Hi H2002 (and others),
Clear communication with email is difficult so thanks for cutting me some
slack and I will try to explain my last post a little better. I will be
interspersing with parts of your post but only to act as a point of
reference for discussion - not to argue
all with
likely that
are not
produce
experiences are? If you have the ability to notice when a
potency /dosage works and change it accordingly, why do you think
others using dry doses do not have that? Do you think when someone
does not come back we do not investigate that or wonder about it? (
sheri responded to robin's posting as "Oh really?" - is that how
mutual trust in postings is developed? Do you mean to say that dry
dosers lie or are not carefully observing physicians or not-so-
conscientious practitioners? I do not like that statement for what
The implication was not that other people were lying. Because I was
accepting what they said I gave 2 reasons why I thought aggravations may not
be seen by them when I do see them. Robin, if you felt I was questioning
your integrity, I apologise - I had not intended to do so.
One of the differences I have observed, as a general rule (and I am trying
to be VERY careful with my words so that I do not sound as though I am
making iron clad statements) between practices is that closer management of
(some) liquid practices results in a higher first follow up rate than dry
prescribing practices. For example, in my own practice I would perhaps see
one, maybe two, perhaps three "no-shows" over a year for that first follow
up appt. It is very rare. I have always felt that this high return rate was
result of the close case management I have to engage in monitoring the
liquid dosing between the first and second appointment.
When I do read back to some of them at the first follow up about the
aggravations (usually minor) they reported to me via the phone as we
adjusted the dosage, it is not unusual for them to express surprise because
they had forgotten about them. A dry dose practitioner who has no or little
contact (and I am not suggesting Robin) between these appointments would not
get to hear of these - they would have been forgotten.
teachers seem
instead of a
carries a dart
May be you are right- but when you need to drag around a load what
would you use- a lumbering mammoth or a darting bird? Horses for
Remember that the post of mine was about the minority and not the majority.
With the minority I mentioned I do find that dry dosing is a like a
lumbering mammoth. I had already said the majority can cope relatively well
with dry dosing - they do not need the rapid and flexible adjustments that
liquid dosing offers even though they may benefit from them at times.
dry and water doses- and did not see a whole lot of difference -
there are people who even swear by mother tinctures- what would that
Consider that we "water dosers" are also being backed into a corner. I have
tried to find common ground in past posts by acknowledging that I too
prescribe dry at times, that dry doses work well, and that most people can
manage dry doses with ease. I know the discussion has had a "holier than
thou" and at times a vitriolic tone but I am yet to see a dry doser
acknowledge (correct me if I am wrong) that there are advantages to liquid
dosing at certain times that dry dosing can not offer.
For example, the Ramakrishnan approach to cancer. Because my own experience
with dry dosing is limited, I will draw on his. His book is full of survival
rate comparisons between dry doses and liquid plussing for the different
types of cancers. When he introduced plussing less people died. Now I am not
necessarily advocating the entire Ramakrishnan approach as it is another
"special method" - and as you know, I can get a bit funny about special
methods - but it can be useful to look at the elements and principles that
underpin a method to make it successful. In this instance it would appear
that it is nothing more than what Hahnemann taught in the later editions of
the Organon. Ramakrishnan acknowledges that there is a significant
difference in survival rates between his old dry dosing methods and his new
approach of plussing and the rapid repetition of the remedy that it allows.
In introducing this I am not trying to score points or provide others with
ammunition but just trying to point out that maybe there is something to
what Hahnemann said and what others have found.
If I look at my own practice I find liquid dosing invaluable and I will
explain some of the reasons why. The ability to change dilution, successions
and size of dose creates an incredibly flexible system of medicine to meet
many contingencies. I have already mentioned about sensitivity in other
emails but let me give you a bit of a picture of some of the ASD (Autism
spectrum disorder - how shall I change this label so I do not upset people,
especially when it is one the parents and the sufferers themselves use? - no
offence taken Joy) children I treat. They usually have a range of food
intolerances and sensitivities and some of them will be anaphylactic. The
parents who bring them to me are usually on a running wheel of other
therapies and protocols - some of them I mentioned in a previous email.
To dry dose these children would have several disadvantages for me. Firstly,
these families are putting so many interventions in place that a single dry
dose would be lost in the passage of time - it is too easy for them to
attribute any improvement in their child to the other interventions they are
making because they know nothing about homeopathy and these other
interventions have a more constant presence. The more rapid repetition that
liquid dosing allows keeps the homeopathic treatment firmly in their mind.
Liquid dosing also allows them to see that it really is the remedy that is
making the difference rather than the dietary changes, supplements,
probiotics, or whatever because they can stop it at any time and see their
child slip backwards - usually in a matter of days during the early stages
of treatment. As a general rule, those with the greatest food sensitivities
and intolerances also react the most strongly to the prescribed remedy. It
may take very infrequent olfaction doses in multiple dilutions but at least
they can treated with a minimum of discomfort. The further away from the dry
dose I take them, the better they do. The closer I take them to the dry dose
by reducing dilution, etc, the more they react so I do not even try to go
there now. I would love to hear and learn from people who can manage these
sensitivities with a dry doses - how do you do it especially where prolonged
treatment with remedy changes will be needed?
I also think, as Hahnemann said, that the rapid repetition speeds up their
rate of cure as the healing response of the vital force is triggered again
and again. I often think of the vital force as a muscle - the more often it
can be stimulated without confusion by the remedy, the quicker it will
strengthen to bring about healing.
There are also a few cases I have managed where I have prescribed rapid
changes of remedies to match rapidly changing symptoms - sometimes several a
day with rapid repetitions. One case I am managing at the moment is a person
with considerable disabilities who is at "end of life." Her disabilities are
such that only palliative remedies are being prescribed but they have been
pulling her back from the brink for several years now when she would have
otherwise died on many occasions. If I had tried to dose this woman with dry
remedies in the way I have been able to with liquid remedies, the dry
prescribers among you would have been slapping my wrists in horror long
ago - it would have been a dreadful thing to do to her yet the advantages of
liquid remedies have served her well. This is what I meant about the
"darting bird" - in and out very quickly - I am sure dry doses would have
been too lumbering here.
Phew! I am exhausted by this subject too - do not want to do much more on
it. I know that haranguing makes it very difficult for a discussion to take
place. Apologies for any that has occurred on my part. Time for bed.
Fran Sheffield
Homeopathy Plus! (Information - Education - Treatment)
http://www.homeopathyplus.com.au
The Do No Harm Initiative (Homeopathic Immunisation)
http://www.d-n-h.org