Welcome!

As is mentioned in the subject of the forum, we are going to discuss data sources of our Materia Medica.

Let me give you an example. You may expect that all information in Hahnemann's Materia Medica Pura is based on provings. You will be surprised to see that for example information about Hyoscyamus in MMP is mostly based on toxicological findings of 18th century! It seems that Hahnemann's attempt was to purify his MM based on dynamic provings but he was not successful in all his MM's datas.

Nowadays are MMs are full of different types of signs and symptoms like provings, toxicological findings, clinical reports, constitutional concomittents, reports from necropsy, experiments on animals, .....

Is the value of all these signs and symptoms the same? Don't we need to re-study our MMs and their sources? Isn't it valuable to base our MMs mostly on dynamic and live symptoms?

I invite you all to participate in related discussions.

Sincerely,

Ardavan

__________________
Dr Ardavan Shahrdar, MD, DIHom<br /><br />Website:<br /><a href="http://www.minutus.org" target="_blank">http://www.minutus.org</a><br /><br />Mailing list:<br /><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minutus" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minutus</a>

yes,its surely is homeopathic materia medica is full of these.initially hanemann atributed to the
to the toxicological principle of drugs,later he found drugs have dynamic effect.do toxicological
data include these dynamic effects?the study of materia medica is much rewarding it helps
to know what is to cured in diseases and what is curative by medicine.now there trenendous additions of
drug provings-dyanmic provings esp. by jermmy sherr,dream provings mainly of rajan
shankaran.lot of drugs being added on mere clinical confirmation famous -carcinosinum.
new provings-chocalate,neon,hydrogen,aids,music etc.
what r the requirements for adding up these in to our daily practise ,these r being added
in complete rep& other mordern rep.how reliable r these provings.
the methods of jan scholten
all these reqire serious thinking
awating u r response
i dont like this beautiful subject to be sidelined.
i invite all the members to participate in this forum

Yes, this is a very important subject. But is there any MM now which clearly differentiates between the different classes of symptoms, so that if one is interested in the dynamic effects alone, one can see that part only. If it is not there, will it not be worthwhile to prepare such a MM in electronic format so that filtering becomes easy?

Will it not be better if the number of homeopathic remedies were reduced and better proven keeping the present day conditons in mind?

Or will it not be better to reprove a small number of polycrests?

__________________
Wishing health and happiness to one and all,<br />Swamy<br /><a href="http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Wholistichealth" target="_blank">http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Wholistichealth</a>

Sometime i think whether the remedies were actually proven like this as we have studied?

With the introduction of Computers, it become easy to locate the required/similimum remedy. It is necessary that all symptoms to be standardized & a list of these ' Standardized Symptoms '(SS) to be prepared and these SS should be mentioned against each remedy. It will be than easy to locate & compare.

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

hello,

Perhaps a smaller number of truthfully validated remedies snd their corresponding guiding characteristics can be of more help than greater number of dubious validation.
If so then the question is what does one need to do in order to achieve this ?
We must start somewhere. Everyone of us must painstakingly proceed through this phase of doubt by validating (for ourselves) the truths of homoeopathy (or any belief system) This system must be practically applyable. I have found that doing provings upon myself is one step in this direction ( it can be distorted but does help).
Hahneman did not follow anyone blindly and since we give alot of status to hin; then why should we not follow his example. Prove to ourselves that homoeopathy is rea; Then practise helping others. I will stop there, this my not be the sort of coversation this 'thread' had intended.

John