Re Sequential therapy and heilkunst
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2002 11:46 pm
Regarding the string about ST and Heilkunst.
I was a patient of a practitioner who practices like this (though never
prescribed higher than 10M) and in my second year of studies our
principal professor taught us this type of prescribing. Unfortunately
where I live, this is the predominant form of homeopathy. They combine
drainage and ST and other "advanced methods" etc. They don't call it
Heilkunst though because they aren't associated with Verspoor.
It's very routine. I think what it amounts to is: first precription:
sulfer and Nux-v 200CH each. Then a new prescription chosen from the
top 20 polycrests based on whichever keynote they hit upon first in the
follow up consult. Which "brings up" something else to be treated by
yet another polycrest chosen on the basis of a keynote. And so on ad
nauseum.
Honestly, in consult it was like as soon as you said something that they
recognized as a keynote this little light went off in their head and
they had their prescription and didn't bother listening to anything you
said after that.
I think what they end up doing is suppressing the original complaint and
then "treating" the proving symptoms that come up from the subsequent
prescriptions. So they will continue in a cycle of creating artificial
disease to treat over and over. Very lucrative. I think completely
unethical, and as Dave mentioned very unhomeopathic.
They also spent a lot of time denouncing Classical homeopathy.
But, I,ve since seen "classical" homeopaths - mostly trained in the
Indian method. Who, by their Zig-Zagging prescriptions, end up
accomplishing the exact same thing, but describe it in different terms.
Be VERY cautious of these types of practitioners.
A comment to the person who suggested there may be too many new
remedies. No such thing! There are billions of possible substances in
the world that may have great medicinal effect and we are restricting
ourselves to a mere handful! I think the problem is what's chosen. I
mean, someone in Europe proved Dog excrement! We should chose
intelligently, for example filling in the gaps in the periodic table.
Looking to Botany and zoology and seeing where the gaps are. For
instance, we have some plant families with many representatives. Then
there are other whle Phylla that are completely unrepresented. And when
considering animal remedies the situation is even poorer, we haven't
even scratched the surface of possible animal remedies.
Marc Archambault
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I was a patient of a practitioner who practices like this (though never
prescribed higher than 10M) and in my second year of studies our
principal professor taught us this type of prescribing. Unfortunately
where I live, this is the predominant form of homeopathy. They combine
drainage and ST and other "advanced methods" etc. They don't call it
Heilkunst though because they aren't associated with Verspoor.
It's very routine. I think what it amounts to is: first precription:
sulfer and Nux-v 200CH each. Then a new prescription chosen from the
top 20 polycrests based on whichever keynote they hit upon first in the
follow up consult. Which "brings up" something else to be treated by
yet another polycrest chosen on the basis of a keynote. And so on ad
nauseum.
Honestly, in consult it was like as soon as you said something that they
recognized as a keynote this little light went off in their head and
they had their prescription and didn't bother listening to anything you
said after that.
I think what they end up doing is suppressing the original complaint and
then "treating" the proving symptoms that come up from the subsequent
prescriptions. So they will continue in a cycle of creating artificial
disease to treat over and over. Very lucrative. I think completely
unethical, and as Dave mentioned very unhomeopathic.
They also spent a lot of time denouncing Classical homeopathy.
But, I,ve since seen "classical" homeopaths - mostly trained in the
Indian method. Who, by their Zig-Zagging prescriptions, end up
accomplishing the exact same thing, but describe it in different terms.
Be VERY cautious of these types of practitioners.
A comment to the person who suggested there may be too many new
remedies. No such thing! There are billions of possible substances in
the world that may have great medicinal effect and we are restricting
ourselves to a mere handful! I think the problem is what's chosen. I
mean, someone in Europe proved Dog excrement! We should chose
intelligently, for example filling in the gaps in the periodic table.
Looking to Botany and zoology and seeing where the gaps are. For
instance, we have some plant families with many representatives. Then
there are other whle Phylla that are completely unrepresented. And when
considering animal remedies the situation is even poorer, we haven't
even scratched the surface of possible animal remedies.
Marc Archambault
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]