Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LM 's - initial action of a remedy

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    The LM Potency 1

    Dear Homeolist,

    Aphorism 246 gives the most exact details on how to give the LM potency and must be put in context with the statements in aphorism 248 about the daily and alternate day dose. Here Hahnemann clearly says "every noticeably progressive and conspicuously increasing improvement is a state which, as long as it persist, generally excludes any repetition of the medicine..." The reason for this is that the medicine being use is still "hastening toward completion". This reflects what Hahnemann said in aphorism 245 of the 5th Organon on the single dose.

    Then he says "On the other hand" that there are some cases that have "slow, continuous improvement based on one dose of a aptly selected homeopathic medicine taking 40, 50, 60 100 days to complete the cure, depending on the nature of the medicine, but his is very seldom the case" The he goes on to state how important it is to "foreshorten this period" to 1/2, 3/4 or less so that a more rapid cure is attained. This reflects what Hahnemann said in aphorism 246 of the 5th Organon on repeating the remedy to speed the cure.

    Hahnemann makes it VERY clear that there are two types of reactions that must be treated differently.

    A. A *visibly progressing and strikingly increasing ameliorations*. In this instance he says to leave single dose act without repetition as long as this state last. It also implies that any time during treatment that there is a dramatically increasing amelioration on a series of doses stop the remedy. I would like to report that my colleagues and I have seen many cures of chronic diseases with single and infrequent doses of the LM potency.

    B. A *Slow continuous improvement* that could take up to 100 days to cure. This, however, is seldom the case. Most of the time a slow improvement just ceases at some point and the patient relapses. In this case on should repeat the dose at suitable intervals to speed the cure. This quite often happens in protracted chronic disease. One can repeat the dose to speed the cure only if one meets 5 conditions noted at the end of the paragraph.

    1. The remedy is perfectly homeopathic (not a wrong remedy or a partial simillimum)
    2. The remedy is potentized and dissolved in water. (not the dry dose)
    3. The remedy is given in a small dose ( 1pill in 8 tablespoon medicinal solution, given in a split-dose, etc.)
    4. The remedy is given at suitable intervals based on what experience has shown. (individualization)
    5. The degree of potency must be change on each dose (the medicinal solution must be succussed prior to ingestion.)

    There is a GREAT difference between a *visibly progressing and strikingly increasing amelioration* and a *slow continuous improvement" where the patient usually relapses. Hahnemann is offering a very important differential diagnosis. When the patient is already hastening toward cure on a single or infrequent doses they do NOT need the cure to be sped! The statement about the daily dose in the footnote to aphorism 246 says the LM may be given daily WHEN NECESSARY. It is NOT NECESSARY the LM potency will cause aggravations or only slow down the cure.

    All the statements about the daily and alternate day dose that follow in aphorism 248 are about *how to speed the cure in SLOW moving cases*. These are the cases where we need to be "foreshorten this period" to 1/2, 3/4 or less so that a more rapid cure is attained. If the patient is experiencing a strikingly increasing amelioration on a single dose, infrequent doses, or a short series of doses, the repetition of the remedy is counter indicated. If the patient is only slowly improving then one uses the techniques suggested in aphorism 248 to speed the cure. This is what the Organon actually teaches. This is the best of both worlds!

    Dr. Croserio was a very close colleague of Samuel and Melaine Hahnemann. He (and Jahr) was invited to Hahnemann's death bed to see the Founder lying in state and he helped Melanie in her practice after the Founder passed away. He also defended Melaine in court when she was charged with practicing without a licence. For these reasons, I call him "faithful Dr. Croserio". Hahnemann was sent 2 LM cases by Hahenmann in 1843. Boenninghausen wanted more clarifications so he asked Croserio for an eyewitness account of how Hahnemann used the LM potency. This letter can be found in Boenninghausen's Lesser Writings under the title Hahnemann's Doses of Medicine.

    Dr. Croserio noted in his eyewitness account that Hahnemann "frequently" gave single doses by olfaction followed by 7 days of placebo. Paris casebooks confirm the fact that the Founder certainly did *frequently* used single doses (often by olfaction, but sometimes through the oral solution) and gave the patient placebo for at least 1 week! Some patients got almost exclusive olfactions of single doses and placebos. He did not always use the daily or alternate day dose. His method was artistic not mechanical and was individualized by the circumstances.

    Dr. Croserio's letter also stated that as soon as Hahnemann saw definite medicinal action he either diminished the dose or stopped the remedy and the patient was given placebo. The Paris casebooks confirm this perfectly. Hahnemann sometimes gave a single dose followed by at least 7 days of placebo while he waited and watched. At other times, he gave a short series of 3 to 7 doses over a 7 day period and had the patient come back in one week. At this time, he would re-evaluate the case. He might give the remedy or he might give placebos at this time and have patient come back in another week. If there was definite medicinal actions he would follow the series of doses with a series of placebos. Hahnemann constantly interpolated and followed his medicinal doses with placebos at different intervals.

    Hahnemann never gave the daily dose or alternate day dose for long periods without stopping the medicine and giving placebos for at least 1 week! Some patients were on placebo for 7, 14 even 21 days or more at times. This *on again - off again* method was used will ALL his patients. I have not seen 1 case in the microfiches of the Paris casebooks between 1840 to 1843 (the LM epoch) where Hahnemann give the daily or alternate day dose for months without stopping the remedy and giving placebos. This is true in the Casebooks DF-10, 11, 12, 13, 14, etc., which have LM prescriptions The idea is too stop the remedy when there is a visibly progressive and strikingly increasing amelioration, an aggravation, or anytime there is any confusion about the direction of the case.

    Here is one of Hahnemann's cases which he sent an LM case to Boenninghausen in 1843, which is found in his Lesser Writings, in The Smallness of the Dose. I have double checked this this case with a work by Hanspeter Sailer called Di Entwicklung von Samuel Hahnemann;s aertzukcger Praxis, Verlag, Haug, 1988, which investigates the same case. This case was taken just before the Founder become fatally ill so it shows his final methods.

    On Jan 14, 1843 the patient case complaining of sore throat alternating with a anal fissure. Hahnemann gave him Belladonna in C potency in a 7 tablespoon medicinal solution which aggravated the throat and brought out the anal fissure. This most likely a daily dose. On Jan. 16 the patient confessed he had suppressed a syphilitic chancre with corrosives and Hahnemann gave him Merc. 0/1 in 7 tablespooons. Here is a list of prescriptions.

    1. Jan. 14, 1843 Belladonna C potency in a 7 tablespoon solution.
    2. Jan 16 Merc. 0/1 in 7 tablespoon solution.
    3. Jan. 20 Merc. 0/2 in 7 tablespoons.
    4. Jan. 25 Sailer says Hahnemann gave 2 placebos.
    4. Jan. 30th 7 days of placebo in medicinal solution.
    5. Feb. 7 Sulphur 0/2. in 7 tablespoon solution.
    6. Feb 13 Merc 0/2 olfaction.
    7. Feb 14 Merc 0/2 in 7 tablespoon medicinal solution.
    8. Feb 20. placebo in 7 tablespoon medicinal solution
    9. March 3. Single dose olfaction of Nitric Acid. (17 days on single dose olfaction)
    10. March 20 second single dose olfaction of Nitric Acid. (Patient cured)

    This example case is typical the repetition of remedies followed by placebos as well as single dose olfactions. In a period of around 65 days (little over two months) the patient spent around 39 days without medicine! Many times Hahnemann gave nearly as much placebo as medicine. In this case the patient was off medicine more than he was on medicine and this was a serious case of syphilis! The idea that Hahnemann gave the daily dose for weeks, months and years on end is a complete myth!!!

    I would also like to say that the LM remedies are not a low potency system. One cannot compare the C and LM potency solely by the amount of the original substance left in the dilution. There is a great difference between a mathematical and dynamic equivalence. The LM 0/1 of 1 pill in an 8 tablespoons solution has around the same amount of medicinal substance as the 6C but its power is much, much greater due to its 1/50,000 dilution and 100 succussions per dilution. In over 20 years of comparing the LM with the C potency ( I use both side by side) I would say that the LM 0/1 acts like a higher potency than the 30C or higher. To think they are like a low potency C is a great mistake. Boenninghausen tested the LMs and wrote that it acted like the high and highest C potencies!

    All things equal, I would say the LM 0/1, 0/2 and 0/3 act with a similar depth of the 60C to 200C or higher although the duration of the remedy may not be as long as the ultra higher C potencies. The LM potency will cause strong aggravations when misused. I have seen it, my colleagues have see it, and I have received countless letters from patients who were greatly aggravated by receiving the LM potency daily or alternate days in a mechanical fashion. Many times they felt very, very good in the first week or so (strikingly progressive amelioration) and then got worse and worse because the dose was never slowed down or stopped. These are clinical facts.

    I have found that over medication either causes the patient to become non responsive to the remedy due to over exposure or it causes aggravations that make them over sensitive to the remedy. Sometimes this can make it hard to use even the correct remedy later in the case. The cases that are spoiled the most are those who only needed a single, infrequent doses or only a short series of doses but were never given a chance. What should be one "best case scenarios" become one's "worst case situations". One must be very careful with the LM potency because over medicated will cause aggravations, accessory symptoms or adverse counter actions of the vital force if abused. Hahnemann had some strong aggravations at times! Like all homeopathic potencies, the LMs must be treated with great respect!!!

    Hahnemann spoke about raising the LM potency every 7 to 14 days in aphorism 248 but the Paris casebooks show that this was only a baseline example. He would sometimes raise his potencies very fast before the bottle was finished and in other cases he would keep the patient on the same potency interspersed with or followed by placebo for longer periods. Sometimes he would move up to find a better potency and at other times he would move downward because of aggravations. There was no fixed rule. The time of raising the potency was dependant on when the medicine was consumed, how much placebo he was giving, and the circumstances.

    I know that some give all patients the daily or alternate day dose and only stop if and when they see aggravations. This does reflect one aspect of Hahnemann's method but it does not take into account what he says in aphorism 246, Dr. Creoserio's eyewitness account nor what is found in the Paris casebooks. Sometimes Hahnemann gave a single dose and placebos and other times he gave a series of split-doses at intervals like daily, alternate days, on the third day, etc.. It all depended on the symptoms of the patient and the circumstances. Hahnemann constantly alternated series of medicinal doses with placebos and waiting and watching. He used so many different methods that a simplistic mechanical approach can not embrace his artistic method. As Creoserio said,

    "It would be impossible for me to give in a letter all the shadings of his treatment. By your constant correspondence with the learned sage you have had abundant opportunity to learn to appreciate his rare powers of observation, and you will therefore easily see that his mode of action was not always the same".

    Hahnemann varied the adjustments of the dose, the time or repetition, the use of placebo, and the raising of the potency based on what the individual needed. He used single doses and infrequent repetition interspersed by placebo as well as frequent repetition daily, every other day, every three days, etc. He did not treat all his patients the same way because "his mode of action was not always the same." Everything was individualized.

    I have presented quotes from the Organon, a case from the Paris casebooks, and an eyewitness accounts that all show similar facts. Although I have many other cases and more documentation I have used examples that are in the public domain so they can be confirmed by interested parties. I hope this opens the doors to some deeper research.

