Creating Waves of Awareness
A medicine ‘X’ in 30 C potency is given to a group of 4 provers - A, B, C & D.
After taking the first dose, the following symptoms are produced in each prover.
A: Nausea; salivation; vertigo < stooping.
B: Nausea; salivation; stitching pain in the chest.
C: Nausea; salivation; abdominal pain after eating.
D: Nausea; salivation; Itching of skin folds with sweating.
So, the Materia medica of ‘X’ is as follows:
Vertigo < stooping
Stitching pain in chest
Abdominal pain after eating
Itching of skin folds with sweating
In the above proving, we have just assumed that each symptom is due to the drug they had taken, and not due to any coincidence. Nausea and salivation was found in all provers, hence considered as a common symptom of the drug, whereas the other symptoms are unique and hence, given more value!
The questions are:
1. When a patient gives a common symptom of a disease, it is not given much value. On the other hand, when a drug produces one or two symptoms in almost all provers, how it becomes less important?
2. A peculiar symptom produced in one prover is given more importance in proving. But, that peculiar symptom could be a coincidence, and not due to the dose he had taken. When the same symptom is found in other provers, it has to be given more value, but it becomes a common symptom in our homeopathic proving. How?
3. It is also said that the placebo provers also give the symptoms of the drug taken by others! How? If the provers can influence each other, naturally, patients in the same wards should also interact. So, if we give, causticum to the husband and phosphorous to the wife, naturally, the remedies should interact negatively. Am I right?
I request you to share your views.
Dr Rafeeque, Quite an interesting discussion.
Now let us take more variables. Let us take the outcome of drug X, Y, Z given to different groups of provers E, F, G. ( Each one constitutes a set of 4 and one medicine, e.g medicine X to group E; Y to group F; and Z to group G) Now if all of them for all the 3 drugs prove
Then these symptoms become most common as these are proved by majority of the provers as well as drugs. And if we take actual MM, several drugs carry the symptom Nausea, so it is of no value. As it has been proved by many drugs and many provers and if we have to select the drug for Nausea, we will land with many medicines, so we can't prescribe, because we can't select the medicine on the basis of common symptom Nausea.
But suppose any two or three of them proved Vertigo on stooping, then it carries more value than the common symptoms Vertigo.
But if any one of them proved that he was feeling good with vertigo, and it is marked symptom and if proved by subsequent clinical observations, then this symptom though occurred in one subject, carries a highest value.
If 3 provers in group say that they feel better by vertigo, then it becomes much stronger symptom, for incorporation in MM. More the number of provers giving the peculiar symptoms, will make it red line symtom for that remedy.
On the other hand more number proving common symptoms, will loose it's importance and will be considered common symptom for many provers and many drugs.
Dr.Bahal Sir provided the exact guide lines...kindly provide more..
Thanks Dr. Rafeeque for an interesting & very important subject...