Author: Dr. Rajesh Shah, MD (Hom), founder of Life Force Homeopathy, is a globally well-known physician & researcher pioneering scientific homeopathy.
Misconstruction has surrounded homeopathy ever since its inception.
Misconceptions have surrounded homeopathy ever since its inception. Even after 200 years, it remains one of the most misunderstood branches of medical science—unfortunately, even within the homeopathic profession itself. The diversity of viewpoints on the scope of homeopathic treatment within the profession may not be a healthy sign for the science’s growth.
Homeopathy is among the youngest of medical sciences, calling for a modern approach and extensive research. Several points concerning the misinterpretation of various facets of homeopathy, even among homeopaths, are raised and discussed here.
After almost three decades of study, practice, teaching, promotion, and research in homeopathy, I wish to share my thoughts and concerns, clarifying what homeopathy is not.
From dictionaries to encyclopedias to websites and books, it is almost explicitly explained ‘what is homeopathy’; however, it is equally important to discuss what homeopathy is not!
Homeopathy is one of the most mysterious science streams, which is highly misunderstood, and over-understood. Hence, there exists confusion in the minds of not only the lay people (patients) but also the homeopaths themselves.
After spending almost three decades studying, learning, practicing, teaching, promoting, and researching homeopathy, I will rightfully share my thoughts and concerns, explaining what homeopathy is not.
What Homeopathy is Not
- Homeopathy is not a miracle medicine
Many people believe that homeopathy is a miracle science, and it can make a magical cure for even the most incurable diseases, such as cancer, comatose stages, paralysis, etc. Actually, it is not. Homeopathy is simply a science based on specific laws (law of similars, comparable with that of vaccinations), with its own scope and limitations. There are rules, parameters, and methods of application that determine the scope of Homeopathy treatment. Homeopathy is very effective, but please do not expect magic or miracles.
One common myth about homeopathic treatment is that it is a cure-all or a panacea. This is not true. Homeopathy, like any medical science, has both a defined scope of application and certain limitations. No medical system can claim to be a panacea. For example, homeopathy can help alleviate the early stages of rheumatoid arthritis, but it cannot reverse the structural deformities that may develop over time.
One of the most complex concepts about homeopathy is that it is primarily based on understanding the mind. The homeopathic fraternity is also not fully saved from this misbelief. The study of mental attitudes, emotions, and mindset is a crucial aspect of patient study in homeopathy. However, it is not the sole determining factor.
Many homeopaths, especially in the Western world, have a delusion that homeopathy is almost identical to mind medicine. Homeopathy study encompasses, in fact, the disease, the nature of pathology, the immunological or hormonal changes, the physical components (such as perspiration, thermal preference, sleep, etc.), and the mental sphere; all or most of these factors are considered together, depending on the case.
Many homeopaths tend to relate disease or pathology in patients to some emotional parameter, almost always as a cause-and-effect phenomenon. For example, diabetes due to stress in a relationship or arthritis due to grief due to the death of a loved one, etc. Psychosomatics is profoundly comprehended and valued in homeopathy; however, it is not necessarily a causal phenomenon but more a part of the totality. There is no need to attribute primary emotions as the sole cause of disease development in all patients.
Since homeopathy is based on the potentized (incredibly minute) dose of the physical substance, which cannot be measured with the current scientific methods, many have theorized and connected homeopathy with spirituality. It seems interesting to read some correlation between the two; however, it may be detrimental for the growth of homeopathy if taken away from science and towards spirituality. Comparing ‘vital force’ with ‘soul’ and miasms with ‘Buddhism’ will take homeopathy away from scientific growth. Homeopathy is not-yet-fully-understood science, so, to some, it might look like some form of spirituality.
The skeptics have always criticized homeopathic treatment as a placebo therapy due to a lack of adequate research as per modern medicine guidelines. Since the results using homeopathic medicines are fairly reproducible, measurable, and documentable, homeopathy is far beyond placebo therapy. Please refer to our research work on this website.
.
The next label from skeptics is that homeopathy is nothing but faith healing. Homeopathy has worked for countless individuals who did not believe in it. Additionally, babies, as well as domestic and wild animals, respond to homeopathy, proving it to be more than just placebo therapy. Cases of Hepatitis C, for example, where objective parameters such as a drastic reduction in viral load after homeopathic medicines are difficult to achieve with faith healing.
Homeopathic doctors have been taught to be dogmatic about the use of ‘single remedy at a time, for all patients, all the time. It is tough to break this fixity and evolve from this rigid shell, which even the father of homeopathy, Dr. Hahnemann, could not outgrow in his time. The homeopaths tend to be rather emotional when it comes to talking about the use of more remedies in a given case or shy away from discussing it. The profession has yet to engage in a scientific discussion about so-called polypharmacy (the use of multiple medicines). No complex case can be cured using a single remedy, barring a few exceptions.
I deal with very severe pathologies such as ulcerative colitis, ankylosing spondylitis, trigeminal neuralgia, nephrotic syndrome, etc., where it is not possible to administer a single remedy and wait. Every delay could be detrimental, and this is not justified.
The phrase ‘single remedy, single dose’ is often found in homeopathic textbooks, but it is no longer relevant in today’s medical practice. I have practiced the said phrases very diligently for over a decade and a half, and have evolved beyond dogmatism.
Sticking to the idea of a single remedy and a single dose could even lead to criminal intransigence.
Some teachings have led to creating a cloud of delusions amongst some homeopaths, who believe that the practice of homeopathy can be based on the understanding of a patient’s dreams. The study of dreams is one of the twenty-odd parameters in homeopathy—one of the most unreliable, indeed. Its importance should not be overemphasized.
The importance of the theory of disease suppression in homeopathy is often misunderstood. Yes, the use of immunosuppressive medications, such as corticosteroids, leads to the suppression of the immune system, which can eventually allow the disease to progress to more severe levels. This is very well understood in homeopathic philosophy.
However, an extension of the concept of suppression, whereby some believe that anti-fever (paracetamol, Tylenol), painkillers, and antibiotics always lead to suppression, and must always be avoided. In my opinion, this is not true. This calls for scientific debate.
The proponents of homeopathy claim that homeopathy is not slow. Actually, this is partly true and partly not. Homeopathy is not slow in treating chronic diseases. It is relatively slow in the treatment of acute diseases and can be very slow in the treatment of critical diseases.
Homeopathy is not very fast, either. Let me be honest. Homeopathy is neither very fast nor very slow. We need research to make homeopathy faster.
Any contradiction to the concept of constitutional medicine is a potential trigger for the third world war, amongst homeopaths at least. After twenty-five years of intense homeopathic practice, I believe that ‘constitutional medicine’ is a hype created in the profession. It calls for a review and re-evaluation. It is a vast topic and cannot be discussed in detail here.
In brief, not all cases are considered constitutional medicine, and some can still be treated successfully.
One school of thought is that homeopathy can cure every acute and critical disease, such as cerebral malaria, bacterial meningitis, acute renal failure, severe pneumonia, acute myocardial infection (heart attack), and the like.
I strongly opine that it is not true. Homeopathy is a science that has a limitation whereby severe acute and critical disease situations cannot be consistently treated with success. Please read the word ‘consistently’ with emphasis. Success in some cases may not be enough. The results must be comparable to those of modern medicine, allowing us to ethically claim the success of homeopathy in severe acute and critical illnesses.
Many people and some homeopaths believe that if the symptoms of the patient match those of some medicines, every disease becomes curable. In other words, if the medicine selection is perfect, the cure is certain, irrespective of the nature of the disease. This is not true. The curability of any disease depends on several factors,
such as
1 The nature of the disease. For example, hepatitis (inflammation of the liver) may be curable, while cirrhosis (scarring) of the liver is not curable.
2 The extent of pathological change. For example, fewer patches of Alopecia Areata (hair loss patches) are curable, but total hair loss (Alopecia totalis) is not curable.
3 Reversibility of the disease process and outcome. Inflammatory arthritis can be helped, but Osteoarthritis (bony overgrowth) cannot be reversed.
4 Selection of the correct homeopathic remedies.
The well-developed medical knowledge acquired by medical science is greatly required for the advancement of homeopathy. Homeopathy does not claim to be beyond modern medical science. In fact, it is high time to understand that homeopathy and medical science are not distinctly different as far as medicine is concerned. They are not contrary, but complementary and collaborating, belonging to the same field of medical science.
Some may believe that ‘modern medicine’ and homeopathy are at odds with each other, but in reality, they are not enemies. I have always wondered how such concepts have grown in the minds of medicos, homeopaths, and lay people. Homeopathy is just a science, a part of medical science.
If we examine the evolution of engineering sciences, do we believe that computer engineering is opposed to electronics, mechanical engineering is opposed to electrical engineering, or civil engineering? Not really. They all complement each other. Why don’t we have the maturity in medical sciences?
One of the myths among laypeople, modern medicos, as well as surgeons, is that homeopathy is against surgery. Surgery is a part of homeopathy. Surgery is a science and art in itself. Surgery is neither a property of modern medicine nor of homeopathy. It is essential to understand that homeopathy is a therapeutic method of treating diseases in a specific manner. Surgery is a method of treating diseases differently, without the use of medicines. Both are complementary to each other. Precisely, therefore, the homeopathic training in India trains every homeopath for basic surgery, at the undergraduate level, as much as it trains a modern medico. Every qualified homeopath in India is a physician and a surgeon. This is not the case in the Western world, though.
Google Reviews
Excellent
Posted on Google
My overall experience was excellent. The doctor provided a thorough consultation with clear guidance and genuine care. I truly appreciate the professionalism and support throughout the process.
Posted on Google
Overall experience was good
Posted on Google
Good facility and supporting staf
Posted on Google
Doctor was very polite and suggested a good medicine
Posted on Google
Staff was supportive , Professionalism was good
Posted on Google
Thankyou so much for discount 🙏🙏🙏 A lot of blessings from my side to the whole team of life force. OM SHANTI
Posted on Google
very co operative staff, helpful , dr shah is a very good dr with lots of patience assures a good treatment plan just started with the treatment hope it alll goes welll
Posted on Google
I was suffering from Discoid lupus and urticaria since 8 yrs and then i got to know about the Dr shah and it's been 3 yrs i am on medication from Dr Shah and my lupus and urticaria is now improving. All thanks to Dr shah.
Posted on Google
They are the only people who healed my condition. After years of trying various treatments- homeopathy finally cured me. The service is excellent. They take monthly follows up , send the medicines on time. Would highly recommend it for people with chronic issues
Posted on Google
Real Results from Real Patients
Eczema
