rawulfia in BP

[elham]

Rawulia is definitely allopathic to blood presure and you will be happy to
know one out of every four people who takes reserpine (the alkaloid of
rawulfia) for Blood pressure ends up with manic depression.
By the way you may try rawulfia in some cases of manic depression.
Rawulfia temporarily brings down the blood pressure but no better than
atenenol or Envas or any other allopathic medicine.
By just putting a label -Homoeopathic medicine- a medicine does not become
Homoeopathic.
Please, before giving any tincture, make sure it has no side effects. I
know people who
have died at the hand of Homoeopaths by the use of large doses of digitalis
tincture.
Best regards
Elham

[VBLUES]

30.10.03.
It is called Rauwolfia in the first place. Rest of your remarks I personally
find very adequate and should be read with care by the others.
There is people dying due to wrong homeopathic therapy, of course. The most
famous ones were Paganini ( who died after too much treatment from Hahnemann
himself in Paris ) and the former Austrian Emperor ( same historic period)
patient also of Hahnemann. Kind regards, Dr medic Viorel V. Bucur (
www.dr-bucur.com).

[priya p s]

what is the dose exact of rawolfia MT to be given as in case of acute?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Shannon Nelson]

Interesting remarks!
It's true that even Hahnemann surely couldn't save every patient he treated,
but why are you saying that "too much treatment" killed these patients,
rather than too advanced a disease?

Also, it would be helpful to include just a relevant bit of the post you are
replying to. E.g. I can't tell *what* remarks, or of whose, that you are in
agreement with.

Thanks,
Shannon
on 10/30/03 3:39 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:

[VBLUES]

31.10.03.
Well, the remarks I was referring to, where in the mail I answered, so it can
be found with the e-mail adress. I did not tip any new one, but just replied
the one I read.
Regarding the "too much" stuff, well, too much is always wrong in life,
including medicine. I the case of Paganini, he got to much Mercury for too long, in
the other famous case I do not remember details right on the spot.
However, I suppose Hahnemann did not "switch" in time the remedy or maybe it
was his wife doing the treatment, which late in Paris, was often the case.
Most mistakes are made with the second prescription, not with the first -
this is the main rule ! In other words, the symptoms or changes reported by the
patient after the first remedy are in these cases wrongly interpreted, so there
comes the wrong second prescription and the case runs out of line, being very
difficult to catch up with again, only eventually after a long break and a
complete new start.
After marrying the second time, Hahnemann went to Paris and started while
being mid-seventy, anew. By then, the most famous patients - including for ex.
british secretary of foreign affairs and so on - came to him from all over
Euerope, however he used to sit in a armchair and smoke his pipe, while his young
wife ( some 40 years younger ) already learning from him, did the patients at
the front desk. He just intervened to correct some things here and there.
After his death, she was dropped by the french because she was no learned
doctor as such. She was a painter actually.
Kind regards, Dr medic V.V.Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).

[Julian Winston]

At 5:12 AM -0500 10/31/03, VBLUES@aol.com wrote:

snip]
Actually, when he left for Paris is 1835 he was *80* years old.
And Boenninghausen was a lawyer and botanist.

"learned" and "doctor" are not mutually inclusive terms.

Melanie was Hahnemann's pupil. After his death she continued to
practice and was fined. She then continued to practice under the
aegis of Karl Boenninghausen, the physician son of the Baron who
married Melanie's adopted daughter.

JW

[Shannon Nelson]

Hello,

Perhaps this first part is in reply to a request from me, that one include a
small part of the post you are replying to, so that others can tell *what*
you are replying to. You note

on 10/31/03 4:12 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:
But this winds up being more trouble than it's worth -- I delete mails
eventually after they are read, and it's a nuisance having to go back to my
in-box, resort, and sift thru old posts. So, while it would surely be
*possible* to figure out what you're referring to, it would be a courtesy
for you not to require every read to do that, when it's rather easy for you
to do as I have done above, and put me out of my "misery"!

But, this is just a suggestion. If it's offensive to you, or not worth the
bother, that of course is your choice. I just thought I'd mention it, as
some are unaware of the problem and for me, it sometimes makes the
difference between understanding posts, and simply deciding not to bother.

I recognize the rest of your remarks as being in reply to my post, so will
note they are very interesting! It seems not impossible that even Hahnemann
did make mistakes sometimes... Since I know nothing about the cases you
refer to, but am curious about your information source?

Best wishes,
Shannon
I did not tip any new one, but just replied

[VBLUES]

1.11.03.
Well, by "learned doctor" I meant she did not study medicine, which is of
paramount importance for understanding things including homeopathy, right. There
are so-called homeopaths with no study of medicine of what kind whatever, but
they will never be as good as the ones who did study. It is a matter of the
total complexity of the things. Hahnemann himself was not only a "learned
doctor" but also a pharmacyst, something unthinkable today. Otherwise he could not
have understood the stuff.
Besides, he was very cultivated, knew several difficult languages like
hebrew, greek and latin already as a student, making translations to cope with life
costs.
He also had knowledge of the writings of Paracelsius and from his father, who
happened to work at Meissen Porcelain Manufacture and it was from him that he
learned all things about the salts of Ca, Siliceea, Sulphur, etc, so to speak
from the first hand.
Second, the old Boehninghaus, originally from Westfalia ( small town of
Herford ), was one of Hahnemanns sons-in-law and saved his original scripts, today
in California, among other many other merits. However, Kent and Hering were
maybe as good as he was or at least as meritous.
Meanwhile, we know for sure that many things written by Hahnemann actually do
not correspond anymore, just being denied by experience. Nonetheless, he
remains the founder.
Melanie D'Hervilly came SPECIALLY to marry Hahnemann, some even say she was
actually sent by the french to take him over - maybe out of envy or whatever,
you name it ! Kind regards, Dr medic V.V.Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).
P.S. Better quality in the discussion already. Thank you for the answer.

[Julian Winston]

At 5:37 AM -0500 11/1/03, VBLUES@aol.com wrote:

[snip]
Hahnemann NEVER acknowledged being familiar with Paracelcus. When one
of his students (I think it was Trinks) recognized the similarity of
Hahnemann's work and that of Paracelcus, and asked Hahnemann about it
(in about 1820 or so), Hahnemann denied knowing the work of
Paracelcus.
He has never reference Paracelcus in any of his writings.

I believe this information is in Bradford's "Pioneers of Homeopathy."
Let us not confuse Boenninghausen (Clemens Maria) with his sons Carl
and Frederick. It was the SON (Carl) who married Melanie's adopted
daughter. The daughter was adopted just before Hahnemann died. She
married much later. Can he still be a "son-in-law when Hahnemann had
already died?

Those who have read Boenninghausen's (the old man) case books say he
was an amazing prescriber.
Where do you get this information? She came to Hahnemann to be healed
of an illness. Let us not spread unsubstantiated gossip.

JW

[Julian Winston]

At 5:40 AM -0500 11/1/03, VBLUES@aol.com wrote:

AGAIN! WHAT are you replying to? Who said what and when?
PLEASE include the text of what you are replying to when offering a reply.
It is generally how e-mail lists are conducted.

JW