Books

The Science of Homeopathy – page 289

original case was well-taken, a review may very well reveal the correct remedy. The homeopath, upon re-reading the original case, may say, “Oh my God! That’s the true remedy. Why didn’t I see it before?” This is a common event in the career of beginning homeopaths whose prescribing skills have yet to undergo further refinement.
If a more precise medicine is seen in the original case, then it should be given. This is so even though the current picture may have changed since the first prescription. Having been changed by an imprecise rem- edy, the current image is not to be relied upon for a new prescription.

If no remedy is clear upon review of the case, then the only alternative is to wait. Eventually (probably within a few weeks), the changes in the defense mechanism will stabilize into the original image. At that point, a completely re-taken case will most probably reveal a clear image, and then that remedy can be given.
The worse response would be to make a wild stab at the best possible remedy when the image is not yet clear. This would very likely result in further confusion of an al- ready disordered case.

INTENSITY
OF SYMPTOMS

E M/E
NEW SYMPTOMS

CC

REMEDY

TIME PERIOD 1 MONTH

Figure 22:

CASE VII:

Patient: “My original problem is better, but now I have another one.”
Case: Chief complaint better without aggravation, while new and deeper prob- lem has emerged. No change in energy or mental-emotional state.
Interpretation: Suppressive and disrup- tive effect of medicine.
Prescription: 1) Study again the original case to discover the correct remedy in the first place. 2) If no remedy is apparent, antidote with allopathic drugs, coffee, or camphor, and then wait for new clear im- age to emerge

CASE VII:

Here, we have a circumstance which is somewhat unusual, but by no means un-

heard of, especially in the first years of prescribing. The patient reports no signifi-