Animal Communicator answer from another thread

QR: I actually have nothing against AC per se - if people think it works and want to spend their money on it then fine by me. What I do have a problem with is people giving advice when they clearly do not have a sound grasp of the really very basic science behind how animals work, which makes me worry that they have an equally poor grasp of how the herbal remedies they suggest also work and interact with other medication/physiological processes.

For example St Johns Wort is a natural anti-depressant, but I would never recommend a female friend use it for that without also making them aware that it causes the contraceptive pill to not be as effective as it is otherwise, because that would be irresponsible of me. I would not mention herbal remedies to people without first researching all the known interactions and side effects. I find herbal medicine fascinating, and have a few books on the subject - but it is something to be treated with caution.

For example in horses - would the OP know which herbal remedies they suggest are illegal in affiliated competition - there are quite a lot.
 
Of course, this is the reason that cats eat rodents rather then just munching on grass which, after all would be the easier option...
My degree isn't even in ecology and I know that you are right
grin.gif
 
I must admit SC I agree, I am not against ACs, hell I have used one (she was VERY hit and miss), but I do have an issue with someone advising treatment when they clearly do not have the credentials to do so, especially if they recommend 'natural' remedies. I must make it clear that I do not have a problem with 'natural' remedies, many of the tried and tested medicines we use today are derived from natural sources, but, again, I have a problem with an AC prescribing.
 
my cat munches on grass, and then shortly afterwards he pukes!

I personally believe in Animal Communicators, having had one out to my horse a couple of times.

then again, I believe in a lot of stuff that would make the normal joes' toes curl
smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
ditto SC

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I'm aware of the metabolics of cats thats why they don't ingest (or VERY rarely) ingest essential oils as medicine they prefer hydrosols as a by product of them. What I was saying was it is DEBATABLE and pointing out that they do eat plant matter. My aim was to point out that where does the borderline between om/herb/carn lie.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I must admit SC I agree, I am not against ACs, hell I have used one (she was VERY hit and miss), but I do have an issue with someone advising treatment when they clearly do not have the credentials to do so, especially if they recommend 'natural' remedies. I must make it clear that I do not have a problem with 'natural' remedies, many of the tried and tested medicines we use today are derived from natural sources, but, again, I have a problem with an AC prescribing.

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on definition of prescribing. The plant materials I mentioned have science behind them and have been heavily researched. The idea behind aromatics and self selection is that the ANIMAL prescibes as they are the only ones that know what they need. And before anyone asked no I am not anti allopathic medicine at all, in fact the opposite. My first horse was saved by conventional medicine and one of my horses is currently on bute and antibiotics for a hurrendous infection he's had and vet coming again tomorrow for him. And when I got the vet out 3 weeks ago as my mare had a puncture wound just missing a tendon my vet told me to keep giving her what I was along with what he recommended so I did!
 
Just had a look at the original thread and the result of the bloods thread. Funny how the results one is only one page long. maybe this just shows how when people feel there is something they want to slate they get stuck in then when results come they go a little quiet.....?
 
You are, in a way, prescribing Ragwort, which has very scientific basis to say it is toxic.
Thanks for starting this thread though, it has been very amusing with some of the replies given
grin.gif
 
ok i have a few questions, if you have a "gift" why is it used as a way of making money??? jesus had a gift and he did not charge
wink.gif
????
What is you moral stance on taking money from what can be percieved as "vulnerable"???
why are you in particular blessed with this "gift" and i am not???

an AC has been to my horses (not through my choice another was using them and they took it apon themselves to look at my horses) and told me my mare was DEFINATELY have a colt


................of course she had a filly
wink.gif
 
The Veterinary Surgery Act of 1966 prohibits anyone other than a qualified veterinary surgeon from treating animals, including diagnosis of ailments and giving of advice on such diagnosis.
However the healing of animals by contact healing, by the laying on of hands or distant healing is legal.

However The Protection of Animals Act 1911 requires that if an animal clearly needs treatment from a veterinary surgeon the owner must obtain this. Therefore before treating animals it is advisable to seek assurance from the owner that the animal has been examined by a vet. To give emergency First Aid to animals for the purpose of saving life or relieving pain is permissible under the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 Schedule 3.

Above refers to the veterinary surgery act.

