Minutus

Leelah-

I enjoy your posts a lot and respect the experience that comes thru.

Meanwhile regarding potencies - aren't there as many potency
philosophies as there are practitioners? From the time Hahnemann
gave drop dose of Bryonia mother tincture to the times when people
were even applying Calendula 10M or 50M externally for wounds -
there are so many posological guidelines that ultimately it is
everyone's game. Greats like Clarke and Burnett also were giving low
potencies... I think finding the right medicine is probably 80% of
the work, the right potency is only 20%. Or we would not have had
such variation in prescription potencies among even the classic
masters.
I have managed many pregnant women in my practice including my wife
during the birth of my daughters. I have found not only were all of
my pregnant patients reacting differently and needed different
potencies during pregnancy ( as even in non-pregnant times) the same
woman might react differently during different pregnancies. Somebody
reacting to Pulsatilla during first preg. would only react to Sepia
in the second and to a different potency. Regarding repetition some
authors write that the reason for repeating itself is to mitigate
aggravation... single doses were considered more dangeroous than
giving 3 doses within a short time... ML Tyler gave ascending
potencies like 200, IM, 10M rapidly...

I have used even Ars 10M in acutes- there was this food poisoning
case where I wanted to give Ars 30 ( my usual acute potency) I did
not have Ars in any other potency than 10M at that time. The patient
was in allopathic hospital still having vomiting and diarrhoea while
on Metronidazole drips. So I gave 10M 3 doses. The very first dose
stopped both vomiting and diarrhoea...This is another reason why I
do not give too much credence to dose hair-splitting...
In this case in question- patient responded well to Cantharis
initially - had a good night sleep - in most of my acute prescribing
sleep is one of the things I enquire about to find if the medicine
had acted well- sometimes patients even volunteer and ask " doctor
did you give me sedatives? I slept so well". The problems started
after Sepia only. Even then we do not know if it was a wrong
prescription because Sepia itself seems to have ameliorated in a
general way.... None of the rules of dosing during preganancy would
apply in this case as she has been already thru so much of
allopathic dosing and so none of the marked sensitivity to medicines
that you showed during pregnancy might be present here.
Regarding the effect of medicines I have NEVER been 100% sure of my
selection- to a reasonable degree yes - but never absolutely.

And truth fully I would say nobody could. Neither our homeopathic
science nor our knowledge of our patients is that concrete. That is
what makes practice of homeopathy a thriller... because there is
still a suspense. I have fallen flat on my face many a time when I
was absolutely confident of my selection whereas sometimes just
cursory selections based on incomplete symptoms have worked wonders.
Which as I reiterate is what would happen in all systemic (
holistic) medical systems. It is just not the input that decides
what would happen - it is what the system ( body politic) does using
the input that matters - We do not heal .. we only help the system
to heal itself and this is the fundamental difference from allopathy
where with a reasonable amount of confidence we can say that this
antibiotic will take care of this...it is a determinative approach -
here we cannot because ours is a systemic approach.

Thanks for the good discussion on this topic
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "doctorleelah2h"
wrote:
over
gone,
I
to
Since I
plussed
to
had
curative?)
acutes
some
threw
have
like
that I
wrote:
the
sensitive.
her I
to
often.
done.
of
dozen
during
through
to
little
it
infection
there
response
allowing
patients.
this
diffrently
You
time.
that
to
of
go.
pregnant
was
serious
in
contractions.
which
since
in
from
was
concerned
case
email
use
or
simply
to
of
around
email
use
or
simply
to
---
Terms
email
use
or
simply
to
it
its

Hi,

I still think of finding the right potency difficult. It is as you say: So
many practioners - so many philosophies that makes it different and
difficult.
Some say use low potencies (C6- C12) in acutes somebody else says - use at
least C30 - C200.
In chronics (except from LM's) I read in different books and study material,
to use C6- C12 (in repetiton), from which others say, you don't put a
porsche motor in a DAF and use middle or high potencies. And then: do you
repeat, how often and so on.
I know you have to look closely at the state (of VF) of the patient, but
still.......
Best regards,
Willy
-------Oorspronkelijk bericht-------
Van: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Datum: 06/05/05 06:09:34
Aan: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp: [Minutus] Re: I goofed - Potency, Repetition
Leelah-

I enjoy your posts a lot and respect the experience that comes thru.

Meanwhile regarding potencies - aren't there as many potency
philosophies as there are practitioners? From the time Hahnemann
gave drop dose of Bryonia mother tincture to the times when people
were even applying Calendula 10M or 50M externally for wounds -
there are so many posological guidelines that ultimately it is
everyone's game. Greats like Clarke and Burnett also were giving low
potencies... I think finding the right medicine is probably 80% of
the work, the right potency is only 20%. Or we would not have had
such variation in prescription potencies among even the classic
masters.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Wily,

This diversity of opinion and experience is one (among several) reason
why it's best to begin to learning *one* system, which has worked well
for well-trained and well-experienced prescribers. As with learning
*anything*, it is *much* harder to begin from a state of overload and
confusion, then gradually make order from the chaos, than it is to
begin with an orderly (tho incomplete) understanding, and gradually
fill that in over time.

The risk, of course, is that one obtains that "orderly tho incomplete"
picture and resists adding anything to it. As we are seeing all around
us...

I think that is the approach that (all? most?) schools take--they teach
a core approach, and then at later points (some will) introduce other
approaches as well, or at least make the students aware of those. At
the school I attended we were actually taught to *use* only the
high-potency, single-dose, watch-and-wait approach. But one of the
core instructors was also well experienced with low potencies, and with
Eizayaga's method, and made sure that we understood that those styles
too can be very effective. She gave us some context for *what
circumstances* might favor one approach or another. And she cautioned
us strongly against drinking too deeply from the flowing river of
seminars and conferences (oh, yummy! ), until we had gained a
solid base from which to understand these added perspectives.

I've found that to be really, really good advice, and for that reason
am a huge fan of learning thru formal coursework (whether residence,
correspondence, e-mail or whatever), rather than studying on one's own.
These different approaches *do* fit together--but then, so, we are
told, do gravity and electromagnetism. The devil of it, is figuring
out HOW they fit! And how we can use that broadened understanding.

And for broadening one's perspective (big grin) places like this are
hard to beat! LOL
Shannon

Hi, Sorry I've been away.

Yes matching the potency is the most importnat part of case
management. BUT one can discuss till teh cows come home about what is
teh best potency to use in general during pregnancy.

Remember here we are discussing the situation of a NEW case (with no
past expereince of the susceptibiltiy or the sensitivity) that has
been on suppressive treatment, who is already having premature
contractions, and now after a dose of a remedy in 30C has developed a
very high fever - resulting due to generalised spread of bacterial
toxins.

The response of the homeopath or advise from others has to be
specific to this situation. My replies have been specific to it. the
general rule, in new case with detrimental complications is to watch
the reaction to ONE dose and make an educated and experienced
inference from it. Which is what I mentioned: Parital remedy, very
sensitive patient, with high susceptibility.
This requires an accuracy of prescription, 4-6 hourly follow up with
accurate inferences, low potency dosing, constitutional remedy back
up.

In such a situation, How does one "try" to see what another dose of
remedy would have done? HOW can one afford not to be accurate in
remedy choice? HOw can one be inaccurate in assessing what the first
prescription has done?
Obviously this is a case and situation for someone with experience -
and we need to reach that level of clinical management as homeaopths.
It is not an impossiblity, any number of Indian homeopaths have done
so. I have done so in many cases as well - but I've felt burnt out on
my own.
One has to be wary of whitewashing the TRUTHFUL INFERENCES of this
particular episode, NOT assume that inaccuracies in remedy and remedy
response, and 'wait and watch' without a specified time frame are
acceptable alternatives.

I think BEth truthfully realised exactly where she had missed it
(inspite of a good but incomplete history taking), and reaslied what
needed to be corrected in her approach, and that in the long term is
MOST heplful for each of our journeys and developments as GOOD
homeopaths.

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "hahnemannian2002"
wrote:
low
same
Somebody
Sepia
patient
while
prescribing
medicines
wonders.
using
allopathy
30C's.
So
response
responded
pattient
wrote:
the
at
This
prefer
can
do
learn
not
to
these.
start
urinary
in
on
I
be
of
of
-
of
Check
use
to