|By – Dr. Ashutosh Pradhan||Click Here to download PDF|
I happen to view one TEDxPICT Talks on YouTube.com which Homoeopathy-Hatred talk. Here is my reply as a Homoeopath to the TEDxPICT Talk Speaker.
Reference: TEDxPICT Talk – Dispelling the myths of homeopathy by Dr. Shantanu Abhyankar (URL – https://youtu.be/zXKcRklWkcA accessed on 16-April-2020)
Credibility as “Homeopath”
The doctor who never practiced homoeopathy with true perspective, and ‘formatted’ his brain to study 12th standard has no moral right to refer to the knowledge he gained as a Homoeopath. As medicine is a practical knowledge and one who is talking on the basis of only theoretical knowledge and zero practical knowledge ethically has no right to speak about a topic which he has never practiced.
Modern Medicine – Contempt of other pathis
He speaks about systems followed by the then “modern medicine” allopathy during Dr. Samuel Hahnemann’s times. During this he has agreed that allopathy was ‘dwarf’. He has discarded allopathy and is referring it as modern medicine; my question is why only allopathy is modern medicine? Even we have newer methods of receiving a case with which we call homoeopathy too as a modern medicine. Why only allopath has a proprietary right over terms “modern medicine”? This shows their contemptuous approach with all other sciences. On the contrary the ethics state that each physician should respect other science. All those who say their own pathy modern medicine indirectly are creating contemptuous hatred towards other sciences / pathies. The medical council should take serious cognizance of the fact and take disciplinary action against such pseudo-scientist for their un-ethical act.
Then he went further to explain and support the so called holistic approach of allopaths – a patient of fungal infection goes to skin specialist – he treats it and refers the patient to endocrinologist for diabetes who in turn refers to the patient to ophthalmologist, then all three together realize that the patient is obese has low self esteem and needs to be referred to a psychiatrist and the patient lands up with a psychiatrist. Now let’s consider and assume from the patient’s perspectives: visit to a skin specialist = Rs.2000/- (+ waiting and consultation time on an average 1 hour) >>> visit to endocrinologist = Rs.2000/- (+ waiting and consultation time on an average 1 hour) >>> visit to ophthalmologist = Rs.2000/- (+ waiting and consultation time on an average 1 hour) >>> visit to a psychiatrist = Rs.2000/- (+ waiting and consultation time on an average 1 hour). The first question came to me was why a psychiatrist and why not a psychologist? May be the group chain will get broken if psychologist in roped in? Total amount spent = Rs.8000/- total manhours spent by the patient and one attendant = 4 hours X 2 = 8 hours. At the end of fourth consultation what did the patient achieved? Best known to the patient. Dr. Abhyankar surprisingly calling this as a holistic approach? I am shocked. Such a group practice a holistic approach? With such a lose referral who gained, the patient, the individual doctor, or the corporate hospital? I bet none of these specialists who examined this patient may have taken full case history that includes complete proforma as specified in the Harrison’s Clinical Medicine. They may have seen only the chief complains and the system involved pertaining to their specialization only.
What happens when the patient reaches a homeopath? The homeopath receives full case history of the patient which includes complaints from mind to toes. The treatment given will be for fungal infection along with possible root causes of the recurrent fungal infection starting from mind to toe. All this is covered in the homeopathic management of the patient. There is no need to visit 4 different homoeopathic “specialist / subject experts”. From patient’s perspective = Rs.2000/- (One time consultation fee) + Rs.400/- (one week medicine charges) = Rs.2400/- on an average time spent one hour for the case taking and zero hour of waiting as we homeopaths strictly work on appointment basis. That means Rs.2400/- + two manhours spent. This is what homeopathy’s holistic approach means, and not the group practice.
He went to comment on safety aspect of non-allopathic medicines. He commented that herbal medicine just because it is herbal is not safe. However, a scientist would have explained the mode of preparation of the medicines. In homoeopathy the source material if further processed by way of potentization which eliminates the source material beyond Avogadro’s number. On the other hand, an allopathic medicine is concentration of the active principle. Obviously, the side effect profile of the concentrated decoction of the chemical substance will be more and that of potentized homoeopathic medicine which is beyond Avogadro’s number yet is in the form of a nanomedicine will be zero. Click Here to reach an article on what we mean by Homoeopathic Medicine as Nano Medicine.
Ancient Text Vs Mercurial Allopathy
Allopathic science being mercurial, yes Sir it is mercurial, there are generations of antibiotics which has become obsolete whereas the same medicine Cinchona bark which led Dr. Samuel Hahnemann to discovery of homoeopathy works the same way as Dr. Hahnemann has documented centuries ago. Whereas the clinical trials of generations of antibiotic have become obsolete. So long as the homeopath experiences evidence of action of Cinchona the way it’s written in homeopathic texts and homoeopathic pharmacopeia, how does it matter whether it is ancient, or it is as on date. Ultimately what matters to a homeopath is patient’s wellbeing and cure.
Organon of Medicine
Surprisingly the one who has never seen Homoeopathic Philosophy and Organon of Medicine (written by Dr. Samuel Hahnemann centuries ago), in practice tries to be authoritative with the subject. Dr. Abhyankar goes further to state that the text written when even thermometer, blood pressure instrument was not invented needs to be believed as of 2017-2018. As a practicing homeopath who has practiced organon of medicine written by Dr. Hahnemann centuries ago, I endorse yes, it is still applicable even after the advent of equipment not just a thermometer, blood pressure instrument but even after advent of USG / MRI machines. The main reason is Organon of Medicine is based on the principles of health or life force and disease force. As against that all these modern gadgets are based on assessment of materialistic parameters. Hence it is the success of Organon of Medicine. The principles of which are so precise that with advent of so many gadgets still the principles stand firm on their grounds. He makes a blunder statement that he was expected to believe what ever is written in the Organon of Medicine, you are made to believe? Absolutely blunder, no one is compelling you to believe. It is your logical and rational mind that has to explore it further clinically. However, what has been conveyed by Dr. Abhyankar earlier in his talk is that he immediately after becoming a homeopath started 12th standard studies. Which means without assessing the practical application of Organon of Medicine he is criticizing it. In other words, it is equivalent to, he questioning the relevance of Bhagwat Geeta, Bible, Kuran in today’s world, after invention of modern armamentarium of war? Completely pseudo-scientist materialism.
As per him allopathy is blamed to have side effects. He says each medicine will have side effects. However, a scientist would have explained the method of preparation of the medicines. It is but natural that the medicine in concentrated form will have much more side effects than to homeopathic medicine in nano-particle format. If you go in the definition of side effects, it means effects on the other systems and functions of the body which are not expected to occur. If you take paracetamol as a pain killer [earlier when it was invented as a new clinical entity (NCE) it was meant for pain and not for fever] , lowering the body temperature was its side effect. However, the fun is paracetamol is commonly prescribed for its originally noticed side effect rather than the effect. Which is not the case with regards to homeopathic medicines. Homeopathic medicines when consumed under monitoring of a qualified homoeopath does not have side effects. However, if the medicines are taken without being under monitoring of a qualified homeopath there will be unwanted effects. He further spells out allegations against the other pathies. He further gave an example of oral contraceptive pills and it’s side effects. However, he forgot that contraception can be achieved through other means such as safe period method, or other mechanical devises too. Then why one wants to propagate oral contraceptives when alternative methods are available? One must think about it!
Speaking about Avogadro’s number is irrelevant when presence of nanoparticles in homeopathic medicine is an established fact way back in 2010. During Dr. Hahnemann’s times there was no nanoscience. Dr. Abyankar’s hatred towards homeopathy by using ancient references in a selfish way. He discards it saying it’s ancient when he don’t want to give credit. He uses ancient reference ignoring the time when the concept was explained, there was no nanoscience theories. Shake, shake, shake…he used a very lose and non-scientific language to describe the concept of potentization. As he is scared if he explains in scientific terms one may not scorn it, as desired by him. Similarly, he did not mention the primary vehicles alcohol and sacrum lactis out of which the homeopathic medicines are prepared. Water is never used in the preparation of homoeopathic medicines. Some pseudo-scientist has come up with this water-based potency concept to weaken homeopathy. Hence the relation with use of water to prepare homeopathic potencies is completely irrelevant and a lie. He says that he was taught that the vehicle should not have any effect on the human body which is completely incorrect. The Homeopathic Pharmacy recommends using a substance or a liquid as vehicle that does not alter the effect of source substance from which the homeopathic medicine is prepared. When a speaker at the level of TEDxPICT talk, is making such blunders, one must doubt about his knowledge of homeopathic pharmacy. He is absolutely making statements without authentic references.
Cross Question & Cult Practices
He further goes to contempt homeopathy by saying that homeopathy demands un-questioned obedience from you. Which is against scientific rationale of referencing. Dr. Abhyankar should provide the world references which compels a homeopathic student to believe it’s concept without asking a cross-question. I doubt about credibility of the speaker who is telling lies after lies without providing authentic references for his statements and arguments. He further extends his contempt by stating it as cult practice. His hatred towards Dr. Hahnemann further takes him to a new level where he has objections to call Dr. Hahnemann a master. On the other hand, I have heard other scientists being referred to as master of the science they invented. Calling someone not a master and making a hatred speech for such a recognition achieved master, shows narrow-mindedness of the speaker. Delivering hatred speech just out of own emotions against a person is non-scientific. He further adds that its blind following. He is narrating his own experience of “blind” learning. As a homeopath he himself never cross-checked Dr. Hahnemann’s concepts in the practice and untimely left homeopathy to appear for 12th standard exam again.
Evidence Based Medicine
In his pseudo-science speech, he is contradicting his own acts by saying that we scientifically explore it before we discard it. I bet he should prove that he ever logically and scientifically applied homeopathy in practice. Without its practical application or without having scientifically exploring the science, he is just ignoring the cures evidenced patient after patient. The science that ignores cures patient after patient has no legitimate right to claim being an evidence-based medicine. Rather it needs to be called as ego-based medicine.
Alternative medicine is the term given by some pseudo-scientist and no homeopathic text calls itself alternative when homeopaths practicing in India knows that homeopathy is the main line treatment and modern medicine is an alternative treatment for many patients.
By writing this article I am not denying other sciences. All other sciences are best at their own place. The patient should benefit from all systems of medicine and should not become soft target of such pseudo-scientist propaganda and hatred speech. I really pity the ‘knowledge’ of the mean-minded pseudo-scientist, expressed by means of a hatred talk on the eminent TED platform. TED administration should delete such hatred speech videos forever.
I pray to God Asclepius (Rx) and God Dhanwantari let the Science prevail to save lives and ease the suffering of mankind. Let humanity prevail.
#WorldHomeopathyWeek #Science #PseudoScience #PseudoScientists #FallingApple #Gravity #HistoryofGravity
1. Pradhan AC. Homeopathy – Science of Eras to come – https://www.drpradhan.com/homeopathy/homeopathy-sciences-of-eras-to-come (accessed on 23-April-2023)
2. Pradhan AC. Homeopathy – Nanomedicine – Mechanism of Action of Homoeopathic Medicines – https://www.drpradhan.com/homeopathy (accessed on 23-April-2023)
Feel Free to Share without altering this PDF. © April 2023, Dr. Ashutosh Pradhan – Consulting Homoeopath – Wellbiance® Quality of Living Clinic