Repertory Analysis, Dosage and Repetition


My method of taking the most prominent general, be it mental or physical, as a starting point and eliminating remedies from the group thus reached is much more comprehensible and more easily followed….


After the longest and most difficult part of your task, that of individualizing your symptoms, has been completed the remaining portion, that of selecting your remedy with the repertory, is quickly done and is a simple mathematical proposition. Like all other mathematical problems we must start with the right premises and follow certain axioms in order to arrive at the correct solution. Thus if the logic of our symptom analysis is correct, if the technique of selection be without a flaw, the choice of the remedy must be mathematically certain.

Before giving the demonstration of the repertory analysis I wish to say a few words concerning the administration of the remedy after we have found the one which covers our individualized symptom picture. One of the most difficult things to comprehend is when to repeat the dose. You will find as a general thing in acute cases that if a slight aggravation of the symptoms comes in a short time you will not think of giving another dose, for your patient will get along better without more medicine; but there are conditions when it is necessary to repeat the dose. For this there is no clear-cut rule that can be laid down, and it is very difficult thing to teach and to understand; rather it can only come by experience and by using powers of observation.

The safe rule to follow is, never repeat the dose after reaction begins.

If more than one dose is necessary repeat the dose until there is improvement and then stop; more doses will only retard the cure. When reaction is taking place never repeat the remedy; when reaction ceases or improvement stops, the remedy may be repeated.

Many good homoeopathic prescriptions are spoiled by too oft repeated doses of the right remedy. We are often treating the effects of too many doses of the remedy when we think we are treating the disease.

I do not like to bring the question of potency up in this place, but it is one thing I wish to emphasize; that is, when the dilution of the right remedy will carry your case part way to health, and you are sure you have the right remedy, increase the strength of the remedy rather than change to another unsuitable one. In this way you will find your cases being carried on to a complete cure.

We find certain rules given us for the repetition of the remedy in Chronic Diseases and Hahnemann discusses these on pages 209-213, in speaking of the third mistake in the treatment of diseases. Quoting in part, we find, on page 209: “The third leading mistake that the Homoeopathic physician cannot too carefully or steadfastly avoid is in hastily and thoughtlessly giving some other medicine… but if once a medicine… is acting well and usefully, which is seen by the eight or tenth day, then an hour or even half a day may come when a modern homoeopathic aggravation again takes place. The good results may not appear in their best light before the twenty-fourth or thirtieth day. The dose will probably have then exhausted its favorable action about the fortieth or fiftieth day, and before that time it would be injudicious and an obstruction to the progress of the cure to give any other medicine. Experience teaches that a cure cannot be accomplished more quickly and surely than by allowing the suitable antipsoric to continue its action so long as improvement continues… Whoever can restrain his impatience as to this point will reach his object the more surely and the more certainly… periods of aggravation will occur, but so long as only the original ailments are renewed and no new, severe symptoms present themselves, they show a continuing improvement, being homoeopathic aggravations which do not hinder but advance the cure. The physician must; therefore, in chronic diseases, allow all antipsoric remedies to act thirty, forty or even fifty and more days by themselves, so long as they continue to improve the diseased state perceptibly to the acute observer, even though gradually; for so long the good effects continue with the indicated doses and these must not be disturbed and checked by any new remedy.”

In footnote, page 212, we find: “But he who will not allow himself to be convinced of this and imitate what I now teach, he who is not willing to imitate it exactly, can leave the most important chronic diseases uncured.”

This third step of our Trinity is of equal importance with the first two, for no matter how well you have done the first and second parts of your task all your efforts can be spoiled by the wrong administration of the remedy.

Glen Irving Bidwell