The dark underbelly of Iridology? Some members here might have followed the drama that occurred a few weeks ago in this FB group. Please permit me a brief summary: The president and colleague of a different branch of Iridology publicly and privately complained about the information discussed in this FB group (claiming “Dr. Jensen is outdated”) and that diagnosing was practiced in this page (while the complainers themselves had participated in diagnosing from the start when they joined our group). I was wondering if any folks have perspective on this: What is up with a select few long term professionals in the Iridology community? Where is the solidarity? I have participated for over a decade in various groups. Why is it that that some leaders in the Iridology community require one maintain high interpersonal vigilance… in terms of healthy boundaries? I have been regularly disappointed and perplexed by some leaders in the Iridology communities since the beginning of my training until now. What do you think of feel? What is your experience? What solutions are there you recommend?
I enjoyed reading a few, but had hoped that this was a group where we could further our findinds. Many times in other countries doctors are the ones taking Iridology, which it is then in their power to diagnose. They can use it as a tool as to what tests to run. That being said, I am not a doctor. I appreciate you brining this up and reminding us to keep things professional. The proffesion is only as refined as we remember to keep it.
I believe we are here to learn. Diagnosing is very different than saying what we have learned in our practice. After we see things a few hundred times it seems usual but not always what is so.
Iridology is an assessment of the biological field (terrain ). The foundations of iridology is to identify the Constituion the Dispsition and Diathesis …. never diagnose because It depends on a lot of factors Iridology it not a perfect science, but to know the field is a very valuable tool…..