Leela lets face it, all you have to do is wink these days & it will end up in the delusions section of some rep. (2 winks=bold type).
Open-ness indeed.
Looking forward that Chris' examples may demonstrate theimportance of symmetryin a disease picure as a whole; contained within traditional provings; absent in the modern 'pictures.' Sorry I'm pushed for time for I would like to write on this.

Hi all,
Interesting discussion. I recently studied Silica in depth and felt that Sankaran is really on target with his core picture. Nevertheless, I don't feel just any one source alone will make up the perfect picture of the remedy. Many sources combined in my studies have helped me to come to better knowledge of the remedy's picture and essence. Personally I find it always dangerous to go either "black - or white" there are different perceptions out there and I imagine that there may be different "kinds" of Silica patients one resembling closer Kent's description and an other one closer Sankaran's - and both will benefit from the same remedy. Does it really matter which is the better book in the end ? Isn't it just more important to find the similimum no matter through which book's help one finds it ? I have yet to find one source of MM which is totally complete, covering EVERY little detail of a remedy ! Let's remember that even the great geniuses of Homeopathy are human beings and not all around perfect and infallible. Discernment on our part is what counts in the end.
Claudia

I agree with you Caludia.

Louise, that was funny, really!
Well I think provings are getting a bit strange. But if I understand Snakaran, I know these approaches are experimental on his part. His mind is constantly searching. ITs us who put him on an infallible pedestal, take eveything he says as homeopathic law and he has cautioned people about doing it at ALL his seminars and lectures in college too.

Scholton's brilliance and interpretations are something wonderful. Also he has not said that his book or understanding is unfallible. In fact he has requested ALL of us, that if we have used his suggestions to help out a case and have been successful, he would like to have the details of that case as "CLINICAL Proving", which I believe is fair enough. And He is ready to make changes if things are proved otherwise.

Boericke, that we all refer too, is made up of all clinical symptoms. Do you expect the normal provings process to produce the pathological symptoms that he has included? Yet we refer to him and prescribe without questionning. So I think Scholton should be given his opportunity to do this.


Regards,
Docotrleela

[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: doctorleela ]</p>

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Dr Leela - has Sankaran done a whole new series of provings on Silica, or are his descriptions derived from observations of his cases?

I've been reading the lyghtforce list, and I didn't want to have that sort of somewhat grouchy discussion - I thought it might be easier to discuss these new ideas within the framework of a single, well-known remedy.

Does Scholten's idea of anger and father/family issues come through as a core symptom for your Silica cases? I can, from what little I know as a student, understand Sankaran's picture - it relates well to the traditional. But the Scholten one I have trouble with, not because I think he's making it up, but because I can't see where he got those ideas from, I suppose.

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: felix ]</p>

HI FElix,

That's some question you've asked there! I've had to go and read up a bit. NOw lets see:

Do I agree with Scholton's description of Silica?
Scholton mentions a lot about SIlica,( that I just read up about - I'm afraid for the first time!). But I agree with his interpretaion of the Silica SERIES/GROUP in general and with its application in Salts of Silica as in Mag Sil, Kali Sil, Calc Sil, etc.
I cannot say I really disagree with what he says though. If I think about a couple of Silica cases, there are the issues of family and relationships that were important to them. And yes, these patients did have a large father element in their lives, But I can't say I based my prescriptions on that!

Has Sankaran done a whole lot of provings or are these clinical deductions?
Well I know for a fact tht Sankaran always has a group of students working with him and they are continiously proving new, and reproving old remedies with clear cut double blind guidelines that are the instructions for provings.
Whether he has done so for Silica is difficult for me to tell. But I think Silica is such a well proved remedy in "classical" Materia Medica anyway, and it so frequently indicated, that I would think he has made observations and deduction and thus come to an insightful remedy picture.

I have never had to use Scholtons' specific Silica picture, as the original Materia Medica is exhaustive and clearly points to Silica very often in physical general and PQRS as well as mentals. But Sankaran's insights into Silica have come to my aid very often. I think Scholton is most helpful in Salts of Silica where there is inadequate Materia medica, and one wonders when Silica sounds like a partial similimum, does a Salt of Silica apply. And one HITS BULLS EYE!!

Hope this is helpful,

Warm regards,
doctorleela

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

It depends really, what is your mission, open-ness or effectiveness.
I want to know why Claudia says "I find it always dangerous to go either "black - or white" ..
I am intrigued.
Also, where are the leaps documentented..if at all?
Can we read anywhere exactly, how & why Sankaran or Shcholten, for example, arrive at their conclusions?
My underatnding of Scholten's interprtations is Carbonica=father; Natrium=mother.
Given that everybody has a father and a mother...
ie..it is never rare strange,peculiar or characteristic to have 'issues' with a father or a mother...

Hi Louise,
Claudia says either black or white...in the context of saying either "this book says the truth" or "that book says the truth", either Kent or Scholten.... I meant to say there is truth to be found in each of them. Furthermore, by going either black or white, by tossing out the other, one is not able to benefit from another point of view. Does that clarify ?
Claudia

While it is true everyone has a mother and a father, it is not true that everyone's major issue is with them. That is the important factor when using Scholten's method - you must identify the BIG issues in the person's life. It is not necessary to diagnose on the basis of every little issue, or on common things either.

I have found that many people have trouble with Scholten's method, especially students and new homoeopaths - they have a tendency to simplify the themes in the remedies - every angry person gets Magnesium, everyone with a problem with their Mother gets a Muriaticum. But this is counter to the idea of Rare, Strange and Peculiar - you must still look for what is unexpected in the case.

I often let the patient answer this question - What is the part of your life that you have the most trouble with? - that will often lead me to the series and even the element they need.

Using this method, I have cured:

Malaria with Calc-phos
Wolff-Parkinson-White Syndrome with Am-brom
Lymphomatoid Papulosis with Am-sulph
Severe dysmenorrhoea + intense fears of the dark and of ghosts with Cobolt met
2 x cases of Morning sickness with Am-mur and Beryllium
Psoriais and depression with Hydrogen
Damage to a hip joint in an aerobics instructor with Kali-phos
Anxiety attacks with Vanadium
Repeating colds and flus and sneezing with Kali-sil
Chronic diarrhoea with Mag-sulph
Insomnia + exhaustion with Am-carb
Severe mood swings + cervical pain with Mag-phos
Chronic chest infections with Oxygen
An acute cough with Ferrum met
Depression with Chromium met
Candida infection with Am-phos
Shoulder pain and chronic skin infections with Ferr-sulph

I still use the traditional methods for choosing a remedy, but this method has often been invaluable in helping to cure cases that otherwise seemed mysterious to me. Many of these people never needed any more treatment - the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome patient, who was scheduled for open-heart surgery one month after I saw him (which he never needed), is still well 2 years later from a single dose of Am-brom. That has got to say something powerul on behalf of this method.

Also remember, the Scholten's method is not just a "mentals" method. He strongly advises that when choosing an element for the person, that the generals and even some of the particulars fit as well. It is possible to make a Scholten prescription on nothing but physical symptoms - people often seem to forget or ignore this aspect.

Scholten created his theories by looking at the provings and clinical experiences of traditional remedies, and examined those things common to Natrum remedies, common to Magnesium remedies etc. He did not pull these ideas out of the air, and he was certainly not the first to conjecture that the component elements of remedies shared traits - Kent did this, as did others.

[ 20 January 2002: Message edited by: DavidJK ]</p>

__________________
David Kempson.<br />Dip.Homoeopathic Medicine.<br />Lecturer Australian College of Natural Therapies (Brisbane Campus)<br />Member AHA, AROH, HMA<br />Member Australian Homoeopathic Association. Member#0442.

Yes Claudia. And the relevence of that statement to this discussion might be what? that some work of Scholten/Sankaran's is emtremely spectulative...?
There is such a thing as the truth.
David not only students & newcomers have 'problems' with spectulative theories.

[ 20 January 2002: Message edited by: louise price ]</p>

Louise, I'm just saying look at all the books and then discern yourself if it applies - not that any one author mentioned is speculative or such a thing. Is that relevant enough for this discussion ???
Claudia