Discussion Aurum Metallicum

[ctb_warrior]

Aurum metallicum in homeopathy alongwith other symptom based meds can help with suicidal tendencies.

So, if anyone wishes to get help, this could help.

Good luck

 

[sadbh—itstimetogo🤎]

Evidence/links?

 

[ctb_warrior]

Evidence/links?

Materia medica
Also you can check on Google.
I have learnt this info from several homeopaths. My ex was also a homeopath.

 

[sadbh—itstimetogo🤎]

Materia medica
Also you can check on Google.
I have learnt this info from several homeopaths. My ex was also a homeopath.

Are you able to explain it in your own words or provide reputable evidence yourself outside of quoting your expert ex?

 

[fluorescentpearl]

Maybe this would fit more in the recovery channel? Regardless it's interesting, if you could cite some proof and evidence

 

[ctb_warrior]

Are you able to explain it in your own words or provide reputable evidence yourself outside of quoting your expert ex?

I can share my own experiences with homeopathy. As for internet sources, I'll have to search for it.
I have left this information here not for self treatment but as hint that a good homeopath can help patients who have suicidal thoughts but don't really want to CTB.
I was given aurum metallicum a few years ago and it did lock the suicidal thoughts out of my mind.
Secondly, I had ingested arsenic salt that I borrowed from chemistry lab. I started vomiting non stop. I was given arsenic alb. 30 and my vomiting stopped within 10 minutes.
Thirdly, my maternal grandmother was given 3 weeks to live by the doctors because of breast cancer. A well known homeopath took this challenge and due to him, she lived for 3 more years.
Fourthly, thanks to homeopathy, I rarely fall sick. It helped me develop Good immune system.
My cholesterol had increased in between, I took homeopathy for 3 months, and it lowered my cholesterol.
I had kidney stones a couple of years ago, I had berberis vulgaris 30, it took 2-4 months to cure that.

These are my own personal experiences.

Maybe this would fit more in the recovery channel? Regardless it's interesting, if you could cite some proof and evidence

That's right. It is a candidate for recovery section. The reason why I posted it here is because a lot of people who want to CTB, don't even open recovery section. I posted this article here so they can read it, rest is upto them if they wanna try it, or continue to ctb.
I posted some of my personal experiences above


Disclaimer: a lot of contemporary homeopaths are ineffective these days and that's why homeopathy is losing its reputation that it doesn't work. Very few old homeopaths who have studied materia Medica in depth are effective even for illnesses like cancer.
As I have materia Medica at my home, I am able to treat myself.
When i was 12, i was having pain in the front side of the head, i checked materia medica and found cimicifuga is the medicine for it. I took cimicifuga and my pain disappeared.

The medical fraternity has spread the word that it's placebo so that their trillion dollar pharma industry doesn't suffer due to the sweet pills dipped in alcohol.
Aurum metallicum is Gold btw
Aurum metallicum is Gold btw

 

[orodruin10]

As someone who's in the biomedical field, I feel like I need to comment on this.

Homeopathy helps in the sense that it is a placebo. It gives you more hope in recovering your health, helps you change your habits, etc... because you believe that this will help, thus tricking your mind. I'm not surprised if people think it helps with suicidal tendencies and even other diseases because of this.

In the physicochemical sense, it simply does not work. It is absurdly unlikely that a single bioactive molecule exists in the homeopathic product due to the nature of the dilutions that these are subjected to when prepared. Plus, their proposed physical theories, such as the "memory of water" that people evoke to counter the dilution question, have not been reliably reported to exist, even going against the fundamentals on how molecules interact with each other, H2O included. The nature of non-covalent bonds of H2O with other H2O molecules and other molecules, atoms and ions in solution is the same whether the bioactive molecule has never been in the solution or if it has been completely removed from the homeopathic product.

