WHO condemns homeopathy but there are different opinions

The World Health Organisation (WHO) says homeopathy has ‘no place’ in the treatment of disease. It would be right to say the first line of defence against serious diseases like malaria, HIV and influenza must be conventional scientifically-proven medicines, it is blinkered to condemn homeopathy outright when there are countless numbers of people around the world who can testify to the efficacy of so-called alternative treatments.

I know that if I had a serious illness I would seek out the help of doctors. But I cannot join the WHO in its blanket condemnation of homeopathic medicine when my experience of using it last year, not for myself but for one of our cats, was so positive and remarkable. Mandrake was diagnosed FIV+ a year ago, and our local vet immediately wanted to act in line with the current veterinary consensus, which is to cull any cat diagnosed with the virus. I refused to allow this, and despite Mandrake being gravely ill at the time (he had a high fever, wouldn’t eat, couldn’t walk, had eyes thick with green pus) the vet would not provide any further medical assistance, not even pain relief. It was a case of ‘let me euthanise or take the animal away’. It was that harsh. I had seriously offended the vet by dissing the golden gods of science and suggesting the vet didn’t know everything.

The vet’s attitude seriously pissed me off and galvanised me to look for help elsewhere.

I brought Mandrake home and began using homeopathic remedies and colloidal silver (no scientific evidence for that working, either), nursing him around the clock for three weeks as he slowly but surely recovered. The cat that was supposed to have died within weeks is still here today. Of course there is no cure for FIV, any more than there is yet a cure for HIV, but Mandrake is doing well. He’s in no pain, he has no fevers, his eyes are usually clear but occasionally need a wipe, he’s happy and outwardly healthy. I’ve since found out that the scientific veterinary consensus is challenged by a number of animal charities, and a scare tactic used to persuade me to put him down—I was told he would infect our other cats—was completely unfounded, with there being a less than 0.007% chance of that happening. We’ve since had the other cats tested. None of them are FIV+.

I am not anti-science. But scientists are people, and in common with all of us are fallible. That’s no big deal. I would never advise anyone to use homeopathic medicine when modern science can help more assuredly. I do get annoyed when scientists treat all those of us who try alternatives as basically stupid. If stupid I must be seen as, so be it. Without colloidal silver and homeopathy, my lovely ginger tom would be dead by now. That’s a fact. It might not be something science can or even wants to understand, but that doesn’t make it untrue. Of course the FIV virus could get the better of Mandrake today, tomorrow, next week, next month—and probably will, sooner or later. That’s not the point. If I’d listened to someone with science as their guide, and the consensus opinions of their peers, Mandrake wouldn’t have been able to enjoy his life to the full this past year.

I won’t apologise for commending homeopathy based on my experience. I won’t recommend it as the first line of defence either. Why that is so objectionable a stance to some scientists, I don’t know or care to understand.

Related articles by Zemanta

• WHO asked to condemn homeopathy (guardian.co.uk)
• Docs to WHO: publicly condemn homeopathy for dangerous diseases (boingboing.net)
• Diary of a homeophobe: part one (guardian.co.uk)

Related Posts:

1. Finding new ways to be cruel to animals in the name of science I was appalled when I read a Telegraph article online last night about how American scientists plan to create mice with brains completely composed of human cells. I’m actually a...