Hello!
I've been looking at Boericke's, and Clarke's, and www.homeoint.com
for some information regarding a Helios remedy named Codeine Phos.?
I cannot seem to find any info on it, but know it's real.... Can anyone
help?
Thanks in advance!
Health, Hope, Joy & Healing :
May you Prosper, even as your Soul Prospers 3John 2
Jennifer Ruby
Email advice is not a substitute for medical treatment.
http://www.rubysemporium.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SymphonicHealth
______________________________________________
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Codeine Phos.
Re: Codeine Phos.
ruby wrote:
===============================
Dear Jennifer,
From a materia medica by Bernoville:
Codeinum:
Nervous, pancreatic diabetes. Occipital headache, tremblings, itching. Eructations. Great thirst. Frequent dry cough, worse at night.
Codeinum phosphoricum (1x). Advised by Wendellani in nervous diabetes because of the compound Codeine and Phosphorus.
Blessings,
Andy
===============================
Dear Jennifer,
From a materia medica by Bernoville:
Codeinum:
Nervous, pancreatic diabetes. Occipital headache, tremblings, itching. Eructations. Great thirst. Frequent dry cough, worse at night.
Codeinum phosphoricum (1x). Advised by Wendellani in nervous diabetes because of the compound Codeine and Phosphorus.
Blessings,
Andy
-
Dave Hartley
- Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:47 pm
Re: Codeine Phos.
Wendellani ? Is this Scholtenism?
Find one mention in EH,
Blackwood's Digestive Tract
Gastralgia
mentions material dose of 1/4 - 1/2 grain
One rubric in Synthesis 8
GENERALS - PAIN - cancerous affections, in
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443
Find one mention in EH,
Blackwood's Digestive Tract
Gastralgia
mentions material dose of 1/4 - 1/2 grain
One rubric in Synthesis 8
GENERALS - PAIN - cancerous affections, in
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443
Re: Codeine Phos.
Hello!
I've been looking at Boericke's, and Clarke's, and www.homeoint.com
for some information regarding a Helios remedy named Codeine Phos.?
I cannot seem to find any info on it, but know it's real.... Can anyone
help?
Thanks in advance!
Health, Hope, Joy & Healing :
May you Prosper, even as your Soul Prospers 3John 2
Jennifer Ruby
============
Dear Jennifer,
From a materia medica by Bernoville:
Codeinum:
Nervous, pancreatic diabetes. Occipital headache, tremblings, itching.
Eructations. Great thirst. Frequent dry cough, worse at night.
Codeinum phosphoricum (1x). Advised by Wendellani in nervous diabetes
because of the compound Codeine and Phosphorus.
Andy
============
Dave Hartley wrote:
Regarding :Wendellani ? Is this Scholtenism?:
Dave, I think you are asking if this reference should be trusted because it appears to involve
the "conjectural" recommendation of an combination remedy based on a general knowledge of the homeopathic
use/indications of its two constituent ions. Evaluation of Wendellani's suggestion I cannot do, as I have
not used the remedy. However, I would like to comment on the method:
*Scholten, while developing this method to a more advanced stage, did not originate it. Vithoulkas gave him the
idea, and, as from the above reference, it was thought of well before Vithoulkas.
*Vithoulkas' method: In a case which seems to have attributes of two (or more) remedies that can exist as an
anion-cation compound, identify symptom(s) which exist in the clinical or proving record of the compound
indicated to provide confirmation of conjecture.
*Scholten's method: if no data available on a compound with indications for its constituent components, would
be to try the remedy in the absence of a better choice (here's where objective confirmation methods come in
handy (cf pupillary response-see D. Littles website, Weihe(sp?) points, Abrams reactions, etc). The latter
methods need to graduate to a new level of utility, or something new, as I and many others have found that one
of the major limitations of homeopathy is its success rate when the symptom picture is not typical of a remedy.
Sometimes its a bit like taking pot shots at a target, even when the remedies in question are well known, the
symptoms of the patient are not well enough elucidated, through missing or obscured information.. Lack of
knowledge of medicines (hard data from provings and clinical use) is another obstacle seen. Most practitioners
do not spend, or have the time to probe until the remedy is incontrovertible, so trials are made, and pt. becomes a
guinea pig. Objective testing methods could prevent this necessity, reduce mistakes, and improve reliability
markedly. Of course the most common means of failure probably involves observational error, lack of
experience, or case analysis, but missing info about pt and remedies are not small causes. Rapidity is a
big culprit, because to do it right takes more time than many practitioners are willing to spend.
So, in summary, the method in question is not, in my opinion, at fault, since Dr. Scholtens contributions, which
have used the above combination method extensively, are, in my opinion, usable when used properly. By
properly, I mean that in all possible instances, proving or clinical information is used to substantiate the
prescription. Lacking that, it takes a sophisticated knowledge of materia medica and case-taking in order to
determine that giving that unknown remedy is the last available option, but that judgement may at times need to
be made. It should be done carefully (in all cases being careful in posology), and success should be shared.
This allows increase of knowledge via clinical means, when provings will not be forthcoming anytime soon. It is
a "cart-before the horse" method given the Hahnemannian method, but it has opened up materia medica to
investigation and use until provings can be done, and "invited" more of those provings, I would surmise. I
doubt more people have become guinea pigs via Scholtens investigation of previously unknown remedies than
usually happens in homeopathic circles through the other problems mentioned above. Therefore a complete
vilification of the combination methodology (and Scholten's ideas in general) may be unwarranted.
The other aspect of "Scholtenism" is his theoretical construct and use of data from small numbers of clinical
uses to verify that construct and remedy indications. I have my own opinion about this, but is not what I am
discussing here, and I do not wish to start a forum on it via this post! It is there, lets use it where applicable,
and do provings.
Dave, the foregoing is not to disagree with your opinion, only to expand a little (from my viewpoint) what the
issue is here regarding codeine phos. Wendellani's suggestion may be based on zero hard data about Codeine
phos, and that was your point if I read it correctly; and I agree. Jennifer, I was reproducing what I could find,
and the record may be only that and what Dave posted. I hope the foregoing has been worthwhile.
Andy
I've been looking at Boericke's, and Clarke's, and www.homeoint.com
for some information regarding a Helios remedy named Codeine Phos.?
I cannot seem to find any info on it, but know it's real.... Can anyone
help?
Thanks in advance!
Health, Hope, Joy & Healing :
May you Prosper, even as your Soul Prospers 3John 2
Jennifer Ruby
============
Dear Jennifer,
From a materia medica by Bernoville:
Codeinum:
Nervous, pancreatic diabetes. Occipital headache, tremblings, itching.
Eructations. Great thirst. Frequent dry cough, worse at night.
Codeinum phosphoricum (1x). Advised by Wendellani in nervous diabetes
because of the compound Codeine and Phosphorus.
Andy
============
Dave Hartley wrote:
Regarding :Wendellani ? Is this Scholtenism?:
Dave, I think you are asking if this reference should be trusted because it appears to involve
the "conjectural" recommendation of an combination remedy based on a general knowledge of the homeopathic
use/indications of its two constituent ions. Evaluation of Wendellani's suggestion I cannot do, as I have
not used the remedy. However, I would like to comment on the method:
*Scholten, while developing this method to a more advanced stage, did not originate it. Vithoulkas gave him the
idea, and, as from the above reference, it was thought of well before Vithoulkas.
*Vithoulkas' method: In a case which seems to have attributes of two (or more) remedies that can exist as an
anion-cation compound, identify symptom(s) which exist in the clinical or proving record of the compound
indicated to provide confirmation of conjecture.
*Scholten's method: if no data available on a compound with indications for its constituent components, would
be to try the remedy in the absence of a better choice (here's where objective confirmation methods come in
handy (cf pupillary response-see D. Littles website, Weihe(sp?) points, Abrams reactions, etc). The latter
methods need to graduate to a new level of utility, or something new, as I and many others have found that one
of the major limitations of homeopathy is its success rate when the symptom picture is not typical of a remedy.
Sometimes its a bit like taking pot shots at a target, even when the remedies in question are well known, the
symptoms of the patient are not well enough elucidated, through missing or obscured information.. Lack of
knowledge of medicines (hard data from provings and clinical use) is another obstacle seen. Most practitioners
do not spend, or have the time to probe until the remedy is incontrovertible, so trials are made, and pt. becomes a
guinea pig. Objective testing methods could prevent this necessity, reduce mistakes, and improve reliability
markedly. Of course the most common means of failure probably involves observational error, lack of
experience, or case analysis, but missing info about pt and remedies are not small causes. Rapidity is a
big culprit, because to do it right takes more time than many practitioners are willing to spend.
So, in summary, the method in question is not, in my opinion, at fault, since Dr. Scholtens contributions, which
have used the above combination method extensively, are, in my opinion, usable when used properly. By
properly, I mean that in all possible instances, proving or clinical information is used to substantiate the
prescription. Lacking that, it takes a sophisticated knowledge of materia medica and case-taking in order to
determine that giving that unknown remedy is the last available option, but that judgement may at times need to
be made. It should be done carefully (in all cases being careful in posology), and success should be shared.
This allows increase of knowledge via clinical means, when provings will not be forthcoming anytime soon. It is
a "cart-before the horse" method given the Hahnemannian method, but it has opened up materia medica to
investigation and use until provings can be done, and "invited" more of those provings, I would surmise. I
doubt more people have become guinea pigs via Scholtens investigation of previously unknown remedies than
usually happens in homeopathic circles through the other problems mentioned above. Therefore a complete
vilification of the combination methodology (and Scholten's ideas in general) may be unwarranted.
The other aspect of "Scholtenism" is his theoretical construct and use of data from small numbers of clinical
uses to verify that construct and remedy indications. I have my own opinion about this, but is not what I am
discussing here, and I do not wish to start a forum on it via this post! It is there, lets use it where applicable,
and do provings.
Dave, the foregoing is not to disagree with your opinion, only to expand a little (from my viewpoint) what the
issue is here regarding codeine phos. Wendellani's suggestion may be based on zero hard data about Codeine
phos, and that was your point if I read it correctly; and I agree. Jennifer, I was reproducing what I could find,
and the record may be only that and what Dave posted. I hope the foregoing has been worthwhile.
Andy
-
Dave Hartley
- Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:47 pm
Re: Codeine Phos.
Hi Andy,
Yeah, I guess compleat villification would be going a bit far
Though in general, I'd say you read right.... though 'twas the latter prong
of the forked logic path, [of which you (too) appear not to want to discuss
in great depth here/now] which elicited my (light) mock...
A lot of the supposed "evolution" of homeopathy comes perilously close to
devolution when the slightly (I hope I may say) fringier (fringiferous?)
excursions are peddled to the less-experienced/educated/grounded who should
maybe oughtta be soaking in the main-stream a wee bit longer, so they can
form a solid perspective from which to evaluate/explore the fringe without
dissappearing in quicksand or mudpit.
And that doesn't even take into account the REvolution devolution...
well.. carry on !
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443
Yeah, I guess compleat villification would be going a bit far
Though in general, I'd say you read right.... though 'twas the latter prong
of the forked logic path, [of which you (too) appear not to want to discuss
in great depth here/now] which elicited my (light) mock...
A lot of the supposed "evolution" of homeopathy comes perilously close to
devolution when the slightly (I hope I may say) fringier (fringiferous?)
excursions are peddled to the less-experienced/educated/grounded who should
maybe oughtta be soaking in the main-stream a wee bit longer, so they can
form a solid perspective from which to evaluate/explore the fringe without
dissappearing in quicksand or mudpit.
And that doesn't even take into account the REvolution devolution...
well.. carry on !
Dave Hartley
www.Mr-Notebook.com
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Seattle, WA 425.820.7443