sequential homeopathy

[Paul Booyse]

Hi Mary Ann,
OK. The disturbed vital energy is not the susceptibility. It is the result of the effects of stressors on the vital force. So it remains and will re-establish disorder as any stressors are again experienced. Even before the stressors, the state is still clearly experienced. Take for example an Arsenicum patient. They tend to be susceptible to germs and "toxins" ( or poisons or allergens). Yet they are fastidious in terms of cleanliness and germs, so they experience much less stressor attack than the average person. Yet they remain anxious about these attacks and can still develop pathology, if not to these stressors then they could develop deeper pathology such as cancer etc.
Regards,
Paul
________________________________

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Sheri,

v. Bönninghausen used a sequential method. Not exclusively - but in a
great percentage of his cases. Different that of Elmiger -
but sequential nevertheless.

Yet he was to the end of Hahnemann's life his favourite homeopath. H.
kept urging him to come to Paris.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Sheri Nakken]

We were talking about Elmiger and I was then talking about Heilkunst who has since based their work, at least partially, on Elmiger
We all are sequential in some ways, but not in the way of Elmiger, ending up as Heilkunst
Sheri

At 10:03 PM 3/14/2009, you wrote:
------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases Reality
Next classes start March 18 & 19

[robin.logan@btinternet.com]

This has been discussed at length many time over on here and other forums over the years. The problem I had with method was that it seemed, at least according to the most vocal advocates, that they use specifics eg Nat mur for the grief event. I dont know if this is the correct application of the method but it put me right off. If Nat mur was a specific for ailments from grief homeopathy would be so easy but it is far from that. I think it went something like Stramonium for the fear event, Thuja for the vaccinations. Thats cant be reliable.

[Mary Ann Gilmore]

Hi Paul,
Thanks for the opportunity to communicate. I am not assuming that the disturbed vital force is the susceptibility, but that susceptibility was a part of the overall problem Dr. Elmiger was addressing when trying to reestablish the vital force. He mentioned using diet and other options along with ST. Rather Dr. Elmiger was taking into account that some susceptibilities as well as other things are inherited and that was why he wanted to remove the layers; in order to get back to addressing even prebirth issues if necessary, which is much more comprehensive than an 'allergy shot.' That is the point I am making. My conclusion from following the logic and method he proposes would include going back to whatever is necessary (or possible) in order to reestablish the vital force. Though once the layering is removed, the causes of susceptibility and/or other issues could be more clearly addressed. And of course, once the vital force is reestablished, no matter what type an individual is, and no matter how assiduous the maintenance and prevention is, in the environment humans live in now, stressors, whether the same or different, are there to impact people and disturb the vital force all over again. So one can look for an outcome of improved health, maybe even good health, to maintain, but not perfect health unless the negative stressors themselves are permanently removed, i.e. pollution, toxins, greenhouse gases, etc. to name a few.
Mary Ann Gilmore

[Luise Kunkle]

In Germany we have a saying:"Who cures is right:-)

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Sheri Nakken]

thanks, Chris, for the indepth clarification for everyone.
Sheri

At 07:26 AM 3/16/2009, you wrote:
------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases Reality
Next classes start March 18 & 19

[Luise Kunkle]

On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Christine Gillen wrote:

cut
A "somewhat" different example:

1938

Consultation: 1. July 1. Sulph C 30. 2. Calc., 3. Sulph, 4. placebo
Next cons: 12. Aug 1. Caust, 2. Puls., 4. Caust, 4. placebo
Next cons: 30 Sept 1. Bell, 2. Calc, 3. Sulph, 4. Calc, 5. placebo
The guardian was also advised that
Agreed - but I said it was different, didn't I?
1)
He started his sequential method in 1833 - 2 years befor he began his
*professional* practice, 3 1/2 years after starting to prescribe. 3
1/2 years of on-the-side practice is not all that much experience.

2)
His casebooks do contain many thousands of clinical cases - but to the
best of my knowledge these have not even been deciphered and
copied/published anywhere (except for those on my pages) never mind
evaluated.

As far as I know he never anywhere explained his method of choosing
the sequences.

If anything to the effect does exist and I am just ignorant of it -
please let me know where I can find it. I should be very interested in
such publications.

Regards

Luise
"Concordance" simply means that

--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Chris,
correction : 1838. Sorry.
I am not trying to make any point except that he used a method that IS
sequential. This is what it has in common with Elmiger and Heilkunst.
As to the other aspects of the latter two's methods I have not said
anything - cannot say anything because I do not know them well enough
to have an opinion. However, from what I do know, I should think that
they are quite different.

Anyway, here is the case:
[ square brackets mean additions by me - round brackets are part of
the document)

N Heinr. shepherd[???] [German Hirte] of horses in Walstede (38
years)

Shape[???] of illness [literally translated from German -
Krankheitsform - there are probably better ways to translate it]

Severe inflammation of eyes for 2 years, with redness of the white,
clouding of the pupil, with itching and stinging,, early [in the day]
and in sunshine worse, in the evening better. (Earlier fistulous ulcer on the
throat)

Individuals: Much sweat.

1838

1 July 1. Sulphur C 30, 2. Calc., 3. Sulph, 4. plac.

12. Aug.

The eyes much better.- Still like skin before and clouded.

1. Caus. 2. Puls. 3. Caus. 4. plac.

30 Sept.

afterwards worse rather than better. - The eyes [could not decipher
it], very [dto] - Like fog before the eyes. - Early [in the day]
worst.
1. Bell 2. Calc. 3. Sulph 4. Calc. 5. placebo

[End of record.]
Yes. That was a typo.
Who is harsh? Definitely not I. I am merely presenting what is
documented. Evaluation, where any should be desirable, I leave to
others.
I do not know what you mean. There are very few clerical errors and to
my knowledge no omissions. The above case notes are typical for his
records after he had started professional practice. Actually, typical
is the wrong expression. Practically all the case notes I have seen
are like this. From 1831 to 1835 (when he started his professional
practice) they are a lot shorter - just one line written transversely
in a copybook for each consultation.
In this case the spacing would probably have been 1 week between
doses.

When you go to my page (www.bar-do.net) you find under "Hauptteil" 50
of his cases, chosen randomly. Everyone, even those not being able to
read German, can see there the percentage of cases where he used
sequences and the dates he used them.
This is merely your interpretation. Actually I am using the word
because IMO it best describes his method. I have been using it in my
articles also. A sequence is a sequence - no matter of what, no matter
how the elements of it are chosen.

But perhaps you are right - I should probably call it: Sequence Method
to distinguish it from those of Elmiger and Heilkunst. Nevertheless:
all three are using sequences.
I never said so. You build up a frontline that does not exist and then
demolish it. That suggest a victory - but since the front did not
exist, appearances are abviously wrong:-)
This part of his career as a homeopath I have so far never even
touched, except for stating above that during this time his case notes
were even shorter.

All I have said above concerns his professional career, when he
practically never left his office to see patients. (This he stated in
one of his publications)
Indeed he did:-) But what does this signify?

I have always said that I am a "theoretical" homeopath. I have been
doing research and what I have written in my articless and posts is
from research.
No objections to anything you say above.

Nothing of this I have even touched in any of my articles or postings
anywhere, except for the last paragraph in the article that I have
ready to send to you. (You should get in in a few days)

Dr. Holzapfel has in his editorial taken this up from the point of
view of the Boger-v. Bön. approach. Since I know very, very little
about the latter I have no opinion on the validity of what he says
there. I am sure he would appreciate if, after reading the editorial,
you will send him an email commenting.

Btw. Marion Baschin is writing her dissertaion for PhD at the
IGM-Bosch on some aspects of the practice of v. B. If after conclusion
of it she stays at the Institute, research on v. B. may get impetus.
I do know the "Verwandschaften" of course. From what you write above,
Kastner's work does not seem to be based on v. B's documents but his
publications. Anyhow, afaik v. B. never published on his "Method of
Sequences" - and neither in his Verwandschaften nor in the preface to
his TTB of 1846 it is mentioned.
Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========