Robin-
I feel sorry to see that with each posting you are getting deeper
into this morass...
Looking at your posting I am reminded how my Professor of Medicine
used to practice. As medical students we are taught how to take the
case. Generally our case sheet would run to a few pages and each
detail would be in the case taking form. Even with this the Professor
would look for a detail which most of us would have missed. This
particular professor, an excellent clinician, had such a grasp of
clinical presentations, he would walk into the waiting room look at
the patients for a couple of minutes and tell us the diagnosis or
something close to it. He did not need the 5 pages for arriving at a
diagnosis. We know if WE presented cases like this we will be failed
but would not dream of finding fault with his method which was
arrived after countless years of close study.
Hahnemann who had personally proved all the medicines of original
materia medica and who probably knew more about these than we would
ever know in our life time. Do you not understand that he is
qualitatively different from us? HE is the founder. It is HIS legacy
that we are following. Personally if I could even practice with
quarter the amount of his conviction, erudition and application I
would the best that there is.
Coming back to his cases, he did not believe in publishing Clinical
Cases. He introduces the first 2 cases he presented thus:
"The request of some friends, halting half-way on the road to this
method of treatment, to detail some examples of this treatment, is
difficult to comply with, and no great advantage can attend a
compliance with it. Every cured case of disease shows only how that
case has been treated.
The internal process of the treatment depends always on those
principles which are already known, and they cannot be rendered
concrete and definitely fixed for each individual case, nor can they
become at all more distinct from the history of a single cure that
they previously were when these principles were enunciated.
Every case of non-miasmatic disease is peculiar and special, and it
is the special in it that distinguishes it from every other case,
that pertains to it alone, but that cannot serve as a guide to the
treatment of other cases. Now, if it is wished to describe a
complicated case of disease consisting of many symptoms in such a
pragmatic manner that the reasons that influence us in the choice of
the remedy shall be clearly revealed, this demands details laborious
at once for the recorder and for the reader. In order, however, to
comply with the desires of my friends in this also, I may here detail
two of the slightest cases of Homeopathic treatment"
This is how he presented his cases - not for getting published in
Homeo Links or some journal , not to market his new way so that he
can get a seminar chance but because he had to against his
will....Totally different from the 10 or whatever cooked up cases
people present for getting admission to any society.
At least half the cases that are presented in Homeo Links do not
represent true Homeopathic case taking- if women wearing particular
glasses get Naja ( esp. if they are wearing dresses that look like
snake skin) and if this gets published in Homeo Links - I am certain
Hahnemann would not lower his status by publishing in it...Any way
that is another story - ain't it?
I do not consider you a Sam Basher; but please UNDERSTAND his
background, the time he practiced, the ideas that he brought forth
and the materia medica that he gave us and the philosphy he espoused
before throwing any more cats and dogs amongst the pigeons...
-- In
minutus@yahoogroups.com, "robin9168" wrote: