Minutus

And he also writes, in Chronic Diseases, in the Sycosis chapter, of
alternating Thuja and Nit-ac and in difficult cases moistening the eruption
with the juice of the thuja leaves mixed with alcohol.

Joy

www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 10/28/03 5:07 PM, Rosemary C. Hyde, Ph.D. at rosemaryhyde@mindspring.com
wrote:

I understood from Atiq's post that he was giving a potentized remedy
internally and also applying the same remedy externally at the same time.
It didn't sound as if he was thus treating merely a local eruption, but I
may have misunderstood. In any case, what he said reminded me of this
fascinating passage from "Chronic Disease". Here's the quote from "Chronic
Disease," Volume 1, pages 158-159 in my copy (Reprinted 1998 B Jain
Publishers). I found it fascinating, since no one had ever mentioned it --
it certainly hasn't entered into the usual and customary methods for
administering homeopathic remedies. Rosemary
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Soroush and all,

This is an interesting area:

on 10/28/03 11:04 AM, Finrod at finrod@webstar.co.uk wrote:

inert and of course not allopathic. Aqueous Lotion is perhaps one.

I'm not familiar with the phrase "aqueous lotion". Do you simply mean
water, as placebo?
Do you mean you feel it is improper to put *anything* on the skin? In some
cases this won't be practical (the parents or patient won't tolerate the
discomfort), and in some extreme cases it would even be dangerous, as the
skin can (rarely, I admit) become so raw that infection and dehydration are
concerns. In either of these cases I would think that *some* measure ought
to be available.

But even aside from that, I don't think that every external comfort measure
ought to be considered a "remedy" (tho of course it is an attempt to "remedy
the situation"). I think this is where the term "palliation" becomes useful
-- measures such as moisturizer, oatmeal bath, food-grade oil, perhaps
calendula, and no doubt other possibilities, will be neither curative (as
they don't address the cause and need to be continually applied) nor
suppressive (as they don't impact the vital force, but have pretty much of a
local effect). Would you consider these things objectionable, or is that
not what you were talking about?

Shannon

> To be honest, I have not had a bad agg on LMs

Dear Soroush,

But it can happen! You can see severe aggravation even
after the first dose of an LM precription esp when the
patient is hypersensitive and the dose is not
adjusted.

Regards,

Ardavan Shahrdar

=====
"Life is beautiful, if you look at it in a beautiful way."

Dr Ardavan Shahrdar, MD, DIHom
President of Iranian Homeopathic Association
Website: http://www.minutus.org
Email: ashahrdar@yahoo.com
Mailing list: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk

Dear Rosemary,

I use this principle for acutes too. My three year old daughter woke up vomiting and was worse for drinking so she was not going to take a remedy orally. I succussed Verat Alb and placed a drop or so inside a wrist every half hour and after four doses she fell asleep. When she woke she felt a bit better but liquids still upset her. A few more doses on the wrists and she slept again. This time she woke up demanding dinner! I fed her very carefully in small portions but she was right as rain.

Used the same principle to effect when my husband was vomiting (different remedy). Energy is energy.

Best wishes, Elizabeth

30.10.03.
Well, if Hahnemann would have lived today homeopathy would have been
different not the practicing of it, due to radical change in pathology spectrum. This
is unfortunately one of the great mistakes which are made today : reading old
materials and apllying the knowledge to TODAY'S diseases, 80% or so much
different or totally new ! Kind regards, Dr medic V.V.Bucur ( www.dr-bucur.com).

30.10.03.
There are many remedies for wharts, Thuja being probably the most frequent
and efficient one as well as Ca-ca for truly many children.
"Chronic diseases" ( the 6 volumes ) should not be read because it is not
actual any more, being already severely contradicted by new research and
information. This book as well as some southamericans should better be left in the
libraries and included in the chapter "history of medicine".
Kind regards, Dr medic V.V.Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).

on 10/30/03 9:11 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote:
Considering only the "theoretical part" (leaving out the long lists of
symptoms observed), what is it that you feel has been contradicted?

Shannon

1.11.03.
Answer to : shannonnelson@tds.net/Chronic diseases : well, it just does not
fit anymore, like a lot of other stuff initially formulated by Hahnemann, the
whole miasm theory etc., etc., grouping remedies in tuberculinic, luesinic,
etc. Many southamericans went this way out of whatever reason - a lot of rubbish
had been written actually, confusing people for years.
To put it short : the term of constitution should only have a orientative
importance ( patient coming in, you just look at him and say - this person might
belong to that or that group, in very general terms). The rest should run only
for the polychrests and their satellites and no other influence whatever. I
think this is the approach which brings the most realistic chances for succes.
Please comment. I am not the only one proceeding this way.
Unfortunately, many young doctors are told to read all that stuff so from the
very beginning they pick the wrong road and later do not understanding
ANYTHING ending in confusion and foul compromise.
It is of paramount importance to start from the beginning with the really
good books
Kind regards, Dr medic V.V.Bucur ( www.dr-bucur.com ).

Hi Dr. V.Bucur,

Taking the last first, , which do you consider the "really good
books" that one ought to start with?

As to whether miasms theory is rubbish (and are you also referring to other
"stuff formulated by Hahnemann", or just specifically his miasm-related
stuff?) -- I don't have enough clinical experience to talk authoritatively
about that! But I have heard folks who *do* have enough, who seemed to feel
-- who *said* they found, at any rate -- that miasms theory becomes
invaluable in certain cases, and in long-term treatment of any chronic
disease. I recall Hahnemann's description (in CD, I think?) of how, in his
early years of practice things went swimmingly well, patients got well --
apparently. Then the ailments returned and over time the still "indicated"
and formerly effective remedies no longer worked, and this is what led to
his development of miasms theory, etc. Evidently you have a different
interpretation of that experience of his, and feel that he ought to have
handled it in a different way? Can you detail that for me?

I am not sure I understand what you mean by
Are you saying here that only polychrests and their known-to-be-related
remedies ought to be used, or are you saying that nosodes are useless
(unless indicated by totality), or ??

Thank you,
Shannon

You keep telling us the read the GOOD books.
Would you mind listing those that are good in your opinion and explain why they are better than the others???

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"