TSHM Discussion

Go down

TSHM Discussion

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 10:48 am

-----Original Message-----
From: purehomeopathy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:purehomeopathy@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Andrea McClintock
Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 11:13 AM
To: purehomeopathy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [purehomeopathy] TSHM discussion

Hi all,

I am just a couple of hours back from a week in Cuba sunshine, a much-needed break, and am just now catching up on my email reading. This conversation about TSHM is very interesting to me, being the registrar and person that actually runs the school on all levels now (with the exception of marketing but that is a whole other story) that Raymond is backing off somewhat. I both agree and disagree with some of what is being said here...my brain is still lying on a beach but I just have to articulate some of my perspective on this.

Homeopathy in our experience is an evolution, the Canadian experience, if you will. We face obstacles in educating homeopaths that were not faced in the same way by Hahnemann. Lippe and others though they had some very big ones of their own...we are in a modern society that is just chock full of misinformation, technology, deductive science, corporate health industry including Big Pharma and a whole population indoctrinated in allopathic science, deductive research etc. I am sure, in Hahnemann's vision, we should have been by now, a society that took homeopathy as a matter of course, like breathing. This is not the case, as we know too well.

Remember, our profession was underground for many decades and because of that, we almost came out of the blue. Think of this: Raymond, who I give so much credit to, came to Canada 17 years ago after studying homeopathy in England, the only study possibility for lay homeopaths that were not physicans, or naturopaths. He taught briefly at Fernando's school and the naturopathic college and was so disenchanted with the "modern' method and lack of Organon studies that he decided to start up his own school. He sold everything he had to do this, based on a vision that he had to get homeopathy back into our health dialogue. That was no easy feat and he really had to do this alone but hooked up with Joe very early on, luckily. This collaboration helped the school get off to the best start that it could.

Raymond realizes that the Paul Saunders/John Millar mix no longer works so these men no longer have any influential role in the school. Paul taught one class this year on lab results, and John filled in one class on materia medica. Joy will not be teaching at all after this year. Marla teaches nutrition as that her real strength...she does not go near homeopathy teaching at all.

I have been at the school for 6 years now, coming in just as Glen, Jack and gang were finishing their 2nd year. I don't believe you guys would recognize the curriculum any longer. It is far from perfect, but I have to say that the model is much more pure than it used to be as we have more teachers coming out of the woodwork, and Raymond has been willing to relinquish complete control over his baby, the school Can you imagine what that must be like for him? he created this and yet he loves it enough to let it evolve. He has signed on to allowing the vision of TSHM to expand in the Hahnemannian way. I am no shrinking violet in this myself, having really really pushed for this change, sometimes pretty aggressively, and each year I learn more and more about homeopathic education and how it SHOULD look. This has taken a real emotional toll on me, as it is like Sisyphus, one step forward and 2 back. There is a lot of ignorance out there and within TSHM there are forces that require loads of energy to deflect. But I keep doing it, pushing for the best, most pure curriculum possible given all the limitations and obstacles I mentioned above. There is also a thesis option in Year 3, which was designed to disseminate research to students, homeopaths and the general public (some of it is on the website where there is now a weekly blog on homepathic subject matter as another tool to project a more pure perspective on homeopathic conundrums).

The little-considered points about running a school in our political/social environment have to do with money (yes, it takes big money to run a school), lack of funding support from other sources other than our own pockets if we are students, and that requires us to educated, and be educated, while working and raising families. The 3rd year I was at TSHM, I proposed putting out there a full time program: 5 days a week, fully stocked with more medical sciences, and pumping up clinical work. We ran it, marketed it, and only 1 person was able to afford the time and money to do this. We are not yet in a climate of economy or psychology, where it is possible to structure the program beyond the weekend model....yet! This is where regulation in full is going to be very helpful. I have hired 2 new science teachers in the last couple of months for next year so that Physical Exam becomes more integral and more in line with what physicians do, and we get more opportunity for basic sciences. The 3rd year curriculum has been redesigned, yet again, for next year and will be a full study of the Organon using only Hahnemannian practitioners like Joe, Monica and Kim. This is my vision and I am very excited about it but it is just a taste because we have the limitations as described above. I will share more about the new 3rd year when I can.

Starting in 2010, I have proposed we move into being a mandatory 4 year school, to expand on the study of the masters further with deeper study in the sciences and Chronic Diseases, more clinical internships and supervision/preceptoring.

I feel optimistic about our future as homepaths and this includes education. I have my problems with the snobbery of some of our "better" practitioners, Andre being one, who is totally dismissing our history and the natural evolution of our "coming out of darkness". I also respect him as a clinician and teacher so before you jump on me, consider that.

Now, if this all sounds defensive, I don't mean it to. I am just trying to reassure you that we all experienced our education at differing periods of this evolution. My future in homeopathic education evolves too....I get very very discouraged, very burnt out, emotionally frustrated, trying to "lobby" for a more pure form of homepathic education. I am not sure how much longer I can keep doing that given the other challenges in my life, and some of the machinations at work in the school. And my age, of course. But, for now, I will keep trying because I believe in this. Detaching is important though because when it is time to start my own school, I will let you all know (please be aware that I am being somewhat flip with this comment...the funding and energy required is unbelievable! Plus, this is a small community and I have great respect for what Raymond began).

There will always be Priyas...there always have been. The trick is to not become emotionally bound up with homeopaths that have differing opinions on what homeopathy is. They will fail, or their pool of affect will be so tiny, it won't make any difference. I used to think that the charlatan homepaths would swallow the rest of us up but I am wrong about that. Our patients are the ones who know the difference and isn't that all that matters? You can be as busy as you want to be by practicing the way your integrity allows you to. We support each other in this...aren't we lucky we have each other?

Keep the faith, brothers and sisters!
Love,
Andrea

Hi, Rebecca, Rachel et al.,

Yes, this is a great discussion...very relevant.

With regard to TSHM grads...I agree that it goes beyond just prescribing more than one Rx at a time. The fact that "TSHM may teach modern conceptual approaches" is problematic in itself as there are no such thing as "modern conceptual approaches" in homeopathy.

There is only homeopathy.

I graduated in 2004. It hasn't changed that much...after looking at the faculty today on the school's website, many of the profs are the same that I studied with. With all due respect and no intention of bashing, these profs do not teach the strict-inductive methods of the Organon. I reference them only to objectively show that TSHM is not a Hahnemannian school. :
John Millar, BSc., ND, DHANP, CCH
I remember John using the arm test method of having the patient hold a Rx in their hand to prescribe. This is not based on the law of similars.

I also remember him prescribing Sep. because his patient was speaking a lot with her hands. When describing her Sx's, her hands would move in an undulating motion...like a cuttlefish.

Comment: To be inductive we must get rid of all speculation, opinion and petty biases.
Marla Samuel, MASc (Nutrition), BA, DSHomMed, RNCP
I saw her working at a health food store one day and a customer told her about his girlfriends irregular heart beat and she immediately prescribed Digitalis and if I remember correctly, 1 pellet/day for a week! Can you imagine if this person with a heart condition was sensitive to the Rx and had either an aggravation or proving?!

Comment: Totality of Sx's, prescribe in the optimal posology
Paul Saunders, M.S., Ph.D., N.D., D.H.A.N.P., C.C.H.
My supervising prof for clinics. I disagreed with him on every prescription. I got the prescription right on my patient with M.S. and he was much against it. Can't remember what happened with the other prescriptions.

Comment: We were both prescribing based on different ideas of what characteristic, striking Sx's were.
Joy Schwartz, B.S., F.S.Hom.Med.
I believe she used to be Nancy. We did a guided group meditation of Apis to feel its Sx's.

Comment: Speculation, not objectively observed reliable proving Sx's.




With these folks teaching, I don't think we can consider this remotely Hahnemannian. With Joe, Monica, Kim and Lisa teaching there, we have a very good representation of Hahnemannians. But diluting their teaching with non-homeopathic teachings greatly compromises a quality homeopathic education. How many students are led astray and ruining the good name of homeopathy and wasting their patient's time and health as well as their own time because of these other teachers?

There was a Hahnemannian medical school who had for its faculty: Lippe, Hering, Dunham and I think Farrington. Now that's a quality homeopathic medical school! All the good old Hahnemannians, that we read about, were MDs. They were all very well studied in all the natural sciences. I think it's been more the exception than the rule that lay homeopaths have excelled to the top of the profession. Monica Frohmann is one of those amazing examples.

If pure homeopathy is not being taught throughout the curriculum, then being the best homeopathic school in Canada doesn't mean much. It's equivalent to half of nothing still equalling nothing. Many are still led astray? For example and with all due respect to Priya, she is on the board of directors of the OSH...and she's only a hobby homeopath...who believes she's Hahnemannian.

Perhaps we could rank TSHM up there because we were fortunate to meet the aforementioned Hahnemannians who do teach and practice according to Hahnemann and his greatest students.

As for the OSH, I'm not saying that it's constructive to dismiss everyone their. There may be a few Hahnemannians in the crowd and some may even be willing to listen to what homeopathy is. I'm saying that more than likely, I would find it very difficult to talk homeopathy there and it's constructive to be realistic about where homeopathy is today.

I've taken a few courses now...TSHM, William Ellwood's First Aid, Monica Frohmann's First Aid, Homeopathy By The Book and some of Andre's Chronic Prescribing course. Of all of the courses that I've taken, I'm very grateful to Monica and Joe for their teaching, but my foundation has and is being built on Andre's teaching of homeopathy (Joe's teacher). If you are able to get the Case Taking and Case Analysis lectures...you will be more greatly surprised at how much more there is to case taking and analysis than you previously learned. For me personally, it has given me the greatest practical knowledge and an understanding of homeopathy as a healing phenomenon that's translated into better clinical results.

And I agree with you, Rebecca, that we need way better schooling. Our schooling at TSHM and probably most other professional homeopathic schools, as a medical science and profession, is embarassing. I try to avoid telling people that I went to school for 3 years on the weekends to become a homeopathic physician and graduated with people who like to only practice on their friends and family.

When I listen to homeopathic lectures and I hear about different diagnostic results that I'm not familiar with, I think, "Man, I wish I knew what that meant." When a patient or potential patient talks to me about a disease with test results that I'm unfamiliar with, I think, "Ok, just say general things that won't give away the fact that you don't know what they're talking about."

I would love to be able to have an MRI or CAT scan in my hands and say, "Yes, I can see you have so-and-so lesion here..." and other relevant details. But I can't, not without going home and reading up on it.

With the transitional council being formed and very few, true and successful Hahnemannians on board, our education system will most likely continue on as it is at least in terms of the teachings of Hahnemann. It's a huge uphill battle that we, as a medical profession, face.

Again, I hope that I will one day proudly go to a homeopathic association meeting that is truly homeopathy. For now, I look forward to having drinks with you guys. Smile

Cheers,

G
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

from Donna

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 10:54 am

Andrea,
Thanks for your perspective, looking from the inside out, at TSHM. Regarding the new physical exam classes being more in line with what physicians do, and possibly even some of the new science classes, have you considered opening these classes to the alumni? I know I am interested in learning more physical exam which I am back in Canada.

It is the lay homeopaths who have kept homeopathy (pure or otherwise) alive in Canada. As I see it, the profession will evolve, as it is already, to have more emphasis on the sciences, physical exams, orthodox homeopathy, and, yes, even diagnosis, so that homeopaths can be considered primary health care providers. This will be happy news for the profession of homeopathy, but sad news for the lay homeopaths who kept homeopathy alive and who may be left in the dust with new standards. Even if they are grandfathered, as if often the case when these regulations come about, I would not feel qualified to shoulder those responsibilities (diagnosis, etc.). As you say, for some of us, age is a big factor.

Donna
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

from Jack

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 10:54 am

Thanks Andrea,

Your post was exactly what I needed to read. I was getting down about the state of homeopathy and being reminded of TSHMs journey has given me hope.

I was curious about the amount of medical science training (in-class hours) provided to naturopaths so I emailed the CCNM last week and asked them to provide me with the number of in-class hours for the following subjects in their course calendar. I vlaimed I was comparing schools.

BAS100 Anatomy 13.0
BAS103 Biochemistry 3.0
BAS107 Physiology 12.0
BAS108 Embryology 1.5
BAS112 Histopathology 3.0
BAS115 Immunology 4.0
BAS205 Microbiology 4.0
BAS206 Pathology 6.0
BAS208 Pharmacology 5.0
CLS201 Differential Diagnosis 8.0
CLS202 Laboratory Diagnosis 5.0
CLS221 Physical and Clinical Diagnosis Theory 3.0
CLS222 Physical and Clinical Diagnosis Practicum 2.5
CLE303* Primary Care 2.0
RAD302 Radiology and Advanced Imaging 3.0
NPS401 Minor Surgery 0.5

I was wondering if TSHM (depending on the number of hours involved and the cost) would be willing or able to provide "upgrade" courses to alumni to allow them to match naturopaths in terms of medical education.

I haven't heard back from the CCNM yet.

Thoughts Andrea?

Cheers

Jack
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

from Carol Ann

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 10:55 am

Hello Andrea

Thank you for your valuable insight and thoughtful response. It is the first time I have heard anyone from within TSHM respond with such an open and honest dialogue. It has been a true breath of fresh air!

Please know that I understand that the school is a business, like any other that has to make a profit to survive and grow. My practice is also a business, and I know that financially it is lacking a monetary return on my investment to date. If money and financial return were my only indicators of success, I would have folded a long time ago. However, I have achieved a great deal of satisfaction and joy in watching Homeopathic medicine cure, particularly now that I practice on a full time basis.

I know that I need to grow my field of knowledge, nor will it ever stop.
As an alumni, I would be interested in hearing more about courses that offer "upgrade courses" to better match what Naturopath's study, offers including Physical Exam.

TSHM needs to take a global perspective on what is happening in Homeopathy and understand the very real threats that exist both economically and politically. I would hope TSHM understands the grave responsibility by offering leadership in the Homeopathic community to students, alumni and the general public.

All the best,

Carol Ann Hastings, DSHom Med
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

from Glen

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 11:01 am

Hi, Andrea, and welcome back!

Thanks for giving us the inside scoop. This is excellent to hear about the direction that TSHM is going in...thank you for your dedication and tireless work. cheers
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

post by Andrea

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 7:43 pm

Hi all,

I am glad for your responses, all of them. I
am in a state today, gearing up to go back to my energy-depleting job tomorrow
after a glorious week off, so reading these emails has helped get me gently
thinking again...thank you for that! it is all about me me
me!!!


As far as offering further sciences to alumni, that
is being considered but not in the sense of integrating people into existing
classes. We just don't have the room, logistically, and it isn't reliable
enough for us to spend the $1200.00 per weekend it takes to rent a room at UofT
for a few alumni that would be interested in this. It is possible this
could be a night course over a fall/winter but, at the moment, I can't give
anybody any definitive answer on this. Give me some time to think about
this. The way we had talked about it was in a post-regulatory sense, once
we know what we are facing in terms of upgrading after grandfathering....then we
will feel obligated to take the initiative to offering these upgrades at
TSHM. Until then, we are are really guessing and are re-vamping according
to our guesses about changes regulation will require to the curriculum.
This has helped all the changes come about too.


I forgot to mention that we have a wonderful
teacher in Lisa Decandia too, whose own learning never stops. She is a
core teacher at TSHM now and we are so lucky to have her...she has replaced the
people who were no longer required and it has been a good decision.


By the way, no one, ever, at TSHM, has been taught
to prescribe combination remedies. I am not sure how that idea came about
but pack it away, because it ain't true!


Happy Sunday...
Andrea

Are these actual hours, Jack? Or are they
credit hours i.e UofT half courses are 3 credit hours but this represents 3
hours a week per course over a 12 week period, or thereabouts = 36
hours?

If they are actual, we are way ahead of them in
basic sciences at TSHM...however, CCNM students are already science graduates
and have core sciences already at the university level...perhaps that is why
these numbers seem so small?


Andrea
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

post by Jack

Post by Glen on Sun May 03, 2009 7:44 pm

Hey Andrea,
Are you referring to the numbers beside the courses or the follwoing email I sent where the numbers refer to credit hours X 14?
J
avatar
Glen
Admin

Posts : 102
Join date : 2009-05-02

View user profile http://purehomeopathy.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Patricia on Mon May 04, 2009 12:07 pm

Thank you so much for the information you have shared, Andrea. It's great to know these
changes are happening with the curriculum. I think a 4 year program is very
much needed.

I believe TSHM should be a classical Hahnemanian
school. Now nobody jump on me! Smile But I also believe TSHM should
introduce the philosophies and other schools of thought on homeopathy, to
prepare graduates to know the difference. I’m not saying to teach combination
remedies, for example, but there’s nothing wrong with giving students the
knowledge that these other practices exist, the signatures, and kingdoms and
all that stuff…to help them evaluate what they read as they continue their
studies.

One of our biggest drawbacks is the
perception that our education and training is substandard, when compared to
naturopaths and chiropractors. Andrea, you mentioned that no one could afford
the time or money for full time program, 5 days a week. If you want to be
a naturopath, you have to afford the time and money, and people find a way to
do it.

I would have been one of those who couldn’t
do it. I considered the CCNM before TSHM, but went with TSHM because I knew I
wanted to focus on homeopathy. In hindsight, if I could do it over again, and
at an earlier stage in my life, I would do the naturopathic medicine studies
first, then do more studying in homeopathy, simply because of the better foundation
of knowledge. And maybe a little bit because in our society, that education is
recognized. I feel my homeopathic education is inadequate to have the responsibility of someone's health in my hands.

The TSHM model of weekend classes, while it
does not have the cachet of 4 years of full time medical school, is a very
progressive approach to education. Can we make that a strength? Can we make our
education as professional as possible and not apologize for it being available on
a schedule that allows working adults to pursue this profession? Should there
be more stringent entrance requirements – basic sciences, or an undergraduate degree?
Should there be a more pedagogical framework? What about an e-university
approach? I know, it all takes money!

What about having the program offered
through an existing university or college, and using their resources and
infrastructure? Has tahat ever been considered? WIth "alternative health care" becoming so popular, there's probably a community college or university somewhere that is considering offering some programs.

Patricia
avatar
Patricia

Posts : 4
Join date : 2009-05-03
Location : London

View user profile

Back to top Go down

TSHM discussion

Post by Andrea on Mon May 04, 2009 12:39 pm

Hi all,

Am here on the new forum...hmmmm...trying to be open-minded here, Glen...

I just wanted to quickly address Patricia's query about full-time here vs full time at CCNM. If you attend CCNM you can get OSAP. Not so here at TSHM, therefore, putting out a full time program didn't work because there is no funding subsidy from the government. Nor are we, as a school, given a government subsidy to run things, like universities, colleges or CCNM...
We will try to get OSAP for our future students once regulation is in full force.

Andrea
avatar
Andrea

Posts : 48
Join date : 2009-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Jack on Mon May 04, 2009 3:09 pm

I agree that we certainly did not get enough medical sciences training at TSHM but I do not feel uncomfortable having someone's helath in my hands. Actually I am very comfortable b/c I know immediately when I need to refer a patient to another practitioner. We shouldn't underestimate our training. I mean how many times does a GP actually provide a meaningful diagnosis to a patient aside from routine infections etc. Most times, they are off to the "specialist."
avatar
Jack

Posts : 31
Join date : 2009-05-03

View user profile http://www.homeopathyheals.com

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Andrea on Mon May 04, 2009 3:53 pm

I completely agree with you, Jack. I feel totally fine seeing patients, no matter what the allopathic diagnosis is. I am very communicative with my patients about NOT being an allopath and really play up the benefits of my training and knowledge. And emphasise that, just like MDs, we must constantly educate ourselves. I have never had anyone balk at my training, or lack of allopathic diagnostic knowledge (although I did nursing training but I have blocked out a lot of stuff due to the trauma of training as a nurse...LOL).

How confident you are has nothing to do with using the allopathic science as the yardstick, I don't think. Using our own yardstick is always received well, in my experience. The more we compare ourselves to allopaths and their knowledge, the more energy we are giving them to undermine our own knowledge. And the more energy we give to thinking we are inferior, the more it becomes true.

Even when people in our own camp, with good intentions (again, I am thinking of Andre), put us down as professionals, that adds negativity to what we are attempting to do....I will wait for the jumping for saying something bad about Andre, twice in 2 days! Ewwww...again, has nothing to do with my respect for him as a clinician and teacher. He just adds to our lack of confidence with his beliefs that we, us, are inferior to him...technician indeed!!! Ha ha...I found that so divisive and arrogant...sorry, but I do! How does that help our profession by labelling the majority of homeopaths in this country that way! Yikes! Another rant...give it to me, guys!

Andrea
avatar
Andrea

Posts : 48
Join date : 2009-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Andrea on Mon May 04, 2009 4:24 pm

By the way, Kim Elia has just left today after being in Toronto and Montreal for the past 2 weeks teaching at homeopathy schools. This is what he does for a living: he teaches all over the world, constantly on the move for homeopathy.
When he left here this morning he said that TSHM is the best school in North America in terms of teaching pure classical homeopathy. He also said that OCHM is the worst he sees anywhere in the world right now...that is quite the slam, I would say! And endorsement for us too...so, hopefully, we can play on that over time, eh?

I love the emoticons, by the way! When talking about Andre, I should have put this one in: affraid

Andrea
avatar
Andrea

Posts : 48
Join date : 2009-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by RebeccaG on Mon May 04, 2009 5:00 pm

Hi Everyone,

This is such a great and thoughtful conversation.

I had the wonderful opportunity to be taught by Andre this year in Hahnemannian Prescribing. He is very brilliant and if I could even get half of his knowledge, in my career, I would be more than satisfied.

I, initially, was a bit upset when I heard that he refers to Homeopaths who don't have a medical background as Homeopathic Technicians. My thinking was much like yours Andrea, that this was divisive and he could be contributing to our education in the medical sciences by offering supplemental education in diagnosis, physical exam, pathology etc.

But, on further contemplation, I really started to believe that he has a point not so much in terms of the label, but in terms of how important knowledge of medical science is in our field. If we think about the history of homeopathy, most of the successful prescribers were also trained MDs.

So, I think he is quite a bit arrogant, and I guess I wished he offered education to us homeopathic technicians so we could learn these skills in areas where we may be lacking.

I am waiting for Glen to weigh in on this one Razz

RebeccaG

Posts : 9
Join date : 2009-05-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Jack on Mon May 04, 2009 5:25 pm

We also have to remember that there is a BIG difference between the diagnositic ability and training between an MD and a Naturopath. Naturopaths may have upgraded medical sciences training but how often do they use their diagnostic skills? How often do they order test? How often to they diagnose Atrial Fibrilation, Rheumatoid Arthritis, brain tumors, lupus, etc . How many NDs act as primary care givers? I would bet VERY few. How many times does Andre call for tests etc. withhis patients? I recall in his case taking that he sends patients back to their MDs to get tests and asks them to show him the results. I do that too. His knowledge of disease (ex. MS, Muscl. Dystrophy for example) doesn't come from his lecture hours in pathology but from him seeing so many cases of that certain disease.

I welcome more medical sciences training but there isn't anything that goes on in a typical family practice that I haven't seen, understood, or was suprised by in my homeopathic practice.

Just my 2 cents Smile

Jack
avatar
Jack

Posts : 31
Join date : 2009-05-03

View user profile http://www.homeopathyheals.com

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Andrea on Mon May 04, 2009 6:14 pm

Hiya,

yes, I agree that we could use more medical sciences but not at the expense of homeopathy in a curriculum...we are limited by time (at TSHM) and must choose how to distribute those hours. That is why I think a 4th year that is part of the main training diploma should be required now.

Like you Jack, I ask my patients for their test results and they are so willing to get them. I even have a couple of doctors who fax them to me automatically so this is a kind of grassroots thing that our patients lobby for on their own behalf with their MDs.

And I also agree that it isn't the training that Andre got but the practice. Way back when he trained as a naturopath, there wasn't much medical science in their curriculum, if at all.

Andrea
avatar
Andrea

Posts : 48
Join date : 2009-05-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Diagnosis

Post by Nick on Sat May 23, 2009 2:51 pm

Well it is about time someone else chimed in on this very interesting and thought provoking discussion. Is diagnosis an important component to being a physician, or more specifically a homeopath? How can we not have some proficiency in pathology, physical examination and the ability to DD a patient?
If this aspect – which is the corner stone to practicing a medical system – is not important what does it make us as practitioners of a medical system. Maybe diagnosis is misleading in terms of our focus in this discussion. I would suggest that the fundamental knowledge which gives us the ability to make a diagnosis is more essential. A working knowledge of the body and pathology. The ability to know what the DD might be, given how the patient presents. Of course there is the obvious example of auscultating in a case of pneumonia or bronchitis – how many of us do listen to a chest in an acute infection I wonder? Are we not missing something very valuable to being a healthcare practitioner? I am not suggesting that we need that knowledge to the level that an MD is required too. But surely we must have some proficiency?

Why did Hahnemann in a case of TB listen to that child’s chest for over an hour before pronouncing that the patient would recover? How did Lippe just after graduation bat 1000 in his first epidemic? Why did Boennnighausen suggest that we need to see with our ‘extended senses’ and that provings should be done with the assistance of the tools which extend the senses to further define our materia medica (somewhere in his lesser writings). A teacher of ours also suggested that if the old gang were alive today they would not hesitate to incorporate the new diagnostic technologies into practice and provings. I believe that they would do just that – but again this is all supposition.

To compare the medical education of the past masters is a dead argument because we know that our knowledge is much more advanced today – however they still graduated much better homeopaths that we do today, regardless of the environment and circumstances. I was not happy with my TSHM education at the same time I do know that I received the best education available to me. I am very glad that it is getting better and that we have gathered a good group of Hahnemannian’s as the core teachers. I also feel that it is the exceptional graduate that continues to develop into a proficient Homeopath, not the majority. I think we are lead to believe that diagnosis is not very important and our education engenders a recreational attitude towards the practice of this medical system - that is essentially my opinion.

Another consideration is regulation – what standards will be set regarding sciences and clinical training, as well as homeopathic education – maybe we will all have to go back to upgrade our science and examination knowledge? I am pessimistic and not expecting much out of that whole process anyway.

I would suggest that we all read Andre’s interview entitled “Is it not part of the deal in promoting a method of practice to also demonstrate it’s efficacy?” - both parts - he lays out some great arguments on this very topic – education and qualifications. I happen to agree with him on the majority of points. I sense some antipathy towards Andre in this discussion and I can’t understand why, having read much of his writings and listened to some lectures, his material is some of the best I have ever studied. Even though he may seem arrogant, rude, an A-hole, or whatever – I do not let it distract me.
I also think that to a certain degree the cultural and social environment that we find ourselves in also makes it easy for us argue the necessity of valuable knowledge like pathophysiology and diagnostics. If we learned Homeopathy in a society which requires and expects us to have this knowledge we wouldn’t even be having this conversation, because the curriculum and skill set would socially and professionally be expected of us – irrespective of the many arguments for and against having diagnostic ability. If we do not really know the how and what of disease and its processes then how can we achieve the highest level of success in every case that presents? I like Joe’s response regardless of how he practices – because it makes sense!

And don’t forget that another MAJOR problem with our education is that we do not have an internship program (I think three years would be great) – there is no real ‘theory meeting practice’ under professional experienced supervision. This would also contribute to our clinical skills, pathological knowledge, etc…. What a monumental task it is for us to continue to learn on our own – not even factoring in the practical demands of a North American life style. And it is not like we have patients flocking to support an internship program so that we get a chance to see 100 cases of MS, epilepsy, ADHD, asthma, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic sinusitis, etc… We can read the old masters if we have the time and resources too – but that ain’t as good as real life is it? – although Andre did comment that he learned more researching the old literature than he did in homeopathic school. What options are available to us? We can precept with someone – if we can afford it; continue our education if we can afford it….see where I am going with this. And yet despite these limitations we can do some great good for most of the people that invest there money and faith in us – homeopathy is just great ain’t it?!?!

Nick

Posts : 6
Join date : 2009-05-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: TSHM Discussion

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum