Minutus

As some of you know, I am a homeopathy consumer who reps acutes for my family. This has expanded slowly into repping for chronic problems here and there. Whenever possible of course, I refer to a pro. But in some instances, when a pro is simply not possible, I do the best I can. In certain cases, I figure careful, amateur homeopathy is better than nothing at all. Recently, I’ve realized that I am having increasing problems deciding when and how to repeat.
Case in point. My father is 72, has multiple health problems, one of which is gout. I took his case and decided to try sulphur 200C, which matches not only the gout but many of his other symptoms. So after he takes one dose (water potency), his latest gout attack went away, and he was able to skip more and more of his daily medications over a 2 week period without symptoms. Then he had another gout attack. I said, ok, time for a second dose. This time, the pain was substantially decreased (on a scale of 1 – 10, it went from 8 to 3). He wanted to know if he took a 3rd dose, will the pain decrease further? After 24 hours, I told him to take another dose, and his pain went down to 2.
Now the question is, if the pain level remains at 2, should he wait...or should he keep taking daily doses until the pain has entirely gone? It is so hard to decide when there is pain, because obviously we want there to be none. And when a remedy improves pain but doesn’t take it all away, it is hard to decide whether to keep going or to let it rest for a while.
Another question is, I asked my father to succuss 2x before each dose, thinking it might have a stronger effect on the pain. It is helping, but is still not strong enough. Should he succuss more?
These two questions of frequency and succussions come up a lot. Your answers would help me understand not just this case, but other cases as well.
One of my sons has symptoms consistent with mild asthma attacks. I give him a remedy that helps significantly, but doesn’t get rid of it entirely. So, I have the same questions there. How often should I repeat doses, and how often should I increase the succussions? Right now I am playing it by ear, but whatever help you guys can offer would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Helen

Hi, Helen --
Good questions of method.
Regarding your father: it's critical to know that the remedy's effect was curative before repeating it. You wisely waited two weeks, and obviously it had a reasonably sustained effect on the gout itself. It's not clear from your post whether you were able to ascertain its effect on his overall health, and in raising this question I'm going to assume that you already know that his more important symptoms -- including primarily energy, mental clarity, emotional stability, and critical symptoms of vital organs -- are the best indicators here, and that the gout itself is a rather peripheral one and a poor indicator. (In many cases described by the old masters, gout initially worsened under homoeopathic treatment shown to be correct by the prior and continuing improvement of these vital indicators.)
If you're not completely sure about this progress, it would be safer to stop treatment, let the symptom pattern resume its normal course, and begin again with another single test dose.
Given that you are sure that the remedy has been moving his symptoms in the right direction, though, Hahnemann's instructions were to change (preferably by increasing) the potency from dose to dose and that on that basis a daily dose -- once it was clear that the test dose was curative -- would do no harm.
But -- and this point is easy to overlook -- he also emphasised the matter of quantity and the minor degree of additional potentisation. These two considerations are inseparable, and the detail is as follows.
It's not clear from what you've said what it is exactly that he's giving a couple of succussions to before each dose. Hahnemann's instructions (and he preferred use of Q potencies for this, but the same considerations apply to C potencies) were to dilute a small quantity (let's say a drop or two) in a tumblerful of water and to use a little vigorous stirring before each dose. Of course, this method requires extra work in keeping the water medicinally useful. One needs either (a) to ensure that the water in the tumbler remains uncontaminated by a spoon from the patient's mouth, and to preserve its freshness (for which purpose Hahnemann recommended suspending in the glass a piece of charcoal, but which is equally well done with a little alcohol), or (b) -- and this is the option that is surer to ensure its continuing usefulness -- to make up a fresh tumblerful every couple of days. (In either case it's a good idea to keep it covered and out of the way of those strong odours that might destroy it.)
If you make up a fresh tumbler every couple of days, then you have the consideration of how much stirring to give the fresh tumberful to reach the same degree of potency that the previous glassful had had. But, to take Hahnemann literally, you could simply begin again from a couple of stirs for the first dose. You could also give the bottle from which you taken the tumblerful a couple of taps before you do (one tap being always a good idea anyway, to restore the potency from quiescence after some time -- this being not a Hahnemannian instruction that I recall, but a suggestion that derives from modern physics research showing such effects).
All of this is predicated, though, on checking that the effect of the remedy is curative. If it is not, then, though his gout improves, he will head into deep trouble with organs more vulnerable than his joints -- specifically, his kidneys.
I don't think I can say anything very helpful with respect to the asthma. Asthma is traditionally regarded as a difficult illness, and I have very little experience with it and not even a strong memory of what the masters have written about it. I hope that somebody else can offer helpful advice there.
Cheers!
John
2009/7/4 >

On Jul 4, 2009, at 4:01 AM, John Harvey wrote:
I used to try to bring the replacement glass up to the previous number
of succussions before resuming dosing, but then stopped, and didn't
notice any difference at all. (Tho to be honest, I also never noticed
any problems with simple repetition of dry doses.)

I recall a couple of teachers (one was Sheilagh Creasy, and I forget
who the other was) say that in their experience, if you've reached the
highest available potency and see need to go *higher*, you can instead
drop back down to the lowest and begin the ascent again. One teacher
remarked that, in her opinion, the issue is to *change* the potency,
rather than specific need for specific *type* of change. So I figure
even if you go back to the initial succussions and just begin again in
the usual way, that should satisfy the requirement of "change"--and I
haven't had any problem with it.

It could also be worth changing the potency--see whether 6c in water is
effective (likely to need more frequent doses, but try and see)?
I agree with that! Sometimes a simple palliative effect can be *very*
convincing (but not curative), and you need to see what's happening
over time.

Helen, unpleasant tho it could be, it could be useful to let him
relapse and see whether the relapsed (and ideally stabilized) condition
is better (even a tiny bit) or worse (even a little), or whether he
appears to be completely back to where he started. If it's either of
the last two, seems appropriate to carry on with the remedy.

But if he relapses to a place that's even a little *worse*, then your
remedy may be either suppressing, or else merely palliating *and
allowing the disease to continue its worsening path*.

Also, I'm not clear from what you wrote--did the first dose work
*better* than the second and third--did the first dose remove the pain
*completely* for the first couple of weeks, or if not, what number did
it bring it down to?

Re your son's asthma, even tho not removed entirely, can you tell if
there's any pattern of ongoing improvement, or has it re-stabilized at
the improved-but-not-enough level?

Best wishes!
Shannon

Dear Shannon
With LMs when you have done with LM30, one starts with LM01.
I have found that a simple method of plussing is to use a small water bottle with 1/3 water and then add the potency pill of your choice and succuss 10 time prior to each required dose.
Use a teaspoon for each dose.
If you think you need to keep it, add 5 ml of vodka and keep in the fridge.
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Shannon & Bob Nelson
Sent: 04 July 2009 15:51
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] frequency and succussions
I used to try to bring the replacement glass up to the previous number of succussions before resuming dosing, but then stopped, and didn't notice any difference at all. (Tho to be honest, I also never noticed any problems with simple repetition of dry doses.)

I recall a couple of teachers (one was Sheilagh Creasy, and I forget who the other was) say that in their experience, if you've reached the highest available potency and see need to go *higher*, you can instead drop back down to the lowest and begin the ascent again. One teacher remarked that, in her opinion, the issue is to *change* the potency, rather than specific need for specific *type* of change. So I figure even if you go back to the initial succussions and just begin again in the usual way, that should satisfy the requirement of "change"--and I haven't had any problem with it.

It could also be worth changing the potency--see whether 6c in water is effective (likely to need more frequent doses, but try and see)?
I agree with that! Sometimes a simple palliative effect can be *very* convincing (but not curative), and you need to see what's happening over time.

Helen, unpleasant tho it could be, it could be useful to let him relapse and see whether the relapsed (and ideally stabilized) condition is better (even a tiny bit) or worse (even a little), or whether he appears to be completely back to where he started. If it's either of the last two, seems appropriate to carry on with the remedy.

But if he relapses to a place that's even a little *worse*, then your remedy may be either suppressing, or else merely palliating *and allowing the disease to continue its worsening path*.

Also, I'm not clear from what you wrote--did the first dose work *better* than the second and third--did the first dose remove the pain *completely* for the first couple of weeks, or if not, what number did it bring it down to?

Re your son's asthma, even tho not removed entirely, can you tell if there's any pattern of ongoing improvement, or has it re-stabilized at the improved-but-not-enough level?

Best wishes!
Shannon

Thanks Soroush,

I thought that with LMs you were supposed to make a fresh one each day,
after freshly succussing the stock bottle--is it usual to keep using a
single bottle this way, with LMs? I do that with Cs, and on thinking
don't know why the two should be different in this way...?

John:

The method I learned from my homeopath is this.

1. Dissolve one pellet of remedy in a glass bottle, usually 8 oz of water, with 1 tsp of alcohol.
2. Succuss this bottle before taking each dose.
3. Put the dose (say, 1 tsp) in a cup, and then take 1 tsp from the cup to the mouth. OR, take the dose directly from the bottle.

Shannon: >
++
This is exactly what I was wondering about. Usually, this is what I do. But when pain is involved, it is so difficult to choose to not get rid of it, or even harder, let it come back. But I see that the consensus appears to be this is what is needed to best determine cure vs. palliation.

Shannon:

Yes, the first dose worked better, removed the pain completely (8 down to 0). The second dose improved substantially (8 to 3), and the third improved mildly (3 to 2).



The remedy that I gave my son (Nux V) seems to only palliate. Again on a scale of one to 10, the Nux V brings the symptoms from a 7 to 3. After a few hours, it seems to go back up to a 7 again. Then he comes running to me and asks for it turns out, Nux V is his regular constitutional remedy, and has gotten rid of a lot of his other problems completely, including tantrums, the occasional colic, a horrible skin rash that kept him up nights. That is why even though it only palliates the asthma-like symptoms, I figure it is worth trying, since it worked on everything else.

Of course, I just had a thought. These asthma-type symptoms have always been there, but as all the other symptoms got better, this one got worse, as in the attacks have been more intense. I always just thought the condition is just getting worse, but now I wonder if the Nux V was suppressing after all.

Helen

Hello, Helen --
2009/7/7 >
That looks pretty good!
If you can evaluate the bigger picture from your notes at two weeks and your notes just before the third dose, you may be able to avoid this. If it is unclear whether his important indicators of energy, mental clarity, and emotion are improving or declining as the gout improves, they may later show themselves to be tending either way. If better, then great; if worse, then the remedy, though close enough to do some good, is not close enough to establish a truly curative response. The decreasing rather than increasing response to the remedy does suggest to me that this may be the case (I've always found that the correct remedy removes the symptoms as well on its second dose as on its first, and for longer), but a longer period of evaluation following a fresh dose from scratch (i.e. when all remedy effects have gone) should make that much clearer -- just as soon as the direction of the truly important symptoms is clear. And there is always an outside chance -- if indeed the important indicators are improving along with the gout -- that the reason that the remedy is not holding longer is that the potency should be higher. But the most important thing you can look out for may be what it is that is improving first after the "initial" dose: the important indicators or the gout.

Cheers --

John

Hi Helen,

Sorry, I'm getting back to some attempted-then-neglected responses:
Usually when a symptom begins to return after a low-potency dose, it
does not return all of a sudden with intensity; instead there's a point
(this in my limited but so far consisted experience) where you become
aware of discomfort *beginning* to return, and do have some reasonable
period of warning. Then when the next dose is taken, relief comes
quickly, usually (again this is based on my very small sample size)
within a matter of minutes. So waiting for return of symptom isn't
usually a terrible thing.

If it was a high-potency dose the process should be similar, just over
a longer time period.
That sounds to me, as someone (?) else remarked, like a
not-close-enough remedy. (Sorry!)

Oops, that would be my conclusion... Or at least that it's not a
"clean" cure, doesn't seem quite right.

Can you describe the asthma attacks? When do they come on; how does he
react; what do you notice that makes them better or worse? (Is there
any particular position that makes it better or worse--sitting, lying,
bending forward, bending back, lying on back--anything?)

Shannon