*Homeopathic *referring to “natural and organic”? Are you thinking of *holistic *instead? I’ve never heard of homeopathic to mean anything but homeopathic.
No, the word’s “generally and colloquially used sense” is the same as its dictionary definition. People know what the word means; they’re just in disagreement about it being a bogus substitute for medicine.
I’ve seen “homeopathic” as an umbrella term for alternative medicine.
If someone wants to sell snake-oil pet cures, I don’t think they should be legally stopped from doing that. But they also shouldn’t be able to be licensed as a veterinarian. The whole point of the licensing system is to make it clear who is practicing scientifically supported medicine. Letting someone use their credentials to sell sham-treatments makes the whole system pointless.
And saying pets don’t need to be vaccinated is doubly ungood, as it endangers not just the animal but risks a wider public-health risk.
You Nancy Naysayers need to keep a more open mind with regard to alternative medicine. I’ve never take my pets or kids to allopathic or osteopathic physicians. I’ve saved a ton of money on medical bills…and food bills.
Coincidentally, I’m opening my own homeopathic clinic for pets and their owners, and charging only $500 per treatment session (that’s for both pet AND owner, BTW!).
After years of diligent research and clinical trials, I’ve developed a topical pressurized water spray treatment that coats the entire surface area of my patient and their pet. The therapy promotes vim, vigor and vitality!
My topical, aqueous solution contains trace amounts of minerals, organic and inorganic compounds and dissolved ions that have been demonstrated to…well, they just do all kinds of good things. I administer the solution at body temperature for a relaxing spa-like experience. I’ve also imbued my treatment with fortifying amber-hued color therapy and pungent aromatherapy.
It’s holistic, naturopathic, organic and homeopathic all wrapped up together!
So come on down to my clinic with Fido while I pull down my zipper. Bring the kids and grandma, too.
I lost interest as soon as the post said “my darlings.”
Homeopathic medicines don’t introduce “controlled amounts of a disease”. They’re just water.
You don’t need a licence to give your pet homeopathic medicine - you are doing the same thing by putting water into his dish.
The vet in the OP isn’t recommending natural and organic cures - she is recommending homeopathic treatment, which has no side effects because it has no effects at all.
Scientifically trained people, which vets are supposed to be, should know this. Any vet who doesn’t, or who does and is exploiting the gullibility of her clients to make money, should not be practicing veterinary medicine.
Regards,
Shodan
Son of a Retired Veterinarian Who Used to Be Head of His State’s Licensing Board
This pretty much sums it up for me. She is ripping off her patients.
Would you object to a veterinarian asking a pet owner to pray with him to heal the dog?
How do they even come with those figures? I always assumed they just filled the bottle from the tap and then lied to the patient about its “strength”, but do they actually go through the motions of trying to make it “one part in 100^30”?
Some charlatans simply dip their big toe in a bucket of water and call it torpor tonic.
- Did the veterinarian advertise beforehand that he did faith healing?
- Is he charging for this faith healing?
- Is the vet stating that vaccines kill and prayer is her preferred alternative to stopping Parvo or Heartworm?
I have no idea.
But I cannot see how this irrational behaviour would be any more serious than homeopathy unless actual harm came to the dog.
I don’t know. See above.
Pjen, when you can answer those questions, you’ll get your answers.
There seems to be considerable misunderstanding about what homeopathy involves. It is also confused with herbalism (in reality, herbalism is mostly “allopathic” medicine, meaning its remedies are touted as acting against deleterious signs and symptoms, just like good ol’ mainstream medicine (pointing this out tends to massively piss off supporters of herbalism).
If just the act of “prescribing” homeopathic remedies by a vet is felt to be grounds for license revocation, then is there similar support for taking away the medical license of any physician that does so?
There are quite a few “non-traditional healer” types in the M.D. racket that push homeopathy (i.e. the California pediatrician quoted in the above link). If they’re not actually selling this glop out of their offices it’s tough to advocate anything more than public ridicule.
On the other hand, I’d have no problem with disciplining any physician who offered “homeopathic vaccination” in lieu of the real thing.
If homeopaths are allowed to treat humans, I can’t think of any rationale not to allow them to treat pets.
I still can’t think of any rationale to allow those frauds to treat humans.
Minnesota does not license homeopaths. If a person acting as a homeopath works on a person, they must give them a bill of rights which includes the wording:
Suddenly, we have a problem with the lines getting blurred when a homeopath is also a licensed physician. Minnesota stopped licensing homeopaths a couple years ago. For them, it means “hey, we don’t have ‘big pharma’ breathing down our necks” and for skeptics it means “hey, we are removing legitimacy to homeopathy by not even regulating it”. Unfortunately, to the consumer, or like the person upthread who conflated natural drugs-like the bark of a willow tree to cure a headache- to homeopathy, we’ve got a huge problem about lack of information.
Let’s say you’re feeling gross. You’ve got sores on your genitals, your hands and elsewhere. You start developing a rash. You head to your local ER and speak with the physician. She diagnoses you as having Syphillis. She’s also a homeopath.
So she writes a list of different homeopathic things Arnica 30c and sends you on your way. Maybe she even is nice to tell you to follow up with your local homeopath if you’re not feeling better in a week. In that week, Syphillis goes into the latency period. “HOMEOPATHY WORKED” as the symptoms are now gone. Right?
But, then it comes back.
So there we are. Death. And we’re talking on a human level. A trust is needed to make sure that any ignorance of medicine shouldn’t be supplanted by quackery. Isn’t that the purpose of licensing? I can’t go just grab antibiotics over the counter or even codeine. There’s a reason for the licensing. To make sure that not only are people not taking stuff they don’t need, but to also make sure they know what TO take to heal themselves.
Homeopathy will not heal people. It won’t heal animals. We shouldn’t have a blurred line when it comes to this.
I agree, but somehow it happens. How do we tell the world, “Homeopaths can “treat” people, but they’re too dangerous for pets”?