Minutus

Dear Friends of Homeopathy,
We all know that finding the best homeopathic medicine is very challenging. Well, a Swiss MD homeopath, Heiner Frei, has developed a system (typical of the Swiss, eh!) of repertorizing a patient’s symptoms, while at the same time, subtracting those symptoms that have the polar opposite modality symptoms. Dr. Frei tested his system in a double-blind study on children with ADD/ADHD and got it published in the European Journal of Pediatrics (see the reference at the bottom of this email).
Polarity Analysis in Homeopathy: A Precise Path to the Simillimum

By Heiner Frei
More info about this book is at:

https://www.homeopathic.com/cms-global/ ... uctId=1412
Precise and Efficient

Polarity analysis is an efficient method that helps a busy practitioner by making the homeopathic prescription faster and more precise. The Swiss physician Heiner Frei developed this method to demonstrate the efficacy of homeopathic treatment of ADHD children in a controlled 5-year clinical study. The study demonstrated highly significant effects of homeopathy.

Polarity analysis is based on Boenninghausen's Therapeutic Pocketbook and has revolutionized homeopathic treatment. Cornerstones of the prescription are polar symptoms such as amelioration or aggravation by heat or motion. They mirror the disturbed vital force. Polarity analysis goes directly to the core of the case. It offers clear differentiation of a manageable number of 133 remedies.

Heiner Frei's method is easy to learn. He shows us all its facets and nuances by leading us through 40 exciting cases, from acute hearing loss, allergic disease, chronic obstructive bronchitis, mononucleosis, mumps and scarlet fever to ADHD, Asperger syndrome and epilepsy. Casetaking is facilitated by checklists and questionnaires.

This book comes from the large practice of an experienced homeopathic physician as well as from a passionate researcher who will not rest until he can bring his inspired discovery to perfection. His success rate of 80% speaks for itself.

“With Heiner Frei's polarity analysis, the Boenninghausen method has reached a peak of perfection which we have witnessed in our practice. The modalities are a direct reaction of the vital force to any pathological disturbance: unlike psychological symptoms, they do not require any interpretation. Polarity analysis is a reliable method and it enhances our work, especially for quick treatment of acute illness and for hyperactive children – we would certainly not want to do without it again.”
Ulrich Welte
Reference to research:

Frei, H, Everts R, von Ammon K, Kaufmann F, Walther D, Hsu-Schmitz SF, Collenberg M, Fuhrer K, Hassink R, Steinlin M, Thurneysen A. Homeopathic treatment of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover trial. Eur J Pediatr., July 27,2005,164:758-767.
You can purchase this book at:

https://www.homeopathic.com/cms-global/ ... uctId=1412
Dana Ullman, MPH, CCH

Homeopathic Educational Services

812 Camelia St.

Berkeley, CA. 94710

510-649-0294

email@homeopathic.com

dullman@igc.org (personal)

www.homeopathic.com (website)

www.Huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman (blog)

So is this person dismissing the polarity symptoms or accentuating them?

To: Carol Orr

The author of this book uses OPPOSITE modalities to reduce the chances of selecting the wrong remedy. Although some remedies have OPPOSITE modalities as a part of its picture, the vast majority of the time they do not.

Also, this author has formally tested his prescribing technique (with high success!) for kids with ADD/ADHD.

--Dana Ullman

Hi Dana,

I saw a very interesting video where Heiner Frei was describing his method and a program that he uses figure in the polar symptoms. I wish I could find it on the Internet. Will Taylor introduced the method in one of his classes. The idea is the polar symptoms has higher validity than a symptom that does not exist in the opposite form.

I have not read the book, but just from the video the method reminds me of Paul Herscu's segment analysis where one segment (cycles and segments analysis) will be the opposite of the one that follows it. That is, in the process of becoming ill, a remedy pattern as expressed by the patient will over react to the stressor. As a result, he will produce a symptom that is opposite to the symptom that occurred before it. For example, a veratrum album will become hyper-active both on a physical and a mental level. This will lead to exhaustion with an opposite set of symptoms. Frei is making a similar observation. If you can find the over reaction, it is probably a significant part of the case.
In the Complete software, polar symptoms can be highlighted. They do not change the statistical analysis, but you can weight them manually if you think they are significant.

The book sounds very interesting.

Best,
Ellen Madono

That is nonsense. It is like going to the pharmacy and eliminating all drugs beginning wiht the letters mnopq.
In other words this elimination has zero basis in homeopathy.
Not true but even if it was, it would not make this idea the least bit logical.
Really? He tested his own technique of makin ga mess, and he thinks his own technique is good.
Are we supposed to be impressed?

I suppose I COULD draw a picture with only the orange and green crayons, and call it a sunset and claim it was successful.
Same logic.

.....Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
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."

Dr. Frei gave a webinar for NCH in March 2012 which has been archived http://homeopathycenter.org/webinar/ref ... led-trials
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3684/7050 - Release Date: 01/31/14

Hi,
I think there has been some confusion.
I'm not sure what Dana meant, but Heiner Frei is saying that polar symptoms have higher reliability than findings, sensations or mind symptoms. In his article, modalities and especially aggravations have a higher reliability than polar symptoms. He is not talking about elimination symptoms. Polar symptoms, he says, are more reliable than what he calls findings, sensations and mind symptoms. I think that this is a very interesting and rather subtle argument. I would like to learn more about it. I am taking this from an article by Frei passed out by Will Taylor in his acute care class.
Ellen Madono

Ellen, et al - Go to youtube, search for Heiner Frei, and you'll find several videos on polarity analysis... The following is an url to a video by Dr. Russell Malcolm with an intro to polarity analysis (it's around 1 hour long). See what you think.

