View Full Version : Complementary Medicine - Talks and Workshops.
It is the aim of both myself and my wife Dr Natasha Usher to try to make both information and clinical sessions in complementary medicine as accessible as possible. We are in a very fortunate position that we have a great many years expertise in a variety of areas within complementary and conventional medicine.
So, if you are interested in learning or think there should be a workshop or lecture in any field, be it Hypnosis, homeopathy, bach flowers, TFT etc let us know, and we will see if we can put on a free session on the area of interest. If we don’t have the knowledge in an area we will know someone who does. Both of us are international tutors, course creators and have an extensive background in a variety of areas.
All we need is some interested people and we will put on the sessions.
Complementary medicine can work hand in hand with conventional medicine, or as a stand alone approach BUT only when you have the appropriate information and application, and its our aim to give the basics skills or knowledge, along with debunking many of the myths to allow people the opportunity to learn appropriately.
The opportunities to learn are there for all of you.
So let us know what you want.
Andrew
porshiepoo
12-Aug-07, 21:26
Definately homeopathy workshops plus more hypnosis iff possible. :)
I love homeopathic workshops, but I'd never attend a whole one. Half of one is sufficient. A quarter of one is better. An eighth of one better still. A sixteenth ....... Heck, perhaps I shouldn't attend at all.
He he, I'm only joking. I know how it works really. You need some element of the active ingredient in your mix or it doesn't work at all. Driving past as quickly as possible when the workshop is being held sounds perfect.
Yes, I am joking, I know exactly how homeopathy works. :lol:
Lavenderblue2
13-Aug-07, 07:38
Yes, I would like to see more hypnosis and would also be interested in the use of Bach Flowers - I've only used the Rescue Remedy.
Reiki is another thing I'd like to know more about - I once went to a Reiki practitioner for treatment for a sore back and I think it worked. One of the techniques we tried on Saturday made me think about Reiki.
LB
George Brims
13-Aug-07, 20:43
I love homeopathic workshops, but I'd never attend a whole one. Half of one is sufficient. A quarter of one is better. An eighth of one better still. A sixteenth ....... Heck, perhaps I shouldn't attend at all.
He he, I'm only joking. I know how it works really. You need some element of the active ingredient in your mix or it doesn't work at all. Driving past as quickly as possible when the workshop is being held sounds perfect.
Yes, I am joking, I know exactly how homeopathy works. :lol:
Why apologize for mocking such drivel?
Why apologize for mocking such drivel?
Must say I've found that "drivel" very, very helpful....:)
Same here. Conventional medicine has it's place but the alternatives are frequently more effective and less dangerous. Go to a GP with backache and you'll probably get painkillers. Go to an osteopath and you're likely to get a long-term solution (I did :) ).
Have you actually ever tried Homeopathic remedies George?
crashbandicoot1979
13-Aug-07, 21:40
I'd definitely be interested in workshops in homeopathy and bach flowers, and would attend more hypnosis workshops aswell.
Alice in Blunderland
13-Aug-07, 22:26
When I was pregnant with my first child I was lucky to be offered hypnosis by Dr Millard and would recommend it . I found it relaxing and extremely helpful and was thankful to have this chance.
I also found the laughing and poo pooing of it by other members of staff to be the biggest problem ......some were for alternative methods most were not and quite gladly gave their views on it making it a little embarrasing at times.
I think complimentary medicines do have a place alongside more conventional methods. :)
(OOps is that me and the hubby both out of jobs in the near future now that I have voiced my opinion. ) :confused
Why apologize for mocking such drivel?I'm not apologising and it's not 'such drivel'. If people believe that it works and it works for them then it doesn't matter that you don't believe in it. A homeopathic seed of belief can work wonders on the mind and a healthy mind helps lead the way to a physically healthy body. You should try it but always remember what Andrew says
Complementary medicine can work hand in hand with conventional medicine, or as a stand alone approach BUT only when you have the appropriate information and application
There are things in the mind that we don't understand. Yet.
I understand a scientist's reticence to accept homeopathy, but surely you don't reject hypnosis out of hand? I'm watching 'Atom' on TV and scientists needed to abandon common sense to understand atoms a hundred years ago. No I'm not making it up, I've just heard it on TV lol.
George Brims
14-Aug-07, 00:49
Same here. Conventional medicine has it's place but the alternatives are frequently more effective and less dangerous. Go to a GP with backache and you'll probably get painkillers. Go to an osteopath and you're likely to get a long-term solution (I did :) ).
Have you actually ever tried Homeopathic remedies George?
No. Nor have I cast runes, consulted a witch doctor, had my horoscope read, or had a hole bored in my skull to let out the ill humours.
Some people go to osteopaths and get a permanent *disability*. http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirostroke.html
My conventional orthopedist prescribed a class in stretching exercises and 30 minutes of walking per day. Except when I get lazy or over-exert myself lifting something, this has proved to be a solution for my back problems.
Homeopathy is bunk. Like most of the most successful scams, it takes a germ of truth and then adds nonsense. Conventional medicine used to (and still does) use some homeopathic remedies such as using emetics to hasten the end of a gastrointestinal infection, or capsaicin for muscle/joint pain. But this stuff about water remembering what was in it before it was diluted is just plain silly.
"I know exactly how homeopathy works." It doesn't.
As for the healthy mind healthy body business - well if only! I have known a number of well-balanced, joyfully contented people taken before their time by horrible diseases. And whiny misery-guts people who never get sick too for that matter!
Homeopathy is bunk. Like most of the most successful scams, it takes a germ of truth and then adds nonsense. Conventional medicine used to (and still does) use some homeopathic remedies such as using emetics to hasten the end of a gastrointestinal infection, or capsaicin for muscle/joint pain. But this stuff about water remembering what was in it before it was diluted is just plain silly.
"I know exactly how homeopathy works." It doesn't!Oh yes it does. The following comes from a sceptical website here (http://www.livescience.com/health/070807_bad_memory.html)
Similarly, a major homeopathy analysis published in The Lancet in 2005 found that the better a homeopathy study is performed, the more it is apparent that positive health outcomes are due to the placebo effect.
Dr. José Teixeira of France's National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), a physicist who wrote the sole critical article about water memory for Homeopathy, told LiveScience the "characteristic times of liquid water are well known in physics." Water molecules can change orientation around another molecule, he said, but "the longest life of any structure observed in liquid water is of the order of a picosecond."
Teixeira said research on water memory is performed by earnest homeopaths hoping to find a biological mechanism for a healing art they the honestly believe in. Homeopaths are far from quacks (http://www.livescience.com/health/060407_quack_clinics.html). Many, particularly those based in Europe, complete three-year degrees or post-graduate medical training.
Homeopathy's therapeutic benefits could be attributed to the care homeopaths dedicate to their patients. Homeopaths routinely spend an hour with their patients, compared to ten-minute visit most of us receive at a mainstream physician's office. Mainstream doctors have much to learn from homeopaths.
The placebo effect and caring homeopaths are poweful allies.
No. Nor have I cast runes, consulted a witch doctor, had my horoscope read, or had a hole bored in my skull to let out the ill humours.
Some people go to osteopaths and get a permanent *disability*. http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirostroke.html
My conventional orthopedist prescribed a class in stretching exercises and 30 minutes of walking per day. Except when I get lazy or over-exert myself lifting something, this has proved to be a solution for my back problems.
Homeopathy is bunk. Like most of the most successful scams, it takes a germ of truth and then adds nonsense. Conventional medicine used to (and still does) use some homeopathic remedies such as using emetics to hasten the end of a gastrointestinal infection, or capsaicin for muscle/joint pain. But this stuff about water remembering what was in it before it was diluted is just plain silly.
"I know exactly how homeopathy works." It doesn't.
As for the healthy mind healthy body business - well if only! I have known a number of well-balanced, joyfully contented people taken before their time by horrible diseases. And whiny misery-guts people who never get sick too for that matter!
Sigh, the usual guff non informed people write.
Homoeopathy has been used for years, and we are lucky to have a couple of homeopathic hospitals, which are part of the NHS.
Homeopathic medicines DONT always have to be diluted, the term homeopathy comes mainly from the Greek as in to treat like for like, and any substance diluted or not, that can produce similar symptoms can be used in a homeopathic principle. Many tinctures still have active ingredients within them, and are used in a homeopathic nature.
My wife, has been trained in conventional medicine, hence her being a GP, and has also trained with the Glasgow Homeopathic Hopsital. I have trained in Clinical Psychology along with Clinical Hypnosis, Homeopathy etc. Both of us use an integrated approach, and are happy to debate the merits of medicine as a whole, but only with people interested. This is aimed as an information thread for those interested, not for time wasters.
Andrew Usher
High Witch Doctor of the third degree :)
I only wish your practice was accessible to me, Andrew!
My experience has been that a combination of mainstream and complementary therapies works well for me...but unfortunately the latter seldom come free of charge where I live!
I've found different complementary therapies very successful in treating chronic conditions that my GP (excellent though he is) admitted could not be improved using conventional treatments.
The NHS certainly saved my life last year, but alternative practitioners have vastly improved my quality of life and I'm very grateful to them. :D
In an ideal world it would be accessible to all.
However, we are fortunate that you can access more therapies now than ever before, CBT, NLP, Hypnosis, Homeopathy, Stress Management etc are all available, you sometimes need to fight for them, but they are available, the majority being offered by some Primary Care Trusts. Unfortunately in Caithness, there are very limited services.
It amuses me that some people have a hard time with 'complementary medicine' considering we have been using it since the beginning of time, and in essence that is how the NHS came to be. If it were not for the alchemists of old, where would we be.
We have seen hundreds of cases, and our approach is very integrated, homeopathy might not works for patient A, so we will try hypnosis, or nutritional analysis, or maybe some cognitive therapy. Medicine NEEDS to realise it's about BEING patient centred and getting the patient back on track, its not about simply writing a prescription as they enter the door. I often fear medicine is no longer a vocation for those involved, we need to go back to inspiring people about medicine, about the satisfaction of working WITH the patient and seeing them get better, and you can only effectively do this by working with your patients, understanding their needs, their psychology and aims.
GP's scream out, we don’t have the time, NONSENSE, many of our cases only take 20 minutes after an initial meeting.
It's time to treat patients with the respect and humility they deserve, and to empower them with choices that suit. When a patient understands their situation, the options, the medication, and what they can do by themselves to help themselves, then they are empowered and change can occur.
Margaret M.
14-Aug-07, 20:03
I applaud you and your wife, Dr. Usher. I find that a natural/conventional combo is the most desirable and I chose my doctors based on their belief in an integrated approach. I take medication only as a last resort. I think it is very telling that a number of doctors practicing natural medicine in my area were pharmacists who tired of dispensing drugs and not seeing any improvement in the patients' conditions. I shudder when some people reel of their list of medications -- one caused a side effect for which another medication was prescribed and it becomes a vicious cycle.
Good nutrition is the key to good health but conventional doctors may squeeze in one class on nutrition during their training. So many ailments can be addressed by modifying the diet but how often does a conventional doctor ask us what we are consuming?
One of the biggest sources of disinformation about natural medicine is the drug companies. Ingredients for natural remedies cannot be patented and since they cannot make any money from it, they do all they can to lure people away from it and discredit it by any means available. Unfortunately, the drug companies spend millions in Washington and in advertising and the natural medicine community cannot compete with them financially.
Margaret M.
14-Aug-07, 20:08
As for the healthy mind healthy body business - well if only! I have known a number of well-balanced, joyfully contented people taken before their time by horrible diseases. And whiny misery-guts people who never get sick too for that matter!
........or maybe your perception of well-balanced joyfully contented people and whiny misery-guts is distorted. :)
George Brims
14-Aug-07, 23:50
Sigh, the usual guff non informed people write.
I don't write guff, and I am not an uniformed person.
Homoeopathy has been used for years, and we are lucky to have a couple of homeopathic hospitals, which are part of the NHS.
Bloodletting was used for years. Toxic treatments containing mercury and arsenic were used for years. Having been used for years is not necessarily a recommendation.
You might think it lucky that the NHS has homeopathic hospitals; I think it is a disgrace.
...happy to debate the merits of medicine as a whole, but only with people interested. This is aimed as an information thread for those interested, not for time wasters.
If you only preach to the choir then surely the correct term is not debate? What do you call peddling unproven (nay disproven) remedies to the sick but wasting their time?
What a wonderful post, Natasha is very keen in phytotherapy, due to commence some formal studying in the field soon. Margaret, nutrition is over looked, many GP, Doctors etc have little knowledge in the field.
I have been fascinated also with nutrition and have studied clinical nutrition and also at the moment I am studying Ayurvedic medicine which is pretty engaging.
George your post made me laugh, don’t you realise what's in a lot of pharmaceutical products, as a dispensing practice we do. Take Warfarin for example, it's becoming a more and more commonly used drug, but it's also used as rat poison in a higher dose. Methotrxate again, small dose is used in cases of arthritis and psoriasis, but in high doses is a highly toxic drug used for chemotherapy. I can go on and on.
Oh, and let's not forget that the old system of using maggots for wounds, has come back and is used widely, better get your pitch fork and gasoline to the stand by on that George. Oh, and you know why Dr Samuel Hahnemann developed homeopathy, because he was against bloodletting, the use of mercury and toxic chemicals within medicine, and wanted to offer a more gentler and curative approach.
Oh, and let's not forget that the old system of using maggots for wounds, has come back
Indeed it has! I've seen it done here in ERI. It proved a very successful treatment for an elderly patient who had been facing the amputation of her foot.
She certainly wasn't too keen on the idea of maggots, which she called the "beasties" but was obviously extremely happy with the outcome. :)
Our modern society has been far too ready to dismiss effective treatments simply because they are low-tech and/or don't involve expensive pharmaceuticals.
At the same time, people are being refused drugs for Alzheimers, age related
macular degeneration, and other illnesses, where drugs are appropriate, on the grounds of cost.
Time for a re-think, imo.:confused
George Brims
15-Aug-07, 18:33
What a wonderful post, Natasha is very keen in phytotherapy, due to commence some formal studying in the field soon. Margaret, nutrition is over looked, many GP, Doctors etc have little knowledge in the field.
Where did I ever say plant-based remedies have no place in medicine? The majority of conventional drugs are or were plant based. They are only made synthetically when the cost or lack of supply makes it necessary. As I have pointed out here before, Big Pharma would have a version of every one of those aforementioned "remedies" on the market in a shiny plastic package if they proved out in proper testing.
As for nutrition, you have hit the nail on the head, even if you were aiming for a different one. I firmly believe that sound nutrition is probably the most important thing you can adopt if you want to stay healthy. Unfortunately of course the hawkers and peddlers get involved in this issue too, so there are all kinds of daft diets being foisted on the public.
George your post made me laugh, don’t you realise what's in a lot of pharmaceutical products, as a dispensing practice we do. Take Warfarin for example, it's becoming a more and more commonly used drug, but it's also used as rat poison in a higher dose. Methotrxate again, small dose is used in cases of arthritis and psoriasis, but in high doses is a highly toxic drug used for chemotherapy. I can go on and on.
I don't see your point here. Everyone knows a drug can have different effects in different doses. Warfarin prevents clotting of blood. Small doses = help stave off heart attack and stroke, large doses = rat dies of internal bleeding. As for methotrexate, almost all drugs used for chemo are toxic - after all cancer cells are just human cells gone wrong, so if you kill then you unavoidably affect the normal ones too.
None of this makes a blind bit of difference to the fact that homeopathy, in controlled double-blind trials, works no better than a placebo. That is established scientific fact. Proponents of homeopathy claim that the double-blind trial is not suitable for testing homeopathy, thereby confirming its status as pseudoscience.
Oh, and let's not forget that the old system of using maggots for wounds, has come back and is used widely, better get your pitch fork and gasoline to the stand by on that George.
Again, you're using a straw man argument here. Nowhere have I ever said that older or more traditional methods have no place in the modern world. BTW the maggots thing never really went away. I have heard of it being applied here and there all along.
Oh, and you know why Dr Samuel Hahnemann developed homeopathy, because he was against bloodletting, the use of mercury and toxic chemicals within medicine, and wanted to offer a more gentler and curative approach.
Perhaps he did. What he came up with was something that was still based on medieval beliefs and concepts such as a "dynamic force".
George,
There is a growing evidence base for homoeopathy, as well as many of the other complementary medicines. There is a lot of work being done by the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital, in particular. Much of the problem does relate
to individualisation of therapy and the numbers required to give proof statistically speaking. Remember a small effect still appears as the possibility of no effect, but for those who benefit, the difference is huge. Say 1 in 20 benefit, then a trial may well consider that no significant difference from placebo. But the number of patients needing treatment for one to benefit would be 20. This is the same as the number of people with heart disease who actually benefit from taking a statin to lower their cholesterol. Yet everyone is put on one and everyone believes this is a good thing that will save their life. Statistics can be made to prove or disprove anything.
Some of the major trials in homoeopathy include the following:-
Randomised controlled trial of homoeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial series : BMJ 2000;321:471-476 ( 19 August )
Reilly DT, Taylor MA. Potent placebo or potency? A proposed study model with initial findings using homoeopathically prepared pollens in hay fever. Br Homoeopathic J 1985; 74: 65-75.
Reilly DT, Taylor MA, McSharry C, Aitchison T. Is homoeopathy a placebo response? Controlled trial of homoeopathic potency, with pollen in hayfever as model. Lancet 1986; ii: 881-886.
Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, Melchart D, Eitel F, Hedges LV, Jonas WB. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. Lancet 1997; 350: 834-843
Ferley JP, Zmirou D, D'Adhemar D, Balducci F. A controlled evaluation of a homoeopathic preparation in the treatment of influenza-like syndromes. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1989; 27: 329-335
Kleijnen J, Knipschild P, ter Riet G. Clinical trials of homoeopathy. BMJ 1991; 302: 316-323.
Most of these trials have shown a moderate effect of homoeopathy; there are also other trials that show no effect over placebo. However, these trials are not always well run, and do not often have the required statistical power to prove anything either way. The consensus is that more trials and more evidence is required. There is also discussion in physics circles about water memory, with some evidence that this does exist, which then makes homoeopathy plausible also. Just because we do not understand how something works at present, does not mean that the proof will not be there in years to come. We still know very little, for instance, about how the brain works, how brain chemicals interact with the body, etc (a field known as psychoneuroimmunology and also vital to the understanding of how many of these therapies may well work).
More and more modern drugs are being brought onto the market and then withdrawn in a matter of months or years due to serious life threatening side effects. Any therapy that is effective without risking these problems must surely be a good thing.
Definately interested.
count me in too!!
Serious scientists are doing experiments that might prove water memory exists. Read about them here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory).
ericrollo2007
16-Aug-07, 17:57
As for the healthy mind healthy body business - well if only! I have known a number of well-balanced, joyfully contented people taken before their time by horrible diseases. And whiny misery-guts people who never get sick too for that matter![/quote]
So which one are you George a joyfully contented person or a whiny misery guts???
Any one with a small knowledge of history would know that "conventional" medicine was derived from the "mumbo jumbo" of the past. Bet you've had some willow bark (that's asprin to you George) and have you ever relaxed listening to your favourite music, thats a form of meditation.
Open your mind George let something in to cure your misery!!!!!
George Brims
16-Aug-07, 21:21
So which one are you George a joyfully contented person or a whiny misery guts???
Like most people I am somewhere in the middle, and count myself fortunate that most days of my life I am to be found much more towards the former than the latter. Some days I am pushed towards the latter by encounters with hucksters, charlatans, peddlers of religion, and pushers of quack remedies. Fortunately time-tested and proven chemical therapies are widely available, in a variety of interesting flavours, to alleviate this tension. They go by names like "Guinness" and "Old Pulteney".
Any one with a small knowledge of history would know that "conventional" medicine was derived from the "mumbo jumbo" of the past. Bet you've had some willow bark (that's asprin to you George) and have you ever relaxed listening to your favourite music, thats a form of meditation.
Anyone with a small knowledge of history would know that aspirin was developed in a lab. Only later was it discovered that a related substance in willow bark was responsible for its efficacy as a painkiller.
Anyone with a small knowledge of history would know that aspirin was developed in a lab. Only later was it discovered that a related substance in willow bark was responsible for its efficacy as a painkiller.
My understanding is that it was isolated from willow bark and not developed independently. I don't think there has ever been a medicine that has been developed independently in a lab - they all have a natural root/source.
George Brims
16-Aug-07, 22:54
Oh no Tristan I did my research before saying that. The substance in Willow bark isn't actually aspirin, but a more complex molecule that can be split to produce aspirin. I hate to cite Wikipedia as people have been messing with it lately, but you can find the details here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin
As for all drugs having natural sources this is not the case (though nature is a wonderful tinkerer). Often when an active chemical is found from a natural source it requires modification to reduce toxicity while retaining the desired result.
Nowadays many drugs result from entirely laboratory-based synthesis. In fact, a lot of research is going on to design molecules for specific functions without anyone making them at all. They are modelled in software and tested in simulation against whatever other molecule they are supposed to work. You can download a screensaver that uses the spare compute power of your computer to run these simulations. One of my colleagues was running it for a while.
While the lab approach is common that's not to say no-one is looking at natural sources any more. There are a host of researchers studying the rainforest, talking to the indigenous people about their herbal remedies, poking around in the oceans etc etc. There are so many different species of plants and animals continually waging chemical warfare on each other* that there are bound to be a lot of useful things out there we haven't found yet.
*The bare patches under sycamore trees in the park are not because of the shade - they're caused by a herbicidal chemical the sycamore tree produces in its leaves, which clear the ground for new trees!
I see what you are trying to say, and you are correct in that the lab becomes involved along the way to try an purify any substance.
It does not change the fact that it was initially isolated from the Willow bark. Lab work purified it, made it easier on the stomach by adding other ingredients etc but it was not found out of the blue in a lab.
This site seems to explain it a bit better than Wikepdia http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blaspirin.htm
and from Cardif University.
"Aspirin was developed from salicylic acid found in the bark of the Willow tree"
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/biosi/associates/cold/alt.html
All drugs require tinkering in a lab that does not change their initial source. Although other drugs are often developed around the initial work they still have the source in nature.
Perhaps labs are discovering things out of the blue add a pure this to a pure that and get something good. 20 years ago it was not the case so if you know of any drugs like that I would be interested in knowing about them and the recent advances in lab work.
Nowadays many drugs result from entirely laboratory-based synthesis. In fact, a lot of research is going on to design molecules for specific functions without anyone making them at all. They are modelled in software and tested in simulation against whatever other molecule they are supposed to work. You can download a screensaver that uses the spare compute power of your computer to run these simulations. One of my colleagues was running it for a while.One of my pals designs drugs on a computer for a living! The wet chemistry types in the lab don't get near the would be drug for months. Even then they fabricate them from basic organic molecules made in the lab so they don't have any side effects from external contaminants. Naturally grown stuff is excluded from the start.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.