R
: You have visited India twice and know quite a few
homeopaths. What is your feeling about the Indian homoeopaths?
J
: They are very studious. In your culture, you have a
strong tradition of hard work, for long hours, with long concentration.
In lectures in the West, people often want breaks after an hour and
half. In India one can teach for two and half hours without a break.
Most doctors here see a greater number of patients a week than in other
countries.
R:
You have also visited clinics in India. What is the difference
in the kind of cases seen in India and in the west ?
J:
We see follow ups for half an hour, maybe 10 follow ups a day, plus
2-3 new cases. In India you may see more seriously acute pathology,
where those cases would go to hospital here. I have seen some difficult
cases here. Practitioners work very hard on the cases, taking as long
as necessary to look for a cure. However, due to the short amount of
time dedicated to follow ups
you do not have enough time to make a in depth evaluation of the result
leading to a second prescription.
Of course if the remedy is right then there is no problem, but if
the remedy is only partially similar or if it didn't work then it is
difficult to make a full assessment.
However, this is compensated for because you see patients every two
weeks, whereas in the West we tend to see follow-ups every six weeks.
R:
What is the reason according to you that the homoeopaths in the West
see less patients in their clinics?
J:.
A smaller percent of patients in the West are open to homoeopathy.
In the West homoeopathy died and is now reborn, whereas in India it
never died. India has homoeopathic hospitals and a long history of treatment
of patients with homoeopathy. Homoeopathy is still a private medicine
in the West and therefore costs more. The nature of homoeopathic patients
in the West tends to more chronic deep seated disease such as cancer,
diabetes, epilepsy, and less acute malaria, strokes, heart affections.
We don't see so much of the kind of pathology you see because the patient
is more likely to go to a hospital if they have severe acute illness.
We get more neuroses, schizophrenia and deep seated psychological problems
which may be the reason for longer follow-ups.
R
: What about the experience in treating acute pathology, in the West
?
J:
We treat at lot of intermediate pathology, bronchitis, pneumonia, abscess,
stomach problems, ear aches etc, but less serious acute pathology, and
more long term chronic diseases.
R:
How is homeopathic education in England?
J:
It is generally very good, but not ideal. There is a big emphasis on
philosophy and repertory etc. The training is mostly part time and lasts
four years. There are many seminars from international homoeopaths so
continuing postgraduate education is thorough. What we lack in the West
is a full time course in homoeopathy, homoeopathic universities.
R:
What are the possibilities of this happening?
J:
I believe it will happen in the next ten years. I don't know where,
but if people share the vision and more and more people know we need
it, it is a matter of time, getting the money and the legal problems
resolved. More than anywhere homeopathic education is growing in America.
That is where the opportunity might be to set up an university. However
legally America is more
difficult.
R:
Do you think America will have homoeopathic universities ?
J:
I think it is possible. Once the Americans set their mind on something
it usually happens! Their biggest problem is the Government.
R:
But, homoeopathy is not permitted in most of the states in the US...
J:
Yes in most of the states. Many practice quietly without making too
much noise.
R:
Are you teaching actively in the US ?
J:
Yes, I have taught for the last 5 years in California, New York, Seattle,
and now I am beginning a 3 year course in Toronto, Canada this winter.
R:
How do you manage to teach in so many places, so many
countries world over ?
J:
To me, teaching is part of my mission in homoeopathy, I love teaching.
I have lots of energy. I love what I do. I have a 3 year program I teach
in England that meets 7 times a year and covers philosophy and its applications.
And then the seminars I teach around the world.
R:
Do you think that the status of homoeopathy in Britain is better today
than say ten years back?
J:
Many more people know about homoeopathy, until now the government has
not interfered, and people are supportive. In fact what has happened
is that it has grown faster than the number of patients. At the moment
there are lot of homoeopaths, because in 80's there was only one college
in England, and now there are more than twenty, and the number of patients
has not grown to the same degree, so a lot of homoeopaths must struggle
to start a practice. If they can't get through first two years they
may have to quit.
R:
What is the reason for this?
J:
Britain is a country of 60 million people whereas in India the population
is 1.2 billion. Homoeopathy is better known and cheaper in India. It
is a matter of time. More patients will learn about and change to homoeopathy,
and also perhaps homoeopathy becoming state funded.
R:
You have been teaching for ten years now. What is the level of homoeopaths
as compared to ten years back, as far as prescribing skills are concerned?
J:
In many ways, better. One way is knowledge of materia medica.
Ten years ago people were exploring polychrests now they are exploring
small remedies because they know the polychrests well. Now more people
are doing provings and in my opinion that is the best way to learn homoeopathy.
Knowledge of philosophy is better. Many good teachers have taught their
methods, and many good journals are published.
R:
Please tell something about the provings you have done.
J:
Well I have done 12 provings but I have only published three because
of lack of time. When I was going to do a proving of Plutonium, I went
to Norway and I asked if they would like to prove a radioactive substance.
And to my surprise they said yes. Later I asked the same thing in California
and they too agreed. So there is a lot of good will to provings. Eventually
I did other provings in these countries, but they still thought it was
the radioactive remedies. And it was nice to see that they developed
no 'radioactive ' symptoms! People who do provings may think they are
doing homoeopathy a favour, but what they find out is that homoeopathy
has given them a gift because they learn so much about themselves and
about homoeopathy by doing the proving.
But, one should be very careful with provings. Personally I don't do
seminar provings or quick provings ever. A proving requires close supervision.
A seminar proving may give colour to the seminar, but is less beneficial
to homoeopathy, because so many of the symptoms are not recorded or
well documented.
R:
How long do you observe the provers after the remedy ?
J:
The provers are followed up for six months and then again after a year.
I have seen people with effects for 2-3 years.
R:
How frequently are the doses given to the provers?
J:
Six doses for two days is the maximum with instructions to stop after
the symptoms appear, which is usually after 1-3 doses.
R:
Once the prover starts to develop symptoms have you repeated the same
remedy?
J:
No. When he gets the symptoms he takes no more doses. Rule no. 1. Do
not repeat the dose once the symptoms arise. One reason is that you
have the risk of engrafting that remedy on the person, and the second
is, Hahnemann says that the primary and secondary symptoms will intermingle
so the picture will not be as clear. If we give 1-2 doses, we get a
clear chronological picture.
R:
Have you ever tried antidoting the proving symptoms with the
same remedy ?
J:
Usually I don't antidote with the same remedy, usually I antidote with
another remedy if necessary. In every proving I have to antidote one
or two people, and I haven't tried antidoting with the same. Usually
the symptom picture which develops will be an intermingling of the constitution
and the person's remedy and it will be another remedy which is not the
constitution, not the proving, but another remedy, that's most frequently
the case. A Calcarea patient proving Hydrogen may need Phosphorus to
antidote.
R:
Jeremy, you have done so many provings. Which remedy has a symptom of
`desire to do proving'?!
J:
My birth sign is Aries and Aries need to do new things.
It's the first sign in the Zodiac so we need to run ahead, searching
new grounds.
R:
Don't you think we have now too many new provings ? It is time
that all the genuine provings are well-published...
J:
I think it is essential to conduct new provings. But we have very few
well done provings. I listed in my book 180 provings of the last 10
years, most of them unpublished and since I wrote I am sure there are
another 50 this year. The problem is not too many provings, the problem
is poor provings which are of no use, that just clutters up the materia
medica and instead of being helpful they get into the way. But to do
a well rounded proving picture is invaluable. Every week I hear cases
of good results with my new remedies. But the proving is of no use until
it is published and thoroughly repertorized. And too few provings have
been through that process. They are often left sitting in people's cupboards.
So now we need to publish the provings and fit them into the repertory.
We are now forming an international trust which will
publish the new provings. I am a great fan of Allen's Encyclopaedia
and I think that this work needs to be continued.
R:
How often have you used in your own practice the remedies you proved
?
J:
I have had about 10 cases each of Hydrogen and Scorpion. I had one case
of Salmon, one case of Neon, 2-3 Diamond cases. There have been some
cases of Chocolate. It is very gratifying to be able to cure people
with a remedy that you have followed from conception to maturity, and
finally see the remedy curing a patient. Especially in cases where the
patient would not have been curable without the new remedy, or where
another remedy would have been given unsuccessfully. Take a remedy like
Anacardium. Its essence has been expanded artificially, because the
remedy Scorpion didn't exist so Anacardium filled the gaps in materia
medica. Symptoms were taken from patients who were given Anacardium
for whom it was only a close similar, and those clinical additions were
made to the materia medica. Many patients needing Scorpion receive Anacardium.
In a similar way a lot of people give Sepia, when Chocolate is better
indicated.
R:
How do you develop the understanding about the remedy you prove?
J:
I develop them on the basis of dreams, emotions, physical generals.
I use every symptom from toenail to head. By using the whole totality
of symptoms including the modalities I look for the red line that goes
through the picture. You have to learn how to make connections but not
theorize. I don't look for the simple essence of the remedy. I am not
interested in the cherry on the cake. I am interested in the whole cake
and what binds it together. A proving should not be summarized in one
line.
R:
Have you observed that your provers develop delusions and dreams which
can be connected with the rest of the remedy ?
J:
Yes, I have. Dreams are like painting a picture on water. Without doubt
they reflect the inner nature of the remedy, however, their elusive
nature makes an unstable base on which to create a whole remedy picture.
Once the connection of the whole totality has been fathomed, the dreams
create a useful mirror of the inner reality
R:
How do you find the homeopathic students in India?
J:
It's a joy to teach students here, there is a great desire to learn
and respect for knowledge and teachers. This dedication and thirst for
knowledge are a great satisfaction to teachers.
R:
What path would you recommend a student of homeopathy to take?
J:
People should have many teachers, learn from everyone, follow no one.
Ultimately they should listen to themselves.
|