Dear Hans,
Thanks, went through the article, and it had good clinical tips. Certainly my present concentration is trying to find a corelation between the successive remedies our patients have required. Miasmatic movement or whatever. Hence my keen interest in understanding what is behind the Concordances among other things.

I don't think my question was completely answered. What was the basis of the arrangement of the concordances by Boenninghausan? Were they simple clinical observations of various practitioners, compiled?
Also what was the basis of the systemic arrangement - based on chief complaint? HOW is it applied?
Thanks

[ 24. March 2003, 17:58: Message edited by: doctorleela ]

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Dear HAns and members,

WHile I patiently wait for you (HAns) to turn up on this thread, I realised the article by Will Taylor explains his use of the BB approach and COncordances used in conjunction with the KEnts repertory and found how wonderfully complementary using both could be in analysis of a case and decision on progression of remedies.

HE also used the Concordances, which gives me some idea about how repertorizing for related remedies could be done, but without a helpful insight, I'm afraid to use it the wrong way.(Hans - maybe a new article for you website?)

Also along with this, reading the latest attempt by Roger vanZandvoort's to combine the repertories in a new arrangement into a Universal Repertory sounds very encouraging for homeopathy. (All read on the interesting links JayJ provided - thanks again).

I feel even more grateful today for the college training I recieved being exposed to both types of case taking and analysis, where it was essential to analyse each complaint into Location, Sensation, Modality/CAusation, and COncomittant and furthur miasmatic analysis of the case. I really think they wanted us to use the best tools homeopathy had to offer to help our patients, and it was upto each one of us to use these tools and furthur our knowlege in them. I'll write a testimonial of thanks to them!

I'll looking forward to more contribution for each us to get more "wholely" clinically educated.

thanks,
doctorleela

[ 25. March 2003, 14:15: Message edited by: doctorleela ]

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Dear Drleela, dear other members

I fully understand the questions arising from this tread. Only there is not a quick and easy answer to it. At exactly this point, my apprentices started out almost two years ago and now start seeing what homeopathy is.

It is not done with a few cosmetical changes to incorporate something like a ‘’Boenninghausen method’’ or repertory into our current understanding derived from post Kentian views. What it needs is a leaving behind of all preconceived ideas and ways and to take a complete fresh take of what homeopathy is, its principles, its rules and its application accordingly. Using the tools of those masters without the skill necessary in a rather experimental way will not bring any better results than previously achieved by the means of the latest synthesised works. Even the use of sorting methods like: only print small remedies will not bring the desired result, as this is a theoretical exercise. The patient did not present the symptom: ‘’Needs small remedy’’

Speaking of which—I fail to understand how Boenninghausen’s rubrics being based on a valuation-scale 1-5 can be incorporated in a already existing work which rests on a scale 1-3, and of which it is unknown what these three grades already mean. Likewise, the whole of the Therapeutic pocketbook has found its way into kent’s repertory already, so why incorporate it again?

Here is a point on Will Taylors article:
He runs down the symptoms exactly according to Kent’s approach, giving the mental sphere the leading position. So—its just an exchange of one repertory to another, but by no means reflects the basic understanding of Hahnemannian homeopathy.

Here is the case:
>>Child with asthma attack, which is worse at 11 P.M, worse if the winter window is open, has to sit up in bed to breath, is restless with anxiety and fear, fearful of being alone, wanting both parents right at the bed with him.<<

First step: look for par.: 153 symptoms:
There are no unusual symptoms in this case.

Second: Find remedies which would bring on this symptom-combination.
The points to be incorporated are:
< Winter, < Night, > sitting up, CC anxiety. Suffocative attack.

In my first analysis, I took into account all remedies from the Winter< rubric in grade 4/5, as these grades are freely combinable to other grades.

Acon: -4, 5, 3, 4, 4,
Amm: 4, 3, 2, 2, 0,
Ars.: 4, 5, 2, 5, 4,
Arn.: 5, 4, 2, 4, 3,
Bry : 4, 4, 5, 4, 4,
Camph: 4, 4, 3, 0, 0,
Caust: 4, 4, 2, 3, 2,
Dulc: 4, 5, 0, 0, 0,
Hell: 4, 4, 3, 0, 3,
Hep: 4, 5, 2, 2, 5,
Kali: 4, 4, 2, 2, 0,
Mosch: 4, 3, 2, 0, 2,
Nux-m: 4, 3, 3, 0, 2,
Nux-vom: 5, 2, 5, 4, 4,
Petr: 4, 2, 3, 3, 2,
Puls: 4, 4, 2, 5, 0,
Rhus: 5, 4, 2, 4, 2,
Sabad: 4, 4, 2, 2, 2,
Sep: 4, 3, 0, 4, 2,
Stro: 4, 5, 0, 2, 0,
Verat: 4, 3, 2, 4, 4,

Next step: Materia medica comparison:

Result –done with Jahr’s:
Aconite, Arsenicum, Bryonia, Nux-v, Rhus-t, Verat,

All of those remedies are suitable to deal with this situation, as they are similar to the symptom-complex.

Overall result:
If no more information can be elicted __maybe there is non--, then any of those remedies can deal homoeopathically with this situation.

IMO: In reality, there is a case-history and other things to be observed alongside this attack, which then give more weight to the one or the other remedy.

It seems to me, that this information was chosen vaguely, so that any remedy arrived by any system of analysis could be similar, but the author fell foul of this,
Moschus does not have the Night<, even though, he claims that Moschus acted nicely-whatever this means in precise follow-up information, I don’t know.

And as Will says in another tread—he is only a historian and does hardly treat .

The whole article reflects contemporary approaches using a compilation of Boenninghausen’s repertories, but does not reflect homeopathy as thought and practised by Hahnemann, Boenninghausen, or Jahr.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

HI Hans,
Ok So besides everything else, which I don't think would help to argue about, I'd like
to understand what you're saying about this case:

First step: look for par.: 153 symptoms:
There are no unusual symptoms in this case.

Just as an example, what you consider an unusual symptoms in this condition? Any theoretical example, please.

Second: Find remedies which would bring on this symptom-combination.
The points to be incorporated are:
< Winter, < Night, > sitting up, CC anxiety. Suffocative attack.

Right this I understand.

Result –done with Jahr’s:
Aconite, Arsenicum, Bryonia, Nux-v, Rhus-t, Verat,

OK, so we distinguish between these remedies by eliciting more characteristics (if possible) and comparing the picture with the MAteria MEdica.

Right, then assuming one of these is indicated, then how do the CONCORDANCES help in moving to the next remedy when required ... which was my oft repeated question.

[ 26. March 2003, 15:44: Message edited by: doctorleela ]

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Dear drleela and other members

>>What is a ‘’more striking, singular, uncommon and peculiar symptom in this case?<<
Example:
If every time during the attack the patient would have a headache which is < moving the eyes.
This would be quite uncommon to a suffocative attack.
Likewise the CHANGE in mood while having a suffocative attack goes under the par.: 153.
Example:
The person in question is usually rather anxious, but with the attack gets really bold.

So- not in every case can we find these 153 symptoms.

To your second question about the use of concordances:
Take the article on the BB-website as the basis.

In the situation of a follow-up remedy this works in the following way:
A—for cases where the main-symptom has changed: No use of the Concordances, just select on the now present symptom-picture the next remedy.

B – where the main-symptom remains the same, but some modalities, sensations or concommittant symptoms have changed which lie outside the sphere of action of the previously applied remedy, so that a straight repetition would not benefit the case, there the concordances are used in the following way:
Eliminate with the rubric relating to the area of the main-symptom, which has not changed from the concordances of the remedy previously administered –provided the remedy has shown curativeness. Run against it the rubrics from the other areas not changed of this remedy, then add the changed things from the main repertory to your repertorisation. This narrows down your selection to a small number of remedies, which should be compared first between the case now and the MMP. Often one finds exactly the remedy useful now. This approach also helps a lot in the ongoing treatment of psora, where often a series of different remedies --one after another-- is necessary to effect cure.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

Just saw in my other post:
''Moschus does not have < Night''
Read: Moschus does not have ''suffocative attack <during night'' in the MM
Also Arsen has: ''suffocative attack <sitting up'', which makes it a less likely contestant.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

YEs, that would be an unusual symptom, as I understand it as well.

Now I'll figure out what you've explained on the COncordances with a live Case (as soon as the opportunity comes up) and see if I've got that correctly.

I'll be back. Thanks a lot!

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

I wanted to bring this back to the front before it goes to deep cyberspace. I can't find the hans thread with the sepia case...if someone else can find it...could they bring it up front?