Hi Morag,

I think what I was trying to say is that a strong belief is capable of modifying susceptibility; and that our belief systems as homeopaths will affect those of our patients.

If my patients believe that wearing pink will antidote their remedy they will be more susceptible to antidoting their remedy when they wear pink.

Imagine you are someone with a chronic debilitating disease which has improved significantly after a homeopathic remedy. How fearful you would be about antidoting it and getting all those terrible symptoms back.




[This message has been edited by Rubric (edited 15 October 2000).]

My understanding is that when a remedy works, it works only for an instant to adjust the "vital force". The internal system of government then proceeds to carry out the work based on these directions.

The only way to "antidote" this is to give a new set of commands, by either taking a substance to which you are sensitive, therefore essentially taking another remedy, or waiting until the underlying miasm rises up to recreate the original symptoms.

Our purpose is to reduce or eradicate the miasmatic influence so that the remedies we give will have a long lasting (permanent hopefully) effect. Also we should be building up the strength of the vital force so that it is not so easily affected by simple substances.

When a person is strong and healthy, they should be able to eat mint, lemons, drink mineral water etc without becoming sick. If they do then our job is unfinished.

Rubric
I don't understand your last paragraph. If a person has improved, then those symptoms are gone not to return. Antidoting does not cause the old symptoms to return. It just arrests further progress. ?

Not necessarily. If the remedy is not repeated the patient will often return to their original state.

[This message has been edited by Rubric (edited 15 October 2000).]

everyone seems to be talking about different things here.......just spit it out instead of talking in riddles.

rubric - if someone repeats a remedy because their symptoms come back - usually the effect of the repeat dose (in the same potency) has less effect...wouldn't it be fair to say that one would need to either go up in potency OR go on to a complimentary remedy? it's just a bit vague, the way you stated it...

and djkempson, interesting view on antidoting remedies. I agree with the point on suseptibility - but what seemed a bit confusing to me, since there are really more variables to consider, is that you seem to be saying that people will not antidote their remedy easily - fullstop. Does that not REALLY depend on the remedy (this has nothing to do with the strength of the patient but the powers of the actual remedy)? On the other hand, what about how similar the rem is (if it is a close simillimum, then I understand it cannot be antidoted so easily)? And then you have things like Mineral Water, which Hahnemann forbade - for reasons other than antidoting....
sorry, but it was a confusing statement to me...perhaps I just don't get this one .

one more thingy dj - I've never heard (lectures from college) - nor read in all the books I have, anything described (regarding the vital force/remedy action) quite the way you explained it...
if "The internal system of government then proceeds to carry out the work based on these directions. " then how is it that one is able to slow down a remedy's action - or even halt it, when it has overworked (I've experience this, so I KNOW it is possible)...it just doesn't quite add up to me...can you explain this further...I'd be interested to know more .

And all the business about self-fulfilling prophecy (wearing pink/antidoting based on some fear of it) seems skewed...isn't it more a case of seeing that as an actual MENTAL symptom that a patient would be that worried about something irrational? What I mean is - if a patient expresses this fear of antidoting, by wearing pink (for example) - wouldn't it be more fair to say that one should look up the rubric for that particular (strange too!) fear and make sure it is covered in the remedy that is precribed? And if it was covered, the fear wouldn't be there, would it??

anyhow - interesting things to ponder...a bit out there, some of it - but it makes me think - so I'm grateful for the opportunity to learn more!
Lisa

[This message has been edited by Lisa007 (edited 15 October 2000).]

Hi Lisa

The general rule is to repeat the remedy in the same potency- usually it will just pick up from where the other one left off. Sometimes though, once the remedy has been antidoted it will not work again in any potency for some time.

If this happens the only option is to change to a related remedy after retaking the case. The danger in changing remedies too quickly too often is that you can lose the thread of the case this way.

On the self fulfilling prophecy thing. What I meant was that if I tell my patients that wearing pink will antidote and they believe that as a consequence... Homeopaths are given almost guru status by some of their patients. It is important to keep giving them their power back and not get to like it too much.

You are quite right that if a patient had an irrational fear of antidoting remedies by wearing pink I would have to conclude that they are completely potty and reach for the repertory.

Maybe I could find a rubric for them next to 'Mind, Delusions, mushroom, fancies he is commanded to fall on his knees, confess his sins and rip out his bowels by a' (Kent, p.29)





[This message has been edited by Rubric (edited 15 October 2000).]

Dear Lisa,

Always glad to elaborate!!

What I mean to say about antidoting is that if the remedy has greatly improved or even cured the case, then there should be no antidoting. The patient is well, they should have been made less susceptible to adverse conditions and substances. If the case is not cured then you will get the same symptoms returning whenever the patient is put under stress, and if it is a minor stress like using peppermint toothpaste or drinking a glass of coke, then the patient has not come very far.

Your point about similar remedies is interesting. I think it is true that the less close to the similimum you are then the more fragile the improvement. Cure should involve the strength to resist minor events causing relapse of symptoms. If the case relapses every time the patient has a cup of coffee then either the patient is Coffea, or they need a better remedy.

Also, the remedies do not stay in the body like conventional drugs - there is nothing there to stay. A remedy makes a vibrational change, changes the frequency of the vital energy, and then the vital force continues the action. Whenever you are experiencing symptoms it is the reaction of your vital force to the remedy, not the remedy itself which has come and gone in an instant. If the reaction is too strong then a remedy similar to the reaction can be prescribed, just as if it were an illness (one-sided disease as Hahnemann put it). This makes another change and your vital force continues on the new path.

So when you are "antidoting", you are not doing so to the remedy but to your own reaction to the remedy.

Thanks for explaining what you meant, Dj..although I do understand your last post - as it is what I've been taught and observed. I suppose I simply misunderstood your first post...

And Rubric, hmmm, the first part, well, from what I've read (Hahnemann) - repeating the same remedy in the same potency - will only have lessened effects (and if further repeated - then even less affect and evnetually no affect) - indicates that the case was not taken properly...or am I missing something here??

....but if you meant that giving ANOTHER remedy (a complimentary one that will lead to completing the cure) and starting off with the same potency, then that makes sense.

As for the guru-thing...it is simply part of life - in many professions..and you're right - no one should become too enamoured with the 'status' or themselves ....everyone is suseptible to this human frailty. Always better to enter with humility and the mind-set that there is still much to learn.

oh - dj, your last paragraph - about the remedy's affect upon the vital force made more sense...that is what I was taught...so I think that first post was just plain confusing (sorry!).

Lisa

[This message has been edited by Lisa007 (edited 15 October 2000).]

Lisa

It depends who you read. If you read Kent or Vithoulkas the same remedy is repeated in the same potency. If you read Hahnemann you use LMs!

I would much rather rely on Hahnemann than Vithoulkas for prescribing, thank you....
it's not to say that Vithoulkas can't write - but I tend to trust the older sources on this .
And, just reading Kent - makes me wonder what Boenninghausen says...gonna look it up...

Kent does say to repeat same rem same potency - as long as there are no NEW symptoms - and the remedy gave amelioriation for a time...hmm....

gonna have to read up on this one more...cuz I understand one can go up in potency if the sx indicate this.

anyhow...thanks for the food-for-thought
Lisa

[This message has been edited by Lisa007 (edited 15 October 2000).]