OUT OF PRINT: Classical Homoeopathy Revisited

Recensie

This book review is reprinted from The Homoeopath with permission from Nick Churchill of The Society of Homoeopaths.
2 Artizan Road, Northampton NN1 4HU, United Kingdom.

Reviewed by Louise Deacon

This book is dedicated to Pritam Singh Ghattaoraya who taught Roger Dyson and Jean Cole and it describes the methodology of his teachings. Some people may be familiar with this method, also know as the 'Leicester Method'. It is a clearly written text and the authors give useful case examples of deep-seated chronic conditions over some months or 1 - 2 years treatment for illustrating this method.

These case examples could be helped by the inclusion of follow ups some months and years after remedies. Instead there is no follow up more than a few weeks after giving the remedies to enable us to decide whether this is the effect of suppression, healing proving effects, or what specific remedy reaction has occurred. I would have liked more detail in cases and rubric analysis.

Do Roger and Jean use a repertory? In fact Kent's remedy reactions seem to be unmentioned in follow up discussion. The method involves using a rigid system of prescribing multiple 'miasmatic' remedies usually in descending potency prior to giving the more indicated miasmatic remedies in the case. Instead of starting each case with Sulphur as Hahnemann traditionally did, Psorinum is chosen in preference, starting at I OM and descending to 6C.

This controversial book challenges conventional 'classical' homoeopathic philosophy (one remedy and watch and wait) by treating disease first, specifically by treating the miasm first. It can be viewed harshly as allopathic, reductionist and superficial in its approach or more generously as 'try it and test it out and see for yourself'. It could be argued that the book is actually written rather defensively with all of its justifications included in order to be prepared for any criticism of this approach.

There is of course tremendous value in therapeutics and Burnett is often quoted to justify this approach. The pages are littered with quotations from the Organon and Kent to justify philosophy, which somehow reminds me of how religious homoeopathy can be rather like how you choose to fill your supermarket trolley with a bit of this and a bit of that to suit your own style and set of beliefs.

There is the Organon and then all the books on interpretation of it, just like when the Jehovah's witnesses come and quote their re-written bible and favourite passages. It is important for me to make the distinction between universal law and man-made law. Homoeopathic philosophy apprehends universal law but can complicate the issue with man-made law steeped in superstition and anecdotal belief. It is important we gain the clarity to make this distinction for ourselves before we can properly treat the patients that come before us. Roger and Jean give us Pritam's method rather than helping us to gain inner clarity and understanding.

There are interesting chapters on the concept of superficial remedies and deep acting remedies, as well as drainage remedies, overcoming barriers to cure, such as radiation and the use of the oral contraceptive pill. It is believed that because Silica is a deep acting remedy then it should not be prescribed first until the way has been 'opened' by more superficial remedies. I do have a problem with this concept because it contradicts my own experience with remedies. I have treated patients with these so called superficial remedies, for example with Pulsatilla, and had complete and classical observable tape rewind return of old symptoms and cure. I am sure most homoeopaths could quote such examples with the flower remedies.

There is a brief Materia Medica chapter where thirteen remedies and their use are described. This reflects Roger Dyson's viewpoint that we need to know how to make use of the remedies we have rather than continue to prove new remedies. Roger Dyson uses on average 40 remedies from our Materia Medica of 3000-plus remedies. This reductionist approach could appeal to the student who begins to feel overwhelmed by more and more Materia Medica until all remedies appear to merge into one by about the end of the third year in college. It is however limiting homoeopathy to these forty or so remedies. At the end of the book is a therapeutics index to be used if no other remedies are indicated. Is this a reflection of the case taking and the ability of the practitioner to take a case? The patient after all comes with vagueness and it is our job to elicit the symptoms. Perhaps the real danger here is that intent is overlooked. For when correct intent and the correct remedies are joined together that homoeopathy works consistently well.

On the issue of potency, only the centesimal potency is used, even in drainage. An account of descending potency is given. While an understanding of the need to use altered potency is given, no LM prescribing is used. There is a lack of the dynamism reflected in the choice and use of repeating descending potencies and the 30C for drainage or indicated miasmatic remedies.

This method is all about routine prescribing and the effect I have experienced as a prescriber when using this method is to experience repetition which I have found dull. It is hard to feel that homoeopathy and the consultation is dynamic when you know what you will prescribe as soon as the patient has uttered their presenting complaint. This method is best reserved for when you are completely stuck and at a loss what to do.

I have been taught by Roger Dyson both at The College of Homoeopathy and in a group tutorial situation. I have tried out this method in part at times only when I could not see what else to do. The problems I have experienced with it are quite mixed. In one case I was stuck with a woman who had intractable thick catarrh which needed sinus washouts daily after the book's recommended miasmatic approach - nothing whatsoever had happened. In another case of psoriasis in an eight year old child the start with Psorinum descending and use of Berberis as drainage began to shift the condition from the trunk to the legs and arms classically following Hering's direction of cure. At the second visit when the indicated remedy was identified (as I was still searching for the simillimum) and given, the case was cured. It was not clear that the Psorinum has opened the way in the case and it was confusing to analyse for me because I did not know whether in the end it was Berberis or Psorinum or both and how much does this matter if the patient is better?

I did have the uncertainty of not really understanding the remedy reaction which I do not feel particularly comfortable with. I have also seen live cases relapse seriously resulting in a further psychotic episode for one patient Roger treated in a tutorial.

It is not clear whether Roger and Jean have completely abandoned the search for the simillimum in their adherence to this method though this is how it seems. This is the limitation of this methodology for me because it seems that it is the only way that Roger practises. I feel however this method can be a useful tool; when considered in the context of Ian Watson's Guide to the Methodologies of Homoeopathy it is another 'method'.

The difficulty still remains in deciding which method for which case, which is not mentioned in the book. This for me is what needs to be dynamic as well as the potency and my personal preference is to begin by searching for the simillimum moving to other remedies/nosodes when needed. I will reserve this method for those times. I would encourage people to read the book and make their own experimentation and exploration of another valuable methodology carefully following their own felt sense.

THE HOMOEOPATH - Summer 1998, Number 69