Homeopathic nutritionist?
Options
Replies
-
singingflutelady wrote: »I think it is hilarious that people really believe homeopathic and naturopathic medicine is not for profit. If you don't think they are also making millions off of sick people than you are sadly mistaken.
I've never understood the argument that "Western medicine" is all about profit and that homeopathic/naturopathic "medicines" aren't. Homeopathics and naturopaths do charge for their services and the selling of faux remedies is a huge business.12 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »I've sat in a room with an oncologist and a social worker called in b/c my husband and I told the doctor, "enough" of what they were doing to our son. We chose an alternative route. We had just found out that the all wise doctors and hospital had given our son tainted blood product that gave him hepatitis (on top of his already being very sick). When we told them we were walking away they called social services. It took less then 15 minutes for that lady to see how and why we made the decisions we were making, how we interacted with the doctor and our son, and how our son felt about everything. She walked out and told the doctor to leave us alone. Our son was no longer in imminent danger and we had gotten him medical care when he was in danger and they were to leave us alone. That didn't satisfy that witch and she pursued us. Until we got in her face and told her we would sue the crap out of her and the hospital and put our name on that hospital for giving our son hepatitis. Then she stepped aside and told us to leave. In our case, it clearly was all about the money because if she really thought we were harming our son do you think she would have let us go?
Before you people pass judgement on what someone thinks or believes, stand a few minutes in their shoes. And for petes sake, quit lumping everyone into the same category. If someone was doing that to you on this board by lumping you all into the "*kitten*" category because you all believed the same thing, I would venture to guess quite a few of you would be not only offended but consider it unfair to be lumped together because clearly some are not *kitten* and some are. It's no different when it comes to people that use or choose one form of medicine over another. Claiming "abuse" to a group of people b/c of their choice is no different then what I just said. Both of those statements are false (not everyone is *kitten* and not everyone that chooses to use natural medicine for their family is an abuser). Don't lump us all into the same category because we are not all the same, and some day you may just find yourself sitting where we were making the same decision we made. It's pretty easy to say what you'd do until you're faced with it.
So the hospital gave your son hepatitis and you didn't pursue legal action? Can I ask why not? I'm not trying to argue. I like the conversation and I like hearing differing opinions.
Also, I don't believe anyone is "lumping everyone in the same category." The OP asked about what people thought and she got opinions. The opinion is that this particular "Homeopathic Nutritionist" was off her rocker and people expanded on that. I hope you don't take offense to that. The issue many people have is that the people who use both natural medicine and modern medicine don't make the news. The people who use both responsibly aren't making headlines. The ones who "reject all modern medicine" like @Plutodreams are the ones many people worry about. The people who believe that they know best over all educated doctors and scientists and then act so heartbroken when their loved one dies from something they could have easily been saved from.
8 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »I've sat in a room with an oncologist and a social worker called in b/c my husband and I told the doctor, "enough" of what they were doing to our son. We chose an alternative route. We had just found out that the all wise doctors and hospital had given our son tainted blood product that gave him hepatitis (on top of his already being very sick). When we told them we were walking away they called social services. It took less then 15 minutes for that lady to see how and why we made the decisions we were making, how we interacted with the doctor and our son, and how our son felt about everything. She walked out and told the doctor to leave us alone. Our son was no longer in imminent danger and we had gotten him medical care when he was in danger and they were to leave us alone. That didn't satisfy that witch and she pursued us. Until we got in her face and told her we would sue the crap out of her and the hospital and put our name on that hospital for giving our son hepatitis. Then she stepped aside and told us to leave. In our case, it clearly was all about the money because if she really thought we were harming our son do you think she would have let us go?
Before you people pass judgement on what someone thinks or believes, stand a few minutes in their shoes. And for petes sake, quit lumping everyone into the same category. If someone was doing that to you on this board by lumping you all into the "*kitten*" category because you all believed the same thing, I would venture to guess quite a few of you would be not only offended but consider it unfair to be lumped together because clearly some are not *kitten* and some are. It's no different when it comes to people that use or choose one form of medicine over another. Claiming "abuse" to a group of people b/c of their choice is no different then what I just said. Both of those statements are false (not everyone is *kitten* and not everyone that chooses to use natural medicine for their family is an abuser). Don't lump us all into the same category because we are not all the same, and some day you may just find yourself sitting where we were making the same decision we made. It's pretty easy to say what you'd do until you're faced with it.
So the hospital gave your son hepatitis and you didn't pursue legal action? Can I ask why not? I'm not trying to argue. I like the conversation and I like hearing differing opinions.
Also, I don't believe anyone is "lumping everyone in the same category." The OP asked about what people thought and she got opinions. The opinion is that this particular "Homeopathic Nutritionist" was off her rocker and people expanded on that. I hope you don't take offense to that. The issue many people have is that the people who use both natural medicine and modern medicine don't make the news. The people who use both responsibly aren't making headlines. The ones who "reject all modern medicine" like @Plutodreams are the ones many people worry about. The people who believe that they know best over all educated doctors and scientists and then act so heartbroken when their loved one dies from something they could have easily been saved from.
I had a family practitioner awhile back who told my family and I that he was open to alternative treatments but asked only that we tell him if we did use such treatments since he needed to know in case other treatments might be causing side effects or have known drug interactions. People can pursue whatever treatments for themselves that they wish but when it comes to the life and health of another human being, no matter what the relationship, they had better be very sure they are doing no harm.9 -
I use both Western meds and acupuncture. Western doctors saved my life while Eastern approaches are managing my symptoms tremendously. I Tend to do a ridiculous amount of research on practitioners regardless of their their specialty, read reviews, and ask a bunch of questions on the first visit. That way I can make sure that I am not talking to any joe schmoe.
You have the power as a patient to say no to any treatment. Next time you'll know to pull the plug at the first red flag.7 -
I've worked for a homeopathic veterinarian and I saw some amazing things work for some animals and not for others. Personally I would not return to this "nutritionist". I would find a RD but then you'll get the "You must eat meat and drink milk and eat tons of cheese" POV. I'm not sure what dietary changes your family made. I use my PCM to monitor blood levels in order to make sure I'm healthy. She knows I'm plantbased and I don't subscribe to the BS of the SAD (Standard American Diet). Good luck!2
-
Here's you're statement:ronjsteele1 wrote: »Do you realize that a large portion of the medicines used to treat cancers, etc. they don't actually know "how" they work? They only know when they tried them they worked.
To which I responded:This is completely untrue. I'm sure you can provide some evidence, oh wait never mind, forgot who I was responding to.
Then you came back with this:Acamprosate
Armodafinil
Antidepressants
Cyclobenzaprine
Demeclocycline
Fabomotizole
Lithium
Meprobamate
Methocarbamol
Paracetamol
Phenytoin
PRL-8-53
I think you get the point..........
I see you think that finally have your "gotcha moment", but lets roll back the tape, particularly the bolded. You said "large portion" and "medicines to treat cancer." There are about 5000 different pharmaceuticals available by presciption, 1200 of the most commonly prescribed obes are listed in the PDR. You listed 12 drugs, none of which treat cancer. 12 out of 1200 doesn't even come close to a large portion, unless you want to claim it is a large portion by homeopathic math. So your statement is still wrong and mine is correct.13 -
So the hospital gave your son hepatitis and you didn't pursue legal action? Can I ask why not? I'm not trying to argue. I like the conversation and I like hearing differing opinions.
Because when we consulted an attorney to do so we were told that he could guarantee, even with multiple blood tests from different doctors, that the hospital and blood bank would have already altered both the records of the product he received and our son's personal records. He said it was wrong, but he'd been a trial lawyer for 25+ years and had seen it happen many times when it involved any tainted blood product. He said they had only been able to prove that happened in a couple of cases he was involved in and it was because whomever did the altering made a couple of small mistakes in the process that some smart person found for him. After consulting with said attorney we moved on. We had two medical crisis going on at the exact same time and did not have energy to further pursue after being told that. Looking back, I kind of wish we had but at that moment, we had to choose between focusing on healing two people and the ensuing life change that brought or money to inflict some pain on those who were at fault. We did not have the time, energy, or capacity to do both at once. In the end, we decided not to seek out another opinion (this person was a friend - we trusted him, and still do). It would not have altered our course of treatment nor would money change what we were going through. Our boy is hep. free and blood disease free today, which was worth the decision to put our energy into him. It's a valid question to ask........0 -
-
ronjsteele1 wrote: »
So the hospital gave your son hepatitis and you didn't pursue legal action? Can I ask why not? I'm not trying to argue. I like the conversation and I like hearing differing opinions.
Because when we consulted an attorney to do so we were told that he could guarantee, even with multiple blood tests from different doctors, that the hospital and blood bank would have already altered both the records of the product he received and our son's personal records. He said it was wrong, but he'd been a trial lawyer for 25+ years and had seen it happen many times when it involved any tainted blood product. He said they had only been able to prove that happened in a couple of cases he was involved in and it was because whomever did the altering made a couple of small mistakes in the process that some smart person found for him. After consulting with said attorney we moved on. We had two medical crisis going on at the exact same time and did not have energy to further pursue after being told that. Looking back, I kind of wish we had but at that moment, we had to choose between focusing on healing two people and the ensuing life change that brought or money to inflict some pain on those who were at fault. We did not have the time, energy, or capacity to do both at once. In the end, we decided not to seek out another opinion (this person was a friend - we trusted him, and still do). It would not have altered our course of treatment nor would money change what we were going through. Our boy is hep. free and blood disease free today, which was worth the decision to put our energy into him. It's a valid question to ask........
Wait, so you are saying the hospital would have altered records just to show they weren't at fault??? And would get the blood bank (a completely seperate entity) involved In the cover up? You don't consider that a conspiracy theory? That is absolutely ridiculous. Blood bank have admitted to tainted blood before, in fact, they admitted to giving people HIV, hepatitis, as well as other blood borne disorders.17 -
Here's you're statement:ronjsteele1 wrote: »Do you realize that a large portion of the medicines used to treat cancers, etc. they don't actually know "how" they work? They only know when they tried them they worked.
To which I responded:This is completely untrue. I'm sure you can provide some evidence, oh wait never mind, forgot who I was responding to.
Then you came back with this:Acamprosate
Armodafinil
Antidepressants
Cyclobenzaprine
Demeclocycline
Fabomotizole
Lithium
Meprobamate
Methocarbamol
Paracetamol
Phenytoin
PRL-8-53
I think you get the point..........
I see you think that finally have your "gotcha moment", but lets roll back the tape, particularly the bolded. You said "large portion" and "medicines to treat cancer." There are about 5000 different pharmaceuticals available by presciption, 1200 of the most commonly prescribed obes are listed in the PDR. You listed 12 drugs, none of which treat cancer. 12 out of 1200 doesn't even come close to a large portion, unless you want to claim it is a large portion by homeopathic math. So your statement is still wrong and mine is correct.
This thread is the gift that keeps on giving.
There's a chance in two weeks I might be on lithium. I'm aware that most psych meds are a bit like a lucky dip as far efficacy goes because of the accidental nature of finding they work. But this is most definitely something mostly unique to psychiatric meds, I expect because funding for research is poor because mental health is still the poor man of the medical world so to speak. No-one is having month long fundraising campaigns for schizophrenia.
However, to then extrapolate that to all pharmaceuticals is utterly nonsensical, as pointed out above. AND the fact I don't know why it works isn't going to stop me from trying because guess what? Being chronically sick is abjectly miserable and there's no amount of fancy bottled water with no detectable trace of what it was once mixed with that is going to help. And yes, there is science to back that up. There is no science I am aware of that backs up homeopathy having anything beyond a placebo effect.
I would actually be more likely to look to naturopathy for some things. I would never turn to homeopathy. Magic water isn't a thing.9 -
Of particular notice is the section about electrodiagnostic devices:Some physicians, dentists, and chiropractors use "electrodiagnostic" devices to help select the homeopathic remedies they prescribe. These practitioners claim they can determine the cause of any disease by detecting the "energy imbalance" causing the problem. Some also claim that the devices can detect whether someone is allergic or sensitive to foods, vitamins, and/or other substances. ...
It sounds like something straight out of a Robert Heinlein book. It would have been good science fiction 100 years ago.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Of particular notice is the section about electrodiagnostic devices:Some physicians, dentists, and chiropractors use "electrodiagnostic" devices to help select the homeopathic remedies they prescribe. These practitioners claim they can determine the cause of any disease by detecting the "energy imbalance" causing the problem. Some also claim that the devices can detect whether someone is allergic or sensitive to foods, vitamins, and/or other substances. ...
It sounds like something straight out of a Robert Heinlein book. It would have been good science fiction 100 years ago.
I believe Scientology use a similar device. And I know how I feel about that............8 -
Oh God, be careful honey. A good sense of self esteem and a balanced diet, avoid toxic relationships and get out and walk or bike or go to a gym. Also, someone who loves you. All of these total up to good homeopathy I believe.
Lots of cuddling (s*x) also....oops, edit me.0 -
Wait, so you are saying the hospital would have altered records just to show they weren't at fault??? And would get the blood bank (a completely seperate entity) involved In the cover up? You don't consider that a conspiracy theory? That is absolutely ridiculous. Blood bank have admitted to tainted blood before, in fact, they admitted to giving people HIV, hepatitis, as well as other blood borne disorders.
This hospital has its own blood bank (owned and operated by the hospital) and we had nothing to go off of but what the attorney told us.0 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »
Actually, the FTC's job includes making sure that companies don't deceive consumers when marketing products to them.
For one second, their job is not about making sure consumers aren't "deceived."Actually, the FTC's job includes making sure that companies don't deceive consumers when marketing products to them.Their job is to protect standard medical practice (and the AMA which buys and owns the FDA, FTC, etc.) from being encroached on with other things that work for diseases.When the government feels the need to protect people from their own decisions, then they don't believe much in freedom. And that's what the FTC's labeling decision is 100% about.Informed consent doesn't mean the right to be informed only about what the government thinks "works" just because they don't understand it. It means the right to know and learn about whatever they desire to for medical care and then make their decision based on what they've learned.
http://missinglink.ucsf.edu/lm/ethics/Content Pages/fast_fact_informed_consent.htmIf the FTC can require their statement of inefficacy, then remedy manufacturers have the right to make their statement for efficacy. Let the person decide who they want to believe.Do you realize that a large portion of the medicines used to treat cancers, etc. they don't actually know "how" they work? They only know when they tried them they worked.A lot of people may not know or understand how hpathy worksbut enough people use it and it worksthat they want to continue using it (going to call millions of people worldwide liars? Because that would be pretty bold).
Again, just because millions of people use it doesn't prove it works. Millions of people use horoscopes. I guess horoscopes are scientifically validated?And they continue to study the "whys."
They don't study the "whys." They've had 200 years to study the whys. Water doesn't have memory, diluting a substance doesn't make it stronger, law of similars is pure fairytale. No studies needed.If a chemo worked for millions of people worldwide, you think the FDA and FTC would fight its use?It's all about the money and always will be......
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/alternative-medicine-is-a-34-billion-industry-but-only-one-third-of-the-treatments-have-been-tested-879411/
Making money selling useless supplements and treatments. It's disgusting. But for some reason they get a pass.
AMAZING!!!! Thank you!4 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »
Wait, so you are saying the hospital would have altered records just to show they weren't at fault??? And would get the blood bank (a completely seperate entity) involved In the cover up? You don't consider that a conspiracy theory? That is absolutely ridiculous. Blood bank have admitted to tainted blood before, in fact, they admitted to giving people HIV, hepatitis, as well as other blood borne disorders.
This hospital has its own blood bank (owned and operated by the hospital) and we had nothing to go off of but what the attorney told us.
I'm sorry to hear that happened to you, but glad to hear you son is better now.0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »I love Big Pharma! My life is so much better!
Same here! I would be dead without big pharma.
Add me to the big pharma love fest. I'd be in horrible amounts of daily pain if it weren't for big pharma. I wouldn't be able to run, and I'd be debilitated from my arthritis and chronic migraines. Big pharma and Western medicine gave me my life back.8 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »
So the hospital gave your son hepatitis and you didn't pursue legal action? Can I ask why not? I'm not trying to argue. I like the conversation and I like hearing differing opinions.
Because when we consulted an attorney to do so we were told that he could guarantee, even with multiple blood tests from different doctors, that the hospital and blood bank would have already altered both the records of the product he received and our son's personal records. He said it was wrong, but he'd been a trial lawyer for 25+ years and had seen it happen many times when it involved any tainted blood product. He said they had only been able to prove that happened in a couple of cases he was involved in and it was because whomever did the altering made a couple of small mistakes in the process that some smart person found for him. After consulting with said attorney we moved on. We had two medical crisis going on at the exact same time and did not have energy to further pursue after being told that. Looking back, I kind of wish we had but at that moment, we had to choose between focusing on healing two people and the ensuing life change that brought or money to inflict some pain on those who were at fault. We did not have the time, energy, or capacity to do both at once. In the end, we decided not to seek out another opinion (this person was a friend - we trusted him, and still do). It would not have altered our course of treatment nor would money change what we were going through. Our boy is hep. free and blood disease free today, which was worth the decision to put our energy into him. It's a valid question to ask........
So you've turned away from real medicine based on your horrible experiences. Fair enough. But then turning to 'alternative medicine' still makes no sense when any vestige of rational thought you have must give you reasonable doubts about whether these things work? You are obviously not totally ignorant, I can only conclude you have what my psych lecturer used to call "a few sheep loose in the top paddock" when he was referring to conspiracy theorists.
6 -
If you are having medical issues or are concerned with you or your families diet you should see your doctor who might refer you to a dietician rather than find a homeopathic nutritionist online.
Same as if you were having tooth pain you should speak to your dentist rather than a homeopathic toothiologist.
In both cases one title requires some sort of professional training and schooling, while the other is a made-up degree anyone can claim to have.10 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »Again, the ignorance of not knowing the difference between naturopathic and homeopathic is showing.
Who cares, they're both snake oil salesmen who devote their lives to ripping off the worried well with phony diagnoses and useless treatments. It's ignorant to think that homeopathy treats anything. Oh, by the way, every ND school in the US requires coursework in homeopathy.Until people get that, discussion on their merits can't even take place.We have treated strep (and so many other things) hpathically with no issue.
1) he didn't have strep, i.e. misdiagnosed
2) he did have strep, but it got better on its own
3) you're making it upAs I have said over and over on this forum- the key will always be balance and none of us is perfect at that. Being on the left or the right of the road either way still puts one in the ditch. That's not balance.
Medicine has thousands of scientifically validated treatments, homeopathy has thousands of treatments that have been shown to be nothing more than placebo. There doesnt need to be balance between science and pseudoscience.and chemo has killed many a childI take great issue with the nanny state. If parents are allowed to be told how to raise their kids by the state, at what point does that end? It doesn't. And my children don't belong to the state.
23
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 957 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions