Two major styles of homeopathy have developed since its inception in the late 1700s: classical homeopathy and contemporary homeopathy. Since 1979 we have tried and tested these two approaches, and correlated the results. During this time our doctors and support staff have utilized these methods and correlated them with good hard copy diagnostic backup, including: x-ray; computerized blood; urine and saliva workups; questionnaires; ECG, EEG, EMG; pulmonary function; thermography, etc. The classical procedures included the classical method for case taking using computerized repertorization. The contemporary methods include electro-acupuncture testing, applied kinesiology and sublingual testing procedures using combination formulas.
Classical homeopathy is the original system that was developed approximately 190 years ago. This style of homeopathy offers a vast amount of comprehensive information. It is recommended that the serious homeopathic practitioner become familiar with this system and apply classical procedures when found practical or necessary.
No matter what contemporary style of homeopathy you may practice, the principles and practice of classical homeopathy can be helpful and sometimes essential in correcting difficult cases. Through researching and testing the various homeopathic methodologies, I have found that the classical approach alone has its problems, the primary one being the time that is involved with taking a detailed case history. It takes approximately 45 minutes to one and a half hours to acquire and process the necessary information to provide the appropriate remedy. It could take three or four remedy tries over a period of one or two months to finally find the correct remedy or remedies for just one particular aspect of a complex health profile. It is my opinion and experience that the classical procedures in general will not provide any better results than a good contemporary approach like I have designed and applied to my practice.
With the advent of the industrial revolution, environmental toxicities, vaccinations, suppressive drug therapies, and the basic evolution of the disease processes has drastically complicated the manifestation of today's dis-ease patterns. The more comprehensive approaches of the contemporary homeopathic concepts have shown greater effectiveness, when applied properly. In general, to meet today's more complex challenges in health care, a partial analogy can be made between classical homeopathy and the HIO chiropractic technique. As good as both of these procedures are, we need a more comprehensive armamentarium to overcome today's more complex health dilemmas. The dis-ease patterns of today are much more complex than they were 150 years ago when classical homeopathic principles were developed.
The following concepts of contemporary homeopathy are what we have found to best meet the needs of today's more complex and elusive health care problems. The comprehensiveness and synergistic quality of homeopathic combinations are essential. In the past, many homeopathic combinations were poorly formulated: either there were too few ingredients, providing a poor percentage of results, or too many ingredients working against each other having an antidoting or inimical effect.
Since 1979 my company has been developing the most effective application of homeopathic formulations to meet today's more complex health needs. Due to some inconsistencies in the homeopathic literature concerning which individual homeopathic remedies may antidote another remedy, we began to clinically challenge this aspect of homeopathic practice.
By meticulously correlating the results of using various homeopathic remedies together, we have found that approximately 30 percent of the homeopathic remedies that have been considered antidoting to one another worked well together in clinical testing. Also certain individual remedies, when given together, are synergistic.
By clinically applying the individual homeopathic remedies that are correcting today's manifestations of dis-ease, KBP has developed new levels of effectiveness for conditions ranging from anorexia and bulimia to warts and weight control. Unique to our method of formulation is the hypo-allergenic stabilizer potassium sorbate, originating from the mountain ash tree and vinegar. This allows our formulas to be alcohol free, sugar free, yeast free, nonhabit forming, and free of side effects.
We have found that making each ingredient in three different potencies (9x, 30x, & 100x) and then mixing them together, provides a broad therapeutic spectrum which can help a much greater percentage of people. This procedure also provides much faster and longer lasting results. The broad spectrum of potencies provides a continuous therapeutic effect as the potency requirements change during the healing process. The body will utilize the ingredient(s) it needs at the potency (potencies) it needs, when it needs it. Having these multiple potencies in one formula provides a much more efficient utilization of the homeopathic remedy by the body, resulting in a more efficient cure.
Approximately 90 percent of all the cases we have successfully treated using classical homeopathy were accomplished within the 9x, 30x, and 100x potencies. Though this method of formulation is very labor-intensive, it is well worth the quality of results it provides. It is 90 times the labor to make a 100x homeopathic remedy as compared to a 10x homeopathic remedy.
Contemporary vs. Classical Homeopathic Management Procedures
Using quality designed, contemporary homeopathic combination formulas will provide faster results than the classical approach. In the mind-set of today's patients, getting results quickly is essential.
The classical approach will take a detailed case history and repetorize the many aspects of each symptom. This will usually take approximately one to one and a half hours for the experienced classical homeopath. Then the single remedy of first choice is given at a particular potency. If that specific, single homeopathic remedy does not produce the expected change in three days to three weeks, depending upon the severity or chronicity of the condition, then a second specific remedy is tried, and so on.
The process of trying different, single remedies until one works could take months. This may cause the patient to lose faith in your approach. I am not trying to take away from the classical approach; it may be necessary at times. Even with the contemporary approach a number of formulas may need to be applied. Cracking a complex health case can be related to opening a safe. A different combination may be needed at a specific time to correct the various layers of a complex dis-ease condition. Applying the patient health appraisal questionnaire (PHAQ), and a sublingual testing procedure to confirm which formula the body will respond to at a particular time is the key to correcting a complex case. In the management of acute conditions, it is essential to get results fast or you will lose the patient. In managing chronic conditions, it is essential that a more comprehensive treatment program be used, including multiple remedies, multiple potencies, and detox and drainage remedies. The contemporary combination approach, properly applied, has repeatedly provided better clinical results.
Another "bottom line" difference between the contemporary and classical homeopathic approaches is the fruits of the doctor's labor. Using both procedures since 1979, the case visit averages varied between 10-15 visits, plus a maintenance program, but the difference in the number of patients seen was significant.
The classical doctor may average 8-10 patients per day. The contemporary approach allowed us to see 50-100 patients per day and achieve results that were as good or better than that of the classical approach. It seems clear that the contemporary homeopathic approach, when applied with our "user friendly" system, offers many advantages. The doctor is able to help a greater number of patients resulting in both a greater financial and emotional reward.
The Classical Doctor's Critique of the Contemporary Combination Method
1. "In taking many remedies, they may work against each other." We have addressed this earlier by explaining our clinical testing negating approximately 30 percent of the remedies considered antidoting. Using properly formulated combinations without antidoting or inimical effects is essential for good results. Also, the combination formula must be comprehensive enough with the proper ingredients to help a high percentage of people the product is formulated to help.
Due to the many poor combinations in the market place I understand much of the justification for the classical concern on this topic.
2. "A patient under the influence of multiple individual remedies in a combination formula may confuse the natural expression of their case. This may later make it difficult to take an accurate case history." This may occur for a time however by obtaining a thorough case history using the Patient Health Appraisal Questionnaire (PHAQ), the doctor has a good starting place to return to if necessary.
3. "The doctor doesn't know which remedy actually worked." This is true, yet it doesn't matter. Knowing the combination used, the doctor can repeat the combination if necessary, or if it tests positive. If a formula only corrects a condition partially, and no other formulas such as a detox and drainage, or another formula relating to the patients over all condition test positive, the doctor may want to give the single remedy out of the formula in a higher potency such as 1m, 10m, 50m, etc. From a foundation of knowledge of classical homeopathy and a homeopathic materia medica and repertory, the single remedy can be differentiated from the others on the formula label and given in a higher potency.
The Contemporary Doctor's Critique of the Classical Method
Much of the critique of classical homeopathy has already been listed. However, the following statement may best bring it home to where we live and work: The doctor's bottom line is how many people can be helped in the most efficient, economical, and ecological way. The contemporary combination approach, without a doubt, far surpasses the classical approach. Applying our "user friendly" system of contemporary homeopathy provides fast results, profound percentage of correction, and time efficiency for the doctor. This results in greater patient confidence in chiropractic, homeopathy, and in the doctor applying these procedures.
Frank King, DC
Asheville, North Carolina
Many relevant diagnostic signs are not performed deliberately by the examiner or by the patient at the examiner’s direction. They are observed as the patient reacts to their condition. Fortin’s finger sign, Minor’s sign, and Vanzetti’s sign are three examples of this principle.
Spearheaded by burgeoning scientific and clinical research literature, psychedelics have reached a level of media coverage and popular interest that has not been seen for over half a century. By “psychedelics,” we are referring to the unique class of substances that includes psilocybin (the active compound found in so-called “magic mushrooms”), LSD, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), ayahuasca, 5-MeO-DMT, and mescaline – each of which occurs in the natural world (except for LSD, which is a semi-synthetic compound).
While working at the Lovelace Medical Center in Albuquerque, N.M., one of the primary care physicians stated that imaging every patient prior to receiving chiropractic was not medically necessary. It was at that point I reconsidered the need for the imaging of every patient to avoid malpractice.
