≡ ▼
ABC Homeopathy Forum

 

The ABC Homeopathy Forum

What the different Potencies mean in Homoeopathy

When you just dilute a tincture, the effect will become less powerful. This was the problem that spurred Hahnemann on to invent Succussion and Potentization.

As you potentize a substance, you release from it healing powers that are often unknown in the raw substance (Lyc and Aurum are good examples)

As you go up in potency, different types of powers tend to be released, although to some degree the sensitivity of the patient determines this as well.

At the low potencies like 6c, many of the effects tend to remain physical - potentization immediately shifts the focus from local to general. However the symptoms tend to be fairly broad, and at this level prescribers can get some improvment without looking too closely at the individual's state (so Naturopaths love this potency, since they usually don't understand our philosophy and tend to prescribe on common physical states).

At 12c you begin to see more emotional effects (remember that sensitive people can get these earlier, and insensitive people will get them later if at all). People begin to speak in terms of 'I feel..' rather than 'My (body part) feels..). Dreams, if they appear here, will be non-specific, more feelings that clear dreams.

At 30c you are entering the realm of the Mentals, dreams, beliefs, more unusual emotional symptoms, and peculiar generals. 30c is often the first point where the richness of the substance's symptomology becomes clear, and for this reason it is a very good potency to begin chronic treatment with. The patient will often be able to clearly express their symptoms with little problem. Dreams tend to be strong but about ordinary things that occur in their life currently ( eg. going to work and making mistakes).

At 200c the intensity of the substances healing power is greatly increased, and at this level children, many strong acutes, deep emotional traumas, and long term diseases will respond well. The emotional state becomes less general and quite specific here, often mixing with the mentals to create symptoms peculiar to the remedy. Patients will begin to compensate or deny their feelings here, but will tend to put themselves in and out of the situations that aggravate them. There will be some denial, and some open expression of their state. Dreams are often about situations that seem normal, but something peculiar is happening there (eg. going to work with their dead grandfather). They may often dream of the past.

At 1M, you have reached the Delusional level - Odd mental symptoms are very prominent here, strange beliefs about the world and a person's place in it. Very strong acutes will need this potency, and very deep chronic illness that have a strong and often fixed mental states (eg. Obsessions and compulsions). With this much higher level of intensity, you get much more denial here. People will start to say 'I am not this....' rather than being able to tell you what they are. They will actively avoid those situations that aggravate them, and may almost appear to be unaware of them (so you need to dig more). Their dreams tend to be about things that could happen but never happened to them - they are possible situations but very unlikely (eg. going to work but travelling in a plane to a foreign country with strangers). At first mental states appear common and undifferentiated but this is a result of the person denying them - looking at dreams, hobbies, past traumatic events, talking about stories that really affected them as in books or movies, will be needed to see the truth.

At 10M, denial is very strong. The person will almost never express their state openly except under extraordinary circumstances. The intensity is very high, and the person will go to extraordinary lengths to compensate for the feelings they have. Their dreams tend to be very strange, things that are possible but almost never happen (eg. the president of the USA comes to cook your meals).

At 50M, denial is so great that they may appear to have no state. They may appear indifferent, uncaring, unaffected. Of course their physical form will be affected, but it may look like they have no marked mental state. They have completely compensated for it, or suppressed it so deeply that only their dreams or fantasies will reveal it. Their dreams will be very peculiar, situations that are not possible at all in real life. While 50M patients will come for physical ailments, their level of denial and repression is so strong that great skill and persistance is needed to uncover the mental state's unique attributes.
 
  brisbanehomoeopath on 2009-08-28
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
Hmm.. interesting but I do not quite understand the idea that a potency has something to do with the fact that person is in 'denial' or is 'obsessive compulsive' or he has a 'fixed mental state'.

A psoric person needing a very high potency like 10M or above, will not be in denial. Denial, uncaring, and unaffected state has nothing to do with potency, it has got to do with the miasmatic state. Psoric person will share his fears and delusions very readily but a syphilitic or a sycotic person will be hard to get mental symptoms from.

And, nor do obsessions or compulsions have anything to do with the fact that it is 1M or beyond, it once again depends on the miasmatic state. Obsessive compulsive nature will rarely be found in a psoric individual. e.g. A very psoric remedy will not produce denial or 'closed up' states no matter how high the potency used in the proving is. It will always tend to produce a 'fearful' state.

Coming to 'Fixed ideas', they will also never happen in certain miasmatic states, regardless of how high the potency requirement or employment (during proving).

So, I think you are mixing temperament and potency, they are two hugely different things.

Just because a patient is sharing all his symptoms very freely does not mean he needs a lower potency, and just because someone is 'closed up' or 'uncaring' does not mean he needs a higher potency.




No matter how high the potency, the remedy will only produce states which correspond the miasm it covers, but the symptoms will be at a deeper or more immaterial level with higher potencies.
 
sameervermani last decade
Some of this information has come from the provings and experiments that Divya Sankaran has done around potency. She did provings of well-known remedies - Calc and Nat-mur - in various potencies to see what the differences were. This information (in part) came from the results of her experiments.

Part of this also comes from my experience with potencies, and the experiences of my colleages whom I work with, and other homoeopaths around the world (like Rajan Sankaran, Jan Scholten, Roger Morrison, Frans Vermeulen amongst others). Sankaran in particular has very good and clear explainations of potency selection and backs these up with a large number of cases. It would be useful for homoeopaths to read his books if they have not already.

However I appreciate your input, and I hear what you are saying.

To address your comments one at a time -

Denial and Compensation are relatively new concepts in homoeopathic case-taking. As such they were not written about in the works of the old homoeopaths. They were certainly not differentiated during provings or clinical cures. However with the awareness of their existance (and much of that has come with the modern concepts in psychology and socialogy)has come a need to apply them in case-taking.

Denial is simply that - 'I do not have this feeling.' Any remedy can have denial, especially if the feeling is socially unacceptable in some way. Rather than seeing it as a miasmatic component, it is seen as a common human reaction to certain situations, and thus all miasms and all remedies can have it.

Sycosis has guilt as a strong feature, but a person can deny they have guilt, and may even claim to be pure and free from all moral taint. This does not mean, just because they say it, that it is true. But to the persistent and observant prescriber, you can uncover the truth.

Syphilis has violence as a strong feature, but the person can present as a pacificst. They will deny that there are violent feelings, they may only appear in dreams.

So denial is not necessarily part of the miasm, but part of the person. It is actually something that all human beings do at some time or another. If it is a pattern that constantly occurs, it needs to be fitted into the case but is not necessarily the miasm or the remedy. All that is left is dosage, and potency.

And so Divya did her experiments. And I have found that information very useful for applying potency.

Compensation is similar to Denial but stronger. A person compensates for a socially, personally or evenl legally unacceptable feeling by doing something that is completely different, perhaps the opposite. A violent person cannot hurt a fly. A lascivious person becomes celibate. A greedy person forces themselves to give away too much money.

Compensation is difficult to get past sometimes, especially if you are not aware that it is there or that it happens at all!. The person will appear to be the opposite of what they truly are. However, even in the provings you can see this polarity appearing. The proving creates a strong feeling, and the provers can either express it openly, or they can compensate by doing something else - and so you will often get both kinds of reactions.

However provings tend to be like acutes, sudden, immediate, hard to adjust to. Compensation occurs less frequenly in a proving because the person doesn't usually have time to adapt. However compensation comes out much more clearly in Clinical cures - there you will often see reports of opposite states, even before the concept of compensation was understood.

Look at Lilium-tig for example - ' has to keep busy to repress sexual desires' - Busy is the compensation for the underlying feeling of heightened sexual desire. This appeared even in the proving. Busy does not give you the essence of the remedy which is a conflict about sexuality and morality. In fact a patient in a chronic Lil-tig state might have any number of compensatory behaviors. From my own practice I have seen Loquacity, Heavy exercise, and Industriousness as compensation for Lil-tig sexual feelings.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
An example of a Psoric remedy in denial or in compensation can be clearly seen in Sulphur, the king of the Anti-psorics.

Sulphur is dirty, unwashed, messy, unkempt. And yet, there is the delusion his old rags are fine silks'. He is the ragged, often poor philosopher who feels he is ' a great person'. They show and indifference to their personal appearance and to dirtiness, yet 'fear germs and contagion' and won't even touch a plate that is dirty.

So a psoric remedy can clearly show both extremes, two opposite states.

My experience with Sulphur in clinic is that they often are extraordinarily concerned with their appearance, very neat and tidy but it is a real struggle (psora) for them to stay clean (sulphur).
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
Good discussion.

Many times I feel that what we know is very little and there is so much to learn in homeopathy.

If we leave aside the dogma of feeling 'I know better' and look at the new information which we are not so far aware and try to assess it objectively we will be doing a great service to ourselves.

There are very few people who are willing to discuss in detail about these important issues.

As long as we keep these discussions impersonal, they serve a very useful purpose and help the homeopathic community immensly.

Murthy
 
gavinimurthy last decade
'Compensation is similar to Denial but stronger. A person compensates for a socially, personally or evenl legally unacceptable feeling by doing something that is completely different, perhaps the opposite. A violent person cannot hurt a fly. A lascivious person becomes celibate. A greedy person forces themselves to give away too much money. '

^^ Once again, I am saying, this will not occur in a remedy which covers just psora, no matter how high the potency used.

Counter-phobic responses only happen in venereal diseases, and ofcourse for a venereal disease to reach the mental plane, there must be psora to begin with. If there were no psora, there would be no fear, and if there was no fear, there would be no counter-phobic response.

About the authors you mention, I do not trust in any of these, as they are the 'modern' masters people whom I am always wary of. I trust Hahnemann, Hering, Allen, Clarke, ML Tyler and Kent when it comes to miasmatic theory. I knew the moment you talked about 'pace and depth' that your notions of miasmatic theory have been based on these people who have un-necessarily dissected the purity of miasmatic theory. Sankaran's complication of miasmatic theory is totally baseless, with him having so many miasms including some which border on the hilarious.

For a disease to be labelled as a miasm, it must be contageous in some form, affect every system of the body to some degree, and most importantly, also be manifest in every suceeding generation. This is not the case for things like Typhoid or RingWorm, which can skip many, many generations, before ever being seen again. They can also of course sporadically occur in individuals with no familial history of the disease whatsoever.

I would advise you to trust only the old masters when it comes to miasmatic theory, and mind you, it is not easy to neglect all the 'innovative' and 'cool' theories that some of the people you mention come up with.


Sulphur covers all 4 miasms and that is the reason for counter-phobic compensations.

Sulphur has the extreme selfishness, egotism, and desire to 'collect' objects in the sycotic state, all sorts of fears in the psoric state.

It can have anxiety about others and family in the syphilitic or the tubercular state.

But a remedy which does not cover syphilis e.g. Calcarea Carb or Natrum Mur will never have compensations seen in syphiltic individuals.
 
sameervermani last decade
Indeed - my ideas have changed alot since I starting studying 18 years ago. So it would be unreasonable of me to believe that I have nothing to learn even at this stage. And as I found with lecturing, it was only when my ideas were challenged, and I had to think about them and explain them, that I grew confident in them. And it sometimes meant I had to change those ideas. Who knows how things will be for me in another 5 years.

Actually that is quite exciting a concept for me. I love that homoeopathy is a science that continues to grow and change. I never grow tired of it, as it never grows stale. New remedies, new provings, new theories, new miasms, new approaches - and yet all still fitting within the basic rule system that Hahnemann proposed.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
When I started reading about homeopathy I was strongly influenced by the kentian homeopathy and used to take strong objection to the methods of people like Dr.Sankaran and Dr.Scholten.

Later I realised that I am making harsh comments without ever reading their books and without trying to understand the philosophy behind what they are telling.

I also realised that I am being influenced by the 'negative' reviews I read on the net, without really trying to read their books and understand them.

Even now I am not a great fan of these new gurus, and yet to begin reading their books/literature seriously. However after being in touch with homeopaths like David and a few others who understood these modern concepts and after looking at their detailed cases and the results they claim, my resistance is melting and I am inclined to read about these newer methods seriously.

I am in no great hurry as I am not a professional homeopath and don't treat the public. My practice is limited to a handful of family and friends.

I feel the kentian homeopathy and the knowledge about the well known traditional remedies is enough to solve the more general day to day problems, but if you really want homeopathy to deal with more serious cases, there is a need to add more arms to our arsenal , both in terms of widening the philosophical base and also studying the newer remedies.

Murthy
 
gavinimurthy last decade
our posts are crossing at a fast pace. :-)

Murthy
 
gavinimurthy last decade
I hear what you are saying Sameer, but could you explain to me why Compensation will never appear in those remedies. I have offered reasons for why I believe it does (apart from my first hand experience that it does, which obviously is hard to prove here).

I have never been happy with the multi-miasmatic classification for remedies. For me, Miasm remains an excellent system for differentiating and choosing remedies, placing medicines in all the miasms seems to undermine its usefulness. How would such an idea help you to choose Sulphur? In fact that is a very common question from students.

Miasm as a contagious condition is the original concept Hahnemann had. The concept has evolved, as we clearly see babies born with miasmatic features in parents who do not display them (so they do not literally catch syphilis from their parents).

Homoeopathy is a science, as such it does, and indeed must evolve. While every theory must be tested to see if it both fits within our philosophy, and works in a practical sense as well, discarding something because it is new is Anti-scientific. And such an attitude is Anti-Hahnemannian - a man who was a rebel in his own time!

I do not believe that Hahnemann would have encouraged an attitude of such conservitism - even his own great work the Organon changed 6 times while he was alive. And he invented the concept of Miasm when there was nothing really like it in Medicine.

I also wonder why you are so suspicious of the homoeopaths I mentioned. What is the basis for your distrust. I have read, absorbed, and frequently used much of their information with great success, as have both my students and my colleagues. Proof is in the pudding as they say :) and I have been quite happy with the result.

I did practice the old method of miasmatic prescribing many years ago. I was unhappy with the patchy results. And as I said earlier, multi-miasmatic classifications for a single remedy erode the practical application of miasm. And for me, that was the most important thing - if I am to use this, I need clear guidelines on how.

I am about to post a post on Miasms very soon
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
Omg Gavin...you are melting (heheh this is a Sensation word) :):)

In now way do I want to disparage any method people use to arrive at remedies, if it works and it applies the 4 basic priniciples. I have always stated, on any forum I participate in, that homoeopathy is an Art as well as a Science and there will always be individual approaches that work better for one person than another. There is NOT one way to do homoeopathy. In fact, being a good homoeopath means being flexible enough to use many approaches, to adapt and absorb the new information into the way you currently work.

Many of my patients have done extremely well on the new remedies, or on old remedies found using some of the new methods. Many of them have done well on the old remedies found by the old methods.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
It's not just Kent Murthy, it is everything our science stands for, it is completely baseless to not list Silicea in the tubercular and psoric divisions and list it in sycosis, which is what people like Sankaran do.

It is one of the most powerful tubercular remedies we have, and to reduce it to just a sycotic state (which it covers to a much lesser extent than tuberculosis), and it is proved by the symptoms which it has corresponding to pseuods psora on the mental plane and the physical plane.

I am sorry I am open to new ideas but I am not so open that my brains will fly out.
 
sameervermani last decade
If your system works for you fine. As I said I see miasm as simpley a system of classification - if you can use it to make sucessful prescriptions, and repeat that success, to get the simillimum then there is no problem.

I have treated many sycotic patients successfully with Silicea, deeply sycotic ones. And since I subscribe to the one patient/one miasm theory Silicea remains firmly in the sycotic miams for me.

But like the several systems of choosing remedies, different systems of miasm seem to operate too.

Tuberculosis can be Sycotic in pace and depth - a benign disease that does not kill the patient, and can be lived with. This is actually called Benign Tuberculosis.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
I hear what you are saying Sameer, but could you explain to me why Compensation will never appear in those remedies. I have offered reasons for why I believe it does (apart from my first hand experience that it does, which obviously is hard to prove here).

[SV]: As I have said, the kind of compensations a sycotic or a syphilitic person has, will not happen in a psoric remedy. Sulphur covers many miasms and that is the reason for opposite states.

I have never been happy with the multi-miasmatic classification for remedies. For me, Miasm remains an excellent system for differentiating and choosing remedies, placing medicines in all the miasms seems to undermine its usefulness. How would such an idea help you to choose Sulphur? In fact that is a very common question from students.

[SV]: It still helps, as there are only a handful of remedies with true anti-sycotic properties for example. Once you diagnose a person has sycosis, the remedy has to be one of those. The fact that those remedies lie in other miasms (not all of them), is of no consequence here. The miasmatic diagnosis brought you to the correct subset and then you pick the most similar one.

Miasm as a contagious condition is the original concept Hahnemann had. The concept has evolved, as we clearly see babies born with miasmatic features in parents who do not display them (so they do not literally catch syphilis from their parents).

[SV]: No, children are miasmatic baggage of parents only, and if you take that model out the whole theory of miasms will break down. The 'features' you talk about are different manifestations of the only 4 miasms that plague the mankind.

Homoeopathy is a science, as such it does, and indeed must evolve. While every theory must be tested to see if it both fits within our philosophy, and works in a practical sense as well, discarding something because it is new is Anti-scientific. And such an attitude is Anti-Hahnemannian - a man who was a rebel in his own time!

[SV]: I will quote Hahnemann himself on this , he says :

'He who does not walk on exactly the same line with me, who diverges, if it be but the breadth of a straw, to the right or to the left, is an apostate and a traitor, and with him I will have nothing to say.'
-Samuel Hahnemann.

Only those of us who know we have experienced degrees of reality and truth very few others have, and who are certain of our own perceptions, and very deepest of motivations, may state such a thing, with only very little conscience involved. Never underestimate this, as nothing is more important than the truth, and the role one plays in it's manifestaion.



I have read, absorbed, and frequently used much of their information with great success, as have both my students and my colleagues. Proof is in the pudding as they say :) and I have been quite happy with the result.

[SV]: As I said the diseases treated through these approaches are not true miasmatic diseases, they are life style , situational (relationship issues), and other acute layers which have become stuck. The true anti-miasmatic treatment only happens in one way and that is to use anti-miasmatic medicines which have been known to treat the itch and veneral miasms permanently.

I did practice the old method of miasmatic prescribing many years ago. I was unhappy with the patchy results.

[SV]: Well, that does not mean the theory was wrong, maybe the application was not upto the mark, or maybe the understanding of inwardness of these miasms was lacking.
 
sameervermani last decade
What exactly is your argument against the new materia medica/philosophy, which parts specifically do you have issue with?

I find it is too easy to say the word 'new' without defining it. We can't really discuss it with just that word used.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
Ok you probably answered my last post there.

What is your personal experience with cures using your method, can you give examples or cases perhaps, as I have done?

I am not sure we will come to any happy conclusion here, but you have made your point of view clear and we can agree to disagree. We seem to be getting down to a 'I don't believe you' argument.

I would like to hear other's views on what I have said though.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
Here are my thoughts:

I for one, do not believe there are more than 4 miasms for reasons I have stated above.

Two, I do not think there are so many anti-miasmatic medicines as listed by these modern 'masters'

Three, these things about compensation and stuff are going towards main stream psychology which is ultimately useless for a true homeopath anyways. These are things that Freud would like, they do not help us in curing the chronic miasmatic diseases. main stream psychology is pointless once a person has been treated fully for his miasmatic taint. Once again, one can poke around with parts of the constitution with these prescriptions and lift situational layers which have been stuck, or even acute layers, but if you want to root out the very seeds of the disease which lie in the miasmatic taint, these approaches of sensations, periodic tables and compensations are not
the answer.
 
sameervermani last decade
Okay, let us agree to disagree :)
 
sameervermani last decade
I can do that. Your viewpoint is not uncommon. Disagreement is pretty common in all fields of science and philosophy, and no less in our field.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
He who does not walk on exactly the same line with me, who diverges, if it be but the breadth of a straw, to the right or to the left, is an apostate and a traitor, and with him I will have nothing to say.'
-Samuel Hahnemann.

*********

Hahn. was known to make comments like the above which doesn't make sense, as he himself revised his opinions frequently.

Obviously he feels he alone has the right to change anything as far as homeopathy is concerned.

No wonder.. with such an attitude he alienated many of his former disciples.

Any way, that was history. Hahn. too was a human being and had his share of egos and dogmas.

Any experimentation without deviating from the basic principles should be welcome.

Let us not pre judge the issues without really trying them out. If David says he had more success with Sankaran's methods, why should we dispute it?

If we are not intersted in Sankaran, let it be so. At the same time let us give room for those who want to follow him and to share info about his methods.

Murthy
 
gavinimurthy last decade
As I said, let us agree to disagree.

I am not disputing the fact that David had more success with Sankaran's methods. I am just saying that 'lack of complete success' with traditional concepts by a homeopath is something I would not attribute to those concepts being flawed.

One should be able to have that success and and some more, if one masters the traditional miasmatic concepts to the fullest extent (which I agree is a difficult task given the dearth of good literature on that subject).

Okay, enough of debate for today :), I have to admit, I am tired :)
 
sameervermani last decade
Fair enough Sameer, but I don't remember ever saying complete lack of success. In fact for the first 6 years of my practice I used those methods and kept myself in business.

I just wanted better results, and I found them.
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
hi1

Illustrious thoughts.Congrats to the participants on the forum. No practical science is perfect all are working with in their limitations and so is homeopathy. But we should remember that science in all respects is evolving day in and day out.What was there, in terms of enviorenment,situations,interpersonal dealings and for that matter any morbid state in times of Hahnemann,has undergone a total change in modern times.The tools needed to combat any attack on any level in modern times is the necessity being the mother of all inventions.Cutting it short i have seen in my practice spanning 34 years that after i listened to Dr. Shankaran ,Dr. Scolten,Dr. Prafulla vijaykar,Dr. ML sehgal in early nineties in many seminars, and of course Dr George Vithoulkas before ninetees , i am proud to say that the techniques of the modern stalwarts have helped me solve my previously failed cases. The latest Concepts of Lanthenides by Dr. Jan are proving a mile stone in the realm of Homeopathy for tackling AUTO-IMMUNE diseases.By the way the discussion is prompting me to select a Lanthenides remedy for each one of you!!!!!!!!
 
sarup last decade
Hi brisbanehomeopath,

I think I said 'lack of complete success' above and not 'complete lack of success'.

Please check above.
 
sameervermani last decade
My apologies Sameer I did misread that sentence.

Welcome to the discussion Sarup - nice to meet someone else impressed with the new stuff. I read Scholten's book on the Lanthenides but have not yet had any success prescribing them - so much new materia medica to add in, so little time :)
 
brisbanehomoeopath last decade
Welcome change at ABC !!
 
PANKAJ VARMA last decade

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.