Page 3 of 5

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:35 am
by Shannon Nelson
I do understand that idea.
And I also notice / acknowledge that the chronic disease does not
*always* handle acutes etc. (although at least with *some* patients and
*some* remedies, according to Mangialavore et al., it will). My
remark, and the experience that lead to it, is simply that it *may*
work, and under some circumstances (such as I mentioned), may be
useful.
Yes, understood.
We can't know whether, had the pt been given Aurum for that flu, would
it have handled his flu *and* made further progress on the depression?
What I gather from certain people (e.g. Mangialavore and his students)
is that, *if* the Aurum is deeply enough suited to the person--not a
layer, not a similar (can Aurum do that? I have no idea!), then it
indeed might have. But absent JW's "alternate reality generator" (he
never got that on the market did he? :-) ), we don't know about that
particular case.

Sheri, have you read much of Mangialavore's cases? Are you familiar
with what *he* says about the matter? I understand the problem you
(and Dr. Luc) are having with the theory. But on this matter theory is
not all we have to work with. If you and he have examined
Mangialavore's work and found it wanting--in *effect*, not in
theory--then that would be very much of interest to me. But if not,
then I'll just have to leave it hanging on the "undecided" peg.
Yes, but that's not what's occurred in the cases I've mentioned...
Hm, I wonder who he's talking about??? I've never heard anyone make
*that* claim; only the claim that with *some* patients and *some*
remedies (i.e. those patients' very robust "constitutional" remedies)
that is the case; no other remedy has been needed, thru acutes and etc.
and etc., over many years.
If he's seriously interested, he should talk with Mangialavore. I
suspect, tho, that if it became a matter of "dueling theories" without
close look at the actual cases, no one would come away the wiser for
the discussion.

Best wishes,
Shannon

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:37 am
by Sheri Nakken
I know of this from the beginning with you and understand totally and have seen your discussion with Dr. Luc.

I also would say at this time the vaccine is for this child and all children is DTaP, different than DTP

Sheri

At 11:15 PM 5/31/2008, you wrote:

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:40 am
by Sheri Nakken
No I haven't and I'll ask Dr. Luc
Personally I haven't found the need to use the chronic remedy and it has worked just fine to give an acute. Why take a chance if you don't have to.
Sheri

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:38 am
by Grace Dasilva-Hill
Hi there, yes I have considerable amount of experience.

Hw does one tell? The symptoms that brought the person to the consulting room in the
first place I guess.

As for antidoting, how does anyone know that antidoting has taken place? Do you know of
a test that confirms antidoting? - would love to hear about it. BW, Grace

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Tanya Marquette" wrote:
from

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:40 am
by Grace Dasilva-Hill
Hi Tanya and Sheri,

of course one goes for case taking and prescribing on the totality in the first instance,
there is no disagreement here. BW, Grace

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Sheri Nakken wrote:

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:59 pm
by Shannon Nelson
On May 31, 2008, at 12:49 PM, Irene de Villiers wrote:
This seems very relevant, that the usefulness of the nosode would be
greater when the injury is very fresh, and less certain (perhaps even
unlikely) after years have passed. The children that Dr. Luc (or most
of us) is treating are probably months or years down the road.

Shannon

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 1:07 pm
by Shannon Nelson
I look forward to hearing his remarks!
Re the "why" of using a chronic remedy instead of an acute--I agree
with you that it's hardly a necessity, as a rule! I *gather* that one
reason Mangialavore and his students take this approach (aside from the
obvious convenience, even tho not necessary) is that, when they *do*
see a remedy working that broadly, as well as deeply, that gives them
more confidence in the remedy's appropriateness to the case. In giving
his case examples to illustrate remedies, he does not use any cases
*except* those that have had this sort of a global response to the
remedy, because (as I understand it) he feels these are the only cases
where he is *certain* that there are no other... well, I don't know
how *he* describes it, but I would use the terms "layers" showing thru
to alter the pure picture of that one remedy. (I hope and assume
there's nothing controversial in the idea that underlying "layers" can
show through into the uppermost, active one? It is part of what I have
in my notes from school, so his approach on this one makes sense to
me...)
Shannon

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:05 pm
by Luise Kunkle
Hi Sheri,

for a change:-)) I do agree with you and Dr. de Schepper.

Since you know his teachings very well, what does he say about a case
like this: (it is a real case I know of)

A patient has a chronic condition which involves very severe acute
flare-ups over long stretches of time. It seemed that under chronic
treatment the case moved nicely along, the acute flare-ups seemed to
get lass frequent and less severe.

However, then one of those very severe and long acute states happened
which does not seem to be influenced by any remedy based on the
chronic picture.

Would in such a case Dr. de Schepper try and find an acute remedy for
this state? And would he try remedies in shorter (how short) intervals
if the first one (or the first some to many) do not show any effect?

Regards

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

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:09 pm
by Luise Kunkle
Hi Shannon,
Oh yes, there are homeopaths who refuse to give acute remedies. The
will instead refer to the allopaths where acute treatment is required!

Regards

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

Re: vaccination antidote

Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:22 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Hi Erica,
It's great to hear your experiences with this! I'm especially
intrigued that you've used it successfully on an unvaccinated child.
Could you tell us more about what happened there--what other remedies
had been tried, and what happened after the DTP (or was it DTaP?)
remedy? I wonder what would cause this particular picture in absence
of the child's having been vaccinated--any thoughts, and did you
receive the vaccine (or something similar)?

Thanks!
Shannon