Mr.Hans,

Thus, early provings were done with raw substance, whereas he later mostly or exclusively used potentialized.

If early proving were done be raw substacs & later by potentialized then what was the need of mentioning App.121 & 123 in sixth edition. Furthur,if the symptoms/chracteristics mentioned in MM are of raw substances or of potentialized remedies. Is it not correct that the differant potencies & differant potencies of differant remedies will produce differant symptoms in healthy persons. Then how the symptoms of MM were standardized if raw & potentized remedies are used to find out the symptoms?

Experiments were widened to potentialized versions of substances that have no effect in raw form, e.g. silica.

It is no where mentioned in app.128, but 30th potency is common to all medical substances.

However, can we assume that proving were done in raw form & in potentized forms in consideration of the type & properties of raw substances i.e.Organic, inorganic, toxic, inert, heroic, radiations etc.

[ 10. November 2003, 08:02: Message edited by: kayveeh ]

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..Shiv Khera