Dear Tania,

why exactly have you changed your homoeopath? Were you unhappy with the result he or she gave you?



------------------
David Kempson
Dip.Homoeopathic Medicine
Member A.H.A(Australia)

Yup, the first homoeopath was a lot better than the new one. There are big pointers to Med but Sulph is needed first, before Med. As nrg said, the allergies are very psoric and Sulph will cover that. Asthma is sycotic.

Hyos is a very shallow beginner-level prescription for this case, and I would advise you do not return to the practitioner who prescribed it.

Anna,

Asthma is most definitely also psoric. I don't see any other symptoms here that would point to sycosis.

The Medorrhinum did work though - that's right isn't it? I would not abandon a remdy that worked so quickly. Remember that cases take time to work out with alternation of remedies to complete the cure. Med to Thuj to Nat-s back to Med etc etc.

Kent states the Asthma is very sycotic - he routinely (dare I use that word?) used Nat-s in children's asthma. But I personally think asthma can be any miasm at all. Tubercular is my favorite, but it is just pathology.

------------------
David Kempson
Dip.Homoeopathic Medicine
Member A.H.A(Australia)

I have no advice on homeopathic remedies but would like to recommend a good book on parenting and discipline techniques taylored to different personalities. It is titled Nurture by Nature and discusses childrens personality types and the most effective way in disciplining and loving our children based on what they need.

I am not convinced that the Med. did work. In my opinion, the simillimum will move the case forward rendering permanent results, and not just palliate the symptoms while it is acting. Increasing the potency of a remedy that is not the simillimum can be a recipe for disaster with sensitive individuals (psora is the 'sensitizing miasm').

------------------
Tomi Ann Conner
Lay Practitioner

[This message has been edited by nrg grl (edited 18 February 2001).]

Hi everyone,

NRG, I do think the medorrhinum worked--as was said in the original post, each time he was given a dose of the med., there was a "marked" improvement in the child's behaviour. Of course, I would not have advised such a routine for dosing (once a month? Why not give the remedy and watch and wait for the amelioration to begin and end--then redose? At least that way you could monitor to see whether or not the amelioration became longer in length with each dose). I would need some excellent reasons before I would consider changing a remedy whose administration produced such good results in the patient.

I understand how much importance you place on miasms and respect your knowledge in this area (especially since Choudhury is one of my favourite writers on this subject) but I am of the opinion that remedies can all address several miasms, and I hate to categorize them, one by one, in rigid miasmatic "holes". Please understand that I don't want to say that you think this way about remedies and miasms--I just want to say that this just isn't the way I want to understand them--or human beings, either.

I often see more than one miasmatic influence in each patient, and in this particular little boy, there seems to be a strong tubercular trait (though I am sure psora has its role there too). Sure, tubercular miasm is very close to the psoric one; but it is also very similar to the syphilitic one, right? So, for me there are no clear lines. I just finished reading an amazingly accurate writing by Will Taylor, explaining how medorrhinum--yes, medorrhinum!--is an excellent tubercular remedy! It has always been fascinating for me to see the similarities in the nosodes med. and tuberculinum...and now I understand why they are there. I know, since you read Choudhury, that you will see this understanding of the medorrhinum remedy is very appropriate. That article made me think more deeply about this case, and the reason why medorrhinum would be a good remedy here.

I really do think that what is needed is a potency change--perhaps an LM potency would help to move the case to some resolution. I don't believe any remedy should be given indefinitely, as it has been administered so far--but change should take place on a deep level, so that the emotional polarities seen in this patient will balance out. Maybe, as David says, it will point out a complementary remedy which needs to be used next. Maybe it will actually bring about more lasting amelioration and cure. In any case, I don't want to give up on a remedy that has produced such positive change before ensuring it has done all it can do.

Divina

[This message has been edited by Divina (edited 18 February 2001).]

