Hi Noona,
I couldn't reply to you on the private message facility as a message came up that you weren't accepting messages!! Maybe you have not set this up in your profile.

Anyway to me the Similimum is the perfect remedy for a person. It is the one that reflects the totality of a person's physical, mental and emotional symptoms. It strengthens the Vital Force (See Hahnemann'a Organon) and prevents suceptibility to destructive influences around us. When a person has not been subjected to vaccinations and antibiotics this is a lot easier to find.

I am sure that others will expand on this subject in more detail if you wish it.

__________________
RSHom - Registered Homeopath

Noona,

There is some controversy regarding the simillimum, how to find it, and whether it is constant or changes over time. There are many, like Ricky, who believe that a person has only one "constitutional remedy" and that this remedy is a virtual panacea for any problems the patient has; once it's been found it will cure everything. I believe this view began with Kent and his references to the "Lycopodium patient", "Calcarea patient", etc. in his materia medica (please correct me if I'm wrong).

I agree with Ricky that the simillimum reflects the totality of the patient's physical, mental and emotional symptoms but I disagree that it always stays constant. The remedies or simillima correlate with states of pathology or derangements of the vital force. Because life is dynamic and we are working on the dynamic plane, the simillimum can change during the course of a person's life or even during treatment, especially if the pathology is deep and complex, requiring a number of remedies for a complete cure. The remedies correlate with states of imbalance and are used to retune the vital force to health; they do not correspond with the patient in his or her optimal state. I can only assume that there is some merit to this constitutional typing as it's so popular, but even George Vithoulkas says:

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> In many homeopathic circles, it is common to refer to the "constitutional remedy" as if a particular individual requires only a single remedy. This terminology can properly be applied to patients possessing strong defense mechanisms who tend to require the same remedy over a period of years, whether for minor complaints or for relapses after severe stresses. As we shall see, however, this concept does not apply as readily to other categories of chronic patients. "The Science of Homeopathy" pg. 239 <hr></blockquote>

I don't believe it is constant and in fact I have heard that it changes in 7 year cycles but can't remember where I heard it from!!

I really look on the word similimum and constitutional as one and the same in that I look for the right rememdy that is needed at the time on the totality of symptoms, but this is my personal view. Here I am talking about a chronic , not an acute situation.

__________________
RSHom - Registered Homeopath

Hallo to All
May I add a few thoughts to what was said before.
Ricky talks of something like a perfectly fitting remedy. This is termed an Idem , meaning exactly the same. From there on there are different grades of similitude.
But, what is the remedy similar to? The person or the disease?
Hahnemann and contemporaries answered this question clearly by: the disease.
Not so easy with Kent and the newer homeopaths---they want to have similitude to the person with the disease. But does personality form part of disease?, Or is personality disease? Does the person in front of you who is complaining about a pain want his personality changed? How’s about someone who has different diseases at the same time, but only one personality matching? And then, is a constitution a disease? Does constitution need treatment?
And then—is it the symptoms of the proving, or the remedypictuyre, essence, themes, feelings, personifications, the kingdoms, cycles, analaogies, which leads to the selection, or is it just a feeling in the homeopath ( OH—I am sure he/she needs this).
There are more questions for me than answers, but someone like Ricky who treats:
&gt;&gt;Anyway to me the Similimum is the perfect remedy for a person&lt;&lt;
&gt;&gt;I really look on the word similimum and constitutional as one and the same&lt;&lt;
(Are you sure about that?) might know and fill us in.

Hans Weitbrecht
homeopath

__________________
cure by symptom similarity!<br /><a href="http://www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com/" target="_blank">www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com/</a>

Hi Hans ,

You know that I've been chewing on a lot of what you've studied, posted about, etc...and that I have a great respect for what you have discovered in your years of in-depth studies!!

And when I read this post, something struck a cord in me.

You know who my homeopath is...and you know my thoughts (fairly well) having met me and talked a wee bit in email, etc...or I would hope so, anyway.

The thing is Hans, my Homeopath has often said to me that we treat the disease (not the patient) and you know she has a great respect for Kent.... I've been trying to figure out just what the darn bridge is between the stuff you have talked about and the stuff she talks about (not 'there' yet !)....because they seem so at odds in some respects (from the perspective that she doesn't view Kent the way you do - but then perhaps I'm misunderstanding your view of Kent in totality?).

Anyhow, she has often (also) said to me that you canNOT change a person's personality with Homeopathic remedies. You must remove maintaining causes (as much as is possible!!!) and has quoted §5 to me before... And, she was vehement about the personality/character issue (above) - and annoyed that this is what is being taught - or what is being surmised by some student's today - that people jump in and treat before thinking the case through (i.e. even consider maintaining causes, much less think of advising patients' to do something about them when possible!!...the view of rem-pictures (okay, that is another one!)...mentalising rem's in MM study, etc.... That student's are being taught psychobabble, and 'psychologising' and overlooking signs and symptoms that are present!! (she once said to me, that Homeopathy is so simple and yet, complex to the beginner - and that she only came to realise/appreciate this fact after years of practise!).

And this is where I have to wonder if Kent is really misunderstood in many ways...maybe because of language use in his time compared to our era...maybe because of societal influences, religious influences, etc... Because, I gather from her that a LOT of people do not truly understand Kent's teachings and from you (the other end of the spectrum so to speak) and some thinkg the teachings are in conflict with Hahnemann's teachings. What a paradox to me, personally!

Okay, that is very simplistically put, but I think you know what I mean . Or I hope so.

I wish I could sit down and pick her brains (and yours too!!)....and sort this all out for myself once and for all .

Happy New Year!!!!
Lisa

[ 31 December 2001: Message edited by: LisaAnnan ]</p>

__________________
"The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
Carroll Dunham

Hi Hans,
I appreciate your response .

I know you have studied his papers and cases ...

I also know that she has too... I do understand that Swedenborgian 'thought' was something that Kent seemed to be drawn too. I think I must (as a step in the process for me) go and read up more on Swedenborg...and then re-trace some things...hopefully I'll come to a better understanding of just what it is that you have found that is at odds with the Organon.

Maybe my Homeopath already understands this...maybe she sees it similiarly to you while at the same time understanding something that we don't and therefore is able to sift out the important things? I dunno for sure.

As for her joining the discussion...doubt it Hans..she is so busy with clinics, teaching and is not interested in the internet...doesn't have an email and is boggled by the computer as a whole .

Hopefully I'll be able to sit with her some time this year and have some questions lined up to ask her - and hopefully she'll oblige and answer some of them for me .

As for what you say about Kent not being able to use Boenninghausen...I find that odd, because (and while I haven't exhaustedly read all his writings!!) I read in his lesser writings (Gypser book) that he had a GREAT respect for Boenninghausen and was wondering why the heck no one was using him anymore (in his day). I quoted part of that on the thread that Anna started (the one asking me to look in the Gypser book)...

Ahh...well, I will have to go see for myself..and I'll get there. But, in the meantime, thanks for taking the time to answer me...and I appreciate, once again, your patience with my all questions (which must seem a bit basic to you at this point but I am a student).

Happy New Year,
Lisa

__________________
"The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
Carroll Dunham

Hallo Lisa
Your homeopath seems to be an interesting person.Why not invite to the discussion?
Understanding kent means primarily reading his papers and cases. this is what i have done by and large. i am not saying, that kent created all what people call homeopathy today, but what I can say is that he was a very influential person, and that he introduced Swedenbourgian mythodology into homeopathy, and made it part of it. this view prohibited, that he could use Boenninghausen's works.
My wish for the new year is, that all of us keep serching, comparing, take an opinion for what it's good for and at the end: go there and see for yourself.

__________________
cure by symptom similarity!<br /><a href="http://www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com/" target="_blank">www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com/</a>

Hans- thanks for your interesting informative and thought provoking response as usual.

I have been in practise 3 years and don't have your experience however all I can tell you is what in my experience I have found.

I have tried treating the disease and have got no where. Maybe I can't rep as well as you. However I have found that when I treat the person as an individual, using essence prescribing or repping the mental and emotional, the personality of the individual I have got the results that I would hope for.

At college one eminent lecturer who I have the utmost respect for encouraged us to not to be afraid to try things out the aim being to find out what works for us. I have listened to many Ian watson tapes and I have tried his method, in a couple of cases of rheumatoid arthritis for instance, to prescribe on purely the physicals as that is what the patient wants removed. I tried this, gave remedies low and often and got no where. Thank goodness the patients returned and I then prescribed on the mental emotional and causation, essence prescribing and then I achieved the alleviation of the physical problems. I've seen this over and over again. The physical symptoms maynot even appear in the MM for the remedy I prescribe but they go away with the increased well being of the individual.

So what can I say? I am prescribing in a way that my patients are happy with. What more can I do? Of cause everyone is an individual and the way I prescribe for one may not be the way I prescribe for another. I am still on a learning curve - yes I no we al are - but being at the beginning of my career mine is a steep one.

I only use C potencies, and often bein with one dose of a 1M potency. I don't use LMs but have been known to use water potencies succussed before each dose especially, every day especially where patients are on continual medication like anti depressants and HRT until they are ready to come off them. But again it depends on the idividual I see before me.

Re using Boenninghausen - I admit I have not studied this method in detail but it worries me that the "new" remedies are not being used especially Carsinosin which use a lot in my practice with good results. I reckon I use this remedy like Hahnemann used Sulphur!!

I am not skilled in finding the similimum ( who can truly say that they are?) and wish I were. What I reckon I do is zig zag up the similimum line towards a better health. I don't change remedies unless I feel the one I am using haas "run out" of its action or that a new one definitely shows up clearly.

Maybe this explains the way I do things , rightly or wrongly but it appears to suit my patients and myself. I am always willing to learn from others which is why I am on this BB as often as I can.

__________________
RSHom - Registered Homeopath

Hi Ricky
Thanks for letting us in in your way of healing.

Still for me the simile and the constitution are different from eachother.
I never came across a homeopath who didn't claim to have good results with what they were doing.
Homeopathy relates to the totality of symptoms of the disease, so it is not mentals versus physicals or the emotionals are in anyway predominant.
Could it be that your MM is incomplete, or your repertories full of mistakes?
i had a similar experience in the early 90', when i was using the big synthisized Repertories, trying to find a remedy on physicals.
So--easy way out take the few mentals (centre of the case), match them and the physicals can look after themselfes.
i then had a bit of an eyeopener in a case of asthma in a child, where i prescribed on anxiety in the dark and del.: persued is, del.:strange everything is.
You guess it; STRAM
the result was , that the anxieties were somewhat better, and the child was rushed to hospital in a severe asthma attack.
i hope that this does not need to happen to anyone out there to realize, that it is the totality of the symptoms which guides us to the correct prescribtion.

Hans Weitbrecht
homeopath

__________________
cure by symptom similarity!<br /><a href="http://www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com/" target="_blank">www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com/</a>

Hi Hans,
Thanks for telling us of yur experience as it could happen to any of us. Homeopathy is dealing with individuals and therefore you can expect individual reactions.. The way I personally would have looked at that would have been , right remedy because it has had a reaction, but wrong potency. In a case of possible violent reactions I would start with a 30C split in a case like this. However that could have been how you prescribed. I thinl others might say it was a near/close remedy because of the reaction. OK so did you re rep it on just the physicals and did you come up with another remedy?

Ypu asked about what reps I use. I have CaraPro and I have Boenninghausen rep on it. I do use this rep but in conjuction with others like the Complete Millenium edition or/and the Combined. I also have Murphy, Phatak (which I like) and Boericke.

You know how they say that homeopaths often attract a similar type of patient well I seem to attract those with emotional problems rather than physical so maybe this is why I rep the way I do. With my patients it is the emotional symptoms that tend to be most prominent. It's just that I feel - and please correct me if I am wrong- that if I rep just on the physicals as I believe you tend tend to do but again correct me if I am wrong - all I am doing is palliating. e.g. i had a sciatica case. Coloc really helped but only temporarily as it had to be repeated very often. I only gave the 12 and then 30 potency and didn't want to go higher as I saw no similarity in the mental and emotional picture. When I went to the constitutional via the mental and emotional I came up with Calc Phos and now the sciatica stays away for months at a time. It occasionally needs repeating at a 1M (one dose) and I don't wish to go up until that potency. fails to work.

__________________
RSHom - Registered Homeopath