1M: A Homeopath's Podcast

From a practicing homeopath in midcoast, Maine comes 1M: A Homeopath's Podcast. It's a monthly show created by a homeopath, for homeopaths. The first year of episodes each revolve around a different theme, mixing interviews, materia medica, and archival readings. The second year- beginning in 2017 explores all aspects of practice through the lens of failure- how can our mishaps shape our future success? The idea is explored through Interviews, original content and archival readings
RSS Feed Subscribe in Apple Podcasts




All Episodes
Now displaying: Page 1
Apr 28, 2018

Today I’m bringing you an interview I did with Lauren Fox and Holly Manoogian, of Homeopaths Without Borders.

HWB is a volunteer run organization that was founded in 1996.

Their mission-from the website-  is to introduce or advance the understanding and use of homeopathy in areas where it does not yet exist or is minimally available, as well as to promote and provide homeopathic care and healing in emergency situations.


To date they have provided service in Cuba, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Dominican Republic, Trinidad and Haiti.


There is much more to the history and evolution of the organization at their website, You can visit there and read all about the visionary individuals who have been a part of its beginnings and subsequent success.


Please especially check out the information about their clinical curriculum-Essential Curriculum for Learning Homeopathy-  which is available to purchase in English, or French.  It’s a thorough, compact training thats’ making its way around the world, perfect for study groups, homeopathy schools, practitioners wanting to integrate homeopathy, and more. It’s one of the resources used in the first-year program at the Baylight Center for Homeopathy in Portland, ME, where I teach. Again, you can find more information on the website.


I’ve brought to the podcast before representatives from other non-profit homeopathic efforts, like Camilla Sherr and Jane Davy from HHA, and just last month Carla Marcellus from HTSF, working in Honduras. There are many other efforts, most of which are much less well known than these projects, or are quite local to the country of their organizer’s origin.

Homeopathy lends itself so well to taking it abroad and sharing it in areas of need, to people of little means, in geographic areas that can’t support hospitals and such other challenges, that it had me thinking- when were the first such efforts on behalf of homeopathy?


As many of long-time listeners know, I have a strong interest in our history and often bring archival readings to the show.


So for this episode-before I bring in my interview with Holly and Lauren- I wanted to share a bit of what I found in my sleuthing efforts to find the earliest mention possible of homeopaths working outside of their own communities and intentionally bringing homeopathy to an area of need.


When I do these searches, I confine them to my own personal access to old journals in my software. So it is by no means an exhaustive or definitive research effort.




As you can imagine, it’s not easy to find. In the earliest years, mid- late 1800s, homeopathy was truly in its infancy, and though it was gaining support and popularity through epidemics and the like, homeopaths needed to make a living just as we do now, they also faced strong criticism and resistance, and not to mention, travel - I have to assume- was much more costly and difficult than our current ease of booking online, and networks of hostels, airbnb’s, and the other ammenities for the international traveler. Not that our homeopathic volunteers are staying in airbnb’s per se, but I’m sure you catch my drift.


In anycase, many homeopaths were more… advanced, enlightened, complex thinkers—- however you want to consider it- than the allopathic physicians at the time, that I think it was definitely possible and probable that some were seeing the potential of homeopathy to affect parts of the world in need.


So, I looked for references in the oldest journals I have access to. Mostly I went through the table of contents for titles that were suggestive of what I was looking for.


Definitely documentation of efforts in epidemics are very wide spread, though most of these efforts were reported by homeopaths working within their own cities and communities.

I did find an interesting letter coming out of the early days of India, and a series of letters from an anglo homeopath working in an African American community in Virginia, shortly after the Civil War and emancipation. 

Listen to the episode to hear me read Letter from India and especially Holly and Lauren's passion for their work in Haiti! 

Apr 1, 2018


Today's guest is Laurel Chiten, filmmaker of Just One Drop, one of two documentaries about homeopathy that is screening around the globe as I speak.


If you are a long-time listener, or you’ve checked out some back episodes, you may remember that I interviewed Laurel right about this time 2 years ago, before Just One Drop was released, before she even knew when it would be released.


In fact, I believe it premiered in the UK last year during Homeopathy Awareness Week, which is coming right up, April 7th-the 15th.


If you are a homeopath, it is very likely that you are aware of this film and perhaps you have even had the opportunity to see it. But in case you have *not*, Just One Drop was conceived of and created by Laurel Chiten and her amazing crew to tackle the question- has homeopathy been given a fair trial?


The film circles the globe and time, focusing closely in on one family’s experience with homeopathy and their autistic son, Lucas, and then zooming out and uncovering the truth behind the famed ‘Australia Report’ that claimed to put to rest the question of whether homeopathy works or not. Woven beautifully in-between are artistic renderings depicting homeopathy’s beginnings with Hahnemann, and later development in the United States and beyond.

This year, to celebrate Homeopathy Awareness Week and to help spread the film even further than it already has, Just One Drop will be available for live stream, in 3 different time zones- in the UK on Monday, April 9th, in North America on Tuesday, April 10th, and in Australia on Thursday, April 12th. 


You can find all the details about how to watch the film and register for the screening at the just One Drop websitee-

 Laurel shares about their hopes for this unique live stream event, each of which will be followed by a Question and Answer with Laurel herself and esteemed guests, such as Rachel Roberts, CEO of the Homeopathy Research Intitute, Dr. Peter Fisher, homeopath to the Royal Family, Mark Land (President of the American Assoc. of Homeopathic Pharmacists, Dr. Teresa Nicoletti, a Medical Lawyer, and Dr. Alex Tournier, Exec. Director Homeopathy Research Institute.


I had always been planning bring Laurel back on the show to follow up our initial interview after the film’s release, and it’s really cool to complete that circle and have her here today.


I hope you enjoy this interview with Laurel, and do heed her advice and call up your friends and family and host a screening, it’s easy to do, and as well all know, the world needs homeopathy as much as ever.


Enjoy, and be well, and stay observant.

Mar 6, 2018

Today I am pleased to bring you my conversation with Carla Marcelis, of the Montreal Institute of Classical Homeopathy in Canada, about her work in the clinics of Honduras bringing homeopathy to remote areas where the need is great.


Homeopathy as a first line defense, as a first response to crisis and natural disaster, as the best option for bringing a high standard of care to areas of need around the world… these thoughts have been at the forefront of many of my homeopathic musings lately.


I’m someone who has always been drawn to working where the need is great; I did so when I was a teacher, and naturally when i began studying homeopathy I was thrilled to learn that there were organizations like Homeopaths without Borders and HHA, and now, HTSF


This type of work has always called to me, but I think now, more than ever, the call for this work within homeopathy is loud.


In my news feeds and email newsletters, I have received multiple notices lately about various groups and efforts around the world.


Recently here in the US, the North American Society of Homeopaths is hosting 2 webinars hosting outreach work, one with Nikki Redmond co-founder of Homeopaths Supporting Refugees. I have yet to listen to it, but I’m really looking forward to and hearing how she and other homeopaths are working with refugee camps in northern France and other locations.


I do plan to reach out to see if anyone would be willing to come on the podcast to share more about their work.


In April, NASH has scheduled a webinar with Cristina Garelli, and Wanda Smith-Schick about Homeopathy of the Pacific, which supports the veterans and economically marginalized people in the San Francisco Bay area here in the United States.


If you have not had a chance to listen to E027 from January of this year with Ananda More about her film, Magic Pills, check it out. Her film covers projects in Tanzania with HHA and the HP protocols in Cuba as well as the incredible work of the Banerji’s in India.


The rising chorus is about how homeopathy can be of paramount importance in areas of need around the world, but also our ability to respond- safely and effectively- in epidemics and wide spread acutes.


I’ve heard many senior homeopaths remark that the time for homeopathy and epidemics is on the horizon once again- above and beyond what is already being done in Africa, Haiti, Cuba, etc…


I’m joining this chorus and in addition to today’s show, next month i will have Holly Manoogian and Lauren Fox of Homeopath’s Without Borders on to share about their work in Haiti- I am very excited to talk to them. And i have a few other invitations out that I’m awaiting responses to.


I would be beyond grateful if you do enjoy the podcast if you would leave a review on iTunes or wherever you listen to 1M. It helps others find it and decide if they want to take the plunge and listen, and I surely hope that they do.

Finally- I’m putting together a couple shows about studying MM with Frans Vermeulen to be aired in the summer. I have lots of questions for Frans, but I would love to hear what questions and struggles YOU have when you read MM. If you want to study a remedy ‘from scratch’ what bumps to you encounter? what materials are challengings… what makes you give up?


Post on the fB page or you can email me directly at


the idea is for the shows to be instructive, and learning some best practices from Frans, so dont’ be shy.


Ok! That’s all my updates and introducutions for now. Thanks so much for listening and sharing…..and enjoy this conversation this Carla Marcelis of HTSF and the Montreal Institute of Classical Homeopathy.


Here are the websites from Carla:

The funding site-


Even though it is set up as my fundraising, the money all goes to the organisation and is used directly in the projects in Honduras. Trips are not funded out of this.


This is our facebook site, where we also post blogs when we are in Honduras:










Feb 7, 2018

Links for this episode:


I encountered my guest for today, Kim Elia, when I took my first Whole Health Now course with Will Taylor, Acute Prescribing, several years ago.


I remember Kim’s voice and speaking style being so distinctive and memorable, not to mention how he would rattle off Aphorisms of the Organon from memory without missing a beat.


I thought- who IS this guy? And is he for real? Does someone REALLY possess that kind of knowledge and reference and acuity?


The answer is, yes, yes he really does, and he is real because not only did I get to talk to him in person for over an hour in the conversation that I share with you today, but he is also one of the individuals I met at the Homeopathy-One Conference. That is why I am calling this episode ‘everything and more with Kim Elia’ because he IS everything you think he might be and he knows everything you think he might know… AND more.


And though he is as busy as you would expect for a top international homeopathy teacher and CEO of multiple companies as well as a practitioner, he granted my request for an interview, and you are all in for a treat.


I want to do justice to his experience, so I’ll share some highlights from his biographical write up which you can read in full at Whole Heath Now-


Kim has been studying homeopathy since 1987 and is a graduate of NESH with Dr. Paul Herscu where he also had a clinical practice.


He has an extensive background in nutrition, with years of training and seminars under his belt.

He both collaborates with teams on the development of homeopathic software and is a distributor and trainer.


He’s a sought after international teacher and was a principal instructor and developer of a 4 year classical program at the Hahnemann Academy in Tokyo and Osaka Japan, and of course you can access his teaching at home through DVD and online with offerings such as comprehensive MM courses like Spiders, an exhaustive History of Homeopathy course, and focused therapeutics such as Anxiety, Depression and Jealousy and Asthma to name just a few.


  I think its’ safe to say that at *some point* in your homeopathic career, it would behoove you to spend some time with Kim.


Now, before I transition to the interview, I wanted to add a little piece here.


In the last couple months of 2017, I re-listened to many of the early episodes of 1M. It was really fun to go back to those shows and especially the first year when I ws constructing each show around a theme, tying in archival readings and present day interviews and materia medica.


It was a LOT of work to prepare and pull off those multi-dimensional shows, BUT, I loved the depth of them, and the whole part of being multi-dimensional and artistic in making connections.


It’s definitely easier to present just an interview.


I’ve never been one for settling for ‘easy’ though, so I’m going to try a bit of a hybrid.


As the interviews inspire me, I’d like to add on a segment, maybe an archival reading or materia medica of a remedy, but maybe something else entirely. But something that shoots off of the conversation and adds that extra depth and dimension.




in my interview with Kim, right up toward the top, you’ll hear Kim say that he doesn’t ‘treat’ patients.


It kind of threw me, but I wasn’t quick enough to ask why and pursue it more. We just went on in the conversation.


I kept thinking about it though, and long after the interview ended, I wondered- why doesn’t Kim say that he ‘treat’s his patients or clients?


I let it go and then I stumbled upon something.


I was inspired after my conversation with Kim to start reading the Organon again. I took out my copy translated by Steven Decker and edited by Wenda Brewster O’Reilly, and started from the very *very* beginning- reading the introduction. And there, I think, I may have stumbled upon why Kim does not use the word ‘treat’ in relation to his homeopathy work. Or at least, I stumbled upon a discussion of some terms that shed some light on the possibility.