I am a reiki master and also get communication when i give reiki. Not always but a lot of the time i do. I don't charge for that. It is just a bonus if i get anything.
If i do detect pain or a problem, i suggest they get the vet to check a particular area. I wouldn't want to, nor am I qualified to diagnose or treat any ailments. It is something you have to be very careful of.
I am not looking for an argument about what i do, i don't particularly care what anyone thinks and i don't need to jsutify meyself.
Just thought I would put my bit in.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ditto SC

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I'm aware of the metabolics of cats thats why they don't ingest (or VERY rarely) ingest essential oils as medicine they prefer hydrosols as a by product of them. What I was saying was it is DEBATABLE and pointing out that they do eat plant matter. My aim was to point out that where does the borderline between om/herb/carn lie.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, clearly I am not explaining this well enough. The line between omnivore/carnivore/herbivore is NOT debatable. It is part of the classification system for life on earth. Where each living thing fits, is a result of its evolutionary pathways, its skeletal development, its ecological behaviours and its physiology. A cat requiring plant matter does NOT mean you can debate whether it is an obligate carnivore or not, for reasons I have laready explained. Likewise a deer utilising bones for calcium does not suddenly develop the metabolic pathways, the behaviours and the skeletal structure required for it to eat meat and therefore have an omnivorous diet. Quite seriously, this is very, very basic science - secondary school level biology. I would expect all A level biology students to be able to explain this and most GCSE students as well. Perhaps not to the level I have, but the basic understanding that it is about more than diet should be there.

The borders lie in how the animal in question is constructed - does it have the skeletal structure to allow it to eat meat regularly, does it have the metabolic pathways to allow it to digest raw plant material, etc etc. These borders are NOT changed by the animal choosing to eat something outside of its normal diet for a specific purpose. And frankly the idea of 'self-medicating' on herbal things is borderline dangerous - animals can and do seek out missing essential nutrients. But they also can and do smell/taste something which is not terribly good for them and think 'that's good' and eat enough of it to kill them. If they did not, no animals would ever have died of lead poisoning when lead used to be a constituent part of paints for example: they licked the paint because it was salty - so the comparison is valid - the animal thought it lacked salt, the paint fulfilled the salt function. Unfortunately it also fulfilled the heavy metal poisoning function.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You are, in a way, prescribing Ragwort, which has very scientific basis to say it is toxic.
Thanks for starting this thread though, it has been very amusing with some of the replies given
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

I've prescribed ragwort???? where???!! I simply stated the fact it has medicinal properties (and yes I do happen to dig it out my fields!) anyone can find the info on ragwort on the net.
 
[ QUOTE ]
A very brave animal communicator to venture in amongst you bunch of carnivores!

[/ QUOTE ]

water off a ducks back :-)
 
Again, I'd like to repeat that I am open-minded about animal communication in a general sense. It's the specific ideas, which are simply wrong, on this thread which I have the issue with, and which make me concerned about the foundations on which some of the other ideas are built.
 
[ QUOTE ]
ok i have a few questions, if you have a "gift" why is it used as a way of making money??? jesus had a gift and he did not charge
wink.gif
????
What is you moral stance on taking money from what can be percieved as "vulnerable"???
why are you in particular blessed with this "gift" and i am not???

an AC has been to my horses (not through my choice another was using them and they took it apon themselves to look at my horses) and told me my mare was DEFINATELY have a colt

''percieved as vunerable. many of my clients are anything but!
'gift' thats your words not mine, whether I want to do this or not the fact stands, it happens. I never wanted to work with people, only animals. But soon realised I had no opinion because of how people affect horses. That was my problem to deal with so I did and no do work with people.

maybe jesus didn't take on rehabs that cost him thousands a year, earn nothing out of it then 'gave' them under contract to good people. maybe he didn't also pay £136 a week in nursery fees so his daughter could put her daughter in nursery so she could go back to college. maybe he didn't also need a car to get sed child around 100 miles a week to go to nursery so mother could go to college to make a better life for them and to see horses with problems. maybe Jesus didn't need to spend 5K on a bank loan to put up new fencing in order to take in a 17.2 windsucker that had had problems for all his life since 6 months old thats now sorted, only to find him a new home he'll be going to shortly.. Lucky Jesus! maybe as my lawyer can do what he does he shouldn't charge me as it's helping me? what an idilic world!


................of course she had a filly
wink.gif


[/ QUOTE ]
 
[ QUOTE ]
Again, I'd like to repeat that I am open-minded about animal communication in a general sense. It's the specific ideas, which are simply wrong, on this thread which I have the issue with, and which make me concerned about the foundations on which some of the other ideas are built.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like what and I'll do my best to answer (though might not be till the weekend as teaching all day tomorrow.)
 
Like your assertation that where the line can be drawn between carnivores/omnivores/herbivores is debatable (as explained above, it is not) and the assertation that self-medication is safe - again I have cited an example of why I believe this is not true.

I am actually a little astounded you even need to ask which specific ideas I was referring to, I thought I had made that quite clear and backed it up with scientifically sound examples??!
 
[ QUOTE ]
The Veterinary Surgery Act of 1966 prohibits anyone other than a qualified veterinary surgeon from treating animals, including diagnosis of ailments and giving of advice on such diagnosis.
However the healing of animals by contact healing, by the laying on of hands or distant healing is legal.

However The Protection of Animals Act 1911 requires that if an animal clearly needs treatment from a veterinary surgeon the owner must obtain this. Therefore before treating animals it is advisable to seek assurance from the owner that the animal has been examined by a vet. To give emergency First Aid to animals for the purpose of saving life or relieving pain is permissible under the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 Schedule 3.

Above refers to the veterinary surgery act.

I am a reiki master and also get communication when i give reiki. Not always but a lot of the time i do. I don't charge for that. It is just a bonus if i get anything.
If i do detect pain or a problem, i suggest they get the vet to check a particular area. I wouldn't want to, nor am I qualified to diagnose or treat any ailments. It is something you have to be very careful of.
I am not looking for an argument about what i do, i don't particularly care what anyone thinks and i don't need to jsutify meyself.
Just thought I would put my bit in.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you most certainly have the right to do so. However as far as the law goes I have had it checked out with someone who had a hand in writing up the vet act. But yes it is no better written up than the CSA (child support agency) one as it contains a huge loop hole which i checked out with them and is correct.
 
why oh why shouldn't the OP charge for her services???? I can't get my head around the resentment people have in this regard. My mother is a 'healer' and has helped many people, should she not charge a fee for her work? Maybe some posters would prefer she became destitute instead - or maybe consider her clients as brainless idiots who are only good for being fleeced at every turn.

I am a bit taken aback at some of the prejudice in this thread - when all is said and done, it is a service, much like the multitude of other services people provide to others - we live in money based society and therefore, in order to live you have to earn money, and if someone has an ability that helps others why should they not earn money for it?
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ditto SC

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I'm aware of the metabolics of cats thats why they don't ingest (or VERY rarely) ingest essential oils as medicine they prefer hydrosols as a by product of them. What I was saying was it is DEBATABLE and pointing out that they do eat plant matter. My aim was to point out that where does the borderline between om/herb/carn lie.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, clearly I am not explaining this well enough. The line between omnivore/carnivore/herbivore is NOT debatable. It is part of the classification system for life on earth. Where each living thing fits, is a result of its evolutionary pathways, its skeletal development, its ecological behaviours and its physiology. A cat requiring plant matter does NOT mean you can debate whether it is an obligate carnivore or not, for reasons I have laready explained. Likewise a deer utilising bones for calcium does not suddenly develop the metabolic pathways, the behaviours and the skeletal structure required for it to eat meat and therefore have an omnivorous diet. Quite seriously, this is very, very basic science - secondary school level biology. I would expect all A level biology students to be able to explain this and most GCSE students as well. Perhaps not to the level I have, but the basic understanding that it is about more than diet should be there.

The borders lie in how the animal in question is constructed - does it have the skeletal structure to allow it to eat meat regularly, does it have the metabolic pathways to allow it to digest raw plant material, etc etc. These borders are NOT changed by the animal choosing to eat something outside of its normal diet for a specific purpose. And frankly the idea of 'self-medicating' on herbal things is borderline dangerous - animals can and do seek out missing essential nutrients. But they also can and do smell/taste something which is not terribly good for them and think 'that's good' and eat enough of it to kill them. If they did not, no animals would ever have died of lead poisoning when lead used to be a constituent part of paints for example: they licked the paint because it was salty - so the comparison is valid - the animal thought it lacked salt, the paint fulfilled the salt function. Unfortunately it also fulfilled the heavy metal poisoning function.

[/ QUOTE ]

Granted (and no my mare didn't lick paint) but as I think I stated previously these things need to be in an unultered form. As I have already mentioned on a ragwort question, yes they do eat it and I have already stated 2 reasons why. In my mares case it was a case of take in lead or else get seriously and even more ill another way. If you put a horse heavy metal polluted land (this wasn't in my mares case) then they have the option, eat it or starve, so like the ragwort they may be lead to eat it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I am a reiki master and also get communication when i give reiki. Not always but a lot of the time i do. I don't charge for that. It is just a bonus if i get anything.
If i do detect pain or a problem, i suggest they get the vet to check a particular area. I wouldn't want to, nor am I qualified to diagnose or treat any ailments. It is something you have to be very careful of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is exactly as it should be, I have a real problem with this AC diagnosing and prescribing on the strength of her apparently 'self taught' knowledge, bleddy dangerous if you ask me.
 
[ QUOTE ]
why oh why shouldn't the OP charge for her services???? I can't get my head around the resentment people have in this regard. My mother is a 'healer' and has helped many people, should she not charge a fee for her work? Maybe some posters would prefer she became destitute instead - or maybe consider her clients as brainless idiots who are only good for being fleeced at every turn.

I am a bit taken aback at some of the prejudice in this thread - when all is said and done, it is a service, much like the multitude of other services people provide to others - we live in money based society and therefore, in order to live you have to earn money, and if someone has an ability that helps others why should they not earn money for it?

[/ QUOTE ]

here here. Just because my vet treats my horses should he do it for free?

It might be worth pointing out I went about this myself to find answers to why my animals were ill and why my first horse almost died. I never thought it would get to where it has now. I live week to week, I work and help people in the UK and abroad. Whilst bringing up 2 kids and also my 2 1/2 year old grandaughter lives with me (no I'm not old!) When I started all this years ago I had 3 horses and about 50 poultry and wildfowl and 4 cats. My husband was loaded I didn't have to work but we had an empty farmhouse so I ran B&B (5 rooms) to pay for my own horses upkeep and to pay for the courses I did) through my own choice. During busy times the backs of my knees would ache and would swell but I still did it when I could have sat on my backside. I am now divorced and do this on my own. I know have 10 cats, 6 horses and ponies and loads of other animals. I pay for all of them through the money I earn. Without it they wouldn't be here. I spend 7 hours a week just picking up horse [****]. Haven't had a holiday in almost 7years and only 2 days off this year. between everything I work 7 days a week and NEVER get to bed before 11pm then am up at 7am. I also pay insurance in order that I can do this work and help people and there animals but I'm expected not to be able to pay an electricity bill as you expect me to do it for free? Sorry but my time (what little of it there is) is precious as are my children and animals who working for free takes time away from. maybe if I did someone a free reading as a favor they'd like to do me a favor and pay my £500 vet bill I'm expecting a long with this tuesdays farrier bill lol! In fact if someone else wanted to pay ALL my bills I'd happily do it for free all the time and I don't even expect a holiday in that!

Oh and thats in between cat rescue, hand rearing baby doves and charity work!
 
QUOTE if I detect pain or a problem. Is that not diagnosing???

if someone asks you. 'does that horse look lame'? as it trots nodding it's head is that not diagnosing if you say 'yes'.

What actually is diagnosing a prescribing as the law does not define it.
 
why shouldnt they charge??? because a vet charges as they provided a service - they have a degree to prove they are trainned to provide this service
they dont just suddenly decide that can treat horses and charge people
any old idiot can say they are a "healer" or "communicator" and maybe they are or they arnt but there is no proof or industry standard that they have to abide by, and that is many people problems (me included)
how do the public know they are not making it up as as is mentioned in derren browns book it is not rocket science to me able to perform these kind of "fortune teller" tricks
 
[ QUOTE ]
i would like to point out that i am not deficient in bullshit so there is no need to feed it to me, but thanks for the thought!

Am going to find some small children to eat now as i think my calcium levels are low. kthx!

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I read several fascinating articles in The Horse magazine (an American mag) on carnivorous horses. I was absolutely gobsmacked, but it does happen! Do a google search (I would, but I've got to rush of in a sec!)
smile.gif
 
I am not having a dig, i was just pointing out what the law says.
I don't know why you would want to leave yourself wide open to anyone making any sort of clain against you.

I have no issue with anyone charging for a service. We all have to make a living. i just don't charge for communication becuase that is not what i am there to do.

I just wonder if you have insurance? If you are diagnosing and treating, would your insurance cover you if something went wrong and someone sued you?

Please don't go on the defensive, I am not being critical, i am just curious. Also, what is the loophole in the law?
 
But there not carnivourous, they are simple eating something to fix a deficiency.

No horse has canine teeth, even tushes can not be classes as canine teeth. Horse are herbavoirs, they are prey animals, they are designed to be killed and eaten, not to kill.

Lou x
 
[ QUOTE ]
why shouldnt they charge??? because a vet charges as they provided a service - they have a degree to prove they are trainned to provide this service
they dont just suddenly decide that can treat horses and charge people
any old idiot can say they are a "healer" or "communicator" and maybe they are or they arnt but there is no proof or industry standard that they have to abide by, and that is many people problems (me included)
how do the public know they are not making it up as as is mentioned in derren browns book it is not rocket science to me able to perform these kind of "fortune teller" tricks

[/ QUOTE ]

Bottom line is no one is asking you to use one, part with money or even answer this thread. that was your choice :-) People earn theirmoney what they choose to do with it and who they choose to speak tois their afair, Live and let live lol!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top