In his mail (04-07-04, 8:20 am), M.D. Viorel V. Bucur. show a very good picture of Phos and Caust. Bob&Shannon (05-07/5:48 Meddorrinum) show another aspect. ¿How could it be so?
It's no wonder, but as simple as Hahneman explained: In all remedies are two kind of actions: primary and secondary. That is why coffee start sending away the sleep, and then It came harder; and pure cannabis is a very good to strong people at first but then it relaxes all neural cells. Phos is the very good people, but then there are exacerbations and ache, and this take over the good boy, and when it is not afraid enough it reacts in dirty way. When it pass, then we see again the good boy.
There is no a "only way" route; if you notice, "bad" phos not always present (there is a 1 and 2 in repertory, which means scarcely and sometimes; not almost always nor always).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Phos - good-bad boy?
-
Shannon Nelson
- Posts: 8848
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
Hi Miguel,
I like what you've written, except to note, I would not call the extremes
"good" and "bad" (how about "energetic" versus "depleted"?), and also that
there are more than two possible expressions... That's why we need to learn
not just *pictures* (and two for each remedy would still be a manageable
task--*if* it were sufficient), but instead understand the workings and
effects of the remedy in a deeper way. And this I often struggle with...
(I wonder whether you have mixed the picture given of Med [which was a "bad
boy" sort of picture, tho I still prefer not to call it "bad"] with the
second picture of phos [which was simply depleted and exhausted?)
Shannon
on 7/6/04 1:49 AM, Miguel F at floresmikael@yahoo.es wrote:
I like what you've written, except to note, I would not call the extremes
"good" and "bad" (how about "energetic" versus "depleted"?), and also that
there are more than two possible expressions... That's why we need to learn
not just *pictures* (and two for each remedy would still be a manageable
task--*if* it were sufficient), but instead understand the workings and
effects of the remedy in a deeper way. And this I often struggle with...
(I wonder whether you have mixed the picture given of Med [which was a "bad
boy" sort of picture, tho I still prefer not to call it "bad"] with the
second picture of phos [which was simply depleted and exhausted?)
Shannon
on 7/6/04 1:49 AM, Miguel F at floresmikael@yahoo.es wrote:
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
Hi Shannon:
A couple of years I use to read books from Argentina. They always show these kindly pictures (in Spanish are only a few), resulting that "almost 80% of an average general pediatric practice" can be resolved with eight marvelous remedies(1).
Well, I was so amazing with this simplification that I could catalogue almost everyone into one of 20 pictures. The only problem is that I couldn't help anybody actually. And none could, 'cos here in Guadalajara this is very real.
Pictures are good 'cos gives us the "form" that patient has, but some questions come up:
1) Are pictures evolving or are always the same (patient is all his life Med.)?
2) Pictures are very simplistic, they have not "materia" -are pure form-; how can an inexpert M.D. tell a case from another (How can differentiate between Lyc and Nux-v WHEN simtoms are very similars).
3) When D. gives remedy there is always an aggravation -perceptible or not-, but if he is inexpert and the aggravation goes into different direction than "Hering" law or even he didn't know what is happening, then he turn in panic. Picture is broken ¿has evolved? ¿Is still same?
Pictures give us a form, but not a particular illness. The evolving patient will jump from thuj to phos to sulph pictures in a week, month, year. If he is better, the new manifestation will be desproportionate respect his old illness, but that didn't import to patient. The new little ill is the worst thing for him.
And there is another way of taken cases: a material one.
Kent show in his Lesser Writings in a laugh way: "There is a physician in this city, or at least he has a sign on his door, going about day and night seemingly not in his right mind, or if he be perfectly sane, what he does and says might be attributed to buffoonery (Stram.) with desire to calumniate (Ipec.), but if a very generous view be taken of the matter, he is not responsible for his words and conduct.
He bellows on the street (Bell., Canth.), and assumes an air of importance (Hyos., Stram.).
Some of his friends have observed great anxiety with sweat (Ars., Graph.)"
Two insufficient ways. That's why a lot of doctors take only little "keynotes" to medicate a case. Then we hear Vitoulkas telling he identifies a case for "patient way of moving his hands". It is not book's teach but experience teach; and that is as good as an artist can be, but is not science, is art.
And in art there are mistakes, too usual I most say; and no way to teach the artistic method (can anyone remember Miguel Angel's great first disciple?).
There's a third way. A scientific one. Not as simple as material in which you sum all symptoms; not as simple as seeing a formal picture. But this is artistic right now, because they didn't know how occurs: simple, it is.
The artist uses it when saw the form and compares the material symptoms, then takes a solution. So simple to hear, but so very complex to do. 'Cos implies to know MM, Keynotes, common symptoms and general form (pictures).
God bless you.
------------------
(1) "The homeopathic treatment of children: pediatric constitutional types" - Paul Herscu.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
A couple of years I use to read books from Argentina. They always show these kindly pictures (in Spanish are only a few), resulting that "almost 80% of an average general pediatric practice" can be resolved with eight marvelous remedies(1).
Well, I was so amazing with this simplification that I could catalogue almost everyone into one of 20 pictures. The only problem is that I couldn't help anybody actually. And none could, 'cos here in Guadalajara this is very real.
Pictures are good 'cos gives us the "form" that patient has, but some questions come up:
1) Are pictures evolving or are always the same (patient is all his life Med.)?
2) Pictures are very simplistic, they have not "materia" -are pure form-; how can an inexpert M.D. tell a case from another (How can differentiate between Lyc and Nux-v WHEN simtoms are very similars).
3) When D. gives remedy there is always an aggravation -perceptible or not-, but if he is inexpert and the aggravation goes into different direction than "Hering" law or even he didn't know what is happening, then he turn in panic. Picture is broken ¿has evolved? ¿Is still same?
Pictures give us a form, but not a particular illness. The evolving patient will jump from thuj to phos to sulph pictures in a week, month, year. If he is better, the new manifestation will be desproportionate respect his old illness, but that didn't import to patient. The new little ill is the worst thing for him.
And there is another way of taken cases: a material one.
Kent show in his Lesser Writings in a laugh way: "There is a physician in this city, or at least he has a sign on his door, going about day and night seemingly not in his right mind, or if he be perfectly sane, what he does and says might be attributed to buffoonery (Stram.) with desire to calumniate (Ipec.), but if a very generous view be taken of the matter, he is not responsible for his words and conduct.
He bellows on the street (Bell., Canth.), and assumes an air of importance (Hyos., Stram.).
Some of his friends have observed great anxiety with sweat (Ars., Graph.)"
Two insufficient ways. That's why a lot of doctors take only little "keynotes" to medicate a case. Then we hear Vitoulkas telling he identifies a case for "patient way of moving his hands". It is not book's teach but experience teach; and that is as good as an artist can be, but is not science, is art.
And in art there are mistakes, too usual I most say; and no way to teach the artistic method (can anyone remember Miguel Angel's great first disciple?).
There's a third way. A scientific one. Not as simple as material in which you sum all symptoms; not as simple as seeing a formal picture. But this is artistic right now, because they didn't know how occurs: simple, it is.
The artist uses it when saw the form and compares the material symptoms, then takes a solution. So simple to hear, but so very complex to do. 'Cos implies to know MM, Keynotes, common symptoms and general form (pictures).
God bless you.
------------------
(1) "The homeopathic treatment of children: pediatric constitutional types" - Paul Herscu.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
In einer eMail vom 07.07.04 06:23:34 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt
floresmikael@yahoo.es:
<< 1) Are pictures evolving or are always the same (patient is all his life
Med.)?
2) Pictures are very simplistic, they have not "materia" -are pure form-;
how can an inexpert M.D. tell a case from another (How can differentiate between
Lyc and Nux-v WHEN simtoms are very similars).
7.7.4.
Yes, Medorrhinum remains Medorrhinum, he is BORN Medorrhinum. No evolving
known here so far. Lycopodium and Nux-vomica are close but nonetheless clearly
different. Take a look at Ignatia amara too, in this context. it will be helpful.
Well, in children there are significantly less remedies than in adults. It
could be that one may cope with 20-30 or so. I never counted them for myself. In
children, correct Dg. can also quite often be done on the spot, while in
adults this is seldom the case. The older the patient, the more difficult the
case. Very old patients can actually not be treated constitutionally any more,
only superficial. It is obvious why.
Sorry for interfering, kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur
(www.dr-bucur.com).
floresmikael@yahoo.es:
<< 1) Are pictures evolving or are always the same (patient is all his life
Med.)?
2) Pictures are very simplistic, they have not "materia" -are pure form-;
how can an inexpert M.D. tell a case from another (How can differentiate between
Lyc and Nux-v WHEN simtoms are very similars).
7.7.4.
Yes, Medorrhinum remains Medorrhinum, he is BORN Medorrhinum. No evolving
known here so far. Lycopodium and Nux-vomica are close but nonetheless clearly
different. Take a look at Ignatia amara too, in this context. it will be helpful.
Well, in children there are significantly less remedies than in adults. It
could be that one may cope with 20-30 or so. I never counted them for myself. In
children, correct Dg. can also quite often be done on the spot, while in
adults this is seldom the case. The older the patient, the more difficult the
case. Very old patients can actually not be treated constitutionally any more,
only superficial. It is obvious why.
Sorry for interfering, kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur
(www.dr-bucur.com).
-
Shannon Nelson
- Posts: 8848
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
Hi Miguel,
on 7/7/04 12:19 AM, Miguel F at floresmikael@yahoo.es wrote:
Not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the eight (or 20?) remedies
weren't sufficient? (That wouldn't surprise me!), but what do you mean by
"none could"? *What* is real in Guadaljara? (Sorry for all the questions,
but trying to understand...)
Pictures are useful! But can be limiting if not properly understood.
Yikes, depends who you ask, and (more) on the person and circumstances...
Most would say that the picture can change with age, trauma, circumstances,
etc.
Mm, an "inexpert" prescriber (whether MD or other) often *can't*
differentiate! That is why experience and supervision are of such critical
importance. And sometimes even "experts" need more than one try to find the
needed remedy!
Well... The "picture" of the patient will certainly change due to effects
of any remedy which acts, whether well or badly. Knowing what the change
means, and knowing how to appropriately respond, is part of what takes
training, of course! Maybe you could give a specific example, and more
specific question?
Maybe, but probably not.
The picture (meaning, "the remedy needed") will appear to change frequently
*if* one prescribes on states which are only superficially similar (changes
of mood and circumstance) or based on acutes or local states (e.g. acutes,
injuries, "indispositions", organ congestion, etc.).
*But* if one is prescribing on the patient's deeper nature and broader state
of "constitutional" being, then it will change only rarely. (Which does not
mean that an acute rx etc. would never be needed.) If a person is very ill,
and the VF very unstable, then there could indeed be rapid changes at a deep
level, and these are situations that really demand expert and very timely
prescribing; but if the state of health is reasonably good, then the deep
inner state will be reasonably stable.
Are you saying that as the patient improves, new little ills will arise and
these will become excessly bothersome to the patient? Perhaps, and that's
(a small part of) why self-prescribing isn't recommended; lack of
perspective...
Miguel, I hear your frustration, and I'm not sure what to say. Yes, any
method of prescribing will be insufficient if it is superficially practiced,
or applied to a case that is not suited to it (e.g. trying to use "mental"
symptoms on a comatose pt, etc.). Any doctor who is using keynotes *in
absence of understanding of the materia medica*, cannot be getting good
results. But keynotes used *together* with good understanding of the
remedies, can be extremely valuable.
Perhaps you are indeed seeing lots of sloppy prescribing, I simply can't
tell from here. But it appears to me that there is also *good* prescribing,
and good results, happening here and there. It's something for us to
continue striving for.
Maybe it would help if you explain what you training has been so far? Have
you had formal classes, read the Organon, or ??
It is certainly both. This will happen for *anyone*, and in any field, who
practices for a long time -- one acquires an "intuition" which can make it
*look* as tho the prescribing is based on "hunches" and indefinable things,
when in fact those hunches are solidly rooted in real understanding acquired
over the years. This happens not just in homeopathy, of course.
(Who is Miguel Angel?) No, we *don't* want to try to teach beginners to
prescribe by "artistic method"! (Is this what you feel you have been
seeing?) We want to give them the *skills* to acquire the *experience* that
will enable them to achieve their own "art" over time.
By the "scientific" way, do you mean following Hahnemann's instructions --
taking the case, analyzing it, determining the "characteristic totality" and
finding a remedy which will suit it? If not, what do you mean?
Best wishes,
Shannon
on 7/7/04 12:19 AM, Miguel F at floresmikael@yahoo.es wrote:
Not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the eight (or 20?) remedies
weren't sufficient? (That wouldn't surprise me!), but what do you mean by
"none could"? *What* is real in Guadaljara? (Sorry for all the questions,
but trying to understand...)
Pictures are useful! But can be limiting if not properly understood.
Yikes, depends who you ask, and (more) on the person and circumstances...
Most would say that the picture can change with age, trauma, circumstances,
etc.
Mm, an "inexpert" prescriber (whether MD or other) often *can't*
differentiate! That is why experience and supervision are of such critical
importance. And sometimes even "experts" need more than one try to find the
needed remedy!
Well... The "picture" of the patient will certainly change due to effects
of any remedy which acts, whether well or badly. Knowing what the change
means, and knowing how to appropriately respond, is part of what takes
training, of course! Maybe you could give a specific example, and more
specific question?
Maybe, but probably not.
The picture (meaning, "the remedy needed") will appear to change frequently
*if* one prescribes on states which are only superficially similar (changes
of mood and circumstance) or based on acutes or local states (e.g. acutes,
injuries, "indispositions", organ congestion, etc.).
*But* if one is prescribing on the patient's deeper nature and broader state
of "constitutional" being, then it will change only rarely. (Which does not
mean that an acute rx etc. would never be needed.) If a person is very ill,
and the VF very unstable, then there could indeed be rapid changes at a deep
level, and these are situations that really demand expert and very timely
prescribing; but if the state of health is reasonably good, then the deep
inner state will be reasonably stable.
Are you saying that as the patient improves, new little ills will arise and
these will become excessly bothersome to the patient? Perhaps, and that's
(a small part of) why self-prescribing isn't recommended; lack of
perspective...
Miguel, I hear your frustration, and I'm not sure what to say. Yes, any
method of prescribing will be insufficient if it is superficially practiced,
or applied to a case that is not suited to it (e.g. trying to use "mental"
symptoms on a comatose pt, etc.). Any doctor who is using keynotes *in
absence of understanding of the materia medica*, cannot be getting good
results. But keynotes used *together* with good understanding of the
remedies, can be extremely valuable.
Perhaps you are indeed seeing lots of sloppy prescribing, I simply can't
tell from here. But it appears to me that there is also *good* prescribing,
and good results, happening here and there. It's something for us to
continue striving for.
Maybe it would help if you explain what you training has been so far? Have
you had formal classes, read the Organon, or ??
It is certainly both. This will happen for *anyone*, and in any field, who
practices for a long time -- one acquires an "intuition" which can make it
*look* as tho the prescribing is based on "hunches" and indefinable things,
when in fact those hunches are solidly rooted in real understanding acquired
over the years. This happens not just in homeopathy, of course.
(Who is Miguel Angel?) No, we *don't* want to try to teach beginners to
prescribe by "artistic method"! (Is this what you feel you have been
seeing?) We want to give them the *skills* to acquire the *experience* that
will enable them to achieve their own "art" over time.
By the "scientific" way, do you mean following Hahnemann's instructions --
taking the case, analyzing it, determining the "characteristic totality" and
finding a remedy which will suit it? If not, what do you mean?
Best wishes,
Shannon
-
Shannon Nelson
- Posts: 8848
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
Why would it be that Med does not evolve, but other remedies do?
If Med does not "evolve", how do you explain my son's case, where he did
beautifully on Med from about ages 3 to 7, then moved into a strong, clear
sulphur state (and did well on it) and is now doing great under calc-c? I
think your generalizations are a bit too general!
Shannon
on 7/7/04 3:32 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:
If Med does not "evolve", how do you explain my son's case, where he did
beautifully on Med from about ages 3 to 7, then moved into a strong, clear
sulphur state (and did well on it) and is now doing great under calc-c? I
think your generalizations are a bit too general!
Shannon
on 7/7/04 3:32 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:
-
APEX PRECITECH
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:00 pm
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
Miguel,
I have read another author, AW Woodward, in his
constitutional therapeutics ( A book I bought
primarily for its catchy name) who said Phos has no
mental symptoms ! This based on his own "provings as
well as the provings of others.
Venkat
--- Miguel F wrote: > In his
mail (04-07-04, 8:20 am), M.D. Viorel V.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Careers: Over 50,000 jobs online
Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
I have read another author, AW Woodward, in his
constitutional therapeutics ( A book I bought
primarily for its catchy name) who said Phos has no
mental symptoms ! This based on his own "provings as
well as the provings of others.
Venkat
--- Miguel F wrote: > In his
mail (04-07-04, 8:20 am), M.D. Viorel V.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Careers: Over 50,000 jobs online
Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
In einer eMail vom 07.07.04 15:18:59 (MEZ) - Mitteleurop. Sommerzeit schreibt
shannonnelson@tds.net:
<< Why would it be that Med does not evolve, but other remedies do?
If Med does not "evolve", how do you explain my son's case, where he did
beautifully on Med from about ages 3 to 7, then moved into a strong, clear
sulphur state (and did well on it) and is now doing great under calc-c? I
think your generalizations are a bit too general!
Shannon
8.7.4.
I can' tell but I never heard or saw a Medorrhinum change, while the other
examples I mentioned yesterday, are met everyday. They became classics. I have
doubts at THIS evolvement - criss-crossing the borders, Medorrhinum to
Ca-ca/Sulphur or so.
The last two ones, yes, I agree with.
Sulphur and Ca-ca are close however different on several levels : craving for
sweeties and hunger at 11 a.m. plus the dirty/clean thing and the skin, of
course.
Sulphur is stronger than Ca-ca, which already is tough to break, and much
more stronger intelectually, the type of renaissance like universal genius - da
Vinci or people like that. Getting bored of something in the long range is
Sulphur, in short range is Ph.
The idea for Sulphur is the skin-problem and the inborn incapacity to
comunicate to the outside world the own inside thing - in between, the border is the
skin, therefore problems arise here and MUST be present in Sulphur otherwise
we have no Sulphur but something else. Skin problems + dirtyness, shameless,
shameless to the others around.
In Ca-ca the main problem is insecurity - these persons can not stand alone
in life, they always must lean on somebody stronger than them and offering them
security. Interesting associations and especially marriages happen ... The
ideal secretary must be Ca-sil or so or even Ca-ca.
Like the shell where the remedy is made out of. The whole picture stems out
if here.
Kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).
But there is so much to be said here ...
shannonnelson@tds.net:
<< Why would it be that Med does not evolve, but other remedies do?
If Med does not "evolve", how do you explain my son's case, where he did
beautifully on Med from about ages 3 to 7, then moved into a strong, clear
sulphur state (and did well on it) and is now doing great under calc-c? I
think your generalizations are a bit too general!
Shannon
8.7.4.
I can' tell but I never heard or saw a Medorrhinum change, while the other
examples I mentioned yesterday, are met everyday. They became classics. I have
doubts at THIS evolvement - criss-crossing the borders, Medorrhinum to
Ca-ca/Sulphur or so.
The last two ones, yes, I agree with.
Sulphur and Ca-ca are close however different on several levels : craving for
sweeties and hunger at 11 a.m. plus the dirty/clean thing and the skin, of
course.
Sulphur is stronger than Ca-ca, which already is tough to break, and much
more stronger intelectually, the type of renaissance like universal genius - da
Vinci or people like that. Getting bored of something in the long range is
Sulphur, in short range is Ph.
The idea for Sulphur is the skin-problem and the inborn incapacity to
comunicate to the outside world the own inside thing - in between, the border is the
skin, therefore problems arise here and MUST be present in Sulphur otherwise
we have no Sulphur but something else. Skin problems + dirtyness, shameless,
shameless to the others around.
In Ca-ca the main problem is insecurity - these persons can not stand alone
in life, they always must lean on somebody stronger than them and offering them
security. Interesting associations and especially marriages happen ... The
ideal secretary must be Ca-sil or so or even Ca-ca.
Like the shell where the remedy is made out of. The whole picture stems out
if here.
Kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).
But there is so much to be said here ...
-
Shannon Nelson
- Posts: 8848
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
You may doubt if you like, but that is what happened!
How many patients have you treated with Med, and what is the longest you
have treated one of these Med patients?
Shannon
on 7/8/04 10:49 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:
How many patients have you treated with Med, and what is the longest you
have treated one of these Med patients?
Shannon
on 7/8/04 10:49 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:
Re: Phos - good-bad boy?
I agree with Julian Winston in someway, but then:
My daughter is Phos now; but for a fever without reason was cured with Lachesis, when Phos were better picture and repertorized -she is a baby of 10 months-; the only way I could recognize is when I notice she didn't like clothes over his neck! With phos fever immediately go down first time, but she turned very afraid of all; fever return 8 hors after; Phos 30c again and go away but in two hours; fever came back in 8 hours; Phos 200c put her in panic, but fever go away, and then returned in 6 hours... For me it was clear she wasn't Phos in that moment so I turned to Lach 30c: fever go up, she transpired and good by unknown infection in a single night. Then, a few days after she turned very afraid, Phos 30c (her picture medicine?) now cured her.
I could explain this, but it works that way.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
My daughter is Phos now; but for a fever without reason was cured with Lachesis, when Phos were better picture and repertorized -she is a baby of 10 months-; the only way I could recognize is when I notice she didn't like clothes over his neck! With phos fever immediately go down first time, but she turned very afraid of all; fever return 8 hors after; Phos 30c again and go away but in two hours; fever came back in 8 hours; Phos 200c put her in panic, but fever go away, and then returned in 6 hours... For me it was clear she wasn't Phos in that moment so I turned to Lach 30c: fever go up, she transpired and good by unknown infection in a single night. Then, a few days after she turned very afraid, Phos 30c (her picture medicine?) now cured her.
I could explain this, but it works that way.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]