    Similia Minimus
    Sincerely, David Little

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: The LM Potency 2

      Dear Students and Colleagues,

      I would like to clarify some points brought up in my first post. Baron von Boenninghausen was sent two LM cases by Hahnemann in 1843, just before the Founder left for his Heavenly Abode. The Baron shared theses cases with his colleagues in the Neus Archive f.hom, Heilkunst Volume 1 number 1 1844, page 69 (Stapf Archives). Dr. Stapf raised a number of questions as it is impossible to understand all the potential ramifications raised by these 2 cases just by looking at the extracts. In order to answer these questions Boenninghausen sought help from Dr. Croserio, who was very close to Samuel and Melanie Hahnemann. Dr. Croserio responded with a letter written on Jan. 28th, 1844 which was published with Boenninghausen's commentary in the Neus Archive f.hom, Heilkunst Volume 1 number 12, 1844.The Baron wrote:

      "In order to be quite sure as to the matter I applied to those homeopaths in Paris, who were most intimate with Hahnemann, visited him almost daily, and in consequence, were best informed as to his practice during the *last times*, namely, to Dr. Croserio, from whom I had before had a very friendly communication, could therefore also feel sure that he would give me as detailed as an account as possible."

      Hahnemann Paris Casebooks contain only personal notes of the Founder's practice and leave many questions unanswered. He rarely wrote down exactly how he was giving his remedies. Boenninghausen understood this, and for this reason he sought an eyewitness account to fill in the details. Dr. Croserio's letter is a very valuable testimony because it gives insights as to how Hahnemann really practiced in the clinic. Dr. Croserio wrote:

      "As to his [Hahnenmann's] mode in which he prescribed the medicines to be taken I am able to give you all the information that you may wish, as I have quite frequently been witness of it"

      Creoserio confirmed that Hahnemann was dissolving 1 rarely 2 tiny pills into 8 to 15 tablespoons of water and taking a tablespoon of this solution and stirring it into a tumbler of water.

      He notes that Hahnemann would start with 1 spoonful of the solution and increase this on successive doses, if necessary,

      "until he observed some action."

      "Then he [Hahnemann] would diminish the dose or would stop the medicine."

      This is a very important detail that does not come through clearly in the 6th Organon. Hahnemann frequently stop his the repetition of his remedies and gave placebos while he waited and watched. To this Boenninghausen commented.

      "This passage in the communication of Dr. Creoserio give the most clear and complete exposition of the mode practice by the closely observing Master of the art during the last times, on his patients, and explains most satisfactorily what might have appeared obscure in the two cases lately reported. The addition "until he felt an effect" is of the greatest importance, and must always be closely observed, in order that nothing may be spoiled afterwards by giving *too much* or *too often*"

      Dr. Creoserio also notes:

      "In order to pacify the patients or their relatives he frequently allowed them to take simple sugar of milk"

      Hahnemann often repeated the dose at suitable intervals to speed the cure. In slowly moving cases of protracted diseases this repetition could be daily or on alternate days. The exact intervals, however, are rarely marked in the Paris Casebooks. Nevertheless, the pattern of giving a series of doses and then having the chronic patient return in 7 days was very common, especially at the beginning of treatment. Sometimes, he had them come back in 3 or 4 days. Using a short series of doses followed by a series of placebo is very common in the Founder's practice. The case of O-T demonstrates this method clearly.

      Hahnemann dictated this example case to a secretary and sent it to Boenninghausen. Some details have been clarified from the Paris casebooks
      from the sources quoted in The LM Potency 1

      1. Jan. 15, 1843 Belladonna C potency in a 7 tablespoon solution.

      The patient came with a sore throat that alternated with an anal fissure. The first dose made the throat worse by evening.

      2. Jan 16 Merc. 0/1 in 7 tablespoon solution.

      The throatache was gone but the fissure returned immediately! This shows these conditions were related. The patient then revealed that eight years early he had a syphilitic chancre destroyed by corrosives. All his problems started after this. He was immediately given Mercury 0/1. This fissure and chap were very painful. How often he gave the dose is not noted. It could be a daily dose.

      3. Jan. 20 Merc. 0/2 in 7 tablespoons.

      The patient returned for his check up 4 days later. This show how closely Hahnemann was following a serious case at the start. There are no "take this daily for one month" in his casebooks. The patient's throatache returned slightly. The anus is better although there is still soreness during stool. At this time, Hahnemann raised the potency! The journal says: "One pellet of the Mercuries viv., 2 dynamization, prepared and taken in the same manner in the morning". If the patient took the Merc. 0/1 in the "same manner in the morning" a 7 tablespoon medicinal solution would not be finished yet. Nevertheless, Hahnemann immediately raised the potency to 0/2. He did not wait for the bottle to be finished.

      4. Jan. 25 Sailer says Hahnemann gave 2 placebos.

      The 0/2 continued to improve the throat but there was severe lancinations in the anus. The patient was then given 2 placebos. It seems these two placebos were alternated with the remedy so he was now taking the alternate day dose. This can be told because Hahnemann wrote on Jan. 30th that the patient had taken the last dose of medicine that afternoon. He only had 7 doses and that was 11 days later so he could not be taking the remedy daily. The Merc. 0/2 was taken daily for 4 days and then slowed down to alternate days intersperse with placebo. This shows Hahnemann slowing down the remedy, which is an important method use to prevent over medication. The daily dose of Mercury was not continued.

      4. Jan. 30th 7 days of placebo in medicinal solution.

      The anus was now better but the throat was worse. This shows the alternation of the symptoms still continuing. There was not particular aggravation yet Hahnemann decided to give placebos for 1 week and wait and watch. He must have figured he had enough medicinal action so he stopped the remedy. Then he changed his tactics.

      5. Feb. 7 Sulphur 0/2. in 7 tablespoon solution.

      The anus was still well but there were severe pain as if an ulceration in the throat. Hahnemann wrote in the Chronic Diseases that the suppression of syphilis can cause psora to obstruct the cure. At this time, Hahnemann gave Sulphur 0/2 as an intercurrent remedy. Exactly how often it was given is not noted. Just because the patient returned in one week one can not assume it was a daily dose but it may have been.

      6. Feb 13 Merc 0/2 olfaction.

      The Sulphur brought out clear Merc. symptoms on the 11th and 12th. The throat feel ulcerated and the saliva was increased and now was in great quantities! There was also some constriction in the anus from yesterday. Rather than alternating the symptoms were both present. Here the patient was given an olfaction of Merc. 0/2. Hahnemann did not raise the potency even though the other bottle of Merc. 0/2 was completely consumed.

      This case shows that Hahnemann did not always wait until the bottle was finished before he raised the potency and when a bottle was finished he might NOT raise the potency . This is because he is individualizing these procedures.

      7. Feb 14. Merc 0/2 in 7 tablespoon medicinal solution.

      Hahnemann now gave the patient a medicinal solution of Merc. 0/2. This was to be taken "as before". The last doses appear to be taken on alternate days. Hahnemann keep the patient on the *same potency* as first given on Jan 20th, around 25 days ago.

      8. Feb 20. placebo in 7 tablespoon medicinal solution.

      The throat was better since the 18th but there was much suffering at the anus. There seem to be enough medicinal action so Hahnemann again waited and watched for around 11 days. The placebo had to be given on alternated days to last this long. This shows that patient was most likely taking Merc. 0/2 on alternate days. He was already use to taking the remedy (hence the placebo) every other day.

      9. March 3. Single dose olfaction of Nitric Acid. (17 days on single dose olfaction)

      No more throatache or serious anal problems although there is a hemorrhoid vein that extrudes on stool. Dr. Creoserio made it very clear in his letter that Hahnemann frequently gave single doses by olfaction. He wrote:

      "In chronic diseases he [Hahnemann] would in no case allow the patient to smell at the medicines oftener than once a week, and would give nothing but sugar besides; and in this way he would make the most admirable cures, even in cases where we others had not been able to do anything."

      Hahnemann says. "I let him smell of Ac. Nitr." Hahnemann frequently gave single doses by olfaction and sometimes by oral solution. In some cases he would wait for longer periods than 7 days like 14 even 21 days. There are many such prescriptions in the Paris casebooks between 1840 and 1843.

      10. March 20 second single dose olfaction of Nitric Acid. (Patient cured)

      Now there was hardly any pain after stool, throat well, although he feels some sensation on drinking cold water. 17 days later Hahnemann says "Now he is allowed to smell of Ac. nitr." This means that before this and since March 3rd he was not allowed to smell Nitric acid! This is a single dose olfaction series. There are many of these that are better documented in the Paris casebooks. How long the remedy acted one cannot tell for the record because only wrote "His health was permanently restored".

      What does this case tell us? First of all it shows that Hahnemann used individualization according to the time and circumstances. Secondly, it shows how he would interpolate and/or follow his medicinal doses with placebo. This is witnessed throughout the Paris Casebooks between 1840 and 1843 (the LM epoch). Hahnemann case examples and Dr. Croserio letter offer true picture of how the Founder was actually giving his remedies in Paris in his last times. Over the last 8 or so years I have reviewed many cases which show a similar pattern. That is the use of single doses by olfaction and placebos as well as a series of remedies interpolated with and/or followed by placebos.

      Hahnemann did not speak out his liberal use of placebos in the 6th Organon. This may have been because he did not want to state this in a public work as the placebo was his "secret simillimum". If the public found out it could have caused problems. Most people do not realize that Hahnemann was often using "on again - off again" method when he was giving a series of rapid doses to speed the cure.

      As Dr. Creoserio said when Hahnemann observe a visible medicinal action he would stop his repetitions and give a series of placebos. He would do this every once in awhile just to wait and watch so he wouldn't over medicate his patients. Many also do not realize that Hahnemann was also using the single dose, especially by olfaction between 1840 and 1843. This balance of single doses and infrequent repetitions and split-doses a rapid intervals to speed the cure offers a wide range of methods in the clinic. The idea Hahnemann gave the daily dose to everyone is a complete myth.

      I hope this information is useful to the homeopathic community. There are simply too many people that think they can give the LM potency daily for long periods in a mechanical fashion. One patient was told to take the LM potency daily for 6 weeks just to test the remedy! Aggravations have been called cleansing crises and patients told to continue on the medicine. I have reviewed several cases that were spoiled in this way. There is a great difference between an aggravation and healing crisis. Homeopaths should know the difference! In either case it is usually best to stop the medicine and watch the direction of the symptoms.

      The idea that one can give the daily dose for months is often separated from the words IF NECESSARY found in the footnote to aph. 246. I have not seen one LM case in the Paris Casebooks where Hahnemann thought it was necessary!!! He used almost as much placebo as medicine.

      Similia Minimus,
      Sincerely, David Little

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: The LM Potency 2

        Originally posted by David Little
        Here the patient was given an olfaction of Merc. 0/2. Hahnemann did not raise the potency even though the other bottle of Merc. 0/2 was completely consumed. This case shows that Hahnemann did not always wait until the bottle was finished before he raised the potency and when a bottle was finished he might NOT raise the potency . This is because he is individualizing these procedures.
        Originally posted by David Little

        7. Feb 14. Merc 0/2 in 7 tablespoon medicinal solution.

        Hahnemann now gave the patient a medicinal solution of Merc. 0/2. This was to be taken "as before".
        Hello David,

        Does it state whether the new bottle of Merc. 0/2 was made fresh with a new pillule, or that the first Merc. 0/2 bottle was simply refilled?

        Thanks,
        Chris.

        Comment


        • #34
          LM's

          Someone asked me a question- which I lost. I believe it was why have I gone to such high LM potencies in my practice, do I start with high numbers of skip potencies. No I most often start with LM1 and use every potency- going up either when a bottle is finished , or is not working as well as it was. I give a single dose of LM1 once and wait a month for reaction unless the patient calls me with clear improvement followed by clear relapse. I do not give daily doses but instead once I see the initial response instead instruct to take another dose after one stops moving them forward. Most patients go through bottles slowly and never reach high potencies.

          But I have 4 extremely hyposensitive patients who despite putting large numbers of pills in the bottles need to take doses often- more than once a day and bottles do not last long- well before they are finished they fall to act anymore, so we go through potencies rapidly. I assume someone will say in this case that these are palliation- but all the signs otherwise are of good curative reactions. One is in their 12th year of treatment, suffering from MS and has about 10% of the limitations of 12 years ago.

          Steve

          Steve Waldstein RSHom (NA) CCH PCH
          Aurora, CO 80014
          Web: http://homeopathy-cures.com

          Comment


          • #35
            RE: LM's

            Hi Steve,

            Thanks for answering,
            Why do you stick to the LM's in a Hyposensitive patient?
            Wouldn't a switch to a C potency be more suitable?

            Kind regards, Piet

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: LM's

              I use liquid potencies only- some LM some C. With C potencies I only have 30,200,1M,10M,50M,CM at most 6 potencies to work with. With LM's we have unlimited numbers of potencies to work with. I have had many patients who work their way through all the C potencies and then what do you do- I then start at LM3 and work my way up the LM scale. I don't see much difference between LM scale versus C scale in terms of which is better for hyper vs. hypo sensitive. The liquid dosing procedure gives tremendous flexibility depending upon number of pills, succusions, dilution glasses etc. I want to stress these 4 are incredibly unusual situations- my other 99.9% of patients are not in at all a similar situation.

              Steve

              Steve Waldstein RSHom (NA) CCH PCH
              Aurora, CO 80014
              Web: http://homeopathy-cures.com

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: LM's

                Originally posted by Steve Waldstein
                Someone asked me a question- which I lost. I believe it was why have I gone to such high LM potencies in my practice, do I start with high numbers of skip potencies. No I most often start with LM1 and use every potency- going up either when a bottle is finished , or is not working as well as it was. I give a single dose of LM1 once and wait a month for reaction unless the patient calls me with clear improvement followed by clear relapse. I do not give daily doses but instead once I see the initial response instead instruct to take another dose after one stops moving them forward. Most patients go through bottles slowly and never reach high potencies.
                Dear Steve,


                It is very nice to meet you again on the homeolist! I also usually to give a single test dose first but usually do not wait for as long as month before evaluating the action of the remedy. If there is a visibly progressive and strikingly increasing amelioration I let the single dose act. If there is only slow improvement I repeat the dose at suitable intervals to speed the cure. This could, in the beginning be anytime between 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 day, etc.. As soon as the patient show improvement I slow down the remedy. Anytime during treatment there is a strikingly progressive improvement or a aggravation I stop the remedy. That is aphorism 246 of the Organon in a nutshell.

                You have used the C and LM potency for many years now. As you are using a single test dose of the LM potency over 1 month as is common with the C potency I have a few questions.

                1. How do you compare the medicinal qualities of the LM potency to the C potency?

                2. What correlation do you find between the duration of the LM potencies and the C potencies all things consider equal?

                3. How do you find the action a single dose of the LM to the single dose of a 200c or 1M over a one month or so period? Some people consider it a "low potency" and would never use it this way.

                4. How do you evaluate the action of 0/1 to 0/6 as an opening potency compared to the 30C, 200C, 1M, etc.?

                Originally posted by Steve Waldstein
                But I have 4 extremely hyposensitive patients who despite putting large numbers of pills in the bottles need to take doses often- more than once a day and bottles do not last long- well before they are finished they fall to act anymore, so we go through potencies rapidly. I assume someone will say in this case that these are palliation- but all the signs otherwise are of good curative reactions. One is in their 12th year of treatment, suffering from MS and has about 10% of the limitations of 12 years ago.
                IMO, just as long as all the signs demonstrate curative signs I wouldn't worry. One cannot complain about 90% improvement in MS!!!


                Sincerely,
                David Little

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: The LM Potency 2

                  Originally posted by Chris
                  Originally posted by David Little
                  Here the patient was given an olfaction of Merc. 0/2. Hahnemann did not raise the potency even though the other bottle of Merc. 0/2 was completely consumed. This case shows that Hahnemann did not always wait until the bottle was finished before he raised the potency and when a bottle was finished he might NOT raise the potency . This is because he is individualizing these procedures.
                  Originally posted by Chris
                  Originally posted by David Little
                  7. Feb 14. Merc 0/2 in 7 tablespoon medicinal solution.
                  Hahnemann now gave the patient a medicinal solution of Merc. 0/2. This was to be taken "as before".
                  Does it state whether the new bottle of Merc. 0/2 was made fresh with a newpillule, or that the first Merc. 0/2 bottle was simply refilled?
                  Dear Chris,

                  The Paris Casebooks are the personal notes written by Melanie and Samuel during volume clinical practice. Unfortunately, they did not include all the exact details in each case like date, potency, size of the dose, succussions, repetition, etc.. I certainly wish they wrote more complete records for our sake. The case Boenninghausen received was dictated by Hahnemann to a secretary. It does not have enough details to tell one exactly what Hahnemann was doing. That is Boenninghausen asked Dr. Creoserio for clarifications. One has to read the Organon, the Paris Casebooks, letters and eyewitness accounts to piece together the bigger picture, and even then, we only get a partial view. Oh...if I could only ask Hahnemann a few questions!

                  Now as to your question: The text say, "One pellet of Mercurius viv, 2 dynamization, prepared and taken in the same manner in the morning." The same manner would mean a 7 tablespoon medicinal solution and given daily in the morning. So, it seems he made up a fresh bottle.

                  Sincerely,
                  David Little

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by BRoten1721@aol.com View Post
                    LM commentary

                    Re : LM1 Crotalus Casavelus

                    The mother of my patient misunderstood me and gave her 15y.o. son the whole 1/2 cup of distilled water to drink as opposed to stirring and giving a 1 tsp. dose from it.

                    However, she says he was 'wonderful' "a new person with the anger gone" after that dose and the subsequent doses taken correctly "didn't do much." Now we're proceeding to LM2 (Crotalus Casavelus) and I'll proceed to instruct her to give it in the more moderate dosage. However, sometimes things happen for a reason..........???

                    The remedy has had a profound positive effect..........whether it's that initial
                    1/2 cup (!!!!!!) or the subsequent 1 tsp. doses may never be clear.

                    Has anyone had anything like this happen with LM's?

                    Bonnie
                    I know that people believe otherwise and that Hahnemann did, too, but it was one of his few mistakes to believe that the amount matters. Put simply, there's no amount involved in our medicines.

                    These are etheric energy fields that collide for a mere nanosecond with the etheric energy field of patients, human and animal. A medicine that quite magically transforms into an actual remedy basically slams up against another energy field that's vibrating and resonating with a similar pattern, but the two can't exist in the same space, so the weaker field begins to give way and starts back towards health but to a higher degree than the person or animal has previously experienced. We thus literally push disease out of a patient as quickly as that can be done, which the organism itself determines.

                    What's actually happening during cure is the reintegration of a person's or animal's etheric energy pattern. It understandably follows a course opposite to how disease (sic) originates.

                    Our medicines will eternally be more powerful than natural diseases due to homeopathic optimization, but the amount simply doesn't matter because the Laws of Thermodynamics play no role in our system of medicine.

                    It makes sense when it's explained, doesn't it?

                    God bless!
                    Albert, also Hahnemannian444B
                    www.GiggleBoggleJabbleGooby.com/HaHa and www.Google+.com/AlbertHahnemannian.com and www.Tumblr.com.AlbertHahnemannian.com and
                    http://www.cityevents.tv/Cetah444

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X