earthworms

[Wendy Howard]

Dave wrote:

Dave, I find this strict delineation between homeopathic MM and other
information about the same substance a bit puzzling in view of the fact that
our repertories and materia medica are full of information from toxicology,
herbal usage, etc, etc.

I see Dr J has already written in a similar vein re TCM, but there's a point
here about our remedies too.

An earthworm is an earthworm is an earthworm. However we encounter it, it
remains an earthworm and relates to us from somewhere within the morphogenic
field which we can recognise as "earthworm". Therefore *any* information or
understanding relating to "earthworm-ness" only enriches our knowledge and
understanding of its therapeutic potential - such an understanding being
every bit as important a component of the remedy prescription as finding
similar symptoms in a homeopathic proving. IMO we ignore it to our
detriment.

(And please note that I said "every bit as important", not "more
important"!)

Regards
Wendy

[isali ben-jacob]

I have never used it homeopathically. I have used it and am currently applying in several herbal compositions. It is highly effacous and functionally reflects precisely what the materica medica infers.

I am currently using it in an herbal construct in the treatment of a respiratory case; cardiac case; vertigo case; and painful swollen joints case.

You might take note that functionally it attends to issues of inappropriate fluid movement which results in fluid accumulation; ergo stagnation, that may generate heat and inflammation as a reaction, but certainly pain.

Homeopathically it seems to identify the sycosis miasm.

Robert&Shannon Nelson wrote:

[Dave Hartley]

TCM herbal materia medica is practically useless to a homeopath unless s/he
is trained in TCM.

Those portions of homeopathic MM which are based in clinical observations
are at least incorporated (for the most part) into our MM by practicing
homeopaths.

TCM has +/- 5,000 years of successful history.

If Homeopathy is to gain a third century, and gain broader acceptance while
growing as a discipline, I don't believe it will happen because of (or
assisted in any way by) pollution of it's literary & philosophical basis by
indiscriminate incorporation from UNRELATED sources of

"*any* information or understanding relating to ("earthworm-ness" or
whatever) only enriches our knowledge"

It is of little or no use to most homeopaths or students to know that TCM
uses a particular substance to treat excess of wind in gall bladder or that
the substance might tonify acupuncture point GB21, etc.

Toxicology is a different can of worms here we can rather directly
interpolate useful homeopathic data!

It *IS* of possible general interest to know that the substance has some
specific clinical action - this would be potentially useful in selecting a
substance for proving, and supervising, collating, etc.

I do understand how a TCM professional might like to think the two systems
easily interfaceable. Pehaps it is true, for some few.

Also, some homeopaths will gain insights from anywhere, any stream of
ideation in existence -nothing wrong with that, of course.. on an individual
basis, and hopefully distilled down into homeopathy "by the books" prior to
dissemination of such insights as 'homeopathic'

I don't think TCM materia medica is topical (or useful) on this list,
though... it seems counter-productive, especially (note recent example) when
student(s) may mistake TCM data provided as-if it were homeopathic MM.

regards,
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
http://www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443