Can We Talk?

This page I like to describe as my ‘Joan Rivers’ page or some might even like to call it my Alf Garnett page. There has always been an element of Don Quixote in me, I have however never looked upon it as tilting at windmills more as challenging those who wish to impress their will and unsubstantiated theories upon nice people who the only thing they want to do is help others and cannot believe that many of their gurus are nothing more than frightened little men, with overfed egos and insatiable greed, who desperately wish to hold on to their fragile position of power and their own 15 minutes of fame. This page and all articles written on it are done so without prejudice.

I will also use this page to answer any questions which come up from time to time and should be shared with others in the CH world.

CAN WE TALK? Diagnosis! The subject has recently been brought to the fore and is the reason why I recently resigned from the ICM and The BRCP, two institutions which I have been associated with since 1997 and for which I have the greatest respect. My first allegiance must always be to my students, my work and to the law. The ICM and BRCP maintain that all practitioners must diagnose. It is my contention that complementary practitioners who practice a holistic discipline MUST NOT diagnose!

The figures relating to death in the USA due to wrongful diagnosis is the equivalent of one full jumbo jetliner crashing per week. If that happened no one would ever fly again. The word ‘diagnosis’ has one meaning and one meaning only and in the matter of health care it is legally connected to the word ‘medical’ = ‘medical diagnosis’. There is no acceptable recognition by law for anything less than Diagnosis – the method used by doctors to recognize and name a disease.

Please make no mistake about it; it is criminal for a CH practitioner who is not a licensed medical practitioner to make a diagnosis of a disease. At present only one state in the USA, Minnesota has a CH Bill passed (their governor Jesse Ventura, is also an ex wrestler, just thought I would throw that in) which states that no unlicensed CH practitioner may diagnose, the fine for each offence being $10,000. At this point I should add that the IASH Code of Ethics is based totally on that Minnesota Bill.

VHT, ET and indeed Bowen are holistic non-diagnostic addresses of the body and all contain a pre-prescribed series of choreographed procedures that are applied regardless of the symptoms. IASH practitioners are taught to observe and as result of that observation and depending upon their experience and intuition to address areas of concern within the ethics of the individual discipline.

The EEC mandarins in Brussels are currently looking at legislation regarding CH and there is every indication from information gleaned in Europe as well as recent events in the UK that no CH practitioner will be allowed to diagnose and although I am well known for my anti EEC stance in all things this is one aspect where I agree with them whole heartedly.