Minutus

Toni,
So you have found that, if a patient is alternating between two distinct
states, each state apparently requiring a different remedy, then if you give
both remedies at the same time, the one not presently needed will begin to
act, or continue acting, such that it is able to treat the state which is
not being expressed at the time the remedy is taken?
Thanks,
Shannon

on 1/10/05 3:39 PM, dusty1197 at dusty1197@yahoo.com wrote:

No, Shannon, what I meant by giving more than one remedy "at once",
is that I don't use a single simillimum at a time in such cases. I
should have been more specific. My mistake. I don't mix the
remedies, nor does the client take two or more at exactly the same
time or in the same dose. What I do is determine which chronic
states are present and prescribe accordingly. If I feel that, say,
3 remedies are appropriate, then I will have the client take one in
the morning, another in the afternoon, and the third at night.

In many of these cases, compliance is a problem, as is mental
confusion and poor insight. It would be impossible to expect the
client to select from among the remedies which is appropriate to
which state at any given time. Since all of the chronic states are
present and each takes precedence at various times (usually
unpredictable, except with some of the acutes, which tend to surface
in response to certain stimuli), I just put the client on a cycle of
appropriate remedies. I often do, however, include acute remedies
to be taken PRN, since it's common for acute states, such as rages
or fear/anxiety (panic), to occur. But these are not predominant
except as acute states. Sometimes, it is a caregiver or family
member who is responsible for dosing.

As the case progresses -- and these are cases that require close and
frequent monitoring -- the remedies are adjusted accordingly. The
client may report that s/he no longer has episodes of panic or
rages, or that s/he no longer feels that his/her hands are
transferring contaminants from one surface to another, but that they
are experiencing an increase in intrusive sexual thoughts. Then the
remedies are changed accordingly and a dosing cycle is established.

Toni

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Robert&Shannon Nelson
wrote:
distinct
if you give
begin to
which is
In a
so
than
state.
over
or
condition"
chance
Because
than
anorexic
or a
a

Thanks Toni, I'm getting closer but still not quite understanding...
Do you mean, then, that they're taking daily doses of the remedies that seem
to pertain to their regularly recurring states? Would you be up for giving
an example, and explaining why you felt that separate remedies were needed,
not one remedy that could cover both? (I'm not trying to be dogmatic, but
this isn't an approach I'm familiar with and I'm hoping to understand!)

Just for discussion, an approach I was taught that I *think* might pertain
to the situation you describe, is to give (and we were mostly taught high
potency use) a remedy for the most prominent "state"/complaint, then
changing the remedy as the presenting picture changes. But maybe that's not
for the same sort of situation... An example might help, if you're up for
it?

Shannon
on 1/10/05 5:07 PM, dusty1197 at dusty1197@yahoo.com wrote:

Hello Cinnabar,

expectation

Sure, and in fact I had a case today of someone with dystonia and panic
disorder, who used to be OCD (checking things 1000x etc) who says she is not
so bad now. I have given her Argentum nit for now, but feel that in her
history and with other stuff, there is thuja lurking there. So if all goes
well the Arg.nit will help the current condition, would probably have been
indicated for the OCD, but in both instnaces I feel that once the OCD was
better or now if the dystonia and panic attacks improve (i.e. Arg nit is
curative) there will still be other issues that thuja will clear. We will
have to see, but my experience is that the OCD or the panic disorder or the
dystonia would clear with one remedy. If not wth Arg nit, then perhaps with
thuja, meaning arg nit. was not indicated and I got it wrong.

In your example too, you are talking about ONE remedy for a particular state
and then another remedy for the next (deeper) state. That ties up with the
Organon on acute and latent psora or acute and chronic disease or sometimes
a mixed miasm case. So back to the OCD, one remedy for that state, but
perhaps further treatment for optimal health.

No doubt some case may occur that needs that remedy still sitting the amazon
jungle, and so we have zig-zag from one remedy to the next, but with OCD, so
much can be found in remedies such as Arg.nit, Ars alb, Thuja etc.

Regards,
Paul

Robyn,

I've been slowly (amid interruptions and distractions!) working my way thru
the Lois Hoffer links you sent, but now my (other) computer has died, so
could you send me those links again? Thanks--I'm finding them fascinating!

