Minutus

Joy,

I really appreciate your wealth of information.

What do you think about some people using remedies as selfcare for acute problems?
Thank you for suggesting me but I tried once before and I was dozing off every time I start reading it...it's like a tranquilizer for me!
Yes, I have his book and I read that part. It was interesting. It is saying about C potency. Why he doesn't use LM dose? I heard he is Kentian, is that why? I heard also American homeopaths are more like Kentian, is that true? Kentians use high potency and aggravate patients so it's not good isn't it? Hannemanians don't have that problems as using LM dose?
Pongo

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Joy Lucas wrote:

Dear Liz,

Thank you for your response.

I was thinking about why his homeopath didn't indicate Belladonna in first place when he was giving Hyos. I read about Bell and Hyos are very similar remedy and my son got seizure after giving of China for 3 months. They say homeopathy is safe but with my experience, giving wrong remedy for long extensive period of time is harmful. So I needed to know what timing homeopath can assess the remedy is not working and move on to next level.

So let me clear with your input. Does homeopath prescribe remedy for current status or include past history(I mean deeper concept)? Do you think when my son's homeopath was prescribing Hyos, he couldn't predict Bell was possibility?
Pongo
You ask whether the remedy is correct, and say that there are now symptoms of Belladonna coming out. Well, maybe the remedy was the best choice at the time - what is happening now is that it is indicating the next remedy that's needed.

In homeopathy you can't always hit one remedy and only one, which will be 'the one!' Sometimes it's necessary to zigzag towards a cure - nothing wrong in this - take the case as it presents and retake the case each time, prescribing on what's presenting.

Liz

Dear Pongo
I agree totally that giving the wrong remedy for too long can be harmful. But there is no single rule that says how long to wait after giving a remedy. It depends on so many different things - the remedy, the potency, the frequency, the degree of similarity with the patient's complaint etc. etc.
As for the past history of the patient, you need to know as much of this as possible in order to decide what to base your prescription on now. People change - I was chilly before the menopause - now I am much warmer. So an important 'general' symptom is totally different now from the past in my case. You should only include the past history if the symptoms are still presenting now - if something else has happened since then, and the symptom picture has changed, then you prescribe uniquely on what you see - nothing more.
Obviously you should take the past history into account - and with experience you might recognise the path that the patient is going to take as he moves towoards a cure, since remedies are often related to each other.
A simple example is a child, born with eczema, who is brought to you because s/he has started asthma. In the meantime the eczema has disappeared. Well, in that case, you can be pretty sure, because asthma and eczema are connected, that something (Vaccination or antibiotics, for example) pushed the child further along the road of ill health.
Your first task is to treat the asthma - never mind the eczema. When you have dealt with the eczema, the asthma may well come up again - and at that point you can treat the eczema.
That's a very simple illustration - often it's more complicated - life gets in the way - a bereavement, a shock, a difficult change in circumstances - all these can change a remedy picture and push you into a new state. You simply have to look at what is uppermost and treat that first.
Liz

I will try and answer your comments/questions

. how else to learn if you do not consult with Hahnemann's works - try reading the Organon in conjunction with Julian Winston's summary

http://www.julianwinston.com/archives/a ... utline.php

. you could argue that mild acutes do not need treating and to treat a moderate or serious acute requires knowledge of the diseased state, remedies, potencies, repping procedures, dosing and posology options, so, I really believe no-one should be prescribing without adequate training and supervision whilst prescribing in those early days - it is alarming to me that almost anyone can buy any rx in any potency and is free to administer - make of that what you will

. I am rather out of touch with George's practice these days - yes he was mainly C potency and sometime quite high potency but as far as I know he didn't repeat unnecessarily (this is what often causes the <<< not necessarily the high potency)

. you cannot possibly group together a country's homeopaths and say they are generally following this or that mode, too much of a generalism

. LM's used incorrectly can cause <<< in those who are particularly sensitive and even in those who needlessly are given repeat doses - so homeopathy is only as good as the practitioner is what I have always said

Joy

http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://www.streetcollege.co.uk

Thank you Liz it was easier to understand for me.

Pongo

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Liz Brynin" wrote:

Thank you Joy,

again, really appreciate it!

I will try read the Organon web site to understand more.
Pongo

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Joy Lucas wrote: