You are welcome to use, be my guest, indeed!
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
some delayed feedback
Re: some delayed feedback
In considering this thread about CURE further … since we have certain susceptibilities and have those organs or areas of the body that are more prone to manifesting symptoms … would it not also be true that we show a susceptibility to certain remedy states?
For example, maybe Sulphur cured a tendency to acne. Then years (or many months) later, another morbific effect like exposure to harsh antibiotics comes along and causes reactions. Would it not be likely that in a person who responded well to Sulphur in the past, will also respond well to Sulphur again even though it is a new event? Or would we expect that the cure of acne with S, should also cure the sensitivity to antibiotics?
Is this contrary to the idea that Sulphur cured earlier and is needed again for later unrelated event?
I hope this was not already asked and I missed it…
Sherill
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 6:47 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] some delayed feedback
I have a problem with that sentence: "Cure means the same remedy cures for 2-5 years."
IMO, if you need to repeat the same remedy, even after so long, then:
- it is not a "cure" but a temporary disappearance of the symptoms and signs
- or the root, the cause, the aetiology has not been dealt with and creates the same situation or a different presentation needing the same remedy.
My reading of cure of cure means not only the disappearance of every symptom but the absence of need for any treatment, no matter what method has been used.
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
For example, maybe Sulphur cured a tendency to acne. Then years (or many months) later, another morbific effect like exposure to harsh antibiotics comes along and causes reactions. Would it not be likely that in a person who responded well to Sulphur in the past, will also respond well to Sulphur again even though it is a new event? Or would we expect that the cure of acne with S, should also cure the sensitivity to antibiotics?
Is this contrary to the idea that Sulphur cured earlier and is needed again for later unrelated event?
I hope this was not already asked and I missed it…
Sherill
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 6:47 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] some delayed feedback
I have a problem with that sentence: "Cure means the same remedy cures for 2-5 years."
IMO, if you need to repeat the same remedy, even after so long, then:
- it is not a "cure" but a temporary disappearance of the symptoms and signs
- or the root, the cause, the aetiology has not been dealt with and creates the same situation or a different presentation needing the same remedy.
My reading of cure of cure means not only the disappearance of every symptom but the absence of need for any treatment, no matter what method has been used.
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: some delayed feedback
As usual, my answer will be yes and no, definitely maybe....again, it is individual...
In your example, if the Sulphur is what I call a "situational" remedy, one that covers the actual problem, it will deal with the acne if indicated. If it is ALSO the CORE remedy (aka constitutional), it MIGHT act on the effects of the antibiotics, unless the antibiotics have unearthed a layer of pathology that was silent, for example simply by changing the gut flora, which then become the problem to attend, followed by the Core remedy.
I hope I am clear...this is why you have to repertorise each and every time and not shoot from the hip; we are not mechanistic, each and every minute of our lives, each and every event, as small and irrelevant in appearance, has an effect of our physiology, so each situation needs to be considered as a "blank page".
Indeed you will often find situations as you described, but do avoid to generalise from that as we deal with individuals, not with crowds, herds, flock or statistics.
Do I make sense?
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
In your example, if the Sulphur is what I call a "situational" remedy, one that covers the actual problem, it will deal with the acne if indicated. If it is ALSO the CORE remedy (aka constitutional), it MIGHT act on the effects of the antibiotics, unless the antibiotics have unearthed a layer of pathology that was silent, for example simply by changing the gut flora, which then become the problem to attend, followed by the Core remedy.
I hope I am clear...this is why you have to repertorise each and every time and not shoot from the hip; we are not mechanistic, each and every minute of our lives, each and every event, as small and irrelevant in appearance, has an effect of our physiology, so each situation needs to be considered as a "blank page".
Indeed you will often find situations as you described, but do avoid to generalise from that as we deal with individuals, not with crowds, herds, flock or statistics.
Do I make sense?
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
Re: some delayed feedback
Perfect sense and yes I hear better now that you are arguing against mechanistic prescribing rather than using the same remedy. I am satisfied with - it depends!
Thanks for clarifying.
Sherill
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:03 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] some delayed feedback
As usual, my answer will be yes and no, definitely maybe....again, it is individual...
In your example, if the Sulphur is what I call a "situational" remedy, one that covers the actual problem, it will deal with the acne if indicated. If it is ALSO the CORE remedy (aka constitutional), it MIGHT act on the effects of the antibiotics, unless the antibiotics have unearthed a layer of pathology that was silent, for example simply by changing the gut flora, which then become the problem to attend, followed by the Core remedy.
I hope I am clear...this is why you have to repertorise each and every time and not shoot from the hip; we are not mechanistic, each and every minute of our lives, each and every event, as small and irrelevant in appearance, has an effect of our physiology, so each situation needs to be considered as a "blank page".
Indeed you will often find situations as you described, but do avoid to generalise from that as we deal with individuals, not with crowds, herds, flock or statistics.
Do I make sense?
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
Thanks for clarifying.
Sherill
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:03 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] some delayed feedback
As usual, my answer will be yes and no, definitely maybe....again, it is individual...
In your example, if the Sulphur is what I call a "situational" remedy, one that covers the actual problem, it will deal with the acne if indicated. If it is ALSO the CORE remedy (aka constitutional), it MIGHT act on the effects of the antibiotics, unless the antibiotics have unearthed a layer of pathology that was silent, for example simply by changing the gut flora, which then become the problem to attend, followed by the Core remedy.
I hope I am clear...this is why you have to repertorise each and every time and not shoot from the hip; we are not mechanistic, each and every minute of our lives, each and every event, as small and irrelevant in appearance, has an effect of our physiology, so each situation needs to be considered as a "blank page".
Indeed you will often find situations as you described, but do avoid to generalise from that as we deal with individuals, not with crowds, herds, flock or statistics.
Do I make sense?
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: some delayed feedback
My pleasure.
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz