Internal complaint e.g. a headache of many years’ duration, a diarrhoea of long standing, an ancient cardialgia, etc.
External complaint or local maladies.
§ 168
We shall then be able much more readily to discover, among
the known medicines, an analogue to the morbid state before us, a single dose of
which, if it do not entirely destroy the disease, will advance it considerably
on the way to be cured. And thus we go on, if even this medicine be not quite
sufficient to effect the restoration of health, examining again and again the
morbid state that still remains, and selecting a homœopathic medicine as
suitable as possible for it, until our object, namely, putting the patient in
the possession of perfect health, is accomplished.
commentary:
If after administration of a similar, single dose of medicine (which is exact analogue of disease to be cured) even if it doesn't annihilate the disease completely it will surely advance to cure. After a thorough case taking, we believe that the medicine was exact similimum to the case, but administration of the selected medicine does not give relief to patient then examining again and again the morbid state that still remains ( after administration of the first remedy), and selecting a homœopathic medicine as suitable as possible for the new state (after the administration of the first remedy) , until our object, namely, putting the patient in the possession of perfect health, is attained.
clinical tips:- If a remedy which you believe to be similimum to a case does not cure reexamine the case and then prescribe.
If, on the first examination of a disease and the first
selection of a medicine, we should find that the totality of the symptoms of the
disease would not be effectually covered by the disease elements of a single
medicine - owing to the insufficient number of known medicines, - but that two
medicines contend for the preference in point of appropriateness, one of which
is more homœopathically suitable for one part, the other for another part of the
symptoms of the disease, it is not advisable, after the employment of the more
suitable of the two medicines, to administer the other without fresh
examination, for the medicine that seemed to be the next best would not, under
the change of circumstances that has in the meantime taken place, be suitable
for the rest of the symptoms that then remain; in which case, consequently, a
more appropriate homœopathic remedy must be selected in place of the second
medicine for the set of symptoms as they appear on a new inspection.
§ 169 Sixth Edition
If, on the first examination of a disease and the first
selection of a medicine, we should find that the totality of the symptoms of the
disease would not be effectually covered by the disease elements of a single
medicine - owing to the insufficient number of known medicines, - but that two
medicines contend for the preference in point of appropriateness, one of which
is more homœopathically suitable for one part, the other for another part of the
symptoms of the disease, it is not advisable, after the employment of the more
suitable of the two medicines, to administer the other without fresh
examination, and much less to give both together (§ 272, note) for the medicine
that seemed to be the next best would not, under the change of circumstances
that has in the meantime taken place, be suitable for the rest of the symptoms
that then remain; in which case, consequently, a more appropriate homœopathic
remedy must be selected in place of the second medicine for the set of symptoms
as they appear on a new inspection.
commentary:
Hahnemann now explains the next problem: After a good case taking we find that the totality of symptoms are not covered by a single medicine but many (here he has given two) where in one remedy is suitable to one part and other suitable to another part , then he advices us to give more appropriate similimum rather than mixing two remedy (he is an opponent of poly pharmacy). After the employment of the most suitable (of two or more remedy ) it is not advisable to administer the other without fresh examination, because the medicine that seemed to be the next best would not, under the change of circumstances (by previous medicine) that has in the meantime taken place, be suitable for the rest of the symptoms that then remain; in which case, a more appropriate homœopathic remedy must be selected (and not the second best medicine) for the set of symptoms as they appear on a fresh case taking.
Hence in this as in every case where a change of the morbid state has occurred, the remaining set of symptoms now present must be inquired into, and (without paying any attention to the medicine which at first appeared to be the next in point of suitableness) another homœopathic medicine, as appropriate as possible to the new state now before us, must be selected. If it should so happen, as is not often the case, that the medicine which at first appeared to be the next best seems still to be well adapted for the morbid state that remains, so much the more will it merit our confidence, and deserve to be employed in preference to another.
commentary:
This is continuation of the previous aphorism. After administration of the first medicine if there occur a change in disease condition and not complete cure because the medicine which was selected did not cover all of the symptoms of the patient, then it is not advisable to give the second best remedy unless and until it is indicated again. It usually happens that the medicine that is given for a changed morbid state after administration of the first remedy is usually a different medicine (and perhaps not even the second best remedy) when the case is taken properly again.
In non-venereal chronic disease, those, therefore, that arise
from psora, we often require, in order to effect a cure, to give several
antipsoric remedies in succession, every successive one being homœopathically
chosen in consonance with the group of symptoms remaining after the expiry of
the action of the previous remedy (which may have been employed in a single dose
or in several successive doses).
§ 171 Sixth Edition
In non-venereal chronic disease, those, therefore, that arise from psora, we often require, in order to effect a cure, to give several antipsoric remedies in succession, every successive one being homœopathically chosen in consonance with the group of symptoms remaining after completion of the action of the previous remedy.
commentary:
So far he has given details of administration of a single medicine for disease in general. He has given advice not mix remedy. He now deals with non-venereal chronic disease. Here also Hahnemann holds that we may require to give several antipsoric medicine in succession, each medicine being chosen based on the group of symptoms that remain.
A similar difficulty in the way of the cure occurs
from the symptoms of the disease being too few - a circumstances that
deserves our careful attention, for by its removal almost all the difficulties
that can lie in the way of this most perfect of all possible modes of treatment
(except that its apparatus of known homœopathic medicines is still incomplete)
are removed.
The only diseases that seem to have but few symptoms, and on
that account to be less amenable to cure, are those which may be termed
one-sided, because they display only one or two principal symptoms which
obscure almost all the others. They belong chiefly to the class of chronic
diseases.
commentary:
Hahnemann further advances to difficulties in case taking. In aphorism 172, he says that there are cases in which sele
ction of medicine is difficult. This is due to the fact that disease have only few symptoms where in we are unable to perceive what is to be cured. Very often this type of disease is not really with only a few symptoms, as is commonly believed by a casual observer. An experienced homoeopath who has mastered the theory and nature of chronic disease as illustrated by Hanemann should be able to find many symptoms which are apparently too trivial and vague and negligible to escape the eyes of uninitiated general physician but not to a homoeopath who find in these so called trivial and vague symptoms a RARE, UNCOMMON, SINGULAR AND PECULIAR SYMPTOMS which is all that is necessary for individualizing the case and selection of most appropriate remedy.But Hahnemann further in aphorism 173 says that there are one-sided disease which present one or two chief symptoms that obscure all other symptoms and this belongs to the chronic disease. Such disease are difficult to treat because of the fact that they present only few symptoms.
Read the next aphorism which is continuation of 173
Their principal symptom may be either an internal complaint (e.g.
a headache of many years’ duration, a diarrhoea of long standing, an ancient
cardialgia, etc.), or it may be an affection more of an external kind. Diseases
of the latter character are generally distinguished by the name of local
maladies.
commentary:
We have learnt that one sided disease is a disease which present only a few principle symptoms and make the other symptoms indistinct. In this aphorism Hahnemann says that principle symptoms that obscure other symptoms may be of two types
|
|
Internal complaint e.g. a headache of many years’ duration, a diarrhoea of long standing, an ancient cardialgia, etc. |
|
|
External complaint or local maladies. |
In one-sided diseases of the first kind it is often to be
attributed to the medical observer’s want of discernment that he does not fully
discover the symptoms actually present which would enable him to complete the
sketch of the portrait of the disease.
commentary:
In one-sided diseases with principal symptoms of internal complaint is often to be attributed to the medical observer’s want of proper judgment that he does not fully discover the symptoms actually present which would enable him to complete the sketch of the portrait of the disease.
There are, however, still a few diseases, which, after the
most careful initial examination (§§
84-98), present but one or two severe, violent symptoms, while all the
others are but indistinctly perceptible.
In order to meet most successfully such a case as this, which is of very rare occurrence, we are in the first place to select, guided by these few symptoms, the medicine which in our judgment is the most homœopathically indicated.
commentary:
Hahnemann further illustrates that there are diseases even after thorough case taking presents only a few symptoms which are violent in nature while all other symptoms are indistinct. Further in the next aphorism he asserts that such case as these rarely occurs, where in we are to consider only those few symptoms as guide in selection of medicine, and give the medicine which in our judgment is the most homœopathically indicated.