Minutus

Yup, I have it as similar to phos in several ways: can (but need not) be
*very* social, boundary issues (both can be clairvoyant, vulnerable;
"confusion as to his identity" includes both phos and med (along with 58
other remedies). And of course the phos picture also includes both extreme
sociability and a withdrawn, depleted state. But I think Med would have a
different "feel" from phos, not so fuzzy??? (Speaking of fuzzy, yawn...)

Shannon
on 7/2/04 5:47 PM, rochelle at rochelle@ntlworld.com wrote:

Even though such descriptions of medicines are laudable and are
useful to impress upon us SOME of the symptoms of the medicines we
should never lose sight of the fact that the symptoms of medicines
are SYNTHETIC AND COMPOSITE. They are gathered from different people.
These pictures show us one side of the medicine and for each one of
these descriptions there are probably tens more that are ignored.
Each remedy picture contains many people - it is a composite of many
people. We should also remember that homeopathy is about
individualization and not generalization. When a minor modality can
change the selection of a medicine from Puls to Sepia - such analysis
is good but of limited use. Can we generalize the typical British or
a typical Indian or German and use this description to analyze a
person from that country? Is that individualization? Is it not such
profiling the reason why we carry preconceived misconceptions about
people. We always love these simplistic explanations and then we get
a case that throws off all this by the way side. We should never - I
mean NEVER- under-estimate the complexity of human lives and psyche.
Symptoms are our guides and concomitants are the best possible
indicators. They are something that we can hold on to and are not
ephemereal like mental pictures. We have "Neo Classical" masters
gallivanting around the globe selling their mental and delusional
pictures of simplified Pshyco neuro endocrinological approaches-
Though they add some spice to the mixture this is not necessarily the
whole Spirit of Homeopathy. Less theorizing - the better all around.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Bob&Shannon
wrote:
not) be
with 58
extreme
have a
yawn...)
ends of
timid and
may reside at
children
lethargy), while in
to my more
find it a
Sommerzeit
Medorrhinum!
thinkable
levels in
after
clothes and
somebody
fitting
chains or
sleeping
for "hunt",
way,
Mercedeses or
while
so,
he is
several
of the
they might
and have
Lachesis
a little
paint off,
tough things
term and
somebody
knives
early
teenie.
just out of
Milan
and die,
women
tittling
king, in
of "everything
say "no, I can'
patient
starting
a van,
but this
gets
Marlboro
driving home,
wheel on
angry and
his
where
over the
your
like
very
the
polished,
like this
ferociously into
and
his sons
they hate
their
the
Homoeopathy and
regarding the
document read or
and/or email
use remains
individual
special, punitive
with the

Very laudable opinion- thank you.

However, in all its complexity the human being can be simple too, and we
should keep in mind that over-estimating complexity can make our jobs
needlessly difficult.

Individuality does not necessarily mean complexity: just the fact that this
particular mix of ingredients we see in this particular patient is different
from the mix in another patient: the basics are the same.

Using keynotes to narrow down and eventually find the similimum does not
mean we are reducing the patient to the keynotes: we are using the tools to
build a picture: the tools do not have to be complex, the picture can be.

Dr Edward Bach put it beautifully more than sixty years ago: "Let not the
simplicity of this method deter you from its use for the further your
studies advance, the greater you will realise the simplicity of all
creation!"...

Best
Eleana

Sure yes I agree with you whole heartedly.
But certainly these descriptions are not key notes. And these
descriptions have varied from different observers. More over because
these are mental and behavioral portraits these are influenced by
culture, language, upbringing etc. I believe in findng the similimmum
and not using any particular method to arrive at it; so I am not
against it. I just wished to point out compared to other methods
portraits could be attractive but are more generalized. These are
almost like specifics based on pathology. Does a pathology based
specific- work. Sure it does. probably this is of the same nature.
Dr.Bach might have put it beautifully - but he is probably talking
about flower remedies and they are only 38...We cannot talk in the
same vein about homeopathy with its pages of symptoms and various
combinations.
Thanks for your opinions though. Once again I am not against this
but would take this with a large pinch of Nat Mur - if you will.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Eleana Needham" wrote:
and we
jobs
that this
different
does not
tools to
can be.
not the
your
people.
analysis
get
the
http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo

And what a wonderful remedy Nat Mur is! I have heard it said more than once
from eminent homeopaths that they could run a very successful practice
prescribing Nat Mur to 80% of their patients! How's that for simplicity?

As for all our cultural differences, I firmly believe that homeopathy can be
practiced across the world because it does not need to speak a particular
language: behind the intricacies of different cultures the basics are still
the same: food, shelter, need for love, need for recognition,need for
procreation, fear, struggle for survival, isolation, anger... If you take
the case back to its basics, its one of those that makes the patient "tick".

As for Dr Bach - he did not start with flower remedies - he ARRIVED at them
after over twenty years of staring down a microscope at people's stools and
well after he developed the bowel nosodes! So I do feel he of all people
would be very well qualified to have a robust opinion on such things.

I do respect your opinion and do not disagree with it - in principle. I was
just trying to lighten the load!

Cheers! )

Eleana
From: "hahnemannian2002"
Reply-To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Medorrhinum [was: Why Nosodes Banned Germany]
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 11:47:36 -0000

Sure yes I agree with you whole heartedly.
But certainly these descriptions are not key notes. And these
descriptions have varied from different observers. More over because
these are mental and behavioral portraits these are influenced by
culture, language, upbringing etc. I believe in findng the
similimmum.......<<<<<<<<

_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger

In einer eMail vom 03.07.04 05:11:53 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische Zeit schreibt
shannonnelson@tds.net:

<< Yup, I have it as similar to phos in several ways: can (but need not) be
*very* social, boundary issues (both can be clairvoyant, vulnerable;
"confusion as to his identity" includes both phos and med (along with 58
other remedies). And of course the phos picture also includes both extreme
sociability and a withdrawn, depleted state. But I think Med would have a
different "feel" from phos, not so fuzzy??? (Speaking of fuzzy, yawn...)
Shannon
4.7.4.
Ph is always sociable, in great need of friends, can NOT be alone by
definition. Very early very sociable, many friends around all the time. The Na - salts
are withdrawn, especially Na-mur, typically weeping alone at home and
suffering and grieving alone without wanting anybody around - important differential
diagnosis feature, but there are others as well.
Regarding the face of Ph, especially children are always really beautiful,
one is struck by the beauty and harmony of their face, of their features,
including this beautiful eyelashes. They may or not have sprinkles in the face and
red hair (the irish type, so to speak ... ) but this is not mandatory.
Very often, Na-ph, which is very widespread, may or is confused with pure Ph.
So Ca-ph although here there are some other specifics.
Kind regards, Dr. medic Viorel V. Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).

In einer eMail vom 03.07.04 05:40:49 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische Zeit schreibt
hahnemannian2002@yahoo.com:

<< Even though such descriptions of medicines are laudable and are
useful to impress upon us SOME of the symptoms of the medicines we
should never lose sight of the fact that the symptoms of medicines
are SYNTHETIC AND COMPOSITE. They are gathered from different people.
These pictures show us one side of the medicine and for each one of
these descriptions there are probably tens more that are ignored.
Each remedy picture contains many people - it is a composite of many
people. We should also remember that homeopathy is about
individualization and not generalization. When a minor modality can
change the selection of a medicine from Puls to Sepia - such analysis
is good but of limited use. Can we generalize the typical British or
a typical Indian or German and use this description to analyze a
person from that country? Is that individualization? Is it not such
profiling the reason why we carry preconceived misconceptions about
people. We always love these simplistic explanations and then we get
a case that throws off all this by the way side. We should never - I
mean NEVER- under-estimate the complexity of human lives and psyche.
Symptoms are our guides and concomitants are the best possible
indicators. They are something that we can hold on to and are not
ephemereal like mental pictures. We have "Neo Classical" masters
gallivanting around the globe selling their mental and delusional
pictures of simplified Pshyco neuro endocrinological approaches-
Though they add some spice to the mixture this is not necessarily the
whole Spirit of Homeopathy. Less theorizing - the better all around.
4.7.4.
Of course. You never find a case similar 100%. It is a mistake many make at
the very beginning, trying to find too much similarity in the case, similarity
with the things previously learned and always stumbling at unimportant,
cosmetic details and losing the main stream or not seeing the forest because of the
trees.
One of the typical examples I always bear in mind is the Ph versus
fish-eating thing : there are Ph hating fish and there are some loving fish - what we do
not have in Ph is a "normal" relationship to eating fish. So, having a
typical Ph case not eating fish while the examiner eventually learned from somebody
that Ph must love fish, should not convince him to throw the case over board
for just such a minor thing. What counts, is the big picture.
The similarity is always, when fitting, around 80-90% and even important
symptoms/signs may not be available in one or another case. However, the big frame
must fit and for Medorrhinum, THIS is the big frame.
Kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur.

In einer eMail vom 03.07.04 11:51:16 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische Zeit schreibt
eleanan@hotmail.com:

<< Very laudable opinion- thank you.
However, in all its complexity the human being can be simple too, and we
should keep in mind that over-estimating complexity can make our jobs
needlessly difficult.
Individuality does not necessarily mean complexity: just the fact that this
particular mix of ingredients we see in this particular patient is different
from the mix in another patient: the basics are the same.
Using keynotes to narrow down and eventually find the similimum does not
mean we are reducing the patient to the keynotes: we are using the tools to
build a picture: the tools do not have to be complex, the picture can be.
Dr Edward Bach put it beautifully more than sixty years ago: "Let not the
simplicity of this method deter you from its use for the further your
studies advance, the greater you will realise the simplicity of all
creation!"...
Best
Eleana
4.7.4.
Yes, very good comment, I fully subscribe. It hit the nail on the head.
Kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).

In einer eMail vom 03.07.04 17:24:34 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische Zeit schreibt
eleanan@hotmail.com:

<< And what a wonderful remedy Nat Mur is! I have heard it said more than
once
from eminent homeopaths that they could run a very successful practice
prescribing Nat Mur to 80% of their patients! How's that for simplicity?
4.7.4.
Well, this is exaggerated. Of course, the Na-SALTS are around at about 40%,
the Ca-salts about 40 % and the rest is the rest ... While differentiating the
Na-salts, the most frequent one is Na-ph not Na-mur.
Kind regards, Dr.medic. Viorel V. Bucur (www.dr-bucur.com).

But you are falling into the trap of not including the full scope of a
remeddy's possible presentations. You say: "Ph is always sociable, in
great need of friends, can NOT be alone by definition." And yet part of
phos's pattern is to *over*extend to point of exhaustion and withdrawal; to
become so hypersensitive to others that they cannot bear to be *around*
others. E.g. phos's presence in rubrics such as:

MIND; AILMENTS from; crowd, society, in (37) **
MIND; ANGER, irascibility; general; trifles, at (92) *
MIND; ANGER, irascibility; general; easily (58) **
MIND; ANGER, irascibility; general; temper tantrums (38) *
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; impossible (8) **
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; abruptly, shortly, curtly (25) *
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; difficult (12) **
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; disconnected (8) *
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; incoherently (14) *
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; incorrectly (13) **
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; incorrectly; heart disease, in (4) ***
MIND; ANSWER, answering, answers; refuses to (33) ***
MIND; AVERSION; everything, to (51) **
MIND; AVERSION; family members, to (25) **
MIND; AVERSION; persons, to; all (13) *
MIND; BED; desires to remain in (27) *
MIND; CHILDREN; aversion to; her own (8) *
MIND; COMPANY; aversion to, agg. (221) *
MIND; COMPANY; aversion to, agg.; alone; amel. when (52) *

Note in particular that it is present (as a 1) in "Aversion to company,
amel. when alone"! All of this is part of the "depleted" stage of phos, and
can be very similar to phos-ac (yet the two remedies cannot be used
interchangeably for the situation). There are also mental aspects of phos
that may come up in e.g. delirium and other sorts of illness affecting the
mind.

While the "sociable" picture of phos is the most familiar one, it, like
(many? most? all???) other remedies does have multiple faces it can present,
and it is so important that we are able to recognize (or ferret out) the
less familiar presentations as well.

This is my discomfort with "remedy pictures": Altho they are *wonderful* as
a quick way to recognize common presentations, it can be a treacherous trap
if we think that these "pictures" really define the remedy.

Best wishes,
Shannon
on 7/4/04 8:05 AM, VBLUES@aol.com at VBLUES@aol.com wrote: