Dear Members

Shirley Reischmann wrote:

>>For example, if the person had a tendency toward haemorrhage, was chilly, nauseated after eating, had anxiety over his health, and the problems started after a grief and also flared up when he was anger, and during the flareup, he was frightened, both Nux-v and Phos fit the case. If you can't elicit anything more distinguishing in the case, you could look to the constitution to determine which remedy has a better chance of acting.<<

This little case gives me the opportunity to show how Boenninghausen or Hahnemann would have decided:

The first thing to find out is: What is the ailing thing, what is the complaint.
Is it the Haemorrhage?
Is it the chilliness?
Is it the nausea after eating?
Is it the anxiety over his health?

From above, we don’t know, but what we know is this:
No matter what it was – this is what we know:

The onset of the ailment was after a grief
Whenever angry, the ailment flairs up
During the flair-up he is frightened.

So we are looking for a remedy, which has as CHARACTERISTIC features:
A}Onset after Grief + B}Anger agg + C}Concomitant Anxiety.

B+C are reflected under the rubric: Ailments from Anger with anxiety [TT 318]
A is found: Ailments from Grief: [TT 319]

I take into account only grades 3- 5, as anything below 3 is not characteristic.
Remedies as follows:

Ars.: 5/3
Cocc.: 3/3
Cupr.: 4/3
Lyc.: 3/3
Nux-v: 5/3
Puls.: 4/4
Verat.: ¾

Each of these remedies is characteristic enough to alleviate the problem, and as you can see: Phos [2/2] has neither of those in characteristic grading.

For discussion sake, lets assume, that the patients problem is nausea after eating.
This adds to the list of symptoms: D=nausea {TT 60], E=eating after< [TT 314]. Remedies as follows [from above group]:

Ars.: 5/3/4/4
Cocc.: 3/3/4/3
Lyc.: 3/3/4/5
Nux-v.: 5/3/5/5
Puls.: 4/4/5/4
Verat.: 3/4/5/3
We can furthermore assume, that there is chilliness there whenever the nausea comes and see what happens: [F=chilliness TT 280]

Ars.: 5/3/4/4/5
Cocc.: 3/3/4/3/4
Lyc.: 3/3/4/5/4
Nux-v.: 5/3/5/5/5
Puls.: 4/4/5/4/5
Verat.: 3/4/5/3/3

As you can see easily, common things like chilliness does not narrow down the selection.
Furthermore, we assume, that the tendency towards haemorrhage has come with the other ailments and therefore forms part of the disease-picture. Here is the result: [haemorrhage TT 141]
Ars.: 5/3/4/4/5/4
Nux-v.: 5/3/5/5/5/5
Puls.: 4/4/5/4/5/5

If we are dead sure, that this anxiety about his health is a uncommon and peculiar symptom [which I doubt], then we can use it as well. Hypochondriasis TT 159 :

Ars.: 5/3/4/4/5/4/3
Nux-v.: 5/3/5/5/5/5/5
Puls.: 4/4/5/4/5/5/4

Result: Each remedy is similar enough to cure – unless there are clear contradictions within the proving.

This also explains why many prescriptions work, even if poorly worked out.

Quote:
>>If you can't elicit anything more distinguishing in the case, you could look to the constitution to determine which remedy has a better chance of acting. In this case, if the person were wiry and dark haired, one would pick Nux-v. Whereas if the person were taller and red haired, one would pick Phos.<<

Kent is quite clear in this point when he writes:

--A man who is given to asking questions will naturally desire to know if Pulsatilla ever produced light-coloured hair, or has ever changed dark hair to blond. If the former, then it is pathogenically related to the case; if the latter, it is clinically related to the case. If neither, then why give such reason for selecting the remedy?

If Pulsatilla has cured fifty consecutive cases in blondes, without a single failure, when the symptoms were such as were produced in healthy people, is that an iota or proof that it will not cure just as speedy in brunettes? And if it is not a reason that it will not cure in brunettes when the symptoms call for it, does it appear a fallacity to give Pulsatilla to a woman because she is a blonde?

If dark hair is not a symptom of disease, how can any physician use it as even one symptom in any given prescription? If it is a natural condition, why think of it as one of the elements to be considered in making a prescription? If the hair must be red to be a distinguishing symptom in any given case, how red must if be to make the remedy clearly indicated; or if only slightly red what other remedies would shade in because of its slight difference?

The true basis of a homeopathic remedy is the collection of signs and symptoms, and these must be morbid, has been the teaching of Hahnemann, and his ablest followers. And such teaching is the only teaching that conforms to law.

What benefit is it to pursue the study of biology to discover the difference in natural constitutions of human beings, when it must be the SICK [morbid] condition in the constitutions of human beings that must be fully and extensively evolved to guide the physician in healing sick people?

[From: Temperaments]

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

Hi Hans,

I wish I had more time, but just wanted to quickly ask if you've read (from Kent's Lesser Writings aka Minor Writings) the article called "The Trend of Thought Necessary for the Comprehension and Retention of Homeopathy"?

Regards,
Lisa

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

P.S. The demonstration of how to work the case was interesting; thanks.

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

Yes, thanks.

__________________
Shirley Reischman

Dear Members
Dear Lisa, Dear Shirley
I have this article in Kents minor writings which is the complete compilation edited by Gypser of kent's Articles.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath

I also have the same book by Gypser.
That's why I mentioned both titles, above, in case others had Lesser Writings and wanted to read the article for themselves (page 598 in Gyper's edition).

What is your understanding of what Kent means when he says 'whole person'? Perhaps this is a good place to start so there is common understanding of terms?

Not sure where you're headed with this thread. If this is going off track of where you're trying to go - just say so and I'll split it into a new thread.

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

dear hans,

thank you for your demonstration analysis of shirley's case - most instructive, especially as i am just in the process of starting to delve more deeply into the repertories, and case analysis, than i have to date. this leaves me a bit perplexed still, as to the differences between boenninghausen and kent:

specifically, in the introductions to his repertory, kent himself quotes boenni approvingly, citing what seems to be the same or similar method to what you describe, of repertorizing first on the generals, the strange, rare, and peculiar, and in this way quickly arriving at a narrow range of what might be called "finalist" remedies. indeed, as you have done, or boenni has done, he contrasts this method to what he describes as ill-advised efforts by some, in case analysis, to repertorize every single symptom, and shows what a tremendously long and uncritical, unhelpful list of remedies one arrives at by starting with the particular complaint. and, somewhere (sorry, i didn't mark the place) in these introductory essays, it is mentioned that the skillful (experienced) practitioner can prescribe for 20-30 patients a day!

i assume i'm missing quite a lot; nevertheless, in terms of speeding up the process of case analysis and prescription, and in terms of starting with an analysis that quickly narrows the focus to a relatively few remedies, kent and boenni sound, well, like kissin' cousins.

yes? no? maybe so?

thanks again for an informative thread, and any further comment.

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.

dear hans

dr prafull vijayakar of bombay uses the term "genetic constitutional simillimum" and he means a remedy that covers "all" - food cravings / aversions, mentals, physicals, modalities.....he sort of means the genetic expression in it's totality.

where the constitutional simillmum is one or many ? is that the debate ?
well I think lippe first used the word 'zig zagging'. it is possible ti use partial similia deftly and cleverly over a period of time, provide you do not go higher up in potency, and the patient will feel better than before, after some time.
but this may appear to the presciber that he is changing remedies becuase the picture is changing, whereas the reality is that the similia was never perfect.

I find the explanations of dr vijayakar and the prof vithoulkas's ideas (how he explains the similia, resonance etc) very good.

dr manish agarwala

PS: dear hans, your analysis of shirley's case points how 'zig zagging' works.

hahnemann has less number of remedies with him and he did this zig zagging thing.

dr vijayakar labels this sort of prescribing as "suppression"

if you give syph in a confirmed ars alb case - rashes might appear on the skin and the patient may report that he feels better. the prescriber may invoke the hering's laws and say that this is a cure. he may present the patient's feedback as a proof. try going higer up in potency with syph and you get a massive aggr.
whereas ars alb in a much lower potency may have helped to cure speedily....

I see the remedy as a vibration. the disease state is a vibration. when they match - there is a resonance and there is a cure.(vithoulkas)

I also believe (no time to discuss here) that every disease vibration inside us (acute or chronic) has an exact corresponding vibratory manifestation outside (plant, animal, mineral, etc etc ). they may be others that are partially similar and thus partially helpful.
we may or may not have knowlegde of the remedy - but the truth is there.

before homoeopaths proved lachesis or lac can or syph - patients who needed them did exist. is it not so ? and they were treated by learned homoeopthic masters. how ?

consider the full picture ................

Dear Members

The opinions of what homeopathic remedies are are as many as there are people theorizing about them. Ultimately, the true nature of remedies is hidden to our direct senses, but we can establish their virtues by provings and by the differences in those symptom-pictures differentiate them against each other. And this is all we need to know about them, as there is nothing hidden inside the body which is diseased, which does not show itself in signs and symptoms to the outside. [Org.: 14]

As remedies have only the ability to temporarily alter the provers state of health to an artificial state of disease, expressed in signs and symptoms, they therefore can only cure diseases when applied according symptom similarity.

It was Hahnemann’s merit to discover the chronic miasmatic disease Psora, which in its third stage expresses itself in a multitude of apparently disassociated diseases under endless names.

Another significant observation was, that psora has the great ability to change its symptom picture before and during treatment. This is the reason why Hahnemann speaks of a succession of different remedies necessary to cure psora entirely [Org.:171 ]

It is remarkable to see that Hahnemann already allowed for the dynamic nature of this disease by not rigidly sticking to ONE [constitutional] remedy in the hope, that by the means of one remedy alone the whole malady can be eradicated.

Needless to say, that besides being aware of the above it is necessary to be completely conversant with the latent and acute symptoms of psora if one wishes to treat these chronic cases successfully.

To give some idea, I am offering the miasm-seminar in November.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath