Digest Number 1842/arsenicum or not?
Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:39 pm
Hi Dr Cotter
I think you missed the point a bit here. The point of debate wasn't who is
or isn't or isn't this or that 'constitution' but whether this kind of
'diagnosis' has a place at all. It has always seemed a bit like a party
trick to me, on a par with 'you are a Capricorn, I can always tell, you
know'. I prefer to say to patients 'I think you need this or that remedy'
and if I use the word 'constitutional' I explain it by saying that the
remedy is a prescription for the whole person, taking into account history,
general symptoms and emotional stuff as well as physical. It is the
*opposite* of keynote prescribing, which has its place in acutes. We have
all indulged in the party trick at times (hopefully not with paying
patients!) and I wouldn't have written now except that your last post had
another party trick in it...This post gave an instant diagnosis of liver
disease for someone who showed signs of irritability with you which is like
when the man at the party says 'You don't want to sleep with me - ah, so you
are frigid. Have you thought of doing anything about that?' Not only
ignoring the possibility that the lady might find him unattractive but also
calculated to put her off him for good.
Coincidentally, one of my patients rang yesterday to say that her husband
was behaving in an angry, critical way with her and the children. Did I
think it was his blood pressure and should she give him something. I said it
might well be his blood pressure but if she offered him a tablet it wouldn't
be a very good move in terms of the survival of their marriage!
I hope you don't find this group hostile - there have been some good debates
recently on nature of the 'constitution', on miasms and individual cases,
and although I agree with you that homeopaths can be a bad-tempered and
defensive lot at times I don't think anyone is deliberately being so at the
moment.
Theresa
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:07:59 -0800
From: "H.T. Cotter"
Subject: Re: Single Remedy prescriptions = Sophomoric ?? (WAS HIV)
Hi Paul,
It's been my experience over the years both as a homeopath and as just a
regular observer of my fellow travelers that people tend to attribute their
own feelings and motivations to others. It often causes unpleasantness when
it could be avoided by simply asking a question or two to clarify intent.
I didn't label Julian as an Arsenic constitution, I asked him whether he
was. I was interested in his constitutional type since there were such
clear impressions given by his written word. Even so, what's wrong with
Arsenicum? If it is ones constitutional type, it doesn't make that person
better or worse than a Phosphorus or a Pulsatilla. Some of my friends are
like the Felix's of the world,
I think you missed the point a bit here. The point of debate wasn't who is
or isn't or isn't this or that 'constitution' but whether this kind of
'diagnosis' has a place at all. It has always seemed a bit like a party
trick to me, on a par with 'you are a Capricorn, I can always tell, you
know'. I prefer to say to patients 'I think you need this or that remedy'
and if I use the word 'constitutional' I explain it by saying that the
remedy is a prescription for the whole person, taking into account history,
general symptoms and emotional stuff as well as physical. It is the
*opposite* of keynote prescribing, which has its place in acutes. We have
all indulged in the party trick at times (hopefully not with paying
patients!) and I wouldn't have written now except that your last post had
another party trick in it...This post gave an instant diagnosis of liver
disease for someone who showed signs of irritability with you which is like
when the man at the party says 'You don't want to sleep with me - ah, so you
are frigid. Have you thought of doing anything about that?' Not only
ignoring the possibility that the lady might find him unattractive but also
calculated to put her off him for good.
Coincidentally, one of my patients rang yesterday to say that her husband
was behaving in an angry, critical way with her and the children. Did I
think it was his blood pressure and should she give him something. I said it
might well be his blood pressure but if she offered him a tablet it wouldn't
be a very good move in terms of the survival of their marriage!
I hope you don't find this group hostile - there have been some good debates
recently on nature of the 'constitution', on miasms and individual cases,
and although I agree with you that homeopaths can be a bad-tempered and
defensive lot at times I don't think anyone is deliberately being so at the
moment.
Theresa
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:07:59 -0800
From: "H.T. Cotter"
Subject: Re: Single Remedy prescriptions = Sophomoric ?? (WAS HIV)
Hi Paul,
It's been my experience over the years both as a homeopath and as just a
regular observer of my fellow travelers that people tend to attribute their
own feelings and motivations to others. It often causes unpleasantness when
it could be avoided by simply asking a question or two to clarify intent.
I didn't label Julian as an Arsenic constitution, I asked him whether he
was. I was interested in his constitutional type since there were such
clear impressions given by his written word. Even so, what's wrong with
Arsenicum? If it is ones constitutional type, it doesn't make that person
better or worse than a Phosphorus or a Pulsatilla. Some of my friends are
like the Felix's of the world,