Ricky, I wrote a naturopath incorrectly prescribed homoeopathic Symphytum <that is, homoeopathic potency of a homoeopathically prepared remedy> and applied it in a ridiculous posology schedule and caused stomach ulceration and internal bleeding.
This is consistent with a homoeopathic proving of this substance. If you want to co-jointly do a proving we can compare results.
Any properly indicated remedy will achieve good results when applied properly. I've also seen fractures and sprains heal in double quick time to the astonishment of doctors and patients alike. This is old news to any homoeopath.
My point is that Jessica's post was scant on information regarding the age of the patient. But she did mention that the patient had low vitality and a great deal of organic pathology. Now we all know this means the risk of stirring up secondary psoric ailments increases, don't we? What is the point is pushing through the rate of healing time to the bone fracture if you wreak havoc in other areas, the diabetes, the rheumatoid arthritis. This is not rapid, gentle healing, it's more like a bull in a china shop, and for what purpose...so we can claim another success with Symphytum? I'm suggesting that regardless of what is perceived as an acute or a chronic condition the centre of the case is always going to be the patient, their vitality, their state of overall health. If we ignore the patient we are not doing homoeopathy. We are more like allopaths who are content to merely "fix" a limb at the possible expense of the greater health of the patient.
I'm saying it is our task to be cautious with repetition of the dose in such cases, and apply any acute remedy, as always, on homoeopathic principles. There was an example here on this site not so long ago wasn't there, where the right remedy may well have been given, but the elderley patient did not respond very well. Can't remember the details, but this is the kind of situation I'm talking about.