Susceptibility , peculiarities etc.- Dr Krishnamurthy
Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 7:50 am
Dear Dr Krishnamurthy,
The case you mentioned about convulsions has been seen by the list
many times in the past also. The list and myself have benefitted in
the use of Knerr and Lilienthal. While appreciating the ` methods',
I also am convinced that this is also one among many workable ones.
The peculiarities, however so they are, cannot decide a case unless
they agree with the rest of the case. I think the group will also
agree on this. Also, the `one remedy- permanent cure' will be the
fantasy of many a physician and which is actually never the case.
Even, Boenninghaussen and Hering (on whose mm Knerr compiled his
concordant rep) wrote and believed that many remedies were required
for a cure. Hering, in particular laid emphasis on location,
modalities, time and concomittants. If concomittants alone were alone
to decide a case, every homeopath will see a peculiar and will see a
remedy as four blind men `saw' an elephant. The `whole
case', `totality', `nothing less than the totality' are drummed into
one's ears each time he takes his organon.
This theory of concomittants, which was artfully exploited by
Boenninghaussen with his Therapeutic Pocket book and his `method' is
in direct contrast to the keynotism which , though begun well by
Lippe and Guernsey ( who were masters of the MM) later gained
notoriety because they alone were used to decide a case. I remember
Robert's words in his preface to his " Sensations as if " ,:-"
However peculiar a symptom, the final decision regarding its
usability must rest with the totality of the case and of materia
medica.".
Your remarks about fellow homeopaths from your city, Dr Koppikar and
Bala is really unfortunate. As this has descended to a personal
level, I also add my own curious question about your practice.
1. Why did you choose to prefer chinese medicine over homeopathy
for my son whom I sent to you with my wife when they visited
Chennai ? Where did your theory of concomittants go then and what
good it did to your belief that homeopathy is the best ( as you
acknowledged in your last post about Randi)?
2. Why did you scare my wife with your ` diagnoses' of Lever failure
and onset of Tuberculosis for the persisting cough? (when four
doctors independently diagnosed that it is just Childhood Asthma and
correctly the cough subsided on using anti asthmatic allopathic drugs
which I used temporarily). Such remarks with innocent people may
raise your income level but this is a discussing forum and phoney
things will be very easily seen thru.
Your actions have raised great suspicion in my mind whether all you
write with so much of affirmation and emphasis is true or not. Will
you explain them to the group now ?
Regards
Venkat
The case you mentioned about convulsions has been seen by the list
many times in the past also. The list and myself have benefitted in
the use of Knerr and Lilienthal. While appreciating the ` methods',
I also am convinced that this is also one among many workable ones.
The peculiarities, however so they are, cannot decide a case unless
they agree with the rest of the case. I think the group will also
agree on this. Also, the `one remedy- permanent cure' will be the
fantasy of many a physician and which is actually never the case.
Even, Boenninghaussen and Hering (on whose mm Knerr compiled his
concordant rep) wrote and believed that many remedies were required
for a cure. Hering, in particular laid emphasis on location,
modalities, time and concomittants. If concomittants alone were alone
to decide a case, every homeopath will see a peculiar and will see a
remedy as four blind men `saw' an elephant. The `whole
case', `totality', `nothing less than the totality' are drummed into
one's ears each time he takes his organon.
This theory of concomittants, which was artfully exploited by
Boenninghaussen with his Therapeutic Pocket book and his `method' is
in direct contrast to the keynotism which , though begun well by
Lippe and Guernsey ( who were masters of the MM) later gained
notoriety because they alone were used to decide a case. I remember
Robert's words in his preface to his " Sensations as if " ,:-"
However peculiar a symptom, the final decision regarding its
usability must rest with the totality of the case and of materia
medica.".
Your remarks about fellow homeopaths from your city, Dr Koppikar and
Bala is really unfortunate. As this has descended to a personal
level, I also add my own curious question about your practice.
1. Why did you choose to prefer chinese medicine over homeopathy
for my son whom I sent to you with my wife when they visited
Chennai ? Where did your theory of concomittants go then and what
good it did to your belief that homeopathy is the best ( as you
acknowledged in your last post about Randi)?
2. Why did you scare my wife with your ` diagnoses' of Lever failure
and onset of Tuberculosis for the persisting cough? (when four
doctors independently diagnosed that it is just Childhood Asthma and
correctly the cough subsided on using anti asthmatic allopathic drugs
which I used temporarily). Such remarks with innocent people may
raise your income level but this is a discussing forum and phoney
things will be very easily seen thru.
Your actions have raised great suspicion in my mind whether all you
write with so much of affirmation and emphasis is true or not. Will
you explain them to the group now ?
Regards
Venkat