chemo

Shannon Nelson · Post by **Shannon Nelson** » Sun Jul 06, 2003 11:12 pm

or Caust? They are not always revolutionaries...
on 7/5/03 6:31 PM, ROCHELLE at rochelle@ntlworld.com wrote:

Patricia Hatherly · Post by **Patricia Hatherly** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:52 am

Dear Rochelle

If it is breast cancer you're dealing with Lac-h may well be the most
indicated Rx.
It's not yet so well-expressed in our MM or Repertory as it's a Rx still
gaining clinical approbation.

However, in my clinical experience, Lac-h is a Rx par excellence for all
manner of breast pathologies. Often these come on from a deep unacknowledged
anger (indurated) at not having been nurtured. To nurture others, therefore,
becomes a Behavioural Simillimum.

The main aetiology for the Lac-h state is "insufficient" nurturing at the
breast.
How long is long enough? Well, that depends on the infant.
We tend to wean earlier than most infants "like" because of the easy
availability of convenient weaning foods.These are no so easily available in
underdeveloped societies and most certainly weren't an option in our very
early evolutionary past when babies were breast fed for at least 4 years
(which is about how long it takes for the neonatal brain and gut to mature).

regards
Patricia Hatherly

Nancy Siciliana · Post by **Nancy Siciliana** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:37 pm

Hi Rochelle,

Well, I would say that that MM of Lac-H is, um, insufficient! What remedy
would not have those symptoms, at one time or another?

I immediately thought of lac h because of 2 things:

1) all the lacs, but particularly lac-h, must be differentiated between
carcinosin. After all, they are made from the same tissue--one healthy; the
other diseased. The differentiation will always be a matter of pathological
development in the case (ie is your patient's pathology sufficiently
progressed to match the diseased picture we get from carc, or not?).

2) please read a more indepth study of lac-h for more grounding in the
remedy. You will see the nurturance/defence/strength issue at the core of
this remedy, as you do in carcinosin...but in lac-h there is a great concern
for humanity in general--a nurturance of humanity, or as Sankaran puts it so
nicely...great philanthropic love for the family of mankind...not a brother
or sister...but a "cousin"...not a direct relation, but ultimately another
human being...and ultimately we are all related! (PS--I actually gave this
to my cousin as her remedy and it was amazingly curative for her! The case
centered on nurturance--and the lack of it--in her life). In carc, a person
may want to "serve" and help all of humanity but it will be done in such a
way that their own goals and "lives" will be sacrificed to these ends...in
lac-h, a person actually defines his/her life by those philanthropic
actions, and creates their sense of selfhood from that work. One is not
leading "their" life, which is subsumed in all kinds of activities instead
of those which the person really wants to do; the other is leading a
philanthropic life of selflessness. See the difference?

3) Sankaran and Melissa Assilem both have some good MM descriptions of this
remedy. Nancy Herrick has done a proving of this milk, I believe; as have
the other 2 authors. Tinus Smits also has a nice little write up on Lac
Maternum...where he makes a remedy from a combination of the milk of several
mothers...but comes up with basically no difference in proving symptoms.
Melissa Assilem has the definitive write-up on the role of mother's milk in
human development, however, and is worth the read simply for that.

Hope this helps...

Nancy

Rochelle · Post by **Rochelle** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:17 pm

Dear Patricia,
The problem is actually stomach lymphoma and I am not intending to treat it only to prevent and/or alleviate side effects as she is not my patient. Cad S. actually fits quite well but thanks for your information on Lac H.
Regards
Rochelle

www.rochellemarsden.co.uk

Rochelle · Post by **Rochelle** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:18 pm

Thanks Nancy for the further elucidation of Lac. H. But as I have stated I am not treating the cancer only the side effects of the chemo.

All the best
Rochelle
www.rochellemarsden.co.uk

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Nancy Siciliana · Post by **Nancy Siciliana** » Tue Jul 08, 2003 12:26 am

Hi Rochelle,

I suggested the lac-h not for the cancer but for the mental/emotional characteristic you described for the patient--which led you to think about carc initially.

Hope she does very well, regardless!

Nancy

Patricia Hatherly · Post by **Patricia Hatherly** » Tue Jul 08, 2003 9:06 pm

Dear Nancy

A most sensitive description of the essence of Lac-h. My clinical experience
endorses all your comments.
At the end of the day most of my "gut problem" patients after we've done
Lyc, various bowel nosodes etc, eventually get Lac-h then do beautifully!
I will even go so far as to state that Lac-h & Carc are complementary Rx.

Apart from the sources you've mentioned there's something extra in the MM of
Milk published by Links last year. Alize Timmermann has something and
there's also a long article by me with several cases (one of them which
began with a prescription of Carc)!

I obtained 2 potencies of Lac-m from Tinus Smits in 2001 when I went to his
seminar in Nepal, and conducted a proving later that year. It was published
at the end of last year in time for his trip to Australia. Harry van der Zee
has just done a review of the proving in this latest issue of Links.
While there are similarities betwen it and Lac-h, there are also differences
because Lac-m contains colostrum!

I've just had an article published on Lac-m in our national journal Similia.
If you are interested it's on the web:
www.homeopathyoz.org
Follow the prompts to publications and the article is there in its entirety:
"Lac-m; to Be or Not to Be?"

best wishes
Patricia Hatherly

Rochelle · Post by **Rochelle** » Wed Jul 09, 2003 12:13 am

Dear Patricia,

You wrote:-

I am really interested in this as I have an awful lot of IBS patients and a lot do well on Lyco. have you ever given it to men as I have a case that maybe right for it.

All the best
Rochelle

www.rochellemarsden.co.uk

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Shannon Nelson · Post by **Shannon Nelson** » Wed Jul 09, 2003 1:55 am

Hi Patricia,

Are you saying that you are more apt to use LM of the rx with men??
(For curiosity and my "statistical research" (smile), do you always simply
start with LM1, or ever begin LMs higher...)

Thanks,
Shannon
on 7/8/03 11:50 PM, Patricia Hatherly at triciah@rnhconsulting.com.au wrote:

Shannon Nelson · Post by **Shannon Nelson** » Wed Jul 09, 2003 2:03 am

----------
From: Bob/Shannon
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1976 15:58:42 +0100
To:
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: chemo

Hi Patricia,

Are you saying that you are more apt to use LM of the rx with men??
(For curiosity and my "statistical research" (smile), do you always simply
start with LM1, or ever begin LMs higher...)

Thanks,
Shannon
on 7/8/03 11:50 PM, Patricia Hatherly at triciah@rnhconsulting.com.au wrote: