| This is so exciting because
you are the expert on spiders and snakes, am I right?
Well, firstly, I should address that point because I would straight
away say that I am no expert.
Oh, I see. Well, thank you for coming. Next!
But I am certainly interested, and yes I have done a lot
of work and preparation for lectures and articles on those creatures,
but in reality I have collated and reworked and massaged some great
work by other authors. They include Deborah Collins in New Zealand,
Keith Avedissian in Australia, and then Sankaran and Farouk Master
in India, then Massimo’s work and also Karen Allen in the
US. They have all contributed to a kind of synthesis which I have
built up and present. Perhaps what I do differently is focus on
building a 3 dimensional profile of the families and the individual
members of those families by being critical of what has been said
about them before. I also use a lot of video and photos to freak
students out. I am fascinated by what they evoke in me. I have to
say that one of the reasons I embarked on some of this work was
because of my abject terror when it came to spiders. I hate them.
So much so I actually caught myself out one day and had to ask why.
What were the things they evoked in me? All dark and steamy stuff.
Anyway from doing some provings – especially White Tailed
Spider I have to say (touch wood) that my feelings to them are much
more balanced. Right now for example it is spider season in Sydney,
and they are everywhere outside the house. Massive ones. Huge. Some
of the webs are like steel poles!
And when does spider season end, because
I would certainly hate to be wandering cluelessly over to Sydney
in the wrong season! But getting back to our topic, which I think
was spiders and snakes, it has occurred to me that we rely so heavily
on Lachesis and Tarentula, and know so little about the other snakes
and insects as remedies that my question would be, if I could just
stop thinking about massive spiders, do you find that Elaps, Bothrops,
Cenchris, Vipera, Crotalus, etc., and the other spiders--Latrodectus,
Aranea ix., etc. are needed just as often to solve cases as the
few we know so well?
It’s a great point and I think it is very likely. We can
postulate that our Lachesis and Apis cures could well have been
more elegant and refined and more gentle and rapid and permanent
had a more accurate family member been given. Likewise, when we
come to lecturing and presenting the profile of such remedies, we
often attribute a quality of the family – say the snakes,
to Lachesis and the information becomes unfairly weighted. I have
been guilty of this myself in my own lectures, but attempt these
days to be much more accurate in presenting. Essentially we give
these polycrests because we have some solid provings and because
time has confirmed some of that information. Lachesis was proved
in 1828. That’s almost 200 years of continuous use. But its
hard to be so confident in the proving information of a recently
proved remedy. Its sure easier and safer in a clinic to go with
the polycrest as opposed to the freshly proved and untried remedy.
Apis rather than Culex. Lachesis rather than Python. Platina instead
of Iridium. On the one hand it makes such sense to assume that all
medicines are equal. They are all unique and therefore all should
be considered as possibilities at the start of a case. Perhaps simply
what is missing in these lesser used remedies is a meaningful proving,
perhaps some deeper knowledge of the origin of the substance and
time to get some solid clinical information.
That said I have to admit that when it comes to newer remedies
I am often a little hesitant. I will these days be wary until they
are shown to be valuable. I have so many prescriptions of remedies
such as Dove, Brassica, Dragon Fly and Fire and Culex to name a
few that did absolutely nothing. Those prescriptions were often
based on a lecture I have heard or a direct translation from the
proving or from reading an article. It’s not to criticize
those provings but to point out that we need more information about
their clinical application. In these situations my enthusiasm for
the sexy prescription got the better of me! On the other hand I
would not be with out some of these new additions especially since
so many times they have come to the fore in those cases where the
familiar polycrests are redundant. You’ll notice I am hedging
my bets.
Are we losing a lot of cases because we can't
recognize these other insects and reptiles?
Without a doubt yes yes. Scholten says the most amazing and obvious
things in one of his books. To paraphrase he says if you don’t
know what the remedy is in the prescription to a patient, then chances
are you don’t know the remedy or it hasn’t been proven
yet! I love that. It makes me so enthusiastic about the authentic
magic of the proving and the value of it. There is absolute value
in exploring the unknown in our potential materia medica. There
are squillions of species begging for a proving and from all the
kingdoms. Australia for example is just pumping with deadly stuff,
jellyfish and lizards and snakes and weird stuff. And then theres
the world of the plants and minerals too. The homeopath Peter Tumminello
whom I work with in Sydney is doing incredible work on some of the
gem stones.
But all of that said there is a strong part of me that tempers
that enthusiasm for unbridled expansion for an appreciation of what
we already have. Do we really need 3000 remedies? Really ? I doubt
it. Hahnemann had 10 at one stage and then 50. To that end a lot
of my work has been in the reproving of some older remedies to get
some clinical verification and validation, Mosquito, Cockroach,
Cactus, Liquorice. And furthermore and so important is this other
belief I have. While it sure helps to have a great grasp of materia
medica and have so much incredible information of remedies in your
head, it doesn’t necessarily make you busy. It doesn’t
necessarily translate into a recipe for success. From what I have
seen a busy and meaningful practice often comes from a fusion of
qualities. In New Zealand this is what my post graduate program,
is called. The Fusion Sessions. This is our focus. I am focused
on getting our great practitioners and students busy in their clinics.
This is what fires me. The successful homeopath is often an all
rounder. A listener; with passion, who can run a small business
and yet have a solid grasp of the technical skills of the homeopath.
This is really what I want to push in Canada at my seminars. Yes,
focus on the technical skills of Homeopathy, such as the second
prescription and grasping deeper and more vital aspects of materia
medica. But more than that, remember that the healing art of homeopathy
is in the listening to the story of the patient. How to be with
a client. How to massage information out of them. And how to earn
a living as you do this. How to stay alive and energized and enthused
and passionate in the process.
Need to go to bed now...
Then I'll just go on talking, shall I? You
probably can't hear me over the giant crickets anyway; but, I once
heard someone say that whatever rubric Lachesis is in, you can just
assume the other snake remedies are there too. Do you subscribe
to that?
No way. That is going too far and is very inaccurate. In fact it's
outrageous. The law of similars voiced through the proving is essentially
the major way we get our information about medicines. In Herings
provings and the subsequent provings, Lachesis creates some very
characteristic and unique symptoms in the provers. Death Adder does
something else. Python does something else. Naja does something
else. Its all very well to be smart and look for the common features
in the different members of a family but hang on. Homeopathy is
about difference. It is about individuality. It is the differences
between these these substances which is important. If you are to
say however I have noticed that there is a lot of strong sexual
energy in most of the remedies that come form the sea, or isn’t
it interesting that the Kali's have strong issues around duty then
I am happy to buy that. But to turn the repertory into an amorphous
innacurate rubric sharing would never catch my vote. We have to
be a little careful with the emphasis on the families and kingdoms.
There is a lot of great work being done here but…..Heres an
example. When a homeopath writes and says in examining the remedies
of the conifers I notice that they all seem to be about the same
issue, and this is the issue and here are the rubrics I have chosen
to assert and justify my claim, there is a lot of very subjective
selection going on. What about all the rubrics from the family members
that were uncommon. There will be far more of those than the common
ones. The way I see it at the moment is, that in the desire for
some reliable materia medica we must come to a synthesis of information
based upon the provings, the toxicology, the cured clinical cases,
the family information from where the substance derives etc. But
we cannot rely on just one source of information. We need to be
much more multi dimensional in our materia medica. To rely on only
one way is very narrow for me.
Does each snake have, perhaps, one keynote
where, if you see it in a case, you can just go with that remedy?
For instance, the Vipera keynote of "aggravation from letting
the legs hang down"? Do we really need to know just as much
about the other snake remedies as we know about Lachesis? I ask
this because, every time I think I've discovered something "new"
about a snake remedy, such as the Crotalus cascavella "fear
that someone is behind him", I find out the others have that
too! Lachesis has it and Cenchris has it....
Ok now this is a great question too. To my way of thinking I like
the current idea that each family, and each member of that family
has a unique and identifiable central core statement or delusion.
I am fine with that. I am hestitant though to assert exactly what
they are. I think that will take years to work out. I am instantly
nervous when a homeopath does a new proving and says this is what
it's about. Too quick. This takes years of clinical observation.
Now what I have just said is a bit different to your keynote suggestion.
Keynotes are often shared between other remedies and family members
so when a patient says to me something which I know to be a keynote
of a remedy, I do not automatically run with it. Hey call me conservative
but I use straight up good old fashioned Hahnemannian ideas of peculiarity
in my practice. I am always looking for that which is weird. That
which cannot be explained. That which is unique and characterisitic.
I am pretty flexible though. I use keynotes. I use Boenninghausen.
I use kingdoms. I prescribe on what I see and hear, and my methodology
does change and it is flexible. But underneath it all is Hahnemann.
How often do you give a remedy based on the
patient saying, "I am terrified of that!" About what percentage
of the time does that turn out to be the remedy--the thing the patient
is scared of?
UMMMMMMMMMMMM hardly ever or never!!!! I would take that info into
account but that’s way too simplistic. Some of the snake medicines
are scared of dogs. The dog medicines are scared of spiders. One
of the best cases of a cured spider phobia was using Lac caninum.
I have a couple of hilarious stories giving remedies to patients
based on saying things like that. But my prescriptions based upon
them have rarely been spectacular. Hypothetically we can say that
we have a part of us that is attracted to the thing that will heal
us. At some level we do seek out the medicine. But we rarely get
the dose right. Its my experience that often we attract the symbol
that represents that which we need to learn. Its all useful information
to help us find that remedy. That said, homeopathy is fairly radical,
it is pretty weird, and spread throughout the literature are amazing
results and cures based upon this type of information. Such intutition
in the case taking is often sharper than any other type of analysis.
You said the following:
We can postulate that our Lachesis and Apis
cures could well have been more elegant and refined and more gentle
and rapid and permanent had a more accurate family member been given.
My question would be, do these remedies work
at all if some other family member is actually the simillimum? For
instance, will Lachesis work in a Bothrops case? Even acutely, if
someone has a thrombosis and you're thinking of Bothrops and all
you have is Lachesis, can you give Lachesis in such a case?
Hey Elaine, now that is a good question. But it all depends by
what you mean ‘work’?
Yes Lachesis will act in a Bothrops case. It will remove some of
the symptoms, but clearly not all. One of the things which I am
always hammering home to my students is the reality of being in
practice. Yes our ideal at all times is to find the simillimum.
Yes it may be Bothrops. But if you don’t know that remedy
yet, or it hasn’t been proved yet, or you don’t have
it in your kit, then you still have to give something. Give the
closest similar you can see. Of course it is going to be imperfect
but it is a start. Now Hahnemann gave some awesome and clear instructions
in the Organon on just what to do in these situations. From aphorisms
162 to 200 he is telling us how to treat patients when we only have
a few number of remedies and they are imperfect to cover the whole
case, and then what to do in one sided cases when we don’t
have enough information to make an accurate prescription. These
rules and guidelines are just fantastic. And even more important,
is that they take the pressure out of the clinical situation. Instead
of angsting for a week over a case, trying to decide between this
or that, give the this, knowing that it may be an imperfect similar
and look for any improvements. I benefited so much in my training
from Jeremy Sherr's lectures on the second prescription. His emphasis
on this has been absolutely born out to me for the last decade in
my own clinic. There is great value in knowing what to do next.
Hahnemanns instructions are just like gold. So give Lachesis in
a Bothrops case. But look for the reaction and look for the parts
of the case which remain unresolved and then, quite possibly much
later, the clarity of the bothrops prescription will take shape
and then give it. For me this is the value of the emphasis on the
family relationships between remedies.
I hold in my hand, the last question!
Alastair, if you could, please tell us a
bit about a snake remedy that we probably know very little about
but which has been very useful to you and others.
Hey
Well its not so much of an unknown remedy but we read this about
Cenchris:
"Fascinating, sexy people. Want to be appreciated by others
[due to a terrible fear of being isolated], but are afraid of being
raped. Fear of rape in very attractive people, who provoke it. They
want a very strong sexual partner or they are themselves masculine.
Are not crazy about tenderness or cuddles." [Mangialavori]
This is completely accurate and verified by my experience. I work
in the inner west of Sydney and at the top of Oxford St. which is
Sydneys main gay area, and I seem to see a lot of this. Young, fit,
toned, vital people with lots of energy looking really good who
are at the same time making themselves as attractive as possible,
seeking some fairly casual sexual contacts, who are afraid of violence
(and may have well have experienced this) but get themselves in
some dangerous situations. Its an amazing dynamic to see, but come
Thur., Fri. and Sat. nights, in this part of town, its very visible.
Alastair, thanks for dropping by!
______________________________________
UPCOMING SEMINARS:
Case Taking and Sleuthing-- Boulder Colorado April 2005
Taupo New Zealand-- The Fusion Sessions April June December 2005
Toronto Canada-- The Canadian Bridge Sessions May September 2005
Galway Ireland-- Anxiety and Depression April 2005
Preston England-- Anxiety and Depression May 2005
Tension in Balance Stress management Seminars-- Sydney Australia
April 2005
Tension in Balance Stress management Seminars-- Gold Coast Australia
May 2005
Society of Homeopaths Conference-- England 2005
Homeopathy and Stress-- Bangkok Thailand May 2005
CONTACT ALASTAIR GRAY: alhomeoz@ihug.com.au
|