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.
Greetings George V.
I am learning from your students of 25+ years ago and am honored to meet you, even if only on paper!
My question is: I have a 70 year old woman who has responded very well to Ignatia 200C, then Ignatia 1M, both rx times with the exception that the bladder infection she has been plagued with for 7 months came back after 2-3 weeks. This is very painful and incontinence becomes worse.
Then she goes to the doctor to get antibiotics. I reassessed her case and gave Nat. mur. 200C, and a month later the woman gets a bladder infection again. I gave her Cantharis 30C acutely and it helped when she took it for 3-4 days. Last FU, I gave her Carcinocin 200C, 2 weeks later she had a bladder infection. I will start from square one today when I see her again, but this is the first time I see such improvement then she goes down. I find no reason that she would be antidoting. She recently moved in with her 30 year old daughter into a home with her other daughter and son-in-law and grandson. The house is cooler than she would like but she holds her tongue often. She is a retired lawyer and with her last law partner who screwed her over financially – big financial loss for her. Now she’s a bit stuck but doesn’t say this.
Any insight or direction is appreciated. Thank you.
Best to you,
Molly McNally BSc PCHom
Your question shows me that you are applying real homeopathy and not fantasies. Your question is really valid and useful for everybody who wants to practice real evidence based homeopathy. I do not know if you are aware of my teaching of the last 13 years, in which case you would understand me better. I hope to organise a way to give the possibility for students to come in contact with this teaching through an e-learning soon.
Your case, according to my teachings, which I have given over the last 13 years as “the levels of health”, belongs in group 3 and level 7. That means that when she came to you she had a deep depression that was due to suppression of her bladder infections in previous years with antibiotics.
The Ignatia was the correct remedy and therefore the patient jumped to a higher level of health (Group 2 level 6) in which we see the coming back of the infections. That is excellent , but the patient, in such a case is going to have severe infections that should be treated correctly homeopathically, in order not to relapse into depression again. It will be difficult for me to say what you should do in this case, but perhaps you have to retake the whole case including the acutes and also the chronic symptoms and give a remedy that covers both acute and chronic.
I have explained this situation quite in detail in my teachings in the video courses that are running in different countries and are several hours of teaching. That means that I would need to write a very long letter to you which still will not be complete unless someone has followed the whole of the teachings. One more thing I should say is that in such cases the re-appearence of the acutes need to be handled with great caution and care that the case is not finally confused.
To subscribe to George Vithoulkas’ newsletter, click here.