Only in this way can we trace cause and effect in a series from beginning to end and back again from the end to the beginning. By this means we arrive at a state in which we do not assume, but in which we know. The man comes first, the individual- the will, the understanding, the loves and hates.
These things come first. The distortion on this level is the disease, not the morbid tissue changes. Lecture 2 talks about the Organon aphorism on the Highest Ideal of a Cure. And to refresh you that verbiage, it says: When treating disease, we must consider what comes before, and our end goal, our cure, is to bring them back to where they were before the state that brought the patient to our office.
In this same lecture he talks about those observations that we ascribe to Hering- symptoms moving in reverse direction again, to what was before and the layers of man,. But they man had not been susceptible to the bacillus he could not have been affected by it. Such references to the idea of first and last, prior and result are sprinkled throughout the entire book in this way. What it tells us is that the concept is central to homeopathy as Kent saw it, in all aspects. From taking and perceiving the case, to susceptibility, to miasms- psora comes first and precedes the other miasms, there cannot be acutes without chronics and vice versa, the idea of a simple substance prior to a materia substance….
What is primary and what is secondary or what is the result is a cornerstone of the lectures. Yet these points- primary and ultimate- are not floating in space with a cosmic unseen connection. What is primary or prior, and what is the result or ultimate, is joined by the idea of influx, or continuance. This phrase or synonymous phrases are also embedded in nearly every lecture of the book. You heard it first in the initial quote I read- about cause and effect and a series running from beginning to end.
Kent is a master at planting seeds of concepts before turning them over in a direct reveal. It has wild dreams, twitching, restless sleep, nervous excitement, hysterical manifestations, but if we examine all the organs of the body we will find nothing the matter with them. This sickness, however, which is present, if allowed to go uncured, will in twenty or thirty years result in tissue change… the individual has been sick from the beginning…. This is the first introduction of the idea that if you see someone with no morbid sx.
It also supports his plea to learn pathology and physical disease states- not because we prescribe on it- but because then you will know what you are looking at. IS this patient at the beginning or the end or the middle stage of the pathological stage of their disease? He emphasizes this quite a lot-. An array is of course a display or an arrangement of multiple things … not just beginning and end, but what the course is between them. We see some patients at the beginning and probably fewer at the end, but most of them are in the middle.
By knowing the progression of disease, but understanding that there is a first and last and an inbetween, we can identify where our patient is in that progression and that can and will inform our analysis and prescriptions. Hence, cure must be from within, out.
The idea of a progression is also applied to the types of disease we have: Now- I bring all this up not to tell you about the difference between acute and chronic, because we all know that. But to lift out the language Kent is using and this concept of flow and order because again, he repeats it within all the important concepts in the book.
And thus there will be only one remedy to match, when we apply the same concepts to the study of disease images, i. AS a broad and substantial illustration let us think of a chain. What is it that holds the last link of a chain to its investment or first attachment? At once we will say the intermediate link. What is it that connects that link? Its previous link, and so on to the first link and its attachment.
Do we not thus see that there is one continuous dependence from the last to the first hook? Wherever that chain is separated it is as much separated as possible, and there is no longer influx from one link to the other. In the same way as soon as we commence to think of things disconnectedly, we lose the power of communication between them. All things must be untied or the series is broken and influx ceases. Again, we see that man exists prior to his body, but as yet we do not see all the finer purposes of his being.
Those Lectures- entitled Idiosyncrasies, Individualization, and Characteristics began to bump up against previous concepts like indisposition, circumstance, obstacle to cure and more. Each of these concepts circles around each other like bumper cars, having similarities and connection, yet simultaneously retaining a unique meaning that helps make distinctions within a case.
Likewise, his discussion of vital force, simple substance, vs. It can be confusing and I found that by drawing out- literally with pen and blank white paper- I could discern the meaning of each one. But I bring it up to encourage you, the next time you read Kent, if you find yourself glossing over words and concepts that seem similar but he is clearly using different words for - STOP. Take the time to piece out each one. I personally have held a lot of these teachings at bay, considering them, but not incorporating them fully into my practice, simply because I have had a hard time making the leap from the original 3- psora, syphilis and sycosis though including cancer and tuberculosis - to the more than ten now commonly accepted within various circles.
Had psora never been established, as a miasm upon the human race, the otter two chronic diseases would have been impossible, and susceptibility to acute diseases would have been impossible. All the diseases of man are built upon psora; hence it is the foundation of sickness; all other sicknesses came after. Now, at that time, 2 other miasms were considered. But it stands to reason that if psora made humans susceptible to sycosis and syphilis, as well as all acutes, then there is potential for other miasms. In each instance, there is something prior to the manifestations which we call disease.
We speak of the signs and symptoms of a disease, we speak of the outcroppings of the symptoms when we speak of syphilis, but remember there is a state prior to syphilis or syphilis would not exist. It could not come upon man except for a condition suitable to its development. In like manner psora could not exist except for a condition in mankind stable for its development. What stands out to me, though is that considering this state- created by psora, that allows for the development of syphilis or sycosis, then it stands to reason that state that allows for the development of tuberculosis- which we accept is a miasm- and cancer…which we also accept as a miasm.
Otherwise, he could not be susceptible or could not develop that which is within him. The image of his own interior self comes out in disease…. The original simple psora has added to it syphilis and sycosis, and THESE PROGRESS and have now effected a state, they have CONTINUED to effect a state in mankind, whereby the race is so susceptible to acute affectations that many of our citizens have every little thing that comes along, and every little epidemic of influenza brings them down with an acute attack… This was not done in one generation but has been accumulating on the face of the earth so long as we have a history of man.
So - while the emphasis in reading is mine, you can hear that Kent is again emphasizing the idea of progression and continuance, but in the realm of miasms. Clearly he did not see them as a static state, but as a state that is growing generation to generation. Have contributed to the proliferation of the expanded miasms, which follows his theory that miasms complicate and progress.
The majority of the college teachers sneer at the doctrine of psora; they sneer at the miasms and continue in their efforts to establish homeopathy upon an allopathic basis…. Kent was teaching in the final years of homeopathy here in America, while it was being diluted and extinguished by the American Medical Association. It seems it was a time of holding on for dear life, not a time of renaissance and expansion, which we know happened over 70 years later. A very specific point that was made also in Lecture 20, the first on syphilis, in regards to the point of contagion.
Suppose we assume that the syphilitic miasm is a disease that would run for a definite time, and suppose that an individual has gone through with the primary manifestation and is told by his physician that he can safely marry; if he marry, his wife becomes and invalid; but she does not go through the primary manifestations, the initial lesion and the roseola, but she has the syphiloderma and the symptoms which belong to theater state of the disease. This disease is transferred from husband to wife, anti is taken up in the stage in which it then exists and from thence goes on in a progressive way.
The woman catches it from the man in the stage in which he has it at the time of their marriage; she takes that which he has; if he has it in the advances stage she takes it in that stage; she takes from him the stage he has to offer. This is equally true of psora and sycosis…. The state is transferred, so that one in the advanced states of psora will transfer to his good wife the psora which he has, and she takes it up and progress with it and adds it to her own, and it progresses in accordance with her peculiarities.
I had not been exposed to this concept of contagion at the state of manifestation. It makes perfect sense, but I would have not been able to articulate or put this into words myself. Which is of course why we must individualize, and why homeopathy is what it is, and not allopathy, which gives ONE treatment for syphilis- operating under the rule the syphilis is syphilis. But we know, syphilis is not just syphilis.
The other concept it clicked into place for me is not the passing on of miasms, but the passing on of unresolved traumas, memories, etc. There was an article that was circulating for some time about the acceptance in conventional circles that the effects of trauma and memories can be passed on genetically. I accepted this as a good, energy based practitioner should though it feels far more clear to me and understandable by considering that these memories and traumas could transfer in the same way that miasms do- and not just in a general way, but in the particular way that trauma and experience is stuck within the parent at the time of conception.
I think that the concept of susceptibility is embedded in that which is prior or primary. I began the chapter on susceptibility thinking that it would be more about that prior state, but instead the lecture emphasizes more contagion, potency, and dose. What I came to realize in the course of reading the entire book and now in zeroing in on this lecture, is that susceptibility, contagion, and cure are like the 3 legs of a stool-. They each have a part to play- equal to each other, but distinctly important- in the seat of health.
Contagion comes in, we are susceptible to it. The Contagion has the cause- so consider this paragraph: When cause ceases to flow in a particular direction, it is because resistance is offered for cases flow only in the direction of least resistance… now in the beginning of disease, i. So contagion and susceptibility could be viewed like a teeter totter- the other side can only dip down to the level that the other side allows.
Perhaps you remember playing on a teeter totter as a child. If you pushed very hard, the return to you depended on the strength of the individual on the other end, and the degree to which she pushed back and could resist. If she resisted little, then perhaps it would not even totter back to your side, she could again bounce down- little resistance but strength enough to push back some.
She could offer no resistance, and slam down on the ground. She could offer strong resistance, and push the teeter right down. Regardless, you can see the direct relationship between the two. Cure comes in with the same idea- our susceptibility to the cure, to the remedy, the artificial disease that provokes our vital force to offer resistance. There is this difference; in cure we have the advantage of change of potency and this enables us to suit the varying susceptibilities of sick man. But it is not so with medicines. Man has all the degrees of potentiation, and by these he can make changes and thereby fit the medicine to the varying susceptibility of man in varying qualities or degrees.
Of course, this is one of the biggest blindspots in allopathic medicine- the gross administration of often one-size-fits-all potencies and doses, such as vaccines, antibiotics, etc. Like a well tended multi-generational garden, each time you walk through you catch blooms you never saw before, sweet blossoms tucked in under large leaves that obscured your vision the previous time. Pull out your Kent, read a Lecture or two, and share your insights with me! Thanks again for listening, for sharing with your friends and colleagues. If you are coming to the conference, look for me!
When I began the podcast in January of , I had a list of homeopaths who I knew I wanted to reach out to. I reached out to Shilpa and she graciously made time in her busy schedule and we recorded this interview over a year ago, actually, in March of If you follow her work, then perhaps you have read her biography and know about her many moves, but listening to her tell her story of starting multiple clinics after graduating from full-time homeopathy school in India, moving between countries, stepping into teaching, is inspiring.
Willing to examine her results, utilize approaches she never thought she would use.. Building a new practice, clinic and community again and again Shilpa shares how working under different conditions exposes your varying skill levels, strengths and weaknesses, understanding, depth, and expectations…. We know that homeopathy can treat serious illness, because we have the clinical evidence.
Shilpa had the experience of facing serious pathology in her rural clinic and shifting it using homeopathy. How do we grow and have different experiences, without being world travelers, or the option to create multiple clinics? Shilpa recognized that her situation, the moving and recreating something new and connecting and drawing on her own strengths, is an integral part to not only her ability to thrive as a homeopath, but to who she is. I love this because I think that THIS is what is true for all of us-not that we all need to go through the kind of location dynamic multi-faceted career that Shilpa has had, but that we all need to find where our unique strengths and talents intersect with our practice of homeopathy- and make space within our lives and our practice where those strengths and talents can grow and shine.
It may be teaching, it may be research, it may be creating gardens of plants in homeopathic use, or cartoon videos of remedy pictures or proving… I could go on and on. I hope to meet you there! Usually I repertorize using CD, but because Roger has already been through these cases and added the remedy to the necessary rubrics, the remedy in the case often comes out quite high. This time, I wanted to use a different Repertory- Synthesis in my RadarOpus- to see if there were any differences and also for those folks who may not be using Complete Dynamics. I like to pull out some of the key take-aways and best tips that came out during our conversation, so you can listen for them.
Precision prescribing in acute cases. Lady of 74 has had hypertension for many years. Sudden loss of power of the right arm and leg with thick speech. Pupils sluggish, fibrillating heart. History of having a bowel complex. So new issues came to light-. This came up again, but in a different way. I missed a rubric because I was looking for it in the local particular, which in this case was a mind symptom- and Roger pointed out that I could have looked for it in the General.
Speech as a functional issue - which is what came up in this case. Different repertories are set up differently, and if you choose to use a different reference, be aware of how they might be different from maybe what your standard book is.
Also- the idea of a symptom of functional disorder vs. Identify the signs of the vital force- the movement of energy. We also got into some technical features of CD, in terms of searching and using synonyms. This conversation came in the middle of the call, but I cut it out and tucked it at the end, so that if you are well versed in CD, you can choose to skip that part at the end. It also helped the flow, so we stayed with the symptoms of the case and relevant rubrics, and kept the technicalities at the end. I thought this was interesting and commented on it.
Homeopaths used to read, make annotations, and actively studied and noted and made cross references in their publication and repertories, etc. This greatly enhanced their scope of reference. In an earlier part of our call, when we were just greeting each other and getting warmed up, Roger had commented that with applications such as Facebook, people often do not read articles to completion, or as deeply and attentively into text. Not just quotes or select passages, but the whole text, from start to finish.
Sure, you can read Kent on your own. When was the last time you talked about it, though? At Harvard Business School, one of the primary reasons for the case method of learning, where students read a case, or story, collectively and then debate it, is to make students more aware of the different perspectives people bring to any discussion and the ways in which those perspectives can deepen understanding and help a group reach a more rounded decision.
Book clubs function similarly — they force you to engage on new and interesting topics, and they do so by listening to people who think differently than you. The sign-ups are rolling in, and there is no cap, so the more the merrier. Sign ups are open right up until the start date- June 23rd, and the discussion will roll right on through August 31 on the private Facebook page, or you can opt to do the bi-weekly webinar based discussions to talk to others LIVE.
I'll be there facilitating the discussions in both places. Please join me and other homeopaths from around the world for a Homeopath's Bookclub! I find it to be like a Russian nesting doll- a new hidden surprise each time you peel back what you see on top. But you know what makes those hidden surprises really meaningful? Sharing them with someone else. Trading ideas and questions- looking at something in a new way. Well, for the same reason that I started a podcast. Not just at the coffee and tea breaks of an occasional seminar…. Nope- I want to dig into some of the best that homeopathic literature has to offer and talk about it and exchange ideas with other homeopaths who think about this stuff too….
Homeopaths who are practicing or have practiced and have seen philosophy in action…. This is a new endeavor. Regardless of how you practice, whatever approach you use, homeopathic philosophy runs through it. You can engage at whatever level feels right for you, and whatever chapters and lectures are most relevant to you and where you are right now in your practice. I have divided up the book over 7 weeks- approximately 50 pages or 5 chapters per week. See the details here. Maybe you have a case that is a perfect illustration of some aspect of case taking or analysis- or a case that is stumping you and applying some philosophy might help you get some perspective.
Groups will be limited to 12 participants, and conversations recorded and available to you for later listening, or if you miss one. You can find all the details, with the breakdown of chapters and links to sign up at my website- concentrichealing. You can also find clickable links on the Facebook page. I believe the most effective study and training we can do is homeopathic to our own needs. But how do we figure out what our needs are- homeopathically- for our own skills and practice to progress? This is where I remind you that way back in that first episode of the podcast I likened these shows to inviting you into my studio where everything is in progress and a mess- and not my gallery where the finished pieces are hanging up for sale.
Basically what I have done is look through my caseload over the last 2 years, give or take a few months, and pull out those cases that have gone cold- truly cold. Sometimes people come back years later, but in this case, these folks have not returned for treatment in many months or over a year, despite a reminder or prompt for a follow up. I read through them, my case notes and my repertorization and follow ups if there were any, to see what stood out to me.
I started making a list of what I saw to be a potential issue, and as i read more cases, certain issues began to crystallize and a definite list began to develop, so I could scan the cases for what i seen in previous ones, but alert to any anamolies. Just like a practitioner who is just a couple of years deeper into practice than you can easily point out where you might have overlooked something or chosen a better rubric, YOU are not the same practitioner you were when you first took a case a year or 2 or even 6 months ago.
Now, the intention is not to fix it. To improve their form and performance, it is standard practice for athletes and teams to watch video clips of themselves and their games, to analyze their performance and use what they saw to train accordingly. There are businesses that have sprung up exclusively to deliver this service to athletes and performers and teams. It is yet another parallel application of the idea of similars- that seeing ourselves in another form provides the map to change. With just that time and space from the original engagement with the Case, I can witness my own process from an outside perspective and distance, and it has the potential to help me zero in and sharpen my skills, just like the athletes do.
The first case is of a child whose mother first approached me to help with allergy symptoms, but in the background was a very intense difficult family dynamic. Looking over this case, I could see how I struggled with grasping the totality, my repertorization, but also acknowledging that the family dynamics probably took over. In the second case, I was struck by how much I missed the mark on this young child with control issues, jealousy, and temper tantrums. I didn't repertorize appropriately AT ALL, and in this situation I likely had one or two shots to make a difference, or the family was going to pursue other options.
And so they did. The last case I inventoried was of an adult woman with acute cracking, peeling fingers. Against the constitutional backdrop the remedy I gave helped the fingers, but didn't cure them, and also did not ultimately touch the deeper levels of pathology, with hormonal migraine headaches. I close the episode with a few choice quotes from an older interview with Lou Klein from the American Homeopath Journal, The quotes spoke well to the issues that I found in my inventory. Stay tuned for a promo soon about Summer Homeopathy Book Club: Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy by Kent.
Thanks to all who support on patreon. What is called for is that we take into account the whole, the organism as a unity, from the deepest to the most superficial. Roger and I connected in March and went through 2 cases, E was the first one: The Case of the Restless Child, A friend helpfully pointed out that giving the case and case number ahead of time would enable the audience to participate by doing the case in advance…which is such a great idea.
I have included the text of the case below, but you can find it.
Understanding samuel hahnemanns homeopathy
You can work the case however you like, using Complete Dynamics, but of course any other software as well. Since this was the 2nd case of the night and we had covered so many great points through the first case, this one went a bit quicker. As I have done in previous episode, I'm going to list a few bullet points of the main points covered.
Homoeopathic Recorder , p. With each attack there is severe throbbing pain in the region of the right frontal sinus and right eye; occasionally there is a sensation as though the skin over the frontal region is under tension; as the attack wears off, a numb sensation remains in this area. With this pain, he always feels warm in the upper half of his body, especially is there a warm feeling about the right eye. There is usually a yellow nasal discharge; five days before consulting me, the discharge suddenly stopped; the next day a severe attack of pain set in.
Noises give him the sensation as though the vibration struck him in the right eye. With the pain, it is difficult for him to keep his eyes open; he also feels drowsy. Most of the attacks begin in the morning, increasing as the day wears on, then decreasing as evening approaches. Occasionally the pain lasts all night or late into the night. On March 10, xxx 2c. Relief set in an hour afterward. On March 13, the pain returned; this time xxxx 1M. There has been no return of the trouble since. Never in seven years has there been such a long period of freedom from attacks.
Again, identifying and focusing on the deepest pathology. In this case, nerves vs. A distinction about choosing generalities when the pathology is really focused on one particular system. Frontal sinuses means forehead. As I was schooled on the sinus rubrics, I was also getting a lesson on the structure of the repertory.
I brought up a couple of usability questions to Roger during the call- one I left in, the other I edited out because I thought in listening to it that it was hard to follow. CD offers a feature that allows you to group symptoms and name them- so you can put all your sinus symptoms together, or your head pain or what have you. Toward the end we talked about how well certain remedies score in the repertorization and Roger gives his recommendation for when to consider differentiating…which would be almost always unless there is huge difference in the percentages of your top remedies.
That is something I have never really paid much attention to - the difference in the percentage of my highest remedy vs. I will be back in May with a regular episode. In turn, I hope to create a template that YOU can use to inventory your own cases and go through a similar process…. A podcast created by a homeopath, for homeopaths. MacRepertory and RadarOpus respectively. Together, however, they have co-founded this new non-profit , Homeopathy-One. Homeopathy-One offers a platform for leaders and followers of all schools of thought- traditional and contemporary - to come together, so that we can start to hear each other and find unity in diversity.
Shortly below this on the website, they offered an invitation to get in touch and involved and be a part of the movement…. I reached out to their contact with an invitation to talk to me, and all of you, about their effort- and…. What an awesome surprise it was to wake up to emails from both Frederick Schroyens and Rajan Sankaran agreeing to come on the show- and so here we are!
We managed to find a time across 3 times zones to Skype and spent a great hour together talking about Homeopathy-One: Each featured homeopath will have the opportunity to present their unique approach with case examples for one-hour, followed by a 30 min. Not to mention you can stay in touch through a newsletter which is already in motion, bringing news and opportunities from around the world, or if you are inspired to bring homeopathy to an area in need, Homeopathy-One, as a non-profit, will be considering applications for funding support to help spread and strengthen homeopathy where it is most needed.
The registration is open, and from now until May 15 you can qualify for the early-bird pricing, of E. There are also a limited number of reduced registrations for groups of 5 or more; you can contact them directly for more information. Also, like and share their Facebook page https: You can find the HOPE webpage, which Rajan mentioned, and some of the speakers have videos accessible, at http: I'll be back next week with the April edition of Repertory with Roger If you think about it, what we do as homeopaths when taking a case is different than any other holistic or medical practice.
Like doctors, we want to know about the body- was ails it, what makes it better or worse, the quality of the pain, when it started, what started it, the medical history, effects of medications and so on.
- Dog Body, Dog Mind: Exploring Canine Consciousness and Total Well-Being!
- Home for the Holiday (TABOO TALES Book 8).
- collected works of dr nash in leaders of homeopathy Manual.
- A Traveler from Altruria [with Biographical Introduction]?
- Thanatos (McGrath, Folge 2) (German Edition).
- MI FACEVA IMPAZZIRE COME NON MI ERA MAI SUCCESSO - IN CERCA DI SENSAZIONI FORTI: 20 Racconti erotici indicati per un pubblico adulto (Italian Edition).
- Die! Rise! Shine!: Stories of Death and Resurrection.
We want to know their general physical disposition, and details about symptoms in addition to the chief complaint. Boy- do we want detail. Like a therapist, we want to know how the patient feels, emotionally. How do they respond to challenging situations in their life? How are their relationships? Do they get angry? Unlike a therapist, we do not counsel. Like a life coach, we might wonder about their aspirations and goals- and where are they in that journey? But we do not give suggestions or exercises to improve themselves. Like a spiritual guide, we ask about their dreams and fears and say more… say more… and what does that mean?
Some who have the knowledge and credentials may recommend supplements and include other therapies, many refer. For the patient who comes in for some relief for their arthritis, and finds themselves recounting the pain of their parents divorce some 30 years prior, the experience is not often what they expected. Others might be suspicious and closed, uncertain of why dreams have anything to do with arthritis. What we perceive in the hour or two hours that we initially meet or speak with a patient sets the trajectory, and while we can course correct along the way, providing the patient stays with us, we can never get back that initial meeting.
When i look back over my old cases, I can easily find holes where now I would gather more information. Places where I pushed for detail, that did not end up making a difference in my understanding of the case. Glossed over physical details that were important, in favor of the story. I have no doubt that in a couple years, I will review the cases I am taking now, and find another group of what I will later consider to be mistakes and mis-steps. We are meant to take the case without prejudice.
Once we start looking, we narrow our field of perception, and do a disservice to our patient and ourselves. One of the most interesting aspects of this to me, is long-term successful prescribing in cases that are short compared to our modern cases, and also more heavily weighted on physical symptoms. Often even one mental symptom is not mentioned. These homeopaths used small remedies, as well as large ones. Do you still need to pay attention to your case taking? How can you continue to improve and refine your case taking when you are no longer technically a beginner?
As I like to do, I plunged into the journals of my RadarOpus software to find some good writing. I head to the material that was written before our contemporary methods, because in those writings is wisdom that can be applied across the spectrum. I settled on an article by C. A quick bit of background on Boger, as either a first introduction or a refresh-.
He wrote several textbooks, journals, and translations. As always, I encourage you to comment on the website or the Facebook page with your own thoughts about the topics in the show. Let's get a whole crowd of us to read Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy by Kent! There will be a private Facebook group, and I'll be facilitating discussion. You can also choose to talk to people- live! Whether you are reading it for the first time, or the 5th Another Repertory with Roger is on tap before the end of the month.
Roger chooses cases from the old Homeopathic Recorder Journal issues, and enhances his repertory by making sure the remedies in those cured cases are represented under their corresponding rubrics. In this way, he is expanding the CD repertory, and small and lesser known remedies are better represented and more likely to come up- all from reliable cured cases. All of these cases are accessible on his Facebook page, and as always there will be a link in the show notes to that Facebook page, as well as the case.
I apologize for the audio on my end, which has an echo. The case chosen for this month is a pediatric case, a young girl with restlessness keeping her up at night, with symptoms you likely run into in your own practices today- croupy cough, nasal obstruction, aggravations at night keeping everyone up! I chose this case because while many of the old Homeopathic Recorder cases might feel so different from the longer, more involved cases of today, this pediatric case felt like I could have taken it yesterday in my own clinic.
A child of five years, plump with firm flesh, light complexion, has many common symptoms and some unusual ones, e. Tendency to mouth breathing. Nose stopped tight with mucus welling forth. Tonsils not large, uvula long, swollen. Grinding teeth in sleep. Perspiration free, head, neck, hands, feet. Desire sweets, rich foods. Cannot stand soap around nose, causes sneezing.
Tendency to chest colds and asthma. Cough croupy, alternating with sneezing all night long. Wheezing all over chest. Dyspnoea accompanied by yawning. Pulling hair, clapping hands, throwing herself, finally weeping. Itching all over so cannot sleep, very restless. Attacks of pain mid-abdomen, cramp-like, accompanied by nausea and vomiting. Aching legs prevent sleep, wants them rubbed. Itching eyes and nose, keeps rubbing them.
1M: A Homeopath's Podcast
She has milder attacks farther apart, is far less nervous, can sleep all night. Before the call, I previewed some of the main points that came out of our discussion of how to repertorize this case, with suggestions that will hopefully help you in clinic. In the heavily mentalized cases of the west, we can quickly become distracted by the story and emotions.
But we must never forget the physical pathology- what is affected the most, and is of the most important. In a case where there are many symptoms, in order not to over repertorize, focus your rubrics on the deepest pathology. To cover the specific symptom of your patient, choose the specific rubric that may be smaller- a sub-rurbic- but also choose the larger General Rubric.
That way, you will not omit a potential remedy in the sub-rubric. By including the smaller more descriptive rubric- rather than only going with the General- you are more likely to push the smaller remedies to the surface. You will miss some remedies if you only rely on the clinical rubrics… the descriptive symptoms show you the dynamics of what is going on in the person- and that is what we are treating, the dynamic vital action of the patient. Listen closely to the section where Roger talks about crossing three rubrics to give you a dimension to the final rubric that make it like repertorizing in 3D!
Have you ever wondered when to use coryza, catarrh or discharge? Roger clears it up! The idea that an aggravation or amelioration can be - an often should be- looked at beyond face value. Thanks again for listening, and for all you do to support the podcast, sharing it with others and giving me feedback. You can support the podcast with a one-time or regular donation at https: It's a monthly show created by a homeopath, for homeopaths. The first year of episodes each revolve around a different theme, mixing interviews, materia medica, and archival readings.
The second year- beginning in explores all aspects of practice through the lens of failure- how can our mishaps shape our future success? The idea is explored through Interviews, original content and archival readings. Categories alternative medicine general. E An Interview with Karen Allen 0. This is an excerpt from What am i P. Brown Read before the annual meeting of the international hahnemannian association, atlantic city, n.
I am a homoeopathic physician!. In this recording, I allow the essay to stand alone, with no commentary. I also recommend reading it yourself here: E A Conversation with Spero Latchis 0. Does it work for you? How does it compare to how you typically approach MM study? E Helping Children and their Parents with Homeopathy: A Conversation with Desiree Brazelton 0. You can find some of the resources Desiree mentions at: HWB is a volunteer run organization that was founded in Enjoy, and be well, and stay observant. Here are the websites from Carla: The funding site- https: E Everything and More: Links for this episode: I let it go and then I stumbled upon something.
On paper, i draw 3 columns. For the patient- the case: Check it out here: How could Boiron,for example,be able to defend themselves? Show me evidence that any homeopath is even interested in the answers to these questions. Interested enough to do even the simplest kind of honest investigation, and discuss the results. Homeopathy is based on out and out foolishness not necessary to repeat here. Let Boiron sponsor these tests that you insist on. They could front up the money, then step aside and let reputable scientists do the testing.
Let reputable people then assess the results. Boiron have everything to gain, should what they claim turn out to be true. The trouble is -even charlatans of their type know that they have everything to lose should things go against them. Which they know very well would be the case. Responses so far are abysmal. Seems homeopaths do not wish to deal with straight forward questions nor provide any insightful answers:. In any case, the link may provide you with some humour on his attempt to apply science terminology to homeopathy mysticism deep sarcasm on my part.
In my opinion, your questions 2 and 4 can never be of any use to disprove the entire homeopathy. Your last questions is kind of circular reasoning, is it not? But if we want to adhere to the scientific principles, then we have to proof first that it does or does not have an effect. To be clear, I am not making the case here that homeopathy works. I think I understand what you mean: But even then, my 3 questions remain: Your question 5 implies an argument with an unproven assumption, rendering it useless, no? Are you living in the same world as us? The majority of homeopthic remedies are sold in this state Boiron, Booth….
Are you agreeing that this is contradictory to memory of water? Are you agreeing that all those homeopathic sellers are liars? So impurities in water are amplified but still, they do no effect but dust do! So keep running… Then this is what Ernst ask: Then two things, of course you believe that homeopathy work, that or you are entirely clueless about how chemistry, biology and physics. I am not defending any homeopaths or companies, but since I do not have enough facts, I do not think it would be right for me to attack them.
My limited knowledge comes from a student who wrote a thesis about the subject that I supervised. I find the tone of your last paragraph rather insulting. I can assure you that I am much more knowledgeable in chemistry, biology and physics than most people in the academic community. The whole homeopathy debate can simplified like this: DOES homeopathy in certain contexts work? I have a background in clinical research, so I can assure you that I understand these are not conclusive proof that homeopathy works. These articles can be flukes, of poor methodological quality, fraud,… However, for several of these articles this does not seem to be the case.
On the other hand, for several articles proving that homeopathy does not work, substantial errors have been demonstrated. Again, am I completely convinced that it does work? However, people claiming there is not a single double-blind randomized study out there with positive results have not done their homework properly. It is of crucial importance to attempt to answer step 1 without even thinking about step 2! If a scientist is confronted with empirical facts that contradict his belief system, it is the beliefs that should be adapted to fit the facts, and not the other way around.
Leaving step 2 out of the equation, there are enough clinical results that at least suggest that more research is warranted. This is how the subject, with these questions in exactly this order should be investigated. HOW could homeopathy possibly work? Obviously this is where most people get stuck. If the point of question 1 concerns the like cures like principle, then could it not be better formulated instead of asking for a mechanism of 2 random examples? Is the like cures like principle really that impossible?
Is this not exactly what is used in vaccination? A small dose to initiate a counterreaction… Off course I have to admit that when I hear the Berlin wall example, I raise my eyebrows. But the general principle that states that a small stimulus can elicit an opposite reaction of a bigger stimulus is not such an extraordinary thing hormesis. So again, I think question 1 should be formulated a little clearer. If it only concerns those specific examples, then the question is not very useful with regards to the bigger picture.
As already stated, I am very unfamiliar with how homeopathy works in practice. Apart from whether homeopathy works or not, I think it is very likely that most of them do believe in their own work. This does not make them disingenuous. With respect to this question I am curious whether he is familiar with the forementioned hypotheses of Cosic and Del Giudice. If these were true, transfer and storage of specific information for some categories of molecules but not for others could be explained relatively easily… Specific electromagnetic information emitted by molecules and stably stored as coherent oscillations in coherent domains would only occur for linear macro- molecules with semi-conductor characteristics.
I am merely pointing out that this question can not be used to disprove the entire discipline. Which seems to be the goal of the author when reading his last paragraph, even though he claims otherwise in an earlier comment? If a mechanism of action for homeopathy would ever be found and proven I know, for many here even considering this scenario is impossible, but for the sake of thought experiment… , obviously at least some commercial products will be proven to not work, right? For 2 reasons this question simply does not make sense at this point! I am not saying it does, but this is something that should be proven before relying on it to formulate an argument against homeopathy.
- The Williams Guide to Amish Country - 2014 Edition!
- The Will To Deceive.
- Homeopaths of the world: I herewith offer you a deal – please think about it.
- Author Updates.
- Vinton McCabe?
- Household Homeopathy: A Safe and Effective Approach to Wellness for the Whole Family!
- Customers Also Bought Items By;
- War Imminent: The Scrolls of Caed (Chronicles of Thalis Book 1)?
- Healing Echo: Discovering Homeopathic Cell Salt Remedies?
- The Keeper of The Diary;
You admit your limited knowledge, nice, maybe then you can agree that you are wrong. You are this type of guy who act like there is grey area about homepathy. But it is wrong, the thing is investigated, over and over, for years now ! Do you realize that homeopathy claim to be able to cure disease like Ebola, or cancer? If this was true some homeopaths would got a nobel prize about it! Then you are just discarding the TONS of negative one and keep 1 or 2 with small and barely significant effect — aka natural course of the disease — while homeopthy is claimed to be a powerful remedy.
Then i correct you because you are wrong. Hormeosis another concept out of context have nothing to do about how vaccine works. Vaccines use immune system you need proteins called epitopes that are recognized and processed by the immune cells , hormeosis is about sensibility to some toxic material and is dependant on some intracellular mecanism, no need of epitopes and immune system memory. Then you are again wrong, we discard homeopathy for all the absurd axioms, the like cure like principle too. You have to prove it, and you have nothing to prove it.
[Homoeopathic Online Education, David Little] Printable Version
Homeopath talk about memory of water, then WHY do they sell homeopathic remedies as solid granules? This make no sense, even by their own rules! And yes, the vast majority of the homeopthic remedies are sold in this state. As i said, you are either clueless about science, either homeopath both come together usually. I think you are both to be honest. What you know about the goal of the author?
The only goal is to see what homeopathy have to say. Then it annoy you and you discard it, because there is no good answer no answer that fit you to this question… The only real answer is: The best part is that you keep denying it while admitting that you know nothing about production of homeopathic remedies, but in fact, most of the homeopathic remedies are produced the wrong way according to homeo guiderules — and people pay for it. Quark- You should look up whom you are communicating with mate.
He gives his name, unlike you, and it appears to all you are shitting on your own front doorstep. Do yourself a favour mate. He is your Iceland to your England. Then you are also clueless your gloubi-boulga about dark energy is the proof that your like to speak about things that you do not understand, at all , so if you have something interesting to say, go on, otherwise stop embarassing yourself.
Andrew — who are you??? Before smearing your excrements on others for not using their full name, please start with yourself.
No publications, no academic profile, no CV… Nothing that indicates there is a person who has supervised a student thesis. The person using that name writing the nebulous drivel in a comment above seems to be a fake. Both sides will claim their evidence to be the most reliable, while condemning that of their opponents as seriously flawed. As a doctor I am highly trained in medical science. From this standpoint I can fully understand the arguments of those who oppose NHS homeopathy, for I once shared their views. That is until I was persuaded by clinical experience how homeopathic medicine can produce a genuine beneficial treatment effect.
Early in my career a colleague had been trying to convince me of the curative possibilities of homeopathy. Although sceptical, I agreed to go along to a number of talks on the subject given by medically trained homeopaths who impressed me with their clinical knowledge and depth of expressed compassion and concern for patient wellbeing. At one of these events I came away with what was described as a homeopathic First Aid kit. At the time I was working in ENT surgery and late one night I was called to see a patient who had arrived as an emergency with advanced quinsy peritonsillar abscess , a rare and potentially serious complication of tonsillitis.
Saliva steadily dribbled out of his mouth and trismus of his jaw prevented lancing. Both temperature and pulse were raised in a plethoric and toxic patient who had not responded to GP prescribed antibiotics for a week. Purely by chance I had the homeopathic First Aid kit in the pocket of my white coat. With the consent of the patient and that of his partner I popped a Belladonna pill into his mouth, more out of curiosity than conviction, before setting off to prepare a drip and IV antibiotics.
On returning 10 minutes later, I was astounded to see the patient sipping water and talking freely. His pulse and temperature had reverted to near normal, and on examination there was no quinsy to see, just a superficial mucosal red flush. Such an extraordinary, rapid and complete response was curious to say the least. The clinical team, myself included, all expected a relapse but none occurred.
This experience changed my view of homeopathy.
I am now a full-time NHS GP in a group practice with about 9, patients and continue to use homeopathy when appropriate. I have found homeopathic medicines to be particularly effective at the extremes of age. Infants respond very rapidly with the correct remedy, while elderly patients with chronic disease or multiple-pathology can receive safe, effective homeopathy alongside usual care, often resulting in a reduction in the amount conventional drugs they are prescribed.
My positive experiences of using homeopathy in general practice are replicated by other GPs who have found it to be an additional and very useful clinical tool. In Europe, where homeopathy is more widely accepted by the medical profession, doctors who integrate the therapy into their practice report lower prescribing costs and fewer hospital referrals. These are the very things the Department of Health is constantly calling on GPs to deliver.
At a time when the health service is under extreme financial pressure, any therapy which doctors see improving the health of patients and is relatively inexpensive, should be being supported and embraced by the NHS rather than investigated. Quark, I will not respond to your post since it is barely more than insults. What matters is the content of the debate. I can assure you though that I am not a homeopath. Whether you believe that or not is obviously your own choice. I take this as further support of my suspicion that you are misusing a real persons name.
I wonder if that is illegal? That would be a matter of definition. You are certainly not very convincing in your efforts to hide your beliefs. Sure it is easier than be wrong! Then, you put yourself alone in this uncomfortable position by writting outright wrong statements and hope that no one see through. Also, thanks for not adding more absurdity about Cosic and Del Giudice, it would have been too much to bear i fear.
I can not believe you misinterpret my answer this heavily… I am saying exactly what I mean!!! I am not a homeopath: I do not hold the believe that homeopathy works, in every single one of my posts I have stated this several times explicitly!!! I believe in the scientific method, and when I follow this consistently, I can not say that there is no data to back up the claim that homeopathy seems to work in certain contexts.
If I am wrong, then I will be happy to admit that! But instead of shouting that I am wrong, please provide me with an explanation why a specific meta-analysis with positive results should be dismissed? I am not pro homeopathy, but pro science and pro open mindedness. Yes, I understand perfectly that in your opinion my open mindedness goes beyond what you consider reasonable. But this does not give you the right to insult or accuse me! You are accusing me of doing something illegal!?!
Every lead will lead you to me. Accusing me of something illegal not only has nothing to do with the debate, but you simply have not just reason to do this! This is something an honorable person should understand and apologize for. Sadly, your comments come over as an example of someone so open-minded his brains have fallen out. Homeopathy originated, more or less full blown, from the back of the neck of Samuel Hahnemann in In more than years there is not a shred of convincing clinical evidence that homeopathy works beyond placebo effects, disease regression to the mean, and the tendency of many illnesses to cure themselves with time.
Some decades before Hahnemann first published his Organon , James Lind, in the first-ever example of a randomized clinical trials demonstrated unequivocally that citrus fruits cured scurvy. Hormesis has zilch to do with homeopathy: Whatever ridiculous theory homeopathists come up with to explain their miracle dilutions, they need to apply equally to the ethanol used as initial solvent for many of the starting materials and to lactose, used to formulate final dilutions as homeopathic pills, as well as to the water used to make the dilutions.
The burden of proof always lies with the person proposing the hypothesis. But homeopathists have proved repeatedly and for more than 2 centuries that they are not scientists. Over that long period of time they have consistently refused to bow to the weight of scientific evidence. They are therefore working from a faith , just like believers in the many forms of deities humans have invented over the years. Please advise us at what stage you consider we can relegate homeopathy to the state of history. Your lengthy post comes over to the reader as an argument from ignorance.
Homeopathy does not contain elements that can be associated with science — no more than the Anglican church. Any application of the scientific method to supporting the belief system of homeopathy falls flat on prior probability, the same as the application of scientific methods to defining God or to finding the type of cheese the Moon is made of — a long since disproven hypothesis.
HOW could homeopathy ever work. As a molecular biologist, I was definitely the right person to oversee this. The last part of the thesis was an overview of meta-analyses of clinical trails. Having a clinical background, and being involved in clinical trails on vaccination in the past, I was more than capable of judging the quality of these papers.
Granted, I do not know a lot about homeopathy practices, but to judge the quality of clinical studies, that is not what is most crucial, as long as you understand proper experimental design and statistical analysis. They are therefore working from a faith, just like believers in the many forms of deities humans have invented over the years. My experience is that they are not interested in understanding how their medicine works, which is off course very unfortunate. However, although this obviously brings more doubt to the table about their practices, this is not a full proof reason to discard the discipline.
To judge the discipline we need to look at the discipline itself, not at the knowledge of their practitioners. And we do that by in the first place looking at the clinical trails, which DO suggest that at least in some contexts there might be an effect higher than placebo. And no, I am not looking at the single studies who by coincidence show positive results as Quark suggests. These are flukes, and I mentioned explicitly in my previous post that I take this into account.
I look at meta-analyses which are by their very definition executed to get around flukes! And again, I do understand the possibilities why even a meta-analysis could be a false positive. The reverse can be said about the Shang meta-analysis; here several critiques to explain a false negative have been formulated.
AGAIN, I am not convinced that homeopathy works, but purely based on the clinical data, there is reason to warrant more research. I try to empathize with both sides of the debate, and I think you should too: So more research should be performed, even if it is to proof beyond any single shred of doubt that it does not work. With debates like this, where people are being attacked and insults thrown, you will not convince a single homeopath, which should be your goal as a non-believer!!!
I definitely get your question when we should relegate homeopathy to the state of history! We should realize that in order to do this, we have to convince believers with very very hard and abundant data. There are still too many positive results in order to do this! If a proper critique to these studies is not formulated, they will always be used to justify the practice… If any of you does know why these studies are invalid, please enlighten me. But simply saying they have to be fake remember, flukes are out of the question with meta-analyses because you do not believe the results is not adequate!
I understand perfectly what hormesis is. I did not say that vaccination is a form of hormesis, at all! That it only applies to radiation is simply untrue! It is a general concept that addresses a biphasic response of a certain agent. Nevertheless, if the Cosic-Del Giudice hypothesis is correct, then homeopathy is a form of radiation!
This hypothesis states that proteins, RNA and DNA molecules behave as semi-conductors who emit an electromagnetic signal which is the result of electron propagation through the backbone of the molecule. Accordingly to the electron ion interaction pseudopotential of the amino or nucleotide sequence, this emission will be molecule specific. The resonant recognition model predicts and there is empirical data to back this up; inter alia photobiomodulation that specific biological responses can be elicited with these EM signals.
The ONLY reason why I joined this forum was because I wanted to know what the author thought about this hypothesis, since I believe him to be more knowledgeable than myself. If you indeed are a molecular biologist it is rather unfortunate that you fail to comprehend the basic principle of logic and science that states the obvious: Did you miss the lectures on basic research methodology where they talked about hypothesis testing?
You can only try to prove the opposite, which has consistently failed in the case of homeopathy. As a molecular biologist you should also acknowledge the fact that prior probability of a biological effect of pure water, whether shaken or stirred and especially when as is most common evaporated from sugar pills, is astronomically[sic] low. You can do whatever you want with statistics, but if your hypothesis is non sensical it mean nothing — you seems to have hard time about this one —. Hence, this is why thoses clinical trials are worthless here. Hormeosis need that there is a dose in the first place, if there is nothing water there is no hormeosis.
Then, hormeosis is not a stronger effect when you dilute the compound opposed to homeopathy, again. So tell again why you think it is of interest here? Then your story about Cosic-Giudice is Luc Montaignier story over and over… But strangely you are not talking about him? There is no experiment that show that if you put whatever molecule in water, and dilute it ad nauseam, you get an EM imprit of it Benveniste tried, Montaignier tried, and surely less notorious one, nope. Dearest Edzard You really could post that reply I sent in a while back now and allow your readership to see and judge what an arse I am.
Thanks for the ad hominem, and for the promotion of homeopathy over the decades and attracting the interest of Professor Robert Hahn to your research methodologies. Here I can rely on a comment posted on my blog some time ago by someone who can read Swedish thank you Bjorn. He commented about Hahn as follows:. A renowned director of medical research with well over publications on anesthesia and intensive care and 16 graduated PhD students under his mentorship, who has been leading a life on the side, blogging and writing about spiritualism, and alternative medicine and now ventures on a public crusade for resurrecting the failing realm of homeopathy!?!
Hahn is evidently deeply religious and there is the usual, unmistakably narcissistic aura over his writings and sayings. He is religiously confident that there is more to this world than what can be measured and sensed. In effect, he seems to believe that homeopathy as well as alternative medical methods in general must work because there are people who say they have experienced it and denying the possibility is akin to heresy not his wording but the essence of his writing.
He has a serious issue with skeptics and goes on at length about how they are dishonest bluffers[sic] who willfully cherry-pick and misinterpret evidence to fit their preconceived beliefs. He feels that desperate patients should generally be allowed the chance that alternative methods may offer. He believes firmly in former-life memories, including his own, which he claims he has found verification for in an ancient Italian parchment.
He also points to individual research like this as credible proof of the biologic effect of remedies. He somewhat surprisingly denies recommending homeopathy despite being convinced of its effect and maintains that he wants better, more problem oriented and disease specific studies to clarify its applicability. There I was, a conventional GP trainee when my trainer took me to the cafe at Yeovil hospital where I met the recently appointed professor of Complementary Medicine at Exeter University…and was smitten…..
I remember Yeovil but not you. Seems you chose to swallow it all though. I already do, darling, as a consulting full time clinical doctor in the NHS. When will you start demonstrating any evidence that you can be a true scientist, rather than what appears to be a broken record repetitive predictable dull mudslinger?
Forgive me if I am wrong? To first do an ad hominem on Professor Hahn, then mention his extensive formal merits is a sad and predictable act and an action of last resort in the face of challenging scientific debate. It is also abusive. Do you know about the dynamics of abusers and abused and the temporal consequences of issues being unaddressed which lead to projection and persistence of torment by those unable to safely disclose?
I have never seen a comment on this blog I would regard as abusive. There are hostile comments, ad hominems usually in response to persistent stupidity , sarcastic comments and irony, but not abuse. Look to places like YouTube and Twitter for truly abusive comments. He has occasionally posted exceptions when comments are abusive to himself , but the foul language, threats of assault and death, and truly abusive ad hominems that characterize some websites are thankfully missing here. I sincerely hope that you will not get a PTSD because of me. But you know, if people like you would stop spew non sense, it would help a lot too.
Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Click here for a comprehensive list of recent comments.
Homeopaths of the world: I herewith offer you a deal — please think about it. Published Monday 20 June How does a nano-particle of coffee, for instance, affect the sleep centre in the brain to make the patient sleep? Or how does a nano-particle of the Berlin Wall or a duck liver affect anything at all in the human body? The liquid subsequently evaporates. How is it that the information retained in the liquid does not evaporate with the diluent?
In fact, a liquid C12 remedy most certainly contains dimensions more impurities than stock. These impurities have, of course, also been vigorously shaken, i. Would this not necessitate a process where only some molecules in the diluent are agitated, while all the rest remain absolutely still? Some stock used in homeopathy is insoluble for instance Berlin Wall. I have granted you that potentisation works in the way you think. But how is information transferred from one solid material to another?
Everything we drink is based on water containing molecules that have been inadvertently potentised in nature a million times and therefore should have hugely powerful effects on our bodies. Posted in alternative medicine , bogus claims , conflict of interest , critical thinking , homeopathy , pseudo-science. Colin on Monday 20 June at Edzard on Monday 20 June at Egger on Thursday 23 June at Pete Attkins on Monday 20 June at Author information Abstract The efficacy of classic homeopathic therapy is scientifically not well proven.
The long-term effects of homeopathic treatment of chronic headaches: Author information Abstract Little is known about the long-term effects of homeopathic treatment. Thank you for brining this discussion to a close. Alan Henness on Monday 20 June at Colin on Tuesday 21 June at Alan Henness on Tuesday 21 June at My two questions still stand.
How this affect the conclusions of individual papers? Their names does not apper on the paper? In the pseudodebunk of Gaylard? No, in debunking to Adrian Gaylard they appear: