I know of only way to select a Homoeopathic remedy, and that is to find one which matches the objective and subjective symptoms of the patient. Some remedies are easily found, but at times the required one is elusive and I find this grouping more a d more useful for getting on the track of the elusive one.
Recently one of my friends told me of a case which had responded beautifully to Lycopodium but which now failed to react to it, although he had changed the potency and it still seemed suitable. I suggested that we look over Group V. Scanning the list, we noted that Arg. nit. and Natrum carb. are both in this list and had some points of resemblance to Lycopodium. Reading over these drugs in the materia medica, it was seen that Arg. nit. was not suitable, but that Natrum carb. fitted very well. The response was immediate and gratifying.
Again, a few days ago, a man came in suffering from a harassing, dry cough, day and night. He could give me no modalities. The irritation seemed to be in the throat pit. Bryonia had done wonderful work for this man and yet did not seem to fit this more acute condition.
Somewhat nonplussed, I turned to Group IV in which Bryonia is placed. Ammonium carb. and Ammonium mur. had most of his symptoms, but when my eye caught Conium farther down the list, I paused; “What is the sensation in the throat?” I asked. “Dryness,” he said promptly. “A large or small area?” was the next query. “A small, dry spot,” was the answer. That fitted Conium. The other symptoms agreed and Conium was prescribed with great confidence.
I think it was Hering who declared that in making a prescription, it was of the utmost importance to know the remedy which had been given before. I may qualify that: it is of the greatest importance if the preceding remedy has been helpful.
For then the group has been discovered and probably the best results will be obtained from some remedy in that group.
At least that has been my experience. I have found the grouping trustworthy and often shortens a tedious search.
NOTES ON THE BOYD GROUPS CLASSIFICATION.
WILLIAM GUTMAN, M.D.
The most important steps in prescribing for a chronic case, carefully to be considered, are the second and the following prescriptions. As a guidance for the subsequent prescriptions we have the changed symptoms picture and the series of so-called complementary remedies. To this comes as a third and very valuable aid the groups classification of remedies according to Boyd. Personal experience has shown that the remedy following the first correct prescription is often to be found in the same group, sometimes in a related group. Boyds classification should always be considered and often a remedy, originally not thought of, will be found in this way.
EXAMPLES: A case of severe stomach disturbance reacted well upon Lycopodium. The remedy prescribed afterwards did not bring about a response although it seemed to be indicated by symptoms. A consultation of the groups showed that Cancerosinum is in the same group and there was in addition a hereditary disposition for cancer. The nosode was prescribed with excellent result.
A very severe eczema which did not respond to the apparently well indicated remedies had an excellent response following the prescription of Carbo animalis, selected with the help of the Emanometer. With this selection the basic group was discovered and the next remedy, Rhus tox., was chosen from this group, and brought further decided improvement.