Dear Luise,
I think you sell yourself short, as do most homeoapths, becase we're afraid of the "big ones". Heart attack, cancer, meningitis...

Its all about staying calm, keeping one's wits about oneself and observing. Easily said - but I have learnt, it only takes a little maturing and possibly one good clinical expereince to gain the confidence.

What is the first line of approach with a person experiencing cardia angina (similar to any other type of angina)
Describe the pain - find out the modalities, find out the concomittants, ask about the physical generals (thirst, tongue, perspiration).
Look for a possible precipitating cause - eg shock, anxiety, financial loss, grief, etc. - this if obvious - is a very good guide to the remedy.

The fact is that no one ends up dying in the first few attacks of angina, unless that person is highly diabetic. In a majority of cases, a person has been having mild episodes of angina and breathlessness for many weeks, Sometimes thinking they have indigestion.

So often one may actually have enough time (in between episodes) to get a good consitutional history. In these cases, a constitutional remedy is the first to reach for, till the person is calm enough to describe the acute symtpoms. (Most of my expereince with heart patients have been like this - the consitutioanl remedy supported with the sprcific remedy - the INDIVIDUAL PROTOCOL).

The first line of ACUTE remedies is: Aconite (for fear/fright), Amyl Nitricum for vasoconstriction. IF you don't know what to do - keep these remedies handy for the emmergency.
Aconite will calm you down.
Amyl Nitricum works like Sub Lingual Sorbitrate.
Cratageus Mother Tincutre is a great heart tonic and supportive treatment.

The second line of remedies are after one is able to get an acute history based on the questions mentioned earlier. The acutely indicated remedy can be ANY COMMON REMEDY if the modalities fit - eg: > exertion, or > rest, or restlessness, etc < cold, >warm, etc.
THis will buy you more time and enhance some of teh characteristics in case a more specific remedy is needed.


Then the third line come the specific heart remedies. HEre are rubrics from Boericke repertory:
Circulation; HEART; Pain; Constricting, as if squeezed in vise: acon., adon., aml-n., arn., ars., cact., cadm-s., calc-ar., coc-c., colch., iod., iodof., kali-c., lach., laur., lil-t., lyc., mag-p., magn-gr., nux-m., ptel., spong., thyr.


Circulation; HEART; Pain; Neuralgic, ANGINA PECTORIS: acon., adren., aml-n., arg-cy., arg-n., arn., ars., ars-i., aur., bism., cact., camph., cere-b., chin-ar., cimic., cocain., conv., crat., crot-h., cupr., cupr-acet., dig., dios., glon., haem., hydr-ac., kali-c., kali-i., kalm., lat-m., lil-t., lith-c., lob-p., mag-p., magn-gr., morph., naja, nat-i., nat-n., nux-v., olnd., ox-ac., phos., phyt., pip-n., prun., samb., saroth., spig., spong., staph., stront-c., stront-i., tab., thyr., verat-v., zinc-val.
(quite a few common remedies here as you can see)


Circulation; HEART; Pain; Shooting, down left shoulder, arm to fingers: acon., arn., asper., bism., cact., cimic., crot-h., kalm., lat-m., lepi., naja, ox-ac., rhus-t., spig., tab.
The last rubric contains the most commonly indicated specific remedies for angina. If the presentation of angina is atypical (ie right sided pain, or pain radiating to a different area of the body) the remedy gets even more specific.
Then the concomittant symptom will qualify furthur (eg: better with eructations, or better with sips of water, or worse when sitting erect, or worse from lying on the abdomen, etc)


The best thing to do with what I have suggested is to talk to a friend or relative who has had angina and make out a mock analysis of what they went through asking all the questions. Work out the possible remedies - and when you are actually in a situation like this, you'll do the motions.
Hope this helps,
leela

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Hi Leela,

On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com wrote:

cut
>
> What is the first line of approach with a person experiencing cardia
> angina (similar to any other type of angina)
> Describe the pain - find out the modalities, find out the
> concomittants, ask about the physical generals (thirst, tongue,
> perspiration).
> Look for a possible precipitating cause - eg shock, anxiety, financial
> loss, grief, etc. - this if obvious - is a very good guide to the
> remedy.
>
> The fact is that no one ends up dying in the first few attacks of
> angina,

The fact is that many heart attacks come without any previous
incidence of angina pectoris.

One of the patches in the patch-quilt called my life was spent typing
medical reports in hospitals etc. I knew enough to know what these
were saying. So what I am saying above is based on experience:-)

unless that person is highly diabetic. In a majority of cases,
> a person has been having mild episodes of angina and breathlessness for
> many weeks, Sometimes thinking they have indigestion.


> So often one may actually have enough time (in between episodes) to get
> a good consitutional history. In these cases, a constitutional remedy is
> the first to reach for, till the person is calm enough to describe the
> acute symtpoms. (Most of my expereince with heart patients have been
> like this - the consitutioanl remedy supported with the sprcific remedy
> - the INDIVIDUAL PROTOCOL).
>
Come on now, Leela. While I am not in the very least doubting that
*you* and David and..... can reliably find the consitutional remedy,
even at the very first visit or very soon after, I also know that for
many people this constitutional never gets found or only at the
umpteenth visit.

Do let's be realistic - to mangle the English language;-)


> The _first_line_ of ACUTE remedies is: Aconite (for fear/fright), Amyl
> Nitricum for vasoconstriction. IF you don't know what to do - keep
> these remedies handy for the emmergency.
> Aconite will calm you down.
> Amyl Nitricum works like Sub Lingual Sorbitrate.
> Cratageus Mother Tincutre is a great heart tonic and supportive
> treatment.
>
> The _second_line_ of remedies are after one is able to get an acute
> history based on the questions mentioned earlier. The acutely indicated
> remedy can be ANY COMMON REMEDY if the modalities fit - eg: > exertion,
> or > rest, or restlessness, etc < cold, >warm, etc.
> THis will buy you more time and enhance some of teh characteristics in
> case a more specific remedy is needed.
>
>
> Then the _third_ line come the specific heart remedies. HEre are
> rubrics from Boericke repertory:
> *Circulation; HEART; Pain; Constricting, as if squeezed in vise:*
> acon., adon., aml-n., arn., ars., cact., cadm-s., calc-ar., coc-c.,
> colch., iod., iodof., kali-c., lach., laur., lil-t., lyc., mag-p.,
> magn-gr., nux-m., ptel., spong., thyr.
>
>
> *Circulation; HEART; Pain; Neuralgic, ANGINA PECTORIS*: acon., adren.,
> aml-n., arg-cy., arg-n., arn., ars., ars-i., aur., bism., cact.,
> camph., cere-b., chin-ar., cimic., cocain., conv., crat., crot-h.,
> cupr., cupr-acet., dig., dios., glon., haem., hydr-ac., kali-c.,
> kali-i., kalm., lat-m., lil-t., lith-c., lob-p., mag-p., magn-gr.,
> morph., naja, nat-i., nat-n., nux-v., olnd., ox-ac., phos., phyt.,
> pip-n., prun., samb., saroth., spig., spong., staph., stront-c.,
> stront-i., tab., thyr., verat-v., zinc-val.
> (quite a few common remedies here as you can see)
>
>
> *Circulation; HEART; Pain; Shooting, down left shoulder, arm to
> fingers:* acon., arn., asper., bism., cact., cimic., crot-h., kalm.,
> lat-m., lepi., naja, ox-ac., rhus-t., spig., tab.
> The last rubric contains the most commonly indicated specific remedies
> for angina. If the presentation of angina is atypical (ie right sided
> pain, or pain radiating to a different area of the body) the remedy
> gets even more specific.
> Then the concomittant symptom will qualify furthur (eg: better with
> eructations, or better with sips of water, or worse when sitting erect,
> or worse from lying on the abdomen, etc)
>
I do not know whether the above was written for *my* benefit or as
general information.

If it was for me I may assure you that I am familiar with all of it.

And I also may assure you that by doing so you very often will find a
very inconsistent and contradictory lot of remedies.

The homeopaths who have learned no methods except punching symptoms
into the software and letting the computer decide which are the "most
similar" and prescribe on this repping may not even realize this, nor
even may the people who have gone by the method lined out in the
prefaces of Kent and v. Boenninghausen's Rept (I learned it that way
myself originally).

However, any way you do it, you may prescribe the most similar remedy
or even one fitting to a "t", and it does absolutely nothing. And then
a remedy that does not fit at all may do it.

Belladonna, by my own experience in one case, confirmed by a
homeopathic pediatrician, in the great majority of cases still cures
scarlet fever, although, in Germany at least, the presenting picture
has very little similarity with Belladonna. I would give B. in any
case of this disease - this is a protocol! It also can cure
streptococcus angina that does not present as scarlet fever - I do not
know how relliable it is there - without any of the B. symptomatology,
except perhaps the way the tonsils look, which in most cases is
pre-determined by the diagnosis "strepthroat".

Both Somenath and people like Banerji are right in that we have to
reconsider afresh, without prejudice, the principles of homeopathy;
reconsider them by what experience - all kinds of experience - shows.

No-one treats the way Hahnemann or v. Boenninghausen did - no matter
what anyone says. To confirm this just look at the diet Hahnemann and
v. Boenninghausen prescribed as required during a chronic treatment,
at what they prohibited. Same for the way one has to live. I can just
see any homeopath in the Western world or India forbidding their
patients their daily or even weekly bath, any spices, kitchen herbs,
other herbs:-))

Regards

Luise


> The best thing to do with what I have suggested is to talk to a friend
> or relative who has had angina and make out a mock analysis of what
> they went through asking all the questions. Work out the possible
> remedies - and when you are actually in a situation like this, you'll
> do the motions.
> Hope this helps,
> leela
>
>
>

--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

HI Luise,

Thanks for the vote of confidence - thankfully the attitude to be working in a team seems to have paid off I can say that since working in a team, my results have sky rocketed in our capacity to be accurate and take the patient towards healing. That is why I have been encouraging homeopaths on the list to begin to think in teams. Each of us going what we can do best and contributing towards healing without BIG EGOS and PRIDE and ARROGANCE.
IT only needs a little maturity and humility... something that anyone could have more of.

... which is precisely the reason why we have to find good methods of determining the constitutional and not rely on one sole method. Each case has to be approached individually.

The problem is when homeoapths don't know what to look for, and what to treat. This is where the timeline is essential. IT is what each homeopath has to learn to percieve. I think it depends on the homeoapths educaiton more than anything. I can be sure that a majority of classical homeopaths in Mumbai do reach the constitutonal - that is, as long as people like your freind SOmenath do not distract them with baits!
IT is not easy to be sure of the constitutional. BUt with more expereince, trying various methods, hard work and constant willingness to learn - it can be done. If one is only looking for shortcuts, like your new friend - it won't happen.
HOW hard have you tried?

Come on now Luise:-)
With a statement like this I think you haven't grasped or experienced what the constitutional remedy does and can do. IF one has been on classical constitutional treatment - one hardly ever reaches the point of a massive heart attack killing you.

How many of your patch quit patients in the hospital were on classical constitutional homeopathic treatment?
I'd think instead they were either trying combinations, or quick fixes that your new friend has suggested. ;) (I'm interested in finding out more authentic detials of your new friend by the way - how much do you know about him?)

Which also means that its sad that people are easily distracted from classical constitutional homeopathic treatment - and its even MORE SAD when homeopaths too are lured by the quick fixes!

I have read some details from BAnerjee that Robyn sent me - I don't think AT ALL that he is looking at things in a "NEW" way. HE is classical in his approach, but he does have a methodology that he seems to be perfecting. I found it very interesting - let me add. So I"m not against new methods - though you know that by now.


I"m glad you do - because that is the place to start - hopefully other students have read this as well.

ACtually it was dr. Koppikar (one of the most legendary classical homeopaths in Chennai) who suggested that there should be homeopathic specialization. HOmeopaths who specializing in mastering the Cardiac remedies or liver remedies or coma remedies, or renal failure remedies or pneumonia remedies, or asthma remedies, or bipolar remedies, so that though they treat constitutionally, they can be called upon (in a hospital setting or clinic setting) to prescribe the acutely indicated homeopathic remedy more accurately. Then they continue to follow up the case constitutionally.

This is slowly becoming a reality in Mumbai. Most of my professors have taken up some area of specialization that they have a great affinity and talent for. And then they work in groups and hospital settings that allows for each ones talent to be fully realised while those who benefit are the underpriveledged as well as privelidged alike.

Also we're not arrogant to think that we can manage the whole show. We have MD allopaths who help us clinially monitor progress of the patient to confirm improvement or detrioration.
I will tell you all more about this as soon as I have the article ready for hapthy.com

I was lucky to be from the Mumbai school where this is a reality and continues to be so. I have faith in classical homeopathy because of professors who have repeatedly demonstrated fantastic results in serious conditions in our hospitals and OPD's. They too were willing to think outside the box, but not to the point of rejecting basic principles.
I intend at some point in the future to develop as an "emmergency expert" - I can't really see that happening with your friend's fixed protocols.
Individual protocols, yes, as I explained in the cases presented. I can give you a few more cases if you like. I hope you read them...they take about an hour to type out (including the typos;)

I have treated quite a few pateints already (certainly not hundreds like your friend) in emmergency conditions while left to die by the allopaths and i have seen the single remedy do amazing things (while the case continued to be managed by the MD's concerned).
IF I have to continue to fight this mental battle here on the list - I will do so. Its not hard for me because I know what I"m talking about - and I know it is the way of the future.
I want to give other homeopaths the hope and the confidence that this is possible if they work a little harder and learn from the right people. They don't have to cower down to a fixed protocol in defeat.

Hopefully, Luise, it will give you some as well!
Would you like to give is a chance on constitutional homeopathic treatment for you?
Leela

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Most of the people believe that emergency cases require allopathic treatment.If any Homoeopath also say like this it shows his/her ignorance,inefficiency and inadequate knowledge in the field of homoepathic system of medicines.Emergency cases demand uncanny,quick and correct decisions and the ability of the Homoeopathic Physician is best tested during emergencies.
Homoeopaths those who fear to attend in emergency may go through the book "Homoeopathy in Emergecies of Medicine" by J.Bnedict D'Castro published by B.Jain. for priliminary study.

__________________
Dr.S.K.Pattnaik,HMD,M.D(Alt.Med),Ph.D
Chairman,Indian Council for Holistic Health Care
http://holihealcouncil.forumup.in/
http://artofhealing.freeforums.org/
http://ichhc.tripod.com/

Quote:
Come on now, Leela. While I am not in the very least doubting that
*you* and David and..... can reliably find the consitutional remedy,
even at the very first visit or very soon after,



I am curious to know who is that...... fortunate fellow to be clubbed with Dr.Leela and David. He must be quite elated for this honor.

Murthy

Hi Leela,

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com wrote:

cut
>
Luise:
>> The fact is that many heart attacks come without any previous
>> incidence of angina pectoris.
>>
>> One of the patches in the patch-quilt called my life was spent typing
>> medical reports in hospitals etc. I knew enough to know what these
>> were saying. So what I am saying above is based on experience:-)
>
Leela:
> Come on now Luise:-)
> With a statement like this I think you haven't grasped or experienced
> what the constitutional remedy does and can do. IF one has been on
> classical constitutional treatment - one hardly ever reaches the point
> of a massive heart attack killing you.
>
Luise now: When I hear a statement like that I "feel a goose walk over
my grave". While I have never, to my knowledge, known anyone under
classical homeopathic care who had a heart attack, I have known at
least 2 persons who got cancer and died of it. The majority on this
list have also known one of them.

Leela:
> How many of your patch quit patients in the hospital were on classical
> constitutional homeopathic treatment?

Luise now:
This is one of the "quotes out of context" I have mentioned, why I am
losing interest in discussing. My above quoted remark was in the
context of treating angina pectoris as precursor to a heart-attack.
There never arose the question of whether *any kind of* homeopathic or
other treatment had occurred beforehand.

Leela:
> I'd think instead they were either trying combinations, or quick fixes
> that your new friend has suggested. ;) (I'm interested in finding out
> more authentic detials of your new friend by the way - how much do you
> know about him?)
>
Luise now:
I have no friends or foes on this list - not as far as I am concerned.
There are people I agree with - sometimes, often, most of the time -
and others, where I do not. Of none of them I know more than what I
have read on the list or, in a few cases, what is on their site. This
includes Somenath, of whom I do not even know what is on his site..

Leela:
> Which also means that its sad that people are easily distracted from
> classical constitutional homeopathic treatment - and its even MORE SAD
> when homeopaths too are lured by the quick fixes!
>
Luise now:
If homeopaths are so lurable, too bad for the profession;-)

Leela:
> I have read some details from BAnerjee that Robyn sent me - I don't
> think AT ALL that he is looking at things in a "NEW" way.

Luise now:
Interesting. His concepts of e.g. "constitutional groups" (and other
things) appear novel to me.

Leela:
>> If it was for me I may assure you that I am familiar with all of it.
>>
>> And I also may assure you that by doing so you very often will find a
>> very inconsistent and contradictory lot of remedies.
>
> I"m glad you do - because that is the place to start - hopefully other
> students have read this as well.
>
Luise now:
After 25 years of working with/in/at/around (classical)
homeopathy, one way or other, I do not consider myself exactly a
student - or only in the sense that we all are to the end of our
lives:-)

cut
>
Leela:
> Hopefully, Luise, it will give you some as well!
> Would you like to give is a chance on constitutional homeopathic
> treatment for you?

Luise now:
I am also a specialist - I am a t"theoretical homeopath". As such I am
interested in all aspects of the craft - and I have studied many, many
approaches - all inside the spectrum of classical homeopathy, if
classical is defined as braodly as David outlined. Of the "outside" -
e.g. "mixopathy" I just know that it works.

Of protocols I am only starting to find out - for one thing through my
work on v. Boenninghausen (who had been outside my scope of study
before), later, hopefully, through my work on the homeopathic MD,
whose records I will decipher and copy, d.v., and I had hoped also
through Somenath.

According to his latest post, however, it seems that he is going to
withdraw from the list. The purists may rejoice - the list will
remain as freshly fallen snow. Once again the "bumble-bee general and
his army" have succeeded, as so often before. The list can become a
trickle of mails again. No students and "lurables" will be in danger
of being led astray;-)

Mission accomplished!

Regards

Luise


--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

>
>Luise now:
>I am also a specialist - I am a t"theoretical homeopath". As such I am
>interested in all aspects of the craft - and I have studied many, many
>approaches - all inside the spectrum of classical homeopathy, if classical
>is defined as braodly as David outlined. Of the "outside" - e.g.
>"mixopathy" I just know that it works.

Hello,

I just don't know any other way of defining classical homeopathy
other than by the methods found in the Hahnemann's Organon, the Chronic
Diseases, the Lesser Writings and his Krankenjournals. It also includes the
innovations of Boenninghausen, Hering, Jahr, Lippe, Allen, Kent, Boger,
etc. These methods include single remedies, alternations, intercurrents,
sequences and series of remedies chosen by similar symptoms. I just can't
imagine how to define classical Homoeopathy other than Homoeopathy based on
these "classics"? What are the other definitions of "classical Homoeopathy"?

Sincerely, David Little

---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, David Little wrote:

>
>>
>> Luise now:
>> I am also a specialist - I am a t"theoretical homeopath". As such I am
>> interested in all aspects of the craft - and I have studied many, many
>> approaches - all inside the spectrum of classical homeopathy, if classical
>> is defined as braodly as David outlined. Of the "outside" - e.g.
>> "mixopathy" I just know that it works.
>
> Hello,
>
> I just don't know any other way of defining classical homeopathy other
> than by the methods found in the Hahnemann's Organon, the Chronic Diseases,
> the Lesser Writings and his Krankenjournals. It also includes the innovations
> of Boenninghausen, Hering, Jahr, Lippe, Allen, Kent, Boger, etc. These
> methods include single remedies, alternations, intercurrents, sequences and
> series of remedies chosen by similar symptoms. I just can't imagine how to
> define classical Homoeopathy other than Homoeopathy based on these
> "classics"? What are the other definitions of "classical Homoeopathy"?
>
Well, as you say, I also think that all those approaches - and
probably more - can be said to be based on the "classics".

I am surprised that you yourself include sequentialism - it seemed
different to me in your discussions with the Heilkunst people years
ago.

And I have from many disussions, where often I was on "the other
side", very much got the impression that a lot of classical homeopaths
have a lot more restricted definition.

I have argued for years that we should find a definition of classical
homeopathy that all can agree on. I see no reason not to agree on
yours - at least if you include the Sehgal people (some of them insist
that their approach is classical - others do not)

Regards

Luise

--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

On Apr 6, 2006, at 8:13 AM, Luise Kunkle wrote:

> [...]
> I am surprised that you yourself include sequentialism - it seemed
> different to me in your discussions with the Heilkunst people years
> ago.

What the Heilkunst people do is *far* different (at least parts of it
are) from what Boenninghausen et al did! At least that was my
understanding. (If anyone here knows enough about ST to correct or
elaborate, please do!)
Shannon

At 06:43 PM 4/6/2006, you wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, David Little wrote:
>
>>
>>>Luise now:
>>>I am also a specialist - I am a t"theoretical homeopath". As such I am
>>>interested in all aspects of the craft - and I have studied many, many
>>>approaches - all inside the spectrum of classical homeopathy, if
>>>classical is defined as braodly as David outlined. Of the "outside" -
>>>e.g. "mixopathy" I just know that it works.
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>> I just don't know any other way of defining classical homeopathy
>> other than by the methods found in the Hahnemann's Organon, the Chronic
>> Diseases, the Lesser Writings and his Krankenjournals. It also includes
>> the innovations of Boenninghausen, Hering, Jahr, Lippe, Allen, Kent,
>> Boger, etc. These methods include single remedies, alternations,
>> intercurrents, sequences and series of remedies chosen by similar
>> symptoms. I just can't imagine how to define classical Homoeopathy other
>> than Homoeopathy based on these "classics"? What are the other
>> definitions of "classical Homoeopathy"?
>Well, as you say, I also think that all those approaches - and probably
>more - can be said to be based on the "classics".
>
>I am surprised that you yourself include sequentialism - it seemed
>different to me in your discussions with the Heilkunst people years ago.

Dear Luise,

Hahnemann's and Boenninghausen's use of sequences of remedies has
NOTHING to do with Sequential Therapy or the so-called Heikunst methods! It
has to do with using a specific sequence of remedies chosen by the symptoms
noted in one prescription. For example, on March 10th, 1851 Boenninghausen
gave W. Soh. a farmer age 37 (Lesser Writings page 174) a sequenced
prescription that included 1. Rhus t; 2. Bry; 3 Rhus t. one dose every 5
days in the morning. On March 16th, 1851 he gave 1. Kali carb; 2. Sulphur;
3. Kali carb; 4. placebo; 1 powder every 5th day. These are sequences of
remedies in one prescription hence they may be called "sequenced
prescriptions".

In ST they give combination medicines made with several remedies at once
by causations as they work their way backward through the time-line by
which the disease was developed. This is not classical Homoeopathy nor
Homoeopathy by any real sense of the word. It is Sequential Therapy. So
don't go and say the David Little says ST is classical Homoeopathy! I am
amazed how you spun a simple word "sequences" into saying I am calling ST
classical Homoeopathy! You should know better than that, especially in the
context of our discussions of sequences used by Hahnemann and
Boenninghausen. Try to build up a little mutual respect and trust and...?

A sequence means "a series or succession of things in a specific
order". A sequenced prescription means a prescription that involves a
specific order of remedies like the examples above. Calling alternations
"double remedies"; a sequence of single remedies in one prescription
"sequential therapy" and a series of remedies over time "remedies mixtures"
is the incorrect use of polypharmacy terms to describe homoeopathic
methods. This only causes confusion and is mostly used by those who are
confused or have an agenda to confuse because they use combination
medicines (taking several remedies at one time) in the name of Hahnemann, etc.

At least Homoeopaths should kept their terms straight. The following
is not definitive and may not be perfect but it offers definitions of the
main ideas. Hahnemann used all these methods at one time or another.

1. A single remedy - one remedy by itself -e.g. Sulphur alone.
2. An alternation - changing back and forth between two single remedies at
different times - e.g. alternating Aconite and Sulphur every 12 hours.
3. A tandem remedy -placing one remedy in line before giving another
remedy. - e.g. giving a dose of Aconite then a series of Sulphur doses.
4. An intercurrent remedy - placing a dose of a second remedy between the
doses of a chief remedy. e.g. interpolating a dose of Hepar between doses
of Sulphur.
5. A sequenced prescription or remedy sequence- the use of specific order
of remedies in one prescription -e.g. 1. Sulphur; 2. Hepar; Sulphur. 3
Sulphur; 4, placebo one dose every 7 days.
6. A series of remedies - given a group of single remedies over time- e.g
Sulphur then Hepar then Lyc, etc.

>And I have from many disussions, where often I was on "the other side",
>very much got the impression that a lot of classical homeopaths have a lot
>more restricted definition.

First one asks if Hahnemann's methods are classical Homoeopathy? Most
will certainly says "yes". Then one politely shows documentation of exactly
what he did to the surprise of some! If one does this in the spirit of
education rather then trying to shock people it usually goes very well. If
one approaches the subject in an iconoclastic manner using polypharmacy
terms like "double remedies..sequential therapy...remedy mixtures...one can
expect nothing but confusion and conflict. Much of it has to do with how
one approaches the subject and their altitude.

>I have argued for years that we should find a definition of classical
>homeopathy that all can agree on. I see no reason not to agree on yours -
>at least if you include the Sehgal people (some of them insist that their
>approach is classical - others do not)

I would say classical Homoeopathy is based on the classics the Organon,
Chronic Diseases and Lesser Writing and the Hahnemann's Krankenjournals and
the innovations of others whose work is in harmony with the themes
introduced in these works. It is ironic but what most people might think is
the most narrow definition i.e Hahnemann's works, is actually a most
expansive definition! It is a paradox that today we have "modern-classical"
Homoeopathy usually associated with constitutional prescribing, which I
might add, has little to do with the way Kent really practiced!

Sehgal folks use likes cure likes, single remedies, etc. but they are
"mental specialists" They are on the fringe but certainly in the fold.

Sincerely, David Little


>Regards
>
>Luise
>
>--
>One thought to all who, free of doubt,
>So definitely know what's true:
>2 and 2 is 22 -
>and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
>==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========
>