dear john, gpm

imo herscu has it right about the general usefulness of modern provings.

what is puzzling is where does the information for the 'new materia medica' with cycles and segments come from? has herscu re-proved all the remedies asking the provers to pay special attention to their mood changes, or having them see a psychoanalyst each week to talk over their changes in mood and mind for the duration of the remedy action? or is it his interpretation of the psychology of each remedy?

as we have in organon 211, the alterations in mood and mind *often* tips the balance in the selection of a remedy - but not always.
presumably herscu has other strategies when the mental and emotional state cannot be assessed, as in the acute post-operative case initially cited.

how for instance would herscu treat a non-human animal with the 'new cycles and segments' materia medica? or an infant or someone not compos mentis?

john, you commented above that the herscu method is 'almost scientific' - that is a lot better than most modern practice, but why not return to the organon for its totally scientific method?

best regards, anna