Minutus

Hi Shannon,
you're pulling my leg right?



Simon
==========================
Simon King LCPH MARH
http://www.Homeopathy-Help.net

Pleeease let the answer to this be "No"

Zinc is well know for its suppressive powers - the MM is well known -
'retrocession of eruptions' and any prompt disappearance of chronic
skin cases will be worrying. They can take time to be cured fully but
as always the correct rx (+ potency and dose) prescribed with as few
adversities as possible (such as steroids etc) will alleviate quickly
and then lead on to cure.

Almost every rx in the Materia medica will have some kind of skin
eruption so we have to try really hard to make sure we get the rx
correct as soon as possible. If the case is so difficult the refer the
client elsewhere rather than suppress even more with Zinc. Joy
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.blogspot.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kind of, because I gather you don't approve!
As to why calendula should be okay but zinc not-okay (as seems a common
assumption), I could only speculate.

Seriously, tho--I don't think Carol was asking about using zinc
ointment *instead* of prescribing, but as an adjunct. I suppose the
reason for not doing this is that it seems *too* effective; no outlet
left for the body, and also once that symptom is gone, you've removed a
useful sign of how or whether the remedy is acting--does that fit your
thinking about it?
Shannon



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Zinc as well as other creams are suppressive. ( Boericke talks
about Zinc as "Poisoning from suppressed eruptions and discharges").
Any remedy that is so very therapeutic for suppressions like Zinc
is - in potencues is also the most suppressive if applied
externally. Why else is Sulphur so good for suppressions- remember
about Sulphur ointments? The same case with steroid creams...There
are so many cases with eczema that progress to asthma after
steroidal and other suppression.

I have repeatedly seen this in practice. Not only are they
suppressive they also delay the time it takes to cure the case with
homeopathy, I have seen a case of chicken pox where for the initial
lesions some Calamine lotion ( I am not exactly sure whether an anti-
histamine was mixed with it ( Caladryl) was applied and for the
latter lesions nothing was. The lesions that got the cream became so
big almost like small pox lesions and the ones that did not get the
cream were typical of chicken pox and disappeared promptly after the
indicated remedy given internally. Even in the initial lesions
wherever the cream was not applied they also went away quickly. I
would rather that people did not try any kind of external
application for skin lesions. Even the character of the lesions
become changed after external application and you lose another way
of finding the remedy. Nothing is universally neutral...

In Kent's lesser writings Kent describes a case of eczema cured with
Mezereum. ( There was none of the mentals, generals and all the kind
of stuff Kent preached but probably forgot to put into practice in
that case but that is another story altogether). He gives only the
PHYSICAL symptoms of the lesion itself and bases Mezereum on that
and cures the case. By using external applications we lose that
kind of information.

The only external application in any skin case that I would ever
allow is some non medicated coconut oil or vaseline esp since most
of the patients in India use this oil daily for their hair and so
are used to it.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Shannon wrote:
common
the
outlet
removed a
your
wrote:
)) )
looking
to be
but I
MARH
easier
think
the
------
---
no
email
their use
site or
consequential,
simply
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to
no
for any
with the
individual
simply
receive
Terms of
----
-----
no
email
use
or
consequential,
simply
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to
recommendation
any
the
special,
change
receive a
Service.

What about oatmeal baths for chicken pox? Very soothing to the skin,
and didn't *seem* to be suppressive?
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

ADJUNCT!?

very funny!
S

==========================
Simon King LCPH MARH
http://www.Homeopathy-Help.net

I can't believe the question was asked in the first place

S
==========================
Simon King LCPH MARH
http://www.Homeopathy-Help.net

Why funny? I'm definitely missing something...
I've never used it; maybe if I had, I'd be getting the joke...
:-/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sorry I thought you realised,
anything suppressive will work in the opposite way to homeopathy, so
using at as an adjunct is not possible

==========================
Simon King LCPH MARH
http://www.Homeopathy-Help.net

Plain common sense would tell me that if the Zinc ointment makes the skin
eruption disappear, it's no different from using a heavy prescription drug
that will drive the disease inward! And, as Hahnemannian says, the change of
symptoms even just at the skin level can really delay the cure (not to
mention the possibly terrible complication of the whole disease).

Look around you, folks. I keep taking cases of patients treated with
external suppressive lotions or ointments for their skin problems: the
disease almost always seems to go to a more important organ. We don't know
for sure how the organism might react, but why take the risk? If the vital
force is showing us a skin sx, then that skin sx should be cured because the
VF did it, not thanks to an external application. If the remedy is not
capable of curing the eruption, then it's not the correct remedy or it's not
the correct potency, or there's a Miasmatic obstacle to the cure... do you
not agree?

Besides, those cases on which the skin sx got "all better" thanks to
suppressive treatment tend to depend upon the constant application of the
ointment to keep the eruption from coming back (and this could be the best
case scenario, since the VF hasn't completely given up expressing itself in
the least harmful fashion yet): what have we healed in such fashion? Most
people with difficult skin eruptions use suppressive products on a daily
basis, and usually for years.

I've never used a zinc ointment, but if it's that impressively *effective*
getting rid of eruptions, I would consider it suppressive.

Now, if we're lucky enough to nail the perfect simillimum in the right
potency and *cure* the patient *in spite of* the external suppression,
maybe we won't forever regret to have advised our patient to use the topical
"treatment". This off course assuming we have the certainty that the patient
has afterward completely suspended the application of the external product.
And, realistically speaking, how many patients do discontinue the use of
something that makes the skin problem stay away? How do we know if we have
truly healed the patient? If the skin symptoms have disappeared, they might
take months or years to return (if they do at all; if the disease hasn't
gone to a more important vital organ), and by then who knows if the patient
will return to see us or just rub the ointment that they can get for $2 at
the store...?

I'd definitely try to convince the patient not to put anything on the skin
other than water and soap (sometimes I wonder if it'd be a good idea to
recommend the discontinuation of soap, since they tend to contain
strong antibacterial ingredients). I do ask them to try to get soaps and
shampoos with only organic ingredients and no preservatives.
I actually like to make an inventory of all the stuff the patient rubs on
his/her skin. Ask them what they have in the shower! Guys, we are
living the Third Reich of the pharmaceutical era.
Most cases that I take include the daily use of anti fungal products, and
sometimes the patient is not even aware of it (as in most cosmetic products,
including foundation, moisturizer, etc). When you have a patient that has
dandruff, do you ask them to stop using the Selsun Blue? I do.

On the other hand, are oatmeal baths and home-made calendula lotion
necessarily suppressive? How about cocoa butter, aloe lotion, coconut oil,
Shea butter? How about mud baths or face marks? I'm sure that they're not
half as bad as your Johnson & Johnson baby soap bar, as far as harmful
ingredients are concerned (including carcinogenic ones).
I would expect the non-processed, organic ones to at the very least present
a lesser risk of poisoning the patient. Perhaps they're actually helping
without suppressing, such as in early morning sun baths, or when a patient
seems to see an amelioration from bathing the affected part (or are
those suppressive?)...

We have to agree perfectly on what *suppression* is in order to find the
answers we need.
So, what is suppression?

Best,
Caro.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]