Minutus

I made the point simply to UNDERLINE that important fact that we deal
with INDIVIDUALS , individually, not with remedies en masse.
- you cannot antidote a remedy (unlessit is true for every instance
that that remedy was used), you can only affect the course of it's
action in any given INDIVIDUAL.

The analogy of 'My foot hurts' is not applicable because it is 'My'
foot. An individual foot belonging to one individual. (now I hope
that hasn't made you hopping mad! - groan....)

Seriously through the point is that I am not simply arguing
semantics, I am trying to emphasise the point that a remedy's action
is never identical in two individuals, you can only antidote aspects
of it's action in that individual. We could better say , 'in such and
such a case where the Sx called for Rx 'X', the Rxs progress was
antidoted by 'Y'....." This tells us more about the case and the
nature of the antidoting, than blindly stating the 'remedy' was
antodoted.

ANY remedy's action could be antidoted in ANY case by ANY substance
to which that individual was sensitive, therefore it is the
individual Px's reaction not the individual Rx that is affected
(antidoted)

Instead of coffee, Mint etc consider other Rxs as antidotes,:
- where we say Rx 'A' is antidoted by Rx 'B' ( e.g. the Rxs in Rx
relationships), this is only true where the Sx of Rx 'B' match the Sx
in the Px caused by Rx'A'. It is to do with the sensitivity (=Sx) of
the Px, and and that's where we should concentrate.

These will not be the same in every Px which is why there are usually
more than one Rx listed as 'antidotes' to any given Rx, and why it
cannot be said that one thing is categorically an antidote to a
specific remedy, any more than we can say categorically never follow
RT with Apis, give Sil to Px with bits in, or give Lyc 200, or start
n eczema case with Tub, etc. It is fine to have these as caveats, but
not as hard and fast rules.

By all means consider 'antidote' stories as caveats but not as rules,
which is what it sounds like if we say substance 'X' antidotes Rx 'Y'.

The way to understand that, is to regard it in relation to the Px
(the case) rather than specifically in regard to the Rx: therefore I
say it is not the 'remedy' that is antidoted.
Simon King,
http://www.Homeopathy-Help.net

Okay, I see your point.
But good luck changing the convention!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I'm interested the future of homeopathy for my children's sake, and
for my children's children

That is to say I want people to be able to make it work, for that
they need to understand it, so I think it is best to talk about it in
ways that promote understanding over convention - convention is after
all only the commonly held belief, often having reached that status
by dint of repetition, I suspect a lot of convention is the result
of 'chinese whispers'

Simon King,
http://www.Homeopathy-Help.net