The point I am disputing is *not* about whether 5th/6th ed method is
better (as I've also said, I'm willing to believe we should *all* be
learning to use it).
The thing that irks me is that you persist in criticizing 4th ed work
on bases which are simply not true--such as the idea that after taking
a remedy from a 4th ed prescriber you're simply left twisting in the
wind for a month.
You wrote:
For "an average sort of functional case" after a high potency, yes.
But that will NOT be true for every case, and if you were *treating* it
as true for all of your cases, I would assume that reflects the nature
of your caseload, and not the teaching you received.
As I know you know, examples of some cases that would *not* be left to
go a month without follow-up include: acutes (of course); a patient in
crisis (of course); a patient with a severe aggravation (*even if* the
homeopath knows no more to do than "hand-holding" and education). I
think that *every* 4th ed prescriber would modify their follow-up
schedule for these patients. Do you agree? (And some homeopaths will
make themselves accessible between appointments also for lesser
needs--that varies.)
I haven't seen many aggravations at all, over my 12-ish years in (tiny)
practice and 20-ish as a patient. It's true there have been a few.
Neither as patient nor as prescriber, tho, did I ever have the helpless
feeling you describe. Perhaps that was just my luck, and my small
patient base.
I wish you *would* stick to that.
I've been very appreciative of your posts on 6th ed method etc., and
they have spurred me to follow thru with learning about it--which is a
very good thing. What I have NOT appreciated, and where I continue to
think that you're doing both yourself and the rest of us a disservice,
is your repeated assertions that only 6th ed prescribers are even worth
consulting at all (sorry, but my guess is that even *still* most of the
best-experienced are 4th ed.; perhaps that's changed by now, but I
would guess not that much) and that repeated assertion that with a 4th
ed prescriber there's "no" follow-up "for a month"--the implication
being that this is the case for any case, no matter what the need, and
that is simply not true.
Sheri, hold your dignity.
Teach us what you *know*, and let us drink from that well. Don't foul
it with unnecessary and inaccurate "dirt" slung at people who do or see
things differently. Be the "water", and let us "horses" decide when,
where, and whether to drink; no need to tell lies about us in the mean
time.
Unlike the question of whether or not to respect people's right to make their own decisions and choices, and choose their own timing.
I guess you've saved your "kicking and screaming" for that!
I agree it is less flexible in that way, and agree that for many cases
(not all) water dosing offers advantages. I use both dry doses (high
and low) and LMs; rarely Cs in water, because I need to make time to
understand that better. Personally I feel that there are advantages to
each approach--which is why I still *use* all of them, on a "horses for
courses" basis.
My kids (13 and 18) hate the fuss of LMs (actually it's less that they
hate it, and more that they just don't *do* it, and I forget!) but both
do great with dry dosing high.
My brain-injured friend at one point could not manage LMs at all--could
not remember the instructions, cried when I tried to explain. But
after some progress on dry doses (with me phoning every day or so to
evaluate progress, since she could not remember the past enough to
compare it with the present) had improved enough that LM doses were not
a problem. (Now we use different scales at different times. Oh, and
by the way, I did not make her go a month between follow-ups.
)My husband won't do *anything* that requires "messing with", but will
open his mouth for me on request.
A friend that I started on an LM years back has done really well with
it--except that once she's feeling better she stops remembering to take
it, until months and months later when she's complaining about some
familiar issue and I ask, "Is your remedy still helping with that?"
And she says, "What a good question, I haven't taken it in a long
time." So she tries it again, and it works again... I think she's
another good candidate for a dry dose high!!
I too have been puzzled about why he spoke so strongly against
repeating same dry potency, when generations of homeopaths have not
seen a problem with it. With high potencies there are usually not more
than a few repetitions of a single potency, and those usually months or
years apart. But I also sometimes use repeated *low potency* dry
doses, repeated usually every 2 to 8 days, sometimes months at a time,
and have not seen any trouble from it--tho freely admit this may not
always be the case.
a) low potency of same remedy (it does *not* antidote, but can soften
the agg)
b) general supportive measures
c) "hand holding," education, emotional support. Hasn't happened
often. One exception is where the pt had pretty bad agg of his asthma,
which lasted I think a couple of wks. 12c one or few times daily did
help, but he was still wheezy. I asked (anxiously) whether he wanted
me to suggest possible antidotes, but he said--as, in my limited
experience with aggs has been *characteristic*--No, actually he felt
*great* aside from the fact that he couldn't breathe
and he was fine just waiting it out.
same, I felt *great* aside from the (suddenly trivial-seeming)
physiological crisis. All I needed was explanation and encouragement,
and I was happy to wait it thru. I was, in fact, happy to know that
*definitely* something was *happening* and that things would be better
afterwards! It has just never been a source of pain for me, not as
patient, nor as mama to patient, nor as prescriber. Perhaps I've just
been lucky...
Good!
Ouch, there ya go. That is where your credibility suffers, IMO.
A person can be "tearing down", or they can be "building up"--you can't
do both at the same time. The time you spend spreading untruths about
those you don't agree with, would IMO be better spent in building up in
ways that will benefit us all.
Watch David Little--he speaks his truth *without* spitting on anyone
else's.
(And, FWIW, he has also said he feel that *all* of the dosing methods
have their place. I wonder why you feel that *you* know so much better
than he does on that score?)
Then it's a darned good thing that my friend was not being treated by
you thru her head injury, nor my husband thru his macho stoicism.
Things have a way of working out, eh?
Shannon