Hello Ceross,

Sometimes people focus on the source of the remedy rather than on its indications. For instance, if you were told hydrophis is a cute little mountain flower, how would you feel about that? On the other hand, if you were told it was a poisonous mushroom, would your reaction be any different? It's the remedy indications which are important, not the source, and indications are very difficult to discern without experience.

There are many, many indications for hydrophis, and so it's almost impossible to know how or why the remedy was chosen without listening to the entire history. The person I referred to in the previous post had MS with various neurological symptoms in the lower extremities, and had done very well on hydrophis for about 2 years. But choosing the remedy wouldn't be based on those symptoms alone, nor would those particular symptoms need to be present for the remedy to be chosen.

Usually I tell people it's better to wait on reading about their remedy until we see some signs of improvement, because tracking down information about the remedy can bias the follow-up, and even make subsequent remedy choices more difficult (because the person may not report their symptoms spontaneously). If you're bound and determined to find out more about the remedy, then you may want to tell yourself up front that flower or mushroom or whatever, you don't care where the remedy came from, and that your main focus will be whether it offers any improvement. My opinion is that it's better to trust the homeopath's judgment, rather than worrying and possibly second-guessing the reasons for why the remedy was chosen. Rather, sit back, pay attention, and ask yourself over the next 4-6 weeks, 'is this helping me, or not'?!

Regards,
David J.

[ 01. March 2004, 01:54: Message edited by: David A. Johnson ]