Hi Dr Leela,

Firstly (just to be clear) I understand there is a difference between a chronic problem and an acute [emergency]....we need to be able to understand the symptoms.

Definitely, people need to understand what pathology they are dealing with to be able to properly prescribe. But still, whether one takes the time to go confirm if there are gall stones (for example) or not - seems irrelevant to me. It's the signs and symptoms which will ultimately lead to the remedy. Maybe I'm missing something here...
but, the symptoms are going to be whatever they are no matter if one has a scan or not - an allopathic diagnosis or not - a prognosis (which is a guessing game, in my estimation) or not.....

Confirming whether someone has gall stones or not doesn't seem to me, to make a difference to treatment ---- if someone is having a strange symptom in the hypchondria area (i.e. after chill a sudden burning pain that shoots up through to the head whilst the eyes twitch or something similarly wierd) and you prescribe on that symptom-complex/totality/expression according to the method Hn lays out, the remedy will work regardless of whether a patient ran for an allopathic diagnosis or not.

What I'm saying is that if the symptoms (characteristic) are rooted out - then one would still prescribe on that regardless of 'diagnosis'. If someone is in dire pain - you wouldn't leave their side until they were out of danger. And the right remedy would help with the 'stuck stones (in the duct)' if there happened to be gall stones (stuck)....so what is the difference?

If you have pain in the abdomen- you have pain in the abdomen...so yes, knowing anatomy and physiology (pathology and disease to a degree, though this is less important to homeopathic thinking, in my estimation) is important! It aids us in knowing how to look up symptoms in the right place in the repertory. It aids us in knowing to look for rem's which have affinities for certain areas of the body (if this is a striking feature of the case). But, I still don't see how having an allopathic diagnosis to come up with a prognosis will help in the end.

Either one knows how to practise (come up with the most suitably homeopathic remedy) or not. And this is NOT dependent on diagnosis. It is dependent on knowing enough about anatomy and physiology but along with homeopathic principles, etc... Prognosis is only a guess - just like prediciting if a remedy is THE simillimum before the patient has taken it. Kinda echoes the 'empty speculation' line of thinking Hn talks about....

That is where I my thinking was....hope it makes sense...if not, I'll try later, to expand (and formulate it better) a bit more.

Best wishes,
Lisa

[ 05 April 2002, 12:23: Message edited by: LisaAnnan ]

__________________
"The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
Carroll Dunham