I Need A Homeopath or Naturopath

I’ve realized I need the help of a homeopath or a naturopath.

Not help with anything related to my own health, of course. There’s no good evidence that homeopathic or naturopathic treatments work, so relying on them for that would be foolish.

Here’s why I think I need their help.

I’m willing to assume that most homeopaths and naturopaths (and other practitioners of new-age medicine, like crystal therapists, and those who practice “therapeutic touch”) are honest and sincere. I’ll willing to assume that they’re not intentionally defrauding anyone. They’re mistaken, perhaps, about their work having anything beyond placebo value, but I’ll assume they’re not con artists.

So, here’s my question: how can I tell the difference? Surely such practitioners have to acknowledge that there are charlatans out there. Con artists do exist, right? Surely no one thinks that everything offered as health-promoting actually works. So, my question for practitioners of new-age medicine: how do I tell the difference between their services, and the services of a true snake-oil salesman?

Seriously, if any of you homeopaths or naturopaths (etc.) out there can answer this question, you will be doing a very significant service to consumers.

49 comments so far

  1. Jordan on


    I have been reading your blog for some time now, perhaps 2 years, and I remember an < HREF="http://www.businessethics.ca/blog/2008/10/marketing-useless-magnetic-products.html" REL="nofollow">article<> you wrote about magnetic bracelets and they’re obvious fraudulence. I forwarded it to my boss at the hosting company I work for who had a moderate to severe case of carpal tunnel syndrome he was dealing with. I believe he made a comment about his experience with the bracelets. He would be a success story in that industry because now he doesn’t even wear the bracelets or experience pain.

    A lot of things jump to my mind in response to your question. First, I would like to point directly to the placebo effect itself. I feel that this is often disregarded or overlooked as a significant feature of human consciousness. If people being healed by simply believing they will be healed is just some textbook effect to consider in scientific studies, we are very much missing the point. If the placebo effect is the reason why some people see positive results from unapproved methods of treatment, that is still a successful method of treatment for some percentage. In a lot of ways this is a kind of ‘magic’ that many people are so sure doesn’t exist. Anyway, let’s not demean the placebo effect.

    This brings me to intention. Intention, so far, is the most powerful force I am aware of. Unfortunately it is not something I could see being easily measured in a scientific manner. Again, intention is powerful and the concept coupled with my experiences with healers and psychics and the fulfillment of my own directed intentions has lead to faith in those practices and processes.

    I am by nature a skeptic and skepticism is also powerful. It can belay the power of intention in many ways and this is a paradoxical paradigm. The idea that if you believe it, it has true power, but if you disbelieve it, you counter-act that power. I truly have battled in my head between the metaphysical phenomena I have experienced and the classical physics I was indoctrinated with. One says the other cannot exist, the other seems very incompatible at times.

    Now I’ve wrote a speech. To answer your question. I would pay attention to the statements. The marketing tactics, anything that makes you wary of any product. Since what you’re trying to understand are intentions, pay close attention to them. They are the basis towards success in alternative healing practices.


  2. Chris MacDonald on


    Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I’ll make just a couple of points.

    1) The placebo effect does not generally last. Its physiological effect is quite short lived. It doesn’t actually cure anything.

    2) Your suggestion that we pay attention to marketing tactics is intriguing. What sorts of tactics should we be wary of?


  3. Jordan on

    Any sort of exaggerated claim involving lots of exclamation points and promises. Think about how you came in contact with the healer in question. Did they approach you somehow toting their talents or did you seek them out because you were in need of alternative means or wanted to try something different.

    My spiritual advisers are healers who do not seek out people to work on. They lead a passive practice and welcome anyone who asks for aid. They rarely charge money and conduct aura balancings for whoever shows up on Friday evenings. I trust these people and the insights they seem to evoke from no apparent source. They literally speak from their hearts.

    Money is the crux between healers and salespeople. How much are you investing in your treatment? Are you paying an absurd amount of cash for someone to conjure up treatments or rituals?

    After saying all that I would turn the question around on Western treatment and medicine. How much are you paying? What are the claims? Were you witness to the studies and results? Could someone who is heavily invested in a pharmaceutical treatment have exaggerating claims or falsified study results?

    Marketing can be very sleazy, beware of any red, bold print.

  4. Kevin Goodman on

    What’s wrong with snake oil? Ingest the right herbs and anything is possible 😉

  5. Ronald Hayden on

    Chris, I can’t help with sorting the well-intentioned frauds from the out-and-out frauds in this area: Their actions are so far from anything that could even be conceivably useful or true that the distinction almost seems meaningless.

    With some other woo-woo it’s easier to understand how one could be misinformed to the degree of practicing/preaching it, and it’s easier to tell sincerity based on the kind of business model they set up. If it’s an MLM scheme or some kind of progressive disclosure scheme where the next payout of cash will reveal the total whole truth finally (see Kevin Trudeau), then they are a fraud for sure.

    In any case, if you aren’t already aware of these, I highly recommend two podcasts and a website for helping sort this stuff out:

    < HREF="http://skeptoid.com/" REL="nofollow">Skeptoid<> provides pithy discussions of specific topics, and is great for a quick hit of sanity.

    < HREF="http://www.theskepticsguide.org/" REL="nofollow">The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe<> is a weekly round-table discussion that is both highly entertaining and unusually informative. Their “Science or Fiction” quiz is particularly good for science items of the day and demonstrating how to sort reality from nonsense.

    By far the best, most in-depth coverage of medical woo topics I’ve ever read (created by the Skeptic’s Guide host, neurologist Steven Novella) is < HREF="http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/" REL="nofollow">Science-based Medicine<>.

  6. Chris MacDonald on


    Exaggerated claims are a good warning sign. But I’m not sure the public can always recognize those. The last ad I saw for a Naturopath claimed to be able to cure HIV, which of course Naturopathy cannot cure.


  7. Chris MacDonald on

    p.s. I’m skeptical about asking the question “Were you witness to the studies and results?” if that’s a question consumers should ask themselves. Most consumers — and I would include myself, here — don’t have the expertise to tell the difference between an excellent study and one so methodologically flawed as to be useless.

  8. geetarchurchy on

    True naturopaths don’t believe in hocus pocus 🙂

    Naturopaths are more inclined to treat a cold using lemon, honey, garlic and ginger in a warm drink, then give you medicine. Why? because these contain the necessary ingredients to cure sore throats etc. They take longer to work, but are a healthier way of doing so.

    Naturopathy is more about avoiding the introduction of toxins into diet for example, than curing HIV, which is quite frankly an absurd statement!

    My only qualification for joining this debate is my girlfriend – she is an Ostepath and a Naturopath. I will forward this post to her and hopefully if she has time she can try to explain better what I have tried to!

  9. Chris MacDonald on


    Thanks. The question isn’t really about what Naturopathy is or isn’t. I’m asking Naturopaths and Homeopaths to help consumers tell the difference between good and bad practitioners of alternative medicine.

    Presumably Naturopaths and Homeopaths know that there are scam-artists out there trying to sell useless or even harmful “cures.” How can consumers avoid falling prey to those?

    I saw a TV show that featured a woman with a silly-looking “crystal therapy” machine. She admitted she didn’t know how it worked, but she charged people money to “balance their auras,” or something. Seemed crazy to me, but I’m just guessing. I’m asking for advice on how to know whether to trust someone like that.


  10. Jordan on

    To play the metaphysical advocate from a skeptical point of view -> you don’t know for sure that naturopathy can’t cure HIV. If my belief based perspective is true then you are part of the reason HIV can’t easily be cured at all (ouch). But I understand we’re here in a scientific realm in this discussion, so as long as we don’t bar anything from existing because we haven’t proved it or can’t see it yet, I’ll go on from that perspective.

    Let the buyer beware! Money, again is the crux of the issue. If you hook me up to some crystal resonance machine and my aura is supposedly balanced and you don’t charge me any money, am I worse off? If you do charge me $10 and I do feel better, am I worse off?

    As you move up the ladder with ailments and amounts of money, as with any other medical transaction, start to beware. Life threatening illnesses are going to require considerate treatment because people value their lives so much. People are going to be out there trying to make money off your desire to stay alive, this is why I throw it back on the Western professions. Tell us how you would know if a doctor or surgeon is one you can trust? Accreditation? Testimonials from previous patients? Add to the list.

