Moving forward with Hahnemann

Over the last few months the Institute for homeopathic medicine has presented argumentation for the practice of homoeopathy to be conducted in accord with the tenets of the Hahnemannian directive exclusively.

For those that have taken the time to do research they have been convinced that the ongoing Kentian methodology is at odds with the practice of Hahnemannian homoeopathy. Sadly the numbers of people that have done this is few. The medical practice of homoeopathy in existence today in the main is following a very dangerous, non-productive and false path under the banner of being a practitioner of homoeopathic medicine.

In the post presented yesterday regarding a specialist cancer treatment centre in Switzerland, there are many questions for the thinking practitioner to ask himself. It is long been our experience that just because a clinic, a group or a medical facility present themselves as specialising in homoeopathy and claiming to treat the patient in a homoeopathic manner does not mean that this is the reality. On the one hand the therapy is moving towards a quasi-scientific, bad psychology/spiritual and doctrine of signatures approach with the sensation method, and on the other hand the orthodox medical fraternity who practice under the banner of homoeopathy also use allopathic methods and treatments in their practice.

It is not for us to get involved in fighting these practices, it is for us to point out Hahnemann’s directions and methodology of treatment that constitutes the real practice of homoeopathy. Our organisation is for research and teaching the application of Hahnemann’s methodology for the benefit of the patient and of the accurately observing physician to facilitate a curative action in the most accurate and proven way. We will not be party to these false practices or the Swedenborgian overlay as promoted by Kent and Hering which contributed mightily to the decline of homoeopathic practice at the turn of the 20th century.

The clinical application of the Hahnemannian model for the practice of applying the law of similars, utilising the collected works of the materia Medica is in danger of being destroyed right now by the false practices in existence. There is nothing left to defend about the practice in the public eye while these false practices exist. It’s time to take a stand, go and read the Organon again without the Kentian overlay and knuckle down to some serious understanding. Without it your days as a practitioner, are not beneficial to the vast majority of patients you treat and will have a limited lifespan of ability to practice. The choice has always been yours.

Advertisements

2 responses to “Moving forward with Hahnemann

  1. Mokhtar Akbari

    Hello, I am a Homeopath from Canada and have studied many different methods of Homeopathy, including classical and more contemporary approaches. I would like to understand more, for my own learning, what people mean when they say that they approach case analysis and case management from a purely Hahnemannian perspective. There is a lot on the internet criticizing new approaches, but I do not find much about what constitutes and defines the purely Hahnemannian approach. I am genuinely interested and eager to learn and have even looked for books on the subject but I can’t find any besides the Organon itself. Could you please help me find books or other ressources that would help me understand how Hahnemannian homeopaths analyse and manage cases? (second prescription, remedy reactions, ect). Ideally, I think that all students should learn all methods. This will lead to the best results for us all and help us to really understand what Homeopathy is and the different paths it has taken. Thank you and all the best with your wonderful website.

  2. Welcome to the site. What defines the pure Hahnemannian approach is how closely you follow the instructions in the Organon. Everything you need to know about casetaking, case analysis, prescribing and case management is in the sixth Edition of the Organon. Use the Dudgeon Translation. Read and re-read it and you will find out how very clearly everything is laid out by Hahnemann. The 6th Edition was his last word on how to practice Homoeopathy. The medicines he used almost exclusively at the time were the LM or Q potencies. Instructions as to dose and preparation and case management are given in the Organon.
    Boenninghausen’s “Lesser Writings” have helpful essays on the approach and he was Hahnemann’s most valued colleague and the best prescriber who ever lived. His repertory “The Therapeutic Pocketbook” is the most reliable, accurate reflection of the “Materia Medica Pura” and “Chronic Disease”. These are the other books that you will need to study and refer to in choosing the most similar remedy, they contain the best and most reliable provings ever done.
    I have studied many approaches myself. Kentian, Vithoulkian, Andre Saine and others.. I have tried to use them in practice and always felt that something was not quite right, or that I’m not smart enough to make this work. Then I found this site and saw the elegance and simplicity of the pure Hahnemannian method at work and I realized that this is real homoeopathy. All the other approaches were flawed in the degree to which they deviated from Hahnemann. I highly recommend reading all the cases on the site and the articles on case taking. I only wish I had found this out 30 years ago when I started! I know from experience that the best, most consistent results come from practicing Hahnemann’s Homoeopathy according to the rules set down in the Organon.

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