Guest guest Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 Hi Joyce I think I had arnica for two weeks after my op. It was to reduce swelling, I was told... I'll bet just using the cane is reminding you to stand and walk in a better position, even if you don't really need to walk on it. If it works, why not use it for long walks for a few weeks, then see how you are doing? Lots of people who haven't had surgery use walking sticks for hiking or long walks, so you won't really look odd, you just hate to go back to the cane when you thought you were past it... I know lots of people who are still limping a bit at four months post-op, and I still occasionally limp myself at 9 months post-op if I get really tired and don't concentrate, so don't worry. I have been told that we will keep seeing improvements for the next couple of years, at least. I thought my rate of improvement had slowed down a lot after the first three months, but yesterday I met someone who had their op four months after I did, and when I saw how much more I could do now (compared to 5 months ago), I realized that I had actually kept improving more than I realized. So hang in there, you'll be able to give up the cane sooner if you use it more right now... n rBHR Oct.17/04 McMinn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 About that improvement - we do seem to forget how bad we were after a while and it takes those wonderous simple things that we avoided for so long and then suddenly do without thinking to help us remember... there was one move in skating - a twizzle it's called - that I had avoided just because I remembered how much it hurt to do it. (there are actually many different twizzles, but one in particular on the left leg used to hurt so much - not that it stopped me from trying it and doing it badly tho!) Today Cliff and I did the dance it's in and for the first time in years it was absolutely easy and done perfectly without an ounce of fear. True I thought oh here it comes, but the thought was simply followed by just stand up and do it. Cliff says my grin after completing it made his day... the twizzle sure made mine!!! As usual in ice dancing he just gets to stand there while I spill out of the frame!!... man is it good to do it all without fear (even falling without fear!). It may be wishful thinking, but I have a feeling that we are going to be better dancers than ever.... Pamela > Hi Joyce > I think I had arnica for two weeks after my op. It was to reduce > swelling, I was told... > I'll bet just using the cane is reminding you to stand and walk in > a better position, even if you don't really need to walk on it. If it > works, why not use it for long walks for a few weeks, then see how you > are doing? Lots of people who haven't had surgery use walking sticks > for hiking or long walks, so you won't really look odd, you just hate > to go back to the cane when you thought you were past it... > I know lots of people who are still limping a bit at four months > post-op, and I still occasionally limp myself at 9 months post-op if I > get really tired and don't concentrate, so don't worry. I have been > told that we will keep seeing improvements for the next couple of > years, at least. I thought my rate of improvement had slowed down a > lot after the first three months, but yesterday I met someone who had > their op four months after I did, and when I saw how much more I could > do now (compared to 5 months ago), I realized that I had actually kept > improving more than I realized. > So hang in there, you'll be able to give up the cane sooner if you > use it more right now... > n > rBHR Oct.17/04 McMinn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 At 03:23 PM 7/10/2004 +0000, you wrote: >My final understanding resulted in the >realization that most of the products were being sold with such a >minimal trace that it didn't make sense to me. When I checked the >numbers and weights, some of those products would be lucky to have a >few molecules in a given tablet! Dan, It is my understanding that is the point of homeopathic medicine--that it is so diluted that very few molecules remain. Many believe in it and have had great success so... I used arnica tablets after my hip surguries. I can't say whether it helped or not, but it didn't hurt. Cindy C+ 5/25/01 and 6/28/01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 Hi Dan I think very small quantities are typical of homeopathic medicines. It's something like large quantities might make you sick or allergic, but very small concentrations mobilize your body to work better against them. (My apologies to any homeopathic physicians who can explain these medicines much better, I'm sure ). I was just given the homeopathic version in the hospital in England, and told to take them till they were all gone (about three weeks post-op). I haven't tried to buy it in Canada. I don't even have the container anymore, so I can't tell you what the concentration was. Sorry I can't be more helpful. n rBHR Oct.2004 McMinn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 Hi Dan I think very small quantities are typical of homeopathic medicines. It's something like large quantities might make you sick or allergic, but very small concentrations mobilize your body to work better against them. (My apologies to any homeopathic physicians who can explain these medicines much better, I'm sure ). I was just given the homeopathic version in the hospital in England, and told to take them till they were all gone (about three weeks post-op). I haven't tried to buy it in Canada. I don't even have the container anymore, so I can't tell you what the concentration was. Sorry I can't be more helpful. n rBHR Oct.2004 McMinn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 > Hi Dan > I think very small quantities are typical of homeopathic > medicines. It's something like large quantities might make you sick or > allergic, but very small concentrations mobilize your body to work > better against them. When Hahnemann devloped homeopathy in the late 18th Century, most " medicines " were downright poisonous, most " physicians " had pretty much no clue about physiology in general, Pasteur had not discovered the role of microbes in many diseases, and surgeons had not yet discovered that patients died less often if surgeons washed their hands before operating. Under those circumstances (where " medicines " consisted of compounds containing mercury, lead, strychnine, arsenic, etc), it's not too surprising that the patient who received the least " medicine " often did the best. After all, most illnesses are self-limiting and most patients will get better as long as you don't poison them to death in the course of the treatment. Hahnemann should be credited with a number of innovations, such as actually testing medicines for effectiveness against specific illnesses, and realizing that doses of medicines that produced violent toxicity were excessive. However, the " Theory of Similars " really isn't something that needs to be propagated into the 21st Century. If you look at the ingedients in a lot of homeopathic medicines (like nux vomica, also known as strychnine), you should be grateful that they're so diluted that there's practically nothing in them. Steve (bilat C+ 4/20/04, Amstutz) PS> Homeopathy has shown me the way to pay off my hips: I'm going to start selling homeopathic sugar. The less you put in your coffee, the sweeter it tastes. Accordingly, I'm going to sell the 5lb bag for $10.00, the 2lb bag for $100.00, the 1lb bag for $10,000.00, and the empty bag...well that's going to cost you serious money. Of course, it'll make your coffee infinitely sweet and the empty bag will last forever, so it's really a bargain! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 > >> >Hi Steve and others, >> > I'm finding my reaction to Steve's total dismissal of homeopathy >> >a little like my reaction to the North American orthopedic surgeons >> >who said that resurfacing was not really an option because they >> >couldn't trust any of the studies done on it in Europe. Basically, >> >they said that Europeans were not rigorously scientific with their >data... >> >> WHOA! There is a wrong useage of the word homeopathy here dude. >Homeopathic >> is defined as (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=homeopathic) >> >> " A system for treating disease based on the administration of minute >doses >> of a drug that in massive amounts produces symptoms in healthy >individuals >> similar to those of the disease itself. " > >Which is what Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, called " The Law of >Similars " . It's the fundamental principal of homeopathy. > >> * Under US law, you cannot patent and thereby own a naturally occurring >> substance, > >This will come as quite a shock to Bristol-Myers-Squibb, which is >making a ton of money on the cancer drug Taxol® (derived from the >Pacific yew tree). Not so fast. No they aren't getting from the pacific yew since that is endangered. Read here: http://www.rand.org/scitech/pubs/sci300.html (click on full article for more) which outlines the legal concept I referred to. A discussion of Taxol is here: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/Depts/Chemistry/MOTM/taxol/taxol.htm The gist of this (and do feel free to help me out here) is that the precedence favors not allowing patenting. In the case of Taxol, the origin of the substance is a protected tree and the fellows at Squibb were able to take a relative and laboriously synthesize Taxol from it -- they don't own Taxol (they do own other chemicals they have isolated and if you make some of these, they can sue you), but do, I believe, own the way to make it. The source is protected and it is not likely folks can reproduce Squibb's extraction process in their basements. In the legal article they did mention that this legal concept was being eroded and cited pressures from groups that want to patent genetically engineered plants and critters as a factor. As I understand it, part of the legal thinking is to prevent someone from patenting air and charging us all for it. Jeff rBHR Aug. 1, 2001 Mr. McMinn > >Steve (bilateral C+ 4/20/04, Amstutz) > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 > >> >Hi Steve and others, >> > I'm finding my reaction to Steve's total dismissal of homeopathy >> >a little like my reaction to the North American orthopedic surgeons >> >who said that resurfacing was not really an option because they >> >couldn't trust any of the studies done on it in Europe. Basically, >> >they said that Europeans were not rigorously scientific with their >data... >> >> WHOA! There is a wrong useage of the word homeopathy here dude. >Homeopathic >> is defined as (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=homeopathic) >> >> " A system for treating disease based on the administration of minute >doses >> of a drug that in massive amounts produces symptoms in healthy >individuals >> similar to those of the disease itself. " > >Which is what Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, called " The Law of >Similars " . It's the fundamental principal of homeopathy. > >> * Under US law, you cannot patent and thereby own a naturally occurring >> substance, > >This will come as quite a shock to Bristol-Myers-Squibb, which is >making a ton of money on the cancer drug Taxol® (derived from the >Pacific yew tree). Not so fast. No they aren't getting from the pacific yew since that is endangered. Read here: http://www.rand.org/scitech/pubs/sci300.html (click on full article for more) which outlines the legal concept I referred to. A discussion of Taxol is here: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/Depts/Chemistry/MOTM/taxol/taxol.htm The gist of this (and do feel free to help me out here) is that the precedence favors not allowing patenting. In the case of Taxol, the origin of the substance is a protected tree and the fellows at Squibb were able to take a relative and laboriously synthesize Taxol from it -- they don't own Taxol (they do own other chemicals they have isolated and if you make some of these, they can sue you), but do, I believe, own the way to make it. The source is protected and it is not likely folks can reproduce Squibb's extraction process in their basements. In the legal article they did mention that this legal concept was being eroded and cited pressures from groups that want to patent genetically engineered plants and critters as a factor. As I understand it, part of the legal thinking is to prevent someone from patenting air and charging us all for it. Jeff rBHR Aug. 1, 2001 Mr. McMinn > >Steve (bilateral C+ 4/20/04, Amstutz) > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 Hello again Steve-- Actually, the " Theory of Similars " IS alive in the 21st century in the form of vaccines! What are vaccines but some of the same virus that causes the disease? It's based on a similar theory--that the body will develop antibodies-- an immune response-- in the presence of the disease causing agent. The problem with vaccines is that they sometimes can lead to people developing the disease that they were supposed to develop immunity to. In homeopathy, the concentrations are so minute that there is no danger of that, but the idea is the same--to provoke an immune response. The basic idea of homeopathy is that the " energy " (for lack of a better definition) remains in the remedy. As I said in my last post, vibrational/energy medicine will be the medicine of the future! Sub-atomic discoveries have shown that there are smaller particles than molecules and atoms. Quantum physics has changed previous thinking about the laws of physics. There is so much that we don't know about the energy systems of the body that I'm sure will become standard knowledge/practice in the future. Alot has happened since the last century but we haven't discovered everything there is to know yet! We presently only use 5% of our mental capabilities--think of the possibilities when we start using the other 95%! I thank people like Dr. Amstutz every day for thinking outside the box and persisting with it! Candace 12/02 C+ Vail --- sog1927 sog@...> wrote: > > > However, the " Theory of Similars " really isn't > something that needs to > be propagated into the 21st Century. > > If you look at the ingedients in a lot of > homeopathic medicines (like > nux vomica, also known as strychnine), you should be > grateful that > they're so diluted that there's practically nothing > in them. > > Steve (bilat C+ 4/20/04, Amstutz) > __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 Great that this discussion of homeopathy has evolved to reference immunology specifically! Re. vaccines: Vaccines can be " some " of a virus that causes a disease. Eg, a portion of an outer part (envelope protein) of a virus that does not vary may serve as a vaccine. Or, an attenuated (killed) whole virus (non-viable in terms of possessing functional genes to support viral replication) may function as a vaccine. It is possible that an attenuated virus may revert to functionality, but the vaccines composed of parts of a virus, lacking in viral genetic material, have zero capacity for infection of cells. Regarding the Theory of Similars...there is merit to immunization ( " sensitizing " the body) with that which can cause disease. That's why so much work has gone into trying to find invariant envelope proteins of the HIV virus. Using Candace's term, the minimal " energy " required from an immunizing agent is some component of the pathogen that can enter into the antigen presentation process, lead to the development of a memory B cell, which can then lay in wait, ready to proliferate like hell and spew out antibody should the pathogen come a'knockin' in force. There is, however, no reliable inverse correlation between dilution and potency; re. immunizing agents, more dilute does not correlate with more potent. Maybe I be startin' to blather on here; blame it on the vicodin! - Bob In surfacehippy , Candace Castle wrote: > Hello again Steve-- > Actually, the " Theory of Similars " IS alive in the > 21st century in the form of vaccines! What are > vaccines but some of the same virus that causes the > disease? It's based on a similar theory--that the > body will develop antibodies-- an immune response-- in > the presence of the disease causing agent. The > problem with vaccines is that they sometimes can lead > to people developing the disease that they were > supposed to develop immunity to. In homeopathy, the > concentrations are so minute that there is no danger > of that, but the idea is the same--to provoke an > immune response. The basic idea of homeopathy is that > the " energy " (for lack of a better definition) remains > in the remedy. > > As I said in my last post, vibrational/energy medicine > will be the medicine of the future! Sub-atomic > discoveries have shown that there are smaller > particles than molecules and atoms. Quantum physics > has changed previous thinking about the laws of > physics. There is so much that we don't know about > the energy systems of the body that I'm sure will > become standard knowledge/practice in the future. > Alot has happened since the last century but we > haven't discovered everything there is to know yet! We > presently only use 5% of our mental > capabilities--think of the possibilities when we start > using the other 95%! > I thank people like Dr. Amstutz every day for thinking > outside the box and persisting with it! > Candace 12/02 C+ Vail > > --- sog1927 wrote: > > > > > > However, the " Theory of Similars " really isn't > > something that needs to > > be propagated into the 21st Century. > > > > If you look at the ingedients in a lot of > > homeopathic medicines (like > > nux vomica, also known as strychnine), you should be > > grateful that > > they're so diluted that there's practically nothing > > in them. > > > > Steve (bilat C+ 4/20/04, Amstutz) > > > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.