert | Kids Health | 25 | November 25th 05 11:56 PM |
Homeopathic treatment effective in ADHD | john | Kids Health | 10 | September 23rd 05 05:55 PM |
Homeopathy is "is no better than dummy drugs" | CWatters | Kids Health | 0 | August 26th 05 04:11 PM |
Homeopathy & pregnancy - ?? | Kevin | Pregnancy | 5 | October 21st 04 08:23 AM |