    Like the results of studies, we are putting a lot of faith in the people who are offering medical or other healing services. My advice is to have a doctor and a naturopath or clairvoyant at your disposal. Get the second opinion. Be wary of doctors who put down natural practices (especially the importance of diet) and be wary of healers who tell you that doctors are always evil scammers.

  11. Chris MacDonald on

    If someone charges me to make me *feel* better, and I end up *feeling* better, then I’ve got what I’ve paid for. But if I’m paying to have my *aura* balanced, and she doesn’t do that, I’ve been cheated. I’ve been robbed, and lied to.

    “Buyer beware” is good, but relatively empty, advice, if the buyer doesn’t know how to spot frauds. That slogan can also can be mistaken for declaring open season on gullible customers.

    Money’s not the crux of the issue: I’d want to know if I’m being lied to (or for that matter being sold something useless that the seller honestly believes in), even if the service were free.

  12. Kevin Goodman on


    I got to tell you that I am just a little disappointed that you rejected my comment. Of course you have every right to do so. I intended to bring some humor to the conversation which I felt was tasteful. I felt safe doing so after you criticized the “field” for being “too damn serious”. My personal take is that Holistic medicine has no credible foundations in modern medicine –except perhaps placebo or psychological. Because these practices are already heavily criticized the consumer has accepted the risks. And you know very well that any response or defense is going to be begging the question.

  13. Chris MacDonald on


    I didn’t reject it — it got lost in the shuffle, along with Ronald Hayden’s. Not sure how that happened. I’ve found them now, and approved both (see above). They appear above @ the date you submitted.



  14. John Board on

    dear Chris I did twitter you. I can read that you are an intelligent person and it is true that most homeopaths and those working with Bach Flower Remedies are in the main honest. I am an experiential homeopath learning by carrying books and remedies on film sets and letting people use the remedies from their own selections from the books. Then of course I asked later how the remedy worked. I created two kits from the remedies most used and most given good marks. In everyday acute situations the remedies can be self diagnosed so be the doctor yourself and try one or two and see how effective or not they are. If you are having trouble finding a problem or a remedy I will lead you to where you might find an answer.
    Regards John.a.board@hollywoodsurvivalkit.com

  15. Chris MacDonald on


    Maybe you didn’t read my blog posting fully.

    I’m not looking for homeopathic help myself — there’s no evidence that works.

    I’m looking for homeopaths to tell me how to spot *frauds* among those who offer alternative/natural health remedies.


  16. John Board on

    To add to my comment john board. Homeopathy has no side effects as you know nor do the Bach Flower Remedies so you can select and be sure you will do yourself no harm. Skepticism is a good thing and I am still surprised how efficacious both these systems are. But I remove my doubts by using so to be just a skeptic without experiencing to see for yourself is like a person not putting their foot in the water to test it and rather wanting outside proof from other toes. I prefer to believe myself and my arthritis is under control since 1987 using homeopathy. Best

  17. Chris MacDonald on


    You’re still not responding to the question I posted.

    I won’t be publishing any further comments that don’t address the topic at hand.


  18. John Board on

    The best way is to go and make a first appointment. If after filling out the form the doctor begins by asking questions you might be with a fraud for in case taking the patient does most of the talking and is not led by the doctor. In other alternates I have no idea.

  19. FaerieDevilish on

    “ethicsblogger Disappointed how few homeopaths, naturopaths, etc. accepted my request to help consumers detect frauds. http://tinyurl.com/homeop Bad sign?”

    I am not here to make an apology of alternative medicine as it is frankly not something I would put my bets on, but I’d like to add two points:

    1) If you have confidence as the blog owner that your words make a serious outreach that covers a substantial amount of the alt medicine naturopathy, then you are not only arguably justified in your disappointment, but then it is time to have doubts, yes. The question, however, remains unanswered if not more than ten follow this blog.

