≡ ▼
ABC Homeopathy Forum

 

 

Similar posts:

Croaking and deep sound in morning, evening and night time 1Back pain in morning & evening 3

 

The ABC Homeopathy Forum

One medicine in morning and another in the evening.

For curiosity sake, I was reviewing the success rate of such prescriptions on this forum and elsewhere too.

I hardly find any chronic cases that have been resolved successfully.

However, I find that patients are expressing relief sometimes in acute cases with such prescriptions.

I invite a debate on my observations, from all my colleague homeopaths.
 
  gavinimurthy on 2016-09-08
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
In case I missed, please post the url of any chronic case, successfully treated with such prescriptions here.
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
After reading many books both old and new including the latest, I am literally at the cross roads.

Homeopathy is amenable for many many interpretetions and every author tries to support his point of view.

Some seem logical, some probable, some out right outlandish, and some doubtful.

I used to be very vehement in criticising prescriptions that deviate from the strict Hannemanian homeopathy.

At some point of time I started pondering over the fact that there are many variations in the way people prescribe and all claim some success..can't deny that as otherwise they won't be in buisiness..when I say buisiness that includes those who do it as a hobby without expecting any rewards.

Hahn proposed a way to follow in Organon. It is based on his perception. Some people find it very difficult to follow it..fail when they try to do so and looked for alternatives.

Some tried combinations, some tried poly pharmacy, some use only mentals, some use sensations, some use the periodic table, some use dreams and some even tried to standardise the therapy based on the disease name.
There are many many variations.

All of them claim they benefitted atleast some of the patients. All of them claim no patient is worse because of their treatment.

I was worried about the suppession that may ensure because of wrong methods. I am not so sure now. I tend to believe now that it is difficult to suppress with homeopathic remedies.

So I stopped criticising others and read everybody with a open mind. May be five years from now (when I retire from my present job) my thinking may crystallise one way or the other or I may accept all the possibilities. Who knows? :-)

*******

From earlier posts..2010 sept 28
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
The above was a post I made almost six years ago. Only a few of the present prescribers know about the background for that post.

Any way, as promised then, I kept quiet, for almost six years. But never lost touch with contemporary homeopathic practices.

I no longer am a supporter of die hard classical homeopathy. Now I am trying to find out which deviations from classical homeopathy are working and which are not.

This thread is a part of that quest.
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
Yes, rightly said, classical homeopathy is a metallic nut to crack for several homeopaths. Moreover, Dr. Hahnemann's ocncepts may not be understood as were his by even supports of classical homeopathy.

Though I am a supporter of classical Homeopathy, I can't say some diversions are not required at least in some cases.

But I differ in opinion about suppression from homeoapthy. Out of my experience what I have learnt is it is rather easy to suppress with homeopathy and sadly, I would say majority of homeoapths are doing this day in and day out albeit, knowingly or unknowingly.

My observation is that most homeopaths think mere disappearance of the symptoms is cure which is not the fact.
Unfortunately, I have seen scarely few Homeoapths bothering about Hering's laws of cure after prescribing which is essential to confirm if the prescription is correct and will cure.

One should check this and if the progress after prescription doesn't comply with the Hering's law of cure then one should review the case and goe for second precription without delay.
 
DrKulkarni 7 years ago
Please read this.

https://instituteforhomoeopathicmedicine.wordpress.com/2016/...

You may comment on this at your convenience.
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
Thanks Dr. Murthy for directing me to this article.

It's a good article, good research work. There are three main points I could extract from this article.

1. So called "Hering's laws of cure" can't be called laws but rules (because of dictionery meaning).
2. These rules are not exactly written in Hering's writings as they are presented now and hence they are actually modified versions of original Hahnemann's observations.
3. Whether each of 5 laws / rules could be varified in each recovering case.

My comments:

1. Whether you call it law or rule it's not important for us. That's more of a dictionary and grammer related issue. Those interested may even debate on it. But for me as a practicing homeoapth what is important is whether that are useful and applicable. They are the tools for homeopath to varify effects of prescription thus helping in stadardizing the the practice & follow up.

2. Again it is not important to debate on who was the original proposed of these rules; may it be Hahnemann or Hering their utility wouldn't change. If they are useful they will remain so. We follower of Homeopathy need useful tools for practice. To come to the basic point entire homeopathy is based on the eternal foundations laid by the Hahnemann. No one has been able to challange and disprove anything nor anyone has been add anything new. Theories proposed by right from Hering, Kent, till contemporary Homeopaths are just modified versions and diversions of originally Hahnemann's concepts.

3. In my last post I had mentioned it is not necessary that Hahnemann's concepts are perceived the way he did. E.g. he told one single dose of correctly selected remedy is sufficient to bring about the restoration of health as proposed, he also told we can not expect without considering the disposition of the patient for prescription one can't expect a perfect cure, so on & so forth. But how may homeopaths are following all his recommendations? Most wouldn't because homeopathy is not as easy as 1...2...3... It requires very creative mind. That's why homeopathy is also known as an art and art is not everyone's cup of tea. Just because we fail to understand or find his proposals in our practice we can't deny them. I know a reknowened homeopath of India who said in one of the seminars "There is nothing like Miasms!" Whereas, Hahnemann himself said, "discovery of Homeopathy is not as important as discovery of miasms without which homeopathy would be incomplete."

It is not necessary that all 5 rules must be demonstrable in same case. Also one should understand the inner meaning of what he might have said. In whichever words he said it he meant that more important disease should be addressed first after the prescription. If there is some heart block or bleeding and the remedy given is healing the acne of the patients first that's a misfire for sure. This theory should nit be applied to the chill, fever and sweating as the author mentions in his article. They are components of the same disease / disorder.
Once I was dealing with case of diabetes. After prescription, the sugar levels came almost to normal but patient developed sciatica soon. Patient was happy for curing(?) his diabetes and glad to take TT for his new found sciatica. Even I could have been happy for getting a repeat patient. But I was not. I knew his diabetes was suppressed and the illness has attacked nerve which is more important tissue than endocrines. Cure(?) had taken a reverse direction. I told him, I will relieve his sciatica but his diabetes would return and I need to handle it again. I could finally do as I said by reviewing case and prescriptions. In this case I would have been happy to see joint / muscle pains or eruptions to come while his sugar reduced. That would comply with what laws of cure state.

Well, I can write pages on this but I think that's enough to convey what I mean. In a nutshell, the laws/rules of the cure are very helpful tools for homeopaths in restoring health as proposed by Master.
 
DrKulkarni 7 years ago
I feel we can think that the remedy/remedies are working well, if the direction of cure is from more important organs to less important organs.
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
I am not a doctor. Call me plain Murthy. :-)
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
Wow!
That's interesting! In spite of no academic background i can see you have made great progress in accumulating knowledge of homeopathy.

Hats off!
 
DrKulkarni 7 years ago
Vithoulkus

The practice of giving combinations of remedies obviously violates all of the fundamental laws of homeopathy - and common sense as well. Nevertheless, it is common practice in some parts of the world. Some homeopaths take a case, cannot see a medicine covering the totality of symptoms, and so they create a combination of medicines, each of which (according to their estimation) covers a fragment of the case. To make matters worse, it is common practice in such circles to mix potency levels as well, and even to give certain remedies at one time of day and others at other times of day. As the reader of this book now knows very well, the process of homeopathy is to find the remedy with the vibrational frequency most closely matching the resonant frequency of the defense mechanism of the patient. Combination prescribing, in this context, would be analogous to trying to create harmony by tuning six different radios to separate stations simultaneously in the hopes of creating a symphony.

Such practice can only create complete chaos, and indeed some of the most pitiable cases in homeopathic practice are those who have undergone years of such chaotic treatment. The defense mechanism of such patients is so disturbed that it is often completely impossible to restore their health to even the level prior to such prescribing, let alone bring about a cure.

For a conscientious and knowledgeable homeopath, combination prescribing can only be forefully and vociferously deplored. Even the attitude, "Well, we have our way and they have theirs," is insufficient, because such chaotic prescribing can only contribute to the ruination of the reputation of homeopathy. If one is conscientiously attempting to utilize a therapy based on energies beyond ordinary perception, then one must necessarily conform very strictly to the specific and refined laws governing the use of such energies.
 
gavinimurthy 7 years ago
True, combination prescribing, in Homeopathy has never justified any of it's principles but only one that the inability of the prescribe to find and similimum and that how little they trust their own profession.

The justification of "that's my way", "that's my experience", etc. can never be any reason apt enough to practice and violate very principles of homeopathy against which Dr.Hahnemann has clearly warned.
 
DrKulkarni 7 years ago

Post ReplyTo post a reply, you must first LOG ON or Register

 

Important
Information given in this forum is given by way of exchange of views only, and those views are not necessarily those of ABC Homeopathy. It is not to be treated as a medical diagnosis or prescription, and should not be used as a substitute for a consultation with a qualified homeopath or physician. It is possible that advice given here may be dangerous, and you should make your own checks that it is safe. If symptoms persist, seek professional medical attention. Bear in mind that even minor symptoms can be a sign of a more serious underlying condition, and a timely diagnosis by your doctor could save your life.