No announcement yet.

Prescribing ?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Prescribing ?

    Hi all,

    There are homeopaths using different methods of prescribing and treating their patients. I would like to learn. What are the thoughts of my honorable members of the BB, on these types of prescribing? If I can be more precise, Where does in homeopathy these sorts of prescribing stands?

    Prescribing on the basis of criteria.

    Acute basis.
    Alternating basis.
    Antidoting basis.
    Chronicity basis.
    Clinical basis.
    Cyclic basis.
    Drainage basis.
    Miasm basis.
    Organ basis.
    Relationship basis.

    Removing blockage basis.

    Single remedy basis.
    Specific basis.
    Moon phase basis.
    Time basis.

    Then on the basis of doses.

    basis of single dose.
    basis on multiple doses.
    basis three doses.

    And on the basis of potencies.

    basis of mother tincture.
    basis of low potency.
    basis of medium potencies.
    basis of high potency.
    basis of high followed by low potencies.
    basis of low to high potencies.

    Curiosity begets rewards.

    [ 08 March 2002, 20:00: Message edited by: Dr. Saboor ]
    Curiosity begets reward. <br />Dr. Saboor<br /><br />Homeopathic Physician & Consultant.<br /><a href="">drsaboor51@ho</a><br />All mails containing attachments on Yahoo mail address.<br /><a href="">drsaboor51@yaho</a><br />Phone calls are welcome: <br />Clinic: 092-433-521206, Res: 092-433-511933

  • #2
    Dr Saboor,
    just to start off your discussion..

    I generally give a single remedy in a single dose, letting the person know the duration of the remedy from the table at the back of the Repertory.
    Potency - I generally give a 30c, but will start lower if I know the person has pathology or has used a lot of medications over a long period.
    In this case, I might use tissue salts or a 6c in an olfactory dose.(again a single remedy in a single dose)
    Conversely, I will give 200c or higher if the case requires it, or I have exhausted the lower potency & the remedy has had some positive effect.


    • #3
      In homeopathy, one should not claim that he or she is right in his/her decision in prescribing a medicine to a patient. That is why, every homeopath have different point of view on one patient case.

      A book in india is very famous "PRINCIPAL OF PRESCRIBING" by Mathur. He has presented the complete picture of prescribing in his preface. Please read preface completely you will find all answers of your questions.

      Your question reminding me a discussion in the past on this BB. No rule in homeopathy for prescribing. No body could claim perfect prescribing method.

      All methods are the need of today's time.
      <b>Love rules without rules.<br />Love rules his kingdom without a sword.<br />Love is like scarlet fever -- one has to go through it and get it over. <br />Where there is love, there is peace. <br />Love is not obedience </b>


      • #4
        Dear J Shah,

        Thank you for the reference of the book, I have already read the same. There are almost 38 different prescribing modes presented in that book where as I mentioned a few that I have put to work and got results as the need or situitation be.

        The big question arises as to their place in Todays Homeopathy.

        It is a fact that every body is not facing the mirror rather he is trying to show the mirror to others.

        I would like to hear some honest replies to this question and no patronising answers. See I am not new to Homeopathy though I still consider myself a student.

        Curiosity begets rewards.
        Curiosity begets reward. <br />Dr. Saboor<br /><br />Homeopathic Physician & Consultant.<br /><a href="">drsaboor51@ho</a><br />All mails containing attachments on Yahoo mail address.<br /><a href="">drsaboor51@yaho</a><br />Phone calls are welcome: <br />Clinic: 092-433-521206, Res: 092-433-511933


        • #5
          Hi Dr. Saboor,

          This is always an interesting question. Lets start with the basis of criteria. I think that comes into play when analysing the case and deciding which rubrics to use. In practice, when someone comes in with an acute, I determine that if it is a flair up of a chronic problem, in which case I try to go a little deeper than if it is a true acute. I also suggest that they return when they are better for a constitutional case study. With some chronics, if there is tissue involement, then I get more clinical and go to remedies affecting that tissue, but still look at the full case. If a few well prescribed remedies don't work, then I look at blocks, which include, but are not limited to miasms. I always use a single remedy except when I am using Ramakrishnan's protocol.

          Next lets look at the basis of doses. I try to let a remedy work until the action is complete. How long that is mostly depends on the potency and the virulence of the problem. So for chronic problems treated with high potencies, I would usully only give one dose and wait. In some cases, where a person tends to be non-reactive, I've given three doses about 12 hours apart and then wait. For acutes, multiple doses, increasing the time between doses as the person feels better.

          Lastly is the potency. I generally give high potencies unless:
          1) the person is very weak
          2) I have reason to believe the remedy will be antidoted (and even then, I often give a high potency and then switch to low if I see that it really does get antidoted - sometimes it doesn't)
          3) If I'm not real sure of the remedy, I'll give a low potency. Usually this happens in acutes, such as colds.
          4) If I'm sure of the remedy in an acute, I will give high
          5) For chronic, I usually start in the middle because I want room to go up in potency over time.
          6) I generally go up in potency, but if a person had a good response to the first potency, but then doesn't respond to the higher and the same remedy is still indicated, I will go lower
          7) If the person seems especially sensitive, I will give the dose in water, otherwise, I give it dry.

          The more chronic the problem, the more case notes I usually have and the more analysis I usually need to do in order to determine which rubrics I am going to use and what method I think is best for the person. I also usually start with the more classical approach and only deviate from that in the cases where I don't get a good response.

          I hope that has addressed the questions you've asked.

          Shirley Reischman
          Shirley Reischman


          • #6
            Hallo Dr. Sabor
            Homeopathy by its definition: cure by symptom similarity lines (par.: 50 org.) sets out clearly the procedure by which a substance for remedial purpose of the given disease is selected.

            Hans Weitbrecht
            cure by symptom similarity!<br /><a href="" target="_blank"></a>


            • #7
              Hi, Dr. A.K.Saboor, Nice to read your mail. How is the weather in your city? You started an excellent title. I want to read your poin of view on the given title.

              I remembered your lecture in a homeopathic workshop where you proved the SPEED OF HOMEOPATHIC REMEDY. I would also like to read your that article here. I want to see that what are views of othre doctors which are contributing here.

              You are a creative mind Homeopath. Keep it up.

              I am sure you also got invitation of the seminar. Please ring me up.
              <b>Dr. M Iqbal (Classical Homeopath)<br />Iqbal Poly Clinic, Main Market, Kharian<br />Phone Clinic: 05771-511337, Residence: 05771-533737 </b>


              • #8
                Dear S. Reischman,

                Now that is an honest answer I was waiting for. Good for you.
                You can help more patients than any other how sticks to classical homeopathy.

                Dear Hans Weitbrecht,

                I have read a lot of your posts and I do appreciate your knowledge.
                Tell me if these methods are right or wrong?

                If these methods are right then why so much of a fuss on prescribing methods. Let every body adopt his selected mode of prescribing and let us stop sounding so high and mighty with our show of knowledge to impress upon others.

                If these methods are wrong then the question arises, these are all the method used by our Master Homeopaths of the past. They were the good followers of the Great Hahnemann, no doubt about that and they had treated more patient successfully that they leave a dictum to follow. They had come across these methods not by chance but through sheer practical knowledge that no one can deny. Or they were nincompoops and how come they achieved so much that we look up to them as our Homeopathic Masters.

                If somebody chooses a different method of prescribing then let him be the sole judge of that. I have learnt something from my religion it says if you cannot find a path from The Book you can gather the evidence of what is right keeping yourselves in the mainframe of The Book and adopt it as a path for the next generations.
                This is the intention of this thread. Any arguments are welcomed so feel free.

                Curiosity begets rewards.
                Curiosity begets reward. <br />Dr. Saboor<br /><br />Homeopathic Physician & Consultant.<br /><a href="">drsaboor51@ho</a><br />All mails containing attachments on Yahoo mail address.<br /><a href="">drsaboor51@yaho</a><br />Phone calls are welcome: <br />Clinic: 092-433-521206, Res: 092-433-511933


                • #9
                  Dear Dr. sabor
                  I leave it in your capable hands to take each of your suggestions and see, if it fulfills the principals set out in par.:52. and then you will see firsthand for what they good for.
                  I wish you happy study.
                  Hans Weitbrecht
                  HOMEOPATH / IRELAND


                  • #10
                    sorry: for par.: 52 read par.:50
                    Hans Weitbrecht
                    HOMEOPATH / IRELAND


                    • #11
                      This will give you some understanding. Basically, the way I view this issue is that there are two major processes involved in the homoeopathic prescription, where one has to be careful. One, the case analysis; two, the remedy understanding. What has happened lately is that under the pretext of refreshing thoughts, some new case analysis methods have been introduced which are far from being scientific. For instance, the case analysis based on the theme of dreams and delusions. I stress that, it is important to consider the repeatedly seen dreams of the patients, in the prescribing totality. But, it is ridiculous to make speculative interpretations of the dreams and delusions, and base the prescription on such a fantasy. This is unscientific.

                      When it comes to interpretation, it tends to become quite subjective and personal. For instance, every prescriber can offer a different analysis to every dream theme, therefore leading eventually to a wide range of remedy suggestions. This could certainly be harmful.

                      Secondly, the remedy understanding. Hahnemann, Boenninghausen, Kent and other masters understood
                      remedies more or less in black and white. But somehow, the new trends of incorporating the study of the materia medica with mythology, symbolism, dream-proving, story-telling and so on, have introduced a lot of unproven data, which I am afraid, will take homoeopathy far from universal acceptance.
                      Forum Pk


                      • #12
                        This para will sufficient for us to open our eyes if we are interested in promoting homeopathy on scientific bases.

                        I have heard the stories that one prover is administered a remedy and another person sits in the next room to 'receive' the effect of that remedy, with intent to 'prove' it ! I read a report in an American journal of a teacher administering a remedy to a patient. The teacher then declares that not only the patient who was administered the remedy would get cured, but all others in the neighborhood who required the same remedy, but not being administered the remedy, would also get cured ! Isn't it outrageous ? How can the homoeopaths tolerate this kind of teaching? If we go to the W.H.O. or Prince Charles, with this kind of development in homoeopathy they would surely withdraw all their support.

                        I strongly feel that the time is changing. There is a lot more awareness and homoeopaths can not be fooled anymore with such fantasies and theorising by classical type homeopaths.
                        Forum Pk


                        • #13
                          Dr. Mas,

                          I agree with much of what you say in these last two posts. However, I do not agree that Hahnemann viewed the remedy pictures in black and white. While Kent perceived the remedies as being more or less static, Hahnemann’s view was a dynamic one. Hahnemann was also very much an empiricist and was interested only in what could be verified with the senses. In my opinion, he would not have approved of all the speculation, subjectivity and interpretation that passes for homeopathy these days. Homeopathy has become a kind of psychoanalysis where the practitioner attempts to fix the body by treating the “disorder” of the mind.


                          • #14
                            Nevertheless, the fact that things like this a fact of the energy nature of the universe. Its like me having a stiff neck and all the clients I have on that day have stiff necks...of I'm going through issues with a parent...and clients with the same issue are drawn to me at that time..or I draw them to me. There must be a certain level of consciousness...when consciousness is in a state of movement..not static...from remedy or otherwise...where the universe reflects us. So also, when consciousness reaches a certain level of movement that isn't filled with old issues from this life or another..perception of "facts" cannot be separated from mental understanding. And this is why people like sankaran can so easily SEE...get...understand...The difficulty lies in not knowing...being deceived about ones own perceptions...which is simpley stated...just neurosis. And, yes, I've been smoking pot.


                            • #15
                              I'm on THE FLOOR.
                              "The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
                              Carroll Dunham