    2) Assuming that none of the hypothetical alternative medicine practitioners actually came up with a terminant answer to the initial problem, could we get away with using this fact against alternative medicine any more than we would be able to if the same question were asked to your average new-age doctor?

  20. Chris MacDonald on


    Fair points.

    Several hundred people subscribe to my email notifications. Nearly 700 follow me on Twitter, including a number of homeopaths, chiropractors, etc. Then there are also Twitter searches & Google to bring blog entries to the attention of those who might be interested.

    So, while you’re right to wonder just how many relevant individuals have read my blog entry, it’s not exactly hidden away in a quiet corner of the internet. 🙂

    As for what we can conclude from silence: well, frankly, not very much. But it’s an interesting data point, I think. I’ve also searched online, and it’s very hard to find information from alt-med folks about how to avoid getting conned. Mainstream med points (when it can) to things like Randomized Controlled Trials. Alt-med mostly refuses to do that, but you’d think they’d have some advice for how to sort the good from the bad.


  21. John Board on

    most alternative Health experts are in the field and doing good and successful work. They are not about proving to skeptics but rather their answer would be try and see for yourself. Homeopathy has not side effects and it is reasonable to say to you try and then you will be the author of positive not skeptical. We do not have to defend what has been successfully used for over 200 years and proven over time. Wake up and smell reality. Read my blog today of what I think about where the health care system is world wide. http://hollywoodsurvivalkit.com
    I have nothing to hide and gain ground in the world as much as I can.
    Be well.
    Ethics are a tool for some and a reality for others. For me they are a reality and I live by them through my own experiences as a healer.

  22. Chris MacDonald on


    I’m not asking for proof for skeptics. I’m asking a consumer protection question. How can *consumers* protect themselves from scam artists.
    Presumably not EVERY alternative therapy works. There must be SOME that are useless, some scam artists out there. How can an inexperienced consumer tell the difference?
    Surely the answer can’t be “pay first, and hope for the best.”


  23. Chris MacDonald on


    p.s. since you raised the issue: how can a potential consumer know that homeopathy has no side effects? I mean, say they were afraid. How would you reassure them? For some, “trust me” wouldn’t be enough, I’m afraid.


  24. Jordan on

    John Board,

    It’s understandable for some of us to get defensive because our beliefs and experiences as healers are being challenged to some degree by the author. The real topic is how to know if someone is a con in the practice.

    My suspicion is that most proclaimed healers are not ‘scammers’ or ‘cons’ and truly carry the intention to heal (which is generally a key criteria in most metaphysical remedies). If you’re going to scam someone, homeopathy is probably not the most effective way to do that.

    Dr. MacDonald,

    Can you provide us with an example or article representing a scam or con situation in homeopathy that we can assess?

  25. John Board on

    I do understand your dilemma. You cannot lump them all together. Homeopathy I explained earlier how you might discover a phony through his case taking. I cannot speak about why others have not written. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and just like medical doctors with shingles up you can only tell after time and your own decision as to whether or not you will follow the protocol suggested. This would be the same with other kinds of alternate healing. I think if we look at the law courts as a guide we would be safe to say that we should be skeptical about medical doctors and not about alternative healers for they are not in court defending their protocols.

  26. Chris MacDonald on


    No, not a homeopathic scam. I stipulated in the blog entry that homeopaths are persons of integrity — though I suppose we could imagine someone selling plain water and *telling* customers that it’s genuine homeopathic medicine.
    What I really have in mind is stuff outside of homeopathy. If someone says to an AIDS patient “here, these special crystals will heal you,” how can the potential patient know whether the crystals will work or not?


  27. John Board on

    thank you Jordan for your understanding. I think your question to Chris is appropriate and will give us something concrete to deal with.

  28. John Board on

    Jordan you obviously come from reasoned positions and logic in all your posts. I am more one of passion. I wondered who you are but your id is not available. If you wish to share your site send me an email which is on my site. Thanks John

  29. Jordan on


    I feel you should be the one answering your own question. How do we go about knowing if that pill is going to work? Let’s conduct a study!

    I’ve read one book called The Intention Experiment and in this book the author claims to be reporting and have facilitated studies regarding remote healing and telepathy etc. that I believe would meet (y)our rigorous scientific standards. Of course I have not made the effort to check and double check the sources but there is an extensive list in the back.

    I don’t think there was anything about crystals per-say but if we look, there may be credible research that’s been done on these alternative treatments that isn’t published in mainstream sources.


    I’m just a kid and have no website. I grew up with hemophilia and parents who were skeptics of pharmacists, doctors, and lawyers. At a relatively early age I was introduced to the idea of healing myself using mental exercises and visualizations. My parents used to do what they called ‘lymphasizing’. They would run their hands over my bruises just above the skin. Can’t say it worked for sure but I could feel their hands without them touching and there was power in that alone.


    PS I searched ‘lymphasizing’ to check the spelling and found this site. Check it out and use it as an example for our conversation. Does any thing stand out that sets off bells? Any claims without substantiation? [I haven’t read past the first paragraph as I’m headed out the door.]

  30. Chris MacDonald on


    For present purposes, my own method for evaluating medical claims is kind of beside the point. Personally, I probably *would* want evidence from studies of some sort, as you suggest… But that kind of scientific approach is typically rejected by fans of alternative medicine. So I’m curious what kind of assurances they think consumers deserve instead.


  31. John Board on

    You are some confused. we are not talking about medicines although there is ample proof through provings at the beginning of what a remedy will be good for and then 100 or 200 years of success for those uses to go on. What we are talking about is how to tell if the practitioner is good or bad. As I said it is the same in the medical world. How do you tell if the plastic surgeon is good or bad and that usually comes out post operative. Do you understand what I am saying here. In honesty there is no way to tell other than by looking at degrees on the wall which can be false in either case and techniques that may be new or may have hundreds of years of proven successful use behind them. You are the patient and at all times the motto Buyer beware should be adhered to. Your question in the end does not have an answer in any form of healing. Sorry.

  32. Chris MacDonald on


    No, I’m not confused. It was my question; I’m hardly confused about it. Though I may have been unclear, though I’ve tried several times to clarify.

    If I’m sick, and I open up the phonebook, and I find an ad that says “I can help you!”, how do I know whether it’s legitimate, or a scam? You keep referring to some practices being hundreds of years old — are you saying the older the better? Surely not everything old is good.

    How about “Angel Therapy?” Is that worth paying for? Why or why not? How about “aura therapy”? Is there seriously no way for a potential patient to tell the difference between what you do and a scam artist? No questions she could ask? No form of evidence to look for?


  33. John Board on

    In all treatment whether medical or metaphysical, homeopathic or angel dust there is not concrete way to know. the closest one can come is to ask the practitioner for his client list and do research in that way. That is the only way and then we can ask maybe these are his ringers who give good testimonials and that is true for any practitioner of all sorts.

  34. John Board on

    It is very interesting to read this last note. I looked at the Intention page and the other page and realize that you are going down a road that many new age physicists are going down. The body is first of all a physical thing so it is made up of energy pure energy that somehow has come together in a powerful cluster that creates you and me. So it is all electricity of some sort attracted or not in patterns that are created at conception and grown from there. Toxicity is born and also created by elements that interfere with the patterns of what we deem as normal. I came to writings about this from two sources http://www.yurkovsky.com/ a very dense and opinionated writer but in the end solid ideas and http://www.drdaveou.com/ Dr.Ou who starts with Yurkovsky and moves forward from there. The root of their ideas are that all paradigms of healing fail in the dealing with chronic ailments due to basic underlying toxicity which is why so many eventually have a plethora of illnesses. Look at them for their thesis and their techniques are interesting. Their backgrounds are very sound. Lastly on the site Homeopathy world Community I have met an Indian homeopathic doctor with a very solid background who practices Homeopathy at distance. Taking follicle of your hair he can after hearing from you with your problem mix a remedy and put your bit of hair into it and you miles away will reap the rewards of this. His web pages are http://www.wavemedicines.com and http://www.risdth.org provide more information. So how do we know if any or all of those you mention or I mention are real or not for each has a following and each success stories and each dealing with the body and healing with energy at a very base level. I am a simple person and somehow very skeptical and yet I believe that the body is far more or less than we know and things of energy are able to travel hundreds and thousands and millions of miles without disintegration or distortion so why not the energy sign of a follicle of hair traveling with information back to its source and causing cure. Perpostrous but then so is light traveling millions of years to reach us as it was created so we can see what it looked like millions of years ago. There are 300,000,000 (300 million) connectors between the left and right side of the brain. That is now known as fact. Pretty small links I’d say and each separate and knowing where it is going and what it is saying. Think on that and maybe out good Dr. Chris can understand why it is hard to figure out who is real and who not in any world.

  35. Chris MacDonald on


    You said above that “alternative healers for they are not in court defending their protocols.”

    Turns out that’s not true. I just found this about 2 homeopaths found guilty in the death of their own child:

    From the Sydney Morning Herald: “Parents guilty of manslaughter over daughter’s eczema death”

  36. John Board on

    Dear Chris,
    Yes you are right that this case is indeed not only sad but tells us that no paradigm of healing is perfect nor all practitioners capable of dealing with the failures of their own system of healing. I was indeed wrong to say there were no cases against Homeopaths. This is however one case and I want to draw your attention to a couple of links which I found when googling malpractice cases against doctors and suits against pharmaceuticals. In the cases against pharmaceuticals in class action cases there is a great cry that they should not be allowed and the old Bush regime coupled with the FDA and the medical profession tried to put some curb on pharmaceutical liability. It is a shame that so many people have to suffer the fate of drugs that class action suits are necessary to say the least. That sometimes questionable lawyers make these money earners is also regrettable but the bottom line is that if the first tenet was At First Do No Harm instead of How much can we earn from this no matter what the fallout, we as people would be far better off.
    But my first concern with the whole issue is are we really approaching the human body as a complete organism that should not be manipulated through debilitating drugs in an effort to kill or mask disease or dis-ease and should we not seriously investigate the hypothesis that Homeopathy should be a first response to disease and dis-ease as it supports the immune system and the body to heal itself and causes no side effects.
    I chose these sites out of a long list and could find no list at all when I used the same searches and just substituted Homeopathy which does speak some to my opinion.



  37. Chris MacDonald on


    I can certainly support the idea that we should, as you say, “seriously investigate the hypothesis that Homeopathy should be a first response”.

    Presumably such a serious investigation should start with randomized, controlled, clinical trials of homeopathic remedies?


  38. John Board on

    It is a little amazing that a Doctor should be so uneducated as to not know that Homeopathy is prescribed on an individual basis and does not lend itself to randomized testing. I do not like to be fooled with by people like you who have no real desire to find anything out but support for their own erroneous thinking. Perhaps we should end this discussion on grounds that you are not well enough read to discuss an appropriate examination of Homeopathy.

  39. Chris MacDonald on


    I didn’t “fool” you. I asked a question and am still interested in the answer. You brought up the idea of investigating, so I suggested a method. If the method I suggested is inappropriate, feel free to suggest another.

    I have a PhD in philosophy; I’m not a medical doctor. I had never heard the claim that homeopathy can’t be investigated by means of controlled trials. I can’t imagine why that would be true: the fact that treatment is individualized shouldn’t preclude an examination of outcomes.

    So where am I left? I know on one hand how it is that consumers know to trust someone who proposes to administer a Beta Blocker after a heart-attack: there’s a lot of evidence (from clinical trials) that that saves lives. But I still don’t know how a consumer can know whether to trust someone who proposes to treat her cancer with crystals.


  40. John Board on

    As a doctor of Philosophy you have to have the clear understanding that to discuss different ideas one first has to learn about the ideas through study and then you are capable of having discussions. Ignorance is not an excuse. Heard about is hearsay which you are clear to state is not evidence enough so that you have not heard about the facts renders you not in the ball park to play the game.
    Tests of any sort have to be augmented through experience of users over time. None of the flu vaccines are tested appropriately using any method. Perhaps you might spend your time more profitably for yoursel and the others who read your posts by actually doing some examination of the Pharmas and how they have captured our health care. Read about Oxycondon and how the makers Purdue Pharma respond to the hearings about it with stalling tactics and answers that are clouded with ambiguity. Our peoples of the world are having thier immune systems ravaged by our system of medicine currently being touted by WHO, CDC, Governements through the vast publicity and power of the Pharmaceuticals of the world. Study my statement through research which you are capable of. Learn and then we will talk again. I make no apology for my thoughts at this time as to your immature approach and lack of real knowledge of what you wish to talk about. The question of how do you know to trust comes through self education and trial and error as in all things.

  41. Chris MacDonald on


    I’m not sure just how much reading I’m supposed to do before I’m allowed to ask health professionals a question about how THEY think consumers ought to protect themselves from charlatans. That’s what my original blog posting asked.

    Do notice that my original question was NOT about homeopathy anyway (though I do think all health professions should have some way of assuring new patients that their services are a) safe and b) effective — something beyond “trust me”).

    Anyway, clearly this exchange has run its course.


  42. John Board on

    I do agree we should end this post. I ask you one great favour to yourself and the many who find your investigations and thoughts of value. Go back to the beginning of Hahnemann and his first argument with the doctors of the time and why he had those arguments. Perhaps as you read the history to the present you will feel in the end as I do that we are only waiting for the right child to be heard saying The Emperor Pharma has no cloths on and is distorting all of us into a path of humankind destruction.

    I wish you well.

    John BOrd

  43. Jordan on


    I would like to express my appreciation for your work and for opening up a discussion on this subject. In the midst of trying to keep on the topic we reached our hands into a few compelling cookie jars. I am thankful for the opportunity to verbalize my own perspectives and experiences because if not for this discourse, I would not have racked my brain in such a rigorous way. Keep up the good work!


  44. John Board on

    I too have had to think in my responses and keep on topic altho I was altering them. I think if you have the 29.95 my day would be complete if you went to my site and bought a pocket pack and tried it yourself and with your family and friends. It has no side effect and will give you real experience with the remedies. It will lead it where it does but in the pudding is the proof. Thanks too for your patience and thought.


  45. John Board on

    When i receive articles like this one you can understand my concern.
    jon rappoport


    Writer, investigative reporter, commentator


    Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.

    A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won’t say which ones.

    Q: Why not?

    A: I want to preserve my privacy.

    Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?

    A: I believe I could lose my pension.

    Q: On what grounds?

    A: The grounds don’t matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.

    Q: Harassed by whom?

    A: The FBI.

    Q: Really?

    A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.

    Q: So much for free speech.

    A: I was “part of the inner circle.” If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.

    Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?

    A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall “brilliance” of modern medicine.

    Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

    A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It’s one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

    Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.

    A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.

    Q: Why?

    A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.

    Q: And then?

    A: I did my own investigation.

    Q: What conclusions did you come to?

    A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.

    Q: What conditions?

    A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don’t contract the diseases as easily.

    Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?

    A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.

    remainder of interview on my blog

  46. John Board on

    Should you wish to actually get into a clear set of understandings here is a dissertation by Dana Ullman who is well respected in the US

  47. Chris MacDonald on

    Just a note for readers who might not get the reference in the comment above:
    Samuel Hahnemann was an 18th/19th Century German physician whose beliefs are the foundation of Homeopathy, despite being at odds with modern science.

  48. Chris MacDonald on

    I’ve approved John’s comments above in the spirit of open discussion, though in the interest of consumer protection I feel duty-bound to point out that there is no credible evidence that homeopathic remedies work. People should beware about paying money for such remedies. John is very likely right in pointing out that homeopathic medicines have no side effects: from what I understand, they’re typically basically water — or so diluted in water that it is physiologically implausible to think that they could have any effect, good or bad, on the human body. That vast majority of scientists and physicians, including many that have no debts to the pharmaceutical industry, think that Homeopathy is simply implausible.

    See also the Wikipedia entry on Homeopathy to get an understanding of the physiological implausibility of its treatments, and the lack of evidence for its effectiveness.

    John, this posting was originally not about Homeopathy. You decided to post stuff about it — strictly off-topic — so I’ve been forced to reply. I’m not going to approve any further comments on this thread.

  49. […] I Need A Homeopath or Naturopath (May 17, 2009) […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: