Guest guest Posted July 5, 2003 Report Share Posted July 5, 2003 Phil, thanks for your thoughtful reply about muscle testing etc... Hey, I'm all for intuition. The problem I have with muscle testing is that is presented as scientific proof as some sort of allergen. In school one of my more outspoken fellow students put it this way (and I hope it won't offend anyone) , she said, " Muscle testing is intuition for White boys. " What I felt she meant was that those who don't trust their intuition need a validation outside of themselves. Beyond the ethical question (no question) if the other practitioners had just said, I feel this way about it it, then the patient could judge. If my patient said, " I believe in dowsing so I'm changing to a dowsing acupuncturist " , then off they go with my blessing. The allergy diagnosis though is presented as beyond judgment or belief. In the case of my patient with chronic hepatitis C, I hope he gets some relief with the NAET. doug > > IMO, practitioners who uses these methods should integrate the > findings into findings reached through the more predictable senses > [sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell]. If the 6th Sense Dx > conflicts with that reached by more conventional methods, the > practitioner should be wary of dismissing the more obvious Dx. > > The ETHICS of one practitioner faulting the Dx or treatment of > another is an entilrely different matter. I sympathise with ANY > practitioner whose doctor-patirnt trust was undermined in that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.