Anomolies between the Repertory and the Materia Medica

An Astute practicing homoeopath wrote me yesterday that she could only find aggravation from potatoes in 2 remedies in the Materia Medica. (Alum and Coloc)

So the question remains, why did Boenninghausen input the other 3 remedies into the T.P.B.?

The answer is that the work by Boenninghausen is a composition of original provings, discussions with Hahnemann and clinical experience.

The symptoms produced without a known causation would give a whole heap of remedies for consideration, Phos being among the top. However, in provings, in clinical experience, the action of potatoes on the economy give rise to a known effect, for which these 5 remedies appear to have an affinity for.

KENT, who took all of his rubrics from other repertories, has this list, of which ALUM features heavily in all of them. He also has other remedies featured in Boenninghausens work. If he had disagreed, he would have removed them.

However, in using the T.P.B. for a number of years, I have found the remedies suggested to be accurate to the extent that if one is STRONGLY suggested, and I cannot find the match in the M.M., I will still try it if all the other symptoms fit.

If Boenninghausen had not suffered a catastrophic loss of all his work in a fire, I am sure we would know why he included these medicines into the T.P.B.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s