Queries and Solutions - 4.
NATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOMOEOPATHY 1996 Jul / Aug Vol V No 4.
Q 1 : It is true that Homoeopathic potencies administered by olfaction act as
effectively as when taken orally? What is your experience? In which cases this method
should be adopted?
Dr Ravi Tyagi,.
It is true that Homoeopathic drugs act equally effectively when administered by either route. I have successfully used Amyl-nitr Q for the pains of Angina in 2 cases (one being my ownself) and once Camphor Q in a severe case of eczematoid reaction following repeated doses of Sulphur CM by a student of mine. In one case of Uraemic Coma with continuous hiccough, Opium 1M was given by inhalation but with no relief.
Clinically this method can be effectively employed in children, unconscious patients, insane and those suffering with incessant vomiting or severe ulcerations in mouth etc.
Q 2: Do you agree the time has come for adopting polypharmacy, considering the
complexities of the disease manifestation of recent times?.
Dr Vilas Mahajan,.
On the face of it No, absolutely No, though I agree that, nowadays we are getting more complex cases in comparison to the days of master, and it is difficult to select pure and peculiar symptoms. In such cases first select a drug on presenting totality and after the acute symptoms subside reinterrogate the case once again and then select the simillimum. May be at times you may require a nosode to straighten the case but never do polypharmacy. It goes against the basic tenets of Homoeopathy.
Q 3: I have listed below a few sets of rubrics from the Kents Repertory. Kindly explain and differentiate each of them with suitable examples wherever possible.
- Absent-minded, Abstraction of Mind, Absorbed, buried in thought and concentration difficult.
- Anxiety, Restlessness and Nervousness.
- Offended easily and oversensitive.
- Menses painful and Dysmenorrhoea.
Dr Sumit Chatterjee,.
Such type of queries often disturb the minds of inquisitive learners, particularly in Homoeopathy and more so with the type of literature we have with us today. It is very sorry to note that even after decades have passed we have still to rely, believe and accept verbatim as gospel truth whatever has been written by our founder fathers centuries back. There is no authority (an individual or society) worth its name, anywhere in the world, which enjoys universal acceptance, as competent enough to edit, complete and update the treasure filled writings of the stalwarts of the yester-years. Whatever scanty work, which has been done and is being carried on in present time, is very insignificant compared to the amount replied. No doubt some of them had been and are still being carried out by dedicated individuals having all the required knowledge, expertise and drive, but still they lack sanctioned authority, hence fail to earn mass acceptance.
It is in this context, I will like you to keep the following points in mind before we actually take up the list for reply.
- Dr Kents Repertory is a compilation from different sources on Dr Lippes Repertory with the assistance of Dr Lee along with a team of five of his disciples viz Drs Gladwin, Miltho, Powel, Mary Eves and Arthur Allen.
- There is no uniform standardized format or procedure adhered to by the contributors all
through the text, pertaining to the use of terminologies, placement of rubrics etc and
hence we get exactly the same rubric either in different words or with different remedies
or with same remedies but with different ratings eg refer pages nos 92 and 1224, we have
exactly the same rubric "washes always, her hands" but ratings for Syphilinum
are different (indicates two sources).
Again on pages nos 61 and 79 both, the rubrics Lasciviousness and shameless, exposes the person have practically similar clinical presentation but Secale is absent in the former (even though having about 50 drugs) but has 2 marks in the latter (having only 5 drugs.)
Also refer to pages nos 48 and 52--Fear, water--Hyoscyamus has 3 marks while in Hydrophobia it has 2.
Similarly, refer to the rubric on page 49--Forsaken feeling and under it sensation of isolation dont you agree that both of them appear similar. Yes, but the later is under the former and Anacardium is in 2 marks in the latter and absent in the former.
So such are the discrepancies. One has to be very cautious in selecting the appropriate rubric for the patient at hand.
- The authors contributors of the repertories have used the terms to rubricate symptoms
according to their convictions and in their own language for eg in Kent, Restlessness and
Nervousness are dealt with under one head and Anxiety is separate whereas in Dr Boerickes
Repertory, Nervousness is synonymous with Anxiety (worried) whereas Restlessness is a
separate subrubric with different drugs.
Now, coming to the point, take the first set of rubrics of Absent-minded, Absorbed and Abstraction of mind. All the three overtly appear to be similar for a patient presenting with a mask like expressionless face, not oriented with the surroundings, does not respond acutely, but on a close scrutiny we find that all the three have fine differentiating points between them. At times even for senior Homoeopaths, it is difficult to perceive--for eg an absent minded person is not attentive, unobserving and looks preoccupied but his mind is normal, whereas the term Absorbed is applied to a person suffering from compulsiveness, who unknowingly gets fixed to certain specific thought and remains drowned in that condition until awakened. Whereas in Abstraction of mind, the individual is totally out of reality and gets isolated or separated from the rest of the world. He is entirely engrossed in his own world of thoughts, which even he does not know. In this condition the mind itself is sick, a sign towards schizophrenia. The rubric of Concentration difficult is applied for a person with dull intellect and poor attentive capacity. For your information, along with the above stated four, there are many more apparently similar looking rubrics which can be mistaken with the above mentioned ones like--buried in thoughts, reveries, brooding, introspection, sits meditates, intoxicated as if in, dream as if in, confused as if, expression vacant, bewildered etc. Each of them requires to be understood through the mind of the author.
Hope this one example is sufficient to bring to light the actual position of our repertories because not only these few rubrics (in question) are difficult to understand, there are hundreds of such confusing rubrics in the text and all cannot be discussed here, due to obvious constraints.
The National Academy of Homoeopathy, is working in this field for the past 9 years under the guidance of a twenty one member advisory committee of acclaimed professionals and academicians from all over the globe. We expect to complete the work of rectifying and updating the entire text of Dr Kents repertory by this year end.
But for the present, keeping in mind, the existence of these disparities (which is seen in every Repertory), one must make use of the rubrics and the drugs listed, which will in turn depend on.
- Proficiency of the physician to interrogate and his competence in exact interpretation of the symptoms reported.
- Ascendancy of colloquial language, its translation into English and then exact rubrication.
- Adequate know how, of the terminologies / nomenclatures used for symptoms during the time when the repertory was compiled.
- Through knowledge about the construction, groundplan and the philosophical background of the repertory being used.
- The frequency of their application. The more one dwells in the repertory the more he learns to use its rubrics correctly.
Remember, repertories are mere reference books to guide us towards a group of similar remedies. It does no harm if you get 1-2 extra drugs because of referring to all similar looking rubrics (according to your own conception) along with the ones indicated in the group. Ultimately the final selection of the simillimum has to be done from the materia medica with the help of the finer and most peculiar and smaller symptoms which were left out during repertorisation.
So, dont worry, whenever, you are in doubt about the exactness of the rubric, refer all the rubrics you feel are relevant, go through every drug listed under them. Make a note of the common ones and than go to the supreme court (materia medica) for the final verdict. You will succeed in a majority of cases. This is what I do.
My sincere advice to everybody who wish to extract the maximum advantage of repertories is to make it a habit (at least for first few years of practice) to repertorise each and every case which comes to you, whether required or not. Take them as exercises to make you perfect and confirm your selection and make liberal use of dictionaries and the saurus whenever in dilemma.
The conduction of this column is a benign attempt by the editorial board to provide an open platform for the members of the fraternity to get their queries addressed. The author of this column does not claim to be an authority but wishes to submit that the views and opinions expressed by him are his own derived either from his 20 years of clinical and academic experience or obtained by him from respected sources.
It is the sole discretion of the readers, to either accept or reject part or whole of a solution suggested without any criticism against anybody in person.