Minutus

Interested in observations from those who have used LMs often.
How usual is it to notice a clear effect from the first dose, and what is
the usual range of time to (clear) response? I assume this can be quite
variable, but would like to have some better sense of what to expect.

Thanks,
Shannon

Yes, I think replies will be variable as well. In my experience the response
from an LM can fall within exactly the same range as any other potency, i.e.
can be immediate (and in some emergency or acute cases you need it to be
immediate), within hours, days and even weeks and in some cases (if only we
were patient enough) can even be months.

Best wishes, Joy

on 4/24/03 7:35 PM, Robert&Shannon Nelson at shannonnelson@tds.net wrote:

Interested in observations from those who have used LMs often.
How usual is it to notice a clear effect from the first dose, and what is
the usual range of time to (clear) response? I assume this can be quite
variable, but would like to have some better sense of what to expect.

Thanks,
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Joy,

So if there is no response to the first dose, one could continue with a dose
a day? At what point would one try increasing the dose?

I also hear very varying opinions as to what the appropriate dosage is...
Some say (David little being one, I recall) that a single drop into 4 oz is
usually sufficient. Others always begin with 7 drops. Sigh, "The more I
learn, the less I know." My new mantra.

I had one experience with an LM where it had no apparent effect at all,
until I increased the dose (I think I did 7 drops - "standard direction" -
but worked up to maybe 2 tsp from the cup instead of one... I don't think
it would have been more). At that point I got a clear and fairly strong
aggravation, which was horribly unpleasant so I decided the remedy was
wrong, and stopped it. Should I have just dropped the dosage back to where
it didn't "hurt", and kept plugging?

Possibly months???? Yikes, that's depressing... Do you say that because
you've ever *seen* it, or is this kind of a theoretical assumption?

Trying to compare this with my own experience (which covers a good ten
years, but not so many people or doses): When my first choice fails, I am
not quick with a second try (remedy-picking has to compete with the rest of
my life!). While I have *often* (I would say usually) seen a remedy produce
results very quickly (anywhere from immediately to a few days), I have
*never* seen results become apparent any more than several weeks later. I
have on occasion waited up to two months to have a clear sense of what's
happening, but have never seen a remedy manage to declare its usefulness
that late, if it had not done so within a few weeks at the very outside.

Can anyone tell me about cases where reaction too weeks to set in, but then
was deep, lasting, and satisfactory?

Thanks so much!
Shannon
on 4/24/03 1:41 PM, Joy Lucas at joy.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:

I often use LMs. I find that, in the same way as with c potencies, one has
to gauge the vital force and level of sensitivity of the individual and act
accordingly. For instance, the case whose resolution I posted a week or so
ago, with the Cenchris, the guy never actually took a dose of anything. He
used LM1s throughout, and about once a week, or even every two weeks, when
he felt the previous dose was starting to wear off, he opened the bottle at
arm's length for a couple of seconds. On the other hand, I've started
people who are obviously really strong and relatively hyposensitive off on
LM3, 5 drops daily, and they respond very well and quickly, and proceed
toward cure.

Sometimes, if I've suspected too great a sensitivity or, other times, if I'm
not sure of the prescription, I've started with a water potency of 6c or
12c, daily for a couple of weeks, to gauge how strong the response is and
ascertain that I've chosen a remedy that will have a positive action, before
switching to an LM potency of the same remedy for long term treatment.

Most urban Americans have various reasons why a remedy might be antidoted if
I give a dose and wait for a month, or they'll totally forget they took
anything and go on to something else, making it impossible to tell if the
remedy would have worked -- LMs are a good way to get around these common
problems.

Hope this helps.

Rosemary

Thanks Rosemary,

Hm, 12c daily is an alternative that has appeal, as I have somewhat more
experience with that. There too, tho, each time I've used that approach,
the response has been nearly immediate, which leaves me unsure whether this
is a reasonable expectation, or how long I should be prepared to wait, and
how long I should have someone continue daily repetition if no response is
evident (and thus far no one has needed it more often than once every few
days!). (Until there is *either* improvement or aggravation, I suppose???
And it does seem better to do this with 12c than with LM, if I am unsure of
the remedy...)

A related question: I have on several occasions had someone (or myself) use
12c of a remedy that I planned to later give in high potency, if the 12c
acted well. Has anyone happened to see any cases where high potency worked
well, but low potency did *not* work? I.e., I'm wondering whether there's
any downside to "testing" remedies this way.

Cheers,
Shannon

on 4/24/03 4:55 PM, Rosemary Hyde at rosemaryhyde@mindspring.com wrote:

Hi, Shannon. Good question, about the high potency vs. loaw potency.

Personally, what I've seen is if the remedy is going to work -- i.e., if
it's the "right remedy" at the moment -- it works. If not, it doesn't.

FWIW

Rosemary

Dear Shannon, I apply the watch and wait technique with LM's in much the
same way as I do any other potency - if, initially there is no immediate
response doesn't mean it is time to repeat - quite the opposite, you still
watch and wait. When you think enough time has passed you really look at the
case again and if convinced of the remedy then I would repeat the same dose
again and then watch and wait again, and so on, repeating only if and when
necessary. If still nothing happens after a certain period of time (this
will vary with every case and has as much to do with instinct as observable
powers) I would be thinking that either the potency or the remedy or both
are wrong and move on accordingly.

Re the amount of drops - this isn't written in tablets of stone and again is
variable - you have to 'experiment'.

Re aggravations from 'wrong' remedies - there are some who would say that if
you give any remedy to someone then it will do something. Others say that
only the simillimum will give a response (and I am including aggravations
here), and yet others say that everyone has a simillimum but also a number
of 'satelite' remedies which when given will probably 'do' something. I live
in the latter group. So called aggravations have to be put into perspective.
If convinced of the remedy then you have to decide if the symptoms arising
from the aggravation have to be prescribed on or whether the client can go
through it without too much discomfort. If not convinced of the remedy then,
hmmm, why prescribe it?

Re waiting months, yes I have seen it myself and in other's cases. It takes
nerves of steel but it also depends on how much the client is suffering and
their own thresholds. Sometimes it can happen simply because the client
doesn't communicate often enough, so it happens almost by default in these
instances. If I have time to dig out some cases I will let you know and
there is (published I think) an excellent case of Ian Watson's which took
months (Kali carb I seem to remember was the rx).

best wishes, Joy

on 4/24/03 10:13 PM, Robert&Shannon Nelson at shannonnelson@tds.net wrote:

Thanks Joy,

So if there is no response to the first dose, one could continue with a dose
a day? At what point would one try increasing the dose?

I also hear very varying opinions as to what the appropriate dosage is...
Some say (David little being one, I recall) that a single drop into 4 oz is
usually sufficient. Others always begin with 7 drops. Sigh, "The more I
learn, the less I know." My new mantra.

I had one experience with an LM where it had no apparent effect at all,
until I increased the dose (I think I did 7 drops - "standard direction" -
but worked up to maybe 2 tsp from the cup instead of one... I don't think
it would have been more). At that point I got a clear and fairly strong
aggravation, which was horribly unpleasant so I decided the remedy was
wrong, and stopped it. Should I have just dropped the dosage back to where
it didn't "hurt", and kept plugging?

Possibly months???? Yikes, that's depressing... Do you say that because
you've ever *seen* it, or is this kind of a theoretical assumption?

Trying to compare this with my own experience (which covers a good ten
years, but not so many people or doses): When my first choice fails, I am
not quick with a second try (remedy-picking has to compete with the rest of
my life!). While I have *often* (I would say usually) seen a remedy produce
results very quickly (anywhere from immediately to a few days), I have
*never* seen results become apparent any more than several weeks later. I
have on occasion waited up to two months to have a clear sense of what's
happening, but have never seen a remedy manage to declare its usefulness
that late, if it had not done so within a few weeks at the very outside.

Can anyone tell me about cases where reaction too weeks to set in, but then
was deep, lasting, and satisfactory?

Thanks so much!
Shannon
on 4/24/03 1:41 PM, Joy Lucas at joy.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Joy,

Ouch, this doesn't give me much by way of guideline... I realize that
nothing is hard-and-fast with homeopathy, and yet have always assumed that
one can (and must) make "informed guesses" about what type of response to
expect, and how quickly.

Maybe I can formulate a question from this; but meanwhile, if any
"guidelines" come to mind, I would love to hear!

Esp. as to how long one should watch and wait after a single dose of LM, as
I'm especially uncertain on that score.

As always, thanks so much for your thoughts!
Shannon

on 4/25/03 3:44 AM, Joy Lucas at joy.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:

Dear Shannon, to home in on your last point and without repeating too much
of what I have already written, I would say that if the case has urgency,
suffering and emergency aspects and you want to use LM's then you wouldn't
want to be waiting very long to repeat (if repetition is necessary at all) -
e.g. a dangerously high fever I would probably be repeating in half an hour.
Acutes tend to move much faster and so you will have quicker indications as
to whether or not to repeat. Chronic cases vary so much in their unfolding
that it is harder to say. If nothing is happening after a month, then a
repetition might be in order - again, it depends on the clients own ability
to cope.

Many say that LM's are safer and softer in the way they help a case go
forward thus making repetition more reasonable but I am sure there are many
of us who would warn against the severe aggravations from LM's that have
been experienced.

Mud slightly clearer? )

Joy
on 4/25/03 1:20 PM, Robert&Shannon Nelson at shannonnelson@tds.net wrote:

Thanks Joy,

Ouch, this doesn't give me much by way of guideline... I realize that
nothing is hard-and-fast with homeopathy, and yet have always assumed that
one can (and must) make "informed guesses" about what type of response to
expect, and how quickly.

Maybe I can formulate a question from this; but meanwhile, if any
"guidelines" come to mind, I would love to hear!

Esp. as to how long one should watch and wait after a single dose of LM, as
I'm especially uncertain on that score.

As always, thanks so much for your thoughts!
Shannon

on 4/25/03 3:44 AM, Joy Lucas at joy.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

About 'wait' (and this is just from memory, so it may not be too accurate):
I think it was a case Vithoulkas mentioned, a Helleborus one (?), some sort
of brain fag case, where he was pretty sure is was the right remedy, but
after one month nothing much had happened, but wait, and after two months
most would have said: give something else, but after three months of waiting
things started moving in the right direction. (Brain/nerve tissue is slow to
'move', and also: who's so sure about the chosen remedy..)
(Hm, maybe how about some Helleborus for me ..)
The real repair of tissue might take time, and nerve tissue takes a lot more
time than for instance stomach mucosa.

Hennie