Polarity...no, not yet...
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
NESH Countdown: Week #1
-
Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD
- Posts: 2279
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:00 pm
-
Ellen Madono
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:00 pm
NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Dr. Roz,
For me, PA (Polarity Analysis) has become my first contact homeopathy method. For a busy doctor like you, it would be very helpful. Herscu is fancy steps for what does not work with PA. (I do pre-analysis in any case.) Dr. Frie's work has solved cases that have stumped me for years. I don't know why those patients stay with me. Remedies found through PA makes sense, but I was not thinking about them. Clearly, his PA remedy choices are better than mine. PA is hardly foolproof however.
PA is really Boenninghausen analysis with some very good statistical analysis of rubrics that have been used in Dr. Frie's cured cases. Dr. Frie has implemented Boenninghausen's ideas in ways that fit our current computerized database culture. But his database is really small because it covers only the Pocket Book of Boeninghausen (125 remedies). No Apis, Gels... He discourages any rubric that has not be reliable in cured cases. He has another weapon that actually comes from Boenninghausen but is difficult to describe quickly. Dr. Frie mentioned a case that stumped him and he finally solved it with a modern remedy that I had never heard of. So, obviously, you want skills other than PA.
Permanent access to Dr. Frie's computerized repertory costs about 100 dollars. I think that even the raw beginner could get results with this, so I have started training a Japanese beginner and I am planning to put the lessons up on my site. I am recording them, but my site is being remade now, so there is a lot of disruption. Anyway, I am recording lessons as if my website were had a future. I would do the same thing in English if anyone is interested. It is difficult for me because the beginner has to learn all the basic concepts, but I think a beginner could be learning the concepts as they stumble along trying out case taking, analysis, and management. If they were going through the motions of what a professional does, they would learn faster. When they are actually asking questions, I would answer instead of only lecturing. That is the way I learn the most easily.
Best,
Ellen
For me, PA (Polarity Analysis) has become my first contact homeopathy method. For a busy doctor like you, it would be very helpful. Herscu is fancy steps for what does not work with PA. (I do pre-analysis in any case.) Dr. Frie's work has solved cases that have stumped me for years. I don't know why those patients stay with me. Remedies found through PA makes sense, but I was not thinking about them. Clearly, his PA remedy choices are better than mine. PA is hardly foolproof however.
PA is really Boenninghausen analysis with some very good statistical analysis of rubrics that have been used in Dr. Frie's cured cases. Dr. Frie has implemented Boenninghausen's ideas in ways that fit our current computerized database culture. But his database is really small because it covers only the Pocket Book of Boeninghausen (125 remedies). No Apis, Gels... He discourages any rubric that has not be reliable in cured cases. He has another weapon that actually comes from Boenninghausen but is difficult to describe quickly. Dr. Frie mentioned a case that stumped him and he finally solved it with a modern remedy that I had never heard of. So, obviously, you want skills other than PA.
Permanent access to Dr. Frie's computerized repertory costs about 100 dollars. I think that even the raw beginner could get results with this, so I have started training a Japanese beginner and I am planning to put the lessons up on my site. I am recording them, but my site is being remade now, so there is a lot of disruption. Anyway, I am recording lessons as if my website were had a future. I would do the same thing in English if anyone is interested. It is difficult for me because the beginner has to learn all the basic concepts, but I think a beginner could be learning the concepts as they stumble along trying out case taking, analysis, and management. If they were going through the motions of what a professional does, they would learn faster. When they are actually asking questions, I would answer instead of only lecturing. That is the way I learn the most easily.
Best,
Ellen
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Wow Ellen, you amaze me with all the knowledge you have ingested. I attended Scholten’s seminar on his plant system recently and really gave up on that one!! I just use the system that I feel goes with the case , find a remedy and check it out in my favourite old fashioned Clarke’s MM (on my Vision software though rather than the cumbersome volumes!!) I rep using Vision and check if remedies suit from that. I have recently been using Ton Jansen’s HDT and dare I mention it the Narayani remedies but only as a support with a constitutional.
All the best
Rochelle
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 22 July 2018 00:08
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Rochelle,
That would frustrate me too. I would like to get the same answer as Paul and he says most people do, but I am not so hung up on being perfect. I am not sure getting the same answer is the gold standard of understanding. I am probably not so different from you in that I have spent a long time studying him. I have not had the luxury of attending a seminar taught by Dr. Herscu, but I have use C&S since about 2005 and have read everything he has written as well as doing his letter's program and the WHN seminar that he taught for 6 weeks.
I use the software that comes with Radar. Always the software brings up a priority list of remedies that is much shorter than typical analysis. I just feel that the C&S list is also better than a single dimension list. In simple repertorization, the logical relationship between rubrics is unclear.
I have done a lot of study of the 5 elements, 8 branches of the Mappa Mundie. What happens is the relationship between physical symptoms and the metaphysical become clearer, or I have a better imagination. I am working on the Enneagram now hoping for similar results but because of the lack of relationship between the physical and the metaphysical, I am getting the feeling that I am doing something very different with the Enneagram.
Jeremy Sherr suggests that we should always do Pre-analysis. I am very faithful to his pre-analysis procedure. I try to make those physical and metaphysical relationships. Also, the time or causal relationships between symptom groups is essential. (the essence of Herscu's Cycles and Segments.) Because of the way I took the case (a lack of necessary detail), I don't necessarily get a full Herscu cycle, but I do get relationships between groups of symptoms, and even if I am dissatisfied with the clarity of my pre-analysis, it is better than no pre-analysis.
Jeremy says you can even use a 3 element system. Sometimes three groups are the most that I can manage to get out of a case.
According to Jeremy, pre-analysis is the messy paper and colored pencils stage. I am not so artistic and I just scribble. (I also have a program for laying out tiles called Tinderbox, but it is expensive and only an analysis nut like me would care to invest.)
So, when I clearly have a cycle, then I use the cycles and segment software of Radar. If not, I just group symptoms. Just grouping symptoms is not nearly as accurate as a clear S&C logic. But, as I say, pre-analysis in any form is better than no analysis.
This is all a long way of saying that Paul helps us to understand the best form of pre-analysis. If you can't get there, try to get at least half way.
It has taken me years to think this way, but when I read about a remedy in the MM or provings, I am also doing the pre-analysis routine (either formally or in my head). Paul lays out the reason behind the coherence between Remedy description, Proving and Case. This makes the logic of homeopathy so much simpler.
Best,
Ellen
All the best
Rochelle
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 22 July 2018 00:08
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Rochelle,
That would frustrate me too. I would like to get the same answer as Paul and he says most people do, but I am not so hung up on being perfect. I am not sure getting the same answer is the gold standard of understanding. I am probably not so different from you in that I have spent a long time studying him. I have not had the luxury of attending a seminar taught by Dr. Herscu, but I have use C&S since about 2005 and have read everything he has written as well as doing his letter's program and the WHN seminar that he taught for 6 weeks.
I use the software that comes with Radar. Always the software brings up a priority list of remedies that is much shorter than typical analysis. I just feel that the C&S list is also better than a single dimension list. In simple repertorization, the logical relationship between rubrics is unclear.
I have done a lot of study of the 5 elements, 8 branches of the Mappa Mundie. What happens is the relationship between physical symptoms and the metaphysical become clearer, or I have a better imagination. I am working on the Enneagram now hoping for similar results but because of the lack of relationship between the physical and the metaphysical, I am getting the feeling that I am doing something very different with the Enneagram.
Jeremy Sherr suggests that we should always do Pre-analysis. I am very faithful to his pre-analysis procedure. I try to make those physical and metaphysical relationships. Also, the time or causal relationships between symptom groups is essential. (the essence of Herscu's Cycles and Segments.) Because of the way I took the case (a lack of necessary detail), I don't necessarily get a full Herscu cycle, but I do get relationships between groups of symptoms, and even if I am dissatisfied with the clarity of my pre-analysis, it is better than no pre-analysis.
Jeremy says you can even use a 3 element system. Sometimes three groups are the most that I can manage to get out of a case.
According to Jeremy, pre-analysis is the messy paper and colored pencils stage. I am not so artistic and I just scribble. (I also have a program for laying out tiles called Tinderbox, but it is expensive and only an analysis nut like me would care to invest.)
So, when I clearly have a cycle, then I use the cycles and segment software of Radar. If not, I just group symptoms. Just grouping symptoms is not nearly as accurate as a clear S&C logic. But, as I say, pre-analysis in any form is better than no analysis.
This is all a long way of saying that Paul helps us to understand the best form of pre-analysis. If you can't get there, try to get at least half way.
It has taken me years to think this way, but when I read about a remedy in the MM or provings, I am also doing the pre-analysis routine (either formally or in my head). Paul lays out the reason behind the coherence between Remedy description, Proving and Case. This makes the logic of homeopathy so much simpler.
Best,
Ellen
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Joe,
Yes I remember this which is why I don’t knock the empathy between patient and practitioner doing the healing!!!!!!!!!
I had a recent case “cured” from her painful stiff swollen arthritic knees with 1 (yes 1)dose of Rhus Tox 6 that I gave her while she was sitting with me as I wanted to see if she would be less stiff standing and walking after the consultation. She emailed me a few days later to say that she hadn’t even repeated the dose and that she was pain free and the swelling was going right down . I have to say that as I was going through the case it did sound as if this could be her constitutional remedy!!
Rochelle
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 22 July 2018 01:44
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Do you all remember that well advertised conference in Bruges? Biiiig gurus there....I have been told (but weirdly have not seen anything written about that) that a paper case was given to them with the request to find the remedy according to their own system that they push so hard (Sankaran, Scholten and others...).
The results: each one of them had a different prescription, a different remedy but each remedy had a logical and coherent explanation according to the system used....
Fast forward to my system, which is that I do not have a system but keep writing that there is no SINGLE and UNIQUE Simillimum, but multiple possible ones depending how you approach and understand the patient. The Simillimum used is very much dependent upon the practitioner, not only the patient, at least with the modern methods; this is what Hahnemann meant (IMO) by writing about being an impartial, unbiased observer. If I could give a name to my system it would be Simplicity, but it actually nothing else but Boenninghausen slightly expanded.
Isn't the first thing we are taught when we start taking cases "shut up and listen"? then clarify what the patient means, then look for the remedy that comes up. Only then should we go to the more sophisticated methods (and not only one at a time) to confirm our prescription if at all need be. Why start with methods that are beautifully crafted and very logical on their own but still have plenty of limitations...yes I know, many cases that were blocked and not moving with the "traditional" approach were solved with those new methods, but that is the proper way to go, from simple to elaborate.
That is my opinion....mind you, I am just a freaking lissencephalic simpleton of a surgeon trying to sound intellectual....duh...
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
Yes I remember this which is why I don’t knock the empathy between patient and practitioner doing the healing!!!!!!!!!
I had a recent case “cured” from her painful stiff swollen arthritic knees with 1 (yes 1)dose of Rhus Tox 6 that I gave her while she was sitting with me as I wanted to see if she would be less stiff standing and walking after the consultation. She emailed me a few days later to say that she hadn’t even repeated the dose and that she was pain free and the swelling was going right down . I have to say that as I was going through the case it did sound as if this could be her constitutional remedy!!
Rochelle
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 22 July 2018 01:44
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Do you all remember that well advertised conference in Bruges? Biiiig gurus there....I have been told (but weirdly have not seen anything written about that) that a paper case was given to them with the request to find the remedy according to their own system that they push so hard (Sankaran, Scholten and others...).
The results: each one of them had a different prescription, a different remedy but each remedy had a logical and coherent explanation according to the system used....
Fast forward to my system, which is that I do not have a system but keep writing that there is no SINGLE and UNIQUE Simillimum, but multiple possible ones depending how you approach and understand the patient. The Simillimum used is very much dependent upon the practitioner, not only the patient, at least with the modern methods; this is what Hahnemann meant (IMO) by writing about being an impartial, unbiased observer. If I could give a name to my system it would be Simplicity, but it actually nothing else but Boenninghausen slightly expanded.
Isn't the first thing we are taught when we start taking cases "shut up and listen"? then clarify what the patient means, then look for the remedy that comes up. Only then should we go to the more sophisticated methods (and not only one at a time) to confirm our prescription if at all need be. Why start with methods that are beautifully crafted and very logical on their own but still have plenty of limitations...yes I know, many cases that were blocked and not moving with the "traditional" approach were solved with those new methods, but that is the proper way to go, from simple to elaborate.
That is my opinion....mind you, I am just a freaking lissencephalic simpleton of a surgeon trying to sound intellectual....duh...
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
-
Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD
- Posts: 2279
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Thanks, I will try to have a look.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
-
Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD
- Posts: 2279
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Yes, you described that somewhere...the power of lower potencies is amazing, even if they are not in the F series....I had to to...
...
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
...Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
-
Ellen Madono
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:00 pm
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
I am stuck on people who rely heavily on organized clinical insights. Paul Herscu, Mangialavori, Sherr are all like that. They don't dream up a protocol and see if reality fits their dream. Dr. Roz's F potencies are based on a Fibonacci mathematical construct, but it is found everywhere in nature, so why not in homeopathy. That is different than dreaming up autistic treatments. I haven't studied those treatments, so I am speaking in total ignorance, but that is the direction of my prejudice.
-
Soroush Ebrahimi
- Moderator
- Posts: 4510
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2002 11:00 pm
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Dear Ellen
Please explain PA in greater detail.
Thanks
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 22 July 2018 12:02
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Dr. Roz,
For me, PA (Polarity Analysis) has become my first contact homeopathy method. For a busy doctor like you, it would be very helpful. Herscu is fancy steps for what does not work with PA. (I do pre-analysis in any case.) Dr. Frie's work has solved cases that have stumped me for years. I don't know why those patients stay with me. Remedies found through PA makes sense, but I was not thinking about them. Clearly, his PA remedy choices are better than mine. PA is hardly foolproof however.
PA is really Boenninghausen analysis with some very good statistical analysis of rubrics that have been used in Dr. Frie's cured cases. Dr. Frie has implemented Boenninghausen's ideas in ways that fit our current computerized database culture. But his database is really small because it covers only the Pocket Book of Boeninghausen (125 remedies). No Apis, Gels... He discourages any rubric that has not be reliable in cured cases. He has another weapon that actually comes from Boenninghausen but is difficult to describe quickly. Dr. Frie mentioned a case that stumped him and he finally solved it with a modern remedy that I had never heard of. So, obviously, you want skills other than PA.
Permanent access to Dr. Frie's computerized repertory costs about 100 dollars. I think that even the raw beginner could get results with this, so I have started training a Japanese beginner and I am planning to put the lessons up on my site. I am recording them, but my site is being remade now, so there is a lot of disruption. Anyway, I am recording lessons as if my website were had a future. I would do the same thing in English if anyone is interested. It is difficult for me because the beginner has to learn all the basic concepts, but I think a beginner could be learning the concepts as they stumble along trying out case taking, analysis, and management. If they were going through the motions of what a professional does, they would learn faster. When they are actually asking questions, I would answer instead of only lecturing. That is the way I learn the most easily.
Best,
Ellen
Please explain PA in greater detail.
Thanks
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 22 July 2018 12:02
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Dr. Roz,
For me, PA (Polarity Analysis) has become my first contact homeopathy method. For a busy doctor like you, it would be very helpful. Herscu is fancy steps for what does not work with PA. (I do pre-analysis in any case.) Dr. Frie's work has solved cases that have stumped me for years. I don't know why those patients stay with me. Remedies found through PA makes sense, but I was not thinking about them. Clearly, his PA remedy choices are better than mine. PA is hardly foolproof however.
PA is really Boenninghausen analysis with some very good statistical analysis of rubrics that have been used in Dr. Frie's cured cases. Dr. Frie has implemented Boenninghausen's ideas in ways that fit our current computerized database culture. But his database is really small because it covers only the Pocket Book of Boeninghausen (125 remedies). No Apis, Gels... He discourages any rubric that has not be reliable in cured cases. He has another weapon that actually comes from Boenninghausen but is difficult to describe quickly. Dr. Frie mentioned a case that stumped him and he finally solved it with a modern remedy that I had never heard of. So, obviously, you want skills other than PA.
Permanent access to Dr. Frie's computerized repertory costs about 100 dollars. I think that even the raw beginner could get results with this, so I have started training a Japanese beginner and I am planning to put the lessons up on my site. I am recording them, but my site is being remade now, so there is a lot of disruption. Anyway, I am recording lessons as if my website were had a future. I would do the same thing in English if anyone is interested. It is difficult for me because the beginner has to learn all the basic concepts, but I think a beginner could be learning the concepts as they stumble along trying out case taking, analysis, and management. If they were going through the motions of what a professional does, they would learn faster. When they are actually asking questions, I would answer instead of only lecturing. That is the way I learn the most easily.
Best,
Ellen
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Amen to the power of low potencies! I have two Mezereum cases that have had unbelievably deep reactions to a 3c. In one case I started with an F series to avoid aggravations of the skin, but in the other I went down because the higher potencies didn’t seem to be doing the job.
Now I find myself wondering if this depth of reaction would work in remedies less hypersensitive than Mezereum (and Rhus-tox.).
Peace,
Dale
Now I find myself wondering if this depth of reaction would work in remedies less hypersensitive than Mezereum (and Rhus-tox.).
Peace,
Dale
Re: NESH Countdown: Week #1
Hi Dale,
"Magic of the Minimum Dose" - Dorthy Shepherd
was required reading in early studies.
Atb,
Leilanae
"Magic of the Minimum Dose" - Dorthy Shepherd
was required reading in early studies.
Atb,
Leilanae