Are media attacks justified? A response to Vithoulkas

Dear Sir,

I have studied Vithoulkas' work and benefited from his knowledge, including experiencing a week at his teaching centre on Alonissos. I also trained with and later taught for the excellent HPTG – an organisation that was greatly influenced by him. Hence it was with a sense of sadness and deja-vu that I read the article from Vithoulkas in the April issue of Homeopathy.[ ¹ ] I remember how in a similar way he criticised his fellow leaders in the homeopathic world in 1999 in Homeopathic Links.[ ² ] Homeopathy has moved on enormously in the last nine years, but it would appear Vithoulkas has not.

Firstly his article is illogical. The anti-homeopathic tirades in the UK are nothing to do with the teachings of Sherr, Scholten or Sankaran. I doubt our detractors have heard of them. It is the whole subject of homeopathy that incenses them for other reasons, primarily because like curing like, and potentisation are beyond their experience and conception.

Secondly to not acknowledge the enormous contribution that these teachers have contributed displays ignorance. I can speak with experience having studied extensively with them and their colleagues, and use their methods daily. The contribution to us all of Jeremy Sherr's provings is obvious. The philosophy and case management he teaches are invaluable for those who complete his Dynamis course. The case taking and analysis techniques of Sankaran and Scholten have revolutionised homeopathy. They have enabled more accurate prescriptions to be made from a vastly increased number of remedies to the advantage of our patients and the joy of ourselves.

To not acknowledge and applaud some of the greatest contributors to our science in its history is at best hiding one's head in the sand. At worst it smacks of sour grapes.

• References

• 1 Vithoulkas G. British media attacks on homeopathy: Are they justified?. Homp 2008; 97 (02) 103-106.
• 2 Homeopathic Links In: Hiwat C., van der Zee. (eds.) A Man with a Mission. Interview with George Vithoulkas. 4. 1999: 202-211.