Page 3 of 6

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:18 pm
by Luise Kunkle
Hi Chris,
How many different substances, just occurring together without any
chemical interaction, are combined in any plant remedy, any animal
remedy.

It is moder regular medicine that takes them apart, never homeopathy.

Regards

Luise

--
One thought to all who, free from doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:19 pm
by Luise Kunkle
Hi Chris,
No one, *no one* knows the homeopathic mechanism at work in any
homeopathic remedy. All our explanations are at best hypthese, at
worst plain speculations. If we explain them to our patients as facts,
we are telling them plain lies.

Do you ever wonder why it is that combo

Before making such a statement or better even before getting
convinced of it oneself one should first find out whether it is true!

How can the theoretical basis that applies to

Who says it doesn`t?

I'm intrigued as to how a

We expect the people sceptic of homeopathy to accept
experience/evidence of cures in lieu of scientific proof. Yet we tell
people like Didi (and others) that their experience does not count,
that their evidence is sham cannot be because it does not agree with

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free from doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:28 pm
by Luise Kunkle
Hi Christine,
A great percentage of prescriptions even of the moste purist
homeopaths are based on symptoms that *never* occurred in provings.
They got into the MMs and repertories because they had either occurred
when treating a patient ( one might or might not call this an
"accidental" proving, depending on how narrowly "proving" is defined)
or, more topical, they were symptomes that disappeared when the remedy
was given.

It is really hard to understand that homeotaths are not aware of that
fact, which, after all, is so easy to confirm.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free from doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:43 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Hi Joy,

Easier to explain in context of the post I was replying to.
My point was that proving a "combo remedy" should not have any more
pitfalls than proving e.g. a remedy such as Carlsbad water, or Skookum
Chuck, or any of the other "water remedies" (remedies made from the
waters of various medicinal springs etc.). I think that, as always,
the catch is that you have to do the proving on the *same* sample--or
sample prepared in as nearly the same way as possible--as the one on
which the proving is done. Does that sound agreeable to you?
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:44 pm
by Gail
I think it is an untested assumption that a combination remedy is
more difficult for the vital force than a single remedy.

I have only two anecdotal experiences that would suggest the
contrary, but they are worth considering. The first one was from a
lecturer from one of my early learning experiences. She was
generally oversensitive to remedies - did most of her remedy study
by taking a dose of the remedy, and was then able to pass her exams
because of her experiential learning. Understandably she became very
wary about the power of the remedies and reluctant to use them for
simple first aid - for some reason someone persuaded her to try a
combination remedy - and rather than sending her vital force into a
spin, she had the sort of healing reaction which convinced her that
sometimes there was a good space for combination remedies.

The other experience is of a friend who is also oversensitive and
finds that the simple mineral remedies seem to throw her vital force
into a spin - whereas the plant and animal remedies (which after all
are combinations of the minerals) seem to be easier to handle.
What these two experiences suggest to me is that an oversensitive
vital force is one that is very easily thrown out of balance - the
simpler a remedy (at this extreme, a single mineral) the more likely
the vital force will see-saw wildly - as the remedy becomes more
complicated (at the other extreme, a combination remedy) it holds
more of a balance as the ingredients themselves find a way to stay
together in a sort of integrated balance - and perhaps this balance
is easier for a weakened vital force to handle.

So a combination remedy to me, yes deserves proving, but shouldn't
be dismissed as having no homoeopathic potential - they may be the
very remedies that we need as our world becomes more toxic and
people increasingly become oversensitive. That increased
civilisation leads to increased sensitivity is one of Kent's
observations. The proving of the combination of Bryonia and Rhus Tox
shows that a combination gives us a new remedy, showing some aspects
of its ingredients as well as some synergistic surprises, and should
not be dismissed simply out of a type of intellectual prejudice.
Gail A

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:57 pm
by muthu kumar
Thanks for getting riled up enough to reveal my identity-
and we are back to being courteous I see...

The discussion is not about doing a chronic case.... when there is a
situation where we cannot be there and the only alternative is going
to an allopath I do not flinch giving the patient a combination to
keep at hand to tide over a painful crisis...

Mostly I have never given combinations for my clientele who come for a
strict homeopathic practice - as I have repeatedly posted in this
forum, but in my allopathic practice I have used combinations for
replacing antibiotics. These combinations were administered like
allopathic pills. I have done that, I have seen that they are
effective, I do not know what to call this - homeopathy, mixopathy,
mongrelism, pseudo homeopathy or nonsense- take your pick. I do not
care...

This IS effective; May be you cannot labeling your practice as
homeopathy. This is a dispensary where people come with complaints and
least care what you give them - as long as they are cured enough for
getting to work the next day. And they cannot wait around to see if
the well chosen remedy works or not....
Tell me what you would do - when someone who has come to you for
treatment - who has to go to work next day - delivering food for about
7, 8 office locations carrying it in hot sun the next day,not in a car
but on top of her head in a basket- cannot wait to report to you next
day evening ( my mornings I used to work in another hospital and
mostly cannot discuss with her even if she knows how to call over
phone), who will run to the nearest allopath in the morning if the
problem persists and get shots- and has not come to you for homeopathy
per se- just for relief for an acute condition- and who might or might
not turn up for chronic treatment

and let us say this is just that one case out of a million( in my case
may be one in 4 or 5) for which you cannot find the simillimum with
your depth of knowledge-
what would you do- give the indicated remedy and ask her to come for
the next consult - give the indicated remedy and give her some
combination to take in case she did not feel relief with what you gave
or not take the case at all - or in this case where she did not come
for homeopathy at all - and you have something made out of homoepathic
medicines and you have given to hundreds others with no side effects
and acts ( or palliates - which is enough at this time) and you know
would make her a good patient who might eventually get convinced to
follow homeopathy.

No nosodes, no isodes, no "anti-miasmatics", just a few of the common
indicated medicines for that particular problem

Yes it is bizarre is it not - ( I have been called that by my
allopathy colleagues who see that I practice homeopathy)...

but then some people's attitudes are bizarre and some people have
bizarre personalities, and my practice is so I guess....

At least I am not jumping down any one's throat for not following "The
Book"...
-- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Joy Lucas" wrote:
Kumar, a few nosodes,
the chemist and pick
then take the case and
bother doing the latter

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:19 pm
by muthu kumar
Excellent - correct

With water springs you have the option of putting some antibiotics
into the springs and mixing that as well and then proving it

;-)

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Robert & Shannon Nelson
wrote:
were
any

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:38 pm
by muthu kumar
A combination remedy without proving violates one of the fundamental
laws - similia similibus - because a combination remedy is not similar
to anything - period.

At the same time there are so many remedies in our arsenal that were
adapted from folk lore and traditional practices - that is - we took
them and PROVED them and made them into true homeopathic medicines...

I have no question with that... but still these medicines were in use
for some said conditions before homeopathic proving- that is what Didi
did - and I have done- to combine things because by experience we
have found that they work - is there proving - nope - but this is
more in line how Hekla Lava came to be used or Gunpowder...

Is this front-line homeopathy - no; probably a last-ditch effort -
heck why not? Esp. if the alternative is to go for allopathic drugging?

And this is not different from what I call as Designer Remedies - from
Rajan and Scholten... given 2 remedies with individual symptoms to
combine them with some postulated symptoms and using them on the said
symptoms and verifying them in practice. Where was it proved? In
dreams ? In Collective unconscious ? Come on....

Even in my or Didi's combo we combine not arbitrarily - usually the
remedies that are usually indicated in such condition and based on
tissular and location proclivities...
There is a rhythm to this madness ;-)

The only difference is where it is done and who does it - in the
center of Mumbai and London by some one with enough marketing and
charismatic clout to get people pay to listen to you and you charge
$700 for a consultation or in the slums of Chennai and Africa for charity-
-- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Gail" wrote:

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:21 pm
by Christine Wyndham-Thomas
Chris

Didn't I see mention that a proving had been done of Rhus Tox and Bryonia?

Christine

Re: arnica case - chronic/acute - &dentist

Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:27 pm
by Joy Lucas
I'm not riled, life's too good to feel riled and I had no idea you had
an identity crisis! apologies

anyway to answer you questions with one answer - if a homeopath cannot
give the required time to decide on the most indicated rx (whether
thinking on your feet for an acute or with the luxury of more time for
an acute) then they shouldn't prescribe - you might just as well ask
the client to pick a letter from A-Z and select some rx. Even if you
think the simillimum might be any number of, let's say, 3 rx you could
supply those rx but not give instructions to take them as a combo, but
to take, wait, decide, repeat, try another. Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.blogspot.com
http://homepage.mac.com/joylucas/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/provings