Minutus

Ellen Madono wrote:
________________________________
________________________________

I agree with you entirely there Ellen-

Computers are not just for repping and there are other uses for it.
Computers can help put in making searches and using the Materia
medica in ways that cannot be done without them. The argument
against the computers are similar to the ones against repertories I
have heard in some circles.

Case taking and listening to the patient are skills that every
homeopath ought to have irrespective of the repertory / computer you
use. In the approach to take the case, there is nothing that has
surpassed the guidelines Hahnemann laid out, in my reading. This
aspect is collecting THE FACTS of the case. Ideally this collection
of the facts should be similar in all SYSTEMS of medicine - does not
matter whether it is allopathy or homeopathy. Then according to the
systems of medicine there are additional items that get collected.
In Indian and Chinese systems of medicine there are humoral
approaches and 3 or 5 element understanding. In modern day practice
these separate system based understanding is ABOVE and BEYOND
general clinical approach and should NOT SUBSTITUTE for them. This
is what Hahnemann suggested that we do and that is what we should
aim to do most of the time.

It is in the analysis of these facts that the gurus mostly differ.
Some of the gurus SUBSTITUTE their approaches for normal clinical
case taking and thereby change the facts of the case. If their case
taking and analysis go beyond the clincal case taking then that is
not a problem. Because there are still parameters that we can track
when creative case taking needs to be cross checked etc.

But whatever the approach computer usage can revolutionize the
approach we take as long as we understand that primary clinical case
taking and understanding the case from a psycho-somato-spiritual
basis is needed. once that grounding is there, other things can be
speeded up and even spiced up with computer use.

Ellen, keep up your good approach.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Ellen Madono"
wrote:
gotten to
is one
approaches to
completely
dependent on
argument
down your
sources of
if he is
me.
around the
just for
read the
the 40th
computer for
uses. I
that were
computer could
a big
remedies, or
issue of
take. That's
study is all
have. If you
books.
have nots.
homeopath
computer, but he
garbage out. I
without a
flimsy
one can save
When the
really
usually
organize
only one
is central
computer will
repping, I
for the
that I
arguments. That's
my
one with
two very
boat of
analysis
who don't
that sense;
medica.
Mangialavori I
results.
result of
medica. You can
still come up
program is a
illustrate,
concentrate
finer
understanding
problem is
has been
they do not
simply prescribe
us, no matter
wrong and
judgement of
can lay our
chaff, and
felt that I
reading and
those.
prescribing
should they
the whole
they
mechanics
general, it seems
perhaps being a
subject how
free, in
myself, I buy a
I can,
have a very
odd?
remedy
from it.
listed
computer
know
all the
rubrics in
books. I don't
they don't
physical symptoms
time
computer I
categories
pages long to
would get
You can go
exact
problem. But
specific type
instances of
because I won't
I will
throughout
be able to
book. I
I can't.
than guru
it. Of
seeing it
Slow in the
comfortable than a
pa%40bar-do.net>>
books.
http://www.wholehealthnow.com/homeopath ... usive.html)
that
describing
like Sankaran
of
was having a
Organon. ;((
to depend on
impression of the
would improve.
Furthermore, the
is claimed
their
very lame.
am sure any
how to
read more
reading. I don't
ok/miracle
software package.
was
so I resort
(botanical
solid way to
I have
are great
advanced features
that we have
them. They use
used in
compare
you how to
any good
those
making in
DVD, when
yourself.
to rep a
find the
theirs.
this kind of
seminar
and reading
training
strategies 2.) to
facility in
on
interpretation of the
helpful too.
for
Potentially, through
do not do
and that
homeopathy is not
and
-

Hi H2002,
Who argued against computers;-)

For one thing the issues was not use of computers but use of computer
**software**

Many things you can do with a computer without needing the software.
Many of the things Ellen mentioned one can do that way.

I think knowing this may be helpful to many homeopths and students who
cannot afford the software.

That was **my** point.

As to the other posts, the question to me seems to be:

Is it a good way to **study** homeopathy relying on the software?

Is using and **relying on** the software good for beginners?

----

And last not least I just do not see the polarity of using software -
any way whatsoever - to Guru following. This is comparing apples and
oranges.

Regards

Luise
Are they

--
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-
the mistake is mine. I am not talking about computers but about
homeopathic computer software. The software if properly used allows
so much more than whatever we can do manually using reps and such.

Even now there are people who rarely use the reps- most of their
practice is off their heads- whatever they remember from their MM
knowledge.

Tools ( including the reps) are worth only if they are used
correctly. So instead of pointing out why something is not useful it
might be better to find out how that thing can be made of use in the
correct way. That includes computer software as well as the writings
of the masters of homeopathy - both old and new.

The use of computers and guru following are independent of each
other- mostly - I agree with you there.
Probably not to start with but probably in a 4 year course around
the 2nd or 3rd year should be fine.
If the beginners can make good judgments - yes.

Even old hands in homeopathy make mistakes in prescribing - so
whether you prescribe from a knowledge of materia medica or just
thru repertories or using computer software - you can mistakes in
any of these. Nothing we use is fool proof. Computer software just
makes it easy to make the mistake and gives people a false sense of
pride and accomplishment in arriving at the remedy. At this I will
not fault the computer software but inadequate preparation in other
aspects of homeopathy - attention to case taking, attention to
clinical analysis of the case, attention to the value of symptoms in
prescribing- to be at fault.

The way Gurus tie into that - is some of the loosey-goosey ways that
some of them select the medicine - jumping from a periodic table to
the pharmacy table for example...and this allows doing sloppy work
justifiable - with or without computers. If the curriculum
concentrates on homeopathy as a system of medicine and not as
creative calisthenics , computer software will only help students -
beginners or life-long.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Luise Kunkle wrote:
it.
repertories I
computer
software.
who
software -
and
you
collection
not
the
collected.
practice
This
differ.
case
is
track
case
be
that
don't
take
see
troubles
surprising
other
that's
the
your
repping.
strategies. I
to
is
what
more
time
think
it.
in
and
those
homeopaths
the
prescribing,
all,
I

> Even old hands in homeopathy make mistakes in prescribing - so

Case in point:

When my oldest son was about 6, he got sick at school--headache, highly
sensitive to light, couldn't be upright without needing to vomit. Our
pediatrician checked him into the hospital for tests. Nothing obvious was
showing up, and they were talking about doing a spinal tap the next morning
if he hadn't improved.

I consulted over the phone with our homeopath (who had been treating my son
for ADHD), and his fancy computer program came up with Belladonna. That just
didn't *feel* right to me, with what I was seeing. So I labored over my
Boericke (the only book I had at the time, and still my most reliable
resource) for several anxious middle-of-the-night hours, and came up with
Nux Vomica. My husband had stayed at the hospital, while I stayed home with
our younger son, and I went over to the hospital with vials in hand at 6 am,
still wondering if I should trust my repping or my homeopath's. Oldest son
was still in the same condition as the day before, so I gave him the remedy
I'd chosen. Within half an hour, he was sitting up watching cartoons. The
doctor was amazed when she came in to check on him at 8--she'd never seen a
recovery like that. Instead of ordering the spinal tap, she discharged him.

Would the Belladonna have worked? I don't know. I do know that, even with my
pitifully weak knowledge and limited resources, I was able to come up with
an effective remedy.
Cee

Celia,
Love it. Mom out thinks her homeopath!! Keep it up.
Best,
Ellen

Sometimes, between "mama's intuition" (esp., for this purpose, tutored
by homeopathic training) plus the benefit of being able to *see*
him--I'd be willing to bet that Bell. wouldn't have worked--but maybe
nux-v would have been your h'th's next stop. Good for you!!!

Celia-

Interesting and keep it up.

I have seen this many times ( embarrassingly in a few of my own
cases) where one of my students / juniors / knowledgeable patients
found the remedy by some simple key note while I needlessly
complicated the case with endless analysis.

There was one case where I suggested Mygale ( > sleep and other
symptoms) but Phos ( my junior gave) cured (desire cold drinks).

The trick - whether it is an experienced homeopath or a beginner- is
to get to the core of the case- what are the symptoms, what are the
pertinent ones, what symptoms are new and can lead to a
prescription; this is what differentiate the beginner from the
experienced. But as they say- even the wise old Homer could nod-

So the last thing we need is hubris- Homeopathy is a tough master
that way because there are enough nuances in each case to ensure
that we do not fall into a routine and rut- the beauty of homeopathy.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Celia M. Malm" wrote:
highly
Our
obvious was
next morning
treating my son
That just
over my
reliable
up with
home with
hand at 6 am,
Oldest son
the remedy
cartoons. The
never seen a
discharged him.
even with my
up with

Hi H.2002
Nothing ever new under the sun:-)

The split between "clincal homeopathy", - i.e. clincal analysis and
thus judging the value of symptoms, both for initial selection
of the remedy and for evaluating grogress of cure - started around
1815 and has been around since then, severly influencing in manifold
ways the fate of homeopathy in various parts of the world.
There have been "gurus", created by groups of people following
uncritically the specific ways outlined by them, in all the various
methods of homeopathy (and not only of homeopathy, of course - but
this is OT:-).

Whether the prescribing of one school/method is loose or looser than
that of others has also been a matter of opinion. IMO it depends on
the individual homeopaths and also on what is considered sloppy
prescribing.

If the curriculum
This is back to the thread - and I wonder whether your aspects have
much to do with the question.

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 <==========

Hi Celia,

most homepaths - probably India being an exception - have very little
experience or even knowledge about acute prescribing.

This may explain what you write below.

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 <==========