Creating Waves of Awareness
Single Remedy vs Combinations
My question is if only one similimum is required for cure then how these doctors are getting success?
Tags: Single, combination, community, homeopathy, remedy, world
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Madhu Azad on -
i mean one similimum at a time is required and not 2 or 3 medicines...
if proving of these combinations be done then can we safely prescibe these medicines??
-
Permalink Reply by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj. on -
The only way to do provings with combinations is as follows:
If I want to mix remedies, I do so in the crude and from that mix I produce a single remedy. Thus we create a single tincture out of the different tinctures of the components. From this mixture we can produce the potencies. Then we get an entity that has features of all the components, but with its own unique character. Much like Causticum and Hepar sulphuris calcarea, which are Hahnemann's. I take my cues from him and his direct disciples and some later homoeopaths that follow him and from none else. He spent 50 years inventing and perfecting this great healing art. He sorted it all out for us.
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. chandrakant bhapkar on -
that is what homoeopathy is based on 'proving'. if those combination has some base then it is safe to priscribe. we not only make the diseases more complecated but putting the human race in dengerous modeby using those combination, where there is no return.
-
Permalink Reply by DR. Sushil Bahl on -
Opinions differ when it come to combinations and patent medicines. Honestly, all the opinions are belief based, so no one can conclude for sure. Since combination medicines are easy to prescribe, so there can be a natural tendency to this short cut, as it doesn't involve repertorization, study of MM or individualization, for selection of medicine.
Also the major concern: None of the combinations/patent had been proved,as an entity, so how can we claim that these are homoeopathic medicines.Where is the principle of likes cure likes involved!
More over it may at the most act as palliative, only and therefore, is contrary to the second aphorism – “The highest ideal of cure is rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of health, or removal and annihiliation of the disease in its whole extent, in the shortest, most reliable and most harmless way, on easily comprehensible principles.“
I feel we must conduct in-depth studied on combinations, to prove its action as an entity.
-
Permalink Reply by Madhu Azad on
-
some combinations are being clinically proved..is there any harm in prescribing them??
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. chandrakant bhapkar on
-
Hahnemann experimented on himself and others for several years before using remedies on patients. His experiments did not initially consist of giving remedies to the sick, because he thought that the most similar remedy, by virtue of its ability to induce symptoms similar to the disease itself, would make it impossible to determine which symptoms came from the remedy and which from the disease itself. Therefore, sick people were excluded from these experiments. The method used for determining which remedies were suitable for specific diseases was called proving, after the original German word Prüfung, meaning "test". A homeopathic proving is the method by which the profile of a homeopathic remedy is determined.
At first Hahnemann used material doses for provings, but he later advocated proving with remedies at a 30C dilution, and most modern provings are carried out using ultradilute remedies in which it is highly unlikely that any of the original molecules remain. During the proving process, Hahnemann administered remedies to healthy volunteers, and the resulting symptoms were compiled by observers into a drug picture. The volunteers were observed for months at a time and made to keep extensive journals detailing all of their symptoms at specific times throughout the day. They were forbidden from consuming coffee, tea, spices, or wine for the duration of the experiment; playing chess was also prohibited because Hahnemann considered it to be "too exciting", though they were allowed to drink beer and encouraged to exercise in moderation. After the experiments were over, Hahnemann made the volunteers take an oath swearing that what they reported in their journals was the truth, at which time he would interrogate them extensively concerning their symptoms.
Provings have been described as important in the development of the clinical trial, due to their early use of simple control groups, systematic and quantitative procedures, and some of the first application of statistics in medicine. The lengthy records of self-experimentation by homeopaths have occasionally proven useful in the development of modern drugs: For example, evidence that nitroglycerin might be useful as a treatment for angina was discovered by looking through homeopathic provings, though homeopaths themselves never used it for that purpose at that time. The first recorded provings were published by Hahnemann in his 1796 Essay on a New Principle. His Fragmenta de Viribus (1805)[84] contained the results of 27 provings, and his 1810 Materia Medica Pura contained 65. For James Tyler Kent's 1905 Lectures on Homoeopathic Materia Medica, 217 remedies underwent provings and newer substances are continually added to contemporary versions.
if combination preparations follow this type of proving which is done by hahnemann. then we r ready to use combination
-
Permalink Reply by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj. on
-
The Organon is not based on opinions. It is based on pure experiment. So if we follow the Organon, all speculation becomes redundant.
Indeed none of the mixopathic "remedies" are true remedies, because they have not been proven. The Law of Similars does not apply to them, because of this lack of proving. Above in a previous post I have given the means to conduct provings with combinations, provided we first produce a single tincture from which the potencies to prove are made. Then it turns into a simplex and mixopathy does not come into the picture at all.
So if we think that for instance we should or could have a universal remedy for scarlet fever, we ought to mix all the tinctures of the remedies that cover it, with the possible exclusion of the inimicals. From this mixture of tinctures we make a single remedy, which by its very nature as a mix has components of all and its own unique character.
Thus we may obtain remedies that cure most if not all of the cases before us. We may also discover they do not. It could truly simplify the practise of homoeopathy and thus help us in better capacity for treatment. It could also produce the exact opposite and give us only more remedies to cure that particular state before us.
-
Permalink Reply by DR. Sushil Bahl on
-
Dr. Madhu, the fundamental question is not whether these combination medicines are providing relief or not.The question is whether there is any homoeopathic principles of prescribing is involved or not. Day in and day out, various combinations are being prescribed by Allopathic Doctors and more or less their patients are also satisfied, under normal circumstances. So what is difference between these two prescriptions, except that one is prescribed by Allopath and another by a Homoeopath.
A medicine does neither become Allopathic or Homoeopathic by dint of its name, nor according to the name of the manufacturer or even the professional label of the prescriber.
In fact a drug becomes a medicine when made suitable for prescription. A medicine becomes a remedy, when applied against a particular diseased condition.
A remedy becomes Homoeopathic only when applied on the basis of symptom similarity. Any remedy prescribed on any other basis or principles, can be any thing, other than Homoeopathic medicine.
-
Permalink Reply by Madhu Azad on
-
I got your point. You mean when the medicine is not homeopathically prescribed it won't do much help to the patient and law of similars is lost. It won't help in cure and just palliate or suppress the condition...thanx sir 4 your replies.
-
Permalink Reply by Debby Bruck on -
If we had a "LIKE" button, I would click it for your words here Dr Sushil.
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. Wequar Ali Khan on -
Dear Dr Sushil, i do agree with your views fully, "Mixopathy" must undergo the microscope of Organon, only then it reaches the status of a true homeopathic medicine.
Dr Jagat,s views also holds water.
These are hard times for Hahnemanian homeopathy.But it has survived on its own merits.
-
Permalink Reply by H/Dr Muhammad BiLAL HAMZA on -
dear.dr .saleem.. i think u not reads homeopathy philiosophy..and not understand it..therefore your comment on that combination result is good, and alternate remedy using is good.
Please read Organon of Medicine and understand it.
© 2013 Created by Debby Bruck.
