Dealing With One-Sided Cases

Last week, we discussed two-rubric prescribing and the confusion in cases with many rubrics leading to many remedies. This week, let's dive into one-sided cases, some of the most difficult cases that come to homeopaths, the ones with very few symptoms. Hahnemann recognized this also and wrote about it in the Organon in Aphorisms 172 through 184. He described these cases as one-sided and are less amenable to cure. Let’s review each of the Aphorisms and really understand what he was sharing with us.

These Aphorisms are in common language and not from any translation. They are simple explanations of the content in layman's terms.

• Aphorism 172 – In reference to the cure of cases, Hahnemann recognized that some difficult cases are those with too few symptoms. In his described methods for removal of disease in previous Aphorisms, he told of the importance of the whole person and understanding the multitude of symptoms. But when there are few symptoms, the system for cure changes.
• Aphorism 173 – Those diseases with few symptoms are less amenable to cure and are termed one-sided. Typically only one or two symptoms obscure all other symptoms. They occur chiefly in the class of chronic diseases.
• Aphorism 174 – The principle symptom may either be an internal complaint or may be an affection of a more external kind. The latter are generally distinguished by the name of local maladies.
• Aphorism 175 – In internal one-sided diseases, it is usually the homeopath's inability to see the more subtle symptoms that would lead him/her to perceive the disease correctly.
• Aphorism 176 – Still there are diseases when careful examination does not lead to but one or two severe and often violent symptoms. All other symptoms will remain hidden.
• Aphorism 177 – These cases are very rare. The job of the homeopath is to understand these symptoms as completely as possible and to use them to select the very best remedy most homeopathically indicated.
• Aphorism 178 – When the correctly prescribed medicine provides a similar artificial disease, it will sometimes annihilate the malady. This happens most often when the few morbid symptoms are very striking, decided, uncommon, and peculiarly distinctive.
• Aphorism 179 – More often though, the medicine that was first chosen will be only partially effective and not perfectly suitable because there were too few symptoms to accurately guide to the best remedy.
• Aphorism 180 – When the imperfect first remedy is given, it will often bring forth new, previously unseen symptoms. These are often a part of the remedy that has been given or other symptoms that have not been experienced before.
• Aphorism 181 – It is possible that some of the new symptoms could have come forth as a result of the remedy first employed. They owe their origin to the remedy but it must be understood that they could only have appeared as a result of the individual expressing them. Now that the new symptoms have appeared, they become a part of the whole disease picture and should be used to find the next best homeopathically indicated remedy.
• Aphorism 182 – The imperfect first remedy, owing to its limited and too few symptoms upon which it was prescribed, serves to complete the full picture of disease and helps us choose a more suitable second remedy.
• Aphorism 183 – When the first remedy ceases to have a beneficial effect, assuming that a new more morbid condition does not appear that requires more immediate action, a new examination of the disease must take place. We must take the case again new and fresh, based on the new, more complete picture of the disease that now includes more symptoms that can guide us to the best homeopathically indicated remedy.
• Aphorism 184 – After the second remedy has been given, it is necessary to watch for a positive response. When the movement of the case has ceased, then the case must be approached anew. (Sometimes the change of potency is what is necessary.) This should be repeated by finding the next most homeopathically indicated remedy and repeating the process until the case has cured.

As we can see, Hahnemann described the process of starting with too few symptoms, giving the best-indicated remedy, and finding out what appears next. The person could only show new symptoms of the remedy as a result of their susceptibility and those new symptoms that appear are unique to the person. Only that one individual, with those unique symptoms, could have produced a partial proving of the remedy. This brings more symptoms to the surface and gives a better picture of the person’s disease.

It is then necessary to retake the case based on the new picture of the person's disease and the new set of symptoms. Once a new homeopathically indicated remedy is found and prescribed, it is necessary to wait and see the response. Once a response is exhausted, it is now time to change something about the remedy. Usually, a new higher potency of the same remedy will reestablish movement in the case again. Once movement has ceased again, it may be necessary to find a better, more homeopathically suited remedy to complete the cure. This process should be repeated until cure has ensued.

Please share your experiences in the comments below! All others may benefit from them. These are rare but not uncommon cases to have to deal with.

Keep the conversation going! I would love to hear your questions and thoughts below!