Creating Waves of Awareness
FURTHER DISCUSSIONS ON GRAY AREAS IN HOMEOTHERAPEUTIC
When I wrote “Gray Areas In Homeotherapeutic” I expected an intensive discussion, from the senior and serious clinicians, because the problems dealt in that article were of daily occurrence in clinical practice of homeopathy. To my dismay the response was meager; and what scant response that I got was in the vein as if I had committed some sacrilege against homeopathy. Then I wrote a sequel to that article. Now after a long time Dr. Ranga Sai has dealt with those difficulties in a matter of fact way. I’m thankful to him for that. At least he has discussed the problem in a befitting manner. For the benefit of all I am answering to Dr. Sai in the form of third blog, on the same topic.
a) I wrote in that article that some medicines are prescribed without paying heed to their known modalities; and the example that I gave was of Hep.Sulph. It is one of the coldest remedies of the materia medica; but when used to abort a pre-suppuration furuncle or boil, it is given in a very high potency. e.g. 1M or 10M. to any patient irrespective of his being a cold or a warm patient. According to Dr. Sai modalities are ‘not a major deterrent if you are giving the remedies in lower scale.’ According to him pathogenetically the pathology should match. But we were talking about aborting the suppurative process. Hep.Sulph, in lower potencies, promote suppuration, and discharges the pus. Now the promotion of suppuration was in Hep.Sulph’s pathogenesis, but the abortion of suppuration, with high potencies, was a clinical deduction, or a practical finding.
Dr. Sai says, ‘but our purpose is to address WHY these boils are coming in the first place.’ Dear Doctor, this Why is a very weighty and a gigantic question, not to be dealt with by you or me. We can’t lift that rock, or the glacier, of which it is a small tip. These recurring boils, say, are in a diabetic patient, of some 15 years’ standing, with all the complications, incidental to such cases; e.g. hypertension, hypertrophy of the heart, arthritis and many many other minor or major complaints; and the patient is taking some 8 to 10 different medicines, every day for as many years. (I’ve discussed such situations in my pervious blogs). So Doctor, don’t think of such a feat. We can’t do much by way of cure. They have surpassed that stage. No one should dare to destabilize such a patient. Only try to mend the nook and corners of such cases. Your ‘cure enthusiasm’ won’t work here. These cases are beyond cure. You will find all the miasms jumbled up in such cases, beyond your power of disentangling them. You cannot even delve to the level of miasmata because a powerful artificial drug-miasm keeps you from reaching there. These are hugely burdened cases with drug toxins. Theoretically speaking if you ever succeed in separating individual miasms, you could not tell one from the other. Every single miasm would be camouflaged by the drug miasm. So ubiquitous is the drug miasm! Without de-toxicating the system from the drug effects, which is well nigh impossible, you cannot think of curing such a case.
These cases are for palliation only. Sometimes you address a skin problem, sometimes frozen shoulder or any other arthritic complaint. Sometimes you are treating some dyspeptic symptoms, sometimes a toothache. You can go on serving them in a piecemeal fashion. In this way the patient will be divided between you and the allopath. You can go on taking one complaint after another till you will feel that, for most of the daily complaints, the patient is under you. You are also doing the palliation; but your palliation is far superior to the allopath; and the patient feels more comfortable. .
c)Your idea of repeating the same medicine, before the next menstrual cycle, but in a higher potency, seems to be a sane idea, but not without trepidation, unless we find it working. If the repetition complicates the case, you’ll curse your stars for repeating it. What will be the result of repetition, who can tell?
d) Your recommendation for using higher potencies for children, a la Dr. Borland, because, as you say, they are safer. According to your dictum “the higher the potency, the safer it becomes.” The cause for this, according to you is that higher potencies have “little of the material quantity.” You must be knowing that the question of ‘material’ ends when the Avogadro’s number is reached. Even in the 15th. C potency (let alone the 30, 200, 1M, etc.) there is no material of the drug is left. For further discussion I’ll give you the trouble to read my blog on ‘Sensitivity problem’. Here you adduced another dictum, i.e. ‘greater the susceptibility, higher the potency,’ ‘that’s so simple,’ you say. But it’s not that simple, I say, and refer you again to the same blog. Your way of dealing with higher potencies gives an impression as if higher potencies are superficial as compared with the low ones. The reality is vice versa. After crossing the Avogadro’s limit the medicine acquires another level of reaction, which cannot be materially measured.
