Minutus

It makes interesting reading- and who knows - might work also. There
are those who say miasms and drug indications can be found based on
facial configurations - we saw a post in this group as well- if that
were true then bulging belly might indicate Nux vom. as Gallavardin
claims-

My favorite is his work on Alcoholism. The remedy indications are
excellent ( tested out and they work) and mostly based on indications
from the old masters ( Hering and the like) - of course I would think
Gallavardin himself can be considered an old master.

We lost some knowledge when the emphasis for prescriptions went from
physical diseases to just generals and mentals. When locations were
considered more important for prescribing there were a lot of
indications just based on this, Hering writes in his Analytical
repertory how a prescription can change based on a small fact like a
thumb being affected- ( or a particular finger- something to that
effect - I am not quoting verbatim).

What can we say - if we accept it that a person wearing a thin saree
like snake skin can get Naja - then her husband with thin lips can get
Nit.acid ( by the way Nit.acid really has a lot of affinity to lips -
right?)
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Theresa Partington" wrote:
book for a
drying up
to 5m
after new
on 2nd,
moon) will
are the
doing
as he
...well,

That is certainly what he is best known for

H2002 wrote
resulted in for example (the San Franciscite --Van Ness Ave)
Lilienthal's encyclopedic book of differentials; and clinical books with
more specialism that were incorporated into it -- all pointed to
syndromes related to named diseases >>> THEN related to remedies. Still
not treating the disease itself -- but the peculiar nature of the whole
WITH the disease. IE - how to see the most common variations in
syndrome of those types of terrain susceptible to a particular disease.
In Lilienthal, this is compiled only up to circa 1890's- but
incorporating all the experience of Hering and the great empiricists of
rural America 1830 until that time. The latter of course treated most
of the spectrum of diseases of humankind with the exception of many
parasitic diseases not endemic to US -- without ABs. Compilations of
Anshutz, Stephenson, OA Julian, Scholten, and all our newer provings
followed.

Kent (starting circa 1880's) - brought more psychosomatic wholism into
homeopathy and steered it away from disease syndrome empiricism and into
mental-generals as more important than specific differentials and
indicators in named disease syndromes. This approach ties the psyche to
the soma and is fantastic when it applies, a failure when it does not.

Your resonant point relates to the method of using locations, sensations,
extensions, radiations, modalities to cure Chief Complaint. The arbiter
was not dimeanor or thermal/desires/aversions necessarily - but the
relativity of one syndrome presentation of the same named disease in
contradistinction to other presentations. Para 153 type nuances could
make that differentiation that substantiated grounds for prescrip of one
rx over another. This is comparative pathological prescribing, which when
appropriate, reduces the field of remedies and allows use of past
empiricism that as you say, tended to look at whole presentations of a
particular nosological category as the "first symptom" - with the
difference between one diabetes and another as important.

We tend to forget to check these in the old books at times (relying on the
same info chopped up into repertory "sound bites" if you will... ). On
the other hand, we of course also have to step back and see the remedy
picture in the case regardless of the disease name, keeping in mind that
the pathological prescribing differentials may be irrelevant. Requires
the flexible mind.

Best,
A