Digest Number 464

[frogsisland.freeserve.co.uk]

re logistical considerations.

If the average homeopath sees 35 patients a week and sees them, on average
every six weeks, they could be said to have 210 patients receiving
on-going, current treatment.. If only 50% of them have taken a liquid
potency or low potency remedy which the homeopath is anticipating having to
repeat before the 6 weeks are up, eg on a daily basis, theoretically that
homeopath could have 105 ten minute phone calls in an evening (17.5 hours?)
Of the other 50% there will be people ringing with acutes, possible
aggravations etc anyway. I do realise that not all the 'possible repeaters'
would ring every day but I can see why so many of us( including me) estimate
the likely repetition required, and tell the patients to get phone if they
feel they need to.The practical alternative to this is never to give more
than one dose of anything between appointments, which in itself is imposing
a 6 week gap that may not be appropriate. (Or is this the reason that the
Dr mentioned in another context sees 50 people in a 12 hour day? -something
that was presented as admirable and which nobody queried!). From my own
experience, I have had few if any real problems with predicting what
repetition will be required and I'm not sure if my patients would be
prepared to ring up before every tablet or drop anyway...

I have also worked out that if a homeopath ( such as me) commonly uses
remedies in 6 potencies or more and has about 250 remedies and wishes to
test for optimum potency for each remedy before prescription rather than
trusting to experience of remedies and, conditions and patients, they would
need 1500 remedies already and to order each new one in, say, 6 potencies:
with LMs, CMs, 3Xs and tinctures the possible number would be even higher.
To test every remedy using muscle testing or ART thus seems quite
unrealistic unless you use a remedy making machine. Before I did that I
would like to be reassured of the efficacy of the method. This would,
actually, be perfectly possible. If 5 practitioners skilled in the relevant
technique were to observe/take one case and between them draw up a
shortlist of remedies and potencies and test them as described they would,
independently, come up with same remedy and potency for the patient.
Although we can't do double blind trials on homeopathic treatment we could
on this, as only one remedy and potency in the range offered could be
optimal. May be this research has been done - if so I would like to read it
and am perfectly ready to be persuaded.

I appreciate that in our discussions we are looking at questions of
principle and best practice ( and quite rightly so), and this probably looks
a bit flippant. However there is a serious problem, I believe, with
homeopathic graduates being too nervous of making mistakes to get started
and another with homeopaths who do get beyond the 'handful of patients'
stage actually hanging on in there. Perhaps those of us who have sustained
reasonable practices over some years should stick our heads above the
parapet occasionally on how we manage to do it without having a private
income or suffering nervous breakdowns.

However, you might think I could be better employed than sitting here
making these, possibly
pointless, calculations!

Theresa

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Re
This is telling the same as Aph 245:
"Every perceptibly progressive and strikingly increasing amelioration in a
transient (acute) or persistent (chronic) disease, is a condition which, as
long as it lasts, completely precludes every repetition of the
administration of any medicine whatsoever, because all the good the medicine
taken continues to effect is new hastening towards its completion. Every new
dose of any medicine whatsoever, even of the one last administered, that has
hitherto shown itself to be salutary, would in this case disturb the work of
amelioration.

Hahnemann is telling us, it is possible to repeat every day 'if necessary'
(in contrast of the waiting for periods of forty, fifty or a hundred days),
but he is not telling this daily repetition is a 'must' for the LM's.

and also re
discussion of number of remedies required to use response testing techniques
for potency selection