this article by Lois Hoffer may be of interest to you on the topic of double
remedies etc.
things are not always as we have them presented to us - sometimes things are
ommitted from our texts for a variety of reasons - but once found one has to
decide how to include this new found information into an already formed
belief system that was formed without it - or to ignore it - which is more
often the case I suspect. I know that I would benefit from further
discussion on this topic as I think others on the list would also.
http://www.webstore.fr/~lois.hoffer/dblrem/ukhma-2.htm
http://www.webstore.fr/~lois.hoffer/dblrem/chrono.htm
both these links are from the following site
http://www.webstore.fr/~lois.hoffer/dblrem/dr-menu.htm
Best
Robyn
"True healing is a shift in the intent of the disease, not merely its
manifestation" (P.Alexander).
S hannon wrote:
Thanks Toni, I'm getting closer
but still not quite understanding...Do you mean, then, that they're taking daily doses of the remedies that
seem
to pertain to their regularly recurring states? Would you be up for
giving
an example, and explaining why you felt that separate remedies were
needed,
not one remedy that could cover both? (I'm not trying to be dogmatic, but
this isn't an approach I'm familiar with and I'm hoping to understand!)
Just for discussion, an approach I was taught that I *think* might pertain
to the situation you describe, is to give (and we were mostly taught high
potency use) a remedy for the most prominent "state"/complaint, then
changing the remedy as the presenting picture changes. But maybe that's
not
for the same sort of situation... An example might help, if you're up for
it?
Shannon
on 1/10/05 5:07 PM, dusty1197 at dusty1197@yahoo.com wrote:
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 10/01/2005
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]