I just don't understand it. Homeopathy gained it's fame and notoriety at the turn of the last century for it's great successes in treating acute conditions, not for doing deep psychological prescribing. But that's all we do now.
Paul Herscu acknowledged that many of his former students admit to him that they don't take acute cases and they feel really inadequate if they have to. What a shame when we possess such a wonderful gift from Hahnemann--a little white pill containing marching orders to the immune system ("It says here we've got diarrhea.").

Hahnemann says in the Organon (#22, footnote a.) that a pathologically untuned vital force "...calls for the help of a wise physician. If such help is not forthcoming, it tries to save itself at all costs by increasing the suffering and especially by violent evacuations, often at the cost of tremendous sacrifice, sometimes at the cost of life itself." He says the vital force was "given to us to sustain our life in harmony as long as we are healthy, not to heal itself in disease...."

Colds are horrible things. I can remember an awful-sounding cough my daughter had 2 summers ago which hung on for nearly a month; by the time I took her to a homeopath, the cough was so violent that I can't describe it here as a courtesy to our Calcarea, Phosphorus and Carcinosin readers; what was gained by letting her "have her cold"?

Snoopy