My friend (?) and colleague, David Kempson, wrote an absolutely scathing review of “Tidbits 83: The Vaccine In Potency Is Here” on hpathy’s Facebook page. If you haven’t read Tidbits 83, click below:
David didn’t think it was good news at all (that the vaccine in potency was here), and he didn’t think it would help anyone with vaccine damage (except for a random few who might happen to serendipitously match the—as yet unknown—“remedy picture” of the Pfizer vaccine).
You see, here’s the problem: David thinks that every case has to be a “complete case”, by which he means a “constitutional case”; and if you prescribe without taking such a case—well, you’re just lazy! Yet he begins his remarks with, “Of course we can use the poisoning picture to prescribe on.” We can? Well, wait a minute…. If that’s true, shouldn’t we end on that note of agreement????
Never the less, there are 2 different points of view here on what a properly-taken case is. What do you think is the right way to treat vaccine damage?
I give you now, the one and only …
[The vaccine in potency] will NOT antidote anything bad the jab does. No remedy does this. It will only work for a few people who display the picture of the jab, as every other remedy in our arsenal works. We can use the poisoning picture to prescribe [on] of course, although as we know from our provings this only provides a very crude picture.
Yes, David, a crude picture, but so what? Can we antidote poisons by using the poison in potency? Can we? You might as well say “yes”, because you just admitted it. What could be more important, given what our topic is: Antidoting a poison. That’s what we’re trying to do here with Pfizer 1M, is it not?
This is still an unknown remedy with no proving.
So what? It doesn’t need a proving for our purposes. What something can cause, it can cure in small doses. Isn’t that homeopathy’s motto? Well, the COVID vaccine is causing quite a lot of bizarre and even deadly symptoms; therefore, the vaccine “in small doses” ought to be able to cure whatever those things are! Here are some of what the Pfizer vaccine is causing (statistics from the European Union*):
Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine…from BioNTech/ Pfizer – 12,362 deaths and 1,054,741 injuries to 25/09/2021 [September 25, 2021]
28,662 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 172 deaths
29,569 Cardiac disorders incl. 1,834 deaths
277 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 23 deaths
14,027 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 9 deaths
822 Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
16,330 Eye disorders incl. 30 deaths
92,590 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 514 deaths
274,633 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 3,517 deaths
1,186 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 59 deaths
10,876 Immune system disorders incl. 65 deaths
36,113 Infections and infestations incl. 1,214 deaths
13,804 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 191 deaths
26,554 Investigations incl. 387 deaths
7,555 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 225 deaths
138,223 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 155 deaths
837 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 78 deaths
185,082 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,341 deaths
1,347 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 39 deaths
172 Product issues incl. 1 death
19,436 Psychiatric disorders incl. 159 deaths
3,605 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 205 deaths
24,848 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 4 deaths
46,177 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,443 deaths
50,420 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 111 deaths
2,007 Social circumstances incl. 15 deaths
1,034 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 34 deaths
28,555 Vascular disorders incl. 532 deaths*
You can use it but it will be difficult to apply until either clinical information on patients who’ve been cured has been provided (from more than a few cases), or someone does a proper proving.
You know what? All of this is very nice, David; sure, I’d love to see a proving and cured cases, many cured cases; I’d love to be able to say, “In this sample of 1000 patients with vaccine damage, 80% of them were cured after taking the vaccine in potency,” I’d love to be able to point to such a study. But they don’t exist. So what are we supposed to tell people who are suffering from vaccine damage? “Oh, I’m sorry, you could have tried the vaccine in potency, but David Kempson says there’s no proving, so… sorry, no can do! I guess you’re outta luck. Can I take your constitutional case, though?”
Well, as Robin Murphy once said, “Just because you took a longer case didn’t mean you took a better case!”
Pay attention to this David, because this is what’s missing from your analysis:
ETIOLOGY OVER-RULES SYMPTOMATOLOGY.
That means, etiology over-rules the totality of symptoms; which means if you have a clear etiology, all the superfluous information you might be gathering in a 2 hour case-taking would be a waste of time. And do you know what the proof of that is? Arnica! The proof is Arnica! Does anybody take a constitutional case before giving Arnica? Think about it! If someone falls down and hurts himself, are you going to take a 2 hour case? Or are you going to give Arnica? It’s a short case! A “short cut” in your words, David. Short, but proper!
Ailments from blunt trauma = Arnica. Does that mean it will be Arnica 100% of the time? No, but it’s where any homeopath would start.
Cathy’s case of vaccine damage (see Tidbits 83) is not a constitutional case! It’s a clear case of etiology: Ailments from the Pfizer vaccine. All her complaints came after that; we have to cover the etiology!
Please continue, David; I’m sure you’re not finished.
As usual there are so many errors in this article by Elaine…
As usual????? What does that mean? Good heavens! I had no idea that all my articles were so riddled with errors! I’d ask which errors you were referring to, if I cared!
…both in understanding and in application of the remedies (which are two things often bound together).
- A remedy is only Homoeopathic if it matches the symptoms of the patient. A potentized medicine is NOT Homoeopathic because it is potentized, but because we have carefully matched the specific symptoms of the patient to the symptoms we know the remedy can produce.
I know that, David; and if you hadn’t decided to take such an arrogant and obnoxious tone with me, I might have said, “Good point!” But since you’ve decided to be a horse’s ass, I’m going to take the trouble to point out that in the article David is referring to, I was merely trying to define the term “in potency” since it was part of the title, and many of our readers may not be familiar with homeopathy. Is that alright, David? You do know that there is such a thing as “over-explaining”? But, judging by the length of your “commentary”, maybe not.
As there is no proving of this remedy as yet, it is only a crude poisoning picture being used.
I know! This is a case of crude poisoning! See the list of symptoms above to refresh your memory of how truly poisonous this vaccine is! And how are we supposed to antidote it? That is the question! How do we antidote this very dangerous substance before it does harm? We antidote it with the poison in potency! That’s how you do it. Now, if you don’t believe me, maybe you’ll believe Robin Murphy. Here’s what he said in my interview with him 11 years ago:
I have lectured for years about the different ways of prescribing homeopathic remedies; but, people today still believe there’s only one way. Emergency prescribing is different from Acute prescribing; treating miasms is different, you can’t just have one approach, you have to have multiple approaches, there’s, like, 15 different ways: tautopathic, isopathic…the first remedy ever given in homeopathy by Hahnemann was not homeopathic. Peruvian bark was an antidote to Peruvian bark poisoning, it was tautopathic. So Tautopathy is a big branch in homeopathy that I don’t see being taught anywhere: Arsenic poisoning? You give them Arsenicum, and it’s worked for two hundred years. If I know someone’s been poisoned by a drug, I give the drug in potency!**
Well, there you have it! That’s what I’ve been advocating. By the way, for the benefit of our audience, “tautopathy” means giving the drug that aggravated back to the patient “in potency”. Giving Pfizer 1M to someone with vaccine damage is an example of tautopathy. I guess many of you didn’t know that Dr. B (Dr. Manish Bhatia) has written an article on tautopathy. It’s called, “An Introduction to Tautopathy…” and it starts out like this:
Tautopathy (Tauto-same) is the method of curing or removing the bad effects of conventional drugs by means of identical potentised drugs. For example, if you are suffering from the bad effects or side-effects of the antibiotic Penicillin, you can use potentised Penicillin to remove its side effects. This idea has been confirmed not only clinically by large number of homeopaths but has also been studied scientifically. There have been studies in which potentised lead and potentised arsenic have been used to promote excretion of the same substances in cases of poisoning. The results have shown that such use of potentised substances can help remove the symptoms caused by the toxicity, by enhancing the elimination of the toxin from the tissues.
Tautopathy is not based on ‘similars’. It is not homeopathy but it is pretty close to it. It is more in the realm of Isopathy. Tautopathic drugs have two advantages –
- They can be proved like homeopathic medicines and can be assimilated in homeopathic materia medica. This provides a chance to use these medicines on the principles of homeopathy too.
- They can be given to antidote or remove the bad effects of conventional drugs.
I rest my case! David? Are you still there?
This [the crude drug-poisoning picture] might help,
Yes, it will!
but it is like swatting a fly with a tennis racket.
David, I don’t think you can swat a fly with a tennis racket … I really don’t.
- Do not tell people to just take ‘whatever falls out of the bottle’. Have you never bothered to read the Organon of Medicine?
Oh snap! You really swung for the bleachers there, David! Well, you seem to know so much about my articles and how full of mistakes they are, did you read these?
“Organo-Phobia (Fear of Reading the Organon)”
“Using More Than One Remedy In a Case: What Would Hahnemann Say?”
“Case-Management In a Hop, Skip and a Jump”
They’re all about The Organon but, I don’t see how I could have written them since I have, apparently, never bothered to read it! And by the way, what I actually said, in case you’re interested, was, “Tap the [remedy] bottle gently, whatever falls out is a dose.” At another point in the article, I said that a dose was “a few pellets.” On the Boiron tubes, a dose is defined as “5 pellets”. So, I actually think there was nothing there worth bringing up, unless you were just hoping to “deflect and distract” because the actual topic isn’t going too well for you, is it?
Pay attention to Size of Dose unless you want to harm your patients.
OK…I guess we’re not done with this.
- Isopathic treatment does have its place in Homoeopathy,
Yes, I know! That’s what I’ve been trying to say! So why do you keep arguing with me? This is its place, right here, in antidoting poisons.
but it should always be the last resort.
Why? Why on earth should it be the last resort? You’re saying: if you know a drug made you sick, the LAST thing you should do is make a remedy out of the drug! Is that right? Well, I guess therein lies the difference between you and me; because, making a remedy out of the drug would be the FIRST thing I would do!!! And by the way, if anyone wants to know how to do that, click below:
And I’ll tell you a little story, David. I had a rash about 5 years ago, it was very itchy and taking over my life! I took a complete case that you would have been proud of! In fact, I posted this case in the ezine, it was called “The Insane Rash”; here it is:
There were peculiar symptoms that you would have loved! Scratching made eruptions pop out! The itch was wandering. It could be in several places at once. Scratching aggravated. Hot applications did not ameliorate but neither did cold. I repertorized all the symptoms in the case. Mezereum came out on top, but it didn’t work. I tried remedy after remedy. At best, sometimes a remedy would work for a while and show promise, but then it would fail. Histaminum was one. Apis was another one. I was demoralized. It went on like this for a long, dreadful month, keeping me up at night. I couldn’t sleep. I wondered if I would ever be normal again.
Then, an utterly random stroke of luck came my way: The television was on, and I happened to hear a commercial for Perdue’s Chicken saying, “We don’t feed our chickens antibiotics!” I suddenly remembered my friend Claire’s antibiotic rash while at the same time remembering the Chinese chicken I ate at my cousin’s house a month earlier, and it all came together for me in one grand epiphany! “OMG!” I said. “Antibiotics! I’ve got an antibiotic rash!!!!!!”
Of course, then it was simple; I knew exactly what the remedy was! Do you know? A remedy I actually had it here, thank God:
It worked! It worked right away! It was a miracle, a Godsend!!!!! Nothing else worked. You know why? None of the other remedies matched the etiology!!!! Even though, yes, some of them matched the symptoms; but, the symptoms are over-ruled by the etiology, as Robin Murphy always said! Again, from my interview with Robin Murphy:
Me: What are the common mistakes homeopaths are making, Robin?
Robin: Ignoring the etiology or treating it like just another symptom. The etiology is what has to be cured! Concentrating on etiology would simplify a person’s practice. … Putting symptoms above etiology is a big mistake! When I take a case, I’m only looking for the etiology. If there is no etiology, then I do general homeopathy: mental/emotionals, generals, physical particulars…but, in 80% of the cases, there’s some cause…ignoring etiology is the biggest mistake.***
Use of a remedy made from the substance might work to remove the obstacle of a severe poisoning,
Well, that’s what a vaccination is, David, it’s a severe poisoning. Have another look at that symptom list above, it’s pretty bad, exceedingly bad. But you’re referring to a poisoning as simply some sort of “obstacle” in the case, aren’t you? NO, that is the case!!!! That’s the case, OK? It’s not in the way of the case, it IS the case!
…but it should never be the first step of treatment.
This is where you’re wrong!
It might be done in a case of an emergency…
Well, David, most poisonings are emergencies!
…where there is risk to the person’s life of course.
Did you see all the deaths in that list above?
What “obstacles”? Poisonings? You’re calling them “obstacles”? No, sorry. A poisoning is an acute case and you do not mix up acute and chronic symptoms, just as James Tyler Kent once said.
… often only become obvious through the process of attempting to use remedies applied against the overall picture.
No one knows what you just said.
It is lazy prescribing…
Lazy. OK. I’ll just add that to the already long list of what’s presumably wrong with me.
… if done as a way of avoiding taking the case.
Taking a long case and acquiring superfluous information is not always appropriate or what is needed.
Homoeopathy requires hard work, and again as Hahnemann warns in the Organon…
That’s the book you want me to read, right?
DON’T LOOK FOR SHORTCUTS. Shortcuts inevitably make things worse or at the very least make Homoeopathy look simplistic and ineffective.
David, when you know the cause of your complaint, the case is pretty much solved. For example, Maria, who often presents here, had a house-guest once who spent the night. Her face broke out and became numb after applying a new make-up she had just bought, some sort of face powder. This case is in the ezine too:
Maria knew just what to do. She made a 6C remedy out of the make-up and the rash and numbness went away instantly! Now, I’m sure you think Maria was LAZY because she didn’t take a “proper” constitutional case! No, Maria was smart and did exactly the right thing and her guest was probably really impressed with homeopathy after that very scary incident.
Every case is not a constitutional case. In fact, Kent was quite clear on that. See what he had to say about it below:
“The Examination of the Patient” from Kent‘s Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy
When an individual is suffering from a dangerous crisis, a serious accident or emotional trauma, or a virulent acute miasm [an infection like the flu], the treatment of choice is the acute remedy or acute inter-current. …
The key in such situations is not to mix the acute and chronic symptoms together in one grand totality as this confuses the case.
So you see, here Kent is saying: if you’ve got a big issue in front of you, a “dangerous crisis”, to use his words, give the remedy that matches that, and JUST that! Don’t mix up the acute and chronic symptoms!
- [Coming back to “Tidbits 83: The Vaccine in Potency Is Here”] The remedy ‘wearing off’ doesn’t prove that the vaccine caused her problem…
Did I say that? I never said that, David! Have the decency not to misquote people when you’re attacking them! I said that if her heart problem had been from some cause other than the Pfizer vaccine, Pfizer 1M would not have helped her!
… (although I don’t disagree that [the vaccine] did of course [cause her problem], we are all seeing these cases). Elaine you should be a bit more careful about how you explain things to medical professionals.
‘Wearing off’ might be palliation only, it might mean the potency is too low, it might mean there is tissue damage, it might mean you’ve completely missed the important symptoms, it might mean you really have no idea what remedy can cure (since there is no proving!)
I see we’re back to that again.
- She has a peculiar symptom that is completely ignored. ‘It’s hard to know if the remedy will work on that’ – yes! Because you are not applying a remedy based on Homoeopathic principles.
By “peculiar symptom”, I assume you’re referring to her “delusion of smell”; that she “smells” cigarette smoke that isn’t there, isn’t that right? Well, it turns out David, that was caused by the vaccine! How do I know? Because if you had read the case a little more carefully, you would have seen this:
Cathy: Plus, I went a whole day, and only now, (9:38) do I have the faint whiff of cigarette smoke. That is also positive.
Elaine: OK, so, at first we weren’t sure if the remedy would act on this [delusion of smell] but, apparently it does. This is very encouraging!
That’s right, who knows if the patient will be cured, or have those peculiars disappear,
They did disappear, David.
because there is no attention being paid to it.
Well, just hope it goes away on its own then. Always a good strategy….
Yes, David, hope is my strategy.
- Constant need to use a remedy, on a daily basis, with the symptoms frequently returning, is not necessarily a good sign.
David, she’s taking the remedy as-needed, OK? I’ve found that drug diseases–side effects– are very persistent and she’s had this drug-proving for months.
This may be a sign of palliation and therefore at some point suppression. If there is heart damage here, and you are suppressing that one symptom (because where is the rest of the case to check that?) you might very well harm this patient.
The rest of the case? Her blood pressure came down, and that phantom cigarette smell went away. That’s it. Rapid heart rate, elevated blood pressure and phantom cigarette smell. That’s the case.
- Where is the rest of the case?
That’s the whole case.
Where are the generals? The mentals? Any other symptom at all? Using one symptom to prescribe on is very dangerous.
She’s got Ailments From the Pfizer vaccine. It doesn’t matter what her symptoms are, don’t you understand that? It’s a case of etiological prescribing. When a person trips and falls and you give Arnica, does it matter what his symptoms are? You’re going to give Arnica, right? It’s ailments from blunt trauma, an etiological prescription, you don’t take a 2 hour constitutional case!
That is the way you suppress and cause damage to patients. You cannot check direction of cure in a case where you have taken no case!
You seem to know very little about prescribing on the etiology. David, are you taking a constitutional case for everyone who walks in with an acute?
Without checking direction of cure this patient could end up going into a sudden decline because no care was taken. It is very concerning to see.
- Periodic relapsing does happen in cases, but the reason must be carefully determined, not just accepted as ‘oh well chronic cases just relapse’.
But they do, don’t they? And when that happens, what should you do? Throw up your hands and give up? “OH NO! The remedy has stopped working! All is lost!” Well, believe it or not, a lot of people do just that instead of simply repeating the remedy!
Relapsing must be examined, the direction and quality of the changes looked at closely, before deciding to continue applying a remedy. Without doing this the remedy should never routinely be repeated. This really is terrible advice and does not follow our principles at all.
Yes, David you are right. If the picture changes, repeating the remedy might not be appropriate; but in Cathy’s case, the same symptoms remained the same.
- If this is chronic,
It is chronic, she got her shot 4 months ago. But the symptoms broke out right away and they’ve remained the same for 4 months.
… and all your theories about why your remedy isn’t holding are true,
I don’t have theories about why the remedy isn’t holding. The only thing I wanted to impress upon Cathy was that it’s normal for remedies to wear off, especially if the complaint has been around for a long time and she shouldn’t become discouraged by that; she only needs to repeat the remedy. The question is, when it’s repeated, does it work again? If yes, then no need to borrow trouble and assume that some bad thing is happening when clearly, something good is happening.
… then you should be taking a chronic (constitutional) case…
Take a constitutional case. Well, David, Kent says no! Kent says that case, the constitutional case, comes after the “crisis”—to use his word— is over! Maybe YOU’VE never bothered to read Kent’s Lectures!
… not just being lazy and throwing an unproven isopathic medicine at the patient.
Yeah, throwing remedies, that’s what I like to do….
Chronic cases are a result of the inherent weaknesses within the patient…
Cathy has been poisoned. It’s a very clear case. We know what the cause is.
… they rely on the peculiar internal state and must be addressed by proper case taking and REAL Homoeopathic prescriptions. You cannot claim the remedy is not holding just because chronic cases often relapse.
- ‘I’m predicting a complete recovery’. Well prove it.
OK. This just in from “Cathy”, 10/10/21:
Elaine, what does RSB stand for?? I think I need to watch something to explain all of this. Here I am, I have been taking homeopathic remedies since I was a teenager, and all this vibrational energy healing is completely new to me. I have bought many books on homeopathy (including all of Dana’s) and I am clueless. I must not read very well. As for the remedy, it is working better. Now I have moments (like right now) where I feel almost normal. First time in a long time.
Take a proper case. Show us the direction of cure. Do follow up over a longer period to prove this case has ‘completely recovered’. Like all of your cases presented on this site, they are all treated like acutes, with no long term follow up, and an enormous number of erroneous statements made about the Homoeopathic method and about our philosophy.
Well, first of all David, the vast majority of my cases on this site ARE acutes, that’s why they get treated like acutes! As for the “enormous number of erroneous statements” I’ve made about homeopathic method and philosophy? You’ve failed to mention even one of them! Are you just trying to make yourself look superior at my expense? If not, then name something, give examples!
I really do doubt such cures come from the way these cases are dealt with, but as no follow up is done – who knows really.
OK, David, regarding the matter at hand, namely Pfizer 1M for ailments from the Pfizer vaccine, an acclaimed author of at least 5 books on homeopathy (who asked me to withhold his name), is actually my source for this; so, perhaps you’d like to take it up with him (contact me); or, better yet, Dr. Bhatia … or with Kent, or Robin Murphy…. I have to cook dinner now. But let me try to sum up your problem for you, because it’s everyone else’s problem too:
Sometimes we really do need to take the totality of symptoms. But there is also something called “The Hierarchy Of Symptoms”, and at the top of that sits “Etiology”. Underneath is Diagnosis, Delusions and Strange/Rare/Peculiar, followed by Mental/Emotionals, followed by the Physical Generals and lastly, Physical Particulars. It isn’t just the “Etiology” that over-rules; anything above over-rules what’s below! So a remedy that matches the Generals will over-rule the Particulars! And a remedy that matches the Delusions will over-rule the Mental/Emotionals. Otherwise, why call it a “Hierarchy” — if everything is equal? If everything is equal, there is no hierarchy. You think about that!
Bye! See you again next time!