Answers by George Vithoulkas – September 2008

Answers by George Vithoulkas – October 2008

The answers that follow are
not complete. It is not possible to write a whole thesis on each
one as it requires everything that has been said before, but I will
express the basic ideas.

On the other hand these short answers can
inspire serious students to ask more questions such as whether,
in a chronic case, the appearance of an acute condition that may
arise after the remedy, is a good or a bad sign, or when should
such condition be treated and when not, or when will a case need
a series of remedies in a particular order and when will such a
practice confuse the case to such an extent that the patient has
no hope of recovery.

On another level the questions that may arise
from intelligent students can continue the discussion to a deeper
understanding of the problems that we are facing when we practice
serious and not superficial homeopathy.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————————–

Dear George,

Classical homeopathy’, refers to the idea that one follows the
basic ‘Hahnemannian’ principles. However, in your response to a
letter you stated that one can indeed repeat a remedy (without adjusting
the potency) and that there is no difference between a dry dose
and a liquid one.

“In certain cases it is true you need to repeat the remedy, and
when you have to do that, it is better to start from a low potency
(under 30C) till you have a reaction (an aggravation of some sort)
then stop and observe. It is better if you can raise the potency
every week. This should be done when the pathology is deep and
the remedy is not clear. There is no difference between a dry
and a liquid dose
. If, for instance, you dilute a dry dose
into water and then take sips from this water, with every sip
you take it is actually another dose.”  GV

Didn’t Hahnemann himself tell us it is better to use liquid doses;
that every following dose should be slightly stronger than the previous
one? See par. 246 (and 248)

“And this may be very happily affected, as recent and oft-repeated
observations have taught me under the following conditions: firstly,
if the medicine selected with the utmost care was perfectly homoeopathic;
secondly, if it is highly potentized, dissolved in water
and given in proper small dose that experience has taught as the
most suitable in definite intervals for the quickest accomplishment
of the cure but with the precaution, that the degree
of every dose deviate somewhat from the preceding and following

in order that the vital principle which is to be altered to a
similar medicinal disease be not aroused to untoward reactions
and revolt as is always the case1 with unmodified and especially
rapidly repeated doses.” (Emphasis added)

Could you please explain this seeming contradiction? If we want
homeopathy to survive and to be recognized, we should all stick
to the rules.

Kind regards,

Marc Van Wijk

 

Dear Marc Van Wijk,

What you point
out is very correct. In order for homeopathy to survive and to be
recognized as a science it is important that we stick to certain
principles. During the past decennium there have been some developments
that are presented as homeopathy but that have lost all connection
with the basic principles of homeopathy and that greatly damage
our science, as could be seen in Great Britain last year. Some of
these developments even are the opposite of what Hahnemann intended,
like the use of signatures, or the prescription of remedies on imagined
symptoms instead of provings or on concepts as ‘delusions’ or ‘sensations’.
I have recently written an article about this in ‘The Homeopath’,
with the title ‘British media attacks on homeopathy’.

Are they justified?’.

(Also, you can see
)

We cannot, however, accept everything Hahnemann
wrote as a rule as you suggest. Hahnemann gave us homeopathy and
we are greatly indebted to him for this. However, through the experience
of very gifted homeopaths after Hahnemann certain issues have become
more clear and complete. Nevertheless, a lot of subjects still need
investigation and for this we need homeopaths that work in the correct
way so that experiences can be exchanged. This is one of the reasons
why I have developed the full training of the ‘International Academy
for Classical Homeopathy’ that is now on video, so that worldwide
we get a group of homeopaths that have the knowledge to contribute
to the right development of homeopathy.
)

It is true that in my experience there is
no difference between a dry and a liquid dose of a remedy (and Kent
writes the same). The reason why Hahnemann dissolved remedies is
not because they worked differently then, but because he wanted
to stir or shake them to change the potency a little bit after every
dose, as you can read in the paragraph you copied. This can be one
of these things that we need to share experience about so that it
becomes clearer.

Another thing you must take into consideration
is the fact that the gross number of patients we treat nowadays
have a much lower vitality and are much more complicated miasmatically
than the ones Hahnemann had to treat. Therefore things might turn
out differently in our contemporary practice.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear Mr.  Vithoulkas,

If you have given Phosphorus in a case and within a few days realize
that Causticum was the correct remedy, must you first interpose
another remedy, since Phosphorus and Causticum are inimical? If
you interpose another remedy, how would that remedy be  selected?

Donna Burdick

Dear Donna Burdick,

The predominant rule is that a remedy can
be given when its symptoms fit those of the case. If you want to
interpose a remedy it should be selected according to the current
symptoms. Now, if you have given Phosphorus it is best to wait to
see what its action will be instead of jumping in with Causticum
after a few days. After all both remedies are very similar and you
can never know for sure whether Causticum will have a better action.
Always try to approach your cases rationally and do not make overhasty
decisions.

(You can read my article “Getting in touch
with the correct remedy”
)

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear Prof. Vithoulkas,

My daughter, who is 7 yrs. old, is suffering from allergic rhinitis
since one year. Her homoeopathic medication started with Silicea
0/1 which has now reached to Silicea 0/5.

Every time she takes the medicine, she stays okay for a month or
so, but again she has the same symptoms, and the medicine is repeated.
This has been going on for one year. Is it possible to give her
a remedy which cures her of this problem forever, so she does not
get the symptoms of allergic rhinitis again?

Thanks,
Sandra.

Dear Sandra,

The evaluation of a case is not done only
on a local symptom, but also on the general condition of a patient.
If your daughter has a general and local amelioration after Silicea
terra, then you can repeat the remedy when there is a relapse. There
can be several reasons why the remedy doesn’t work very long, but
if the reaction is as I described then you should not change the
prescription. By repeating the correct remedy when there is a relapse,
through time your daughter’s organism will strengthen and become
more stable. Allergic constitutions often need a longer time to
revitalise. The situation you describe can also be due to the use
of Q potencies, as they are low potentised and therefore often have
a shorter action. It can be useful to give your daughter a higher
potentised remedy like 200K or 1MK and see if the reaction is different.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear George  Vithoulkas

Have you ever used Schussler’s Cell  Salts (6x  potencies)? Do
you see their action as simply homeopathic or as supplying minerals
to the body?

Jose Nunez

Dear Jose Nunez,

I have given several remedies in low D potencies,
but I always only prescribe them if they fit the symptoms of the
patient, not according to any other ideas.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear Dr Vithoulkas,

My unusual question might best be prefaced by my experience:

Once, when touching a very high powered magnet, I felt its power
enter and strengthen me, then the magnet went ‘dead’.

I am often times made stronger by having a bottle of a needed homeopathic
remedy near me, or touching me.  Does the remedy in that bottle
lose its power, get changed in some way or ‘go dead’ as the magnet
did, when I am made stronger by its nearness?

Thank you,
Jean

Dear Jean,

It seems that you have a very sensitive organism.
I have never experienced that a remedy stops being active because
someone with a sensitive organism touched it. The action of a homoeopathically
potentised substance is not based on magnetism.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear Prof. Vithoulkas,

I have been taking allopathic medicine for high triglycerides and
low HDL, for the last two months. One of my friends advised me to
take Ginseng 1X and Crataegus Mother Tincture, as adjuvant to allopathic
medicine. I have been taking these medicines together.

Can homeopathic medicine of 1x and mother tinctures be taken together
with allopathic medicines, or with other homeopathic remedies?
Also, how much time should there be between homeopathic medicine
and allopathic medicine or food or water?

I will be grateful for your help in this matter.

Best regards,

Naresh Kumar

Dear Naresh Kumar,

The remedies you mention are not homeopathic
remedies but herbal remedies. This is not a field in which I have
expertise, so I cannot advise you on this.

Concerning homeopathic remedies I can say
that it is not advisable to treat someone with more than one remedy
at a time as it will be unclear which remedy acts if something changes
and it will not be possible to continue the treatment intelligently.
This also is true when herbal remedies are taken next to homeopathic
ones.

You can read in chapter 18 of my book ‘The
Science of Homeopathy’ my ideas about the handling of remedies.


George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Greetings Mr. Vithoulkas

Eight years ago a young man self administered Aconite 10M twice
in one day. He has been exhibiting proving symptoms for eight years
now. Can a remedy frequency be grafted permanently onto someone?

Tracy Frank

Dear Tracy Frank,

What you describe is a seldom seen phenomenon
but it has been recorded in the homeopathic literature before. That
is why I always warn people to be careful with the unnecessary and
too frequent prescribing of potentised remedies.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear Sir,

I’m newly graduated in homoeopathy and practicing for the last
two years. I have seen that homoeopathic medicine can act with single
dose of 30c, 200c, 1000c potency. My friends and also some seniors
use these potencies for weeks or months regularly, twice or thrice
a day. I’m confused about the single dose.

With best regard,

Dr. Satish Patil

Dear Dr. Satish Patil,

The answer to your question is in fact already
given in the previous question. It is never advisable to repeat
high potencies routinely. One of the important characteristics of
homeopathy as therapy is individualization. If we want to apply
homeopathy successfully we have to individualize the symptoms of
the patient, but also the selection of the potency and the frequency
of the dose.

(you can read my book “Science of Homeopathy”

)

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear sir,

With reference to “Relationship of Remedies” by M. Gibson Miller.
He lists Nitric Acid as being BOTH complementary AND inimical to
Lachesis. Can you explain this seeming contradiction?

Thanks and regards,

Dr. Shafique

Dear Dr. Shafique,

As I already answered to Donna Burdick, the
predominant rule is that a remedy can be given when its symptoms
fit those of the case. By the way, the relationship of remedies
is only to be taken into regard if the remedy you have given has
had some action. If there has been no action at all then for the
organism it is as if the remedy was not given at all.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear George  Vithoulkas

If a patient has a local inflammation calling for Myristica, and
a systemic infection requiring Pyrogenum, how would you proceed?

Philip Pandolfi

Dear Philip Pandolfi,

Our main concern should be to preserve the
life of the patient. As the systemic infection is more threatening
for the life of the patient himself, it is advisable to first treat
that. We always work from the centre to the periphery. If the local
inflammation still exists after the general treatment then you can
treat this if necessary.

George Vithoulkas

———————————————-

Dear Mr. Vithoulkas,

I reside in the USA, a nation with constitutional rights which
are ignored and trampled upon by the American medical system.  Since
birth, my grandson had severe digestive problems and allergies,
so we took him to two medical doctors who both practice natural
medicine.  We were advised by both to avoid vaccines until age 2,
and then, not unless his digestive and immune problems were resolved.

Due to his mal-absorption problems he was admitted to the hospital
at age 6 months, at which time the doctors discovered that he had
not been vaccinated, which they classified as “child neglect”.
They learned that we were giving him nutritional supplements and
probiotics, which they classified as “practicing medicine without
a license”.  Therefore we were reported to Child Protective
Services and my daughter was forced to get vaccinations under threat
of loss of custody of her son. The vaccines produced “regressive
autism” in my grandson (right on his first birthday).

Against the hospital’s “advisement”, we took my grandson
to a homeopathic physician.  I have never questioned his remedies
until now with his last prescription being for “Tuberculinum
200c/1M”.

I went on the internet to research and found the following from
the Materia Medica on your website, which greatly alarms me:

Homeopathic Materia Medica

“Tuberculinum is indicated in renal affections, but caution is
necessary, for where skin and  intestines do not perform normally,
even high potencies are dangerous.”

“In apyretic purely tubercular phthisis, results are marked,
provided the eliminative organs are in good order, but nothing below
the 1000th should be used, unless absolutely necessary.” “If
the heart is in good shape, a single dose of Tuberculinum 1000-2000
is given, provided there are no marked indications for other remedies.”
“When Tuberculinum is contraindicated, recourse must be had to the
nearest antipsoric.”

In addition you have stated “If you give a close remedy and not
the correct one, you will simply speed up the degenerative process”.

Due to these cautions, and the fact that the child’s organ systems
are greatly compromised, I am absolutely in fear of giving this
remedy (Tuberculinum) to my grandson.  My question is thus:

Regarding “When Tuberculinum is contraindicated, recourse
must be had to the nearest antipsoric”, what would your recommendation
be as to the “nearest antipsoric” that would not carry
the contraindications as with the Tuberculinum???

Thank You,

Evelyn  Grady

Dear Evelyn Grady,

What you write is a very regrettable story
and I am sorry for you that this has overcome your grandchild. Unfortunately
you are not the only one who has undergone this kind of experiences.
Concerning your grandson’s case, it is difficult for me to advise
you on this, as I have no details about his symptomatology.

The materia medica texts you quote are not
written by myself and I have not experienced these things in my
own practice. The potency of any remedy should be selected on the
particular case that has to be prescribed for. If there is any doubt
about which potency could be started with, the first potency should
not be higher than 200 K.

George Vithoulkas

 


To subscribe to George Vithoulkas’ newsletter, click
here.

About the author

George Vithoulkas

George Vithoulkas

George Vithoulkas is an Honorary Professor of the Moscow Medical Academy, Professor in the Kiev Medical Academy, Honorary Professor at the University of the Aegean, Greece, Collaborating Professor in Basque Medical University (2001-2004) and Doctor Honoris Causa of "Doctor ViktorBabes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Timisoara in Romania. In 1995, he established International Academy of Classical Homeopathy in Alonissos, of which he is the director. In 1996, he was honored with the Right Livelihood Award (also known as Alternative Nobel Prize) "for his outstanding contribution to the revival of homeopathic knowledge and the training of homeopaths to the highest standards".

Leave a Comment

cialis-viagra.com.ua/cialis-tadalafil/cialis-5-mg/

стероиды

www.buysteroids.in.ua