Divina,

I don't think the Med. worked because, even though there was a marked improvement while the remedy was acting, the symptom picture returned the same as before once the remedy wore off. This looks like palliation rather than cure to me and I don't consider these "good results", as I expect more from the simillimum. Because the remedies can be stimulating, palliating, and suppressive, looks can be deceiving, with palliation and suppression mistaken as cure. This is what happened in my case. There is a fine art to differentiating the effects of remedies and what they mean, as I'm sure you know. Many homeopaths don't understand this and will mistake the prescribed remedy for the simillimum, increasing the potency in an attempt to get the curative effect they want.

I do place a lot of importance on miasms because I have found that the cause of pathology is very important in selecting the remedy. Please understand that I am only speaking of chronic cases here. And I also understand that there are not always rigid lines between what remedies address which miasms. I know from experience that there is a lot of crossover in this area.

I am not familiar with the tubercular miasm but will read up on it in relation to this case. I'm curious to know what tubercular traits you see here.

BTW, I am now including my name in the signature so people don't have to refer to me as nrg.

------------------
Tomi Ann Conner
Lay Practitioner

Hi Tomi Ann,

First of all, Welcome! in your new signature

I'm still not convinced its time to change--the amelioration is so dramatic, I think another potency will either change things more deeply or point out the next remedy. I'd have my misgivings if the "palliation" was so subtle or if only a few things happened that showed some response--but the assessment we get from mom is that the little boy is "a dream" after hours of being unmanageable. That says quite a lot to me. I want to be sure that the non-permanence of this amelioration is not a result of routine dose directions.

I am also really happy about the fact that you place a great deal of weight on the miasms in your prescribing. If you hadn't brought it up, I don't think it ever would have arisen as a topic of discussion. It should always be a consideration in any prescription because it gives us a fuller understanding of the patient's dis-ease, and so it is an integral part of the totality which should never be overlooked. Trouble is, many people don't "get" the miasms...and they don't understand just how complex they are and how complex they make every remedy...so I want to avoid the simplistic trap of slotting remedies into miasm categories, as I said above. You and I both understand that remedies may have aspects of singular or multiple miasms and submiasms...so what I don't want to see happening is declarations of certain miasmatic traits "limiting" or ruling out various symptoms, as in "well, this case is tubercular, therefore I'd rule out carcinosin because of the swollen joint the patient suffered in the past...". For me, even the nosodes which are supposed to be the definitive embodiments of each miasm have strong "cross-over" traits, and are not clear cut. Carcinosin sure has a ton of psoric aspects, and tubercular ones as well. Medorrhinum looks sycotic as well as tubercular, too. Why? Because the diseases themselves (cancer and gonorrhea) are psoric, sycotic and tubercular at the same time.

It is true, there is a great psoric trait in this case, but consider all the tubercular symptoms, as well:
-sensitivies and allergies to dairy foods, as well as to other environmental allergens
-asthma
Then, symptoms one would usually think about for tuberculinum:
-violent rages, erratic, headstrong behaviour, screaming and throwing things in anger--polarized with an adorable, entertaining, and engaging behaviour
-hitting one's head on the floor, repeatedly
-poor sleep

All that's missing is a description of the child as someone who is constantly running about, moving from room to room and rarely sitting still (but I sense he is quite energetic anyway...just from the symptoms above). In fact, if you look at the symptoms for tuberculinum and medorrhinum, the behaviour and mental state of these two remedies especially, it is quite difficult to tell them apart, particularly in children.

Divina

Just to add my 2 cents worth....

Potency is an important issue. Well selected remedies will "wear off" more quickly if the potency is not matched to the potency of the illness. It is probably always a good idea to try a higher potency first before leaving behind a remedy that seems to work. If the remedy is not correct, the higher dose will do nothing. I have seen this time and time again.

NRG's caution that it could simply be palliation is valid though. My experience is also that palliation generally becomes less efficient as you go up the potencies in a particular remedy. In fact usually one step up often collapses the apparent "cure" - perhaps the higher dose cures itself. This always tells me if I'm heading the wrong way.



------------------
David Kempson
Dip.Homoeopathic Medicine
Member A.H.A(Australia)