Minutus

Perhaps - Not so much missed the point as did not address it while
adding a new point regarding "shock".
How I see it:

Arn 30C is very unsuitable for shock prevention - you need at least
200C, and no repetition without symptoms.
Also, multiple doses will ASK for aggravation. So I would not use Arn
the way it was used there.

Presumably if someone is known to be sensitive to a specific remedy
one would act accordingly.
I mentioned the 5000 or so cases as that is statistically very
significant with no deaths - so it shows that routine use of 200C can
and does prevent many deaths which otherwise would occur during surgery.
That statistic alone makes "routine" use of a single 200C dose of Arn
well worth while in my view, for surgery cases (unless one
specifically knows of a sensitivity of corse).

I'd rather see the VERY rare case of bruising than the much less rare
case of shock death.

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Hi Irene
No - the Arnica interfered with her treatment. She was put onto Warfarin before an intervention to regulate the irregular heart beat that she suffered from and which was exhausting her. She was also taking Arnica, which anti-doted the Warfarin and re-thickened the blood, meaning that they couldn't do the intervention. She had to stop taking the Arnica before they could carry out the intervention - quite a serious thing as it involved stopping then restarting her heart.
I gave this as an example of homeopathy interfering with the action of allopathic drugs, not as a debate of the desirability or not of using homeopathy v. allopathy. Simply to say that if a patient is on allopathic drugs, and wants or needs to continue them, you do need to take homeopathy's effects on thsoe drugs into account sometimes. Homeopathy can and does interfere - it is not without effect on allopathic drugs even if it works on a different level. IMHO
Liz
Isn't that back to front? How i see it:
The warfarin interfered with her arnica healing.

Hi Liz,

I did not really mean to make light of a serious issue.
It is just that I would have chosen homeopathy instead of allopathy
to handle the irregular heartbeat (safer too than heart stopping
interventions, this being a homeopathy forum) , and thus I'd see the
warfarin as the thing to remove of the two medicines in conflict.
.... I do not question they can be in conflict or that one has to
look at what a client is already doing when planning what comes
next.......

Namaste,
Irene.
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Thanks Vera, that is interesting! I would have thought that a
constitutional Arnica would have a *greater* need to take it before, as
well as after, and that there would be *less* risk of aggravating. But
clearly that wasn't the case... Do you suppose he'd already had
sufficient arnica at that point, and his best preventative at that
point was "nothing"?

Just for fun, are you able to tell more about his case, to see which
parts of it make sense in a "constitutional arnica", and whether there
are other parts that seem surprising? Has enough time passed yet to
see just what things have improved--if you have leave to say? (It's
worth noting that the wonderful feeling of inner well-being doesn't
*always* mean that the remedy will do all that's needed; e.g. a friend
that I sporadically treat had a just wonderful M/E amelioration from
Carcinosin, but now, some months down the road, it's clear that the
expected physical improvements haven't happened. I do wonder just how
I should be using that information...)

Shannon

Hi Vera,

in this case I would consider whether had had, in the re-arrangement
of his system under the constitutional, at that specific time he had
come to a point, where this aspect of Arnica (after all, it definitely
has to do with bleeding, one way or other) was topical for him.

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 <==========

First one thing that I've noticed is that when there is this sense of total well-being (physical and emotional - even if there is still pain the sensation is also physical) it's usually a sign that the remedy is going to help a lot, and for a while. I've noticed this in acute and in chronic. But it's not just an M/E sensation - it's something that affects the whole organism. That's my experience anyway - anyone else seen this?.

I first gave him Arnica in acute after he reported a foot injury that happened while he was working, but he ignored it so much during those few hours as he was busy and on his feet the whole time, and only realised after he had stopped working that he must have banged his foot. He was in quite a lot of pain - don't remember whether he went for an x-ray or not, it was a while ago. He started with Arnica 30 as that was what he had, and then moved to Arnica 200. In two or three days he felt much better, but he reported the wellbeing sensation immediately after taking the remedy for the first time. To the best of my knowledge he'd never taken anything homeopathic before as he was totally anti - in this case he just felt so bad and this is what there was so he agreed to try it.

This wasn't an "official" patient, but someone I knew fairly well, and as I thought about the mental and emotionals (more than the physicals) of Arnica, there seemed to be a good match. So next time he wasn't feeling well with something different, I tried Arnica first and it helped. That happened often enough to see that there was a constitutional here. Interestingly enough - his daughter came down with some bad stomach pain once, no clear cause, the mother called, and on the basis of the similarity between father and daughter I gave Arnica again - and it helped almost instantly (again phone case where no-one was going to give me a fuller picture!). The daughter is also pretty much anti, although she's seen the positive effects.

He was going through months and months of dental treatments, including surgery and implants. As a rule, I didn't give him anything preventative, and he didn't bleed from treatment. I would give him Arnica after treatment, making sure to allow as much time as possible between the Arnica and the next treatment. The only time he bled like that was when he self-medicated.

He had treatment subsequently, without self-medicating, and didn't bleed again.

I think I posted about this a while ago as well. Hope this fills the picture in a bit.

Vera
--
------------------------------------
Vera Resnick RCHom
Classical Homeopath
Alternative Medicine
054-4640736
e-mail: vera.homeopath@gmail.com
www.freewebs.com/verahomeopath

Hi Irene
Yes - I agree with you. Homeopathy every time. But I don't think it had worked for her...and she was a homeopath herself. She had some serious heart problems. And after tow attempts at reversing the irregular heart beat, they had to give up, poor thing.
Have lost contact now - don't know what happened to her.
Liz
________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rochelle
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 12:14 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Well here's a new one!!!!! More!!
More from the patient:-



The tablets he takes are diclofenac for arthritis.

Does anyone know about this link?
Rochelle

Registered Homeopath
EFT(Advanced) Practitioner
www.southporthomeopathy.co.uk

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

Hahnemann observed a pharmacological law of nature which is essentially comprised of primary and secondary effects. The primary effect of any drug upon the organism is followed by an opposite secondary reaction produced by the Vital Force in which the organism instinctively attempts to self-regulate itself back to homeostasis or "normal" functioning.

This pharmacological law of nature, i.e. primary and secondary effects, occurs when either homeopathic or allopathic drugs are used in medical treatments. However, the Law of Similars and the Law of Contraris have different mechanisms of action.

Homoeopaths take note of the primary effects produced by a substance in provings and use this knowledge apriori to prescribe according to the Law of Similars in cases of real disease or injury. For example, Arnica in ALL potencies produces primary symptoms similar to inflammation and extravasation, as well as a sensation as if hit by a blow. In a real injury where muscle fibres are torn and bleeding, and where an inflammatory process is underway, we can give the patient Arnica homoeopathically, knowing it will produce similar symptoms in the first instance temporarily, thus stimulating the opposite or secondary healing reaction of the Vital Force to counteract those primary symptoms.

Allopaths also take note of primary and secondary effects but almost always prescribe a medicine which produces an opposite effect to the initial complaint. For example, if a patient complains of constipation they prescribe a drug which will cause diarrhoea in its first effect, congestive states are treated with anti-congestants, pain is eradicated with pain-killing medication, anti-inflammatories are used to reduce swelling etc. In this way, the Law of Contraris usurps the natural healing opposite secondary reaction of the Vital Force, but unfortunately often leaves the patient drug-dependent for longer periods of time.

In an acute situation such as post-surgery, the recovery time with allopathic medication can actually be longer than anticipated because the secondary action of the Vital Force is inhibited or misdirected. On the other hand, we've all probably seen cases where doctors were astonished at the rapid recovery time of patients who had (usually secretly) been given homoeopathic medicine post-surgery!

Hahnemann did not attempt to fancifully explain how homoeopathic medicines cure, he only described their mechanism of action in terms of his observations of primary and secondary effects upon the organism. There is a practical wisdom in using the single medicine at one time in the minimum dose. It is true that homoeopathic medicines in potency do not "react" chemically with allopathic medications, however both types of medicines must by their very nature influence the Vital Force of the patient under treatment. If homoeopathic and allopathic medicines are given at the same time to treat the same condition, then the Vital Force is more than likely receiving two opposing sets of instructions and this is where we need to be careful in prescribing. It is foolish to assume that homoeopathic medicines are totally safe and harmless under all circumstances and can be routinely given without due care and attention, particularly if we're unsure of how the patient is being allopathically medicated, or if we don't understand the exact nature of the patient's susceptibility and illness.

A couple of other considerations regarding Arnica: Constantin Hering warned not to give Arnica in cases of rabid dogbite. Why? Hahnemann said Arnica was contraindicated in cases of purely inflammatory *acute* diseases... and in diarrhoeas. "In such cases it will always be found to be very hurtful, the reason of which is obvious from its peculiar mode of action..." (MMP). Therefore, I would not prescribe Arnica in cases of cerebral haemorrhage or spinal meningitis - regardless of how much the patient complained of severe headaches or as if they'd been hit by a cricket bat! The bacteria that are evident in meningococcal disease destroy the integrity of blood vessels causing the vessels to leak and diffuse the infection even more. That is not the time to give a haemorrhage-causing drug like Arnica to a patient with little chance of producing a healthy and robust immune response. Diclofenac is also contraindicated in cases of cerebral haemorrhage and can cause diarrhoea and gastric ulceration in a number of patients. Imagine if the susceptible patient received both medications together in those situations!

Hope useful,

Chris Gillen

Thanks Chris for your interesting analysis of the situation. I would still like to know where the doctors got their information from. The patient tells me that he bled profusely after the operation - circumcision (from taking the Diclofenac?) and I still bet if he had taking the Arnica the bleeding would have been minimal!!
Rochelle
Registered Homeopath
EFT(Advanced) Practitioner
www.southporthomeopathy.co.uk

I have heard of at least one conventional proving where placebo group exhibited similar symptoms to the provers.

And on the subject of sensitivity, we are often told that the reason we need more repetition now is because people are more blocked and less sensitive. I actually find myself repeating remedies far more often now than I did 20 years ago so if there is a difference I would be more inclined to go with that.
I have never really understood how provings produce such marked symptoms when giving the wrong remedy doesn't seem to.
I think we have a lot more to learn about homeopathy.
Theresa

Shannon wrote
Posted by: "Shannon & Bob Nelson" shannonnelson@tds.net shannonwi2000
Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:37 am (PST)

Hi Luise,
A few factors are probably at least part of the reasons:
- the nature of the remedies being proved?? I'm only speculating
here, and it would be interesting to have a list of those remedies
where this occurred. One that comes to my mind is plutonium
nitricum--an intense substance, and perhaps not surprising that it
produced intense symptoms. Another was from the blood of a wounded
eagle, and I wonder if there wasn't an aspect of personal sensitivity
to the substance at issue, since that person had done other provings
without any mishap--but said after the eagle proving that she intended
never to do another. Do you happen to know what some others
were?
- Today's prover population is probably a more sensitive and less
robust population than the ones in the old provings?
- Also I think they tend to be *bigger* groups, which would presumably
allow greater variety in the intensity...?

And, am I mistaken in thinking that even still, severe and/or lasting
effects are uncommon in provings?

Shannon