I've seen it mentioned by ML Tyler in her book Homeopathic Pictures.
Jayne
Julian Winston wrote: 22 July
I'm doing a presentation on "homeopathic myths" at two conferences,
and I'd LOVE to have documentation of where this problem with a 200
appeared in writing.
JW
---------------------------------
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
200c myth
-
Mike Emmans Dean
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: 200c myth
I once read a German reference to a German doctor in the
1920s or earlier who called it "eine schlechte Potenz" - a poor or
bad potency. I didn't make a note - never had problems with Lyc 200.
Whether it predates him, or he got it from Anglo-American homeopaths,
who knows.
I checked on the web if homeopaths in Germany were still
superstitious about it. Only one hit. Alfons Geukens
(http://www.audesapere-augsburg.de/html/ ... kens1.html):
"... gaben wir Lycopodium 200 und später M, mit guter Reaktion."
"... we gave Lyc 200 and later M, with good response."
Mike
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Jayne Evans wrote:
1920s or earlier who called it "eine schlechte Potenz" - a poor or
bad potency. I didn't make a note - never had problems with Lyc 200.
Whether it predates him, or he got it from Anglo-American homeopaths,
who knows.
I checked on the web if homeopaths in Germany were still
superstitious about it. Only one hit. Alfons Geukens
(http://www.audesapere-augsburg.de/html/ ... kens1.html):
"... gaben wir Lycopodium 200 und später M, mit guter Reaktion."
"... we gave Lyc 200 and later M, with good response."
Mike
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Jayne Evans wrote:
-
David Little
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 11:00 pm
Re: 200c myth
Dear List,
The 200c is a fast acting very dynamic potency that sometimes does
cause strong aggravations in long term chronic diseases, especially those
with organic pathology. It is remarkable in serious acute disease and the
early stages of chronic diseases where the illness is mostly functional in
nature. It also can be useful in the primary stage of chronic miasms where
the external lesions are present. Nevertheless, it has earn a reputation as
the "great aggravator" in some circles because it has been applied in
conditions to which it is not similar.
Sincerely, David Little
The 200c is a fast acting very dynamic potency that sometimes does
cause strong aggravations in long term chronic diseases, especially those
with organic pathology. It is remarkable in serious acute disease and the
early stages of chronic diseases where the illness is mostly functional in
nature. It also can be useful in the primary stage of chronic miasms where
the external lesions are present. Nevertheless, it has earn a reputation as
the "great aggravator" in some circles because it has been applied in
conditions to which it is not similar.
Sincerely, David Little
-
Shannon Nelson
- Posts: 8848
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 10:00 pm
Re: 200c myth
Hi David,
I'm very interested in these remarks!
Questions interspersed:
on 8/17/04 11:24 PM, David Little at little@simillimum.com wrote:
In cases with identified organic pathology, I was taught to always use low
potencies (30 at the highest). So does 200 in this case cause aggravation
simply because it is too high -- and 1M and up would cause even worse
troubles? -- or are you saying that 200c is even *more* troublesome than
higher potencies in cases of organic pathology?
(Are high potencies sometimes used for organic pathology?)
I'm confused by this. If the external lesions are present, doesn't this
mean that the case is rather fresh, and was directly acquired by the
patient, as opposed to inherited, as more of our miasmatic load today is? I
have been accustomed to using 200c as sort of a "default" starting potency
(i.e. higher if picture especially strong, clear or intense; lower if
picture vague or patient depleted, etc.), and so have given and most
remedies, including most nosodes and other miasmatic remedies, in 200 as a
starting point (almost no significant problems, FTR). Do you feel that one
ought to start higher (or LM, of course) *unless* the external lesions are
there?
Thanks!
Shannon
I'm very interested in these remarks!
Questions interspersed:
on 8/17/04 11:24 PM, David Little at little@simillimum.com wrote:
In cases with identified organic pathology, I was taught to always use low
potencies (30 at the highest). So does 200 in this case cause aggravation
simply because it is too high -- and 1M and up would cause even worse
troubles? -- or are you saying that 200c is even *more* troublesome than
higher potencies in cases of organic pathology?
(Are high potencies sometimes used for organic pathology?)
I'm confused by this. If the external lesions are present, doesn't this
mean that the case is rather fresh, and was directly acquired by the
patient, as opposed to inherited, as more of our miasmatic load today is? I
have been accustomed to using 200c as sort of a "default" starting potency
(i.e. higher if picture especially strong, clear or intense; lower if
picture vague or patient depleted, etc.), and so have given and most
remedies, including most nosodes and other miasmatic remedies, in 200 as a
starting point (almost no significant problems, FTR). Do you feel that one
ought to start higher (or LM, of course) *unless* the external lesions are
there?
Thanks!
Shannon
-
David Little
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 11:00 pm
Re: 200c myth
At 11:29 AM 8/18/2004 -0500, you wrote:
I have seen cases with limited pathology where the 1M acts smoother
than the 200c. I know this sounds funny but potency is not always linear.
There are differences in their qualities and there are wave-like motions in
the upward direction. Many times the 1M actually seems to come on slower in
chronic diseases than the 200th. Sometimes, one has to wait a week to weeks
to see it act. This is usually not the case with the 200. It seems to act
quicker than the 1M in those types of cases. This may make it not suit some
types of pathology.This is an area that needs more research and I don't
have all the answers. What do others think?
In general, it is fine to thing from low to high yet each potency also
has some peculiarities. Since I starting using them in medicinal solution
and very small doses I have had much less problems then my dry dose days.
Higher potencies like the 200c and 1M are sometimes useful in limited
organic pathology but the patient should still have some clear general
symptoms and stable vitality. In one-sided cases with few symptoms and
organic pathology with weakened vitality they often make big trouble. Here
you want a remedy and potency that clear some of the pathology so the
general symptoms come back and you can find a more suitable remedy if
necessary. Too high a potency can bring on unproductive aggravations and
too many symptoms far too quickly causing chaos in the VF. The whole
episode drains more vitality out of the patient which is hard to replace.
Now if there is heavy organic pathology it is best to start with the
lower ranges (6c to 30c) and work up slowly. I am not very happy with the
dominance of Kent's series and degrees 30C, 200C, 1M, 10M, 50M, CM, MM,
etc. I think these jumps in potency are too high in many cases. I wish I
could easy get the 6c, 12c, 18c, 24c, 30c, 50c, 100c, 150c, 200c, 500c, 1M,
5M, etc. Having to jump from 30 to 200 than 1M than 10M is too much for
many patients. Hahnemann like to use a series of like 190, 191, 192, etc,
rather than big jumps. This, of course, led him to make LM 0/1, 0/2, 0/3, etc.
Of course, the LM have a place in this discussion. They are very deep
acting but their durations may not be as long as the ultra high potencies.
This can be used to one's advantage in organic pathology. You do not have
to commit the patient to prolong actions without re-dosing so you can keep
more control on the degree of medicinal power. LM a very suitable in such
cases but one must be careful with those who tend toward hypersensitivity.
They do better on the 6c to 30c.
Hahnemann liked to use the 191 to 199 range more than the 200c. For
some reason, he did not use the 200c that much. Why I wonder? Was it
because he found the 19O-199 more gentle? There are so many things I would
like to ask Samuel. Maybe later in Homoeopathic Heaven?
Yes, the primary stage is the beginning of an acquired miasm. This is
the first stage of infection. That means the person has a soft tissue
infection caused by mites, bacteria, fungi or viruses, the sycotic
gonorrhea, the syphilitic chancre or the first stage of TB fever, etc. The
200c is good for the primary stage of the chronic miasms because they are
the most acute-like symptoms. The 200th comes on fairly quickly and reaches
crisis somewhat rapidly. They also work well in the latent stage where most
the symptoms are still functional in nature but as soon as the secondary
pathology gets heavy they can cause a lot of trouble.
As long as the inherited miasms are somewhat functional the 200th is
fine *if it suits the patient's sensitivity and vitality*. In general the
more pathology the lower the potency. Sounds like things are going fine in
most cases. So now you have to look very closely at the cases things DID
NOT go so good! Why do these infrequent complications happen? We certainly
don't want any significant problems but we also do not want ANY problems
that cause extra suffering for the patient. This, of course, is a goal we
may never reach.
How clear the picture is a factor in potency selection related to
confidence in the remedy. This is important. Clear or unclear, however, is
based on how the case is presented and the ability of the homoeopath see
the disease-Gestalt in the moment. It is not really based on the patient's
constitution and temperament. It is very important to judge the sensitivity
of the patent on a scale of 1 to 1000 and the nature and stage of the
disease state as well as the stability of the vital force and the amount of
vitality. This is MOST important. You must also think about the nature of
the remedy. You can have a masked picture in a hypo-sensitive and a clear
picture in a hyper-sensitive. How they react to the remedy depends more on
the patient's dispositions then on how we see the case.
Keep up the good work. I love the way your mind operates!
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
I have seen cases with limited pathology where the 1M acts smoother
than the 200c. I know this sounds funny but potency is not always linear.
There are differences in their qualities and there are wave-like motions in
the upward direction. Many times the 1M actually seems to come on slower in
chronic diseases than the 200th. Sometimes, one has to wait a week to weeks
to see it act. This is usually not the case with the 200. It seems to act
quicker than the 1M in those types of cases. This may make it not suit some
types of pathology.This is an area that needs more research and I don't
have all the answers. What do others think?
In general, it is fine to thing from low to high yet each potency also
has some peculiarities. Since I starting using them in medicinal solution
and very small doses I have had much less problems then my dry dose days.
Higher potencies like the 200c and 1M are sometimes useful in limited
organic pathology but the patient should still have some clear general
symptoms and stable vitality. In one-sided cases with few symptoms and
organic pathology with weakened vitality they often make big trouble. Here
you want a remedy and potency that clear some of the pathology so the
general symptoms come back and you can find a more suitable remedy if
necessary. Too high a potency can bring on unproductive aggravations and
too many symptoms far too quickly causing chaos in the VF. The whole
episode drains more vitality out of the patient which is hard to replace.
Now if there is heavy organic pathology it is best to start with the
lower ranges (6c to 30c) and work up slowly. I am not very happy with the
dominance of Kent's series and degrees 30C, 200C, 1M, 10M, 50M, CM, MM,
etc. I think these jumps in potency are too high in many cases. I wish I
could easy get the 6c, 12c, 18c, 24c, 30c, 50c, 100c, 150c, 200c, 500c, 1M,
5M, etc. Having to jump from 30 to 200 than 1M than 10M is too much for
many patients. Hahnemann like to use a series of like 190, 191, 192, etc,
rather than big jumps. This, of course, led him to make LM 0/1, 0/2, 0/3, etc.
Of course, the LM have a place in this discussion. They are very deep
acting but their durations may not be as long as the ultra high potencies.
This can be used to one's advantage in organic pathology. You do not have
to commit the patient to prolong actions without re-dosing so you can keep
more control on the degree of medicinal power. LM a very suitable in such
cases but one must be careful with those who tend toward hypersensitivity.
They do better on the 6c to 30c.
Hahnemann liked to use the 191 to 199 range more than the 200c. For
some reason, he did not use the 200c that much. Why I wonder? Was it
because he found the 19O-199 more gentle? There are so many things I would
like to ask Samuel. Maybe later in Homoeopathic Heaven?
Yes, the primary stage is the beginning of an acquired miasm. This is
the first stage of infection. That means the person has a soft tissue
infection caused by mites, bacteria, fungi or viruses, the sycotic
gonorrhea, the syphilitic chancre or the first stage of TB fever, etc. The
200c is good for the primary stage of the chronic miasms because they are
the most acute-like symptoms. The 200th comes on fairly quickly and reaches
crisis somewhat rapidly. They also work well in the latent stage where most
the symptoms are still functional in nature but as soon as the secondary
pathology gets heavy they can cause a lot of trouble.
As long as the inherited miasms are somewhat functional the 200th is
fine *if it suits the patient's sensitivity and vitality*. In general the
more pathology the lower the potency. Sounds like things are going fine in
most cases. So now you have to look very closely at the cases things DID
NOT go so good! Why do these infrequent complications happen? We certainly
don't want any significant problems but we also do not want ANY problems
that cause extra suffering for the patient. This, of course, is a goal we
may never reach.
How clear the picture is a factor in potency selection related to
confidence in the remedy. This is important. Clear or unclear, however, is
based on how the case is presented and the ability of the homoeopath see
the disease-Gestalt in the moment. It is not really based on the patient's
constitution and temperament. It is very important to judge the sensitivity
of the patent on a scale of 1 to 1000 and the nature and stage of the
disease state as well as the stability of the vital force and the amount of
vitality. This is MOST important. You must also think about the nature of
the remedy. You can have a masked picture in a hypo-sensitive and a clear
picture in a hyper-sensitive. How they react to the remedy depends more on
the patient's dispositions then on how we see the case.
Keep up the good work. I love the way your mind operates!
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
Re: 200c myth
I agree very much with this. Whenever I have clients that have medium to
serious pathology I would never even dream of giving 200c because in the
past it has always caused serious discomfort to the person. If the client
has a reasonable amount of energy, i.e. has vitality still I would consider
1m often, especially if the corresponding emotional state is quite deep
seated, otherwise, if the pathology is physical I would always use LM's or
low and go no higher than a 30c - all depending on the individual. I always
have thought of 1m as being smoother, calmer and often taking longer to have
an effect - but why this is, is a good question.
I tend to want to reserve the 200c for cases which have some kind of dynamic
and intense quality to them in the same way that I would reserve a 10m for.
I am referring here to chronic cases and not acutes.
Best wishes, Joy
www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 19/8/04 9:21 AM, David Little at little@simillimum.com wrote:
I have seen cases with limited pathology where the 1M acts smoother
than the 200c. I know this sounds funny but potency is not always linear.
There are differences in their qualities and there are wave-like motions in
the upward direction. Many times the 1M actually seems to come on slower in
chronic diseases than the 200th. Sometimes, one has to wait a week to weeks
to see it act. This is usually not the case with the 200. It seems to act
quicker than the 1M in those types of cases. This may make it not suit some
types of pathology.This is an area that needs more research and I don't
have all the answers. What do others think?
In general, it is fine to thing from low to high yet each potency also
has some peculiarities. Since I starting using them in medicinal solution
and very small doses I have had much less problems then my dry dose days.
Higher potencies like the 200c and 1M are sometimes useful in limited
organic pathology but the patient should still have some clear general
symptoms and stable vitality. In one-sided cases with few symptoms and
organic pathology with weakened vitality they often make big trouble. Here
you want a remedy and potency that clear some of the pathology so the
general symptoms come back and you can find a more suitable remedy if
necessary. Too high a potency can bring on unproductive aggravations and
too many symptoms far too quickly causing chaos in the VF. The whole
episode drains more vitality out of the patient which is hard to replace.
Now if there is heavy organic pathology it is best to start with the
lower ranges (6c to 30c) and work up slowly. I am not very happy with the
dominance of Kent's series and degrees 30C, 200C, 1M, 10M, 50M, CM, MM,
etc. I think these jumps in potency are too high in many cases. I wish I
could easy get the 6c, 12c, 18c, 24c, 30c, 50c, 100c, 150c, 200c, 500c, 1M,
5M, etc. Having to jump from 30 to 200 than 1M than 10M is too much for
many patients. Hahnemann like to use a series of like 190, 191, 192, etc,
rather than big jumps. This, of course, led him to make LM 0/1, 0/2, 0/3,
etc.
Of course, the LM have a place in this discussion. They are very deep
acting but their durations may not be as long as the ultra high potencies.
This can be used to one's advantage in organic pathology. You do not have
to commit the patient to prolong actions without re-dosing so you can keep
more control on the degree of medicinal power. LM a very suitable in such
cases but one must be careful with those who tend toward hypersensitivity.
They do better on the 6c to 30c.
Hahnemann liked to use the 191 to 199 range more than the 200c. For
some reason, he did not use the 200c that much. Why I wonder? Was it
because he found the 19O-199 more gentle? There are so many things I would
like to ask Samuel. Maybe later in Homoeopathic Heaven?
edited
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
serious pathology I would never even dream of giving 200c because in the
past it has always caused serious discomfort to the person. If the client
has a reasonable amount of energy, i.e. has vitality still I would consider
1m often, especially if the corresponding emotional state is quite deep
seated, otherwise, if the pathology is physical I would always use LM's or
low and go no higher than a 30c - all depending on the individual. I always
have thought of 1m as being smoother, calmer and often taking longer to have
an effect - but why this is, is a good question.
I tend to want to reserve the 200c for cases which have some kind of dynamic
and intense quality to them in the same way that I would reserve a 10m for.
I am referring here to chronic cases and not acutes.
Best wishes, Joy
www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 19/8/04 9:21 AM, David Little at little@simillimum.com wrote:
I have seen cases with limited pathology where the 1M acts smoother
than the 200c. I know this sounds funny but potency is not always linear.
There are differences in their qualities and there are wave-like motions in
the upward direction. Many times the 1M actually seems to come on slower in
chronic diseases than the 200th. Sometimes, one has to wait a week to weeks
to see it act. This is usually not the case with the 200. It seems to act
quicker than the 1M in those types of cases. This may make it not suit some
types of pathology.This is an area that needs more research and I don't
have all the answers. What do others think?
In general, it is fine to thing from low to high yet each potency also
has some peculiarities. Since I starting using them in medicinal solution
and very small doses I have had much less problems then my dry dose days.
Higher potencies like the 200c and 1M are sometimes useful in limited
organic pathology but the patient should still have some clear general
symptoms and stable vitality. In one-sided cases with few symptoms and
organic pathology with weakened vitality they often make big trouble. Here
you want a remedy and potency that clear some of the pathology so the
general symptoms come back and you can find a more suitable remedy if
necessary. Too high a potency can bring on unproductive aggravations and
too many symptoms far too quickly causing chaos in the VF. The whole
episode drains more vitality out of the patient which is hard to replace.
Now if there is heavy organic pathology it is best to start with the
lower ranges (6c to 30c) and work up slowly. I am not very happy with the
dominance of Kent's series and degrees 30C, 200C, 1M, 10M, 50M, CM, MM,
etc. I think these jumps in potency are too high in many cases. I wish I
could easy get the 6c, 12c, 18c, 24c, 30c, 50c, 100c, 150c, 200c, 500c, 1M,
5M, etc. Having to jump from 30 to 200 than 1M than 10M is too much for
many patients. Hahnemann like to use a series of like 190, 191, 192, etc,
rather than big jumps. This, of course, led him to make LM 0/1, 0/2, 0/3,
etc.
Of course, the LM have a place in this discussion. They are very deep
acting but their durations may not be as long as the ultra high potencies.
This can be used to one's advantage in organic pathology. You do not have
to commit the patient to prolong actions without re-dosing so you can keep
more control on the degree of medicinal power. LM a very suitable in such
cases but one must be careful with those who tend toward hypersensitivity.
They do better on the 6c to 30c.
Hahnemann liked to use the 191 to 199 range more than the 200c. For
some reason, he did not use the 200c that much. Why I wonder? Was it
because he found the 19O-199 more gentle? There are so many things I would
like to ask Samuel. Maybe later in Homoeopathic Heaven?
edited
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-
Dave Hartley
- Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:47 pm
Re: 200c myth
>From: Bob&Shannon [mailto:shannonnelson@tds.net]
used for
It is the same answer, Shannon.
One component of "susceptibility" which for practical purposes, also
means "suitability toward non-aggravating healing response"
-must always be that imaginary place on a graph where two
lines cross -- \ /
One of those lines is Vitality \ /
The other is Sensitivity X
/ \
If a person has high vitality and low sensitivity, use whatever you
want, more or less.
200C or 1M in organic pathology ? No problem (though I'd still
recommend being normally careful, and giving ALL remedies in liquid
poslogy, and starting off with test dose, all parts of normal prudent
case management) Probably you'd want to tip-toe around any situations of
auto-immune disorder & cancer.
If the person has low vitality and high sensitivity -- you're probably
looking at lowest potencies and possibly treatment akin to "drainage"
-to build up vitality toward the point of being sufficient to mount more
of an overall healing response.
I've used LM1 as a starting place in Lyme disease and in chronic/acute
kidney failure in persons of good vitality amd medium sensitivity --and
looking back on the kidney case, I was over conservative; should have
opened (or very rapidly moved up to) LM4 or so.
best,
David Hartley www.holistiq.com
San Francisco EastBay (510)776-5914
---------------------
From: Bob&Shannon [mailto:shannonnelson@tds.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 11:21 AM
To: David Hartley
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re:200c myth
Thanks Dave, that makes sense! (Except I am still curious about
whether/when high potencies might be used for (or in cases of) organic
pathology? I have a dim memory that sometimes this might be the
case...)
Best,
Shannon
on 8/19/04 3:51 AM, David Hartley at dave@holistiq.com wrote:
Shannon wrote:
Precisely.
There are no "always" .. only usually or sometimes, or
try-this-first.
IDEALLY, the best solution is to match the potency AND
dose to
1. susceptibility
2. progression and pace of disease
vs the qualities of the particular remedy: it's own "pace &
progression" as shown in provings. -which must also be considered
during remedy selection, not only in posology.
used for
It is the same answer, Shannon.
One component of "susceptibility" which for practical purposes, also
means "suitability toward non-aggravating healing response"
-must always be that imaginary place on a graph where two
lines cross -- \ /
One of those lines is Vitality \ /
The other is Sensitivity X
/ \
If a person has high vitality and low sensitivity, use whatever you
want, more or less.
200C or 1M in organic pathology ? No problem (though I'd still
recommend being normally careful, and giving ALL remedies in liquid
poslogy, and starting off with test dose, all parts of normal prudent
case management) Probably you'd want to tip-toe around any situations of
auto-immune disorder & cancer.
If the person has low vitality and high sensitivity -- you're probably
looking at lowest potencies and possibly treatment akin to "drainage"
-to build up vitality toward the point of being sufficient to mount more
of an overall healing response.
I've used LM1 as a starting place in Lyme disease and in chronic/acute
kidney failure in persons of good vitality amd medium sensitivity --and
looking back on the kidney case, I was over conservative; should have
opened (or very rapidly moved up to) LM4 or so.
best,
David Hartley www.holistiq.com
San Francisco EastBay (510)776-5914
---------------------
From: Bob&Shannon [mailto:shannonnelson@tds.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 11:21 AM
To: David Hartley
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re:200c myth
Thanks Dave, that makes sense! (Except I am still curious about
whether/when high potencies might be used for (or in cases of) organic
pathology? I have a dim memory that sometimes this might be the
case...)
Best,
Shannon
on 8/19/04 3:51 AM, David Hartley at dave@holistiq.com wrote:
Shannon wrote:
Precisely.
There are no "always" .. only usually or sometimes, or
try-this-first.
IDEALLY, the best solution is to match the potency AND
dose to
1. susceptibility
2. progression and pace of disease
vs the qualities of the particular remedy: it's own "pace &
progression" as shown in provings. -which must also be considered
during remedy selection, not only in posology.
-
Dave Hartley
- Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:47 pm
Re: 200c myth
>> Probably you'd want to tip-toe around any situations of
and TB !
And undoubtedly other situations that aren't coming to mind this second.
David Hartley www.holistiq.com
San Francisco EastBay (510)776-5914
---------------------
and TB !
And undoubtedly other situations that aren't coming to mind this second.
David Hartley www.holistiq.com
San Francisco EastBay (510)776-5914
---------------------
-
David Little
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 11:00 pm
Re: 200c myth
At 05:10 PM 8/19/2004 +0100, you wrote:
Dear Joy,
Thank you so much for sharing your experience, which I consider
valuable. This confirms my experience. Anybody else have any ideas about
the nature of various potencies? What about the 200c and 1M, etc?
I think the worse aggravations I had in my random number of dry pill
days was from the 200c not the 1M. I would just have the patient open their
mouth and throw the pills under the tongue. I call this we "whoops" method
because they get is what they get by chance. I never really was very
comfortable with opening up cases with the ultra high potencies after
reading Kent's cases from his "high as possible" days. I followed his later
advice to start lower and work up through the degrees as needed. When I
finally read the Organon correctly and tested its postulates out in the
clinic I found Kent's ideas that the size of the dose doesn't not matter
completely wrong. That alone reduced the number and strength of the
aggravations I was seeing. People usually think of aggravation only in
terms of the potency but the size of the dose and delivery system also have
a great effect.
The 200c has earned its nickname "the great aggravator" for some
reason. Was this why Hahnemann like the 190-199 better? God only knows. The
200c does have a very intense nature and suit disease with similar
phenomena. I find that the potency should be as similar as possible to the
patient and their disease state. I know many are using the 200c as a
"baseline potency" but I have not found this always the best thing to do. I
don't have a "standard" opening potency in either with the C or LM potency.
I do, however, tend to go lower rather than higher because it is easier to
raise a potency to get more action than produce aggravations that only slow
down the cure and make the patient uncomfortable. One must look at each
case individually and assess the predispositions of the constitution and
temperament, the sensitivity scale (1 to 1000), the nature and stage of the
disease, the stability of the vital force, the amount of vitality, etc.
Individualization is the rule.
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
Dear Joy,
Thank you so much for sharing your experience, which I consider
valuable. This confirms my experience. Anybody else have any ideas about
the nature of various potencies? What about the 200c and 1M, etc?
I think the worse aggravations I had in my random number of dry pill
days was from the 200c not the 1M. I would just have the patient open their
mouth and throw the pills under the tongue. I call this we "whoops" method
because they get is what they get by chance. I never really was very
comfortable with opening up cases with the ultra high potencies after
reading Kent's cases from his "high as possible" days. I followed his later
advice to start lower and work up through the degrees as needed. When I
finally read the Organon correctly and tested its postulates out in the
clinic I found Kent's ideas that the size of the dose doesn't not matter
completely wrong. That alone reduced the number and strength of the
aggravations I was seeing. People usually think of aggravation only in
terms of the potency but the size of the dose and delivery system also have
a great effect.
The 200c has earned its nickname "the great aggravator" for some
reason. Was this why Hahnemann like the 190-199 better? God only knows. The
200c does have a very intense nature and suit disease with similar
phenomena. I find that the potency should be as similar as possible to the
patient and their disease state. I know many are using the 200c as a
"baseline potency" but I have not found this always the best thing to do. I
don't have a "standard" opening potency in either with the C or LM potency.
I do, however, tend to go lower rather than higher because it is easier to
raise a potency to get more action than produce aggravations that only slow
down the cure and make the patient uncomfortable. One must look at each
case individually and assess the predispositions of the constitution and
temperament, the sensitivity scale (1 to 1000), the nature and stage of the
disease, the stability of the vital force, the amount of vitality, etc.
Individualization is the rule.
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
-
David Little
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 11:00 pm
Re: 200c myth
Hello Minutus,
Hahnemann used a wide range of opening potencies (0/1 to 0/7). In
one case he tested a 0/21!! That is like starting with the C in MM and
beyond! The point I want to make is - if one is not getting the reaction on
needs from the 0/1 try the 0/2, etc.. In cases where you need more dynamic
energy you can move up through the potencies quickly. Hahnemann tended to
move up one degree every week or two although sometimes he waited much
longer. In some cases he went up even faster than a week. Those that are
very sensitive can stay of 0/1 for long periods. Many of these folks don't
like to move up very fast. It can take months to go from 0/1 to 0/2 and
0/3. Those that are more hyposensitive can move up very quickly. A quick
upper movement also suits some cases of acute disease. Hahnemann's advanced
methods evolve the most sophisticated methods of individualizations. This
is where science and arts come together. The methods of adjusting the dose
to suit the time and circumstances are almost infinite. This might be some
of the things that overwhelms some of the 4th Organon prescribers who have
gotten used to a fixed method. Give a dose of the 200C first and wait one
month. This is easy - yes - but it is not the best way to go.
Individualization is a cardinal principle of homoeopathy.
Sincerely, David
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
Hahnemann used a wide range of opening potencies (0/1 to 0/7). In
one case he tested a 0/21!! That is like starting with the C in MM and
beyond! The point I want to make is - if one is not getting the reaction on
needs from the 0/1 try the 0/2, etc.. In cases where you need more dynamic
energy you can move up through the potencies quickly. Hahnemann tended to
move up one degree every week or two although sometimes he waited much
longer. In some cases he went up even faster than a week. Those that are
very sensitive can stay of 0/1 for long periods. Many of these folks don't
like to move up very fast. It can take months to go from 0/1 to 0/2 and
0/3. Those that are more hyposensitive can move up very quickly. A quick
upper movement also suits some cases of acute disease. Hahnemann's advanced
methods evolve the most sophisticated methods of individualizations. This
is where science and arts come together. The methods of adjusting the dose
to suit the time and circumstances are almost infinite. This might be some
of the things that overwhelms some of the 4th Organon prescribers who have
gotten used to a fixed method. Give a dose of the 200C first and wait one
month. This is easy - yes - but it is not the best way to go.
Individualization is a cardinal principle of homoeopathy.
Sincerely, David
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000