HTH, Judith Mateo - Portland OR

I watched the whole thing, with increasing concern.
Malcolm has the desire to process homeopathy patients in about five or ten minutes of appointment allocation (cattle trough medicine like allopathy) , and get them out the door with a prescription, developed mecahnically, and with a chance of matching as many patients as provings symptoms for the same illness originally matched. The other twenty percent of patients do not matter, There is no individualizing. He's looking for a statistical okay by percentages. The twenty percent he misses will also be missed by every other "homeopath" using this mechanical system, and will have no homeopathy available to them (by this system).

Second, the mechanics of the polar calculations used are not correct.

Worst, the principles of homeopathy are being ignoered in favor of a statistical goal.

Specifically: The polar idea is based on an incorrect assumption.
They are assuming that when a remedy proving has some provers report opposite symptoms, that it matters how maby report opposite symptoms. They have developed artificial mathematics to play with these:
For example let's say fifty provers are involved and 26 report better eating spinach and 24 report worse eating spinach. They subtract the smaller umber for the bogger one and say the net is for 2 feeling better eatign spinach.

They say (inventing a polar example) if the patient is worse eating spinach, then the remedy with this polarity is "CONTRAINDICATED"
and they look for another one.

This is invalid.
The truth is: If the remedy helps ANY person one way or another, then it is a valid rubric/remedy to consider if the patient has the symptom covered by the remedy...and it WILL work if patient also has the constitutional type to go with it...but that takes more than five minutes.......
The percentage of provers DOES suggest a range of constitutional types involved, and so some constitutional types will get one polarity and others will get the opposite polarity. Their statistics for "success" of prescribing, will be better than they used to be, only becasue they are being biased towards the constitutional types that have the symptom polarity that occurs more often.

That is not homeopathy.
They are taking the individualizing out of the system.
They may as well use a computer program on line that is unattended.

They are considering 20% error prescriptions (from mechanizing with bias to common constitutional types) to be just fine as a statistic. Does everyone like that idea? Heck with those 20% who do not happen to have a common constitutional type, as they show opposite polarity symptoms and their correct remedy by this method will be "contraindicated"? Statistically these "homeopaths" (Homechanicalpaths?) will improve their results statistically and the claims that will make homeopathy look good (Malcolm claims), especially for common acute complaints.
Thank goodness he at least sees it will not work for chronic cases.

SO - make every potential homeopathy patient a statistic, and toss the bias remedy calculated by the software, blindly their way and smile at better statistical results for the 80%

Yuck.
I'll take a real homeopath thanks.

By the way, the whole polarity idea is false anyway. Many remedies have a very strong one-way polarity. Yet a patient with a symptom strongly the *opposite* of that one-way polarity, is VERY likely to match within the remedy if every other important aspect fits.
ANY strong polarity is that way - even if provers showed ONLY the one direction.
I am recalling a Lachesis case, where the individual had a symptom which was the very strong opposite of the Lachesis polarized symptom, and the rest fitted well.
The point is that the symptom was relevant even though only represented as an opposite - becasue Lach has a "super-sensitivity" in the matter of that symptom. SO what that provers of Lach happened not to include the constitutional type/s to show the opposite one. The STRENGTH of the symptom made it a guiding symptom.
But that is real homepathy. ANd I absolutely prefer it. But it cannot be mechanized.

This newfangled thing would of course never have found the Lach remedy needed. It would actually have strongly excluded it. The individual would have been in the 20% with no help available.

Some things have no easy short cut, and are worth the trip along the lengthier path.
The lengthier path suis ALL the individuals and individualizes. Is that not why we liek homeopahty in the first place?
Leave the cattle trough tactics and false/absent principles, to the allopaths.. Please.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
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."

Friends,
It is a real pleasure to see people’s interest in and appreciation for the work of Heiner Frei, as compared with Irene’s un-informed and dismissive attitude toward the subject.
Although I tried to write Irene privately to express concern for her unhealthy and uninformed attitude, it seems that the stress of her legal situation has permeated her responses to me (and to others on this list). As a person who underwent significant legal dramas myself back in 1976 (arrested for “practicing medicine without a license”…a case that we won in a legal settlement!), I know what these legal dramas can do to a person. However, I dealt with it much much differently than Irene…and I worked with a diverse group of homeopaths and various alternative healers and those people who appreciated our work to actually turn this drama into a VICTORY. Kindness and openness is a much healthier (and more effective) strategy
People who want more information about Frei’s book can see it here:

https://www.homeopathic.com/cms-global/ ... uctId=1412
Dana Ullman, MPH, CCH

Homeopathic Educational Services

812 Camelia St.

Berkeley, CA. 94710

510-649-0294

email@homeopathic.com

dullman@igc.org (personal)

www.homeopathic.com (website)

www.Huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman (blog)