Arnica before surgery - was Synovial cyst (lumbar) operation
Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:46 am
The reason to use Arnica before surgery, is prevention of shock.
Death rate from shock associated with surgery is variable from 2%
fatality in knee replacement surgery to 47% fatality in certain kinds
of heart surgery. THAT is what arnica prevents when used before surgery.
Do you still not see a reason to use it
I'm aware of what Vithoulkas thinks about it. I like a lot of what he
writes on homeopathy but do not know what surgery experience he has
with Arnica.
Maybe he did not see Arnica in use before each of about 30 surgeries
per week for 2 years with Arnica before each.
Zero shock deaths was such a remarkable result that the vet I worked
with who thinks homeopathy is witchcraft, soon would not do surgery
without it!!
When I left after 2 years, I had to first teach his wife/receptionist
how to use Arnica for surgery patients. (The vet himself would not
touch the witchcraft stuff.)
Not really. I like a lot of what Vithoulkas writes, but on the matter
of prophylaxis the man is misguided, and thus has the wrong idea
about arnica before surgery as well. He also has a rather allopathic
approach to the action of arnicfa,l sugesting it acts like coumadin.
This is not true.
It only acts like coumadin IF such action is warranted by the
Law of Similars.
There are at least ten thousand rubrics associated with arnica as a
proven remedy, and NO individual needs to have all ten thousand
symptoms in order for arnica to be effective for the ones they do
have. Arnica (or any remedy) will only act in the areas where the
symptoms follow the Law of Similars - and NOT in the other 9990 or so
rubrics it has. Vithoulkas has missed this essential point. Hence the
"coumadin effect" during surgery, after taking arnica, will ONLY act
if surgery is causing a blood clot somewhere that needs to be broken
up. And when it does act there, to break an inappropriate blood clot
- and prevent potential; embolism for example - that is a GOOD thing!
Vithoulkas also claims that there is no such thing as prophylaxis
using homeopathy. Well - apart from the fact that experience clearly
shows otherwise since 1808 at least, the Organon explains clearly the
principle involved in prophylaxis. It is a finding made during the
proving of remedies.
Some quotes:
Aph 121:
"In proving medicines to ascertain their effects on the healthy body,
it must be borne in mind that the strong, heroic substances, as they
are termed, are liable even in small doses to produce changes in the
health even of robust persons."
The changes that are made in healthy people - namely in those persons
WITHOUT the symptoms of the remedy at time of taking it - are
positive in that the remedy strengthens them in those areas. That
this is meant by these words, is confirmed a few aphorisms later, here:
Aph 141:
"Let it not be imagined that such slight indispositions caused by
taking medicines for the purpose of proving them can be in the main
injurious to the health."
SO this is contrary to what Vithoulkas has assumed. Vithoulkas has
not accepted the proven fact that remedies taken when the symptoms
are not there (when there is health there) - can strengthen the
individual and are NOT injurious (such as bleeding during surgery,
which would be injurious).
APh 141 continues:
"Experience shows on the contrary, that the organism of the prover
becomes, by these frequent attacks on his health, all the more expert
in repelling all external influences inimical to his frame and all
artificial and natural morbific noxious agents, and becomes more
hardened to resist everything of an injurious character, by means of
these moderate experiments on his own person with medicines. His
health becomes more unalterable; he becomes more robust, as all
experience shows."
Again - there is confirmation that using a remedy BEFORE there are
symptoms - is strengthening to the health.
It is only if the remedy is taken repeatedly and often, that actual
proving symptoms may occur (as Dr Roz mentioned in his email on this
topic).
Homeoprophylaxis has been in very effective use since 1808 in
veterinary medicine that I have seen recorded - and I personally have
used it with success for at least 20 years - and the principle is to
apply the remedy before need, in such a way as to build the strength
and robustness referred to in Aph 141, but not in enough doses to
cause a proving.
Thus one obtains the corollary use of the proving principle here, a
principle that leads to homeoprophylaxis success - the principle of
strengthening health against symptoms that could be caused by the
remedy substance.
To me this is the obvious principle behind all homeoprophylaxis, it
comes straight from the Organion and is then directly applied - and I
am sorry that Vithoulkas seems to have missed it altogether.
I get the impression from his lecture on the advice against
arnica before surgery that he has little if any experience on the
field, using arnica, and that his advice is purely allopathic and
based on assumption - including the incorrect assumption that flies
in the face of the Aph 141 claim that remedies strengthen the
individual if TAKEN WHEN THE REMEDY SYMPTOMS ARE NOT ALREADY THERE.
Clearly remedies DO strengthen the individual against symptoms of the
remedy, if the remedy is taken when symptoms have not occurred, such
as in the taking of arnica before surgery.
I also feel that if Vithoulkas had been in the surgery with me for
the multiple surgeries where arnica taken ahead of surgery prevented
death from shock in ALL cases, he would quickly have to see the
wisdom of Aph 141, and how it can logically be directly implemented
in homeoprophylaxis.
Vithoulkas, in that lecture, basically implies there is no such thing
as homeoprophylaxis - and yet we have more than 200 years experience
of its efficacy:-)
Aph 141 *explains* that efficacy. It follows a known finding in
homeopathy.
My own experience described, and that of so many thousands or
millions of others, confirms it.
All the above notwithstanding - the REASON to use arnica as
prophylaxis before surgery is mainly to do with preventing surgical
shock. It DOES help prevent bleeding as well, but the shock aspect is
even more life saving.
So - I can not be persuaded that the reduction in death rate from
shock to zero or near zero, by use of arnica before surgery, is "no
reason to use it".
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."
Death rate from shock associated with surgery is variable from 2%
fatality in knee replacement surgery to 47% fatality in certain kinds
of heart surgery. THAT is what arnica prevents when used before surgery.
Do you still not see a reason to use it
I'm aware of what Vithoulkas thinks about it. I like a lot of what he
writes on homeopathy but do not know what surgery experience he has
with Arnica.
Maybe he did not see Arnica in use before each of about 30 surgeries
per week for 2 years with Arnica before each.
Zero shock deaths was such a remarkable result that the vet I worked
with who thinks homeopathy is witchcraft, soon would not do surgery
without it!!
When I left after 2 years, I had to first teach his wife/receptionist
how to use Arnica for surgery patients. (The vet himself would not
touch the witchcraft stuff.)
Not really. I like a lot of what Vithoulkas writes, but on the matter
of prophylaxis the man is misguided, and thus has the wrong idea
about arnica before surgery as well. He also has a rather allopathic
approach to the action of arnicfa,l sugesting it acts like coumadin.
This is not true.
It only acts like coumadin IF such action is warranted by the
Law of Similars.
There are at least ten thousand rubrics associated with arnica as a
proven remedy, and NO individual needs to have all ten thousand
symptoms in order for arnica to be effective for the ones they do
have. Arnica (or any remedy) will only act in the areas where the
symptoms follow the Law of Similars - and NOT in the other 9990 or so
rubrics it has. Vithoulkas has missed this essential point. Hence the
"coumadin effect" during surgery, after taking arnica, will ONLY act
if surgery is causing a blood clot somewhere that needs to be broken
up. And when it does act there, to break an inappropriate blood clot
- and prevent potential; embolism for example - that is a GOOD thing!
Vithoulkas also claims that there is no such thing as prophylaxis
using homeopathy. Well - apart from the fact that experience clearly
shows otherwise since 1808 at least, the Organon explains clearly the
principle involved in prophylaxis. It is a finding made during the
proving of remedies.
Some quotes:
Aph 121:
"In proving medicines to ascertain their effects on the healthy body,
it must be borne in mind that the strong, heroic substances, as they
are termed, are liable even in small doses to produce changes in the
health even of robust persons."
The changes that are made in healthy people - namely in those persons
WITHOUT the symptoms of the remedy at time of taking it - are
positive in that the remedy strengthens them in those areas. That
this is meant by these words, is confirmed a few aphorisms later, here:
Aph 141:
"Let it not be imagined that such slight indispositions caused by
taking medicines for the purpose of proving them can be in the main
injurious to the health."
SO this is contrary to what Vithoulkas has assumed. Vithoulkas has
not accepted the proven fact that remedies taken when the symptoms
are not there (when there is health there) - can strengthen the
individual and are NOT injurious (such as bleeding during surgery,
which would be injurious).
APh 141 continues:
"Experience shows on the contrary, that the organism of the prover
becomes, by these frequent attacks on his health, all the more expert
in repelling all external influences inimical to his frame and all
artificial and natural morbific noxious agents, and becomes more
hardened to resist everything of an injurious character, by means of
these moderate experiments on his own person with medicines. His
health becomes more unalterable; he becomes more robust, as all
experience shows."
Again - there is confirmation that using a remedy BEFORE there are
symptoms - is strengthening to the health.
It is only if the remedy is taken repeatedly and often, that actual
proving symptoms may occur (as Dr Roz mentioned in his email on this
topic).
Homeoprophylaxis has been in very effective use since 1808 in
veterinary medicine that I have seen recorded - and I personally have
used it with success for at least 20 years - and the principle is to
apply the remedy before need, in such a way as to build the strength
and robustness referred to in Aph 141, but not in enough doses to
cause a proving.
Thus one obtains the corollary use of the proving principle here, a
principle that leads to homeoprophylaxis success - the principle of
strengthening health against symptoms that could be caused by the
remedy substance.
To me this is the obvious principle behind all homeoprophylaxis, it
comes straight from the Organion and is then directly applied - and I
am sorry that Vithoulkas seems to have missed it altogether.
I get the impression from his lecture on the advice against
arnica before surgery that he has little if any experience on the
field, using arnica, and that his advice is purely allopathic and
based on assumption - including the incorrect assumption that flies
in the face of the Aph 141 claim that remedies strengthen the
individual if TAKEN WHEN THE REMEDY SYMPTOMS ARE NOT ALREADY THERE.
Clearly remedies DO strengthen the individual against symptoms of the
remedy, if the remedy is taken when symptoms have not occurred, such
as in the taking of arnica before surgery.
I also feel that if Vithoulkas had been in the surgery with me for
the multiple surgeries where arnica taken ahead of surgery prevented
death from shock in ALL cases, he would quickly have to see the
wisdom of Aph 141, and how it can logically be directly implemented
in homeoprophylaxis.
Vithoulkas, in that lecture, basically implies there is no such thing
as homeoprophylaxis - and yet we have more than 200 years experience
of its efficacy:-)
Aph 141 *explains* that efficacy. It follows a known finding in
homeopathy.
My own experience described, and that of so many thousands or
millions of others, confirms it.
All the above notwithstanding - the REASON to use arnica as
prophylaxis before surgery is mainly to do with preventing surgical
shock. It DOES help prevent bleeding as well, but the shock aspect is
even more life saving.
So - I can not be persuaded that the reduction in death rate from
shock to zero or near zero, by use of arnica before surgery, is "no
reason to use it".
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."