Dry Dose?

[Jeff Tikari gmail]

"(reducing its violence)" What does that mean, John?
How does 'violence' enter a remedy's property?
Jeff

[John Harvey]

Hi, Jeff --
Let me begin with a disclaimer: an unacceptable degree of unintended pathogenetic violence is something I've never seen myself in practice. Many others on this list, though, have, and Hahnemann saw too much of it in his own practice to be satisfied with its effect on the patient. I've used the word "violence" as shorthand for the extremity of the primary responses that arise to potentised medicines administered either in too great a dose (not potency) or in unchanged potency (not dose).
Hahnemann's specific references to the strength (or, in my word, violence) of a medicine's primary action include the following (specifically relevant to size of dose rather than to repetition):
"If we give too strong a dose of a medicine which may have been even quite homoeopathically chosen for the morbid state before us, it must, notwithstanding the inherent beneficial character of its nature, prove injurious by its mere magnitude, and by the unnecessary, too strong impression which, by virtue of its homoeopathic similarity of action, it makes upon the vital force which it attacks and… upon those parts of the organism which are the most sensitive and are already most affected by the natural disease"
[from § 275; original emphasis. Notice Hahnemann's use of the word "attacks", reflecting both the primary effect of a homoeopathic medicine (indeed, any medicine), which is to derange health, and its potential violence].
Hahnemann then describes precisely the relationship between the degree of violence and the size of the dose as well as its homoeopathicity to the patient:
"For this reason, a medicine, even though it may be homoeopathically suited to the case of disease, does harm in every dose that is too large, and in strong doses it does more harm the greater its homoeopathicity and the higher the potency selected"
[from ¶ 276].
The appropriateness of the term "violence" may perhaps be seen in the passage that immediately follows the one just excerpted:
"Too large doses of an accurately chosen homoeopathic medicine, and especially when frequently repeated, bring about much trouble as a rule. They put the patient not seldom in danger of life or make his disease almost incurable. They do indeed extinguish the natural disease so far as the sensation of the life principle is concerned… but he is in consequence more ill with the similar but more violent medicinal disease, which is most difficult to destroy"
[from § 276].
Hahnemann then goes on, in § 280, to offer -- in his dense language -- brilliant insight into the use of ascending doses to overcome even the medicinal illness due to a relatively gentle first dose.
The primary relevance of the (relative) "violence" in the context of the present conversation, though, is its reduction through the process of dilution and vigorous stirring. Dilution -- by reducing quantity of vigorously potentised medicine -- ensures gentleness in the first dose's effect. Stirring the container of subsequent doses removes completely the violence that may (and, in Hahnemann's observation, often did) otherwise follow those subsequent doses.
Hahenmann refers to this in the following passage:
"… this period [of 40–100 days for the cure of chronic diseases, which can at times occur after a single dose of the appropriately selected medicine] may be very happily [diminished to one-half, one-qurter, and even still less], as recent and oft-repeated observations have taught me, under the following conditions:
• firstly, if the medicine selected with the utmost care was perfectly homoeopathic;
• secondly, if it is highly potentised, dissolved in water, and given in proper small dose that experience has taught as the most suitable in definite intervals for the quickest accomplishment of the cure,
• but with the precaution that the degree of every dose deviate somewhat from the preceding and following in order that the vital principle which is to be altered to a similar medicinal disease be not aroused to untoward reactions and revolt as is always the case with unmodified and especially rapidly repeated doses"
[from § 246; original emphasis].
He then explains it:
"It is impractical to repeat the same unchanged dose of a remedy once, not to mention its frequent repetition (and at short intervals in order not to delay the cure). [Let me interrupt here to say that Hahnemann here is not hinting at doses unchanged in amount (dosage); his intention in referring to an unchanged dose is a dose that is unchanged in potency. -- JPH] The vital principle does not accept such unchanged doses without resistance, that is, without other symptoms of the medicine to manifest themselves than those similar to the disease to be cured, because the former dose has already accomplished the expected change in the vital principle and a second dynamically wholly similar, unchanged dose of the same medicine no longer finds, therefore, the same conditions in the vital force. The patient may indeed be made sick in another way by receiving other such unchanged doses, even sicker than he was, for now only those symptoms of the given remedy remain active which were not homoeopathic to the original disease, hence no step towards cure can follow, only a true aggravation of the condition of the patient"
[from § 247; my emphasis].
A footnote to that aphorism more specifically concerns this technique's relevance to potency rather than dosage:
"We ought not even with the best-chosen homoeopathic medicine, for instance one pellet of the same potency that was beneficial at first, to let the patient have a second or third dose, taken dry. In the same way, if the medicine was dissolved in water and the first dose proved beneficial, a second or third and even smaller dose from the bottle standing undisturbed, even in intervals of a few days, would prove no longer beneficial, even though the original preparation had been potentised… with but two succussions in order to obviate this disadvantage… But through modification of every dose in its dynamisation degree,… there exists no offence, even if the doses be repeated more frequently, even if the medicine be ever so highly potentised with ever so many succussions"
[from footnote 133 to § 247; original emphasis].
In a nutshell, then, the potential violence in the initial dose is reduced through dilution, and the violence easily aroused by repetition of the dose in unchanged potency is obviated completely by changing the potency by a smidgen.
Cheers --
John

[bluemax722]

Thank you John. I liked your presentation. You understand Hahnemann real well and you explain well also.

One small question.

You say "In a nutshell, then, the potential violence in the initial dose is reduced through dilution, and the violence easily aroused by repetition of the dose in unchanged potency is obviated completely by changing the potency by a smidgen."

By smidgen you mean succussion, right?
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, John Harvey wrote:

[John Harvey]

A smidgen of succussion, yes!

Thank you, Blue.

John
--
"There is no exercise better for the heart than reaching down and lifting people up."
— John Andrew Holmes, Jr.

[Jeff Tikari gmail]

There are streams of virus, bacteria, etc. entering our system continuously and being neutralized by our antibodies/lymphocites/white blood cells and then excreted without causing any symptoms. It is only when any pathogen overcomes our system defence that symptoms are produced and we medicate to bolster our immune system. When we employ homeopathic remedies above 12C, we are administering remedies that have no molecules in them only impressions in the water clusters of the original remedy. If the remedy choice is correct it will attach to the invading pathogens (in a lock & key fashion) and neutralize them. It will also attach to those biological cells that are susceptible to the pathogen and so protect them from the attack. Once the pathogens are neutralized they are safely excreted by our system. The potentised remedies with no molecules have a very short life.
Should we administer material potencies - below 12c- the the actual drug molcules remain and if in large numbers can cause a proving.
As there was no molecular science in SH's days, he did not know the action of potentised drugs.
Jeff

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

What then is you explanation of the mechanism of action when dealing with non viral/bacterial/toxic problems. like mental or emotional situations, where we do know homeopathy works very well??

Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD. "The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind". www.naturamedica.webs.com

[Irene de Villiers]

Except... that is not how it works. (Sounds like you read how antibodies work)

For example in breast cancer, it works this way:
(and there is no pathogen involved here, nor possibility of placebo effect):


And how do you explain that it helps duckweed to grow better here?


Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[Jeff Tikari gmail]

If you don't accept what I have written, just reject it. I am not going to argue over every point. Cancer is an auto-immune disfunction and I am sure you all must know how to deal with off targeted molecules.
Jeff

[Sheri Nakken]

Jeff, why do you need to believe/say that the remedy attaches to pathogens? There is no proof of that and illness is about the strength of the host and toxins primarily. Hahnemann didn't know the action of potentized remedies and NEITHER do we
Sheri

At 01:39 AM 1/26/2013, you wrote:

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

Not arguing, explaining!

I am not in the habit of accepting blindly what anybody else writes but I am extremely interested in learning different approaches, THEN only accepting, rejecting or laughing it away.

I have recently be taught that all my years of practicing surgery, studying and teaching physiology were completely wrong, and that a heartbeat was "a mere gently squeeze".......oh the humility of being finally exposed to the truth.......

And I sincerely hoped that your view of the action of remedies would carry some weight, information and increase my ability to better choose remedies.

Too bad.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD. "The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind". www.naturamedica.webs.com