The ABC Homeopathy Forum
Page 1 2
Organon-The original.
§ 247 Sixth EditionIt is impractical to repeat the same unchanged dose of a remedy once, not to mention its frequent repetition (and at short intervals in order not to delay the cure). The vital principle does not accept such unchanged doses without resistance, that is, without other symptoms of the medicine to manifest themselves than those similar to the disease to be cured, because the former dose has already accomplished the expected change in the vital principle and a second dynamically wholly similar, unchanged dose of the same medicine no longer finds, therefore, the same conditions of the vital force. The patient may indeed be made sick in another way by receiving other such unchanged doses, even sicker than he was, for now only those symptoms of the given remedy remain active which were not homopathic to the original disease, hence no step towards cure can follow, only a true aggravation of the condition of the patient. But if the succeeding dose is changed slightly every time, namely potentized somewhat higher (§§ 269-270) then the vital principle may be altered without difficulty by the same medicine (the sensation of natural disease diminishing) and thus the cure brought nearer.1
(Note:these notes are given as an explanation)
1 We ought not even with the best chosen homopathic medicine, for instance one pellet of the same potency that was beneficial at first, to let the patient have a second or third dose, taken dry. In the same way, if the medicine was dissolved in water and the first dose proved beneficial, a second or third and even smaller dose from the bottle standing undisturbed, even in intervals of a few days, would prove no longer beneficial, even though the original preparation had been potentized with ten succussions or as I suggested later with but two succussions in order to obviate this disadvantage and this according to above reasons. But through modification of every dose in its dynamiztion degree, as I herewith teach, there exists no offence, even if the doses be repeated more frequently, even if the medicine be ever so highly potentized with ever so many succussions. It almost seems as if the best selected homopathic remedy could best extract the morbid disorder from the vital force and in chronic disease to extinguish the same only if applied in several different forms.
§ 248 Sixth Edition
For this purpose, we potentize anew the medicinal solution1 (with perhaps 8, 10, 12 succussions) from which we give the patient one or (increasingly) several teaspoonful doses, in long lasting diseases daily or every second day, in acute diseases every two to six hours and in very urgent cases every hour or oftener. Thus in chronic diseases, every correctly chosen homopathic medicine, even those whose action is of long duration, may be repeated daily for months with ever increasing success. If the solution is used up (in seven to fifteen days) it is necessary to add to the next solution of the same medicine if still indicated one or (though rarely) several pellets of a higher potency with which we continue so long as the patient experiences continued improvement without encountering one or another complaint that he never had before in his life. For if this happens, if the balance of the disease appears in a group of altered symptoms then another, one more homopathically related medicine must be chosen in place of the last and administered in the same repeated doses, mindful, however, of modifying the solution of every dose with thorough vigorous succussions, thus changing its degree of potency and increasing it somewhat. On the other hand, should there appear during almost daily repetition of the well indicated homopathic remedy, towards the end of the treatment of a chronic disease, so-called (§ 161) homopathic aggravations by which the balance of the morbid symptoms seem to again increase somewhat (the medicinal disease, similar to the original, now alone persistently manifests itself). The doses in that case must then be reduced still further and repeated in longer intervals and possibly stopped several days, in order to see if the convalescence need no further medicinal aid. The apparent symptoms (Schein - Symptome) caused by the excess of the homopathic medicine will soon disappear and leave undisturbed health in its wake. If only a small vial say a dram of dilute alcohol is used in the treatment, in which is contained and dissolved through succussion one globule of the medicine which is to be used by olfaction every two, three or four days, this also must be thoroughly succussed eight to ten times before each olfaction.
Note:
1 Made in 40, 30, 20, 15 or 8 tablespoons of water with the addition of some alcohol or a piece of charcoal in order to preserve it. If charcoal is used, it is suspended by means of a thread in the vial and is taken out when the vial is succussed. The solution of the medicinal globule (and it is rarely necessary to use more than one globule) of a thoroughly potentized medicine in a large quantity of water can be obviated by making a solution in only 7-8 tablespoons of water and after thorough succussion of the vial take from it one tablespoon and put it in a glass of water (containing about 7 to 8 spoonfuls), this stirred thoroughly and then given a dose to the patient. If he is unusually excited and sensitive, a teaspoon of this solution may be put in a second glass of water, thoroughly stirred and teaspoonful doses or more be given. There are patients of so great sensitiveness that a third or fourth glass, similarly prepared, may be necessary. Each such prepared glass must be made fresh daily. the globule of the high potency is best crushed in a few grains of sugar of milk which the patient can put in the vial and be dissolved in the requisite quantity of water.
bandarbabu2000 on 2004-10-21
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
What is important is
To increase the potency slightly,before repeating the medicine.
For pellets,you can do it,by striking the bottom of the vial,on a hard book,for about 10 times,each time before you take the medicine.
For liquids,shake the bottle vigorously,for a few seconds,before taking the medicine.
Any further doubts welcome.
Murthy
To increase the potency slightly,before repeating the medicine.
For pellets,you can do it,by striking the bottom of the vial,on a hard book,for about 10 times,each time before you take the medicine.
For liquids,shake the bottle vigorously,for a few seconds,before taking the medicine.
Any further doubts welcome.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Thanks for the quote Murthy.
That's why in chronic diseases when you expect long time of treatment-plussing is so great-BUT actually it's the first time ever that I heard of increasing potency of dry pellets!
?
That's why in chronic diseases when you expect long time of treatment-plussing is so great-BUT actually it's the first time ever that I heard of increasing potency of dry pellets!
?
