The Role of Homeopathy in the Patient's Disease

By Dr. Saran Zeb

This book contains 18 chapters. The first chapter contains the life of Dr. Hahnemann. The second chapter contains different methods of homeopathic treatment. In chapter third, I discuss case taking. Chapter four contains a case analysis. Chapter five consists of homeopathic repertorisation and in chapter six, I discuss the minimum doses.

Chapter seven onward consists of various health issues and mentioned the cases which I treated last 25-years. I mentioned a few hundred cases in this book and contains different types of methods. Each chapter is divided into three parts, therapeutic method, classical method and revolutionised method. Chapter 18 contains Materia Medica. I include 15 remedies which can be used daily bases in homeopathic practice.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse UK
• Release date: Jan 25, 2022
• ISBN: 9781665595995

Dr. Saran Zeb

My Name is Dr Saran Zeb. I am a fully qualified classically trained Homoeopathic Doctor and a member of the Faculty of Homeopathy. My homoeopathic qualifications include, DHMS, RHMP, HMD, LFHom, MFHom , PGCE I have been practising in the area of London for over 25-years. My achievements and services as a Homeopathic Doctor have been highly recognised and appreciated by the local community in London and the outskirts areas. Due to my success and a reasonable demand in the East London area, I have to expand my services to reach out to a greater number of people in the area. I have treated over 5000 patients successfully who were under or on the long-term care within the NHS primary and secondary care.

Book preview

THE ROLE OF

HOMEOPATHY

IN THE

PATIENT’S DISEASE

DR. SARAN ZEB

63572.png

AuthorHouse™ UK

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403 USA

www.authorhouse.co.uk

Phone: UK TFN: 0800 0148641 (Toll Free inside the UK)

           UK Local: (02) 0369 56322 ([phone] from outside the UK)

© 2022 Dr. Saran Zeb. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse 01/25/2022

ISBN: 978-1-6655-9598-8 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-6655-9599-5 (e)

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

CONTENTS

Preface

Chapter 1 The Founder of Homeopathy

Chapter 2 Methods Used in Homeopathic Prescription

Chapter 3 Case Taking or Homeopathic Consultation or Patient’s Case History

Chapter 4 Case Analysis

Chapter 5 Case Repertorisation

Chapter 6 The Minimum Doses

Chapter 7 Mental and Emotional problems

Chapter 8 Headache and Hemicranias (Migraine)

Chapter 9 Respiratory problems

Chapter 10 Digestive problems

Chapter 11 Female Reproductive Problems

Chapter 12 Male Reproductive Problems

Chapter 13 Kidney and Bladder Problem

Chapter 14 Skin Problems

Chapter 15 Pain

Chapter 16 General Problems

Chapter 17 Accident and Emergency Remedies

Chapter 18 Materia Medica

References

PREFACE

This book contains 18 chapters.

1. The life of Dr Hahnemann.

2. This chapter contains different methods of homeopathic treatment.

3. In chapter third, I discuss case taking.

4. It is Includes a case analysis.

5. Chapter five consists of homeopathic repertorisation.

6. I discuss the minimum doses.

Chapter seven onward consists of various health issues and mentions the cases I treated last 25-years. I said several hundred consultations in this book and contains different methods. Each chapter is divided into three parts: therapeutic, classical, and revolutionised approaches. Chapter 17 mentions accident and emergency remedies, which can use daily, and Chapter 18 contains Materia Medica. I include 15 remedies that can use daily.

I try to prepare this book so that anyone can benefit from it. The public can benefit from the therapeutic section, student and junior homeopaths can benefit from the classical part, and senior and experienced homeopaths can benefit from the revolutionised approach.

CHAPTER 1

The Founder of Homeopathy

Homeopathy was found by an allopathic doctor called Dr Samuel Hahnemann. Homeopathy was found by an allopathic doctor named Dr Samuel Hahnemann. Dr Hahnemann was among those individuals who always followed the path of truth and honesty. Dr Hahnemann was among those individuals who always followed the path of truth and honesty. He faced all the challenges bravely, which came on his way to discover Homeopathy.

Now the question arises, why did this individual choose to face the challenges while living a comfortable life by practising the allopathic system of medicine?

As I mentioned above that Dr Hahnemann was an allopathic doctor. He was treating his patients allopathically (conventional treatment). His earning was good, and he led his life without opposite forces. When he found significant differences between the theory and the practice of the allopathic system of medicine and there was no transparency among these two. The books claim that medicine ‘A’ is good for intermittent fever, but when he was prescribing it to his patients, it worked for some and not for others. Or, after treating his patients, they become more weak and venerable than before treatment. Or he was curing one problem, and the side effects of the medicine give more problems to the patient. Then he reflected on his practice. The thought was coming to his mind, am I delivering good to my patients? He was feeling guilty to carry on such a practice.

When Dr Hahnemann started his allopathic practice, he faced the same issues. When Dr Hahnemann started his allopathic practice, he met the same problems. He has two choices. Firstly he can close his eyes ignore these medical issues, and let the patients suffer from the terrible side effects of allopathic medications. A result lives a trouble-free life. Or the second choice was to face the challenges and to discover the absolute truth about the disease.

Hahnemann sacrificed his life so much for his discovery that we cannot separate him from his discovery. Therefore, most homeopaths say Hahnemann is Homoeopathy and Homeopathy is Hahnemann.

To understand more about Hahnemann, struggle, courage, determination, and facing challenges, I would like to mention the following history about his life.

SAMUEL HAHNEMANN

Christian Friedrich Samuel Hahnemann was born on 10 April 1755, of Meissen in Saxony – East Germany.

Samuel Hahnemann attended the Elementary school in Meissen until he was fifteen. During this period, Magister Johann Muller, one of his teachers, realized that he was a student of exceptional ability and quality. Mr Muller taught Samuel Hahnemann Latin, Greek, and German, which had a particular influence on his studies and made him a unique student in his class.

After completing his study in Elementary School, Samuel took admission and became a Prince’s Grammar School student at Easter, 1771. During his four years of study in this school, Samuel Hahnemann develops his talent for languages, mathematics, botany (analysis of plants), and geometry. Samuel wrote a dissertation (thesis) in Latin in his final year, entitled ‘The Wonderful Construction of the Human Hand’.

Samuel’s family was all artists. It was clear from the beginning that he would not follow the family tradition, and he was interested in a career in the medical profession.

He lived in his town until he was twenty years old. Then he went to Leipzig and, in 1775, was admitted to the University of Leipzig to study medicine. Since 1775 he became self-supporting and remained independent. He started translating books from Greek and English into German to support himself financially. He translated four books from English into German during his stay. He spent all his spare time earning his living.

Samuel Hahnemann was disappointed in the lectures and tried to gain scientific knowledge from medical textbooks, contributing to his further frustration and isolation. Frustration, disappointment further increased by the absence of any practical studies due to the leak of a hospital. He left Leipzig, late in 1776, to overcome his frustration for Vienna. Here, Samuel had the opportunity to work under Dr Quarin at ‘The Brother of Mercy in the suburb of Leopoldstadt’ hospital. Dr Quarin has performed his duty as a senior physician of the hospital. Samuel had benefited enormously from Dr Quarin in his nine months study, but he faced financial difficulty and discussed his problem with Dr Quarin. Dr Quarin arranged for Samuel to introduce Von Brukenthal, who offered him a post as Librarian and family physician at his home in Hermannstadt in 1777. This job lasted for one year and nine. He gained extensive literature, botany, chemistry, and several languages such as German, Latin, Greek, English, and Spanish during this period. (Cook 2005).

Dr Christian Friedrich Samuel Hahnemann set up his first practice in the town of Hettstedt in the summer of 1780. Samuel left Hermannstadt to complete his formal studies at the University of Erlangen, in spring 1779. This time he was twenty-four years old. Samuel studied throughout the summer term, concentrating on botany under professor Schreber to obtain the required level. He passed the final examination and submitted a twenty-page dissertation entitled ‘Summary of the Conditions of Cramp According to cause and cure’, dated 1779. After that, he obtained an oral examination before an Academic Board; by satisfying the Board, he was awarded the degree of Doctor of Medicine on 10 August 1779.

In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, drawn blood in significant quantities by cupping or using leeches was a feature of medical practice. The seeds of Hahnemann’s discontent with the system and eventual rebellion of the inhumanity and barbaric quackery of the medical practices.

Not surprisingly, Dr S Hahnemann turned his attention to the excitement of developing his field of chemistry. In April 1781, he departed for Dessau, which offered him more scope for his intellectual nature. He soon found a practice and again satisfied his desire for learning by studying chemistry. Soon he established a practice, and together with his interest in chemistry soon led him to Haseler’s pharmacy in Dersau. Soon after, Hahnemann fell in love with a seventeen-year-old girl Johanna Hennette Leapoldine Kurcher, the manager of Haseler’s Pharmacy. (Cook 2005).

Dr Hahnemann published his medical essay in the Medical Observations Journal describing the catarrhal fever in Quenstdt. Dr Hahnemann’s needed to increase his income due to his forthcoming marriage. He accepted the post of Medical Officer in Gommer, which allowed him to continue his studies. A year later, he married Johanna.

Dr Hahnemann continued the study of chemistry before his daughter was born in 1783. Dr Hahnemann continued the study of chemistry before his daughter was born in 1783. Soon after, in 1784, another medical essay was published called ‘Direction for caring for old Sores and Ulcers of 192 pages, where his growing disenchantment with the contemporary medical practices became apparent.

Samuel Hahnemann and his family left Gommern and went to Dresden where his second child was born on 30 November 1786. After which, his wife gave birth to their second daughter, after which they moved to Wilhelmine, where he continued to study medical sciences, mainly in translating books on these subjects, which provided him with a source of income.

Although Hahnemann’s financial situation was deplorable, it got worse with the birth of their fourth daughter, named Caroline. He could not cope and survive in the city of Dresden, so he decided to move into the rural environment of Stotteritz. This place was cheaper compared to the town and also the benefit of the fresh country air was a bonus.

The negative side of this migration was the lack of access to library facilities. Therefore, Hahnemann had to work in a single room for the entire family. To avoid the children’s noise and disturbance, he did most of his writing and studying during the night while the children were asleep.

Dr Hahnemann accelerated his activities as a writer to fulfil his family’s living needs. His two medical works and five chemical experiences were particularly outstanding among these.

Among his eight translations from English, French and Italian into German, a book (1,170 pages), called ‘A Treatise on Materia Medica’ by Dr W. Cullen, was also included. One particular drug, Cinchona bark, diverted his attention during the translation, and he decided to experiment.

This experiment was the first principle of Hahnemann, this new method of treatment called- Homeopathy. The crucial basic principle of homeopathy is called Similia Similibus Curentor – ‘let likes be treated with likes’. He said that Cinchona bark (in homeopathy called China), used as a medicine for intermittent fever, acts because it can produce symptoms similar to intermittent fever in healthy people. This experiment later became known as ‘proving’.

Cook (2005) states, Through my enquiry into the art of healing, I found the road to truth upon which I have to tread alone, a road removed from the common highway of medical routine. The further I advanced from truth to truth, the further my conclusion moved from the traditional approach, built only on opinion. However, I allowed no single one of my conclusions to stand unless fully confirmed by experiment.

Dr Hahnemann believed in those issues that society leaked at that time, such as the benefit of a balanced diet, the value of exercise and taking fresh air, cleanliness, and personal hygiene. He also believed that the hospitals were poorly staffed, filthy, and unsanitary. Hahnemann blamed the corrupt pharmacists for their high charges and poor quality of their medicines. When he stayed in Molschleben, he started his literacy and completed four volumes’ Pharmaceutical Lexicon’.

Hahnemann’s second son Ernst was born on February 1794 in Molschleben but died when he was three months old. At that time, Hahnemann was writing the first volume of the ‘Friend of Health’, published in 1795. He mostly talked about his own experiences in rich and poor areas in this volume.

After living ten months in Molschleben, Hahnemann’s family migrated to Pyrmont. They were to stay in Pyrmont for only a few months. 1795 they lived in Brunswick; soon after, they moved to Konigslutter. Here he completed the second part of the friend of Health’ and the ‘Pharmaceutical Lexicon.

Professor Hufeland, chair of medicine at the University of Jena, gave a chance to Dr Hahnemann to contribute his articles to his journal called ‘Practical Medicine’. Among one of his essays, he outlined and discussed the three existing healing methods.

Stay in Konigslutter, Hahnemann wrote of the nature of scarlet fever and his experiences in treating the disease during an outbreak. He mentioned the details of the preparation of his antidote remedy, named Belladonna.

Eventually, Dr Hahnemann settled with his family in Torgau. His financial freedom provided him with the opportunity to continue his writings and translations.

When Hahnemann was sixty years old, he delivered a treatment speech and cured with ‘White Hellebore’ in Latin at which was about 86-pages, in the University of Leipzig. He quoted references from many publications in eight different languages, impressing the audience about his ability for other languages. His speech was well-received among the medical professions; even the Dean of the University of Leipzig appreciated his speech. (Cook, 2005).

Dr Hahnemann decided to prepare such a group that collaborates to prove new medicines—before this, he established only twenty-six remedies. These collaborators consisted of healthy volunteers trained to test drugs (newfound remedies) on themselves and record the resultant symptoms they experienced. Hahnemann laid down strict procedures for the collaborators that provided a first or second potency tincture. Dr Hahnemann made efforts to minimize the ‘power’ risk by developing antidotes in advance. This concern he raised in one of his letters, which he wrote to Dr Stopf (among the ‘prover’ and one of Hahnemann’s best friends), as an instruction.

The outcome of this hard work (proving), Hahnemann published ‘Materia Medica Pura’. This Materia medica has contained sixty-six remedies. Cook (2005) states, Of particular significance was his comment on the homoeopathic approach to prescribing. ... it would be, therefore, the duty of the physician to distinguish the subtle variations of every individual case – that is to specialize and individualize in each personal case, instead of treating the diseases. In another edition he concluded: … only the most careful observer can become a true scientific healer.

After staying seven years peacefully in Leipzig, Dr Hahnemann faced intense criticism from other medical professionals. According to the newly discovered method, they claimed local authority to ban Hahnemann from treating patients. Also, they demanded that he should not prepare, store and dispense homeopathic medicines on his premises. After a long fight, the other medical professionals eventually succeeded in their case, and no choice was left for Hahnemann apart from closing his practice. After this event, Dr Hahnemann decided to go Leipzig for Kothen in 1821.

Dr Hahnemann received a warm welcome in Kothen, which not only allowed him to practice, but he could prepare, make and dispense his remedies. This freedom and peaceful atmosphere allowed him to develop his new medical treatment (homeopathy) and enjoy life with his family. Cook (2005) states, In addition to his tireless work in his practice, where the waiting room was always full six days a week, year after year, Hahnemann corresponded prodigiously, although he was then in his late sixties.

Dr Frederick Quin (physician to Prince Leopold) introduced homoeopathy to England.

Dr Quin established the British Homoeopathic Society in 1844; later, the name converted to the Faculty of Homoeopathy. Five years later, he founded The Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital.

Dr Hahnemann’s wife, Johanna, became ill with bronchial catarrh, associated with high temperature. After suffering for four weeks with her illness, eventually, she died in March 1830.

Marie Melanie arrived in Kothen from Paris after the death of Hahnemann’s wife, and she had visited Dr Hahnemann as a patient. Melanie was a charming, pretty, and very attractive 30-years old lady. After three years, Hahnemann’s relationship with Melanie grew stronger. Eventually, Dr Samuel Hahnemann and Melanie were married in January 1835. Five months later, Hahnemann and his wife Melanie went to Paris for the rest of his life. Hahnemann delivered a speech to The Gallic Homoeopathic Society by arriving in Paris.

When Hahnemann was eighty-eight years old, he suffered bronchial catarrh, and eventually, Dr Samuel Hahnemann died peacefully in his bed on the morning of 2 July 1843.

CHAPTER 2

Methods Used in Homeopathic Prescription

There are three types of methods that can use in homeopathic prescription.

• Therapeutic Homeopathy/Key Notes Prescribing

• Classical Homeopathy

• Revolutionized Homeopathy

Therapeutic Homeopathy/key Notes Prescribing:

The homeopath needs to consider the characteristic symptoms in the therapeutic prescription by following the Law of Similar. First, he needs to consider the characteristic symptoms and, secondly, to prescribe one remedy at a time.

Classical Homeopathy:

The homeopath takes the entire case history, analysis, and repertories to find the constitutional remedy for the patient, which is called the classical treatment approach. In this method, the homeopath prescribes the remedy by considering the patient’s total symptoms. If prescribed based on the constitutional level, it makes the patient better for one symptom and improves most of the other patient’s symptoms.

Revolutionized Homeopathy:

Dr Madan Lal Sehgal has discovered this branch of homeopathy. The method of case taking is the same as classical homeopathy but prescribes the remedy only based on mental symptoms.

Before I can discuss the repertorisation of this discovery, I feel it is necessary to mention how Dr M L Sehgal discovers this way of repertorisation. I believe most of the newly qualified homeopaths, when they start to practice, they facing practical challenges. Some find it challenging to find the correct remedy for their patients. Some have difficulty choosing the correct potency. Some confuse how often should the remedy need to be repeated. Some repertories for their patient by spending hours and then still the remedy does not work.

The practitioners implement their theoretical knowledge to practical, but the result is unsatisfactory. These issues are not so easy to believe. Learning one thing is different, and he believes that learning is another. The practitioner starts to think about his theoretical knowledge, which he gains from college/University by practising in his clinic, making him an experienced practitioner.

There are Laws and guidelines in homeopathy, which should come true when implemented in the clinical environment. For example, if the practitioner prescribes a few doses of the correct remedy, a procedure for minimum doses and advises the patient to attend your second visit after four weeks. Following the appointment, if the patient says that I feel better after taking the remedy, the practitioner will believe in the principle of minimum doses. If the patient did not respond or felt better for a few days and the symptoms come back, the practitioner will question that learning knowledge. If this situation occurs repeatedly, he will be looking for a new direction. He will be starting his research and making a way to move forward and carry on his practice. It is because necessity is the mother of invention.

If the theoretical knowledge does not satisfy the clinical experience, something is missing between these two. The successful homeopath tests his academic expertise with practical knowledge to gain belief. The belief gives him confidence, and the more he has confidence more he will be the curative power. It is only happening if the practitioner is honest and enthusiastic. He will pay attention to minute detail and try to find the truth.

When Dr Hahnemann started his allopathic practice, he carefully observed his patients. He found that the medication he was prescribing cured one problem and gave a couple of others to the patient. He also noticed the medicine claim to cover the particular disease was not helping everyone. Some patients were responding with that drug, and other was not.

So here, he found the conflict between his knowledge and his practice. Therefore, he started to look for the truth. He was questioning why there is a difference between theoretical and practical knowledge. Then gradually, he began to experiment with himself, his family, and friends. Finally, he found the truth that everyone needs to be treated individually. It is because everyone is different from the other, and in this way, he discovered a new treatment method called homeopathy. So he abounded his old allopathic practise and started a new approach by which he was treating a patient with the principle of ‘treat like with like.’

Before I can discuss the repertorisation of this discovery, I feel it is necessary to mention how Dr M L Sehgal discovers this way of repertorisation.

I believe most of the newly qualified homeopaths, when they start to practice, they facing practical challenges. Some find it challenging to find the correct remedy for their patients. Some have difficulty choosing the correct potency. Some confuse how often should the remedy needs to be repeated. Some repertories for their patient by spending hours and then still the remedy does not work.

These issues are not so easy to believe. The practitioners implement their theoretical knowledge to practical, but the result is unsatisfactory. Learning one thing is different, and he believes that knowledge is another. The practitioner starts to feel his theoretical knowledge, which he gains from college/University by practising in his clinic. It is making him an experienced practitioner.

There are Laws and guidelines in homeopathy, which should come true when implemented in the clinical environment. For example, if the practitioner prescribes a few doses of the correct remedy and advice the patient to attend your second visit after four weeks. Following the appointment, if the patient says that I feel better after taking the remedy, the practitioner will believe in the principle of minimum doses. If the patient did not respond or felt better for a few days and the symptoms come back, they will question the practitioner on that learning knowledge. If this situation occurs repeatedly, he will be looking for a new direction. It is because necessity is the mother of invention. He will be starting his research and making a way to move forward and carry on his practice. If the theoretical knowledge does not satisfy the clinical experience, something is missing between these two. The successful homeopath tests his academic knowledge with practical knowledge to gain belief. The belief gives him confidence, and the more he has confidence more he will be the curative power. It is only happening if the practitioner is honest and enthusiastic. He will pay attention to minute detail and try to find the truth.

When Dr Hahnemann started his allopathic practice, he carefully observed his patients. He found that the medication he was prescribing cured one problem and gave a couple of others to the patient. He also noticed the medicine claim to cover the particular disease was not helping everyone. Some patients were responding with that drug, and other was not.

So here, he found the conflict between his knowledge and his practice. Therefore, he started to look for the truth. He was questioning why there is a difference between theoretical and practical knowledge. Then gradually, he began to experiment with himself, his family, and friends. Finally, he found the truth that everyone needs to be treated individually. It is because everyone is different from the other, and in this way, he discovered a new treatment method, which he called, homeopathy. These homeopaths take the complete case history as a classical homeopath but only analyze and repertories the case based on mental symptoms. So he abounded his old allopathic practise and started a new approach by which he was treating a patient with the principle of ‘treat like with like.’

It is like someone is pilling the onion. This more profound level can be gained by experience, motivation, hardworking, honest in your profession, careful consideration of the patient’s cases, and require an excellent observational skills.

I was using the ‘Non-Eliminative method. I was pleased with the result, but after several years of practice, when patients demand increased and people came from far away to attend my clinic, it was difficult for me to spend a couple of hours per patient to repertories the case. I was thinking, how I can reduce the time of my repertorisation without compromising the excellent result. Then I started to pay attention to Dr Seghal’s method and read the literature on his discovery of homeopathy.

Seghal (1990) states, Let me tell you very plainly that whatever I know about Homoeopathy is not my creation, but I have learned it from the Homoeopathic literature. The difference is that I focused my attention on those scientifically true principles and fundamental to the very concept of the Homoeopathic system of medicine. They were lying in the literature as scattered and neglected clues. I have linked them up in my way and given them due importance after being guided by my own experience.

Those clues are:

For greater accuracy in selecting medicine, the mental symptoms are supreme. They can be depended upon to choose a true similar, without bothering for the physicals, if they are available (as the Classical Homoeopaths opined).

Symptoms alone and nothing else (Miasm etc.) is the ultimate deciding factor in the selection of medicine."

Further, he discovered that his experience had proved the relationship between the mind and the disease. When a true similar struck as proof of it, it balances the present condition of mind, and the reason eventually balances the body, and the patient gains his health back.

After studying Dr Seghal’s seven volumes and researching this method, I started repertorisation based on the patient’s mental and emotional symptoms. It was another big brick through to my practice, and my stocked cases moved forward and saw a big smile on the hopeless patient’s face.

The case repertorisation takes about 30 minutes to 45 minutes, and the none-eliminative method repertorisation takes about 1.30 to 2.00 hours. The beauty of homeopathy is that someone goes in more profound and will find the truth. Homeopathy gives fruit to everyone, but it depends on the practitioner how much he wants to achieve. The more you work in homeopathy more it put the curative power in your hands. Some homeopaths only treat minor aliments other than dealing with chronic illness. The limitation of one practitioner differs from another. If you love homeopathy, homeopathy will love you. Homeopathic healing power is not falling in someone’s hands by itself; he needs to prove that he genuinely learns the knowledge and gains the experience. Some homeopaths will be practiced for years without considering the homeopathic laws and guidelines. However, they may be help patients here and there, but honestly, they do not understand homeopathy by themselves. The light of homeopathy only can gain to follow the laws of homeopathy.

In the above three types of methods, I mentioned case taking, case analysis, and case repertorisation. Knowing the procedure, meaning, and explanation of these wordings is crucial.

CHAPTER 3

Case Taking or Homeopathic Consultation

or Patient’s Case History

Why should I pay full attention to the case taking? What are the guidelines to be considered during case taking?

Case taking is the first step toward repertorisation. I must take the careful case history, select the most prominent symptoms and their modalities, and then consider them general. (Boyd 1989). Edward agrees with Boyd and mentions that the important and probably the most challenging problem is obtaining the case’s actual characteristic symptoms. He further explains that every true homeopath will admit that recording the symptoms is difficult. (Cotter 1987).

For example, if the patient is sensitive to noise and fears heights, both are mental symptoms, but the severity of one symptom will differ. I can detect the patient’s body language, gestures, tone of voice, expressing the symptoms, etc. If the patient says, I hate noise, I cannot stand noise, noise makes me feel irritable, and if there is a noise, I put my hands on my ears. I am fearful of heights, but I can walk on flyovers or look down from tall buildings, but I am scared of flying. So his case indicates that the centre point is sensitivity to noise. It is also called the characteristic symptoms of the patient.

If the homeopath is not skilful, he can miss many of these crucial points while taking case histories. It is why taking a case history is not so easy, and at the same time, it is essential. Any mistakes in this part can affect the result, which is, choosing the correct remedy. (Kent 1979).

Cotter (1987) states, The trained homeopath can discern symptoms and signs of individual sickness without speculation, and the only indication for every case is found in the totality of these signs and symptoms which each case presents.

Kent (1987) states, I do not mean that all or any part of what you have written is useless, but it is necessary to have individualising characteristics to enable you to classify that which you have, to perceive the value of symptoms, and, if you must settle down to a few remedies, to ascertain which of these is more important than another, or most important of all. You cannot individualise unless you have that which characterises.

Hahnemann (1994) states, …., the more striking, strange, unusual, peculiar (characteristic) signs and symptoms in the case are especially, almost exclusively, the ones to which close attention should be given, because it is these above all which must correspond to very similar symptoms in the symptom list of the medicine being sought if it is to be the one most suitable for cure. More general and indefinite symptoms, such as loss of appetite, headache, weakness, troubled sleep, discomfort, etc., if not more precisely qualified, deserve little attention, because one finds something general of the kind in almost every disease and almost every medicine. (Hahnemann, #153).

Boyd explains the importance of case taking. He mentioned that two things are necessary for the successful selection of a similar remedy: a clear picture of the patient’s symptoms and a comprehensive knowledge of the Materia medica.

Roy (2002) states The object of case-taking is to gain from the patient a view of the overall pattern of how the vital force is expressed in this individual. This covers mental, emotional and physical spheres and how all these fit together to make a pattern, including over time, which we know as the total symptom picture.

Accurate case taking is the first step towards case analysis and repertorisation. It is essential to take the entire case history to find the constitutional remedy. It is impossible to analyse the whole case history without taking it correctly. Without correct analysis, it is impossible to repertarise, and without accurate repertorisation, it is difficult to choose the constitutional remedy for the patient. It is difficult to cure the patient’s symptoms without finding the constitutional remedy, i.e., chronic disease.

In taking a case history, first, the homeopath asks the patient to describe the symptoms in his way, and the homeopath asks searching questions that will bring out detailed answers and questions and not just Yes or No. The homeopath will ask how the patient is affected by environmental factors such as temperature, weather, and pollution. What kinds of food they are craving, avoiding, or allergic to their moods and feelings and medical history to establish a complete picture of them as a person.

Finally, when a homeopath has taken the complete history, once again, he asks his patient, Is there anything or other symptoms left that you would like to tell me. Sometimes, the patient thinks for a few seconds, and they remember some other specific symptoms that help the homeopath decide the correct remedy (medicine).

After taking the case, history reference is made to the Materia medica to find a remedy, which has, as nearly as possible, a similar picture in its proving and toxicology. The importance of the mental and general symptoms of the patient should also rank high in the remedy picture if a correct selection is to be made. It is wise to list the main symptoms with their modalities and note any strange, rare, or peculiar symptoms. Then one should look at the patient as a whole, as described under ‘Case-taking’, noting the appearance, the general, and mental symptoms.

Select from them the symptoms, which cannot be omitted because they are so marked. Then take one of the repertories and see what remedies cover most of the listed symptoms. Next, look again at the Materia medica of these few remedies to decide on your choice. (Boyd 1989).

Roy (2002) states The object of case-taking is to gain from the patient a view of the overall pattern of how the vital force is expressed in this individual. This covers mental, emotional, and physical spheres and how all these fit together to make a pattern, including over time, which we know as the total symptom picture.

The patients usually are not telling the symptoms entirely. They are only interested in mentioning those symptoms they suffer from, but the homeopath has to ask questions to give more information. If the homeopath hesitates and does not ask the appropriate question, which he feels is vital, he will not take the entire case history.

As practitioners face various types of patients such as male, female, children, and elderly patients, they should have the experience to take the entire case history not to be upset. Does the practitioner need to consider the surrounding environment sitting with the patient? Which type of question do they need to ask in which way that the patient can answer comfortably?

The practitioner must ask about those symptoms first, which the patient comes. Allow the patient enough time to express himself fully, and the practitioner makes notes or keeps remembering those symptoms he needs to ask further. The practitioner should not disturb the patient in the middle of his conversation. Otherwise, the patient will lose concentration and forget what he was saying.

Sometimes the practitioner needs to ask one question a few times during the consultation to ensure that the patient knows what he is saying. But the critical point is to ask at different angles; otherwise, it will irritate the patient why the practitioner repeatedly asks the same question. If the practitioner is in a drought, he upset the patient by repeating the same question, and then he needs to explain the reason to the patient for the asking rapidly. It is because maintaining the practitioner and the patient bond is very crucial.

If it is a female patient, and the practitioner requires asking questions about her menses or other female problem, he must explain and take oral concern that I will be asking some questions about your menses, would it be OK for you. So this way, the patient will be mentally preparing for the question. Should not be asked these questions in the first part of the consultation unless the patient came for the female problem.

I left the emotional symptoms asked in the last. They are essential for the repertorisation; secondly, the patient would not feel comfortable discussing these severe issues in the first part of the consultation. By talking 30 minutes or 45 minutes of history, they are big more relaxed. By that time, the practitioner can create a patient-practitioner bond, which helps to discuss their mental-emotional problem in detail.

Sometimes the practitioner will be facing such demanding clients, especially males, that it will be complicated for them to understand the interlink between the different symptoms. For example, if they have abdominal pain and the practitioner asks about their emotional and mental or sexual life, it is complicated to understand. The practitioner must explain why taking the entire case history is essential. Again, if they are unwilling to discuss those issues, the practitioner should not force them. They can take the information about whatever they can and try to analyse and repertorise what information they have got from the patient.

I also experienced that some patients never took homeopathic treatment before, expecting the consultation as their G.P surgery. They are only interested in telling the particular symptoms which they suffer. As soon I release, they are reluctant to answer other issues. I explained that although you are interested in curing your specific problem, I need to know all about your mental, emotional and physical symptoms. For example, they have eczema on their arm; they are only interested in asking a few questions and, within 5 or 10 minutes, prescribed some cream or tablets, as they expect from their G.P.

I explain to them as an example that there are about 50 remedies for eczema out of 4000 remedies. There is only one remedy among these 50 remedies, which will help your eczema. To find that remedy, I need to consider your totalities of the symptoms, enabling me to find a correct remedy for you. Homeopathy is the medical practice of treating like with like and using the minimum effective dose. That is to say, the patient’s symptoms will be similar to the symptoms of the remedy.

I found this little explanation helps them differentiate between homeopathy and allopathic. Also, feels comfortable describing their mental-emotional and physical problems.

After taking their entire case history and prescribing the proper constitutional remedy, when they attend their next appointment and feel better with their symptoms and the end of the consultation, I show how I analyse and repertorise their case. How do I reach to find a single remedy for them? I was asking about other symptoms they consider irrelevant for their case. When they see all this hard work I did in my spare time, they appreciate and have more faith in homeopathy and recommend other family members, friends, and colleges.

Some patients will be very talkative. They will be talking about their symptoms that are not so crucial for the repertorisation, or will ignore to tell their symptoms and start telling their friends and relatives stories. In that case, the practitioner uses their professional skill and polity to bring the patient on the right track. Otherwise, one hour will be over, and the practitioner will not get any patient symptoms, as Kent mentions in the above paragraphs.

For a classical homeopath, it is essential to take the entire case history. The practitioner needs to ask every system question whether they have any symptoms. But he needs