Which is a better medicine to use ??? Allopathy or Homeopathy ?? Who affects faster? Are there any side effects of Homeopathy ??

Reply

It might be helpful if you first define the key terms of your question: Allopathy and Homeopathy. Not everyone has the patience to search Google or Wikipedia just to understand what you mean. Also, between you and me, explaining unfamiliar terms do tend to generate more hosting credits for you

From your implied contrast between the two, I infer that you are referring to Allopathy as Heteropathy.

Allopathy, or Heteropathy (allo: different; pathos: feeling) is what is usually considered conventional medicine. It is a medical philosophy where cures are effected by administering agents that produce, in healthy individuals, symptoms [b]opposite[b] those of the disease, or illness. A simple example is using cold water to help a fever subside. Similarly, analgesics and painkillers work by countering pain. Laxatives combat constipation by inducing bowel movement. Again, most, but not all, of conventional medicine is somewhat allopathic.

Of course, this makes perfect sense. After all, whoever said that you fight fire with fire must probably be an arsonist who seeks a bigger conflagration. You don't quell a raging inferno by intensifying it but by the application of something opposite: a cooling agent, such as water. Or liquid nitrogen.

Homeopathy (*person*: same; pathos: feeling), on the other hand, is effected by using agents that duplicate symptoms similar to that of a disease. In some books I've read, it is used in the treatment of allergies. Say that a person is allergic to pollen. In classical homeopathy, a small amount of pollen will be gathered, dried, ground, mixed with 100 parts water, shaken, stirred, the flask pounded on the table, distilled, filtered, aerated, boiled, mixed with alcohol, frozen, left alone for hours, et cetera. I'd have to say, it does resemble how alchemists work, only homeopaths seek a much more down-to-earth substance than the philosopher's stone or gold: a cure for a specific illness.

In any case, the objective back then is to dilute the causative agent of the disease. When administered to the poor guy who had allergy to pollen, there would be slight redness on his arms or a warming of the skin at the back of his neck but not an outbreak of rashes induced by undiluted pollen. This is repeatedly administered until the fellow is able to take the treatment with no more adverse effects. The solution is then made stronger and the cycle, repeated, until, finally, the chap can literally stop and smell the roses without keeling over.

Today, homeopathic treatment is available, not anymore in alchemical apothecaries, but in pharmaceutical drugs. Yea, we do have placebo pills that contain trace amounts of the allergen of your choice. It's not available worldwide, though, in the same way Starbucks coffee is not available to the impoverished.

Political, commercial and humanitarian sentiments aside, I'm sure you can see that, even in modern world, homeopathic treatment has a splendid example: inoculation/vaccination. Vaccines are, essentially, "deactivated" viruses: strands of genetic material for your defense system to recognize and create an immunity.

In general, homeopathy seeks to prevent unwanted symptoms from a future exposure to pathogenic agents, a prevention, if you will, while allopathy seeks to eliminate the unwanted symptoms of an ongoing illness, cure if you will. In this case, however, I'd like to point out that, in my opinion, the saying, An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. In the case of vaccines, yes, I'd definitely urge everyone who can have access to vaccines to have themselves inoculated. However, for homeopathic remedies to allergies, I think it would be, at the present, much better to avoid the allergens or take antihistamines than rely on homeopathy, which is, at best, still a largely unexplored, unproven and untested field of medicine.

At the present, I would recommend everyone to carry on with their their allopathic treatment (not that I am condoning hypochondriacs) I would still like to point out that a clean and healthy lifestyle still beats allopathic or homeopathic treatment

 

 

 

Reply

I am from BANGLADESH. In our country, Homeopathy and Allopathy both are popular. Generally rich people use Allopathy and poor people use homeopathy here as homeopathic treatment is less costly than allopathic treatment. People of middle class generally use both.

In my experience, Homeopathy works slower than Allopathy.

I am not sure about any side effect of homeopathy. But I never heard to tell any one who uses homeopathy in our country to tell about any side effect caused by homeopathy.

I do not know more about Homeopathy, but I took homeopathic medicine many times and found me ok and safe though naturally I use allopathic treatment.

Incase of a tumor in back of my elder, allopathic doctors suggest him for operation. He went to homeopathic doctors and after their treatment he becomes ok without operation.

So, I can say, both of Homeopathic and Allopathic treatments are good

Reply