3. SYMPTOMS THAT CAN BE USED

3.1. The “Mind” Chapter
With the veterinary repertory, depending on each species or race, we need a very specific and distinct book.  In nearly every chapter, one has to be careful about anatomical and/or physiological peculiarities.  The exception to this rule is the “Mind” chapter.  Of course, there are racial characteristics here as well: E.g. the rubrics biting (“Mind, biting”) or killing (“Mind, kill, desire, to”).  Generally, though, this chapter can be as useful for animals as it is for humans.

From everyday experience, one finds that animals can have exactly the same emotions as man.  We observe fear, suppressed anger, fastidious behaviour, ailments from grief, jealousy etc.  Another thing is that animals don’t tend to hide their feelings, and are not as much diverted from natural reactions and honesty as people are.  That is why they usually show their emotions more directly then we do.  In the animal kingdom, fear of other animals is fear of other animals; there is no necessity to call a psychiatrist to find out if the animal is telling the truth.  That is the second reason why the Mind chapter transfers very well from humans to animals.

3.2. The “Mind” Chapter in the Repertory
Our problem is that the human language of the repertory has to be translated.  Some symptoms are obvious, e.g. fear of thunderstorm if we consider the restrictions stated in 2.3., anger from contradiction (“Mind, anger, contradiction, from”) or an aversion to strangers (“Mind, strangers, presence of, agg.”), except in a Chow-Chow.

A second group of symptoms can be adjoined to behaviour per definition.  Once this is done the homoeopath knows what the animal is doing and subsequently can use the adjoined rubric.  As an example, we can take individuals that ignore their owners when they return from a holiday.  This is resentment and the appropriate rubric is “Mind, dwells on past disagreeable occurrences”.  We can also define the animal that bites out of fear: “Mind, anger, ailments after anger, with anxiety”.  There are many such rubrics and the more veterinarians practice homeopathy, the more numerous these rubrics/symptoms will be.

A third group of symptoms are not that easy to find in homoeopathic language.  Either they are not explained yet, or they are so individual that one can only use them in particular cases.  Take a horse that regularly jumps out of the paddock and visits all the stables in a radius of 20 miles.  This symptom can be translated as “Mind, travel, desire to”.  Of course, a dog that loves to go with their owners on holiday would not be covered by this rubric – that’s just a normal social behaviour.  A more difficult example is a cat that always turns around and looks scared.  In such a case, it is worthwhile to try and imagine yourself being this cat.  Try to understand what might underlie such a reaction.  It might sound a bit strange, but the more one gets used to thinking like this, the easier it is to do.  In the aforementioned cat, it probably meant that the cat felt persecuted (“Mind, delusion, pursued, enemies, by”).  If, after administration of a remedy from this rubric, the behaviour subsides (along with other problems), one can assume that the interpretation was not far off.  However, bear in mind that every species and breed shows its emotions in a different way – you cannot take a full-blooded horse and expect a cold-blooded one to show the same intensity of emotions.

Therefore, we have to have certain rules to translate psychic symptoms:

A) Try to put yourself in the patient’s situation and form a feeling for the individual problem. In this manner, you should be capable of finding a reason for the behaviour that:

1.  explains the behaviour satisfactorily.
2.  is based on the totality of the chosen behaviour, without neglecting any details.
3.  is based on pure observation and not on interpretation.

B) The result must be a rubric that:

1. contains the remedy which is a simile to the whole case.
2. contains a remedy that covers the peculiar, mind, and general symptoms of the patient.
3. can only be the last piece in a puzzle to solve the case.

This means that the translation of such symptoms should be the last step in solving the case; otherwise, the danger of being misled by fantasy is too great.

3.3 Somatic Symptoms
As mentioned several times already, it depends on the species and breed to determine which symptoms are peculiar.  The rubric “Abdomen, pendulous” is definitively not the same in a cat or a Saluki.  The dwarfishness of a Friesian horse compared to the size of a pony is particular, but not in a Shetland pony of the same size.  A dog that dislikes sausages (“Generalities, food, sausages, aversion to”) has a peculiar symptom, but not a cat with the same aversion.

A second category of good symptoms is very distinct modalities.  If an animal only eats during the night (but not a bat), then the rubric can be taken into the repertorization as a general symptom.  A horse that only coughs during foggy weather (“Cough, fog agg.”) is perhaps Sepia (because the rubric covers only this remedy).  If the cough is only slightly worse during fog, the rubric cannot be taken into consideration.   A kitten that only gets diarrhoea when fed with fat food (“Rectum, diarrhoea, food, fat, after”) shows at least one good symptom.  If on the other hand fatty food, milk, meat and so on all lead to diarrhoea the rubric has to be dropped.

A third category is changes compared to a previous status quo that cannot be explained by pathological, anatomical, or physiological reasoning.  If, for example, a Labrador retriever gets an eversion of lids during diarrhoea, it is peculiar.  In addition, dandruff (“Head, dandruff”) in a cat after a cough is a particular symptom.

One should of course take into consideration, that even mind symptoms can be peculiar and therefore upgraded according to § 153 of the Organon (6th Edition).  This holds true if the symptoms are very marked, if they show a peculiar trait of behaviour.  As an example, an Alsatian that never wants to work (“Mind, work, aversion to mental”), but not a pug with the same attitude.

4. THE STRUCTURE OF THE VETERINARY REPERTORY

From the above information, it is clear that we don’t want to create a completely independent repertory.  We want to include all the human information in the Veterinary Repertory.  The aim of the Veterinary Repertory is to help the homoeopathic veterinarian.  This is done in several ways, but always by adding information to the normal repertory.  Thus, the basis of the Veterinary Repertory remains the normal human repertory and is not a separate entity!

4.1. The Concepts
The symptoms that are linked to rubrics we called “per definition” (see 3.2.) are organized in the Veterinary Repertory by the way of using Concepts.  Concepts are the link between veterinary symptoms and rubrics in the (human) repertory.  We are positive that the use of Concepts will be a great aid to the practising Veterinarian in choosing good rubrics and therefore in determining a good simile.  This novel approach structures the veterinary knowledge and creates an interface between it and the existing homoeopathic information in the repertory.

4.2. Adding New Rubrics
The human repertory is not complete for animals.  Many symptoms are limited to a specific species and/or breed.  These symptoms aren’t found in any of the existing repertories.  This is especially sad as some of these symptoms are very important (think of all the oestrus problems, of castration and its related symptoms, of the different anatomy and physiology in ruminants).  They are central to the animal’s anatomy, physiology, and behaviour.

We would like to share our species and/or breed specific symptoms with you.  Some of these symptoms have no remedies yet.  However, they are reminders that with your help, we can complete them and eventually have a good knowledge of animal-related rubrics, and therefore of animal-related materia medica.

4.3. Adding Remedies
Many of the new rubrics already have remedy additions.  Considering the relatively short amount of time we spent in creating the Veterinary Repertory, we know that most of these rubrics are not complete as yet.  On the other hand, the additions are very reliable.  All additions of remedies that are not derived from well known, already printed veterinary literature are well documented.  This means that the entries that come from our own sources are linked to a specific symptom in a specific animal.  Therefore, we can state that our Veterinary Repertory is a very reliable source of information.  Every new release will be more complete.  With everyone’s contribution, we will soon have a complete and useful tool.

ALGORITHM TO JUDGE THE VALORISATION
OF PSYCHIC SYMPTOMS IN ANIMALS

Complete table at end !!!!!!
Acknowledgements

First, I want to thank my wife Lotte for tolerating all the time I spent at the computer, in the surgery, or behind books.  Without her support (the best cuisine!!), both conceptually and generally, the Veterinary Repertory would have never been realized.

Second, I want to thank the late Dr. Jost Künzli, with whom I had the pleasure and honour to study.  Without him, I could have never developed my homoeopathic knowledge as it is.  Dr. Künzli was a very gifted and honourable teacher, and certainly the best one to teach the use of the repertory.

Jose Ramon Torres added all the information from the veterinary literature and included the works of veterinary authors such as Henri Quinquandon, Flavio Briones, George Macleod, Christopher Day, and Jaques Milleman.  His compilation was a big step in the process of creating the Veterinary Repertory.

I also want to thank the IAVH (International Association of Veterinary Homoeopathy) and its repertory group.  Working under Dr. Bernhard Hornig, they gave us a great deal of input on how to organize the veterinary symptoms.

Finally, I want to thank the Archibel team: Frederik Schroyens, Katelijne Vanhoutte, Phillippe Santantonio, and all the others who helped wherever possible.

Dear Marc,

In addition to this very interesting presentation of your work I would like to ask a question:

What is your message to the fresh veterinary homeopathy students who wish to use this new addition to the human repertory.  May they not be tempted to rely too much on these additions and not acquire the more artistic use of the repertory that we, of the old guard, needed to learn to use it successfully?

I fully agree with you.  I think you have to know the repertory very well to make the most of it.  Believe me: I was brought up with Repertory-milk (lac-rep by Künzli who was my longtime teacher, to whom I owe most of my homeopathic gratitude.

This said, I advise all beginners to use the revised (original) Kent first.  Once you know this repertory, you can proceed to newer versions, since you are then capable of choosing to use the information in these new versions that you assume to be correct.  I still repertorize every patient with Kent’s revised repertory as well as with the Millennium version of Synthesis.  This is very easy in Radar, as you can change from one version to the other.  And it is not uncommon for Kent to be superior.

This said, I am aware that using only the revised version you will miss some good remedies because of the lack of additions.  Don’t think only of remedies such as Carcinosinum.

If we talk about the VetRep there are two issues involved:

1)   In the concepts you find a lot of vet-specific symptoms (and a few disorders) with the link to the relating rubrics (e.g. a dog that always hides bones -> delusion poor, fear poverty …)

2)  The additions and new rubrics are obviously only a beginning of a never ending project.  I am astonished however, when I add new patients, at how often a current vet addition or rubric turns out to be correct.

I would therefore advise the following: for home study, the VetRep is not a suitable tool. But as soon as they work with animals I believe it can be of considerable help.

Thank you for these additions.  It is interesting to hear you say that you find the Kent repertory to be superior in many cases.  Marc Brunson keeps reminding us of this every time he gets the chance.

© Dr. Marc Bär, Zürich, May 2001