Do I remember right, that the veracity of Lutze's attributions of some of
Hahnemann's supposed words is not universally accepted?

Anyway, it's a thought-provoking read!
Shannon
on 1/11/05 3:45 PM, Paul Booyse at pb000014@pixie.co.za wrote:

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Robert&Shannon Nelson
wrote:
understanding...
that seem

*** Yes.

Would you be up for giving
were needed,
dogmatic, but
understand!)

*** Sure. I have a case of a woman with bulimia nervosa who has
extreme lack of self-confidence and finds that food allays the
anxiety she feels at her fear of failing. She is in conflict with
herself, as part of her wants desperately to pursue a career and to
prove to her parents that she is a success, but the other part of
her is convinced that she will fail at it. It is an ongoing inner
struggle that she feels helpless to overcome and eating relieves it.

*** Co-existing with her bulimia nervosa, the woman also suffers
from OCD which manifests as an extreme fear of germs and
contamination. She washes her hands excessively and refuses to
touch her children if she so much as handles something that might
have come into contact with something else that might have become
contaminated by the ground (i.e. if her husband places the newspaper
in its plastic wrapper on her washing machine, then through
transference, the surface of the washing machine is contaminated by
the plastic wrapper which has come into contact with the ground and,
therefore, if she touches the washing machine her hands become
contaminated and need to be washed). She has an obsessive anxiety
about her family's health and plies them with all manner of vitamins
and supplements. Everything she does in caring for them is
excessive and represents more than anyone would need to arrive at a
healthy regimen. She exhibits compulsive rituals of checking and re-
checking and has a pathological need to control the environment.

*** And as if this weren't enough, the woman is also schizophrenic.
She speaks to her parents, who are not present. She goes into
unpredictable and spontaneous rages where she tears up anything she
can get her hands on. She has to have lights on all over the house
and is terrified of meeting her own gaze in a mirror.

*** This woman goes into and out of these states, but they are all
present. There's no way that one remedy would adequately cover all
of them. I rxd Anac, Ars, and Stram.

It can be very difficult organizing the different symptom complexes
and a person needs to do a lot of research into and gain a good
understanding of mental illness. I always pursue the indications
that are most clearly representative of each disorder and clarify
with the client the feelings and emotions that correspond with the
clinical pathology (i.e. What makes you want to binge and purge?
Does it make you feel better in some way? How do you feel
afterward?) If it happens that I see only one remedy, regardless of
how many clinical disorders the client suffers with, then great! I
start with the one remedy that seems most indicated. If I see
improvement with it, I won't set out to try and find others But
if I can clearly see that more than one remedy is indicated, then I
don't allow myself to be hindered by philosophical restrictions. I
give the client what s/he needs.

Toni
pertain
taught high
then
that's not
you're up for
once",
cases. I
same
say,
in
are
surface
cycle of
remedies
rages
and
The
they
the
established.
will
different
looks
this
of

similar
many
OCD,
different
to
Homoeopathy and
regarding the
document read or
and/or email
use remains
individual
special, punitive
with the
daily

If part of this discussion is about a single remedy then I would say that
there is most definitely a remedy that would cover these states (which are
part of ONE diseased state not 3).

And how can you know which rx is doing what. Remedies can take time to work
so if there is a reaction, good or bad, how do you know which remedy is
working?

Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 11/1/05 10:52 pm, dusty1197 at dusty1197@yahoo.com wrote:
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joy, Shannon, Soroush,

I'll answer as best I can in one condensed email. First, I don't go
into any case with the intention of using more than one remedy at a
time. Like each of you, I want to find the simillimum. It provides
better control over the case and, as Joy pointed out, it makes it
easier for the practitioner to know what the remedy is doing and how
the client is responding to it.

If a client with a multiple MI diagnosis describes to me that s/he
is particularly bothered by one subset of symptoms (usually it
belongs to one of the disorders with which the person has been
diagnosed), then I will begin by addressing only that by using the
remedy which is most similar. But there are times when a client
exhibits distinct states, each equally disruptive to his/her ability
to function, that differ from one another. Let's just say that the
sense-perceptible alterations of his/her condition assert themselves
differently at various times and one remedy is simply not suitable
to all of them.

Let's consider how important it is to get a diagnosis of a physical
malady. It provides information on which organs/systems/tissues are
affected, how they are affected, what is required to restabilize or
repair, etc. The same applies to mental illnesses. Each has a
pathological picture, many involve changes in brain chemistry, and
with enough study and exposure to their presentations, one becomes
familiar with the subsets of symptoms that each generates. A
practitioner, for instance, would not confuse the symptoms of
diabetes with those of MS any more than a practitioner should
confuse the symptoms of OCD with bipolar disorder. Knowing what I'm
seeing and understanding the source of what I'm observing is
paramount to recognizing and distinguishing between the various
disorders in a complex diagnosis.

As far as limiting the complexity of the living organism to one
state at a time, I realize that we can go around and around
endlessly and in the final analysis still not agree. Isn't the
human psyche complex enough to support more than one state at a
time? Or are we more likened to rocks?

Here's another example: I had a case of a middle-age woman whom I
saw in her home because she was intensely agoraphobic. She was
absolutely terrified of going out alone and always suffered an acute
panic attack if she tried. Since there was no one to bring her to
see me, I went to see her. Aside from the obvious impairment of the
anxiety disorder, she was married to an unreasonable man and always
felt frustrated. Her primary physical complaint was recurring
bladder infections that were aggravated by intercourse as well
intense urging to urinate after intercourse.

I rxd both Ars and Staph. This was a woman who clearly demonstrated
two distinct states: One of intense fear along with its subset of
symptoms; the other of suppressed anger and its subset of symptoms.

It matters not to me whether interpretations of certain aphorisms
are in conflict with one another. My client needed more than one
remedy, and that's what she got.

Toni

P.S. She progressed very nicely, suffering only minor aggravations.
She reached the point where she was able to express to her husband
when she was too tired to engage in intercourse, rather than
submitting to his every desire. Slowly, over *many* months, with a
gradual increase in potency, she was able to step through her
doorway, then walk to her mailbox, then sit in her car, then back to
the end of the driveway, etc. until she regained her life. Now,
should I have done things differently simply because of the
assertion that she suffered with one dis-ease and not two, or
because there are aphorisms that are subject to interpretation, one
of which might contradict my method? Not a chance!
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, J Lucas wrote:
say that
(which are
time to work
remedy is
with
to
inner
it.
all
all
complexes
the
regardless of
great! I
But
then I
restrictions. I

on 12/1/05 8:22 pm, dusty1197 at dusty1197@yahoo.com wrote:
***this discussion has occurred quite a few times before, whether the
mind/body can support more than one diseased state at a time and I¹m not
going to write about that here but your examples seem to suggest that, e.g.
we could have an individual who is suffering from diabetes, rheumatic
conditions, has recurring headaches, outbreaks of eczema, is mentally quite
dull and emotionally very weepy = then she should receive one rx for each of
these states. This is homeopathic nonsense to most classical practitioners.

But maybe she only need Staph. You are still not saying how you manage a
case where you are giving more than one rx. How do you know what cured her.
If there had been terrible aggravations how do you know which rx was
reactive.

For the examples you have given there definitely is just one remedy that
could have been used. I don't know why you are making it so hard for
yourself and I am certainly not convinced.

Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com

*** I'm not trying to "convince" you, Joy. You asked; I answered.
What's the point in challenging success stories? I share my
experiences; you share yours. If never the 'tween shall meet,
that's okay with me. I still enjoy reading and opening my mind to
the possibilities of learning something new or different. These
clients got better and regained their normal functioning. How do
you measure cure......?

rheumatic
mentally quite
for each of
practitioners.

*** I will say, however, that your comparison of physical conditions
to psychic states is, IMO, a mistake. If I have a client who
developed diabetes after experiencing a tremendous loss, you and I
both know that the psyche is the seat of dis-ease, not the soma.
After all, it was Hahnemann who instructed us to place major
emphasis on the "state" of mind, not the "state" of the pancreas.

Toni