|
| |||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Forums
Courses
Shop
Diseases
Articles
Journal
Directory| |
||||
Homeopathy Philosophy |
||||
| |
||||
| Hpathy Ezine - March, 2007 | ||||
Understanding Aphorism 70 (Contd.)-- Dr. Leela D'Souza |
 |
|||
Earlier in the aphorism, Hahnemann emphasized the need to identify what was the disease to be cured. The means of curing it was by observing the TOTALITY of symptoms that indicated the similimum remedy. In the second part of the aphorism, he states that in nature, there are 3 possible ways by which symptoms of a patient could be relieved, but only ONE method of true cure. Again we come up with the term CURE and what it means from the homeopathic perspective. Too often the term is loosely used to signify symptom relief with no concern for longterm status. Hahnemann reminds us first what cure is NOT, why it isn't possible through non-homeopathic methods that do not follow the Law of Cure; of Similars. The FIRST mode of action is through a medicine that produces in a healthy state an ALIEN morbid state that differs completely from the disease to be cured. This is the ALLOPATHIC mode to treatment. This is what is described as DISSIMILAR DISEASE in Aphorisms 36, 37, 40, 44 where he explains in detail 3 different outcomes of two dissimilar diseases meeting in an individual. Neither of these 3 outcomes could result in cure. Today's practice of modern medicine is 'symptomatic treatment', where a single remedy seeks to deal with a single symptom. This is a hybrid variety of the ALLOPATHY that Hahnemann was referring to. If a person has only one apparent symptom, then there is one symptomatic remedy for it "proved" of its effectiveness by the Gold Standard of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT). What happens when a person has numerous symptoms? One symptomatic remedy for each symptom is the usual answer. This results in a cocktail of chemicals that form an individual prescription but the drugs are proved by Gold Standard RCT's only individually! People with advanced pathology treated by modern medicine end up pill-popping, often almost upto 20-25 'life-saving' pills per day! When will homeopaths and homeopathy reach that point of development where we are able to treat these situations confidently with correctly indicated single remedies?
The SECOND mode of action of any externally applied remedy, is by using a medicine that produces in a healthy individual artificial morbid symptoms that are ANTAGONISTIC to the single symptoms of disease sought to be cured. There are three major problems with seeking to cure ANTIPATHICALLY [Aph #56, 57,58,59]. 1. It seeks to cure only "the single symptom of disease". We know as homeopaths, instead, we seek the TOTALITY of disease to be cured. The single symptoms is inadequate. 2. It seeks to cure by antagonistic means. The follow through is
that even though the single symptom opposed by the medicine is relieved,
one has to take into consideration first if this symptom is recent
or long standing. 3. Chronic disease could never be cured by Antipathic means as there is no involvement of the vital force to cure itself in this approach. Rather, the vital force is forced to remain in a state of primary passive action, battered by the external onslaught of antagonistic medicine. This could happen through homeopathic medicines or other medicines - herbal; symptomatic.
In homeopathy, CURE means the annihilation of disease from its roots. It is what is expected of the similimum. Yet, how many of us have the opportunity to observe a case long enough to be able to say with confidence that we "cured" them of their problems? Various clinical situations come up in terms of using the word cure: 1. At what point of time is a condition considered cured? We first ask whether the condition in question can be classified
an expression of acute or chronic disease [Chronic Diseases pg
35, Organon Aph 99,
205, 206]. In contrast, if the acute disease has been suppressed either by a partial/superficial homeopathic remedy or any other drug, its dynamic impact on the vital force continues, even though the superficial (external) expression of symptoms appear to have disappeared. So it is possible this will contribute to future expression of disease that can be correlated to a "never been well since" that acute disease. Following an appropriate similimum remedy, the "old" symptom of this acute disease will return as per Hering's Law of Cure. 2. At what point do we claim cure in chronic disease? This too is a question that is difficult to answer and is individual
to a case. This means that homeopathic treatment is time related. We have no quick fixes here. The only thing that is fixed quickly and almost magically by a true similimum remedy, is a disease state that has arisen in the recent past. A magical disappearance of a chronic symptom is almost always a sign of palliation or suppression. Those complaints that have arisen early in childhood or adolescence will require a number of years to reach the point that could be termed cure. A well trained, experienced homeopath, during this waiting period, may prescribe for a variety of situations that will arise, as individual as every case, that would need an acute remedy, an intercurrent remedy, a constitutional remedy, chronic phase remedies, an antimiasmatic remedy and in some cases, supportive specific remedies. All this depends on how the case of disease evolved and was suppressed over time. There is only a small percentage of cases that will require only one single chronic similimum over a lifetime time. This also means that to benefit maximum from classical homeopathic treatment, the patient has to be ready for the long haul. But, the benefits are great: one stops the progression of miasmatic disease, there is a regression of majority of pathological change, improved sense of wellbeing, a strengthening of the immune system, and expectedly no new pathology developing.
Bibliography:
|
||||
|
||||
