Homeopathy Tips for 11/15/11 Bending the Rules

As homeopathy has evolved since Hahnemann there have been many new ideas about how to use the energetic medicines. I hesitate to use the word “homeopathic” medicine since this would be in direct conflict with what Hahnemann has described. I use “homeopathic” in the sense of why we are giving the medicine and not the medicine itself.

In the classic Hahnemannian system of prescribing we are searching for the simillimum; the single best homeopathic remedy. That  single remedy that is homeopathic to the case. Homeopathic means similar – suffering.

Hahnemann described his system for prescribing very well in the Organon and it is still the “bible” for homeopathic treatment. Because it was written in German and has been translated into many languages there is room for interpretation right from the start. Then as homeopathy has evolved over time others have added their observations and made changes to Hahnemann’s original system. Indeed times have changed in the last 180 years and all things do evolve.

I have found that his system though is still the best and leaves the least  room for interpretation. It  is easy to follow. Because there are as many ways to do homeopathy as there are homeopath’s this leads to spirited discussion as to what is the best way to do Classical Hahnemannian homeopathy.

Over the years I have found a few places that I bend the rules. I still consider myself a classical Hahnemannian homeopath because the foundation for everything I do is still primarily single remedy prescribing. But there are a few things that I do that have worked successfully for me but leave room for argument because they do not follow the Organon directly.

  • I sometimes give more than one remedy at a time. I do this only when I have given a single remedy for a more chronic case and an acute condition arises. This is the only time. I maintain the response to the first remedy by continuing to repeat it but if the suffering is too much during an acute, then I will give another remedy or possibly two if necessary as the situation warrants. This usually only happens when there is acute trauma and multiple injuries to attend to. I never give combination remedies.
  • Hahnemann says in the Organon to never repeat a dose of an unmodified remedy. This means that every dose should be different from the last. This can be achieved by succussion of the remedy before every dose or further dilution of each dose. Every remedy then has to be in a liquid form. Remedies in pellet form are most common here. They are difficult to succuss unless put in water. For the sake of convenience and because I have not seen a problem, I have my clients repeat the dry pellet sublingually on a daily basis. There is rarely any signs of provings. These doses are unmodified. But to put them in water may be too weak for most clients. I do water dosing when necessary but this is usually when there is aggravation or a sensitive client. I do change potencies when it seems that the vital force is no longer in response to the daily potency. This then becomes the next modified dose.

There are as many ways to do homeopathy as there are homeopaths. Some people practice tautopaty or isopathy as a routine matter of course if certain drugs or vaccination are suspect. Others use only combination remedies. There are still many more ways to use the energetic medicines that are not homeopathic yet get described as such. And even within the more classical Hahnemannian style there are many different methods for prescribing. In the end it really does not matter. Most people will have some level of successful prescriptions.

And just as the system can be changed to fit ones preferences of prescribing there are an equal number of ways to see a case. This leaves much again to the discretion of the homeopath. Once a homeopath prescribes that very first dose of the medicine it now time to observe the vital forces response to it. How this response is understood is completely up to the homeopath. If you put two or more homeopaths on the same case it is a sure recipe for disaster. Each will have their own way.

So I leave a wide margin before judging another system or style of prescribing from different homeopaths. I do not agree with all of them but in the end if the client is improving , who cares. There will be different paths to healing taken by each homeopath. The frustrating thing is trying to explain all of these differences to clients. Because they expect a system of medicine that is uniform it is hard for them to understand the subtle and wide differences in the approach to healing under the title of homeopathy.

So my view is for every homeopath to find their own way. In the end they will anyway. Be tolerant and bend the rules every now and again if you feel or see that something works. It may not work for every client but you may expand your repertoire of styles and help that much more.

Please leave a comment below and share the way you have bent the rules. There just may be some new information that may help another member of this forum. Thanks.

21 comments so far

  1. Asghar Ali on

    If during the treatment of a choronic case manifestations of an accute case come up we shall pend the choronic and attend to the acute case first provided of course it is not the direct outcome of choronicity.

    Asghar Ali

  2. Peter Bezemek on

    Well, correct me if I am wrong, but from your articles I had an impression that you tend look rather favorably on Scholten’s and Sankaran’s methods of prescribing homeopathic medicines, which I would consider being as far from classical Hahnemannian homeopathy as one can get.

    While Hahnemann’s system is based on scientific inductive method of unprejudiced observation and evaluation of the results, modern systems are based on pure speculation (whether enlightened or not is not the point here), which is the exact opposite. If you look at old 19th century journals such as American Homoeopathic Review, Homoeopathic Physician, The Organon, Hahnemannian Monthly (the first 10 years or so) etc. you will see a much different picture from the one we see today. And for me this old way of practicing homeopathy makes much more sense and so far I never needed to look for the new methods as the good old ones work very well.

    I think people are just lazy to study the provings properly and rather try to use whatever crutch they can find to make their life more simple. And if the crutch fails, they don’t have much chance to find the error because their prescription was not based on any observable fact in the first place, If a Hahnemannian homeopath fails to cure, he can always turn back to materia medica and study harder or retake the case to find the symptoms they missed the previous time.

    Regarding the repetition of dry dose, I have tried it a few times and most of the time it did not do anything wrong, but once I had a case of a small child which reacted very well to a dry dose of Veratrum 1M and when it was repeated after almost two months (because the case was relapsing), there was an obvious and terrible aggravation which I had to antidote with a dose of Lachesis 200 (which made the child recover in 12 hours or so).
    From that time, I am wary of repeating a dry dose especially in high potency, save from very acute cases when there is no time to dilute the remedy in water, where I have found it does not matter at all.

    Peter Bezemek

  3. Syed Husain on

    A well thoughtful discussion on the prescription of medicine in homeopath, but experience shows that new generation is prescribing/ repeating same medicine for one or the other reasons. Besides, the basic fundamental of homeopathy “use one medicine at one time ” is now the talk of the past as a large number of homeopaths are prescribing more than one medicine at one time. Not only this, the homeopathic products available in the form of DROPS/ TABLETS/ COMBINATIONS based on new researches,produced by the companies are the products of using 1-8 medicines in one product. Under these circumstances what should be ……?

  4. Kafil Ahmed on

    Only one remedy is enough in a time to treate the patient. i have 12 Year experiance in classical homeopathy and alwayes prescribe one remedy in a time and patients are 100% satisfised to my prescription .

  5. celes on

    Dear Robert,

    The article is very interesting and throws light when we prescribe a combined remedy which will prove positive results.



  6. Karen on

    I am under the impression that there is an important reason it’s imperative to follow Hahnemann and that is so we don’t also suppress. Getting results from following your own methods may be so, if it’s not done with the strictest observation done as of the masters of this art, in my opinion. I am speaking not only as a homeopath but as a patient of homeopathy. Thankfully my teacher and healer was a classical homeopath and I got rid of many chronic ailments, but I will say the only thing he varied on me was repeating a dry dose every now and again. As regards to suppression, I believe it’s something to remember when we are thinking of following something outside Hahnemann

  7. Lucinda on

    Thanks everyone for all the great comments. This morning, I watched a video made by David Warkentin (the developer of the MacRepertory and ReferenceWorks programs for homeopathy) in which he describes his approach to homeopathy and how his views had their impact on how he structured his MacRepertory and ReferenceWorks programs. This is how homeopathy is organically changing over time. It’s alive and this is how it can continue to develope over time. (His video is posted on the Kent Homeopathic Associates web site under “support” then “training”. It’s free)

  8. Donna D'Antuono on

    We certainly live in a different world than Hahnemann’s time. We breathe different air, drink different water, and eat different food. Clients live under the influence of vaccination, synthetic chemicals, genetically modified foods, artificial ingredients, wireless devices,and the supression of illness to a degree we have never seen before. The generations before Hahnmann’s time and ours have produced a weaker and more miasmatically complicated population.

    I have found that many homeopaths seem to draw a particular type of client to their practice – for me it seems to be the hypersensitive type, which the way our world is progressing it is not suprising as our society seems to be on “hyperdrive”. 🙂

    I have tried many ways of administering doses to those who have been so generous to let me take their cases as a student, and I love the idea of starting with a 6C every day and ascending in potency as needed, but have found when beginning to get into the 12 to 15C many of my cases begin to develop accessory symptoms of their indicated remedy, even after diluting in water, while still benefiting mentally and emotionally from the remedy. Again, I think I attract those hypersensitive cases. 🙂 So I have decided to go with Hahnemann’s sixth edition of his “perfect method” of dosing with the LM potencies. After all if it was perfect for Hahnemann – who am I to argue.

    No matter what edition/method of the Organon you are utilizing as a homeopath, our pateints/clients are our primary focus, and if you are curing, not suppressing or palliating (I am not talking about non-curable cases with advanced pathology) than whatever method works for you, definitely stay on your course, but still being open to other’s successes with different modifications.

    The only time I find myself “alternating remedies” or more than one remedy given in one day (not together mind you, always apart) is during severe acute situations, after surgical procedures where Arnica alternating every two hours with Hypericum say for wisdom teeth extraction (works beautifully), or more involved surgicial procedures, and at the time of death where many different remedies may be needed for that transition time.

    We all have the same goal, and that is stated in Aphorism 2. 🙂

  9. Robert Lal on

    We eliminate the symptoms so in my opinion we can change the medicine as per requirement.

  10. Qaiser Abbas on

    Qaiser Abbas Gujranwala Pakistan
    Homoeopathic Doctor In Pakistan

  11. Muhammad Siddique on

    On the light of past and future it clear that “combination is guide the practitioner way of lazy and One Time One Remedy it getting time.

  12. Samuel Oppong-Boadi on

    I think it is important that Homeopaths would take the pains to do further research and review the literature on homeopathy to enrich the practice, since life is not static but dynamic. Furthermore,scholars have been produced by the Homeopathy school to do just that.

  13. Anthony. on

    Many Roads Lead To Rome.

  14. Dr.S.Kalyanasundaram on

    Good suggestion for some patients.I treat most of my patient with 2 or 3 medicines if needed.If we are very confident and get clear cut symptoms we can give single remedy.

  15. V.S. Ramadass. on

    Dear Robert,
    In the present world circumstances, everything is altered from its originality of Hahmannian period and adulterated to some extent. So it naturally creates a train of symptoms which do not cover the ambit of a single remedy’s symptoms and prompts a condition that calls for use of multiple remedies and cure the case. Many remedies are overlapping each other causing confusion at the particular situation which one to use according to its duration of action. From Hahnemannian perod to date, all Homeopathic stalwarts have surely been stumbled in one or the other cases and meted out with failure and have succeeded at last only after using many remedies according to change of symptoms. This clearly substantiate the method of using multiple remedies and impossible to maintain a case successfully with a single remedy. As of now, only very little percentage of worldwide population has some knowledge and understanding of Homoeopathy but other part remains in either in dark or doubt about the effectiveness of the system. I, as a Homoeopath, foresee a day when there should be available a method of finding a sure remedy for each disease or health disorder. For that each Homoeopath universally has to go miles of experience and new research & development.

    V.S. Ramadass,

  16. Lori Gertz on

    As always, your insights are thought provoking and the comments speak to how controversial it all can be. I like the comment that reads, “there are many roads to Rome” and while it is important that we all, as Homeopaths (student or otherwise) follow a structure, it is also important to note that each patient is different and individual and therefore each case begs for an individualized protocol. Dosing is a huge conversation. I like and appreciate the forum that is represented here.

  17. NAJMI on

    Yes, it is true that world and as well our earth has changed since the time of Hahnamann. Keeping the fundamental intact, SINGLE REMEDY(NO MIXING,specially because it is THE SINGLE remedy that is proved and we have the record of), SIMILAR REMEDY and MINIMUM DOSE (there could be many differences so it should be to the experience of the individual practitioner and patient), one must accept every individual way of prescribing ESSENTIALLY AND NECESSARILY HELPING THE PATIENT.
    Of course that is our ONLY aim,

  18. Dr.Rawkrishna on

    Good suggestion for Homeopaths and patients!!!!

  19. Avivit shani on

    I like most the way you practice but I have to question the repeated potency: for my understanding it is all about satisfying the susceptibility, therefor the same potency won’t do any good for the vital force as soon as it exhausted it.
    VF will call for next level of susceptibility to satify by producing sx’s. For me repeating is proving or suppressing. What do you think?

    • DrAshwani kumar rai on

      repetition of medicine is matter of debate but understand one thing that is after prescription of contutional medicine live them for there work n watch pt causiously when the work is complited the pt body should demoand there next either of same medicine same potancy or whatever

  20. DrAshwani kumar rai on

    well,It is very important matter regarding homoeopathic principle n selection of medicine if we individualise the pt there selection is single one but most of the time during case taking we ignore the acute sufferings even history of injuries too n prescribe there constitutional medical n medicine go on inner aspect n done there job meanwhile there internal violation causes whatever acute problem along with slumberd psora must burst fort and come back with intense sevearity at that time it is better to give acute medicine for acute problem than after again start with chronic medicine

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: