How do you feel about Yakir's plants?

[Ellen Madono]

Hi Dale (and anyone else),

Now that you (Dale) had a week-end to read Yakir (Not enough time I am sure), how do you feel about Yakir's Wonderous Order. Like you, Maniagalavorie has become my primary teacher. Without a clear foundation in clinical work, theoretical speculation leaves me behind. Cases are the most informative. Do you feel that Yakir's Wonderous Order is grounded?

I am going to the States, so I am going to order some books. I am thinking of Pitt's MM. I have an old edition of Vermeulen, who contrary to my above statement about speculation, I enjoy reading. Yes, speculation provides some threads for my memory at least. So, I am think about getting his newer Prisma. But, I am not supposed to buy books. So, I have to thin this list down.

Best,

Ellen Madono

[Rochelle Marsden]

The book is really impressive and I have used it in my clinic when I repped a plant remedy I didn't know. I thought it was a perfect fit for the patient but she said it hadn't done anything and never returned for the follow up. How many times do we get patients who say nothing has happened but when we check at a follow up a lot has improved and they just don't remember having the symptoms until you read out to them what they say?

I rather like the system and the ideas behind it . It is MUCH easier to work with than Scholten's new plant theory where you find a remedy with a number system. I spent a weekend with Scholten at a seminar and came out knowing I didn't want to use that !!

i was taught Yakir's system from Annette Sneevliet from the Netherlands who made it so easy to understand and hope to join another seminar with her in the future.

[Ellen Madono]

Hi Dale and Rochelle,

Thanks so much for your reflections.
I don't particularly trust Scholten. But, I refer to him, to see if he can give me a leg up when I am in a thinking jam. Normally, he is of no help. Mangialavori's thoughtful processing of Scholten etc is much more helpful.

Yesterday I was choosing between Alumin-sil whose psychological description was too weak for the patient but had the physical symptoms. And Zinc-phos. Zinc and Zinc phos did not have such a clear fit of the physical symptoms, but some of them. Anyway, I chose Zinc-phos because the mental description by Mangialavori clearly fit.

I reached those two remedies by doing a literature search on Reference works. Repping was leading nowhere. The symptoms were too vague. There were what seemed like possible hardening of tubes (mostly vascular, but also the urethra.) I was able to work with that vague idea in Referenceworks.

I just ordered the MM Pura project references (By Andre Saine and team. The first ones) through Referenceworks. I was sitting on the sidelines because it is so expensive, but finally, I decided that these difficult choices are made mostly through reference research, not through any specific system. I am leaning toward the classical references and unwilling to get to confused with lots of new provings. I need some very good clue to become interested in a new proving. Maybe Pitt, Yakir or Vermeulen will help.

Yakir sounds good. I have plenty on my plate now. So, I can wait on ordering. Dale, your comparison of Pitt to Bailey was helpful. I can wait. Ohhh it is so hard to wait. I have rows of books around my bed. I have no idea how I do it, but I am constantly opening them up and thinking about cases, or what someone else said. Books are so nice compared to computer research. I am thinking, how can I make my computer environment more comfortable.

I think companies like Synergy etc would be very smart to make ipad versions just for reading documents. Put them up on the Internet and read on an ipad. But books are more comfortable than an ipad.
I don't do that book flipping with repertories. Does anyone read repertories?

Best,
Ellen