Saturday, February 27, 2010

What is the difference between Homeopathy and Allopathy

What is the difference between Homeopathy and Allopathy

As a practicing physician for over fifty years, I have reached three basic conclusions as to the cause and cure of disease…the first is that the primary cause of disease is not germs. Rather, I believe disease is caused by a toxemia which results in cellular inpairment and breakdown…My second conclusion is that in almost all cases the use of drugs in treating patients is harmful. Drugs often cause serious side effects, and sometimes even create new diseases. My third conclusion is that disease can be cured through the proper use of correct foods.”
Food is Your Best Medicine, by Henry G. Bieler, M.D., Ballantine Books


How does holistic medicine differ from allopathic? What do holistic practitioners learn, or know, that sets them apart from allopathic physicians? To understand the differences between the two, it is helpful to first understand their differing views of “disease.”

There are two basic theories of disease. One is the Pasteur’s germ theory, which allopathic medicine embraces. This theory promotes the idea that germs (bacteria, microbes, parasites, etc.) attack the body, and once inside wreck havoc, resulting in disease. According to this theory, the best course of action in the prevention of disease is to control or destroy the attacker. If Pasteur’s germ theory was correct, everyone who is exposed to the same germs at the same time should develop the same symptoms, but we don’t see that happen. There are always people who don’t get what the other people around them “come down with.”

The phrase “attack on the body,” in reference to disease, is often heard in allopathic medical circles because of their training to believe Pasteur’s germ theory. Unfortunately, this theory leaves people with the impression we are defenseless against preventing disease, and in need of someone or something to protect us. In the event someone should fall under ‘attack’ by one of these germs, they will also need something to help kill the attacker. This is the part allopathic medicine plays. They supply the protection, or arsenal, to kill the germs. Just how effective is this approach to disease?

Bechamp’s theory of disease is the second theory. He taught that germs have a purpose and are our friend, not our enemy. Bechamp believed that, because germs feed only on weak, dead, or decaying tissues, whether in the plant or animal kingdom, they serve an important purpose. As long as plants and animals are healthy (well fed, needs are adequately met), they do not become infected with germs. Bechamp’s theory, in essence placed all of the responsibility of disease prevention on the individual’s diet and lifestyle. It doesn’t sell products or procedures, nor does it encourage dependence on any institution for the sake of health. In other words, big business can not be achieved by endorsing Bechamp’s theory. On the other hand, this theory makes sense of disease, why some get sick and others don’t, why even people with AIDS get well when they change their lifestyle (diet, drugs, etc), and why alternative (holistic) medicine, that focuses on the overall health and balance of a person, is successful and conventional medicine is, at their own admission, “failing” in the fight against disease.

Holistic medicine endorses Bechamp’s theory of disease, and views disease as an imbalance within the body. An imbalance that stems from needs not being met for a period of time long enough to cause symptoms of dysfunction. For example, if you do not take care of the calcium needs of your body you can develop problems with bone and tooth development, restless legs, or bone density. This isn’t disease, its imbalance. If you neglect your vitamin A needs, nutrition studies show you may eventually develop problems with skin imbalances, light sensitivity, and night vision. Again, not a disease, but an imbalance. The remedy for imbalance comes when one recognizes which needs aren’t being met and meets them in the future. This describes one of the biggest differences between holistic and allopathic medicine. While allopathic is designed to sedate, or eliminate symptoms, holistic medicine is interested in a solution that restores balance.

Other symptoms of imbalance, viewed very differently between these two forms of medicine, occur when the body has to work extra hard to remove toxins, bacteria, and waste from its tissues. Instead of an irritation that needs to be stopped, holistic medicine views these as a sign the body could use some extra support. One example is when our temperature increases (fever). Holistic medicine views this as a positive attempt by the immune system to kill an invading microbe it can’t otherwise eliminate. Instead of interfering with the fever, the immune system should be supported, which often reduces the need for the fever and the body reduces it by itself. Sneezing and coughing after inhalation of an offending pathogen or pollen is another positive response. One the body makes in the attempt to push the irritant back out of the body. If this isn’t effective enough, the mucous membranes make extra mucus to suffocate the offender and eliminate it via mucus discharge. Again, the body should be supported in its efforts. This will reduce the irritation to the tissues involved, lower the stress on the immune system, and hasten the overall elimination process.