New Publication
Homeopathy in Intensive Care
and Emergency Medicine
Homeopathy First Magazine
Best Vitamin C Drink 
Learn More With Caralyn 


Homeopathy World Community

Creating Waves of Awareness

The Real Deal

What I see is needed is not to bring in all this newfangled stuff to make a name for ourselves but to work at what we have and bring that to a more scientific footing.

That requires 3 things:

1. Get rid of the alphabetical arrangement of MM and arrange the remedies by similarity, as matching the disease syndromes.

2. Get rid of the silly head to foot schema and organise MM according to the timeline and sequence of development of symptoms, to reflect those disease syndromes.

3. Rearrange the repertory, to reflect the MM according to that timeline and sequence.

Once we have accomplished that, we have a true scientific footing for homoeopathy and the law of similars cannot be denied nor refuted. My motto is KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid!

All this techno babble is an attempt to imitate the complicated allopathic ideas, while signifying nothing but the adage that complication is a sign of ignorance.

My tongue is sharp and my pen is mightier than the sword. I speak truth to power and shall not cower down in supplication to the ruling paradigm or the attempts to water down homoeopathy with allopathic ideas and thinking.

Truth is self-evident and all attempts at destroying will not succeed for as long as I have breath in me. While I admire the ideas that some may bring forward, I see them mostly as attempts at system building.

Homoeopathy reflects Nature and should remain natural and be brought closer to that ideal. I have given some examples of what we need to do, to make it "scientific", which word today is but an oxymoron.

We are beginning to feel the attempt to rob us of our power. To say it is the loss implicates it is already too late and we are fighting a rearguard battle. I am the one here who is the militant and I go in full frontal attack on anyone seeking to disparage my beloved homoeopathy. OEN is one website where we have won the two battles they wanted to wage with us.

The only way to win is to rally the troops - your client base. They are running in the 100 million in europe and 3.5 billion worldwide. there are 3 million CAM practitioners in the world, as opposed to 1 million doctors. All we need to do, is jointly confront them. To me, TCM and Ayurveda are our allies, but the combo prescriber is the enemy, because he has succumbed to allopathic thinking and caters to the allopaths in the hope of greater recognition.

We don't need their recognition. We need to be their replacement.

To use their terminology, their types of tests, their use of language, is to admit we have to succumb to them. We need not to convince them, but the public. We need to make the public aware they can vote out, the politicians that cater to Big Pharma and vote in, those that cater to the people.

Again, we need to organise MM so that it reflects the reality of the disease syndrome and it can no longer be denied. Instead, colleagues insist we should use materials science, chemistry, bio-chemistry and nano-technology to show the denialists that we are right. I say, no matter how much you show them, they will still deny it.

If you are a grocer, the supermarket is the enemy and the only way you stay in business is to convince the consumer that your products are better, your price lower and your service supreme. You will never convince the supermarket of that, however much you try. We are not dependent on the supermarket, but on the consumers.

Views: 42

Comment by Debby Bruck on June 6, 2010 at 6:59pm
Ask Kavi, "A penny for your thoughts?" And he'll give you the whole dime. Not counting for inflation today. We are in a type of combat with those who want to eliminate healthcare freedom and particularly homeopathic care, especially in certain countries.

The rally cry must be to band together. Although I don't discount those who work in many other forms of healing, I'm not happy about garnishing the title 'homeopathy' for modes of research and healing that do not conform to the basic guiding principles as set down in Hahnemann's Organon. You can't call a cat a dog just because it has fur and a tail. Don't confuse the public and other practitioners what is truly homeopathic at the source.

Do your own thing, but give it a different name. You make it up, since you are making new rules to the concoctions and blends. Red is red, blue is blue, but when you mix them together you get purple.

As Forest Gump said, "That's all I have to say about that."
Comment by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj. on June 6, 2010 at 7:21pm
I call them TCM and Ayurveda, which is basically the only other forms of practice that I accept. All the rest to me is hogwash, which calls itself healing but dies not know the first principles of disease, to know what healing is.
I like purple, but shall not wash the blues and reds together to obtain it, since variety is the spice of life.

Deb, you are right.

An elephant can be identified as a sunflower - both have long stems. The camel is indistinguishable from the peanut - if only the humps are considered. Those schooled in logic would not be satisfied with the peanut and camel identification. You want at least to have some accessory confirmation - that both can live long without water, for instance.

So I have taken those two modalities as our allies. TCM and Ayurveda have more practitioners and are built on a sound footing. They are also sufficiently different from homoeopathy to never be taken for it. Unlike some other forms of money-making off the sick.
Comment by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj. on June 6, 2010 at 8:29pm
Now let me return to those 3 points I made at the beginning of this blog and show you what I mean.

How to Organise Materia Medica

I was asked the following question by someone about this idea:
But aren't you moving towards an allopathic viewpoint - progression of disease, labelling of disease etc.?

Here is my answer:

As you say, the prodrome is also a deviation from health and is separated in time from the symptoms that follow. That is where the timeline and sequence already begin and where you can determine what case of disease has come before you. However, when the patient comes to us, he comes with an end-result - he is sick. The first question we generally ask is "how did this start?" Hahnemann says:

5. "In
every case of disease the particulars of the exiting cause of an
acute disease are of importance. In chronic cases, the most
significant points in the history enable the physician to discover
its fundamental cause."

Hahnemann speaks here about cases of disease. And the materia medica is full of diseases - thyphoid, scarlet fever, dysentery, dysmenorrhoea and so forth are all diseases, which Hahnemann says that we should take note of in their particulars. The particulars denote also the timeline and sequence of development. The significant points in the history involves a sequential development along a timeline, so I do not see at all how I suddenly have become allopathic, when I adhere to it in setting up materia medica. MM should be a reflection of the reality of disease and not of what we think should be cured in any particular case that comes our way. We cure cases of disease and not cases of people. Hahnemann also says:

6. "Unprejudiced
observation is directed at all the changes in health of the mind,
emotions and body. These are clearly visible or revealed by further
examination. He notices only the deviation of health. The sensations
of the patient, those noticed by his relatives and the observations
of the physician are all that needs to be noted. All these
perceptible signs present the disease in its whole extent and form a
true picture of the disease."

To me the deviation of health is just as much in the sequence in which the symptoms appear, which are only the deviations from health. They are ALL the changes, so the timeline and sequence cannot even be left out, in favour of the Kentian approach of treating the person and not his disease. The deviation of health in the provings was also recorded, inclusive of the time at which they occurred. That alone says that the time is of utmost importance, otherwise Hahnemann would have not included these times in his Materia Medica Pura and the CD. TF Allen did the same and only after they had left, were they left out in further MMs written by others. Instead of following the timeline and sequence, the head to foot schema was devised, because many remedies are applicable in several different diseases. We need to therefore separate the symptoms as well, lest we become repetitious and mention the full pathology of Belladonna in teething pains, rubella and hydrophobia, to name a few diseases that Belladonna can cure.
Comment by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj. on June 6, 2010 at 10:45pm
Then came the next question.

So how would you lay out a time line sequence?
Pick a disease or situation and give an example please

That timeline is already there in the MM.

But take for instance scarlet fever.
It begins with general feeling of malaise, in most cases. Then comes the fever, the rash and the thirst, and all the rest. Sometimes the rash comes first, then the thirst, then the fever. Sometimes the thirst comes first, then the fever, then the rash. Sometimes the rash comes first, then the thirst, then the fever. Sometimes the thirst comes first, then the fever, then the rash. sometimes the fever is high and sometimes there hardly is any. Sometimes the rash is dark red, sometimes light. Sometimes the rash is strong and covers a large part of the body and sometimes it is hardly visible. Sometimes there are complications such as encephalitis and sometimes none at all.

Now if you look at the repertory in the back of Boericke, you have about 28 remedies that cover scarlet fever. Funny thing is that the repertory mentions diseases and groups those remedies that cover it together.

In that group you find remedies for any shade of scarlet fever, which appears differently, with a slightly different timeline and sequence, in each different constitution. We know there are different kinds of scarlet fever, some of which carry more danger than others. Any allopathically schooled doctor can tell you the same and can tell the difference.

Now you go back to Allen's and Hahnemann's MM and you discover in those remedies (which are simply records of provings) the times that the symptoms developed (20 hours after; 4 hours after; 25 minutes after taking the remedy).

Those times of development are haphazard, because the organisation in head to foot is haphazard. But if you would pick out those symptoms and put them in the right sequence from the moment of taking the remedy, you would get both sequence and development according to what you see in the patient. You would immediately know that this is a case of scarlet fever and not measles or mumps.

Let me enumerate the advantages:

1. It would also be a very good way to make those doctors accept homoeopathy, because they have a direct demonstration of its tenets.

2. It would teach the student of homoeopathy a lot about pathology, which is essential for them to know and which in the present form also has no bearing on the reality of disease.

3. It will simplify the study of both MM and disease and make it much more accessible.

4. It would simplify the finding of the remedy and make practise much more certain.

5. It would reflect the reality of the individual patient.

6. It would be completely natural and it would prove to be a very powerful demonstration of the law of similars, which is simultaneously undeniable to those who know scarlet fever.

7. It would get rid of system builders, drainopaths, organopaths and mixopaths, who use their systems, dranage remedies, organ remedies and complexes because the present form of MM and knowledge of disease is so damn complicated.

It would kill quite a few birds with one stone.
Comment by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj. on June 7, 2010 at 9:30am
Such organising of MM is a large project and requires cooperation and coordinated efforts.
It will give us the tools to frame the debate on our terms and force the opposition to accept them as valid. Today we face the criticisms and the demands for RCT's which are not even applicable to homoeopathic medicine - and they know it too.

Instead of coming their way and using all the different sciences to prove to the homoeophabes that there is something to it, we need to develop this approach so we force them to accept our terms for the debate. I am sick and tired of hearing the argument that we need to prove it on their terms. It is high time to turn the tables and frame the debate on terms that we decide.

As I say above: We don't need their recognition. We need to be their replacement.


You need to be a member of Homeopathy World Community to add comments!

Join Homeopathy World Community

Search This Site

GET ➤ 
Cancer and Homeopathy
Best Vitamin C Drink
for $3 coupon



© 2017   Created by Debby Bruck.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...