Hi all,
This was posted to lyghtforce, without drawing any response, so I thought
I'd see whether anyone here has thoughts, as it seems very perplexing...
Shannon
Direction of Cure?
-
Dave Hartley
- Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:47 pm
Direction of Cure?
It seems like too much medicinal action.
Give no more medicine, wait & watch.
A week or two.
Use oatmeal soap for mild palliation of skin stuff meanwhile, if needed.
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443
Asheville, NC 828.285.0240
Give no more medicine, wait & watch.
A week or two.
Use oatmeal soap for mild palliation of skin stuff meanwhile, if needed.
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443
Asheville, NC 828.285.0240
Re: Direction of Cure?
Robert&Shannon Nelson wrote:
9999 Question 1-why the switch to sulph ? Did nat -s "stall"? (Possibly) the Nat-s will take the case all the way
if continued/left to do its work?. The sulph may be a partial similar, and sounds like he may be proving it now. (?)
(This is just one idea for explanation of what happened based on info given). What do you say Caroline?
9999 probably not the direction of cure, indicating sulph *may* need re-evaluation
99999 good idea. shampoo is another variable. good to simplify the situation so know what is doing what.
9999 One idea: revisit the decision to change from nat-s. was it a good decision? what potency was given, and how many tries (including raising potency) to make sure it no longer worked? Waht indicated that it was no longer good after apparently such good results with nat-s? If it *was* a good decision to abandon nat-s, then look at complementary remedies chart, reevaluate case, talk to client by phone. See what removing the shampoo and holding off on sulph does.. Later, If needed, see client again.
9999 Dont worrry about it. Case management and followups are the difficult part. I'm not an Organon expert by *any* means, and defer to those who are, but could look at approx 246-261 or so, and 280-...there is some grist there applicable to the situation. Maybe see the book by Nicole Henriques on the 2nd prescrip. I havent read it yet, but I suspect it summarizes (prob mostly Kent's ideas from Lectures on Hom philos., but maybe also Hahnemann's thoughts, on case mngnt and what happens after the first rem) (I hope this is good advice--I ought to get the Henriques book myself
.
9999 Question 1-why the switch to sulph ? Did nat -s "stall"? (Possibly) the Nat-s will take the case all the way
if continued/left to do its work?. The sulph may be a partial similar, and sounds like he may be proving it now. (?)
(This is just one idea for explanation of what happened based on info given). What do you say Caroline?
9999 probably not the direction of cure, indicating sulph *may* need re-evaluation
99999 good idea. shampoo is another variable. good to simplify the situation so know what is doing what.
9999 One idea: revisit the decision to change from nat-s. was it a good decision? what potency was given, and how many tries (including raising potency) to make sure it no longer worked? Waht indicated that it was no longer good after apparently such good results with nat-s? If it *was* a good decision to abandon nat-s, then look at complementary remedies chart, reevaluate case, talk to client by phone. See what removing the shampoo and holding off on sulph does.. Later, If needed, see client again.
9999 Dont worrry about it. Case management and followups are the difficult part. I'm not an Organon expert by *any* means, and defer to those who are, but could look at approx 246-261 or so, and 280-...there is some grist there applicable to the situation. Maybe see the book by Nicole Henriques on the 2nd prescrip. I havent read it yet, but I suspect it summarizes (prob mostly Kent's ideas from Lectures on Hom philos., but maybe also Hahnemann's thoughts, on case mngnt and what happens after the first rem) (I hope this is good advice--I ought to get the Henriques book myself
.