rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn rn rn rn
rn
rn
rn rn
rn
rn rn
rn
rn

Dr Peter Fisher – President of the Faculty of Homeopathy
2/9/1950 – 15/8/2018

It was with great shock and sadness that we received news of the death of the Faculty President, Dr. Peter Fisher, in a road accident near the Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine (RLHIM), London, UK, on 15th August 2018.

Our thoughts go out to his family first of all at this dreadful time. They have lost a loved one, whilst we have lost a leader.

Dr. Fisher was Director of Research at the hospital, Europe’s largest centre for integrative medicine. He was also Physician to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. The Royal family’s association with homeopathic medicine extends back to Queen Victoria, who admired and was treated by Dr. Frederic Quin, one of the founders of the London Homoeopathic Hospital in 1849; George VI permitted “Royal” to be suffixed to its name in 1948.

By long tradition one of the monarch’s physicians unofficially takes responsibility for homeopathic treatment, and it was this role that Peter took on in 2001. He modestly suggested that his appointment was “a matter of being in the right place at the right time” and praised both the Queen and the Prince of Wales for their open-mindedness.

A graduate of Cambridge University and a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and the Faculty of Homeopathy, he was a widely published expert in rheumatology and forms of complementary and alternative medicine. He was previously Honorary Consultant Rheumatologist at King’s College Hospital.

Dr. Fisher chaired the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) working group on homeopathy and was a member of WHO’s Expert Advisory Panel on Traditional and Complementary Medicine. He was awarded the Albert Schweitzer Gold Medal of the Polish Academy of Medicine in 2001.

He worked for more than 30 years at the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital (renamed the Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine in 2010) Dr. Fisher was the hospital’s Director of Research from 1996 and, in addition, its Clinical Director from 1998 to 2014.

Peter Fisher was one of homeopathy’s most devoted and convincing champions – articulate and authoritative as a writer and speaker. As the Faculty report says ‘it is no exaggeration to say that in Peter we have lost an irreplaceable talent, a giant in all his fields of professional endeavour – as a clinician, a researcher, an academic and a champion of medical homeopathy. It is a huge loss to his family and our community.

Peter Antony Goodwin Fisher was born on September 2 1950 to Antony Fisher and his wife Eve. He was educated at Tonbridge School and Emmanuel College, Cambridge, before training at Westminster Hospital Medical School.

His first encounter with alternative medicine came when he went on a field trip to China while he was an undergraduate.

“I was astonished to see a woman having surgery on her abdomen without an anaesthetic,” he recalled. “

To manage the pain, all she had was three little acupuncture needles in her left ear. This was something I hadn’t been taught in any Cambridge lecture.”

He became ill himself as a medical student and, when his doctors told him that nothing could be done to alleviate his symptoms, he gave himself homeopathic treatment, with some success.

There were no opportunities at the time to be trained as a consultant in homeopathy, so he took a position as a research fellow in rheumatology at St Bartholomew’s Hospital. By good luck, a professor at the hospital shared his interest in homeopathy and they published one of the first serious studies of the discipline, in the British Medical Journal.

From 1986 he was the editor of the journal “Homeopathy”.

Peter Fisher was a Fellow of the Faculty of Homeopathy and had recently become its President; he was also elected a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians in 1997. He travelled around the world as a lecturer, noting that homeopathy was taken more seriously in most other countries and suggesting that this was because, in the UK, patients are unusually submissive to the will of their doctors.

In 2007 he was awarded the Polish Academy of Medicine’s Albert Schweitzer Gold Medal.

He died near the RLHIM when he was struck by a lorry while cycling.

Peter Fisher married, in 1997 to Nina Oxenham; they had two daughters.

Dr Peter Fisher, born September 2 1950, died August 15 2018.

Vice-President, Dr Gary Smyth, is to step up to the Faculty Presidency pro tem. All colleagues have the opportunity to mourn Peter’s loss and celebrate his life at Faculty Congress in Liverpool 11 – 14 October 2018.


Meeting with RCVS


REPORT FROM THE CAM SUPPORTERS MEETING

9 May, 2018

Following our 9th May meeting with the RCVS we have at last opened much-needed discussions about the impact of their statement on members of the public and our holistic vets.

2 issues behind the changes

Given the RCVS position that there were two issues behind the changes – animal welfare and evidence – we went ready to discuss these and took a team that could do that as well as explain the concerns and views of all our varied supporters. We were very disappointed therefore that the RCVS representatives were unable in the meeting to provide the information we required in order to work with them to find a solution.

Belgravia clock

So, we have agreed the following:

1. They [RCVS; ED] will provide us with documents demonstrating the evidence that led to their change in the statement in November 2017, and an indication of their preferred type of evidence.

This should clarify why they believe that there is no sound scientific evidence for homeopathy and explain the basis for the issues they have with the use of CAM. 2.

The RCVS have also agreed to clarify which CAM therapies are considered to be supported by sound scientific evidence and therefore excluded from the statement. Again, they were unable to confirm this in the meeting.

… they are currently closed to changing the statement

It was clear from the meeting that whilst they are currently closed to changing the statement, the RCVS are clearly also seeking some solution.

There is still a long way to go and negotiations will not be straightforward, as it all has to go back to committees and council. However they agree that new evidence could mean that they need to rethink.

The official stance was still to insist that there was no ban. However some exploration of the situation established very clearly that they do not approve the use of alternative treatments and this is in effect banned. They allege harm is caused by delaying conventional treatment for first line CAM therapies and they insist that animal welfare law and disciplinary processes can be used in these cases.

… raise public and professional awareness of the implications

We meanwhile have work to do to raise public and professional awareness of the implications of this current situation alongside negotiating with the RCVS in order to reach an acceptable conclusion.

We hope to be able to provide our supporters with much clearer information regarding the statement over the coming weeks once we have received the agreed documentation from the RCVS.

New team players needed

Thank you all for your on-going support, and please keep raising awareness with your friends, family, therapists and vets. We need YOU to work with us to ensure everyone affected is aware of the personal and professional impact this has on the animals in our care by removing our choice to use alternative therapies and medicines.

We also need new team members who can give a little time or expertise to help the campaign. The core team needs help if you want to see things keep moving forward.

CAM4animals

Copyright 2018, British Association of Homeopathic Veterinary Surgeons

Meeting with
BVA Policy Committee


Wednesday 14th March, 2018 

Chris Day, Rachel Roberts and Peter Gregory met with the the BVA Policy Committee yesterday (14/03/18).

No harsh or insulting words were exchanged and they appeared to have been given room to make their points and to advise the BVA on what they might feel able to say, [in any future statement] assuming they want to make a statement at all. They do have an ‘old’ statement gathering dust, that is well overdue an overhaul.

Rachel Roberts was an absolute STAR, with her obvious gravitas in the research area.

It seems that the BVA have purposely held back on replying to all the letters they have received until AFTER this meeting, so that they might have something more ‘substantive’ to say.

We shall learn a bit more about how the meeting was received when we see those letters. “I don’t see how we could have made it go any better. Thanks for all the support and well-wishes” said Chris.


  • Chris Day – B Vet Med, VetFFHom, MRCVS is President of the BAHVS

  • Rachel Roberts – BSc(Hons) MCH RSHom FSHom is Chief Executive at the Homeopathy Research Institute

  • Peter Gregory – BVSc Cert IAVH, VetFFHom, MRCVS is Veterinary Dean at the Faculty of Homeopathy

After careful consideration


Having taken legal advice…

The BAHVS has carefully considered the Position Statement of the RCVS (of the 3rd November 2017) concerning CAMs and particularly the use of homeopathic treatments.

Having taken legal advice, including counsel’s opinion, we are of the firm view that the RCVS Position Statement has no legal standing or effect. Further, it does not in any way form part of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and Supporting Guidance. For the avoidance of doubt, the use of homeopathic treatments is enshrined in law, supported by EU regulation and the Veterinary Medicine Regulations.

This was confirmed during the Parliamentary debate on the 8th May 2018 when George Eustice MP, the Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) stated;

“As I said, the RCVS has sought to be very clear that it is not banning the use of homeopathy by vets; it is not even its place to do that……”

Further, the attempts by the RCVS to marginalise the use of homeopathy on the basis that it is potentially harmful to animals, has recently been rejected by Mr Eustice ,who during parliamentary questions on the 28th of March 2018, confirmed the department’s official position:

“The Department does not have any evidence that shows that homeopathic vets are a risk to animal welfare by using homeopathy as an alternative treatment to conventional medicine options….”

Further, in relation to our individual clinical discretion as vets, on the 25th April 2018, Theresa May during “Prime Ministers Questions”, in response to a direct question as to whether vets should be permitted to use homeopathic treatments as a front line treatment responded:

“…….it is right that those who are professionally able to make these judgments are left to make them.”

It is therefore our clear and unequivocal position that the work of our members should continue as normal, as they are legally entitled to practise homeopathy as part of their practice. Clearly our members will continue to practise homeopathy in any way that, in the exercise of their clinical judgment, they believe to be in the best interests of their patients, including the right to use homeopathic treatments as a first line of treatment where appropriate in their clinical judgement.


Obituary. Chris Day

It is with the heaviest of hearts that we share the news that Chris Day passed away peacefully in his sleep on Tuesday 18th April after a period of illness.  

Words seem inadequate to describe what Chris meant to veterinary homeopathy in the UK and in fact worldwide. There can be few of us that haven’t been inspired or influenced by him during our own homeopathic journeys. He was one of a handful of homeopathic vets in the 1960’s and 70’s alongside George McLeod, Frances Hunter and John Saxton who brought homeopathy into modern veterinary practice. He opened the Alternative Veterinary Medicine Centre near Oxford, a ground breaking practice where a holistic approach and the use of homeopathy was at the centre of all that he did. He spread the word about homeopathy enthusiastically and energetically, giving hundreds of talks to the general public and also teaching generations of new homeopathic vets.  He was one of the founder members of the British Association of Homeopathic Veterinary Surgeons (BAHVS) and the Homeopathic Physicians Teaching Group (HPTG), he also served as the Veterinary Dean of the Faculty of Homeopathy for many years and secretary of BAHVS for over 25 years and was president of BAHVS from 2017 – 2020.

Chris’s death really does mark the end of an era for veterinary homeopathy in the UK, he was a truly unique individual; passionate, determined, forthright in his views, a man of a piercing intellect and capacious intelligence who helped bring homeopathy into modern veterinary practice and who inspired the next generation of vets by giving them the confidence to practise homeopathy in their own ways. At this time, as we are all reeling from the shock of his death, the world does seem a lesser place without him, the gap left by his absence almost too much to contemplate but the dreadful sense of loss is tempered by the knowledge that he will continue to guide us in the legacy he left with his work and his teaching and he will always be a presence in our lives. It would give him the greatest of pleasures to see homeopathy grow and flourish, so go on we must and continue spreading the word as he did throughout his life and we should take courage from his example.

Our thoughts are with Sheelagh his wife and all his family.


Why do we do this to our friends?

Published 24 May, 2018


Welcome to Cutting Edge

the veterinary newsletter benefiting from no commercial relationship or political links to the veterinary industry and ruling bodies.

​Welcome to Cutting Edge

Cutting Edge will cover many subjects, but this edition looks at the hard sell of convenience kibble foods to our clients.

Why do we do this to our friends?

The veterinary industry has long promoted kibble foods to our clients, with claims of ‘Veterinary Recommended’ and ‘Scientific’. The evidence for improved health in our pets by the sale of 100% convenience food to our clients is dubious.

More importantly, advising a totally unnatural diet could be deemed very ‘unsound science’. This practice is the antithesis to all advice in human medicine and nutrition.

Doctors advise ‘5-a-day’ raw portions, and a variety of fresh and unprocessed food. Latest research into the microbiome suggests variety is particularly important. So why are we advising our clients to feed processed, never changing, never fresh and unnatural foods? Is there a collective closing of the eyes to the obvious because of the income generated by our clients trusting us as ‘scientists’?

This autumn will see the publication of a long awaited, two-year research program into species appropriate feeding of dogs, including food trials involving 26 dogs.

The study provides the scientific evidence and reassurance that many veterinary professional have been seeking and underlines the safety and benefits of a raw food diet. If you are interested in receiving a copy of the research paper as soon as it is published please email [email protected]

Nick Thompson, President of the Veterinary Raw Feeding Society writes:

“Raw feeding in pets is a funny thing. A zoo animal nutritionist, describing the raw food vs kibble debate, said recently, ‘the surprising thing for me is that we are having this debate at all!’

Raw feeding, for me as a practising vet, and hundreds of thousands of dog and cat owners all over the world, offers so many benefits. There’s the rapid, obvious health benefits when you change, the long-lasting disease prevention as pets age, incomparable daily meal-time satisfaction and continual owner delight at taking responsibility for feeding your precious pet.

Explaining nutrition to a Martian

If a Martian came down to earth and you were tasked with explaining animal nutrition, you might start with cows and say, ‘cows eat grass’. You’d move on to sheep and say the same. You’d talk about wolves scavenging and eating raw carcases, or wild cats hunting for fresh prey daily. Then you would come to domesticated cats and dogs. You’d have to explain that most people, including vets, think that feeding dry biscuits is the way to go. You’d say that processed proteins are combined with loads of stodgy carbohydrates to stick the whole biscuit together, that the kibble pellets are later sprayed with fats and flavour enhancers, and then bagged and placed on shelves for weeks and months on end before serving. This, you’d have to admit to your martian friend, is widely recommended to be the very best way to feed our most precious family members.

I still find it hard to see how the establishment can suggest this process is better, more nutritious and more ‘correct’ than feeding our pets the real thing. But they do. And that’s why I’m going to tell you why I love raw and advocate it wherever and whenever I get the chance.

Don’t believe me. I’m just a vet. You just need to talk to a new raw food feeder to be bombarded by the changes they quickly notice once their pet is on raw food. They’ll talk about sweeter breath, cleaner teeth, better digestion, solid, healthy pick-up-able poos, better weight management, glossier coat and healthier overall smell.

If you talk to owners who’ve been on raw food for a few years, you’ll hear a similar story. They will tell you they need to visit the vet much less than they used to. They’ll talk of increased vitality in their pets, who seem to age more gracefully with fewer niggles from sore joints, gut and anal gland problems, to mention but a few.

Satisfaction All-Round

Meal times, with raw food, become really positive events. Fussy dogs and cats suddenly find their appetite, bolting dinner and post-meal madness often vanish, only to be replaced by pets relishing their food, then going away to digest quietly.

And owners themselves, describe the satisfaction they now feel when they produce real meals for their pets; satisfaction matched only by the purrs and waggy-tailed appreciation they see plainly in their pets.

“If I sound a bit evangelical about raw food feeding for dogs and cats, then its because I am! In 26 years in veterinary practice, I have never known any other single, simple health intervention that can manifest such positive changes in patients to match the revolution that occurs when you change your pets onto raw food.”

Nick Thompson

“If in my practice I did nothing other than tell owners to stop feeding processed kibble food, and advised them to give raw food that mimicked a freshly caught rabbit, I’d be a successful vet with a great reputation. Its not hard – it is what our pets have evolved to eat over millions of years. That’s why my practice had four freezers at the back, and the income generated meant I could afford another assistant with a clear conscience. What do you think your local GP would say if you insisted on feeding your children a diet that never changed, was 100% processed, was totally unnatural, and contained nothing fresh or raw? Do you think you would be allowed to keep them?”

Geoff Johnson Vet 31 years experience

“I lose count how many times a day I recommend raw bones. Not all my clients are able to feed an entirely raw food diet but raw bones are easy to introduce. The improved dental health after just a few weeks is amazing and long lasting. I have been able to avoid a general anaesthetic for a dental scale and polish simply by recommending raw bones. I also strongly believe that the release of endorphins after chewing and licking for 20 minutes or more, and the joy of being able to exercise their natural behaviour, profoundly improves the quality of life and general health of dogs.”

Ingrid Roemer Vet 12 years experience

Raw Food vs. Kibble Food in Dogs

Dogs have eaten meat for thousands of years. I do not think anyone could dispute this. They are not obligate carnivores, like cats, but they have been eating herbivore flesh-rich diets before humans first made fire and stone weapons.

Species Appropriate Raw food feeding is once again becoming popular. Is it the best way to feed? Is the domestic dog still wild at heart? Do we really think scientifically formulated dried food is the new answer to all our nutritional problems?

Why don’t the owners eat it? 

Arguments for raw food include increased health, fewer vet bills, greater satisfaction at meal times, better stamina and athleticism, smaller, less smelly, more ‘pickupable’ stools and ease of feeding…the list goes on. But how does it stand up against the industry standard, kibble?

Concerns about bacterial and parasite contamination, balanced nutrition, bones getting stuck and the expense of raw food need to be addressed.

The prime argument, however incorrect, against species-appropriate feeding in dogs is the risk of picking up infections from raw meat. Kibble is sterilised and generally has a low level of contamination. However raw meat, or complete raw foods containing raw meat, are frozen in production and storage, diminishing disease organisms to minimal, often zero levels. In the UK infectious agents in raw dog food are better regulated than human food! Worldwide, there are many more reports of human and animal infection from kibble than from raw food by a factor of hundreds.

“I started feeding raw to my allergic Newfoundland in 1995. Overnight, her allergies resolved. At that time, all that was available in the US was chicken parts, so that is what I fed her, including after we moved to the UK for three years. I started my next Newfoundland on raw, back in the States. He did well on raw for 6 years. When my dad was living with us and had terminal cancer, I switched to kibble during that three month period. Three months after my dad died, I hadn’t yet switched back to raw. One night my Newfoundland had a stomach torsion and died. Since then I have fed raw to my Bernese Mountain Dogs. I generally feed commercial balanced ground raw, as I can afford to feed meat that is free range that way. It is difficult to get meat that is not from feedlots or intense management practices in the US unless it is organic. While I love my dogs dearly, I can’t afford almost 3 kilos of organic meat per day for maintenance of three dogs. My bitches have whelped, nursed, and weaned three healthy litters, all feeding raw.”

Sara Fox Chapman Vet 33 years experience

“Feeding raw means happy dogs, pearly white teeth, fresh breath, no fleas, shiny coats. Fingers crossed as I say this but minimal vet input bar an odd bruised toe with bouncing about!”

Di Hodson Vet years 30 years experience

“Here in France people don’t know much about raw feeding but are intrigued when they hear about it and most of them want to try it. I do give them the spiel about inflammation caused by a processed diet, especially kibble, so they know that processed feeding could be an obstacle to cure. Most then feed naturally! We now even have a company, where people can go online and order fresh frozen food for cats and dogs delivered straight to the door – ready mixtures and food items like meaty bones, meat chunks, offal etc – all frozen and ready to eat. It’s not cheap to feed raw here but “good quality” processed kibble, especially “the special ones from the vet” are very expensive too. And when people see, how their animals flourish after changing them over, they are hooked forever.”

Malene Jorgensen Vet 27 years experience

‘Complete and balanced’ is a phrase meaning meals contain all required nutrients at approved levels when fed.

This is easy to do with an ultra-processed, high starch kibble because every single element of the diet can be manipulated to give the approved ‘scientifically formulated’ end result. Raw food producers, on the other hand, even though they are able to manipulate the food less, can use technology and science to create diets that meet FEDIAF, the European pet food industry watchdog, standards.

Many critics of raw food, when trying to denigrate the practice, quote from the 2013 review ‘Current knowledge about the risks and benefits of raw meat-based diets for dogs and cats’, that appeared in the prestigious Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. The review quotes four papers on bone obstruction in pets, totalling 229 cats and dogs. The word ‘raw’ is not mentioned anywhere, suggesting that most foreign body blockage cases studied were not due to raw bones.

Bones are generally very beneficial to the gut, teeth and mind of pet and working dogs. Problems are rare. Kibble does not clean teeth, contrary to popular myth. The same goes for bloat, dilation and stomach rotation in dogs; most cases are not associated with raw food feeding. By far the majority are fed kibble-based diets. A colleague of mine tells a story of dealing routinely with an Old English Shepherd rescue at his practice. He eventually persuaded them to put all the dogs on raw. His income from bloat cases from the rescue all but dried up.

The hassle and cost of raw are always a contender when I talk to clients and give talks on raw food nutrition. But they need not be. Kibble is the ultimate convenience food. That is why it is the world’s most popular method of feeding. But convenience has nothing to do with nutrition, it’s a sales pitch! Do our doctors advise us to eat only convenience foods?

“I have fed raw meaty bones (RMB) for the last 20+ years to both my terriers and wouldn’t feed them any other way. I now won’t take on dog clients for referral for allergies, cancer or other serious chronic conditions unless they are prepared to feed RMB, as otherwise I’m wasting my time. Kibble feeding is an obstacle to cure and must be addressed. The physical presentation of the diet is as important as the chemical composition, which is why I’m not a fan of pre-ground raw food and bones, unless there is good reason eg weaning puppies, just after oral surgery, or short term convenience on holidays. Pet carnivores need to crunch the bones to clean teeth and strengthen gum/tooth margins. However it is important to recognise that the meat on the bone protects the oseophagus on the way to the stomach. This is why it is important to feed meaty bones rather than meat and bare bones. Likewise dense marrow bones can crack teeth, so it is better not to feed weight-bearing bones from large animals, such as beef marrow bones. Stick to either smaller weight-bearing bone options such as chicken, lamb or rabbit, or non-weight-bearing bones from larger animals such as beef ribs.”

Roger Meacock Vet 27 years experience

“When clients feed raw, we notice shiny luxurious hair coats on the animals, plus they have gorgeous teeth with little to no tartar especially when they eat raw bones. It’s much cheaper and safer than a dental! I feed my domestic cats raw and I’m sure that is contributing to the longevity and quality of my elder cat nearly 2 years post diagnosis of nasal cancer, treated homeopathically.”

Lori Leonard Vet 27 years experience

Nowadays, there are dozens of producers supplying excellent complete and balanced frozen raw food meals.

Just Google ‘complete and balanced raw foods for dogs’, to see the options. Raw food is now as convenient as kibble! It is also easy to incorporate into your practice, so you don’t need to lose that income stream, currently provided by kibble.

Prices for quality raw foods match prices, per meal, of the mid- to upper ranges of the kibble market. You get what you pay for. You cannot expect Range Rover performance if all you buy is 2-stroke fuel.

However raw food is not for everyone. Some dogs, if they have been on high-carb foods (all kibbles, grain-free or otherwise) all their lives, cannot maintain weight initially when moved onto quality raw. Some dogs, and they are rare, can’t cope with the new texture and flavours. Labradors, needless to say, are rarely in this group. If you cannot bring yourself to go the whole hog and go raw, then moving up the ‘spectrum of nutrition’ is the key – feed the best kibble you can, or introduce some raw meat and bones once or twice alongside the kibble.

Kibbles go from super-economy to ultra-premium brands. If you are set on kibble, look around for producers who are careful when sourcing raw ingredients. Low-temperature processing is another desirable feature. Also, when you buy kibble, buy quantities you will get through quickly, from a wholesaler with a good turnover of diets to ensure freshness.

There are, as with everything, pros and cons to raw food and kibble feeding. Look at the arguments for both. Consider both. You, and your dog are, after all, what you both eat.

Nick Thompson President of the Veterinary Raw Feeding Society

“I recommended raw food to hundreds of clients over some 15 years at the end of my time in practice. This dietary change contributed to the massive improvement in health of the great majority. Indeed, given the choice of “complementary” therapy options, my choice would be firstly change the diet to one appropriate for the species, and then consider other methods to influence and tune the engine. This is the fuel we are expecting the bodily engine to run smoothly on, You cannot run a diesel engine on petrol (even if super-unleaded!). About 20 years ago, during a visit to Jersey to talk to the Jersey kennel club I had a behind the scenes tour of Jersey zoo, and was lucky enough to meet the chief veterinary surgeon in charge of the zoo at the time. I asked him why Jersey zoo had such an international reputation for being able to breed rare breeds where other zoos around the world had much less success. He told me that it was all about the food and the environment. “The food should be both nutritionally appropriate and socially acceptable”, he said. He explained that this entailed them importing food from around the world, even particular species of plants for some of the herbivores, so they were able to feed the species-appropriate food, and feeding it as they would have been in their natural environment. “It is important that they are happy as well as properly fed”.The same applies to raw fed dogs and cats; the apparent happiness of our pets when offered their kibble diets is simply because the hours a day they would spend in the wild seeking prey, then stalking it, hunting it, trying again when they fail the first couple of times, then taking it to the appropriate place to then eat it – bones and all – is reduced to a 30 second mad dash once every 24 hours. Almost all play behaviours in cats and dogs are food-related, and offering a natural species-appropriate raw food creates a happy and nutritionally balanced animal, with a happy and balanced immune system, endocrine system, and physical form.”

Mark Carpenter Vet 40 years experience


References

  1. Billinghurst I. Give Your Dog a Bone. Bathurst, New South Wales: Warrigal Publishing, 1993.
  2. Lonsdale T. Raw Meaty Bones, Windsor, New South Wales: Rivetco P/L, 2001.
  3. Strombeck R. Home-Prepared Dog and Cat Diets The Healthful Alternative. Ames, Iowa: Blackwell Publishing Professional, 1999.
  4. Patton R. Ruined by Excess, Perfected by Lack – The paradox of pet nutrition. Nottingham: Nottingham University Press, 2011.
  5. Freeman LM, Chandler ML, Hamper BA, et al. Current knowledge about the risks and benefits of raw meat-based diets for dogs and cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2013; 243: 1549-1558.
  6. Schlesinger DP, Joffe DJ. Raw food diets in companion animals: a critical review. Can Vet J 2011;52:50–54.
  7. Strohmeyer RA, Morley PS, Hyatt DR, et al. Evaluation of bacterial and protozoal contamination of commercially available raw meat diets for dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228:537–542.
  8. AVMA website. Raw or undercooked animal-source protein in cat and dog diets. Available at: www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Raw-or-Undercooked-Animal-Source-Protein-in-Cat-and-Dog-Diets.aspx. Accessed Nov 14, 2014.
  9. American Animal Hospital Association website. Raw protein diet position statement. Available at:www.aahanet.org/Library/Raw_Food_Diet.aspx. Accessed Nov 14, 2014.
  10. Canadian Veterinary Medical Association website. CVMA policy on raw or undercooked animal-source protein in cat and dog diets.www.cvma.net/doc.asp?id=21753. Accessed Nov 14, 2014.
  11. de-Oliveira LD, Carciofi AC, Oliveira MC, et al. Effects of six carbohydrate sources on diet digestibility and postprandial glucose and insulin response in cats. J Anim Sci 2008;86:2237–2246.
  12. Axelsson E, Ratnakumar A, Arendt M-L, et al. The genomic signature of dog domestication reveals adaptation to a starch-rich diet. Nature 2013;495;360–364.
  13. Hazewinkel H, Vandenbrom W, Vantklooster A, et al. Calcium metabolism in Great Dane dogs fed diets with various calcium and phosphorus levels. J Nutr 1991;121:S99–S106.
  14. Meyer H, Zentek J, Habernoll H, et al. Digestibility and compatibility of mixed diets and faecal consistency in different breeds of dog. Zentralbl Veterinarmed A 1999;46:155–165.
  15. Nestle M, Nesheim M. Feed your pet right: the authoritative guide to feeding your dog and cat. New York: Free Press, 2010.
  16. Volhard W, Brown KL. The holistic guide for a healthy dog. New York: Howell Book House, 1995.
  17. FDA website. Pet food recall products list. Available at: www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/RecallsWithdrawals/default.htm. Accessed Nov 14, 2014.
  18. FDA website. Recalls, market withdrawals, & safety alerts. Available at: www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/default.htm. Accessed Nov 14, 2014.
  19. Steel RJS. Thiamine deficiency in a cat associated with the preservation of “pet meat” with sulphur dioxide. Aust Vet J 1997;75:719–721.
  20. Boermans HJ, Leung MCK. Mycotoxins and the pet food industry: toxicological evidence and risk assessment. Int J Food Microbiol 2007;119:95–102.
  21. Morita T, Awakura T, Shimada A, et al. Vitamin-D toxicosis in cats: natural outbreak and experimental study. J Vet Med Sci 1995;57:831–837.
  22. Hielm-Bjorkman, Virtanen. Exploratory study: 632 shared experiences from dog owners changing their dogs’ food to a raw food (BARF) diet. www.mushbarf.com/en/information-and-resources-about-barf-feeding. Accessed Feb 19, 2015.
  23. Freeman LM, Michel KE. Evaluation of raw food diets (Erratum published in J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:1716). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:705–709.
  24. Dillitzer N, Becker N, Kienzle E. Intake of minerals, trace elements and vitamins in bone and raw food rations in adults dogs. Br J Nutr 2011;106:S53–S56.
  25. Joffe DJ, Schlesinger DP. Preliminary assessment of the risk of Salmonella infection in dogs fed raw chicken diets. Can Vet J 2002;43:441–442.
  26. Weese JS, Rousseau J, Arroyo L. Bacteriological evaluation of commercial canine and feline raw diets. Can Vet J 2005;46:513–516.
  27. Finley R, Reid-Smith R, Ribble C, et al. The occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Salmonellae isolated from commercially available canine raw food diets in three Canadian cities. Zoonoses Public Health 2008;55:462–469.
  28. Lenz J, Joffe D, Kauffman M, et al. Perceptions, practices, and consequences associated with foodborne pathogens and the feeding of raw meat to dogs. Can Vet J 2009;50:637–643.
  29. Chengappa MM, Staats J, Oberst RD, et al. Prevalence of Salmonella in raw meat used in diets of racing Greyhounds. J Vet Diagn Invest 1993;5:372–377.
  30. Leonard EK, Pearl DL, Finley RL, et al. Evaluation of pet-related management factors and the risk of Salmonella spp. carriage in pet dogs from volunteer households in Ontario (2005–2006). Zoonoses Public Health 2011;58:140–149.
  31. Morley PS, Strohmeyer RA, Tankson JD, et al. Evaluation of the association between feeding raw meat and Salmonella enterica infections at a Greyhound breeding facility. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228:1524–1532.
  32. Cui S, Ge B, Zheng J, et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Campylobacter spp and Salmonella serovars in organic chicken from Maryland retail stores. Appl Environ Microbiol 2005;71:4108–4111.
  33. Rousseau A, Prittie J, Broussard JD, et al. Incidence and char- acterization of esophagitis following esophageal foreign body removal in dogs: 60 cases (1999–2003). J Vet Emerg Crit Care 2007;17:159–163.
  34. Gianella P, Pfammatter NS, Burgener IA. Oesophageal and gas- tric endoscopic foreign body removal: complications and follow up of 102 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2009;50:649–654.
  35. Frowde PE, Battersby IA, Whitley NT, et al. Oesophageal dis- ease in 33 cats. J Feline Med Surg 2011;13:564–596.
  36. Thompson HC, Cortes Y, Gannon K, et al. Esophageal foreign bodies in dogs: 34 cases (2004–2009). J Vet Emerg Crit Care 2012;22:253–261.
  37. Bernard MT. Raising cats naturally: how to care for your cat the way nature intended. Sandy, Utah: Aardvark Global Pub, 2004.
  38. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653
  39. 1069/2009 & 142/2011: EU Animal By-products regulations
  40. 183/2005: EU Feed Hygiene Regulations
  41. Vojdani A. Detection of IgE, IgG, IgA and IgM antibodies against raw and processed food antigens. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2009;6, 22.
  42. Spies JR. Allergens. J Agric Food Chem 1974; 22:30-36.
  43. Bosch et al., Dietary nutrient profiles of wild wolves: insights for optimal dog nutrition British Journal of Nutrition (2015), 113, S40–S54
  44. M. Davies et al., Mineral analysis of complete dog and cat foods in the UK and compliance with European guidelines. Scientific Reports 7, Article number: 17107 (2017)

Copyright 2018, British Association of Homeopathic Veterinary Surgeons

WHAT IS HOMEOPATHY

AN INSIGHT INTO A DIFFERENT SKILL

Homeopathy (homoeopathy / homœopathy) is a system of medicine that bases its therapeutics on the principle of ‘let like be cured by likes’ – ‘similia similibus curentur’.

The medicines used may be derived from animal, vegetable or mineral sources and, in latter times, remedies have also been derived from man-made substances. The initial requirement for treatment is knowledge of what effect a particular remedy or substance will have on a healthy body (i.e. what signs and symptoms it can provoke in a healthy body). 

The signs and symptoms presented by a sick animal or person are then compared to this ‘symptom picture’ of the various medicines, choosing that medicine which is the closest ‘match’.

There is no risk of: a) toxic side-effects, b) medicine residues in farm animal products, c) ‘doping’ or residues in sporting animals, d) stimulation of anti​​​​biotic resistance. Furthermore, laboratory animal research is not required for its development.

The strategy of a homeopathic consultation is to find the correct stimulus for the body’s inherent healing potential (i.e. the correct homeopathic remedy) and, as an essential adjunct to this, to remove or to minimise any factors and influences that could obstruct or impede that healing process. For this reason, attention to the patient’s diet is an essential part of the procedure, with a conscious attempt to feed each species as naturally and as healthily as possible, in line with its evolved needs.

Information concerning the effect of substances on the healthy body comes primarily from three sources:

  • Provings in which healthy human volunteers take the remedy under investigation and record the effects. Modern proving protocols employ ‘blinding’ techniques to avoid bias and the placebo effect.
  • Toxicology reports where appropriate
  • Clinical Experience

Although many of the remedies have, as their source, substances which, in material doses, are toxic, the process of homeopathic preparation removes the toxic properties, leaving only a healing potential

The process of homeopathic preparation involves three distinct stages:

  • Solution
  • Dilution
  • Succussion

The substance is put into solution, using a water/alcohol solvent. This solution is known as a ‘mother tincture’.


Insoluble substances first undergo a process of trituration, which entails the thorough mixing and grinding together of the material with fixed amounts of lactose, for three successive stages. Following this a tincture as above is prepared.

The exact mechanisms involved in this process have not been completely established. Various models have been proposed, based on modern developments in physics and allied disciplines, which satisfactorily explain the observed facts and overcome the objections inherent in Avogadro’s Constant.

According to these models, there are two requirements for the action of homeopathic remedies. One is tropism, which involves a communality of target organ or system for both ultra-dilute and undiluted substances. The other is an inversion of effect whereby a dilution creates the potential to interfere with the action of the original substance.

Numerous physiological experiments have demonstrated the existence of both these effects. New work on the effects of cavitation on water structure and the clumping of molecules in dilution (‘bucky balls’) may also have interesting relevance to homeopathic dilutions/potencies. The emerging field of bio-energetics and the Arndt-Schultz phenomenon may give us more insight into the biological mechanisms involved in homeopathic medicine.

Clinical trials, meta-analyses and experience have also established the validity of the homeopathic method.

Related articles


Websites with research information

www.homeopathicvet.org

www.trusthomeopathy.org/case/res_toc.html

References

Homeopathy: A Frontier in Medical Science. BELLAVITE P., SIGNORI A, Berkley 1995, North Atlantic Books
Is evidence for homeopathy reproducible? Lancet, Vol. 344 Dec 10th. Pp1601.REILLY D, TAYLOR M, BEATTIE N, CAMPBELL J, McSHARRY C,. AITCHISON T, CARTER R and STEVENSON R. 1994
 

International Research Group on very Low Dose and High Dilution Effects BHJ 1994 Vol 83 p84


CAM​
What is it really?

alternative, complementary or integrative medicine


Holistic

You’ve probably heard about alternative, complementary or integrative medicine. These are three names for the same idea. Medicine as taught to most doctors and vets in professional school is referred to as conventional medicine. 

Alternative, complementary and integrative medicine refer to therapies and methods that expand the scope of conventional medicine. Some of these therapies have been used for a long time, such as nutrition, acupuncture, massage, homeopathy and herbal medicine.

Other therapies are less well known or more recently developed. We prefer the terms complementary or integrative medicine, as they best portray the spirit of cooperation and inclusiveness.

Holistic therapies
Musculoskeletal Manipulation – Chiropractic, Osteopathic

Osteopathy comes under the heading of CAM

Veterinary chiropractors and veterinary osteopaths both have advanced training in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases that are particularly affected by the alignment of the spinal column and the limbs.

This means that both chiropractors and osteopaths are excellent resources when animals have mobility problems, or back and neck pain. Osteopaths may also treat other diseases that are affected by pressure on nerves or blood vessels.

Both chiropractors and osteopaths will manipulate an animal’s spine and limbs to resolve abnormal alignment, so it is important that the animal be reasonably cooperative.

Holistic medicine

Holistic medicine is the ideal approach for every patient. Holistic means that, regardless of what therapy is used for treatment, the goal is to improve the health of the whole individual. This means that we need to understand not just the patient’s physical symptoms, but also their mental and emotional state, and their physical and social environment.

Holistic medicine seeks the therapies best suited to a particular individual which minimise the possibility of side effects. 

Medical practitioners may practice holistically within a conventional framework. We find that the use of complementary therapies gives us more options to help patients, and fewer problems with reactions to medications.

Nutrition and environment

Nutrition and environment are two of the most important elements in attaining and maintaining good health. Foods today are grown on soils which are largely depleted of trace elements, after years of intensive farming practices. Organic foods can help, as can nutritional supplements.

Some individuals require more of certain substances in their diet, and patients with particular diseases can also be helped by carefully chosen supplements. Stress affects both people and animals; a stressful environment weakens the body and makes disease more likely.

Avoid situations and individuals that cause conflict and anxiety, and provide time for your animals and yourself to engage in natural, stress relieving behaviours.

Homeopathy

Homeopathy is a system of medicine developed by the German physician Samuel Hahnemann over two hundred years ago, and is used extensively in many countries. Homeopathic medicines are safe, effective, and low in cost.

It works with the body’s natural defences to restore health, rather than just fight disease. Homeopathy is based on the premise that a substance (plant, element or animal product) that causes certain symptoms in healthy individuals can, in a highly diluted form, stimulate a healing response in a patient with an illness or condition characterised by those same symptoms.

Homeopathy has been particularly useful in situations where conventional medicine has undesirable side effects, such as anxiety, behaviour problems, chronic diseases and skin conditions.

Herbal medicine

Herbal medicine is not the same as homeopathy, though it is easy to see how the two are confused. In homeopathy, herbs and other substances are highly diluted and potentised to make remedies.

Herbal medicine uses the herbs as whole plant parts, or as powdered or liquid extracts. A number of conventional medicines synthetically reproduce the active ingredients in herbs, but herbalists find that the use of the whole natural plant product is often more effective and gentler in action.

Many herbs are very safe, but attention must be paid to the dosage. They also can interfere with the action of other medicines in some cases.

Physical Therapy
Hydrotherapy/Therapeutic Swimming, Massage, Stretches

Hydrotherapy also comes under the heading of CAM

The field of rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy is growing as more people engage in activities with their athletic companions.

Any injured or geriatric animal will also benefit from these gentle therapies. Massage improves blood circulation, and stretches improve flexibility. Hydrotherapy is an excellent way for injured or geriatric animals to strengthen their muscles without the stress of bearing weight.

In addition, many rehabilitation vets will explain how people can employ massage and stretching techniques in a home fitness program, to speed recovery or maximise fitness.

Acupuncture

Acupuncture is a branch of Traditional Chinese Medicine which is more than 4,000 years old. It uses an understanding of the body’s normal characteristics and the energy flow of the body to determine how to stimulate healing, relieve pain or resolve body imbalances by placement and manipulation of acupuncture needles.

Several sessions might be needed to see significant improvement in a patient. Often Chinese herbal combinations will help maintain and augment the improvement seen from acupuncture treatments.

Acupuncture is best known for its relief of musculoskeletal pain, and it can be helpful with many other conditions.

Copyright 2018 British Association of Homeopathic Veterinary Surgeons   –   Disclaimer

Shocking victory for proponents of alternative medicine

MARCH 8, 2018


Jon Rappoport

In Australia, an effort to label all alternative (traditional, complementary) medicine products as “based on pseudoscience” has failed.

Traditional remedies (much older than mainstream medicines) are defended as appropriate, and can include health claims. The Crazz Files, a major defender of health freedom in Australia, reports:

“In a major win, the Federal Government has ignored the Australian Greens and anti-complementary medicine activists like Doctor Ken Harvey…and passed a reform package that protects traditional medicine.”

The Crazz Files

“The Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill, which passed Parliament on February 15, supports positive claims for complementary medicines based on traditional evidence, and abolishes the current complaints system.”

“Greens voters were shocked to learn Greens Leader and General Practitioner, Senator Dr Richard Di Natale was aligned with skeptics, whose platform is: ‘There is no alternative to [modern] Medicine’.”

“One of his [Dr. Di Natale’s] ‘concerns’ was that people were being ‘misled’ by traditional claims about the effectiveness of complementary medicine.

He, and the skeptics, wanted labels on complementary and traditional medicines to state: ’this traditional indication is not in accordance with modern medical knowledge and there is no scientific evidence that this product is effective’.”

‘I think it is offensive and disrespectful to those who practice traditional medicine’

The Minister for Rural Health, Senator Bridget McKenzie

“’For some, particularly those using Chinese medicine, the history of practising in that traditional medicine paradigm goes back thousands of years. It’s been extensively refined, practised and documented and in many cases incorporated into mainstream medicine.

So, a statement required by the Australian Government that the indication is not in accordance with modern medical knowledge and that there is no scientific evidence will be seen as arrogant and insensitive to those practising and using traditional Chinese medicines,’

Senator McKenzie

Boom!

Here is a brief analysis of “modern medicine,” the so-called scientific system that is the “only valid system.” It is the system employed in Australia, America, and virtually all countries in the world.



People who watch the news or read mainstream news have the impression that “scientific” medical research is remarkably valid and always progressing. Doctors and medical bureaucrats line up to confirm and ceaselessly push this view.

But they are concealing the dark truth.

Pills = money

Let’s go to the record.

Here are two editors of two of the most prestigious and respected medical journals in the world. During their long careers, they have read and scrutinised more studies than any doctor, researcher, bureaucrat, or so-called medical blogger. And this is what they have written:

Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books

Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet

Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…”

There are many ominous implications in these two statements. I will point out one.

Incompetent, error-filled, and fraudulent studies of medical drugs—for example, published reports on clinical trials of those drugs—would lead one to expect chaos in the field of medical treatment.

And by chaos, I mean: the drugs cause widespread death and severe injury.

Again, if a person obtains his news from mainstream sources, he will say,

“But I see no evidence of such a vast scandal.”

That is a conspiracy of silence. Because this widespread death and grievous harm HAS been reported. Where? In open-source medical literature.

For example: On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:

Every year in the United States

“Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people”.

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it. On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.

  • What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

  • The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

  • In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

  • The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

  • Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

  • NO.

  • Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

  • No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

  • Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

  • It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

Which is exactly…

what the two esteemed medical editors I quoted above—Marcia Angell and Richard Horton— are saying.

If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession. As in:

Disaster!


Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX.

He was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe.

He has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can find out more about the author and his work at: www.nomorefakenews.com



Copyright 2017, Company Name   –   Disclaimer