Minutus

I was referring to what you called "pre-empting" of symptoms. I was
assuming that Joy would find that objectionable, tho perhaps she
wouldn't! Sorry for the confusion.
Shannon

Hi Irene,

I agree with all you say below - and that was exactly my point, has
been my point and will be my point.

"Cured symptoms" make up a lot of our MM and are just as good as those
from provings - and as I said, practically all homeopaths have used
them and are using them - a lot of them just do not realize it,
although it should be abvious - at least to people who have studied
provings.

Therefore the insistaence that a remedy must have been "proven" is to
me rather hard to understand.

I also thhink that e. g. one can consider side effects of allopathic
drugs to be equivalent to provings. Where is the difference?

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 <==========

>Now I guess I really put the cat among the pigeons

more like you've loosed a pack of rats in the kitchen
(yawn)

Homeopathy & provings on humans have a really neat correspondence.
For humans.
Like most of us here on this list who are mainly practicing
homeopathy (classical or Hahnemannian which is why we joined and
contribute to this list, since that is its stated purpose...)
Vivisection & animal experimentation is pretty unsavory, and in fact
that practice of "culturing" vaccines in animals / animal tissue and
then injecting them into humans might be describe in some "black magic
mad science" horror film ... and what a horror it is !

So, forgive me for not wanting to bother with responding to your
argument other than to say-
"classical or Hahnemannian homeopathy"
..the healing art & science which was the brainchild of Hahnemann
and which has been practiced in general accord with the principles he
illuminated
and which has been built upon in similar accord in terms of myriad provings
Is not broken. I does not need fixing.
It needs people to be capable of and dedicated in grounding themselves in it,
such that they become (duh) successful practitioners of it...
and thus able to fulfill its mission: safe, reasonably rapid CURE of
suffering in human dis-ease

(which anyone is certainly free to use on cacti or cattus, or whatever)
Provings, NEEDLESS TO SAY, are an integral part of the system
(which is not wanting of permutation into Irenopathy, where there are
not provings)
(this is the point at which I normally suggest that you establish the
school of Irenopathy, and form your own email list, where you'll
surely be too busy to bother us here with the idea that provings are
an inherently bad idea.)

persons with ten degrees or none may certainly do whatever they like
with potentized medicinal substance.
at some point, that stops being "homeopathy" ... let alone
"classical" or "Hahemannian" homeopathy

At that point, even someone who failed high school should be able to figure out:
This is not only not-on-topic for this list, it is also antagonistic,
and was even stated as pugnacious challenge.

For whatever value you may provide here, you certainly come with a lot
of baggage.
(are you sure you wouldn't like to toddle along and start up that
Irenopathy Institute ?)
warm wishes,
david 510.776.5914 fax: 510.336.6671
www.holistiq.com
www.DavidHartley.com
I.T. support: www.cafegratitude.com
co-founder: www.GratefulMindandBody.com
web developer: www.iamResourceful.com

> Therefore the insistaence that a remedy must have been "proven" is to

Ah! well, this is a little window of clarity upon why you gave up
practicing homeopathy, I suppose.
Still the mystery though--- what it is that keeps attracting you to
take part in email discussion lists where your posts are often (as is
this one) completely antagonistic to the stated purpose of the
discussion group.

It is unfortunate that you were not able to obtain a gratifying and
successful mastery of homeopathy.
Unfortunate for the people how might've benefitted, before you were
poisoned by failures or lack of understanding as to the use & purpose
of provings and how to differentiate that from clinical anecdotes or
gross poisonings.
Unfortunate for you perhaps.
Definitely unfortunate in terms of the 7+ years of having you
continually nipping at the ankles of those of us who are sharing "ON
TOPIC" of "classical" .. "Hahnemannian" homeopathy, in which the value
of provings is rather fully illumined.
rgds,
david 510.776.5914 fax: 510.336.6671
www.holistiq.com
www.DavidHartley.com
I.T. support: www.cafegratitude.com
co-founder: www.GratefulMindandBody.com
web developer: www.iamResourceful.com

Hi David,
??? What on earth does that have to do with anything that's been
talked about in this thread, or any other in recent months if not
years? Can you please quote me anything that appears to you to relate
to "vivisection and animal experimentation"? (Can you possibly be
alluding to Irene's comments about rubrics sometimes not translating
directly from human provings to animal work? Please tell me you're not
lumping that together with vivisection...!)
Again, what does this have to do with anything currently being
discussed?

Again, what are you referring to? What "fixing" are you saying should
not have been attempted? I'm afraid I know what you're referring to,
but I'm really hoping not...
As above. I hope I don't know what you're referring to.
Gee, how nice of you.

I suggest you don't ask for a vote, David, as to which of you has
offered more useful, informative and interesting material lately.

Warm wishes,
Shannon

Repeated doses tried dry, in water, Cs and LMs from 6C to 50M according to the energy levels of patients and from LM1 to higher up to at times LM15, and not much changes, sometimes a kind of a flare-up of amelioration to fall back into the previous situation.
Yet the same remedy keeps coming up as indicated.
Same experience with patients referred by other homeopaths, brilliant ones who definitely found the simillimum, yet no result............same remedy in the F series leads to cure.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit www.drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for articles and information.

Hi Joe,

What does 1f correspond to in relation to X or C or LM ?
What is the highest in the series you've had need to use?
Have you had the occasional aggravation?
Do you use the f scale generally in 'judicious' repetition via liquid posology?
You have or are writing a book on this ?
warm wishes,
david 510.776.5914 fax: 510.336.6671
www.holistiq.com
www.DavidHartley.com
I.T. support: www.cafegratitude.com
co-founder: www.GratefulMindandBody.com
web developer: www.iamResourceful.com
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 7:15 PM, Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
wrote:

It is not a different potency, it is another way to use C potencies specifically made by hand succussion with 10 succusions, not a Korsakov potency, not a Skinner one.
Please do read the paper published, it is freely available at www.hpathy.com in their October 2008 newsletter, or as a free PDF from www.lulu.com , type my name without spelling mistake in the search box or on my blog (address in the signature) but without illustrations or graphs.
In the paper, most of your questions are addressed. It is 47 pages long, 30 without the illustrations and graphs, so it will be easier to discuss if you have the paper handy.
Others will be answered in the 1 year update due in September/October but here is a preview according to your questions:
Highest potency was 233C, very time consuming (and costly) to go above that but I do not think there is any need to go higher.
The repetition is akin to C or LMs: each potency is in a powder that can be taken as one dose (dissolved in a tsp of water for ease) as per 4th Organon, or in a glass of water and the same potency repeated with stirring until the action has stopped, then moving to the next potency, as per 5th Organon or with the use of multiple dilution glasses and intermittent succussions as we do with LM/Q potencies.
It really will be clear when you read the paper.
The update will be published after it is presented at our national conference and will be available for free also at lulu and in my blog, but I will then rewrite the whole experience with its conclusions in a book(let) form.
Just FYI I am getting close to 150 cases with slightly above 200 remedies now prepared and available in F potencies.
It really has completely changed my practice.
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit www.drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for articles and information.

I am so looking forward to reading your update!!!
Can you say a bit (more) about what ways it's changed your practice?

Shannon

Please. please can we all stop having a go at Irene!
She has amply demonstrated that she is absolutely classical in the way she goes about her repertorising and choice of remedy. That is the basis of her practice - and that is what matters. It feels like a witch-hunt!
Irene has NOT said that provings are a bad idea - simply that she finds case results helpful and worthy of consideration as valid rubrics. Can I remind you of her exact words:
"I guess it is a matter of opinion as to what is a proven symptom. I
would see 3300 cases cured by a remedy as valid rubrics, whether
called a proving or a case proof."
Indeed, that is how we have always added to our homeopathic MM - unless you want to exclude such great homeopaths as Clarke et al from being classicists!
I really think that we should all focus more on the positive aspects of what each one can contribute to this list. Irene knows a lot - so does David - in fact everyone is interesting to read. I feel that we should perhaps query an approach we are not clear about, in order to understand the arguments behind it, but then keep any disapproval we may feel to a simply expressed "not for me" message. After all, we are free to accept or refuse any ideas we want - but let's not try to ban free speech! If we don't like something - ignore it! That way, the non-classicists will fall away.
I really value the input of everyone here - there is such a breadth of knowledge available. In particular, I think Irene's contributions to the mental and emotional side of prescribing for animals is hugely interesting (she helps a lot on the CATWELL list too) At college we had vets come to talk to us about how to take a case if the patient is unable or unwilling to talk. It gives another insight into how to look for clues to the remedy.
All this arguing is such a waste of time and energy.
Let's help, not hinder each other.
Liz