Minutus

What was it about this case that makes you deviate from seeking the similimum and resort to prescribing two remedies?

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Doo
Sent: 01 August 2008 21:05
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] some advice wanted
Based on everything you said about the person and the situation. I don?t use rubrics. Just capture the essence of the person and the situation.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, tamarque@earthlink.net wrote:
I would start with Tuberculinum and Pulsatilla alternately. One dose Tuberculinum 200c at night before bed; one dose Pulsatilla 200c next morning. Water doses preferred. Than have her report to you any change for the next few days.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, tamarque@earthlink. net wrote:
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.10/1585 - Release Date: 8/1/2008 6:39 AM

I am sorry Mr. Soroush that I have to fail the test. I don’t know how to prescribe base on evidence. I try to prescribe base on Similimum.
--- On Fri, 8/1/08, finrod@finrod.co.uk wrote:
________________________________

Let’s say a young man falling love with a girl at first sight. He wanted to marry that girl. His mother cannot understand why this one, why not all the other girls she wanted him to marry. The young man started telling his mother everything he liked about this girl. The mother said, “ I have showed you a dozen girls like that, you refused them all.” Can you help the young man explain to the mother why he only loves this girl?

Homeopathy is not an evidence based medicine.

-
-- On Fri, 8/1/08, finrod@finrod. co.uk wrote:
________________________________

According to my experience, when a polychrest and a nosode are indicated at the same time, using them alternately speeds up the healing and reduces aggravations.

Of course, wait and see after every dose of remedy will be the best if we can be with the patient all the time until heal.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, finrod@finrod. co.uk wrote:
________________________________

I would start with Tuberculinum and Pulsatilla alternately. One dose Tuberculinum 200c at night before bed; one dose Pulsatilla 200c next morning. Water doses preferred. Than have her report to you any change for the next few days.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, tamarque@earthlink. net wrote:

Everything presented in this case together lead me find the similimum of the two remedies. This is just from my perception. I am sure every one sees it differently.
--- On Fri, 8/1/08, finrod@finrod.co.uk wrote:
________________________________

Let’s say a young man falling love with a girl at first sight. He wanted to marry that girl. His mother cannot understand why this one, why not all the other girls she wanted him to marry. The young man started telling his mother everything he liked about this girl. The mother said, “ I have showed you a dozen girls like that, you refused them all.” Can you help the young man explain to the mother why he only loves this girl?

Homeopathy is not an evidence based medicine.

-
-- On Fri, 8/1/08, finrod@finrod. co.uk wrote:
________________________________

According to my experience, when a polychrest and a nosode are indicated at the same time, using them alternately speeds up the healing and reduces aggravations.

Of course, wait and see after every dose of remedy will be the best if we can be with the patient all the time until heal.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, finrod@finrod. co.uk wrote:
________________________________

I would start with Tuberculinum and Pulsatilla alternately. One dose Tuberculinum 200c at night before bed; one dose Pulsatilla 200c next morning. Water doses preferred. Than have her report to you any change for the next few days.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, tamarque@earthlink. net wrote:

Dear John
Similimum by definition is ONE at any given time.
If two Rx are screaming at you, you need to differentiate as to which goes in first.
Only after the first has acted and has finished acting - then the presenting symptoms need to be evaluated.
The second prescription is the most difficult area in homoeopathy. In a chronic case it certainly deserves more time than over night!
In terms of evidence based prescribing, after one has taken the case, the prominent symptoms relevant to the case are then selected and repertorised.
Upon repertorisation one or more remedies come through. Here reference is made by Materia Medica and the one most closely matching the totality of the patient's symptoms (The Similimum) is selected and then prescribed.
Although it very rarely happens in homeopathic practise, but just imagine that something has gone wrong in the treatment and your patient decides to sue. You are in the court before the judge and he asks, Well how did you decide on this prescription? And if as part of your reply you answer "I don’t know how to prescribe based on evidence. ", then no further discussion is necessary and the case is IMMEDIATELY found for the patient and you are in heaps of trouble.
Best to have a strategy to avoid that scenario. In my view you do that by comprehending the principles of Homeopathy and expressing them when challenged and show in each case how you decided on the remedy prescribed and keep your notes well so that they can be offered if challenged.
Organon Aph 2:
The highest ideal of cure is rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of the health, or removal and annihilation of the disease in its whole extent, in the shortest, most reliable, and most harmless way, on easily comprehensible principles.

Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Doo
Sent: 02 August 2008 08:11
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Minutus] some advice wanted
Everything presented in this case together lead me find the similimum of the two remedies. This is just from my perception. I am sure every one sees it differently.
Also
" I am sorry Mr. Soroush that I have to fail the test. I don’t know how to prescribe base on evidence. I try to prescribe base on Similimum. "
--- On Fri, 8/1/08, finrod@finrod.co.uk wrote:
________________________________

Let’s say a young man falling love with a girl at first sight. He wanted to marry that girl. His mother cannot understand why this one, why not all the other girls she wanted him to marry. The young man started telling his mother everything he liked about this girl. The mother said, “ I have showed you a dozen girls like that, you refused them all.” Can you help the young man explain to the mother why he only loves this girl?

Homeopathy is not an evidence based medicine.

-
-- On Fri, 8/1/08, finrod@finrod. co.uk wrote:
________________________________

According to my experience, when a polychrest and a nosode are indicated at the same time, using them alternately speeds up the healing and reduces aggravations.

Of course, wait and see after every dose of remedy will be the best if we can be with the patient all the time until heal.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, finrod@finrod. co.uk wrote:
________________________________

I would start with Tuberculinum and Pulsatilla alternately. One dose Tuberculinum 200c at night before bed; one dose Pulsatilla 200c next morning. Water doses preferred. Than have her report to you any change for the next few days.
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, tamarque@earthlink. net wrote:
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.10/1586 - Release Date: 8/1/2008 6:59 PM

If "matching the symptoms of the patient with the symptoms of the
remedy", and then deciding what to do next based upon the patient's
response, is not "evidence based medicine", then what would you call
it?

What would "evidence based medicine" mean?
How do you choose the simillimum other than by the evidence of the
patient's symptoms, and how do you know you've found it, other than by
the evidence of the change or disappearance of the patient's symptoms?

Confused...
Shannon

Hi Soroush,
Soroush this ist YOUR opinion and that of only a certain school of
homeopathy. It does not raise our credibility to act as if it were
different.

Many respected classical homeopaths prescribe more than one remedy at
a time.

Giving cell salts together with a "homeopathic" remedy is in effect
giving more than one remedy at a time. Cell salts are not different
from other potentized remedies - only the method of selecting them is
different.

Giving a nosode *together* with a simile remedy is often done and
often exactly on the same premise as giving cell salts accompanying
the remedy, i.e. it is selected on a different method.

Even v. Boenninghausen, although only giving one remedy at a time, did
not give it he way you have described it above!!

So let's face facts and let's not keep making statements that anyone
with even the slightest knowledge of homeopathic practice now and
since Hahnemann can easily disprove - Every statement so disproved
will lower the credibility of anything else we say.
If you say "I base my prescription on evidence" the judge will want to
know "what kind of evidence". What you tell him will be just as
questionable to the judge as saying: "I pesribe on intuition".

The only thing that may have some meaning to him is to say: "I
prescribe on my experience and on that of thousands of homeopaths
before me". The latter can be proved to a degree by our lilterature -
nothing else can.

There is outside of homeopathic philosophy not one logical reason why
a substance that causes symmptoms should cure them. Only experience
has taught that it does.

There is even no logical reason to accept that our proving symptoms
(outside of poisonings) are in any way correct, even less that most of
them or, to top it, all of them are correct. There are many good
reasons to think that they may not be.

Homeopathy of any kind is a web of belief and experience. Every author
of homeopathy has had his own web - every practicing homeopath also.
So far we do not know which of the webs are the most successful.

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 <==========

Minutus is a Hahnemannian Homeopathy site.
Please could other colleagues offer their opinions on how we should chose our remedies - use whim, intuition etc, or use the experience of colleagues collected and formed into our repertories and Materia Medica on clearly understood principles.
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Luise Kunkle
Sent: 02 August 2008 14:40
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Minutus] some advice wanted
Hi Soroush,
Soroush this ist YOUR opinion and that of only a certain school of
homeopathy. It does not raise our credibility to act as if it were
different.

Many respected classical homeopaths prescribe more than one remedy at
a time.

Giving cell salts together with a "homeopathic" remedy is in effect
giving more than one remedy at a time. Cell salts are not different
from other potentized remedies - only the method of selecting them is
different.

Giving a nosode *together* with a simile remedy is often done and
often exactly on the same premise as giving cell salts accompanying
the remedy, i.e. it is selected on a different method.

Even v. Boenninghausen, although only giving one remedy at a time, did
not give it he way you have described it above!!

So let's face facts and let's not keep making statements that anyone
with even the slightest knowledge of homeopathic practice now and
since Hahnemann can easily disprove - Every statement so disproved
will lower the credibility of anything else we say.

If you say "I base my prescription on evidence" the judge will want to
know "what kind of evidence". What you tell him will be just as
questionable to the judge as saying: "I pesribe on intuition".

The only thing that may have some meaning to him is to say: "I
prescribe on my experience and on that of thousands of homeopaths
before me". The latter can be proved to a degree by our lilterature -
nothing else can.

There is outside of homeopathic philosophy not one logical reason why
a substance that causes symmptoms should cure them. Only experience
has taught that it does.

There is even no logical reason to accept that our proving symptoms
(outside of poisonings) are in any way correct, even less that most of
them or, to top it, all of them are correct. There are many good
reasons to think that they may not be.

Homeopathy of any kind is a web of belief and experience. Every author
of homeopathy has had his own web - every practicing homeopath also.
So far we do not know which of the webs are the most successful.

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 <==========
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.10/1586 - Release Date: 8/1/2008 6:59 PM

john,

i appreciate your suggestions for my case. however, i don't undestand how
you select your remedies. perhaps you understand the remedies so well
that you 'vibe' your way into your selections. but i am sure you studied
the remedies at one point with their keynotes and essences as well as
specific rubrics.

so i respectfully ask what were the elements of the case that reminded
you of tub and puls?

tanya

Hi Luise,
The difference of opinion goes again to whether one defines homeopathy
as "What Hahnemann told us to do," or "What people calling themselves
homeopaths have done." It is a problem, and IMO a serious one!, that
we can't come to an agreement about it.

Personally, I would vote that we ("classicals") acknowledge that the
usage of the term has *changed* since Hahnemann's, in a way that would
be difficult *or perhaps impossible* to recall, and move on from there.
It's actually a *good* thing that the term has become so embedded,
even tho not in the way we (or Hahnemann) would have preferred.

Again, I think that, instead of continuing the battle over "who's
right" (i.e. who's really doing what Hahnemann directed) and "who's
wrong" (i.e. everyone who uses the term or practice of "homeopathy" in
any other way), we ought to simply embrace--and then MAKE PUBLIC USE
OF-- good ol' modifiers: "classical homeopathy"; "Hahnemannian
homeopathy"; even "combo homeopathy". If we do *that*, we can regain
some control over at least *some* of the misjudgments that are
currently being flung at us; we can stand or fall as "classical
homeopaths" on basis of trials and practices that *conform* to
"classical homeopathy", including individualization etc.

Shannon

well, i don't think there is a field of anything that doesn't have its
controveries about how 'it' should be done. i use an integral chiropractor.
he went through the standard schools and then went on to develop this
type of adjustment work. it is pure energy. he considers himself to
be a professional chiropractor. others in the field have rejected that
way of working and refuse to acknowledge it as being chiropractic.
now i was told by a chiro once that in her school there were many
(over a dozen) styles of chiro taught. integral was maybe not one
of them. only to give one of numerous examples. the ama has very
rigid standards and if an md decides to go holistic or support home
births they may find themselves without a license (as did someone
in my county a number of years ago--and he still does not have it back

tanya