I was trying to think this through: homeopathy claims that a small amount of a substance (that causes the same symptoms of the condition you want to treat) will cure that condition. Logically then, if the physician wants to prevent a staphylococcus infection, he wold apply a medicine made from diluted staph bacteria. Is this correct?
Or do I have this wrong?
Or would he use another chemical that appears to cause infection-like symptoms?
It must be hard to be a homeopath-wht governs the decision of what to use?
No.
Yes, but highly diluted.
He would look it up in The Big Book Of Provings Bullshit:
What are provings?
It’s not homeopathy, but you may be interested in reading about the weapon salve.
To simplify, (and this is borrowed from James Randi), if you, as a healthy person, swallow a spoonful of BellaNatural and it causes your face to turn red and you fall down, this is noted in The Big Book under symptoms.
When a patient comes into the homeopath’s office and complains of a red face, the homeopath says, “Hmmm. And are you having trouble with balance?”
“Why yes, Doc, I keep falling down!”
So the homeopath prescribes BellaNatural at a dilution of one drop per ocean. Shaken, not stirred.[sup][/sup]
[sup][/sup]And I’m not kidding about the shaking.
You could always run a bandage through a blender, highly dilute it, and pour it into the wound to stop the bleeding.
No, no, no, not a bandage. You’d need to run a knife through the blender.
As demonstrated by one of leading homeopathic researchersof all time.
Powdered bandages.
Actually, you’d get the correct dosage by just *thinking *about a knife.
If your definition if a dilute staph bacteria means that there is no probability in this know universe that any staph bacteria is persent though maybe a few stray molecules or atoms remain, then yes.
excuses.
He would apply water (which has been in the same room as a sterilizing agent) and has been exposed to (allowed to view) penicillin.
Bob
As bees are noted for being in the world, with intention to gather the nastiness of it, he would apply HONEY to the open wound.
I’ve read about something similar as a way to measure how much vermouth should be added to a dry martini.
ETA: Did you intend your real name (I presume) to appear, or did it just come out as you typed? The man behind Leo Bloom has almost revealed himself a number of times by accident.
–Cecil.
To answer the OP seriously, a Homeopath wasn’t a Surgeon and would not be called upon to treat wounds, normally.
If he did, he’d bandage it and perhaps apply some sort of herbal salve. But for the infection, he’s give a bottle of useless sugar pills or water.
Early on, this wasn’t that bad of an idea. Many patent medicines contained things actively bad for you.
And, when a caring & concerned “Doctor” gives you some pills and assure you they will work, you get not only the placebo effect, but there’s also a 'will to live" thing going on.
It was pretty damn effective in 1800 or so compared to what passed for medicine then. It likely outperformed “real” medicine for almost 100 years.
If water retains memory and curative powers, why can’t I use the water in my kitchen faucet to cure all that ails me? That water has been around for billions of years. It seems to me it comes pre-loaded with cure.
It has the wrong stuff also, and has not been recently made or shaken in the correct manner.
Strange that a mixed drink would devolve into Straight Gin, but Martini fans would never admit that.
Homeopathic Gin
A great Mitchell and Webb sketch that might shed some light on the OP.