There are homeopaths researching the effectiveness of this approach. Unfortunately, the papers reporting their studies have severe flaws in aspects such as very small cohorts, biasing for positive results, poor quality of reported evidence (just because the p-value is significant, it doesn't mean that the measured effect is biologically relevant) and non-disclosure of potential conflits of interests. Granted, these are also present in papers that report results of normal clinical trials or that study conventional scientific questions. We even reached to the point where a replication crisis of scientific research exists due to people only publishing positive results, which is actively being discussed in academic circles. However, properly unbiased meta-analyses and systematic reviews tend to weed out these weak reports, and peer-review, subjected during the submission of the paper in high-quality journals and afterwards within the global academic community, also helps in pointing out flaws by assessing the findings on the context of current knowledge and methodologies and attempts to reuse the papers' protocols in other labs, which it's seldom found in homeopathy research (I am not aware of evidence for this method being published in rigourous journals like Science, Nature or The Lancet)

In short, please be wary of using homeopathic products as a first-line treatment. It may make you think you're feeling better by making you think you're feeling better, but if you really want proper help, do look for rigourous medical help. As a rule of thumb, it helps checking what is the consensus of global medical and scientific organizations on therapeutic approaches (this applies not only to psychiatric diseases, but also to cancer, COVID-19, neurological, immune...), even if you feel like you distrust these organizations (corruption is unfortunately rampant in this world, but it is unrealistic to think it will affect all thousands of researchers and medics worldwide at the same time - thus the importance of "scientific consensus"). It also helps if you're up to (re)learn some basic topics on physics, chemistry and biology, and go on from there. Having some commonly used textbooks or even checking Wikipedia as a first approach helps, and then you can read their references and the more influential reviews on these matters by searching on Google Scholar or PubMed. But always assess potential biases, by checking the authors' affiliations and clinical practices, the journal and the editorial board where the paper has been published, funding agencies... even I have unconscious biases that have influenced this reply.

Some references that could be interesting as entry points: PMID 29599397; PMID 30765373; PMID 12492603; PMID16125589; PMID 35292534; doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7166.2012.01162.x - papers can also be found on PubMed about drug design and the pharmacodynamics of different potential molecules of interest. If you're lucky, you may even find some beautiful fluorescence microscopy images! If the paper is under a paywall, use Sci-Hub.

 

[ctb_warrior]

As someone who's in the biomedical field, I feel like I need to comment on this.

Homeopathy helps in the sense that it is a placebo. It gives you more hope in recovering your health, helps you change your habits, etc... because you believe that this will help, thus tricking your mind. I'm not surprised if people think it helps with suicidal tendencies and even other diseases because of this.

In the physicochemical sense, it simply does not work. It is absurdly unlikely that a single bioactive molecule exists in the homeopathic product due to the nature of the dilutions that these are subjected to when prepared. Plus, their proposed physical theories, such as the "memory of water" that people evoke to counter the dilution question, have not been reliably reported to exist, even going against the fundamentals on how molecules interact with each other, H2O included. The nature of non-covalent bonds of H2O with other H2O molecules and other molecules, atoms and ions in solution is the same whether the bioactive molecule has never been in the solution or if it has been completely removed from the homeopathic product.

There are homeopaths researching the effectiveness of this approach. Unfortunately, the papers reporting their studies have severe flaws in aspects such as very small cohorts, biasing for positive results, poor quality of reported evidence (just because the p-value is significant, it doesn't mean that the measured effect is biologically relevant) and non-disclosure of potential conflits of interests. Granted, these are also present in papers that report results of normal clinical trials or that study conventional scientific questions. We even reached to the point where a replication crisis of scientific research exists due to people only publishing positive results, which is actively being discussed in academic circles. However, properly unbiased meta-analyses and systematic reviews tend to weed out these weak reports, and peer-review, subjected during the submission of the paper in high-quality journals and afterwards within the global academic community, also helps in pointing out flaws by assessing the findings on the context of current knowledge and methodologies and attempts to reuse the papers' protocols in other labs, which it's seldom found in homeopathy research (I am not aware of evidence for this method being published in rigourous journals like Science, Nature or The Lancet)

In short, please be wary of using homeopathic products as a first-line treatment. It may make you think you're feeling better by making you think you're feeling better, but if you really want proper help, do look for rigourous medical help. As a rule of thumb, it helps checking what is the consensus of global medical and scientific organizations on therapeutic approaches (this applies not only to psychiatric diseases, but also to cancer, COVID-19, neurological, immune...), even if you feel like you distrust these organizations (corruption is unfortunately rampant in this world, but it is unrealistic to think it will affect all thousands of researchers and medics worldwide at the same time - thus the importance of "scientific consensus"). It also helps if you're up to (re)learn some basic topics on physics, chemistry and biology, and go on from there. Having some commonly used textbooks or even checking Wikipedia as a first approach helps, and then you can read their references and the more influential reviews on these matters by searching on Google Scholar or PubMed. But always assess potential biases, by checking the authors' affiliations and clinical practices, the journal and the editorial board where the paper has been published, funding agencies... even I have unconscious biases that have influenced this reply.

Some references that could be interesting as entry points: PMID 29599397; PMID 30765373; PMID 12492603; PMID16125589; PMID 35292534; doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7166.2012.01162.x - papers can also be found on PubMed about drug design and the pharmacodynamics of different potential molecules of interest. If you're lucky, you may even find some beautiful fluorescence microscopy images! If the paper is under a paywall, use Sci-Hub.

Thanks for sharing this write up. I strongly believe that medical fraternity has an obvious reason to call it a placebo and reason it out.
I have extensively witnessed homeopathy working even in patients that were not in their senses, how will a placebo work in that case when the patient himself is not in senses.
My mom suddenly started shivering on a summer night and she was not in her senses, she was administered aconite 30, it took 30 minutes to check that shivering.

I'm no expert in this but i can talk from my experience of 36 years.


Besides, even if it's a placebo, and it can get the job done, what's wrong in trying that?

 

[sadbh—itstimetogo🤎]

Thanks for sharing this write up. I strongly believe that medical fraternity has an obvious reason to call it a placebo and reason it out.
I have extensively witnessed homeopathy working even in patients that were not in their senses, how will a placebo work in that case when the patient himself is not in senses.
My mom suddenly started shivering on a summer night and she was not in her senses, she was administered aconite 30, it took 30 minutes to check that shivering.

I'm no expert in this but i can talk from my experience of 36 years.


Besides, even if it's a placebo, and it can get the job done, what's wrong in trying that?

The placebo effect IS real, so if placebos help you, absolutely go for it. But the language you're using suggests that you believe there is a biological cause and effect at play, which can mislead people who are not scientifically literate.

Your body can't even absorb gold, so what you're suggesting doesn't make sense. You literally poop it out.

 

[ToothFairy]

I wouldn't exactly go on about recommending people drugs just because they worked with you or wathever without the word of a professional

 

[ctb_warrior]

The placebo effect IS real, so if placebos help you, absolutely go for it. But the language you're using suggests that you believe there is a biological cause and effect at play, which can mislead people who are not scientifically literate.

Your body can't even absorb gold, so what you're suggesting doesn't make sense. You literally poop it out.

See, i firmly believe that it works biologically or else it wouldn't help people who are unconscious or in kids who don't even know why they are being given something.

Although yeah, I'm an engineer and have no idea about biology or how homeopathy could be working so I am not able to defend it as I haven't studied how it works, I have just learnt how to use homeopathy. Just like, if i drive a car, i may know how to drive a car but may not know how exactly the mechanics work.

Anyways, let's get to the benefit of doubt that it's a placebo, so,as you said, if it works, why not benefit from it..

P.s. homeopathy uses the essence and not the actual gold. Homeopathy has arsenic, aconite, belladonna, stramonium, mercury, formic acid, if homeopathy used the actual stuff all of these are quite harmful if they are taken normally.

Anyways, i don't have a scientific explanation to it at the moment as I have never bothered to read about it. May be in future if I read about it, I'll support it with scientific explanation.

I wouldn't exactly go on about recommending people drugs just because they worked with you or wathever without the word of a professional

Yeah yeah, i have not recommended a medicine. I missed to write a line there but couldn't edit it later.
I intended to inform all the members that aurum metallicum is used to treat suicidal thoughts and it can be taken after consulting a professional homeopath who has a good reputation.
My bad, i should have written that line in my post.