> I do apologise, but I'm not understanding your argument here at all. Are
> you suggesting that in order to differentiate homoeopathy's practice from
> other practices, we would need to understand exactly its mechanism?
If I may chip in with a view:
Hahnemann went as far as posible in trying to cure diseese, but he found many situatons incurable.
We have needed to develop homeopathy further in order to cure what Hahemann fond incutrable, and Joe and I and others have achieved this in some areas. (Joe in more areas than me). We both use the principles of cure of Hahnemann.
He did not say only one remedy was needed, and he did not say the entire organism must be addressed by one remedy always either.
What he did do was to declare that there are three ways to use medicines (see Aph 22 for his wording), summarized in my wording unless in quotes:
* a remedy is *capable* of cure if it can produce the symptoms of the patient.
* to cure "the totality of the symptoms of the disease to be cured", requires a remedy with a "tendency to produce similar or opposite symptoms".
* all else is allopathy where symptoms of the medicine "have no direct pathological relation" to the diseased state.
There is no insistence that one remedy will cure the entire individual. It will cure one disease.
It is a very important distinction.
Hahnemann recognizes there may be more than one disease in an individual, and that when this occurs it is frequently due to allopathy and it is also frequently incurable. (See Aph 41 and 52, 75, 149, 244, 276) .......... of which I'll quote the short one, Aph 75:
.............................................
§ 75
These inroads on human health effected by the allopathic non-healing art (more particularly in recent times) are of all chronic diseases the most deplorable, the most incurable; and I regret to add that it is apparently impossible to discover or to hit upon any remedies for their cure when they have reached any considerable height.
...........................................
THAT was Hahnemann's main sticking point - and is the main area for homeopathy evolution since his time.
Hahnemann also says (Aph 40), that where a cure is attempted, where more than one disease is present, each disease needs its *own* remedy, given "by a judicious alternation" and "each given in the most suitable dose and form".
This further clarifies the point that Hahnemann recognizes the need for one remedy for one disease - and not one remedy for one individual.
Hahnemann abhors the increasing occurrence of incurable complex diseases, initiated by inappropriate use of allopathic medicines.
Aph 149 "...More especially do the chronic medicinal dyscrasia so often produced by allopathic bungling, along with the natural disease left uncured by it, require a much longer time for their recovery; often, indeed, are they incurable."
Again - one sees the frustratiom Hahnemann felt at the limitations of the system, especially where more than one disease was present in an individual.....it again reinforces the need to evolve beetter techniqes, better methods, better ways to use the principles we have.
These multiple disease complex presentations of "incurable" disese, are what I deal with daily.... Except I have developed ways of effecting restoration of health, by adding some techniques in the use of remedies (See my two papers in Hpathy on FIP), some of which are mine, and some of which Joe developed (Fibonacci series, also see Hpathy papers and Joe's book "The Potency" for details).
In all cases, what Hahnmemann describes as the ONLY way to cure - is used, that of law of similars, and the use of matched remedy.
But the techniques of application are more developed.
And indeed there can be multiple diseases present - *each* needing the proper remedy.
For exanple (and this is not published yet) a previously incurable illness, when treated by allopathy with steroids, causes an additional worse disease to develop due to the steroid. This indeed needs multiple remedies to resolve - so as to overcome both the "steroid disease", and the original "FIP disease". And in fact there are more diseses behind that, one of which caused immune system damage - an immune system disease whose total symptoms need to be addressed as well as a specific disease.
So - Complex diseases can have more than two simultaneous diseses, and there's no way to address that with a single remedy. (Per me, per Hahnemann, per Joe, per the principles of the law of similars which always apply to "total symptoms of a disease" and not to "total symptoms of a patient" - Hahnemann's words.
And it is Hahnemann's idea to give a "juducious remedy" for each, not mixed, but alternating, each at their own dose requirements.
The remedy for each needs to be specific and homeopathic per law of simlars, and needs to be individually dosed as Hahnemann says - in judicious alternation and each in the most suitable dose and form.
The point:
I suspect you may have confused "total symptoms of a disease" with "total symptoms of a patient".
Joe wrote:
>> Homeopathy evolves.
Yes thanks to those who work hard at it.
Hahnemann worked hard at it too. It's not a reason to rest on laurels.
All those diseases Hahnemann had to just call incurable - are becoming curable as Homeopathy evolves.
> It evolves, yes, and it retains its single principle, without which it
> surely is not homoeopathy.
>
> I'm sorry that you take offence at the distinction between that principle,
> with its requirements of prescribing (at one time) a single medicine of
> known pathogenesis for the entirety of the case of illness before one,
Hahnemann wants a single medicine for a disease, not for the entirety of an illness before one.
Too many modern complex diseases present themselves needing a remedy for EACH disease present.
It happens frequently that more than one organ has a disease, each with a different cause, each needing a remedy matched to the disease. You can even have one organ with more than one disease afecting it, each from a differnt casue.
Whatever the case, each disease, needs its matched homeopathic remedy.
In the disease I work with most, FIP, a typical example is as follows:
* A kitten gets multiple vaccines, causing disease of the thymus, and consequent malfunction of the immune system's chronic defence mechanism.
* The cat is fed a premium cat food wich causes it to have chronic renal failure.
* The cat drinks fluoridated water which triggers hyperthyrodism.
* The cat gets Bordetella bronchiseptica infection (BB for short) - an interstitial silent pneumonia in cats, (kennel cough and bronchial only in dogs). It is similar to TB by being an interstitial infection, easily made worse..
* by antibiotics....another disease witih far reacing effects calle antibiotic disease...
* Stress due to BB - plus lack of gut health from antibiotics - raises stress hormones which allow a gut virus in unhealthy gut to mutate and that in turn causes disease of the blood in which neutrophils kill body cells instead of invading microbes - called FIP disease.
* The vet gives the cat steroids, which cause a new disease that will kill even more surely than the FIP disease.
...............Homepathy needs to address ALL (EACH of) the above intricated, complex and intertwined diseses.
BB usually is suppressed during FIP, as FIP is a stronger disease. But the other diseses all need to be addressed at the same time.... as the last one, FIP, can not heal unless:
* Kidney disease is addressed so erhythopoeitin is produced to help make red cells that are destroyed by FIP - and also needed to expel neutrophil toxins produced by FIP's cell killer mechanism.
* Liver damage from FIP has to be treated as a disesae whether as part of the main FIP disease remedy or as a separate disese, or with help of blue lights to dissipate bilirubin from broken red cells (this being one of many interactions between diseases present) - it's very idividual.
* Steroid disease must be addressed immediately and constantly (for ten months I find) to stop its block to healing. This requires a steroid-specific remedy, and each steroid casues a differnet diseae.
* Gut health must be restored to allow kidney function and prevent repeat FIP.
* The immune system damage to the thymus, must be addressed, as the thymus directs macrophage which in turn directs neutrophils which are killing the cat - and so that disease is a prerequisite to overcome in order to permit any overcoming of FIP.
* Finally once the other dsieses are all beaten, the BB will re-emerge and will need its disease remedy.
This is a typical disease of the kind Hahnemann found incurable (except it did not arise till 1960; it is man-made or a least man-induced)....so he never saw such a complex mess in his time.
ALL the presenting diseases need to be handled. Not just the last one of FIP.
The chances of finding a single remedy to overcome all six diseases are historically zero, as confirmed by the Organon refs listed in thisd email.
The first success after FIP (and whatever diseases presented with it), was in 2003. It needed a new way of using remedies.
Success increases as homeopathy evolves to allow new techniques.
It's not a change in the use of homeopathy as a law of siilars cure system - that remains - it's an evolution of techniques by which to cure diseaseS - whether presenting singly or "intricated" (a term I borrowed from Joe; I think it fits this concept well).
Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
_______________________________________________
Homeopathy Mailing List
homeopathy@homeolist.com
http://lists.homeolist.com/mailman/listinfo/homeopathy
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen