Homeopathy is dangerous
If you're an unsuspecting person cruising the internet to see what's out there regarding homeopathy and other natural healing modalities, you might come across something like this:
"Homeopathy is dangerous because people using it will delay the medical treatments that they really need."
Let me break down the many ways in which statements like this make me want to gouge my eyeballs out.
How many of you have sought medical treatment, only to be told that the doctors couldn't figure out what's really wrong with you?
And if you were lucky enough get a diagnosis, how long did it take? Was it swift and speedy, or did you need to see a million different practitioners and take a million different tests?
Were you able to go straight to the source, or did you get a runaround?
Could you see the doctor you wanted, or were you confined by who your insurance permitted you to see?
How much did it cost you?
Would you call our medical system efficient and effective?
Yeah.... didn't think so.
I honestly don't have a single client who didn't try the medical route first. Many of my clients have been failed by the limitations of the medical system and have come to me after exhausting all the other options available to them.
I’m not sure where these people got the idea that people try “alternative” modalities first. That is rarely the case.
That said, my personal opinion is that if you try Western medicine first for your complex, chronic condition, you're doing it backwards.
Now, I'm not saying don't get tested. And I'm not saying this applies under all circumstances. Some conditions may already be advanced by the time you get diagnosed and require more intervention.
I also fully acknowledge that not everyone has the luxury of paying out-of-pocket for more holistic practitioners given our current system, and recognize the privilege of this particular point. It frustrates me that we live in a world where more holistic options aren't the default.
However, common sense would dictate that one should try the least invasive things first, before resorting to more invasive methods (unless your situation is dire).
Trying homeopathy or other less invasive modalities before medication or surgery seems like a grounded approach to me. Unless you think rushing into a surgery for something non-life-threatening is a good idea? Hey, whatever floats your boat...
A good practitioner will know the difference and will know when to refer you out for other kinds of treatment. I've certainly referred clients to other practitioners or have suggested other types of interventions.
Homeopathy was created precisely because the prevailing treatments of the time were often more harmful than the illness itself. For those of us with sensitive consitutions, this is as true now as it ever was.
Why should we be discouraged from delaying a treatment that might make us sicker than our illness does, when something more gentle could work just as, if not more effectively?
Another problematic implication in this statement is that medical treatments are clearly the only valid option.
No shade against doctors, but upholding anything as the One True Way, without acknowledging the limitations of that system, and the conditions under which they do and do not work, sounds more to me like faith than science.
Homeopathy doesn't work all the time, under all conditions, and shouldn't be upheld as the One True Way, either.
How about we have more nuanced discussions about the panoply of options available to choose from?
Also, I'm not convinced that western medicine has earned its implied status as the most effective option out there. And again, this requires nuance.
Can we also do away with the either/or, all-or-nothing mentality that's inherent in statements like these?
Homeopathy is great for some things, and not for others.
The same is true of medicine.
And many times, homeopathy can be used alongside western medicine.
Case in point:
Last fall my son injured himself with a hatchet.
It was a huge, gaping wound (message me if you want to see pictures).
Did I use homeopathy to get his wound to heal in that situation?
No. I took him to Urgent Care, where he received 11 stitches.
But I DID use homeopathy to help him calm down, when he started going into sheer panic and terror.
He was absolutely convinced that he was going to need his leg amputated, and/or that he was going to bleed out. He started telling me his last requests. He went absolutely off the deep end. I've never seen anything like it.
He was so worked up that the folks at Urgent Care said they would need to put him under in order to stitch him, if he wasn't able to settle down.
Fortunately, several doses of a homeopathic remedy, along with some guided breathing and co-regulating, brought him to a state of emotional balance, at least enough for him to avoid being admitted to the hospital and given sedation.
This was a situation in which the two seemingly-opposing modalities worked beautifully together to provide the best-case outcome.
It's not an either/or. It's a both/and. Let's stop perpetuating this false dichotomy that one prohibits the other.
(That said, not everything plays well together, so again, as always, a nuanced discussion is required here.)
Let us not overlook the oppression inherent in statements that glorify western medicine.
Yep, you read that right.
Western medicine was born of patriarchy and colonialism. From the very beginning, it sought to Other traditional ways of healing and the people associated with them, especially women, immigrants, and indigenous folks.
Part of the way that oppressive systems work is by discrediting, marginalizing, and seeking to obliterate other traditions, peoples, and ways of doing things.
Upholding the narrative that western medicine is the One True Way is upholding a narrative of patriarchy and oppression.
And finally, the elephant in the room, the ultimate bottom line of those who take time out of their day to bash homeopathy: "it doesn't work."
I mean, how can it? There's literally nothing in it! It defies the laws of science!
*eyeroll*
I have yet to come across a homeopathy naysayer who has actually taken the time to understand how homeopathy really works.
It's easy to dismiss it on a surface level. But if you stop there, you're not exactly being a good scientist, are you?
Maybe a more useful question would be, under what conditions does homeopathy work?
Homeopathy is finicky. It's not always cut and dry. It requires a more nuanced approach.
I personally had an experience of taking multiple remedies before my practitioner hit upon the one that worked to clear my condition.
If I'd stopped after the first remedy didn't work, or the second, or the third... I could have dismissed homeopathy as "not working."
But I stuck with it (and got some western medical treatment in the meanwhile), and when my condition returned after my western medical bandaid interventions wore off, I took the remedy that ultimately saved my life (and stopped my condition permanently).
There are many reasons why your homeopathic treatment didn't work. But to dismiss the field in its entirety is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and indulging in the simplicity of black-and-white thinking once again.
Also... can we count the ways in which western medicine doesn't work?