Astra2012 2 decades ago
In you notes to the first paragraph you wrote:
It almost seems as if the best selected homopathic remedy could best extract the morbid disorder from the vital force and in chronic disease to extinguish the same only if applied in several different forms.
"several different forms"? You mean except for increasing potency we should change dry/in water/oflaction etc or you mean something else?
I really like discussions-you learn so much!
It almost seems as if the best selected homopathic remedy could best extract the morbid disorder from the vital force and in chronic disease to extinguish the same only if applied in several different forms.
"several different forms"? You mean except for increasing potency we should change dry/in water/oflaction etc or you mean something else?
I really like discussions-you learn so much!
Astra2012 2 decades ago
Hi Astra
The note is not mine.It is from Hannemann!!
By different forms,he means you can start with a liquid dose,and may have to switch to olfaction,when the complaint is less severe.
Read the note to second para.
My comments will not be in the same post,as that of the organon.To avoid confusion,I am giving them in a seperate following post.
Murthy
The note is not mine.It is from Hannemann!!
By different forms,he means you can start with a liquid dose,and may have to switch to olfaction,when the complaint is less severe.
Read the note to second para.
My comments will not be in the same post,as that of the organon.To avoid confusion,I am giving them in a seperate following post.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Yes, he writes about succusing and oflaction-but still it is all about having remedy in solution. Not dry.
I always thought that dry pellets carry remedies in one potency only and it can be changed only by succusing in water.
still about different forms (see? to me you are as smart as Hahnemann ) -oflaction is gentlest but how about dry and in water? Is any of them gentler? (assuming that the potency is the same=nothing has been succussed; and dilution glasses weren't used)
I always thought that dry pellets carry remedies in one potency only and it can be changed only by succusing in water.
still about different forms (see? to me you are as smart as Hahnemann ) -oflaction is gentlest but how about dry and in water? Is any of them gentler? (assuming that the potency is the same=nothing has been succussed; and dilution glasses weren't used)
Astra2012 2 decades ago
Astra
You are right.I am wrong.
I just could not find any reference for increasing the potency of dry pellets.
In fact I found evidence to the contrary.
http://www.homeoint.org/morrell/articles/pm_succu.htm
For this reason Hahnemann warned against shipping the liquid remedies over long distances, since they receive an enormous number of additional succussions during the transport, and they are so highly potentized during a long journey that on their arrival they are scarcely fit for use, at least not for susceptible patients, on account of their excessive strength, as many observations go to prove (Lesser Writings, 736 *)
Fortunately for suffering humanity, the dry pills were not affected in this way (ibid., 766 **)
Note 321. Hahnemann, Organon, Sec. 269, 270.
* It is only in this form [i.e. dry pills] that the homeopathic medicines can be sent to the most distant parts, without any alteration of their powers, which is impossible to be done in their fluid form; for in that case the medicinal fluid, which has already been sufficiently potentized during the preparation (by two succussions at each dilution), receives an enormous number of additional succussions during the transport, and they are so highly potentized during a long journey, that on their arrival they are scarcely fit for use... &c, as stated by Coulter above. [Lesser Writings, pp.735-6]
** The supposition of our author that dry globules that have been impregnated with a certain degree of development of power can be further dynamized and their medicinal power increased in their bottles by shaking, or carrying in the pocket, like medicinal fluids further shaken, is not borne out by any fact and will appear to me incredible until it is supported by proper experimental proofs. [Hahnemann, Lesser Writings, p.766]
You really saved me from a catastrophe.How foolish was I to think that even dry pellets can also be increased in potency?
Thanks to you,I am more wiser.
Just type "dry pellets and homeopathy" in google,and there is a wealth of information.
Thanks for correcting me.
The only consolation is there were people,who thought like me,and whom Hannemann admonished by saying that "
that dry globules that have been impregnated with a certain degree of development of power can be further dynamized and their medicinal power increased in their bottles by shaking, or carrying in the pocket, like medicinal fluids further shaken, is not borne out by any fact and will appear to me incredible until it is supported by proper experimental proofs. [Hahnemann, Lesser Writings, p.766]
(forgive me for repetetion.I wanted to highlight it.)
I am not sure whether any further experiments were conducted as suggested by hanneman,to investigate the possibility of increasing the potency of dry pellets.I don't remeber reading it anywhere.
Then,how did I firmly believed that,it is possible?
Somebody must have told me during discussions,and I accepted it as a fact without verifing.That is the only possibility.
So,you see,I too make mistakes.That is why I need people like you,Pankaj,and John to correct me,and erase the outlandish ideas,I might have had.
Murthy
You are right.I am wrong.
I just could not find any reference for increasing the potency of dry pellets.
In fact I found evidence to the contrary.
http://www.homeoint.org/morrell/articles/pm_succu.htm
For this reason Hahnemann warned against shipping the liquid remedies over long distances, since they receive an enormous number of additional succussions during the transport, and they are so highly potentized during a long journey that on their arrival they are scarcely fit for use, at least not for susceptible patients, on account of their excessive strength, as many observations go to prove (Lesser Writings, 736 *)
Fortunately for suffering humanity, the dry pills were not affected in this way (ibid., 766 **)
Note 321. Hahnemann, Organon, Sec. 269, 270.
* It is only in this form [i.e. dry pills] that the homeopathic medicines can be sent to the most distant parts, without any alteration of their powers, which is impossible to be done in their fluid form; for in that case the medicinal fluid, which has already been sufficiently potentized during the preparation (by two succussions at each dilution), receives an enormous number of additional succussions during the transport, and they are so highly potentized during a long journey, that on their arrival they are scarcely fit for use... &c, as stated by Coulter above. [Lesser Writings, pp.735-6]
** The supposition of our author that dry globules that have been impregnated with a certain degree of development of power can be further dynamized and their medicinal power increased in their bottles by shaking, or carrying in the pocket, like medicinal fluids further shaken, is not borne out by any fact and will appear to me incredible until it is supported by proper experimental proofs. [Hahnemann, Lesser Writings, p.766]
You really saved me from a catastrophe.How foolish was I to think that even dry pellets can also be increased in potency?
Thanks to you,I am more wiser.
Just type "dry pellets and homeopathy" in google,and there is a wealth of information.
Thanks for correcting me.
The only consolation is there were people,who thought like me,and whom Hannemann admonished by saying that "
that dry globules that have been impregnated with a certain degree of development of power can be further dynamized and their medicinal power increased in their bottles by shaking, or carrying in the pocket, like medicinal fluids further shaken, is not borne out by any fact and will appear to me incredible until it is supported by proper experimental proofs. [Hahnemann, Lesser Writings, p.766]
(forgive me for repetetion.I wanted to highlight it.)
I am not sure whether any further experiments were conducted as suggested by hanneman,to investigate the possibility of increasing the potency of dry pellets.I don't remeber reading it anywhere.
Then,how did I firmly believed that,it is possible?
Somebody must have told me during discussions,and I accepted it as a fact without verifing.That is the only possibility.
So,you see,I too make mistakes.That is why I need people like you,Pankaj,and John to correct me,and erase the outlandish ideas,I might have had.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Dear Astra
One more thought.
I was taking Causticum by olfaction of dry pellets,since the last ten days.
So,if the potency has not increased,as I thought,what is the worst thing that could happen?
I may start proving the medicine.Is it not a good idea,to prove a medicine,on one's self?After all,Hannemann experimented on himself with atleast 70 medicines.
I am in two minds.
Let me think further.
Murthy
One more thought.
I was taking Causticum by olfaction of dry pellets,since the last ten days.
So,if the potency has not increased,as I thought,what is the worst thing that could happen?
I may start proving the medicine.Is it not a good idea,to prove a medicine,on one's self?After all,Hannemann experimented on himself with atleast 70 medicines.
I am in two minds.
Let me think further.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Hello Murthy-I did not correct you-I just wondered.
Anyway-that's why it's important to me that I understand what's going on in homeopathy.
(and that's why I don't accept everything I hear/read) unless to me it makes sense.
So? Do you think any is gentler?(dry or in water)?
Anyway-that's why it's important to me that I understand what's going on in homeopathy.
(and that's why I don't accept everything I hear/read) unless to me it makes sense.
So? Do you think any is gentler?(dry or in water)?
Astra2012 2 decades ago
Yes, as a hypersensitive I am very aware and I agree with Murthy that water seems to cause less aggravations. I have also done olofaction and learned it should be olofaction of the dose not the vial.
I do some experimenting where it will not cause harm. As a reiki healer I work in the energy field of the body. Gave a friend Arnica 1 M that she needed and then did a healing to see what effect it might have. I had just finished a half hour healing on her without the remedy.
She is a massage therapist and also does energy healing. Well, I won't do that again because I heard the high pitched loud sound I get when a remedy starts working. Her aura and mine were congruent so it is not as impossible as it sounds. I think if she hadn't taken the dose while on the table it would not have worked this way.
I guess, we are all always still learning. Murthy, thanks for taking the trouble to put the information on the site.
I do some experimenting where it will not cause harm. As a reiki healer I work in the energy field of the body. Gave a friend Arnica 1 M that she needed and then did a healing to see what effect it might have. I had just finished a half hour healing on her without the remedy.
She is a massage therapist and also does energy healing. Well, I won't do that again because I heard the high pitched loud sound I get when a remedy starts working. Her aura and mine were congruent so it is not as impossible as it sounds. I think if she hadn't taken the dose while on the table it would not have worked this way.
I guess, we are all always still learning. Murthy, thanks for taking the trouble to put the information on the site.
museon 2 decades ago
Oh, I hadn't thought about the trip in the mail affecting liquid potencies, but I can see how this could happen. After all, it was Hahnemann noticing his remedies at the end of a day travelling were more effective that led to him understanding succession.
From now on I will order LMs only in dry pellets. Thank you again.
From now on I will order LMs only in dry pellets. Thank you again.
museon 2 decades ago
Really? That's how the succussions started?
He was a genius. It is hardest to notice and analyze such "everyday" things.
museon- you are probably hypersensitive to homeopathic remedies because you are just sensitive to energy field.
(and so I must be really grounded!I'm hyposensitive!)
It's very interesting to be able to see more-esp when you combine it with healing.Because people like you can help the rest of us understand homeopathy better.
We can only believe in auras etc- you probably see some of it anyway.
Would you tell us more? Regarding energy field in sickness and in health; in sickness with various remedies like wrong and right?
He was a genius. It is hardest to notice and analyze such "everyday" things.
museon- you are probably hypersensitive to homeopathic remedies because you are just sensitive to energy field.
(and so I must be really grounded!I'm hyposensitive!)
It's very interesting to be able to see more-esp when you combine it with healing.Because people like you can help the rest of us understand homeopathy better.
We can only believe in auras etc- you probably see some of it anyway.
Would you tell us more? Regarding energy field in sickness and in health; in sickness with various remedies like wrong and right?
Astra2012 2 decades ago
§ 249
Every medicine prescribed for a case of disease which, in the course of its action, produces new and troublesome symptoms not appertaining to the disease to be cured, is not capable of effecting real improvement,1 and cannot be considered as homopathically selected; it must, therefore, either, if the aggravation be considerable, be first partially neutralized as soon as possible by an antidote before giving the next remedy chosen more accurately according to similarity of action; or if the troublesome symptoms be not very violent, the next remedy must be given immediately, in order to take the place of the improperly selected one.2
1 As all experience shows that the dose of the specially suited homopathic medicine can scarcely be prepared too small to effect perceptible amelioration in the disease for which it is appropriate (§§ 275-278), we should act injudiciously and hurtfully were we when no improvement, or some, though it be even slight, aggravation ensues, to repeat or even increase the dose of the same medicine, as is done in the old system, under the delusion that it was not efficacious on account of its small quantity (its too small dose). Every aggravation by the production of new symptoms - when nothing untoward has occurred in the mental or physical regimen - invariably proves unsuitableness on the part of the medicine formerly given in the case of disease before us, but never indicates that the dose has been too weak.
2 The well informed and conscientiously careful physician will never be in a position to require an antidote in his practice if he will begin, as he should, to give the selected medicine in the smallest possible dose. Like minute doses of a better chosen remedy will re-establish order throughout.
Every medicine prescribed for a case of disease which, in the course of its action, produces new and troublesome symptoms not appertaining to the disease to be cured, is not capable of effecting real improvement,1 and cannot be considered as homopathically selected; it must, therefore, either, if the aggravation be considerable, be first partially neutralized as soon as possible by an antidote before giving the next remedy chosen more accurately according to similarity of action; or if the troublesome symptoms be not very violent, the next remedy must be given immediately, in order to take the place of the improperly selected one.2
1 As all experience shows that the dose of the specially suited homopathic medicine can scarcely be prepared too small to effect perceptible amelioration in the disease for which it is appropriate (§§ 275-278), we should act injudiciously and hurtfully were we when no improvement, or some, though it be even slight, aggravation ensues, to repeat or even increase the dose of the same medicine, as is done in the old system, under the delusion that it was not efficacious on account of its small quantity (its too small dose). Every aggravation by the production of new symptoms - when nothing untoward has occurred in the mental or physical regimen - invariably proves unsuitableness on the part of the medicine formerly given in the case of disease before us, but never indicates that the dose has been too weak.
2 The well informed and conscientiously careful physician will never be in a position to require an antidote in his practice if he will begin, as he should, to give the selected medicine in the smallest possible dose. Like minute doses of a better chosen remedy will re-establish order throughout.
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
He is talking about the need to antidote,if the original selection was wrong,and the patient is having new symptoms not connected to the disease.
Now,assuming that antidoting is required,how do we do it?
Vithoulkus says it is not correct to antidote by another homeopathic remedy.He says,the best method is to ask the patient to drink 6 to 7 cups of coffee,or to rub camphor to his body.
If the reaction is violent he even suggests taking recourse to allopathic medicines,for antidoting the effect of homeo medicines.
Murthy
Now,assuming that antidoting is required,how do we do it?
Vithoulkus says it is not correct to antidote by another homeopathic remedy.He says,the best method is to ask the patient to drink 6 to 7 cups of coffee,or to rub camphor to his body.
If the reaction is violent he even suggests taking recourse to allopathic medicines,for antidoting the effect of homeo medicines.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Why does he advise against using other remedies? Afraid that the patient will immediately prove that one too?
Astra2012 2 decades ago
meanwhile, looking for something else, I found this on supression
Hope you'll find it interesting.
SOME THOUGHTS ON SUPPRESSION
by Peter Morrell
The best I can do is to list a summary of the main points followed by some discussion. This is then followed by some quotes from Close, Kent and Hahnemann about this topic.
The main points about suppression are as follows:
1. in general terms it can be defined as the apparent amelioration of a group of (usually localised) symptoms in a case, either by a non-homeopathic drug or technique, or by a homeopathic drug that is not the simillimum for the case, and which only covers some of the symptoms;
2. suppression is any unaccountable change in a case; it is usually a medicinal effect --ie. the effect of a medicinal substance upon health; not all substances are medicinal, but those which are can either be used toxically or therapeutically;
3. it produces an effect nearer to the 'toxic' end of the toxotherapeutic spectrum;
4. it is not an effect produced by the simillimum;
5. it is not a healing effect, but is detrimental to health in the short or longer term;
6. it is often seen when a medicinal substance is applied to the skin for conditions like eczema, psoriasis or warts; another good example is haemorrhoids; the healing of wounds is not included and nor can the killing of bacteria with antiseptics (including natural ones) realistically be viewed as suppression; antiperspirants suppress a natural bodily function and thus can be included, as can creams, sprays and ointments for fungal infections like Athlete's foot; or those which relieve muscular pains; and zinc oxide creams for baby's nappyrash;
7. there may be a short or long gap in time between the use of a suppressive substance and the appearance of its suppressive effects;
8. it often results from the abuse of material doses of drugs;
9. it can also stem from too frequent repetition of homeopathic drugs, which are ill-suited to the case; and especially if this has been done over a long period and in high potency;
10. the suppressive remedy is often a minor remedy;
11. the suppressive remedy often covers only a small compass of the patient's symptoms;
12. not being the simillimum, it is not acting as a form of similars; the suppressive remedy is related to the case, but one which matches it only imperfectly;
13. the suppressive remedy can be a remedy the patient is particularly sensitive to, but one which is incapable of generating a healing response;
14. most of surgery, herbalism and allopathy are regarded by most homeopaths as forms of suppression; there is at best only conflicting evidence in support of this view;
15. suppression is especially beloved by the dogmatic Kentian school, and therefore finds special emphasis by American homeopaths in general; they seem to accept the whole concept as an act of blind faith and thus become very angry against those who question at a more fundamental level the value, nature or even existence of suppression;
16. suppression sits hand-in-glove with Hering's Law; yet Hering's so-called Law was never a law, but merely a set of obseravtions which can sometimes be made; that it has become a fixed dogma so easily again testifies to homeopaths' apparent desire for mythologies within their belief system; I would question how many people actually observe Hering's Law or suppression to be occurring unless they are 'out hunting' for it anyway; should we genuinely rely upon the biased testimony of someone wanting to see something happen as evidence for its actual existence?
17. any change within a case must flow either from an action of the Vital Force, or from the action of a remedy; if we can ascertain that it is neither, then it must be regarded as the result of a suppression from a medicinal substance;
18. all changes in cases can be viewed as either events of healing or events of disease --this good rule-of-thumb allows us to analyse more clearly what is happening;
19. cases progress under their own steam; the patient gets better or worse under the influence of treatment; there is a problem relating to how long we decide to view an aggravation as 'temporary' before we choose to review the case or intervene to alleviate the patient; patients must only be allowed to suffer for so long; badly managed cases and those with a long history of allopathic abuse necessarily require stoic use of sac lac and the courgae to keep going even when unpleasant symptoms are still emerging from old suppressions;
20. we must always strive to be good neutral observers; we watch how the case changes under the influence of a remedy; we try our best to interpret those changes; it is often very hard to decide which changes are due to the healing action of a remedy, which to the Vital Force and miasms, and which to a suppressive agent; entertaining fixed dogmas greatly hamper this process of neutral observation as they bring to the case a pile of preconceptions about what is actually happening and 'crowd-out' our direct perception; we must strive to view the case neutrally and assess what is happening as either healing and therefore GOOD, or suppressive and therefore BAD.
Discussion
While most of the above points are, I hope, self-evident truths, there is a need to expand upon some of them in greater detail.
In point 8 and 9 it is clear that suppression involves a material dose or very frequent or long-continued abuse of a potentised drug. In both cases the organism is brought under excessive influence of the drug and not only suffers directly for that, but also starts to actually become a proving of that substance.
In points 10 11 and 12 it is clear that the suppressive drug is not the simillimum and covers only a portion of the case. It therefore follows that proper use of the repertory and taking of the full case should never lead to suppressions of any kind.
The problem with point 16 is that this view of suppression derives from Swedenborgian dogmas about the nature of the organism and all those Kentian hierarchies with mind and nervous system at the top and skin at the base. One is at liberty to accept those dogmas or reject them. There is only conflicting evidence at best, that the organism actually works in that way and it is better in my view to just keep your own counsel and watch how the organism operates for yourself.
In the Kentian viewpoint suppression and Hering's laws are gleefully grasped as important dogmas which confirm each other and the rest of the hierarchy ideas. They use one dogma to confirm belief in another and like dogs chasing their tails, they call that science. Its a weird form of science that never bases its assertions upon direct observation of living things, but upon preconceived dogmas. It is a rigid and inflexible belief-system, which most self-styled classicalists seem keen to push at the rest of homeopathy.
Hahnemann, Kent and Close on SuppressionIn relation to the idea of what a 'medicinal substance' is, Hahnemann in the Organon gives some ideas about that. The following quotes relate also to the primary and secondary effects:
'...primary action is to supress every irritation;..Cantharides to stimulate the urinary passages...large doses of purgative drugs...which excite the bowels to frequent evacuation;...stimulates only in its primary action...stimulating in their primary action only...' (p58) Aph 59
'...electricity and galvanism, with in their primary action greatly stimulate muscular action... this action is only a primary action, and that the organism, after it has passed, most certainly falls back, in the secondary (antagonistic) action, into still greater stupor and immobility...' (p59) Aph 59
'Every agent that acts upon the vitality...deranges more or less the vital force...this is termed the primary action...' (p61) Aph 63
'...after the primary action of a medicine that produces in large doses a great change in the health of a healthy person....' (p62) Aph 65
'...in experiments with moderate doses of medicine on healthy bodies, we observe only their primary action...' (p83) Aph 114
All quotes come from the combined 5th/6th edition of Boericke and Dudgeon.
Close:
'Suppression or palliation of disease is the removal of the external symptoms of disease by external, mechanical, chemical or topical treatment; or by means of powerful drugs, given internally in massive doses, which have a direct physiological or toxic effect but no true therapeutic or curative action.' [pp.75- 76]
Kent:
'Do not apply externally the indicated remedy. If it does no good there is no use in using it. If it cures it does so by healing up the external disease before the internal one is cured and thereby leaving no opportunity for the internal disease to come out.
The healthier the patient becomes the more likelikood there is for an eruption upon the skin. The vital energies must be sufficient for this. A cure progresses from within outward.'
'It would seem that the most natural thing to do is to remove external obstructions, but I warn you, anything that comes from within must be treated from within.' [from his Lesser Writings]
Hahnemann frequently discusses suppression The following is merely a guide to some of the more important references to it in the Organon.
In aph 46 he says that a case of blindness was brought on 'for two years after the suppression of a scalp eruption.'
In Aph 59 he talks of suppressing coughs with Opium '..in its primary action it suppresses all irritation...if the physician continues to suppress it with increasingly strong doses of this palliative, fever and night sweats are added to the disturbance.'
In Aph 69 he states that 'the palliative remedy makes the vital force insensible to the natural disease...'
In Aph 185-206 he discusses at length with many examples the horrors of treating 'local diseases' using internal and external drugs in various doses as a great folly and entirely unhomeopathic.
In Aph 235 he discusses the pernicious effects of the suppressive treatment of fevers.
In Aph 276 he discusses again the ill-effects of high doses in 'local diseases'.
In Aph 285 he discusses the ill-effects of suppressing skin eruptions with local applications.
Likewise in Aph 289 he returns to the discussion of various forms of suppressive events and practices.
The above quotes are from the Kunzli/Naude translation.
Sources:
Close, Stuart, 1924, The Genius of Homeopathy, Jain reprint
Hahnemann, Samuel, 1981, The Organon, Kunzli, Naude translation
Hahnemann, Samuel, c1930, The Organon, combined 5th/6th edition, Dudgeon & Boericke
Kent, James Tyler, c1900, Lesser Writings, Aphorisms & Precepts, Jain
Hope you'll find it interesting.
SOME THOUGHTS ON SUPPRESSION
by Peter Morrell
The best I can do is to list a summary of the main points followed by some discussion. This is then followed by some quotes from Close, Kent and Hahnemann about this topic.
The main points about suppression are as follows:
1. in general terms it can be defined as the apparent amelioration of a group of (usually localised) symptoms in a case, either by a non-homeopathic drug or technique, or by a homeopathic drug that is not the simillimum for the case, and which only covers some of the symptoms;
2. suppression is any unaccountable change in a case; it is usually a medicinal effect --ie. the effect of a medicinal substance upon health; not all substances are medicinal, but those which are can either be used toxically or therapeutically;
3. it produces an effect nearer to the 'toxic' end of the toxotherapeutic spectrum;
4. it is not an effect produced by the simillimum;
5. it is not a healing effect, but is detrimental to health in the short or longer term;
6. it is often seen when a medicinal substance is applied to the skin for conditions like eczema, psoriasis or warts; another good example is haemorrhoids; the healing of wounds is not included and nor can the killing of bacteria with antiseptics (including natural ones) realistically be viewed as suppression; antiperspirants suppress a natural bodily function and thus can be included, as can creams, sprays and ointments for fungal infections like Athlete's foot; or those which relieve muscular pains; and zinc oxide creams for baby's nappyrash;
7. there may be a short or long gap in time between the use of a suppressive substance and the appearance of its suppressive effects;
8. it often results from the abuse of material doses of drugs;
9. it can also stem from too frequent repetition of homeopathic drugs, which are ill-suited to the case; and especially if this has been done over a long period and in high potency;
10. the suppressive remedy is often a minor remedy;
11. the suppressive remedy often covers only a small compass of the patient's symptoms;
12. not being the simillimum, it is not acting as a form of similars; the suppressive remedy is related to the case, but one which matches it only imperfectly;
13. the suppressive remedy can be a remedy the patient is particularly sensitive to, but one which is incapable of generating a healing response;
14. most of surgery, herbalism and allopathy are regarded by most homeopaths as forms of suppression; there is at best only conflicting evidence in support of this view;
15. suppression is especially beloved by the dogmatic Kentian school, and therefore finds special emphasis by American homeopaths in general; they seem to accept the whole concept as an act of blind faith and thus become very angry against those who question at a more fundamental level the value, nature or even existence of suppression;
16. suppression sits hand-in-glove with Hering's Law; yet Hering's so-called Law was never a law, but merely a set of obseravtions which can sometimes be made; that it has become a fixed dogma so easily again testifies to homeopaths' apparent desire for mythologies within their belief system; I would question how many people actually observe Hering's Law or suppression to be occurring unless they are 'out hunting' for it anyway; should we genuinely rely upon the biased testimony of someone wanting to see something happen as evidence for its actual existence?
17. any change within a case must flow either from an action of the Vital Force, or from the action of a remedy; if we can ascertain that it is neither, then it must be regarded as the result of a suppression from a medicinal substance;
18. all changes in cases can be viewed as either events of healing or events of disease --this good rule-of-thumb allows us to analyse more clearly what is happening;
19. cases progress under their own steam; the patient gets better or worse under the influence of treatment; there is a problem relating to how long we decide to view an aggravation as 'temporary' before we choose to review the case or intervene to alleviate the patient; patients must only be allowed to suffer for so long; badly managed cases and those with a long history of allopathic abuse necessarily require stoic use of sac lac and the courgae to keep going even when unpleasant symptoms are still emerging from old suppressions;
20. we must always strive to be good neutral observers; we watch how the case changes under the influence of a remedy; we try our best to interpret those changes; it is often very hard to decide which changes are due to the healing action of a remedy, which to the Vital Force and miasms, and which to a suppressive agent; entertaining fixed dogmas greatly hamper this process of neutral observation as they bring to the case a pile of preconceptions about what is actually happening and 'crowd-out' our direct perception; we must strive to view the case neutrally and assess what is happening as either healing and therefore GOOD, or suppressive and therefore BAD.
Discussion
While most of the above points are, I hope, self-evident truths, there is a need to expand upon some of them in greater detail.
In point 8 and 9 it is clear that suppression involves a material dose or very frequent or long-continued abuse of a potentised drug. In both cases the organism is brought under excessive influence of the drug and not only suffers directly for that, but also starts to actually become a proving of that substance.
In points 10 11 and 12 it is clear that the suppressive drug is not the simillimum and covers only a portion of the case. It therefore follows that proper use of the repertory and taking of the full case should never lead to suppressions of any kind.
The problem with point 16 is that this view of suppression derives from Swedenborgian dogmas about the nature of the organism and all those Kentian hierarchies with mind and nervous system at the top and skin at the base. One is at liberty to accept those dogmas or reject them. There is only conflicting evidence at best, that the organism actually works in that way and it is better in my view to just keep your own counsel and watch how the organism operates for yourself.
In the Kentian viewpoint suppression and Hering's laws are gleefully grasped as important dogmas which confirm each other and the rest of the hierarchy ideas. They use one dogma to confirm belief in another and like dogs chasing their tails, they call that science. Its a weird form of science that never bases its assertions upon direct observation of living things, but upon preconceived dogmas. It is a rigid and inflexible belief-system, which most self-styled classicalists seem keen to push at the rest of homeopathy.
Hahnemann, Kent and Close on SuppressionIn relation to the idea of what a 'medicinal substance' is, Hahnemann in the Organon gives some ideas about that. The following quotes relate also to the primary and secondary effects:
'...primary action is to supress every irritation;..Cantharides to stimulate the urinary passages...large doses of purgative drugs...which excite the bowels to frequent evacuation;...stimulates only in its primary action...stimulating in their primary action only...' (p58) Aph 59
'...electricity and galvanism, with in their primary action greatly stimulate muscular action... this action is only a primary action, and that the organism, after it has passed, most certainly falls back, in the secondary (antagonistic) action, into still greater stupor and immobility...' (p59) Aph 59
'Every agent that acts upon the vitality...deranges more or less the vital force...this is termed the primary action...' (p61) Aph 63
'...after the primary action of a medicine that produces in large doses a great change in the health of a healthy person....' (p62) Aph 65
'...in experiments with moderate doses of medicine on healthy bodies, we observe only their primary action...' (p83) Aph 114
All quotes come from the combined 5th/6th edition of Boericke and Dudgeon.
Close:
'Suppression or palliation of disease is the removal of the external symptoms of disease by external, mechanical, chemical or topical treatment; or by means of powerful drugs, given internally in massive doses, which have a direct physiological or toxic effect but no true therapeutic or curative action.' [pp.75- 76]
Kent:
'Do not apply externally the indicated remedy. If it does no good there is no use in using it. If it cures it does so by healing up the external disease before the internal one is cured and thereby leaving no opportunity for the internal disease to come out.
The healthier the patient becomes the more likelikood there is for an eruption upon the skin. The vital energies must be sufficient for this. A cure progresses from within outward.'
'It would seem that the most natural thing to do is to remove external obstructions, but I warn you, anything that comes from within must be treated from within.' [from his Lesser Writings]
Hahnemann frequently discusses suppression The following is merely a guide to some of the more important references to it in the Organon.
In aph 46 he says that a case of blindness was brought on 'for two years after the suppression of a scalp eruption.'
In Aph 59 he talks of suppressing coughs with Opium '..in its primary action it suppresses all irritation...if the physician continues to suppress it with increasingly strong doses of this palliative, fever and night sweats are added to the disturbance.'
In Aph 69 he states that 'the palliative remedy makes the vital force insensible to the natural disease...'
In Aph 185-206 he discusses at length with many examples the horrors of treating 'local diseases' using internal and external drugs in various doses as a great folly and entirely unhomeopathic.
In Aph 235 he discusses the pernicious effects of the suppressive treatment of fevers.
In Aph 276 he discusses again the ill-effects of high doses in 'local diseases'.
In Aph 285 he discusses the ill-effects of suppressing skin eruptions with local applications.
Likewise in Aph 289 he returns to the discussion of various forms of suppressive events and practices.
The above quotes are from the Kunzli/Naude translation.
Sources:
Close, Stuart, 1924, The Genius of Homeopathy, Jain reprint
Hahnemann, Samuel, 1981, The Organon, Kunzli, Naude translation
Hahnemann, Samuel, c1930, The Organon, combined 5th/6th edition, Dudgeon & Boericke
Kent, James Tyler, c1900, Lesser Writings, Aphorisms & Precepts, Jain
Astra2012 2 decades ago
He feels if you again choose a wrong medicine,which may not work really as an antidote, you will complicate the issue.
It is better,to use as an antidote,some thing about which you are sure.Large amounts of coffee,camphor and ofcourse,alopathy are sure antidotes.
It is better,to use as an antidote,some thing about which you are sure.Large amounts of coffee,camphor and ofcourse,alopathy are sure antidotes.
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Good article on suppression.
Yes,there are some well known homeopathic doctors,who are in favour of using allopathic medicines,when things go beyond control.
As I already told you,Vithoulkus,though a Kentian in many aspects,says,if you can't control pnemonia within 3 days,admit him to a hospital and start antibiotics.
After all,more than our dogmatic views,the patients safety and comfort are important.
Farook J.Master,in one of his books, says,he has found a few cases,where the eczema is controlled,by use of corticosteroids, and they remained healthy even after a no.of years.
To conclude, I would say,if the patient feels less irritated,feels more calmness and tranquility,and more confident,then antibiotics use,in serious cases can't be considered as suppression.
He can easily be treated by homeopathy,after his convalascence period is over.
No worry about suppression etc.
But,you must be cautious of using allopathy for minor ailments like headache,bodyache,and othersuch non serious issues,as they will tend to form a habit,and are to be definitely considered as suppressents.
So.keep away from allopathy,for minor ailments.For major ailments,if you or your doctor is not confident,go to allopathy.
Murthy
Yes,there are some well known homeopathic doctors,who are in favour of using allopathic medicines,when things go beyond control.
As I already told you,Vithoulkus,though a Kentian in many aspects,says,if you can't control pnemonia within 3 days,admit him to a hospital and start antibiotics.
After all,more than our dogmatic views,the patients safety and comfort are important.
Farook J.Master,in one of his books, says,he has found a few cases,where the eczema is controlled,by use of corticosteroids, and they remained healthy even after a no.of years.
To conclude, I would say,if the patient feels less irritated,feels more calmness and tranquility,and more confident,then antibiotics use,in serious cases can't be considered as suppression.
He can easily be treated by homeopathy,after his convalascence period is over.
No worry about suppression etc.
But,you must be cautious of using allopathy for minor ailments like headache,bodyache,and othersuch non serious issues,as they will tend to form a habit,and are to be definitely considered as suppressents.
So.keep away from allopathy,for minor ailments.For major ailments,if you or your doctor is not confident,go to allopathy.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
Good discussions. I have used a chinese rubbing oil which is ten percent camphor to antidote for myself. I agree if there is no serious problem, it is not necessary to antidote, but if you need to consult a Remedy Relationship reference.
Astra,
I explained to Namaste in a post that I have seen auras for seven years and when I take a remedy I first see the bright white aura change to gray, then over time to silver, then to bright silver and then back to white. If the remedy is a good match the first color may be the silver, and fewer aggravations.
Yes, because of energy work my aura is affected and I can be more sensitive. I do not see energy blocks in people, only feel them. I don't mix or open remedies for other people. I can hand someone a bottle without problems.
It is much nicer to see people cooperating in posts. It doesn't ever really matter who gets the credit, what counts is that help is given and understanding increased.
Where I do not feel confident, I am very happy to have those with long term experience step in. And if I make a mistake, then help me understand why.
My best wishes to all of you.
Astra,
I explained to Namaste in a post that I have seen auras for seven years and when I take a remedy I first see the bright white aura change to gray, then over time to silver, then to bright silver and then back to white. If the remedy is a good match the first color may be the silver, and fewer aggravations.
Yes, because of energy work my aura is affected and I can be more sensitive. I do not see energy blocks in people, only feel them. I don't mix or open remedies for other people. I can hand someone a bottle without problems.
It is much nicer to see people cooperating in posts. It doesn't ever really matter who gets the credit, what counts is that help is given and understanding increased.
Where I do not feel confident, I am very happy to have those with long term experience step in. And if I make a mistake, then help me understand why.
My best wishes to all of you.
museon 2 decades ago
Thanks.
I wouldn't wait 3 days with antibiotics in pneumonia-maybe it's not a homeopathic view but it's an emergency and in emergency sometimes allopathy is more reliable, like e.g. in accidents.
I definitely agree with you about suppresion and antibiotics.
"ear problem" can be treated homeopath. after this crisis is over and antibiotics are not used.
I wouldn't wait 3 days with antibiotics in pneumonia-maybe it's not a homeopathic view but it's an emergency and in emergency sometimes allopathy is more reliable, like e.g. in accidents.
I definitely agree with you about suppresion and antibiotics.
"ear problem" can be treated homeopath. after this crisis is over and antibiotics are not used.
Astra2012 2 decades ago
Thanks Museon,Astra and all others,who are following this thread for your interest.
More food for thought.
"No where in Organon is talking about "homeopathic suppression". All the examples are about suppression by crude, large dose medications of allopaths. Hahnemann repeatedly talks about how strong dissimilar diseases of allopathic medication suspends the underlying natural disease of the poor patient!
Although no where Hahnemann is talking about homeopathic suppression, the idea of suppression can be applied in the wrong use of homeopathic remedies. In the footnote to 7th aphorism, he writes:
"In all times, the old school physicians, not knowing how else to give relief, have sought to combat and if possible to suppress by medicines, here and there, a single symptom from among a number in diseases - a one-sided procedure, which, under the name of symptomatic treatment, has justly excited universal contempt, because by it, not only was nothing gained, but much harm was inflicted. A single one of the symptoms present is no more the disease itself than a foot is the man himself. This procedure was so much the more reprehensible, that such a single symptom was only treated by an antagonistic remedy (therefore only in an enantiopathic and palliative manner), whereby, after a slight alleviation, it was subsequently only rendered all the worse."
Homeopathic remedies also induce medicinal diseases. If a one-sided non-homeopathic prescription of homeopathic remedies is repeated or used in large doses (not rare in pseudohomoeopaths' prescriptions), the remedy can cause suppression.
If the prescription is homeopathic to the totality of symptoms but without consideration of miasmic depth of the patient, it acts superficially and often there is a relapse but this is also not identified as suppression."
Any comments pl.
Murthy
More food for thought.
"No where in Organon is talking about "homeopathic suppression". All the examples are about suppression by crude, large dose medications of allopaths. Hahnemann repeatedly talks about how strong dissimilar diseases of allopathic medication suspends the underlying natural disease of the poor patient!
Although no where Hahnemann is talking about homeopathic suppression, the idea of suppression can be applied in the wrong use of homeopathic remedies. In the footnote to 7th aphorism, he writes:
"In all times, the old school physicians, not knowing how else to give relief, have sought to combat and if possible to suppress by medicines, here and there, a single symptom from among a number in diseases - a one-sided procedure, which, under the name of symptomatic treatment, has justly excited universal contempt, because by it, not only was nothing gained, but much harm was inflicted. A single one of the symptoms present is no more the disease itself than a foot is the man himself. This procedure was so much the more reprehensible, that such a single symptom was only treated by an antagonistic remedy (therefore only in an enantiopathic and palliative manner), whereby, after a slight alleviation, it was subsequently only rendered all the worse."
Homeopathic remedies also induce medicinal diseases. If a one-sided non-homeopathic prescription of homeopathic remedies is repeated or used in large doses (not rare in pseudohomoeopaths' prescriptions), the remedy can cause suppression.
If the prescription is homeopathic to the totality of symptoms but without consideration of miasmic depth of the patient, it acts superficially and often there is a relapse but this is also not identified as suppression."
Any comments pl.
Murthy
bandarbabu2000 2 decades ago
To 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.