From the department of ‘couldn’t make it up’

It’s reasonably silly that you can get a qualification as a homeopath, given the complete lack of potential for an unlicensed homeopath to do any harm or for a licensed one to do any good (“you’ve been struck off the homeopath’s register for actually giving someone a traceable amount of medicine”, etc).

But it’s absolutely amazingly implausibly incredible that the course for said qualification includes a module on the benefits of astrology. I mean, are they trying to eradicate any spurious credibility they may previously have had…?

4 thoughts on “From the department of ‘couldn’t make it up’”

  1. I went to one once, just to give it a go. The first "consultation" consisted of almost an hour of in depth discussion. What this was for, other than justifying the fee, was a mystery to me. I didn't even get my one molecule of medicine which was promised for my next visit for an additional £35. Sadly, I'll never know how miraculous the treatment would have been because I didn't go back.

  2. The first “consultation” consisted of almost an hour of in depth discussion. What this was for, other than justifying the fee, was a mystery to me.

    But John, this is precisely why homeopathy "works" (disclaimer: read on for an explanation of the specific and limited cases in which it "works").

    Outcome studies have shown that a significant number of people feel better after homeopathic consultations. Most of us in the mental health sector are in no way surprised by this, despite the obvious silliness of the actual mechanism of homeopathic "medicine" (disclaimer 2: I'm still in the process of qualifying, so my use of the word "us" may be a little presumptuous). People regularly feel better when they spend time talking about what ails them to someone who is clearly listening and taking an active interest.

    This is why psychoanalytic psychotherapy tends to get results, and why I recommend it for emotional and personality disorders. Homeopathy is essentially another "talking cure" and has merit precisely because of that.

    The real problem, as Larry's link points out, is the claim that a "talking cure" can be effective in treating phsyical, rather than psychological, ailments. That's foolishness, and dangerous foolishness at that.

    Referring someone suffering from depression or anxiety to a homeopath may actually have some merit (though obviously I'd suggest a trained therapist would be a better bet). But expecting a homeopath to successfully treat cancer is sheer madness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>