e) About the ‘asymptomatic pathology,’ I’ll request you to read more to broaden your horizon. You’ll get a plethora of information, and much food for rumination.
g) In habitual abortion the problem is not so much of the constitution etc. of the patient, as it is to get the live child in the lap of the mother. Out of thirty cases, e.g. if you get positive results in one case, allopathy, with its modern gynecological advances and techniques, can succeed in twenty cases; even more, if the patients cooperate and bear the expenses. One such case was also alluded to in one of my blogs.
Dr. Sai began his post with the sentence: ‘Hope my answers clarify your doubts.’ Please Doctor they were not my doubts, but the enumeration of ‘some’ of the practical difficulties that every homeopath encounters in his daily clinical practice.
Dr. M. A. Usmani Jan. 16, 2010
Now I reproduce Dr. Sai’s above post for readers ready reference.
Hope my answers clarify your doubts.
a) If boils and furuncles are bothering the patient, you may prescribe remedies to abort them. Now, a remedy would still be servicable to a given symptom if the symptom has its counterpart in the pathogenesis of that specific drug. Thermal are not a major deterrent if you are giving the remedies in lower scale.
More over there are many more remedies for carbuncles and boils, which are equally effective in serving the condition, which you would want to consider.
But, our purpose is to address why these boils are coming in the first place. Any remedy prescribed on the pathological level would remove them but finding the right remedy to address the deeper issue would save you a lot of time and pain to the patient by annihilating them altogether.
b) Hahnemann gives you a good guide line for repetition, as long as the symptom persists and has a similar in the remedy, you may repeat. But before repetition you need to rule if there is any change in the symptoms. I have practically repeated Ars alb 10M at intervals of 10 mins, 4 repetitions , in a case of status asthmaticus, when ars. alb. was the indicated medicine and the patient recovered very beautifully after the 3rd rep. This was later followed by a deeper acting constitutional which removed the process altogether... he hasn't experienced asthma since 6 years. So if you think the patient needs a repetion because the discharge is slower... you may ( you may dynamize every subsequent dose if you are scared of any aggravation ).
c) You may repeat the same medicine before a menstrual cycle, which had serviced before the cycle too, if the potency you are gonna give is higher than the previous one. It would be ideal if you can wait for the coming cycle too and asses the patient.
d)Children often would require a higher potency. The selection is soundly based on the fundamentals of homeopathy and not on any guess work or speculation.
The higher the potency , the safer it becomes. As there is very little of the material quantity and vice versa. The dose is so minute in the higher potency that even if prescribed wrong, it would not lead to any aggravation. But we would not want to prescribe wrong one isn't it Dr.?
As you mentioned children are sensitive, hence they are more susceptible. Greater the susceptibility, higher the potency. That's so simple.
e)If the patient is asymptomatic, that in itself is a symtom ! If looked in the right light.
Ofcourse you may give any medicine on pure pathological basis but there would be some significant landmarks in the past medical history of the patient, which may guide you further.
We don't get fruits unless there is a tree. So ... feel and appreciate the tree. You will then understand more about the seed, the soil and the environs in which this diseased tree is growing.
f) The dribbling of urine is again like above. The principles essentially remain the same.
g) Habitual abortions do have remedies in homeopathy. The authors of past would have lacked instruments to measure or identify the cause in terms of pathology, but they surely had much deeper and significant works in this area. If you give a remedy which would cover this tendency of the women, she would never require a histamine shot.
You may read Uterine Therapeutics by Minton,
Textbook of Gynecology and Hom. therapuetics by A. Cowperthwaite,
Homeopathy in Obstetrics & Pediatrics by H. N Guernsey.
As i have earlier mentioned, selection of potency and repetition has sound principles behind them. Unfortunately this understanding has not been transferred by all the teachers to the students effectively.
Potentiation and the Infinitesimal Dose
The Drug Potential
by Stuart Close would help you master a lot in these areas of repetition and potency.
Hope this answers your queries.
I am open for clarification if any.
Copyright 2011/All rights reserved © Dr Usmani
Contact author for permission to use