Hey Everybody, Vamsi’s In The House!!!
Elaine you had suggested the following in this month’s quiz:
“I would like you to buy or order this remedy: _____________ 30C. He should take 3 doses a day in water with 5 succussions before each dose….”
Wanted to know how do we know the number of succussions before each dose? Here you had suggested 5 succussions. Please let me know what is the basis of this number, or does it vary based on the potency? Do we really need to succuss the medicine everytime?
Kindly educate me on this.
Well, Vamsi, your question has inspired me to do another “Questions Patients Ask” for the ezine! I haven’t written one in over a year! So first of all, yes, 3 times a day because I also tell my clients, “As soon as you see a striking improvement, stop dosing!” That could mean as soon as one dose, if you see a striking improvement. Resume if you start to relapse and here’s the part of The Organon by Samuel Hahnemann, MD that says that:
- 246 Sixth Edition
Every perceptibly progressive and strikingly increasing amelioration during treatment is a condition which, as long as it lasts, completely precludes every repetition of the administration of any medicine whatsoever, because all the good the medicine taken continues to effect is now hastening towards its completion. …
Note he says “as long as it lasts”, meaning that if you can feel the case relapsing, you are within your rights to start dosing again. So, why is this aphorism important? Because people are causing aggravations and provings by continuing to dose despite their patient being strikingly better. The remedy continues to work even though you’re not taking it! You don’t need to take it over and over again once you see clearly that the remedy is, indeed, working. It doesn’t work better by needless repetitions.
In fact, I have a client right now who has an autistic child–a Tarentula case–and you know how violent this remedy is, and here was the mistake she made: The child was getting agitated, so the mother knew to redose and it worked right away! Here was the mistake: she dosed again the next morning, just for the sake of it, because it was morning!!!! And guess what happened? Either it caused an aggravation or antidoted the previous night’s dose, because the child became violent again! Fortunately, she knew to do the Aggravation Zapper. So, yes, lesson learned! If there’s a striking improvement, stop dosing!
Here’s another example. You may have read in on one of my “Tidbits” articles that I had a bad knee for a long time. Maybe a year. And the worst part about it, for me, was that I couldn’t bend my leg sideways, meaning I couldn’t sit in my favorite position anymore–cross-legged on the floor or the bed. Well, in September of 2016, all heck broke loose because I leaned over to straighten a picture on the wall, and I think I heard something go “snap” or “crack”, and all of a sudden my knee was in such pain that I was crippled! I couldn’t lift my leg, I had to hold onto furniture to walk; I was thinking I might need crutches… It was pretty serious, I had to come up with a remedy fast! I tried all the obvious ones with no luck. You know, Arnica, Bryonia, etc.
Finally, comparing both knees, I felt that the left one might be a teensy bit swollen. With that I took Apis 200C. WHAM! Bulls eye! I slowly recovered complete use of my leg! Within just a few days I was back to shopping at the supermarket and I never looked back!
…That is, until a few days ago! I got out of the car, was walking Shana to work, and all of a sudden I grabbed hold of her shoulder and said, “It’s my knee again!” There was a sharp pain and a feeling like my knee would collapse out from under me! Somehow I made it to Sabrina’s Cafe. I sat down and thought, “I wonder if Apis will work again?” All I had was 30C. I took a dose from my Emergency Kit. And you see why everybody needs an Emergency Kit and why it should be with you and not at home in a drawer?
So the good news is that when I got up to walk out an hour later, I no longer had that feeling that my knee would collapse out from under me, but I did still have the sharp pain–though less sharp than an hour ago. I only ever took the one dose! The next day I was even better. And now it’s all gone! I only needed just the one dose, even though it took days for complete recovery, it goes to prove that the remedy keeps on working; and as long as you’re not relapsing, just be patient, don’t redose as long as you’re improving!
For your second question, why 5 succussions before each dose, and do we really need to succuss the bottle at all? Where in The Organon does it say that? So, the answer is in aphorism 247:
- 247 Sixth Edition
It is impractical to repeat the same unchanged dose of a remedy once, not to mention its frequent repetition (and at short intervals in order not to delay the cure). The vital principle does not accept such unchanged doses without resistance, that is, without other symptoms of the medicine to manifest themselves than those similar to the disease to be cured,
If I can interject here, he’s saying, “Don’t give the exact same unaltered dose over and over again, the vital force doesn’t accept unchanged doses, you’ll end up proving the remedy.”
because the former dose has already accomplished the expected change in the vital principle and a second dynamically wholly similar, unchanged dose of the same medicine no longer finds, therefore, the same conditions of the vital force. The patient may indeed be made sick in another way by receiving other such unchanged doses, even sicker than he was, for now only those symptoms of the given remedy remain active which were not homoeopathic to the original disease, hence no step towards cure can follow, only a true aggravation of the condition of the patient. But if the succeeding dose is changed slightly every time,
See? Now he’s getting ready to say it. “If you change the dose each time…”
namely potentized somewhat higher (§§ 269-270)
“If you raise the potency somewhat…”
then the vital principle may be altered without difficulty by the same medicine
“You can keep the case moving without aggravating or proving the remedy.”
(the sensation of natural disease diminishing) and thus the cure brought nearer.1
1 We ought not even with the best chosen homoeopathic medicine, for instance one pellet of the same potency that was beneficial at first, to let the patient have a second or third dose, taken dry.
Look at that. He’s being very clear: Don’t repeat dry doses (pellets).
In the same way, if the medicine was dissolved in water and the first dose proved beneficial, a second or third and even smaller dose from the bottle standing undisturbed, even in intervals of a few days, would prove no longer beneficial,
Did you catch what he was saying here? He’s saying, “Even though you may have put the remedy into water, that’s not enough! Because the same thing applies–don’t take the exact same potency over and over again! And if you’re not succussing before each dose, that’s exactly what your water bottle is, the exact same potency–over and over again!
even though the original preparation had been potentized with ten succussions or as I suggested later with but two succussions
Now, here’s where he’s getting into the number of succussions! He’s saying, “Sure, you might have succussed 10 times in the beginning, or 2 times as I suggested later…. but it doesn’t matter. If you’re not succussing before each dose, you’re giving the exact same potency over and over again, and that’s going to cause provings and aggravations.” Now, notice he said he originally advised people to do 10 succussions before each dose, then he changed it to 2. I went to the middle and picked 5, but I always go down to 2 for hyper-sensitive patients, patients who are allergic, over-reactive, etc., and if a patient is HYPO-reactive, slow to react to stimuli, I go back up to 10.
in order to obviate this disadvantage and this according to above reasons. But through modification of every dose in its dynamiztion degree, as I herewith teach, there exists no offence, even if the doses be repeated more frequently, even if the medicine be ever so highly potentized with ever so many succussions. It almost seems as if the best selected homoeopathic remedy could best extract the morbid disorder from the vital force and in chronic disease to extinguish the same only if applied in several different forms.
He’s saying, “It seems like, if you don’t alter the potency by succussing the bottle before each dose, you can’t really successfully move the case forward.” I hope that answers your question!
Confused About Raising The Potency Correctly
You’ve said a lot of things!
Sometimes you say, when raising the potency, dump out 90% of the water bottle, refill half way and succuss 40 times. Other times you say, “Dump out your bottle, refill half way, succuss 40 times.” Which is it?
It really doesn’t matter how much you leave at the bottom of the bottle. 10 percent, 1 percent, a drop…nothing…
I have a case, you should see it. A client made a remedy out of a completely empty bottle!!!! She had a rash, a side-effect of her antibiotic. I told her to make a remedy out of the antibiotic, but she had taken the whole bottle, there was nothing left! So she made a remedy out of her empty pharma bottle–and it worked! Here it is, click below:
So, I think you can see, if a substance’s energy remains in an empty bottle, then clearly, if you dump out a bottle full of water, there is still plenty of liquid left in there to keep a remedy going, probably several drops; but even one drop would have been enough.
EMF’s and Homeopathy
Hi Elaine. Although homeopathy helped some when my Naturopath recommended I take Ignatia Amara 200C for my Depression, he told me that he got away from prescribing Homeopathic remedies because he firmly believed that the EMF radiation from computers, cordless phones and other appliances reduced the efficacy of the remedies (that he stored).
How could he have known that?
His reasoning was that they were ENERGY based.
I even read on line that we should store our remedies in a metal box far away from these kind of appliances.
Well, if all this is true, I should be in big trouble! Most of my remedies were bought in the ’90’s, before computers or modems were part of everyone’s household. At the present time, a modem sits 3 feet away from the drawers my remedies are in. None the less, they still work!
I keep mine in my office that has computer, printer, fax, smart phone etc. etc.
Well, it’s pretty much the same situation for me.
Of course I do worry about these things, and yet, when I need a remedy and go to my remedy drawer, I still get results! I guess we’ll never know exactly why our remedies aren’t interfered with by all the electromagnetic chaos all around us, it’s a great question, plus a tribute to them, to be sure; but, I just don’t have an answer for why our remedies are so resilient; I wish I knew.
Co-sleeping–Better For Baby
Elaine, my pediatrician says I have to let my son “cry it out”. I’ve trusted my mama gut (or probably my guardian angel helping me out) in regards to not letting him cry it out his whole life. I’ve always felt like things weren’t just right if he’s freaking out in his crib. I guess because society says, “oh they’re teething give them Motrin” and they just drug them to sleep…. I still feel like something is a little off. He has a rash that comes and goes around his mouth. He’s taken histaminum and allium cepa for it at times. These last two nights he’s woken up around 12:30 and then I just keep him in bed with me and then he’s nursed a lot around 5 a.m.
He actually doesn’t sleep better with me. I feel like he wakes up constantly to nurse. He’s 14 months.
Is that all? He’s way too young to be sleeping alone, especially knowing he’s been traumatized by the hospital. I guess the important thing is that he no longer has ITP, right? Everything else will most likely take care of itself over time.
Although last night he didn’t wake up but once and then I just brought him to bed! I was just hoping one day he’d just start sleeping through the night. Is that me being naïve?
Yes! He’s just a baby, they don’t sleep through the night, I hate to tell you. Breast-fed babies wake up often to nurse. As I’ve said many times, no mammal on earth leaves her infant alone at night, in a separate cave or tree branch or whatever, only we do that; it’s just insanity. Check out these 2 articles on co-sleeping:
Cosleeping Around The World
by James J. McKenna, Ph.D.
For the overwhelming majority of mothers and babies around the globe today, cosleeping is an unquestioned practice. In much of southern Europe, Asia, Africa and Central and South America, mothers and babies routinely share sleep. In many cultures, cosleeping is the norm until children are weaned, and some continue long after weaning. Japanese parents (or grandparents) often sleep in proximity with their children until they are teenagers, referring to this arrangement as a river – the mother is one bank, the father another, and the child sleeping between them is the water. Most of the present world cultures practice forms of cosleeping and there are very few cultures in the world for which it would ever even be thought acceptable or desirable to have babies sleeping alone.
Bad news for dads: Babies should share mother’s bed until age three because it’s good for their hearts
Sleeping alone makes it ‘harder for mother and child to bond and damages the development of the brain’
Researchers believe this leads to bad behaviour as the child grows up.
By Fiona Macrae for the Daily Mail
Updated: 19:26 EDT, 27 October 2011
Babies should sleep in their mother’s bed until they are at least three years old, it was claimed last night.
The controversial advice comes from a paediatrician who found that two-day-old babies who were placed in cots slept less well than those who dozed on their mother’s chest.
Their hearts were also under more stress, it was claimed.
New research claims babies should sleep with their mothers until they reach the age of three
Sleeping alone makes it harder for mother and child to bond – and damages the development of the brain, leading to bad behaviour as the child grows up, researchers fear.
Dr Nils Bergman, of the University of Cape Town, South Africa, says that for optimal development, healthy newborns should sleep on their mother’s chest for the first few weeks
After that, they should stay in the mother’s bed until they are three or even four years old.
Sixteen infants were studied while they slept on their mother’s chest and in a cot by her bed. Monitoring revealed the baby’s heart to be under three times as much stress when he or she slept alone.
Better with mum: The study found the quality of sleep the babies had in a cot was far worse.
Being in a cot also disrupted sleep, with the babies’ brains less likely to ‘cycle’ or make the transition between two types of sleep called active and quiet.
In the cots, only six out of the 16 had any quiet sleep and its quality was far worse.
Making this transition is thought to be key to the normal development of the brain.
Animal studies have linked the combination of stress and lack of sleep to behavioural problems in teenage years.
Dr Bergman said that changes to the brain brought on by stress hormones may make it more difficult to form relationships later on, leading to problems such as promiscuity.
The National Childbirth Trust is in favour of bed-sharing, as long as the parents have not been smoking, drinking or using drugs and are not obese, ill or excessively tired.
So, how do you like that?
Elaine Lewis, D.Hom., C.Hom.
Elaine takes online cases! Write to her at LEWRA@aol.com
Visit her website: www.ElaineLewis.hpathy.com