Page 3 of 4

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 11:32 am
by Ellen Madono
Dear Joy,
I took the 1M only a month ago, so I am going to wait as I would if I were a patient. Maybe since I gradually worked up to this potency I need to take it more often. My mental state is very causticum. This is the problem with doing your own case, you don't know if your mental state is changing.
I am reviewing the case, in the slow way that is reserved for my own sx. Actually causticum is the only remedy to which I have had physical aggravations (not provings). The physical ameliorations are not a complete cure, but certainly better than when I started. My batting average is so much better with a real patient.
Never thought of spinach as having nasty minerals.
Blessings,
Ellen

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 3:51 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Thanks, Chris!
(Actually it's urging *absent*, but thanks for the example.)
Where did you find Vertigo > fruit? In my MacRep version of
Boenninghausen's I wasn't able to find anything about vertigo with
either fruit, or the more general sweets. What rep are you using?
Shannon

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 3:56 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Hi Joy,
Actually she says she is *not* dizzy, but just has no sense of balance,
and can fall. She says this comes from eating any sort of sugar at
all, but even fruit (which annoyed her!).

She does have a sugar imbalance; mild diabetic situation, tho the
doctor said it is not the usual thing... hm, I've forgotten, will have
to check. Anyway she gets blood sugar spikes from carbohydrates in
general, so maybe that's behind the balance trouble??? Since sweets
are basically fast-acting carbs.

I'll try to put up more of the case, would love more input!
But meantime--since the loss of balance after fruit fits into this
larger context of sugar imbalance, do you think that lessens its
importance? (But in any case, I haven't found any rubrics that address
it, other than "sweets agg" and (now) "fruit agg"--but I'm not sure
that fruit aggs any worse than other sweets--but I'll ask.
Thanks,
Shannon

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 5:07 pm
by DCR
Ellen,
Your email makes it sound like you are approaching this problem on your own rather than working with a homeopath/naturopath. If I misunderstood - please ignore this response.

In reference to your kidney stones, I would offer the following: About 80 percent of all kidney stones are calcium oxalate stones (as opposed to uric acid stones, struvite stones or cystine stones). [Unless the actual stones are tested and the type determined, the treatment can cause more harm than good.] Once you are sure they are calcium oxalate stones you proceed. There is a complex interrelation between calcium absorption, diet, functioning of the parathyroid gland, hydration, pH, climate, and the formation of stones. There is an equally complex relation between dietary intake of vitamin C and certain minerals, refined foods, oxalic acid and animal proteins. Foods associated with higher oxalic acid include eggs, fish and certain vegetables. The current thinking in allopathic medicine is to reduce or eliminate certain foods and take drugs to control pH, and hope that will 'do the trick'. A few doctors have even realized that hydration is a key factor. As you already know, the naturopathic and homeopathic approach is to look for the underlying cause of the problem, and support the body as it heals itself.

Toward that 'support' you might consider experimenting with a lower oxalate diet (avoiding foods that contain or lead to the production of oxalic acid):
asparagus, beets, beet greens, celery, eggs, fish, blueberries, spinach, Swiss chard, everything in the cabage family, alcohol, black tea, chocolate, cocoa, nuts, dried figs, pepper, etc etc etc

There are also many other dietary changes that will help, such as elilminating all refined sugar - since it stimulates the pancreas to release insulin, which in turn causes extra calcium to be excreted in the urine.

The most difficult thing for women is that they must continue to ensure adequate calcium intake, while avoiding the stones, so this requires careful management of the intake of both calcium and magnesium (as well as zinc and a few other minor players).

In reference to constipation, there are likewise many specific recommendations that can 'support' the system and eleminate any 'maintaining causes' during your homeopathic treatment.

I encourage you to seek out support for the dietary (possibly supplementation) changes that can help you through your homeopathic treatment rather than experimenting with a single item such as tsuruna which you seem to have 'found' via internet, and which you acknowledge is a high oxalate, and therefore potentially aggrivating to the existing kidney problems.

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 6:24 pm
by Joy Lucas
I was beginning to think that there might be something like diabetes
underneath this and put into context the falling/loss of balance might
be thought of as a common sx to diabetes and certainly THAT needs to be
addressed and checked out. If it has nothing to do with the diabetes
then it becomes a peculiar sx (imo) as long as there is no other
medical reason for it.

There is also 'sugar <<

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:40 am
by Ellen Madono
Yes, DCR you are right. Thank-you for your detailed advice. This kidney stone making process is completely confusing to me. I have my stones and I will have them analyzed.

I think the right kidney is not processing uric acid because of the gout bump on the first joint of my right big toe.

I actually found the Tsuruna buying it from a road side stand of a local Japanese farm, the kind where no one is tending the stand. It had no warning about preboiling it so I looked on the internet to find out what it was. I went back to ask the farmer and she said it was good for your intestines. Probably good for someone who is constipated.

I think that the last kidney stone attack may have been precipitated by the Causticum that I was taking. It was a stressful time, but I hadn't had a kidney stone in more than 10 years. Thanks for small stones. I could have waited another 5 years and accumulated a big stone.

Blessings,
Ellen

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 1:53 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Thanks Chris! (No, not sorry I asked! :-) )
Can you explain this:
Do you just mean that, in order to use a concomitant, you need to
identify and rep way(s) in which the concomitant is related to or
affected by the main complaint? Or ?
Shannon

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:45 pm
by Robyn
Shannon, this is an interesting symptom that may be of interest to your
case --- recorded in RU as being from Boericke

GENERALITIES - MODALITIES - INTOXICATION, after - sugar

merc. nat-p
Robyn
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.15/82 - Release Date: 8/25/2005
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:18 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Thanks, Robyn,
For curiosity I looked for a similar rubric in Complete. Didn't find
that, but find the same two remedies (only) under "Generalities, abuse
of, poisoning with sugar." And nat-p is one that's come to mind, but I
haven't pursued for her--guess I'd better look more at it.
Thanks again!
Shannon

Re: Rubric question

Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:49 am
by Kathryn Ellen Madono
Hi,

What does this rubric mean? Withdrawal from what?

MIND - ALCOHOLISM - withdrawal from; to support the

Thank-you,
Ellen Madono
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]