≡ ▼
ABC Homeopathy Forum

 

The ABC Homeopathy Forum

Diffeence between pills and liquid

Could anyone tell me what is the difference between taking a remedy in the form of pills and liquid?

thanks,
Gnan.
 
  a_gnan on 2006-09-25
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
pills are more effective than the liquid. because Pills remains at tonge for some times but not the liquid .

dr.deoshlok sharma
 
deoshlok last decade
what about sniffing the liquid? Ive heard this works as well.
 
Jay 15 last decade
I do not agree with Deoshlok's reply. He is obviously the classically trained homeopath who has not had experience in the use of the Wet Dose with Homeopathic Remedies.

Quite frankly I too was very skeptical of the efficacy of using the wet dose and it was only after I observed Dr Luc de Schepper whom I hosted here in Sri Lanka last year when he arrived with another homeopath member of Homeopaths without Borders, that I was converted.

Luc assured me that this wet dose technique was not his own as it is recorded in the Sixth Edition and has been in use for many years although for some reason it fell out of disuse for some reason that we cannot account for.

He proved to me that just 3 tiny little grains of any remedy smaller than a grain of sand in a 500ml bottle of spring water has a better effect on evoking the patient's response which lead to a cure which seemed almost miraculous especially in the case of my use of Arnica for various ailments that are not listed in the currently used texts.

The patient is instructed to roll the remedy water in his mouth to achieve complete absorption both sublingually and through the intra buccal membranes or inside the mouth.

The remedy is taken in a teaspoonful either direct from the bottle when it is known as the Wet Dose ( to contrast with the Dry Dose, meaning pellets) or the Split Dose which is a teaspoonful of the remedy from the bottle stirred into a half cup of water. In all instances the bottle is succussed a number of times usually over 5 times to ensure that the next dose is slightly higher in potency than the last. This is important to ensure that the ailment is cured faster than otherwise without succussing. This is perhaps the real reason why the Wet Dose is far more potent in curing an ailment in comparison to the dry pellets which are of the same static potency throughout the course.

This method has always been shown to help the patient better than the dry dose in pellets and I can personally certify to this fact having used the Wet Dose for the last 18 months exclusively.

I would recommend that Deoshlok also uses this same technique and report his findings to members.

I emphasize once again that this Wet and Split Dose is not my idea or that of Luc. It dates back to the Sixth Edition.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
I forgot to tick the Email box in my last post.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
Yes I agree with Joe. I consider myself a classical. Many classical homeopaths use dry doses in high potency but this method was use before the 6th edition of the Organon came to light. And if we are trying to adhere to Hahnemanns intentions we must use the watery potencies LMs and the split dose as outlined.This was his final method. Watery potencies avoid unwanted aggravations when used properly. Hahnamann also recommended olfaction(sniffing) the remedy, this would be used for a very sensetive person.
ps In Joes post he is referring to The Organon (Hahnemann)
 
Sycotic last decade
Obviously Hahnemann. There is none other Sixth Edition, as far as I am aware.

Thanks for your agreement.

I hope that this attitude will continue.

Remember that it is the patient that comes first.

Not the debate of Classical versus Non classical alias 'Joepathy' which strangely enough, works admirably.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
Joe, Perhaps you should embrace the term Joepathy. I understand it was initally meant as an insult to you from someone on here, but you should embrace it and take it as a compliment. Its kind of funny as you do definetely have a unique style to you. Keep up with the Joepathy, you helped many with it!!

Regards,
Jay
 
Jay 15 last decade
To Jay

Thank you for the compliment.

It is quite possible that long after I am no more (I will be 77 in 3 weeks), that this new word 'Joepathy' may yet be used to define a branch of homeopathy which to me seems the obvious choice a patient has to at least stabilize and soon cure his ailment. My record of success seems to be growing by the day and I am humbled that I have been guided by God to be the instrument of so many thousands of cures of seemingly impossible cases, some of which had been abandoned first by the doctors, then by the ayurvedic physicians and later by the classical homeopaths which I have cured almost overnight in some cases that I have solved.

I believe I owe this instinct to my forefathers who in the late 17th century were on record as having cured the last King of Kandy which was the capital of Taprobane as Sri Lanka was then known. He had suffered from some illness which had defied the ayurvedic specialists at that time and was rewarded for his expertise by being gifted a vast tract of land in the lowlands.

All I ask of the classical school is to leave me in peace to help those who seek a cure with my Joepathy. They are welcome to criticize me if I fail but all I ask is for a fair chance to prove that this branch of Homeopathy also works, perhaps even better than their own classical homeopathy.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
Dear a gnan.

As stated by a number of others already, the method of administering remedies in water rather than pill form, was the one preferred by Hahnemann in his final years. His assertion was that rather than just 'touching a few nerves' as obviously a pill would, these medicinal solutions 'on the contrary touch many nerves'. Personally I have not used pills or tablets for 8 years now, and on the rare occassion I still use the old Centesimals, I will even give these as either Olfaction (sniffing), which is absorbed directly by the higher centres via the olafactory system, or in water.

A word of warning though to both yourself, and other Homoeopaths. Centesimals are VERY different to LM's, and regardless of what most seem to promote, they will not tolerate the same degree of repeated sucussion as these more highly refined and medicinally active potencies. Repeated sucussion and application of the same Centesimal potency is NOT the same as dosing with LM's, and in fact can make these older scale potencies act in a most furious and injurious manner when continually applied over time, as they simply cannot stand this degree of dynamization. I understand David Little has also come to the same conclusion.

I hope this helps.
 
Hahnemania last decade
Dear Joe.

I am afraid I cannot find the original thread on which you replied to my comment of your mode of treatment (which I did glance over), as it has been a several days, and there seems to be a very high turnover here, so I will reply here from what I can remember.

I have read your posts on a number of different forums, and have always felt the need to comment, as your approach to treatment is just so far removed from true Homoeopathy. However, whenever you reply to these I am always struck by your very obvious dedication to your patients, and by your overwhelming benevolence, both of which of course are very admirable, but this doesn't make you a Homoeopath...

Your mode of treatment takes nothing into consideration of maiasmtic diathesis, which is the cause of 90% of chronic disease, and this is not just a quote from a book here, I actually KNOW this to be true from 12 years of clinnical experience, and by applying remedies in the manner you do, all you are doing is both supressing the patients symptoms, and making their entire case more difficult to treat for those of us who are able.
I am sure you perceive some of your cases to be 'cured' by your method of treatment, but this can only be by means of palliation, supression, or by the complaint in question being only acute to begin with, as you are not even looking into the cause of the condition, or applying remedies based on Homoeopathic principles.

You prescribe remedies based on your experience of individual cases, i.e Remedy A worked for condition B in Patient C, and then prescribe the same remedy everytime you see the same condition, and this is just not Homoeopathy at all, it is more akin to allopathy.

So yes, at the end of the day, although I am enamoured by your dedication and benevolence, I am afraid I must go with the others. Whatever it is you are practicing, it is not Homoeopathy by any stretch of the imagination. You state that you wish to be left in peace, but the very nature of the post I replied to elsewhere was damnning of the classical method which you clearly state does not work. No sir, it does not work for YOU, because you do not have the knowledge to apply it, there is a great difference.

I will admit, I have not seen any of your case histories in full, but from what I have seen, you are not curing anything, except perhaps by accident, you are merely palliating and supressing by this mode of treatment.

In the interests of fairness though, and to give myself and everyone else a deeper insight into a chronic case treated by your method, I 'challenge' (for want of a better term) to post such a case so myself and other classical Homoeopaths may assess how, or indeed IF this method IS actually curing, or as stated, merely supressing symptoms.

Regards.
 
Hahnemania last decade
Hahnemania,

'Repeated sucussion and application of the same Centesimal potency is NOT the same as dosing with LM's, and in fact can make these older scale potencies act in a most furious and injurious manner when continually applied over time, as they simply cannot stand this degree of dynamization. I understand David Little has also come to the same conclusion.'

That's quite different from what Hahneman said, and you provide no indication of when, or after how many succussions and uses of a wet dose this 'furiouis and injurious' response might take place.

I'm no homeopath, but have read about the wet dose in the Sixth Organon, where it states that a patient can be given repeated doses in the wet dose(after succussion) of a remedy with far less risk of aggravation than with dry doses.

As Joe recommends, I've been using Arnica 30C in the wet dose, a teaspoon twice a day, for about ten months now. A 20 fluid oz. bottle of water, with some poured out, will have about 60 - 65 teaspoon doses. So, following that dosing, the orginal three pills of the remedy and the water will be give ten succussions about 65 times before the remedy is all used.

The wet dose is discussed quite a bit here, and I expect many readers would like more detailed information. Do you have any guideline as to when this 'furious and injurious' reaction might set in if C scale remedies in the wet dose are repeatedly succussed?
 
Will88 last decade
Dear Will.

Quote:'That's quite different from what Hahneman said'
Hahnemann was talking about the use of LM's, not Centesimals, as already stated. They are a VERY different scale of potency.
To elaborate further regarding how many sucussions a Centesimal potency will stand before acting in a detrimental manner: I have found liquid potencies will tolerate maybe up to 40 sucussions, depending on how much medicating potency has been used in the preparation of the remedy, and I would also only use this method if applying the same potency a few times on one day in chronic cases, or, in acute cases. It is most deffinately not suitable for the ongoing treatment of chronic disease as the LM's are.
I would also not sucuss Centesimals when they have been dissolved in copious amounts of water, as obviously this is not standardized serial dilution by any means, and the effects can be very eratic, and we cannot ascertain to what degree they are being dynamized, which of course may effect the action of the next potency chosen.

QUOTE:'I'm no homeopath, but have read about the wet dose in the Sixth Organon, where it states that a patient can be given repeated doses in the wet dose(after succussion) of a remedy with far less risk of aggravation than with dry doses.'
Again, this refers to the LM scale only (not to mention when it is properley prescribed and dosed, as it is a much stronger scale of potency), as the use of centesimals was already rejected by Hahnemann at this point. This was the whole point of the 6th edition.

It troubles me greatly that you have been using a remedy daily for 10 months, as this is by no means good Homoeopathy. Injurious affects in this particular instance, would be a proving of the remedy in question. Fortunately though a lot of commercially produced remedies (i.e those found in health stores) are so badly produced or stored, that they do not posess any medicinal action by the time they are taken anyway, but it is VERY, VERY unlikely if this remedy IS medicinally active, that you would have not started proving it after taking it daily for 10 months. What exactly are you taking Arnica for in this way?
 
Hahnemania last decade
To Hahnemania

I do appreciate and respect your views and note that you have been classically trained and have been in practice for the last 12 years. As you may already have gathered by reading my posts I lack the formal training that you have had as to me Homeopathy is only a hobby today as it has been for the last 30 years when as a skeptic I decided to investigate how any remedy in this case, Gelsemium 30 could possibly help to stop my frequent colds from which I had suffered for many years and had almost died in the treatment thereof, as the stupid surgeon who did my tonsillectomy which he had mistakenly suspected was the cause of my colds, started bleeding as he had used a pain killer after surgery on the tonsil fossa and had used an overdose which prevented clotting. I woke up with a massive wad of cotton in my throat and it was a matter of touch and go till he was able to arrest the bleeding.

I soon discovered that I had risked my life quite unnecessarily as my tonsillectomy did not make the slightest difference in my sensitivity to colds and I was back to square one. It was then that a friend who later qualified as a homeopath gave me something he called a 'cold breaker' to stop my colds. It was Gels 30c which was the best he could think of at that time, and this seemed to work and relieved me of the daily dose of Piriton that doctors had prescribed to prevent me catching my weekly cold, which had reached a level that was taking its toll as I was in a state of suspended animation all the time.

I shall now comment directly below the paragraphs of your post to enable me to meet your argument more easily:


I am afraid I cannot find the original thread on which you replied to my comment of your mode of treatment (which I did glance over), as it has been a several days, and there seems to be a very high turnover here, so I will reply here from what I can remember.

I have read your posts on a number of different forums, and have always felt the need to comment, as your approach to treatment is just so far removed from true Homoeopathy. However, whenever you reply to these I am always struck by your very obvious dedication to your patients, and by your overwhelming benevolence, both of which of course are very admirable, but this doesn't make you a Homoeopath...

Your mode of treatment takes nothing into consideration of maiasmtic diathesis, which is the cause of 90% of chronic disease, and this is not just a quote from a book here, I actually KNOW this to be true from 12 years of clinnical experience, and by applying remedies in the manner you do, all you are doing is both supressing the patients symptoms, and making their entire case more difficult to treat for those of us who are able.
I am sure you perceive some of your cases to be 'cured' by your method of treatment, but this can only be by means of palliation, supression, or by the complaint in question being only acute to begin with, as you are not even looking into the cause of the condition, or applying remedies based on Homoeopathic principles.

You prescribe remedies based on your experience of individual cases, i.e Remedy A worked for condition B in Patient C, and then prescribe the same remedy everytime you see the same condition, and this is just not Homoeopathy at all, it is more akin to allopathy.


I am glad that you have followed my progress on this and other forums two of which do not permit me to post on them any more as they felt that I was taking the wind out of their (homeopathic) sails which rocked their boat far too violently to be comfortable for themselves. I have no quarrel with the owners of these sofums as the patients who were being treated by me successfully in them all migrated to this and the other forums that made me welcome to carry on my own 'Joepathy' which strangely enough has worked so far, even though classically trained homeopaths like you have warned me and the patients that Disaster is at hand unless you repent and follow the classical rote.

However in spite of all these dire warnings of disaster I can honestly state that not one case have I encountered that has 'backfired' on me or the patient and at the worst the remedy may not help. I have not encountered any aggravation at all as I only use the lower potencies unless under very special circumstances and even then I only use the 200c potency which usually helps like in Arthritis where I use the Rhus Tox 200c in the wet dose as I discovered that it was the ultimate remedy for this ailment while I used Hypericum 200 to dull the pain for which many patients use the most exotic drugs usually Diclofenac Sodium and even Vioxx.

I prefer not to be guided by the classical homeopathic traditions as to me they seems to be so very convoluted in their scope like the 'Miasmatic Diathesis' you refer to which frankly does not interest me although I do remember studying it some years ago. I am more interested in the 'here and now' in life today, and I can tell you honestly that I prefer to do so as I am aware that at age 77 I do not have too much time left for me in my life to help others as I am now doing, after my sons joined me in my family owned business which was founded by my late Dad in 1924 in Colombo where we enjoy a very prestigious position in the city. Their arrival 10 years ago after their studies in Ivy League Universities in the US, gave me the free time to devote to Homeopathy and although I have made a study of it in the past starting from 1965 when I was first introduced to this science as a skeptic, I prefer today to use my instinct of healing born of my own experience over the past 25 years of study and treatment of people who consult me which has increased in the past 10 years as I have always treated all my patients free of charge as I felt that my gift of healing was not for sale and I also give the remedies to those who consult me in Colombo completely free of charge. I must admit to using homeopathic software specifically Radar 9.2 whenever I am not able to diagnose and suggest a remedy for a case which is rather rarely.

Quite frankly I have never experienced any cases I have treated which had taken a turn for the worse on the lines you have indicated :

'I am sure you perceive some of your cases to be 'cured' by your method of treatment, but this can only be by means of palliation, supression, or by the complaint in question being only acute to begin with, as you are not even looking into the cause of the condition, or applying remedies based on Homoeopathic principles. '

The criterion that I use to treat the common cases that I have had some success is exactly in the manner you have observed that if it is good for one it is usually good for the other. 'Sauce for the Goose, sauce for the gander ' ? This does not quite fit my argument but is nevertheless demonstrative of it.



So yes, at the end of the day, although I am enamoured by your dedication and benevolence, I am afraid I must go with the others. Whatever it is you are practicing, it is not Homoeopathy by any stretch of the imagination. You state that you wish to be left in peace, but the very nature of the post I replied to elsewhere was damnning of the classical method which you clearly state does not work. No sir, it does not work for YOU, because you do not have the knowledge to apply it, there is a great difference.

Glad to note that you appreciate the time and effort that I put into the therapy that I have prescribed. I have no qualms about the nomenclature you choose to call it and as someone suggested above, I shall be quite happy to have it labeled 'Joepathy' if that helps you to appreciate its merits. Knowledge is cultivated throughout one's life and it is the ability to sift this knowledge in this case to a cure that is relevant, removed from the source that you have acquired it, and the source that I have acquired it. It is important to remember that whatever 'pathy' is involved it is the patient's cure that is the primary objective and if you remember the first three Aphorisms of Hahnemann you will perhaps understand the reason why I prefer to use my own God given instincts to help heal any member who posts his ailment on this and other Homeopathic forums, asking for assistance.


I will admit, I have not seen any of your case histories in full, but from what I have seen, you are not curing anything, except perhaps by accident, you are merely palliating and supressing by this mode of treatment.

I am listing below the links to a few cases I have treated successfully and if you have the patience to read them and would like to comment on them I shall be interested. These cases may give you more evidence of the cures that have resulted from my therapy which may be of some surprise to you.

I would like to mention that I have saved these links as I often have to consult them to refresh my mind on the needs of a particular patient whom I may have treated some time previously.

FISTULA http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/1127/
SMOKING http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/41764/
http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/71302/
ASTHMA http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/55717/
http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/65045/
ACNE http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/57895/
DIABETES http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/30
http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/38428/
http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/37658/
http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/50413/
DANDRUFF http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/20742/
SPLIT DOSE http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/49208/
OBESITY http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/15923/
ARTHRITIS http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/49862/
DIAB/OBEST http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/67026/
BETA H S http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/34030/
GERD http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/25315/
http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/66811/
NAT PHOS http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/69036/
ARNICA http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/42450
COUGH NS http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/75042/
KIDNEY http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/76063/
PILES http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/557/
COMA 21YRS http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/40936
OVARY CYST http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/60698/
SPOTTING http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/79233/
BLEEDING http://www.abchomeopathy.com/forum2.php/79462/



In the interests of fairness though, and to give myself and everyone else a deeper insight into a chronic case treated by your method, I 'challenge' (for want of a better term) to post such a case so myself and other classical Homoeopaths may assess how, or indeed IF this method IS actually curing, or as stated, merely supressing symptoms.


I am always available to discuss any particular case selected from those listed above which comprise only a few choice cases I have collated. They are many more that I do not have any record of and you can access them if you are interested as you know, merely by clicking on my name above.

I would like to emphasize that I do not consider that I am an authority in Homeopathy and I only practice it to help suffering humanity which I have stressed I have always done without any expectation of a fee as I feel a deep sense of satisfaction in helping to cure the patient's ailment. As no doubt you will agree the patient's interest comes first and I believe that my own direct approach to a cure is much quicker in evoking a response in comparison to the classical method which you know all about.

I do enjoy engaging in this form of dialogue and debate as it enables me to share with you and others who may read this thread, that there is a non classical approach to healing which some have called Joepathy which is worth at least considering.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
Dear Joe. Okay, I have read a few of the posts linked to above, and I'm sorry I'm still not convinced that in the majority of cases you are doing anything more than supressing symptoms or palliating.
To give just two examples:
A case of Asthma wich showed some apparent improvement after the use of Nat Sulph. Firstly, the remedy was used after a course of steroid treatment, and the remedy started immediateley after this was ceased, so we cannot possibly know whether this 'improvement' was due to supression from this treatment or the remedy. Second example, that of the coma patient. Yes, there was some improvement after arnica, which is to be expected after an accident causing brain damage, but there was no follow up to this, because you do not have the knowledge to do so. The patients improvement ceased under Arnica, and they then went on to develop convulsions, and this is a VERY clear indication to follow with Cicuta Virosa after such a brain injury, but you suggested giving yet MORE Arnica in a lower potency. Are you not aware that if you give a patient a lower potency after a higher one, or give the same UNINDICATED remedy for an extended period of time after it has been curative, the patient will PROVE the remedy, which may cause a complete relapse of the condition?
And what about how the patient is then left with no further treatment, maybe having convulsions long term as a result of this Arnica 'layer' being removed?

THIS is the main problem I have with your mode of treatment, I DO very much admire your dedication to helping people and to your generosity of spirit, but these two things alone are NOT enough to practice Homoeopathy, and without proper knowledge of how to prescribe, follow up a case, and most importantly, to observe the progression of disease, you will more often than not actually do more harm than good.

You simply view the removal of a particular symptom, or group of symptoms as cure, but this is NOT always the case Joe.

You appear to have no knowledge of the basic principles of Homoeopathy, and in particular Hering's law.

If you give ANY badly indicated remedy over an extended period of time such as you do, lets say for asthma, it may well remove these symptoms, but not by CURING them, by actually SUPRESSING them, and driving the condition even DEEPER into the body. So yes, the asthma is removed, but the patient will then go on to develop something more serious in it's place, and this may occur many many months after this supressive treatment is given, long after you have any contact with them. There is no follow up given to your cases, you have no knowledge of what is ocurring after people walk away from this forum believeing themselves to be cured.

However much it may SEEM to be the case in the short term that you are indeed alleviating suffering, in the long term it is actually probably doing them a lot of harm, which then takes an actual Homoeopathy a lot of patience and energy to rectify, and bare in mind that the majority of these cases may walk away and never see a Homoeopath again, in which case you have done nothing more than condemned them to an increased level of suffering in the future, which of course, you will have no knowledege of at all.

In closing, I have done what many others have not taken the time to do, I have taken the time to look into your cases and method of prescribing, and what I see worries me even more now than it did before...

I am sure you would make an excellent Homoeopath given the right guidance and teaching, but all you are probably providing is short term releief at the cost of long term suffering, and this is not Homoeopathy is about at all.
 
Hahnemania last decade
Hahnemania-

I am currently following Joe's advice for chronic eczema and food sensitivities. I am taking the arnica wet dose, and Nat. Phos. 6x. In under two weeks time there has been dramatic change for me, though it is too soon to say if my eczema will dissappear forever.

I am willing to serve as a test case, i will keep posting my progress, and you can tell me if I am being cured or just having my sypmtoms suppressed. I will keep and open mind as i want to learn, and be healed.

I can tell you that I have tried almost everything for relief, to no avail, until now. I will be travelling starting tomorrow, until sunday, after that I will report daily. you just have to tell me what you want to know.

I can say that for the first time in years I have hope that I can clear my eczema after a short time following Joe's advice. I am not biased however, and will post whatever information you ask.

John
 
john34 last decade
To John

I am indeed grateful that you offered your case at a guinea pig level to prove or disprove the efficacy or otherwise of my direct approach to healing now known as 'Joepathy'. As someone recently mentioned this term was first used in a dererogatory sense to describe what to classical homeopaths represented the negative values of using my therapy but it is cases such as yours, which in a few days under treatement with Arnica, took a sudden turn for the better cannot easily be discounted as you have living photographic proof which you have submitted on this forum and which you also shared with me by email. You can later also post them on this thread to show the ungodly mess that the skin on the back of your hand was originally for many years and how it suddenly took a turn for the better by drying up and just when I was at my wit's end to suggest a remedy to heal the dry skin that was flaking off after the ooze dried out, therby causing you even more discomfort, it was my brainwave of using Nat Phos 6x that came to your rescue. The last photograph you sent me last night shows an almost normal skin which will soon heal in a few days.

I really fail to understand the reason for the consternation as expressed above in Hahnemania's post above and I am convinced that he means well by warning other members of the dire consequences that he feels must necessarily follow all my patients who like you were suffering for years under allopathic and later homeopathic treatment all of which were to no avail till my Joepathy came to their rescue.

It may interest you to learn that I have over 10 cases of chronic Eczema that I have CURED during the past 5+ years whom I have not sighted ever after. I presume that it would be safe to qualify these cases as premanently cured. I do however contact with at least 2 of these miracle cures and just recently a patient saw me and displayed what were his lesions which now resemble Vitiligo as the ooze of his chronic Eczema lesions have been cover over by skin which is pink in colour in comparison to his dark brown skin overall. All cases responded to Arnica 6c which as you may know is not listed as the remedy for Eczema in the texts that we have all studied.

It is cases like yours of chronic Eczema which was cured in your case in about 10 days and in other cases in just 3 days that I believe entitle me to continue with my own therapy which is born not only of study and experience, but I feel is more instinctive and perhaps inherited from my forefathers who were reputed to be famous Ayurvedic physicians one of whom cured the last King of Kandy, Sri Wickrama Rajasingha in the late 17th century and this cure was recorded in history.

As I have often mentioned before, Homeopathy is only a Hobby to which I devote about 3 hours daily in helping anyone in distress free of any charge, including the remedies which I use. I do derive some deep satisfaction out of helping to alleviate suffering and I am confident that the good God looks upon me with favour as at my age of 77 years I am still able to do a full days work as I have done since 1950 in my very old family owned business established in 1924.

Homeopathy first attracted my attention as a skeptic in 1968 and after a period of study and experimentation to discover its wonder, I then commenced using my gift of healing to help my own family to overcome their ailments. Sinct that time I have been actively involved in my own way for about 25 years during which time I have not used any allopathic drugs including antibiotics except in 2002 for 3 weeks when I was was on Ciprofloxacine for 21 days post surgery.

I do not seek to challenge the classical concept of Homeopathy. I am sure that those who practice it have very good reasons to abide by the strict rules that succeeding generations of homeopaths have added to perhaps to make this science more and more nebulous to ensure that it is kept within the realm of those qualified in this science. I would like to place on record that the chances of a classical homeopath succeeding in identifying the remedy for an ailment without the use of Homeopathic software like Radar which I too use when the occasion demands it, is very rare indeed. I mention this simple but obvious fact as the identification of a remedy that will fit the complete picture cannot in my opinion be left to the human mind however ingenious it is, as I believe that the selection of this remedy can only be successfully be done with Radar or similar software that has been used by Homeopaths throughout the world.

I do resent however when those qualified classical scholars deride the dedicated effort that I expend in helping those who ask for help on this and other forums not forgetting those who consult me for various problems personally here in Colombo.

All I ask is that these classical types observe the therapy that I use and then make up their mind whether or not my own Joepathy can be used to help alleviate human suffering on the basis of the results that are open to the world on this and other forums.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
Dear John, a very noble offer indeed, and one I would be most interested in pursuing.
I would though like to point out that it can take many, many months before the effects of supressive treatment can become evident, and have seen it even take up to 6, before new, deeper symptoms develop. Are you really willing to continue posting for this amount of time?
If the answer is yes, and I am still posting here also, then yes, this would be good to observe.

For purposes of your own observations though, what you should be looking for is any new symptoms that apper after the skin complaint dissapears (if it does). Anything at all, stomach complaints, headaches, lung troubles, absolutely anything. If you develop a new pattern of symptoms in this way, then the disease has been driven further into the body, and the treatment has merely been supressive. If the above occurs, as I am quite sure it will, having witnessed this many, many times at the hands of other 'Homoeopaths' of dubious methods, and if I AM still around, I would be happy to then step in and prescribe treatment to return the disease to the skin, and then properley cure it.
 
Hahnemania last decade
Dear Joe.

QUOTE:'but it is cases such as yours, which in a few days under treatement with Arnica, took a sudden turn for the better cannot easily be discounted'

Did you not read the above? It is not unusual for classical Homoeopaths to witness such apparent amelioration of a condition under suppressive treatments, so at this point in time, this proves nothing.

QUOTE:'You can later also post them on this thread to show the ungodly mess that the skin on the back of your hand was originally'
Ahh, so wait a minute here, are you saying you have appiled remedies to this patient before? If this is the case then I will also need to know what any remedies given were, in the interests of true scientific experiment.

QUOTE: I really fail to understand the reason for the consternation as expressed above in Hahnemania's post above.
And that is my point Joe, if you had knowledge of true Homoeopathic principles, as laid down by Hahnemann and his followers themselves, then you would understand my attitude to your mode of application. And it is not a case that I 'feel these dire consequences must necessarily follow', but a case of they DO follow suppressive treatment, as observed first by Hahnemann, and then by any observant classical Homoeopath since, including, as stated above, myself.

QUOTE: 'It may interest you to learn that I have over 10 cases of chronic Eczema that I have CURED during the past 5+ years whom I have not sighted ever after'
And you have had contact with these patients since this time, in which there has been no development of other symptoms, as detailed above?
Also, I am not saying that ALL of your cases have received suppressive treatments, as of course it would depend on the remedies given. If you are applying the anti-miasmatic similiums to these patients, then of course, there will be proper amelioration. However, if you are merely applying Arnica to these, then they cannot possibly be cured, as Arnica posesses no anti-miasmatic properties whatsoever.

QUOTE: 'It is cases like yours of chronic Eczema which was cured in your case in about 10 days and in other cases in just 3 days that I believe entitle me to continue with my own therapy'
Again, without proper follow up of the case or cases in question, this apparent amelioration proves nothing at all, and cannot be viewed as cure.

QUOTE: 'but I feel is more instinctive and perhaps inherited from my forefathers who were reputed to be famous Ayurvedic physicians'
In terms of your interest and affinity with medicine this may be true, but of course Ayurveda has nothing to do with Homoeopathy, as they are as different as chalk and cheese.

I am sure you do derive some deep satisfaction from treating people, as do we all (or those of us for hom Homoeopathy is a vocation, and not merely a 'career'), but such personal feelings should not be our concern, our first concern is the PROPER healing of the patient.

QUOTE: 'I do not seek to challenge the classical concept of Homeopathy. I am sure that those who practice it have very good reasons to abide by the strict rules that succeeding generations of homeopaths have added to'
But that is exactly what you ARE doing by promoting your methods, which are in direct contradiction to Homoeopathy's founding principles, and as such you will always receive such strong opposition. And yes, we do have very good reasons to abide by these principles, not least of all, 200 years of experience, and careful observation. I, personally though, have no desire to keep Homoeopathy within the realm of those qualified in the field, only within the realm of the founding principles, and those who observe these, whether they be qualified or lay, as these things are not laid down by us, but by nature, we have merely observed them and based our system upon them.

QUOTE: 'I would like to place on record that the chances of a classical homeopath succeeding in identifying the remedy for an ailment without the use of Homeopathic software like Radar which I too use when the occasion demands it, is very rare indeed.'

On what do you base this assertion? How many classical Homoeopaths do you know, or have observed in practice? Such blanket and unfounded statements as this Joe, is one of the reasons you recieve so much opposition. I can only speak for myself, but in the 12 years or so I have been practicing, I have only ever had one case that wasn't completely cured as far as was possible given the situation, and even this case I am still working on, and these cases run into the thousands and include such things as MS, RA, mental retardation, downs syndrome, all manner of mental illnesses, Arthritis, Lupus, and even two cases of cancer and one of functional blindness, I could go on and on, and ALL of this using only our founding, classical principles, and having never once used anything but my repertories, and knowledge of remedies obtained from self provings. I have never once used computer software to select a remedy, and neither have any of my many colleagues, most of whom have a similar cure rate.

QUOTE: 'I mention this simple but obvious fact as the identification of a remedy that will fit the complete picture cannot in my opinion be left to the human mind however ingenious it is, as I believe that the selection of this remedy can only be successfully be done with Radar or similar software'
You are talking of your OWN mind Joe, do not dismiss the abilities of others, based upon your own lack thereof. As stated, I have never used such software, and so far have only had one case which has failed to show any REAL improvement at all (so far).

QUOTE: 'I do resent however when those qualified classical scholars deride the dedicated effort that I expend in helping those who ask for help'
If, of course, that IS what you are providing, and not mereley, as stated above, supresssion, which then goes on to cause deeper problems for the patient in later life.

QUOTE: 'All I ask is that these classical types observe the therapy'
And I have, in the interests of fairness, done just this, and have seen no evidence, as stated, that your mode of treatment is, in the majority of cases, anything moreof supression, as you there are no case follow ups, and no long term observation of the patient's OVERALL health etc.
 
Hahnemania last decade
Last paragraph should read:

Dear Joe.

QUOTE:'but it is cases such as yours, which in a few days under treatement with Arnica, took a sudden turn for the better cannot easily be discounted'

Did you not read the above? It is not unusual for classical Homoeopaths to witness such apparent amelioration of a condition under suppressive treatments, so at this point in time, this proves nothing.

QUOTE:'You can later also post them on this thread to show the ungodly mess that the skin on the back of your hand was originally'
Ahh, so wait a minute here, are you saying you have appiled remedies to this patient before? If this is the case then I will also need to know what any remedies given were, in the interests of true scientific experiment.

QUOTE: I really fail to understand the reason for the consternation as expressed above in Hahnemania's post above.
And that is my point Joe, if you had knowledge of true Homoeopathic principles, as laid down by Hahnemann and his followers themselves, then you would understand my attitude to your mode of application. And it is not a case that I 'feel these dire consequences must necessarily follow', but a case of they DO follow suppressive treatment, as observed first by Hahnemann, and then by any observant classical Homoeopath since, including, as stated above, myself.

QUOTE: 'It may interest you to learn that I have over 10 cases of chronic Eczema that I have CURED during the past 5+ years whom I have not sighted ever after'
And you have had contact with these patients since this time, in which there has been no development of other symptoms, as detailed above?
Also, I am not saying that ALL of your cases have received suppressive treatments, as of course it would depend on the remedies given. If you are applying the anti-miasmatic similiums to these patients, then of course, there will be proper amelioration. However, if you are merely applying Arnica to these, then they cannot possibly be cured, as Arnica posesses no anti-miasmatic properties whatsoever.

QUOTE: 'It is cases like yours of chronic Eczema which was cured in your case in about 10 days and in other cases in just 3 days that I believe entitle me to continue with my own therapy'
Again, without proper follow up of the case or cases in question, this apparent amelioration proves nothing at all, and cannot be viewed as cure.

QUOTE: 'but I feel is more instinctive and perhaps inherited from my forefathers who were reputed to be famous Ayurvedic physicians'
In terms of your interest and affinity with medicine this may be true, but of course Ayurveda has nothing to do with Homoeopathy, as they are as different as chalk and cheese.

I am sure you do derive some deep satisfaction from treating people, as do we all (or those of us for hom Homoeopathy is a vocation, and not merely a 'career'), but such personal feelings should not be our concern, our first concern is the PROPER healing of the patient.

QUOTE: 'I do not seek to challenge the classical concept of Homeopathy. I am sure that those who practice it have very good reasons to abide by the strict rules that succeeding generations of homeopaths have added to'
But that is exactly what you ARE doing by promoting your methods, which are in direct contradiction to Homoeopathy's founding principles, and as such you will always receive such strong opposition. And yes, we do have very good reasons to abide by these principles, not least of all, 200 years of experience, and careful observation. I, personally though, have no desire to keep Homoeopathy within the realm of those qualified in the field, only within the realm of the founding principles, and those who observe these, whether they be qualified or lay, as these things are not laid down by us, but by nature, we have merely observed them and based our system upon them.

QUOTE: 'I would like to place on record that the chances of a classical homeopath succeeding in identifying the remedy for an ailment without the use of Homeopathic software like Radar which I too use when the occasion demands it, is very rare indeed.'

On what do you base this assertion? How many classical Homoeopaths do you know, or have observed in practice? Such blanket and unfounded statements as this Joe, is one of the reasons you recieve so much opposition. I can only speak for myself, but in the 12 years or so I have been practicing, I have only ever had one case that wasn't completely cured as far as was possible given the situation, and even this case I am still working on, and these cases run into the thousands and include such things as MS, RA, mental retardation, downs syndrome, all manner of mental illnesses, Arthritis, Lupus, and even two cases of cancer and one of functional blindness, I could go on and on, and ALL of this using only our founding, classical principles, and having never once used anything but my repertories, and knowledge of remedies obtained from self provings. I have never once used computer software to select a remedy, and neither have any of my many colleagues, most of whom have a similar cure rate.

QUOTE: 'I mention this simple but obvious fact as the identification of a remedy that will fit the complete picture cannot in my opinion be left to the human mind however ingenious it is, as I believe that the selection of this remedy can only be successfully be done with Radar or similar software'
You are talking of your OWN mind Joe, do not dismiss the abilities of others, based upon your own lack thereof. As stated, I have never used such software, and so far have only had one case which has failed to show any REAL improvement at all (so far).

QUOTE: 'I do resent however when those qualified classical scholars deride the dedicated effort that I expend in helping those who ask for help'
If, of course, that IS what you are providing, and not mereley, as stated above, supresssion, which then goes on to cause deeper problems for the patient in later life.

QUOTE: 'All I ask is that these classical types observe the therapy'
And I have, in the interests of fairness done just this, and have seen no evidence, as stated, that your mode of treatment is in the majority of cases, anything more than supression, as there are no case follow ups, and no long term observation of the patient's OVERALL health etc.

(no idea what happened there)
 
Hahnemania last decade
Hmm, and apologies for the double post, the forum software seems to have incorporated my corrections with the original text.
 
Hahnemania last decade
To Hahnemania

The two examples that you have taken from many others that I have provided have resolved their cases satisfactorily. You are invited to read each case to the end to learn the final result. I believe that you have glossed over the first few pages and if you are really interested in proving that the therapy I have used can be bettered by your own classical methods you owe it to me to do so before you start picking holes.
If you have read the case of Shiny who was at first very reluctant to use the Nat Sulph that I had prescribed and only used it as a last resort after the classical homeopaths could not help the boy with Ars Alb 200 that she was using ad lib. I believe that she was more enamoured of the fact that one of the classical types had the title of Dr which as you know I lack. You may like to know that her son is now happily out of the woods and I have not heard from her for some time. Her son does not have to use his Inhalers any more as in the event of there being the slightest cause for any concern, she would have alerted me. You may like to know that my niece a 21 year old who was a chronic Asthmatic from her very young age of around 3 years is now completely cured and does not require an inhaler any more. When she came to me for treatment about 18 months ago she was using up a Ventolin inhaler in a month and I was informed that this inhaler is good for 250 puffs. It took about 6 months to cure her and the fact is that she is completely cured of Asthma today. What is more relevant is that she has not so far shown any signs of distress in accordance with your predictions and fears.

There is no doubt that her son would have to use the Nat Sulph for some time in the future and you may notice that I suggested the split dose taken every other day which worked for some time but when Shiny discovered that he had to have the full teaspoonful daily she decided to use it. You will observe that the only alternative would be to go back to the steroids and the inhalers. It occurs to me that you may like to suggest any other remedy that you can think of from your classical background to help this boy as it is not the Joepathy or the classical method that is important but the cure of the patient. I have not check this case recently but I did prescribe Blatta Orientalis to either Shiny or Fauzia and it seemed to me that the Blatta was more effective for the patient than the Nat Sulph but this may change again and I may have to revert back to the N S.

The case of the 21 year old patient in a coma was a matter of touch and go at the beginning as he was in a coma for 2 months and the best attentions of his doctors were in vain and he was at that time on a respirator. I had an email from Dungi who informed me about 3 months ago that the boy was discharged a short time after the last post on the ABC but is unfortunately confined to a wheel chair and is otherwise none the worse for his narrow escape from death or what could have been infinitely worse, a state of suspended animation. He is well able to do his own thing today but his back is broken and I doubt that the best efforts of anyone can help him. He is now on Arnica 30c twice daily.

It is all well and good to theorize about what could have been prescribed at the time of this boy's predicament when he was on the respirator and all I had was just that inner feeling that he could be brought out of his coma with Arnica 1M. I hope you appreciate that my assistance with a remedy was with the patient unseen in some part of the world which I later discovered was in California and the only information that I could get was after about 24 hours after the event which was relayed by Dunghi who was only a friend of his family. I believe that I was inspired to suggest it and I thank God that it worked. I must admit that I was very concerned with the later convulsions but I felt that they may have been due to the brain readjusting itself after this form of trauma when it was totally out of operation for 2 months. I have no doubt that it was the Arnica that worked the miracle and I would not hesitate to use it again for a similar case especially now that I have the experience on how it worked.

I cannot accept your forebodings of dire gloom in your paragraph which I copy below:

'However much it may SEEM to be the case in the short term that you are indeed alleviating suffering, in the long term it is actually probably doing them a lot of harm, which then takes an actual Homoeopathy a lot of patience and energy to rectify, and bare in mind that the majority of these cases may walk away and never see a Homoeopath again, in which case you have done nothing more than condemned them to an increased level of suffering in the future, which of course, you will have no knowledege of at all. '

I have faith in my own Joepathy which has worked so far. If it does not work or if even worse it makes a bad situation worse or even worse if it gives rise to another unrelated ailment, I then stand corrected but till this eventuality does occur, I shall stand by my own therapy.
 
Joe De Livera last decade
To Joe and Hahnemania-

I am happy to stay around the forum for months, I have been dealing with ill health for years, so there is much I can learn while awaiting the results of this experiment.

Like I mentioned to Joe, I am leaving for a fishing trip where I will be eating poorly, and will be exposed to the elements for a few days, upon my return, on sunday, I will resume posting. I have no doubt that I may suffer a bit of a setback do to overexposure to sun, water and cold, but, that's ok, i'm sure i'll bounce back.

During this experiment, I would like if we can all keep it professional rather than personal, to see what can be learned without hurting anyone's feelings. And, if it doesn't work, of course I would be grateful for any advice that ultimately is helpful.

Thank you,
John
 
john34 last decade
I needed conium 6x but when it was got for me I find it is liquid.
Please advise-patient is a dog
Thanks
Gita
 
gitamadhu 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.