Minutus

Dear List,

The subject of homeo-prophylaxis is one of vast potential. There are
many levels involved in this subject as well as many strongly held
opinions. I will try to survey of the various arguments for and against the
idea of prevention by homoeopathy.

1. There are those who say that the entire subject is not related to
homoeopathy because homoeopaths should only treat diseases when they arise
in sick people. The say that prophylaxis has no basis in Hahnemann works
and is therefore is unhomeopathic. This position, however, does not conform
with the history of homoeopathy or the facts that are found in Hahnemann's
writings. The old saying “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”
was applied to Homoeopathy the Samuel Hahnemann. The source of this
information is Hahnemann’s Lesser Writings.

"Who can deny that the perfect prevention of infection from this
devastating scourge, and the discovery of a means whereby this Divine aim
may be surely attained, would offer infinite advantages over any mode of
treatment, be it of the most incomparable kind soever? The Remedy capable
of maintaining the healthy uninfectable by the miasm of scarlatina, I was
so fortunate as to discover."

The Lesser Writings of Samuel Hahnemann, Hahnemann, Dudgeon Edition, The
Prevention and Cure of Scarlet Fever, page 377.

In the footnote to aphorism 73 the Founder says, “Scarlet fever found
its preventative and curative means in belladonna”.

This is the first recorded use of a homœopathic remedy for prophylaxis.
During an epidemic of scarlet fever Hahnemann found that Belladonna was
suitable for most cases. Then he gave the remedy as a preventative to the
contacts of those he treated. In 1801 he made a strong solution of
Belladonna from which he mixed 1 drop with 300 drops of dilute he called
the medium solution. From this he took 1 drop and placed in 200 drops of
dilute that he called the weak solution. He shook each new solution
vigorously for one minute as a means of mixing the remedial substances.
Over the years, Hahnemann refined his methods of homeo-prophylaxis. So the
first point is that the prevention of disease by homoeopathic remedies has
been an integral part of the Homoeopathy since the beginning.

Hahnemann's skill with the group anamnesis was tested by the Asian
cholera epidemic. He selected three main remedies for the miasm, Camphor,
Veratrum Album and Cuprum Metallicum. He used these same remedies to
prevent cholera in the healthy. Prophylaxis is very useful in disease the
posses a serious danger. In virulent acute miasms like cholera waiting for
people to get sick before giving a remedy makes little sense. The onset is
so dangerous that it is better to prevent the entire situation if possible/

"The above preparation of copper, together with good and moderate diet,
and proper attention to cleanliness, is the most certain preventive and
protective remedy; those in health should take, once every week, a small
globule of it (Cupr. X [30C*]) in the morning fasting, and not drink
anything immediately afterwards, but this should not be done until the
cholera is in the locality itself, or in the neighbourhood."

The Lesser Writings of Samuel Hahnemann, Hahnemann, Dudgeon Edition, Cure
and Prevention of Asiatic Cholera, page 755.

Hahnemann makes it quite clear in his instructions that prophylaxis
involves giving a similar remedy as well as proper diet and hygiene. He
states that the remedy should only be used when their is a clear and
present danger posing a serious risk. The suggests that the 30c should be
taken once a week at that time. This is quite a complete little statement.

2. There are those who say that prophylaxis has no basis in the proving or
taking a proper homoeopathic case because every case must be
individualized. Homoeopathic prophylaxis is based on matching the symptoms
of the provings to the collective anamnesis of a number of patients
suffering from the prevailing infectious miasm. The method is based on
group repertorisation and comparative materia medica. These method lead the
homoeopath to the specific Genus Epidemicus remedies. Many of the deriders
of the prophylaxis come neo-Kentian prescribers who have a one sided idea
of the Kent's concept of the constitutional remedy. Kent was a supporter of
homœoprophylaxis and he used it in his clinical practice. James offers an
interesting insight about the application of similitude when using
prophylactic remedies.

"Now you will find that for prophylaxis there is required a less
degree of similitude than is necessary for curing. A remedy will not have
to be so similar to prevent diseases as to cure it, and these remedies in
daily use will enable you to prevent a large number of people from becoming
sick. We must look to Homœopathy for our protection as well as for our cure."

Lectures on Homœopathic Philosophy, James Kent, Idiosyncrasies , page 229.

James Kent clearly state that we must look to homoeopathy for
protection as well as cure. A remedy used for prophylaxis does not have to
be as specific to the individual characteristics as a remedy chosen for the
disease state. This is way, a small group of remedies usually has the
potential to prevent infectious miasms in a greater number of people while
to treat that same number of people suffering the infections takes more
remedies and exact individualization. One of the major uses of prophylaxis
is too prevent the disease in those who have contacted the first patient.
Boenninghausen used to give the same remedy to the contacts that worked on
the first patient.

Homoeopathic prophylaxis was introduced by Samuel Hahnemann and used by
great homoeopaths like James Kent.

I will continue this series over the next few days.
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

HI David and List (following this thread of thought):

You wrote:

"Now you will find that for prophylaxis there is required a less
degree of similitude than is necessary for curing. A remedy will not have
to be so similar to prevent diseases as to cure it, and these remedies in
daily use will enable you to prevent a large number of people from becoming
sick. We must look to Homoopathy for our protection as well as for our
cure."

Lectures on Homoopathic Philosophy, James Kent, Idiosyncrasies , page
229.
Yes I've seen the practical results of homeoprophylatics. Maybe I think in
too simple terms, but if homeopathy is one of the energy medicines - then I
consider that the symptom picture is only a display of the energy of the
electromagnetic frequency range that is diminished in the patient. The
matching remedy artificially replaces that diminished energy. Likewise the
use in prophylatics is to ensure that the host's energy level is strong
enough to counteract the energy of the affecting agent prior to contact.

Bob

At 10:36 AM 8/16/2002 -0700, you wrote:

Hello,

Homoeopathy works by action and counter action. The primary action of
the stronger similar homoeopathic remedy replaces the sensation of the
natural disease state in the mistuned vital force. Just as two similar
poles of a magnet repeal one another and the stronger poles dominates. At
this moment the vital force is more passive and receives the impression of
the primary action, which simulates the disease in a delusive but temporary
fashion.

The secondary action of the vital force seeks to remove the remedial
mistunement from without while seeking homeostasis from within and
increasing vitality. This is the source of Hering's law that healing works
from within to within. The positive energy of the life force removes any
negative force of the remedy illness that remains. Primary and secondary
action are complementary opposites that balance extremes. This is
Hahnemann's action-reaction model of cure. Cure takes place through the
interaction of the remedy power and the power of the vital force. This is
where similars and opposites come together to heal. The remedy and the
disease are similar and the vital force plays the role of an opposite power.

During homeo-prophylaxis the situation is similar but not the same.
Here the individual is relatively healthy not ill so the process is similar
to a sub-clinical proving. During a proving there is no disease to replace
so the primary action of the homoeopathic remedy makes an impression
directly on the vital force. If the primary action is too strong the
patient will experience noticeable symptom of the remedy. If the primary
action is just right the patient will feel no major changes but the vital
force will receive the impression of the remedy energy. This may be called
the primary phase of prophylaxis because the presence of the stronger
similar remedy will repel a similar weaker nature disease proving a form of
negative immunity.

This, however, is not the only mechanism of the process. Over time the
vital force will seek to remove the external remedy impingement from
without while trying to reestablish the normal state within. To do this it
must mount a secondary action against the chosen remedy. In this process it
will increase it energy in stages until it is stronger than the remedial
disease. This provides an increase in vitality and specific reaction the
build the organisms power to resist a similar disease in the future through
familiarity. This offers a secondary protection that can last after the
primary action has ceased. There is a short term negative protection
because two similar diseases can not remain in the life force at the same
time. This is because the strong similar overcomes the weaker. There is
also a longer term protection because the secondary action of the vital
force has rallied its power to remove a specific remedy by opposition and
energy. This causes a positive protection to a specific disease.

Primary and secondary action is also the mechanism in orthodox
vaccination but due to the fact that it is material and possess physical
toxins and several immunization being given at once or in quick succession,
it produces marked side effects. There is little doubt that such similar
vaccinations have an effect on resistance to infectious diseases but the
risk verses benefits must be assess carefully. What benefits they have
caused is because it is the use of similars and what negative factors it
has caused is because of the heroic allopathy methods of preparation,
posology and case management procedures.

This may come as a surprise to many but Hahnemann supported the
vaccination of Jenner because he witnessed what he received as a decline in
the presences of small pox patients though its use. It was Boenninghausen
who first spoke out directly against the method when he found that Thuja
could prevent small pox in most patients. He did not think the risk versus
risk benefits of Jenner's vaccination was worth while because homoeopathy
had found a better way. Later homoeopaths used Variolinum to prevent small
pox. I will present some studies and discussions on the use of nosodes later.

Today, we must also measure the risk vs benefit factors of vaccination
and look for the safest most effective way to prevent serious infections.
Homeopathy has shown it has a method but has never been provided the kind
of money necessary to do serious research. We have had to assess the
situations empirically from the comparison of clinic observations and our
results are good. Nevertheless, there are many unanswered questions like:
How effective is the method in general? How long is the average duration of
the effects? How many remedial actions can be elicited over what time
period without becoming counter productive? Is there any danger in giving
too many remedies in this fashion? What is the outcome of sensitive that
strongly proves the remedy? There has been some documentation of the
remedies produce antibodies. Boericke mentions this with Baptisa and
typhoid tiders in his MM. With the people, facilities and enough money we
could prove our prophylactic paradigm.

Posology and case management is a very important study. How do you know
you have gain some semblance of protection and for how long? Where does
individualization come into this area and how is it applied to the patient.
I will try to address some of these questions as I proceed.

Sincerely, David Little
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

The 1st 3 points are my way of trying to understand the healing mechanism
and are related to general use of homeopathic remedies and not
homeoprophylatics. For the VF to eliminate the energy of disturbing agent,
I look at the VF producing energy frequencies 180 degrees out of phase to
that of the morbific agent.
At 10:36 AM 8/16/2002 -0700, you wrote:
1. Homoeopathy works by action and counter action. The primary action
of
the stronger similar homoeopathic remedy replaces the sensation of the
natural disease state in the mistuned vital force. Just as two similar
poles of a magnet repeal one another and the stronger poles dominates.

AGREED - Could it not be that the the artificial disease (homeopathic
remedy primary action) acts as the replusion force by being the same or a
similar frequency 180 degree or therabout out of phase, with the frequency
of the morbific agent. In sound waves, motions 180 degrees out of phase will
cancel eachother out. Something similar to your polarity analogy.
2. The secondary action of the vital force seeks to remove the remedial
mistunement from without while seeking homeostasis from within and
increasing vitality.

YES - As the energy of the VF was initially not strong enough to remove
the morbific mistunement, the primary action of the similar homeopathic
remedy supplies enough similar and out of phase energy to allow the VF to
finally take over to remove the negetave force of the illness. Like the
action of antibiotics allowing a depleted immune system to finally take
charge.
3. Primary and secondary action are complementary opposites that balance
extremes.

YES - And could it not be that the out of phase primary action of the
homeopathic remedy stimulates the same out of phase counter action frequency
from within to allow a final healing the the VF to cancel out the energy of
the disturubing agent? These would be complementary opposites, when balanced
equally against eachother acieve homestasis.
4. During homeo-prophylaxis the situation is similar but not the same.

YES - VF is stimulated to increase the the counter energy by introducing
the appropriate Nosode, like a shield (if I can use the example of USS
Enterprize from Star Trek as a comparison) to ward off attacking invaders.
5. If the primary action is too strong the patient will experience
noticeable symptom of the remedy.

YES - If the primary is overstimulated, perhaps the VF can be fooled into
not recognizing the phase inversion and treats the energy with the same
symptom display it would had it been a real infectious agent locking on. Can
there be a thead of commonality here to explain why giving the Nosode during
the infectious period will enhance the symptom picture as you are further
supporting the morbific agents exact energy phase and perhaps overwhelming
the VF ability to procduce the counter action or overproducing the counter
action which increases the symptom experience, either by a match of the same
energy or too much of the secondary energy reaction ????????. Thus the
selection of a similar remedy may be just enough out of phase enough to to
allow the VF to gently start cancelling out the energy of the attacking
agent, rather than exploding it out of the system . I believe you elude to
this below.

6. In this process it will increase it energy in stages until it is stronger
than the remedial disease.
I only wish I could prove or disprove what I 've just said. I appreciate
there are several grey areas to be considered. However and in the meantime
it helps me in my understanding of the mechanics behind the workings of
homeopathy.
THe Happy Theorist

Bob

Dear Bob,

There will come a time when the empirical model of the classics and
modern science will come together. When it does it will be people like you
that lead the way. The action-reaction model is one that can be observed
directly in patients in the clinic and aids in the selection of the remedy,
potency, size of the dose, and the preparation of the delivery system. This
includes the dry dose, medicinal solution and olfaction and their
adjustments. As we know all living tissue while respond with defensive
adaptions if it is threaten. Since diseases is a mistuning for a living
organic power the life force itself can not differential self from disease.
That is the role of the homoeopathic remedy. It simulates the natural
disease with a stronger but similar energy that is able to mark a
recognizable impression on the living tissue.

The organism is then able to tell self from other and begins a counter
action from within to without. During this process there is a natural
increase in vitality that adds the restoration of health and resistance.
Hahnemann model is similar to how we conceive the activities of the immune
system today. In prophylaxis the action-reaction model is used to
familiarize the organism with a similar negative influence to what is to be
prevented helping to raise resistance and vitality. This is not just the
domain of the nosodes. This applies to constitutional remedies (here I am
using the Kentian term) chosen by the essential nature of the chronic
symptoms and the miasms as well as specific genus remedies from the
mineral, plant, animal and nosode world.

Someday what seems like "Star Trek" explanations today will be
scientific facts tommorrow. I am looking forward to getting my "tricorder".
Sincerely, David
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

Hello all,

This is comment on the general thread called Lyme nosode discussion,
etc., and the subject of homeo-prophylaxis. Many things and be said for an
against this method. There were many who jumped on the wagon of giving
remedies and nosodes for almost anything that have now fallen off. That is
good but do we need to throw the baby (homeo-prophylaxis) out with the bath
water (allopathic mentality)?

I think this discussion is not so much about "does homeo-prophylaxis
work" but rather how should it be applied. Hahnemann, Boenninghausen,
Hering, Kent, Allen, Tyler and many others have used this method and left
ample writings on its effectiveness. They, however, used homeo-prophylaxis
and did not attempt to imitate the universal vaccination programs of
allopathic medicine. This is what I see as a major misunderstanding. There
is no homoeopathic vaccination program. There is, however,
homeo-prophylaxis that can be applied on many different levels according to
the time and circumstances.

One must always first assess the risk vs benefit of doing anything in
medicine. As Hippocrates said: At least do no harm! Some are trying to
mimic the allopathic immunization schedules with homoeopathic remedies by
given a series of remedies and nosodes in the first years of life rather
then giving the patient good constitutional treatment in the developing
years. Constitutional treatment removes the predispositions that make one
susceptible to infections and producing sequels in common non threatening
childhood diseases. Treating the symptoms of childhood disease also
ameliorates the condition and prevents any sequels. So why should one wish
to give a preventative remedy for every remote chance? Succumbing to the
fear campaign carried on by the orthodox school is the first mistake.

When it comes to treating the after affects of vaccinations by similars
remedies or nosodes one must ask the question is it necessary? One the one
hand we now that many will show some symptoms after the injections so they
can be treated by the essential nature of the signs and symptoms.
Nevertheless, there are those symptoms that may take an long time to
develop and would only be noticeable to the most careful observer. For this
reason, does the risk of a minimum dose outweigh the benefit of preventing
long term side effects? I would say if the dose is keep at the minimum the
dangers posed by the remedy are no more serious than doing a proving.
Perhaps less because you don't have to produce symptoms.

Trying to give remedies for every childhood immunization a person had
is again is allopathic mentality. One good constitutional remedy can remove
a host of such insults! If the patient is getting better in every way on
standard treatment why worry? Now there may be some cases that are truly
*never well since* a specific vaccination or series of vaccinations. Even
in this scenario one must remember that there is a host of remedies that
might be effective not just one specific. It still takes individualization.

If the ideas of the similar cure similars, the single remedy, the
minimal dose and lowest degree of potentized remedy are kept in view the
use of prophylactic remedies is safe and effective. When the ideas of same
cure same, many remedies, larges doses, and high potencies is combined with
mechanistic schedules based on allopathic universal immunization the method
become more and more riskly.

Hi David

As we know all living tissue while respond with defensive adaptions if it
is threaten.

- For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction (minimal dose)

The organism is then able to tell self from other and begins a counter
action from within to without.

- Stimulated by the harmonics resonance of the homeopathic remedy

In prophylaxis the action-reaction model is used to familiarize the
organism with a similar negative influence to what is to be
prevented helping to raise resistance and vitality.

- Just rises the intensity of the harmonic energy to oppose the potential
encounter with the attacking morbific energy.

This is not just the domain of the nosodes. This applies to constitutional
remedies
- For sure

Someday what seems like "Star Trek" explanations today will be scientific
facts tommorrow. I am looking forward to getting my "tricorder".

- Perhaps we could do our experiements on the holo-deck

The Best
Bob