Wenda writes:


“another frequently encountered problem in moving from on language to another is that different languages carry different ways of looking at something, conceptuallly dividing things into smaller or larger units. Where one language may use several words , another may only use on.


For example, English has the terms ‘curing’ and ‘healing’ which originally had different meanings.


‘Cure’ referred to medical intervention while ‘healing’ referred to the human organisms’ own efforts to recover from disease or injury.


German, however, has only one term ‘heil’ that covers both healing and cure, which can refer to anything that is remedial or therapeutic. Any such differences between Hahnemann’s original terminology and the translation are presented in the Glossary.’


So- that was interesting. A cure is instigated by a medical intervention. Healing is what the human beings’ own body does, I imagine be it from the immune system or the vital force. and seeing as how homeopathy stimulates the vital force, perhaps the use of remedies is not instrumental in a cure- which implies medical intervention- but only in healing.


This still didn’t shed light on the use of the word ‘treat’ and so per her suggestion, I headed to the Glossary.


In the back of Brewster O’Reilly’s edition, Treatment is defined as such:

‘Cur’, from Latin - Cura- medical treatment. ‘Behandlung’ _german, handling or management 1) The act, caner or method of handing or dealing with someone or something. 2) Administration or application of medicines or other means to a patient or for a disease or injury; medical management. Both Cur and and Behandlung are translated as ‘treatment’.


So again, a medical management, and specifically, the application or administration of medicine.


‘Cure’ is attached to ‘Heal’ and defined as such:

‘To restore health through curative means or through the natural process of healing. To make whole again. In this translation, ‘to cure’ refers to the restoration of health brought through the use of medicines or the treatments, while ‘to heal’ refers to the body’s own processes in recovering from an injury.


Throughout the text of the Organon, Hahnemann distinguishes, in various ways, between healing and curing, however the German language has only one word- heilen, which encompasses both meanings. General references to both healing and care are translated with the words ‘medica’ and ‘therapeutic’



So, maybe Kim is preferring *not* to use the word ‘treat’ because it implies application of a medicine for curative purproses, where as remedies stimulate the vital force to heal- it isn’t the medicine at all


Or maybe Kim is just covering his bases from a legal perspective, as treating implies practicing medicine which we are not licensed to do in this country.


I’ll have to email Kim and ask him to tell me, now that I’ve had the chance to go down my own rabbit hole, which is more fun and results in more learning for myself anyway! I’ve never thought about the differences in those words- heal and cure- before, in quite this way. I used them interchangeably, but now I can appreciate the difference.




Enjoy my chat with Kim Elia, and I'll see you again next month! 









Jan 15, 2018

I crossed paths Ananda at the Homeopathy-One Conference, and being the blatant opportunist I have become around my podcast, wasted no time in introducing myself and asking her if she would come on the podcast to talk about her film and experience creating it.


Being the gracious, and now *necessarily* opportunist she must be in promoting her film, she agreed.


In addition to now being a filmmaker, Ananda is a homeopath and CEASE practitioner, as well as a doula and reiki master, a business owner as co-owner of Riverdale Homeopathy in Toronto, as well as a mother.


Magic Pills was an 8 year journey in the making, and you will hear all about that in our interview. She traveled from Toronto to Cuba, India and Tanzania to document some of the biggest and most impressive large-scale efforts in homeopathy, covering homeoprophylaxis, the Banerji clinics, and Homeopathy for Health in Africa. Her travels took her to many other places as well, many that didn't make the film, but are slated for other projects. 

After the ‘official’ questions were wrapped up, we kept on chatting and I let the recording go and included some of that casual conversation here because it all felt so relevant to where we are in homeopathy, today.


The film is available for community screenings and you can see the trailer and find out more about how to bring the film to your area by visiting



Dec 31, 2017

Year in Review Mash-UP with Case Inventory Part 2:

Five Ways to Learn from Your Results

(this is a lightly edited version of the podcast transcript) 


It IS the time of year for reflection, review, and resolution, is it not?


Perhaps you engage in your own personal reflection this time of year, maybe guided by a spiritual practice or desire for change, new habits, you know.. the standard lines of resolution.


Why not bring your homeopathic Practice- with a capital P- into consideration?


To start, let’s dig a bit deeper into the word ‘Resolution’


late Middle English: from Latin resolutio(n-), from resolvere ‘loosen, release’


I love that idea- to loosen, or release in the origin of the word, because the first definition of  resolution according to Webster is:


1) a firm decision to do or not to do something:


2) the action of solving a problem, dispute, or contentious matter


3) the process of reducing or separating something into its components




the smallest interval measurable by a scientific (especially optical) instrument; the resolving power.

  • the degree of detail visible in a photographic or television image.


We can only consider what we can see clearly, and we can only respond to the degree that we understand the totality. Hahnemann says this in the Organon- that we can only take those symptoms which the patient can describe or that we can observe- without prejudice.


Likewise, the extent to which we breakdown a problem will often determine how well we see the full picture, and our potential for success.



So too must we as homeopaths figure out what are our elements of practice: materia medica, philosophy, analysis, repertorization… and work on these faithfully not only when we’re being paid to do so, but because only by paying attention to these separate components of homeopathy- the small intervals of the whole- can we reap the reward of an improved practice overall.




So how do we pull this all together into something usable?

I’ve pulled together five different approaches to case inventory and review, each of which would enable you to highlight an aspect of homeopathic practice that you can ‘resolve’ to study for improvement, should you choose to do so.


They are:


  1. Karen Allen’s approach
  2. Serendipitous Colleague Approach
  3. The Circle of Consultation
  4.  The Organon
  5. Revive Old Cases


#1: Karen Allen’s Approach


Karen Allen is a well known and respected American homeopath. She practices out of San Francisco, has served as a board member and past president for the Council for Homeopathic Certification, and the Education Director for Homeopaths Without Borders. She has taught and lectured extensively in the US and abroad,  and offers multiple long-distance education opportunities for homeopaths online via her site


Karen said:

what i find is that I can always get better at what I do. I haven’t yet had a month were 100% of my clients had a fabulous outcome. And as long as there are clients who are not getting better, or not getting very much better, or whose healing has stalled, I have things to learn.


But Karen doesn’t stop at platitudes and philosophy. She takes her commitment to improvement to action and describes what she does this way:


I get a piece of paper and go through every case I have touched in the last 3 or 4 months.

On paper, i draw 3 columns.

In the first column go cases with no success- I note the chief complaint and remedy given.

Second column- cases with some result- relief, palliation, in the process of getting better.

Third column- cases where I think this person will NOT go back to their former level of ill health.


Then, I see what percentage of cases ended up in each column.


The first time I did this, my column one-  no success- consisted of 50% of my cases.

Honestly, out of that first audit, my surprise was that it was even that good. Because my sense was that I was failing for 90% of the people coming to se me. And it wasn’t true.

And I believe most practitioners who have never audited their practice feel they are failing because they forgot about those people who are doing great.

They only remember the person having an aggravation of symptoms and th person who didn’t have a good outcome.


over time, my outcomes have gotten better.

For the last tend years on average, 15-20% are in C1 (no success)

30-35% are in C2 (some result)

35-45% in C3 (won’t relapse)


I feel good about those statistics. When 70-80% of the people who come to see me are benefitted, I feel that I can hold my head high.



#2 Serendipitous Colleague Approach


This fall I inherited a case from another homeopath. The patient had moved across the country, and the sending practitioner graciously forwarded all of her notes and case files.


So envision and excel spreadsheet. In the horizontal row is the date, type of visit,  then single word descriptor of complaint 1, 2, and 3 for that consultation. For example: anxiety, cough, insomnia.


It occurred to me that whether this was a unique document created by the homeopath, or an export of records that one keeps in their software just as standard record keeping, you can *use* it as way of evaluating and auditing by simply looking at it in a different way.


Is the pathology getting less serious and limiting over the time span of using remedies?


Is there evidence of Direction of Cure- inside out, important to less important organs, top to bottom?


Is the person improving to the extent that your consultations are less frequent?


Are they getting acutes- fevers- where they did not before, indicating a higher level of health?


Are the chronic exacerbations that the patient experiences as acute flare-ups, less frequent?


#3 Circle of Consultation


I mentioned earlier a graphic that I created called the Circle of Consultation.


I’m proposing this as the 3rd framework for case inventory and audit.


For the patient-

the case: acute, chronic, suppressed, miasmatic, iatrogenic…

what kind of case is it?

this is a point I consider when starting any case as a way to get my bearings, but it’s a thing to look at again if the case is not progressing well.


This might be helpful if the the patient undergoes surgery in the course of working with you, or there’s a trauma.

The other patient quadrant includes obstacles to cure, commitment to homeopathy, finances, concurrent treatments, etc.


So the patient quadrant asks us to consider the type of case the patient comes to us with, and then the smaller gears that that case is functioning around.


The practitioner side is split between management, and prescribing.


Management includes patient education, follow up, case management with applied philosophy, and practice procedures.


The Prescribing quadrant includes: case taking, analysis, synthesis, repertory skills, materia medica knowledge


No doubt there are many more concepts that can be- and will be- added to each of these quadrants.



I welcome your comments on the graphic, as I continue to consider it as a tool, to improve, for improvement.


Check it out here: 

Circle of Consultation


#4 The Organon

One of my interviews for 2018 is with Kim Elia. If you know who Kim Elia is, then you’ll expect that we talked a lot about The Organon. Kim is an incredible keeper of homeopathic history and has detailed, exquisite recall and understanding of The Organon, in all its editions and translations.


We touched briefly on integrating The Organon into teaching, and Kim shared that he brings in aphorisms through presenting a case, so that he can illustrate Hahnemann’s directives through actual cases, making the aphorisms applicable and relevant.



Auditing a case by using the Organon is simple.


Select a case with multiple follow ups.

Review your decisions at each turn.

Compare what you did to what Hahnemann directed.


Did you follow Hahnemann’s directions?

Did you deviate?


What was the outcome?

What would Hahnemann have done?

What might the outcome have been?


You can take this as far as you want. To do so, you will have to have a working knowledge of which aphorisms apply directly to practice, and to which aspects of practice. If you don’t know, then that in itself will serve as a pretty beneficial action.

A good resource is Manish Bhatia’s Lectures on the Organon, available through There are currently 2 volumes available, with excellent cohesive lectures for each aphorism. If you don't already know  Wenda O’Reilly’s version of the Organon, it has helpful margin notes that give the main idea for each aphorism, which makes it a helpful desktop resource to help you find the section you need without having to carefully re-read each aphorism in full, until you find what you’re looking for.


I expect to present my interview with Kim Elia in March’s episode, so be sure to catch that, because we go into more depth about how to get more out of the Organon.


#5 Finally… Just re-do an old Case


At a recent meeting of my state’s Association of Homeopaths, we were talking about this topic of going over old cases. Another homeopath shared that she will frequently pull an old case and do it again. With a few years distance, she will see the case differently, repertorize with greater skill, consider different approaches.


You can consider:


a new approach that you aren’t quite ready to use with cases in progress…

a new approach that you  *are* using with newer cases


take more time for remedy differential

consider families or groups related to the remedy originally prescribed


consider the miasmatic indications if you didn’t look at that the first time around


search for published cases using a remedy that prescribed- contrast those where your case was *also* successful with that remedy, and cases where it was not. There will be equally useful information about the remedy- and your patient- either way.


Try different repertories, or consulting different MM than you did the first time around.


Each of the approaches I’ve suggested chart a course for different waters. They can be specific, conceptual, philosophical, or a combination of the three.

Play around with all of them, see what suits you and your needs at this time, and most importantly, what you get results from.


Like any new approach, don’t take my suggestion as valuable just because I’m taking the time to write and record this :) Try the suggestions, change them, challenge them.


I myself will be putting each of these methods to the test. And I think it will be hard- to take the time, to be consistent, to follow through. But I think some assessment is better than no assessment. Once a month, once a year, twice a year….just try it. And see if you can circle up with a few colleagues to share your results and experiences with- and let me know  how it goes.


So that wraps up the final podcast for 2017>>>


I am SO grateful to all of you, my listeners, and all of my guests who graciously say ‘yes’ when I email them out of the blue. They often have no idea what this podcast thing is, but they love homeopathy, and they love to talk about their work, and so they do. I know we all benefit from it, and so in turn does the rest of the world.


So until 2018, take care, be well, and stay observant.




Nov 29, 2017

The Homeopathy One Conference in Bruges, Belgium, October 13-15 was a bold experiment, envisioned and created by Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens and their Homeopathy-One team. 

Join me as I share the sounds of Bruges and my experience at the conference:

-interviews with participating homeopaths who traveled from America, the UK, India, and more

-key take-aways from presentations by master homeopaths Frederick Schroyens, Massimo Mangialavore, Jeremy Sherr, Marcelo Candegabe, Michal Yakir, Jan Scholten, Jonathan Hardy, and Rajan Sankaran. 

- what happens when the above masters all hear and analyze the same case... with surprising results. 

Two hundred and eighty people attended the conference... let's share it with thousands! 

This episode covers Day Three. Be sure to check out the previous episode, covering Days One and Two, as they set the stage. This final installment covers Day Three, the live case. Listen to excerpts of each homeopath's unique approach and perspective.  Plus a review ofthe pre-conference interview with Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens back in April.


Nov 20, 2017

The Homeopathy One Conference in Bruges, Belgium, October 13-15 was a bold experiment, envisioned and created by Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens and their Homeopathy-One team. 

Join me as I share the sounds of Bruges and my experience at the conference:

-interviews with participating homeopaths who traveled from America, the UK, India, and more

-key take-aways from presentations by master homeopaths Frederick Schroyens, Massimo Mangialavore, Jeremy Sherr, Marcelo Candegabe, Michal Yakir, Jan Scholten, Jonathan Hardy, and Rajan Sankaran. 

- what happens when the above masters all hear and analyze the same case... with surprising results. 

Two hundred and eighty people attended the conference... let's share it with thousands! 

This episode covers Day Two. Be sure to check out the previous episode, covering Day One as it sets the stage. The final installment will cover day Three, the live case plus reviewing the pre-conference interview with Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens back in April.

Nov 13, 2017

The Homeopathy One Conference in Bruges, Belgium, October 13-15 was a bold experiment, envisioned and created by Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens and their Homeopathy-One team. 

Join me as I share the sounds of Bruges and my experience at the conference:

-interviews with participating homeopaths who traveled from America, the UK, India, and more

-key take-aways from presentations by master homeopaths Frederick Schroyens, Massimo Mangialavore, Jeremy Sherr, Marcelo Candegabe, Michal Yakir, Jan Scholten, Jonathan Hardy, and Rajan Sankaran. 

- what happens when the above masters all hear and analyze the same case... with surprising results. 

Two hundred and eighty people attended the conference... let's share it with thousands! 

This episode covers Day One, upcoming episodes will cover Day Two, and Day Three. Listen to them all, share, and consider attending next time! 

Oct 28, 2017

Hello- welcome to 1M: A Homeopath’s Podcast.  I’m Kelly Callahan and this is Episode 25, Repertory with Roger: A case of Hitting the Wall


Roger Van Zandvoort and I have connected several times over the course of the year to talk repertory strategies in the form of a tutoring session for me, utilizing cases from his Clinical Case Project. They have been invaluable sessions, even though the cases are over 1/2 a century old, best practices for repertorization don’t change.


What has changed to some extent are our cases between now and then- what we talk about with patients, the issues they come to us with, and to some extent the types of complaints and treatment they have already had.


I asked Roger if he would be up for doing one of our sessions with a case from my own practice, so we could put the techniques he has to share to a modern case, and see what - if any- different issues arose and pointers that may be unique to a case of the 21st century. 


The case I’m going to share is a new one to me- I wanted a case that was still in development, because it felt like that would allow for the most fresh and authentic conversation- I can’t say whether we are right or not- at least, not at the time of the call. As of this recording, I do have some preliminary results from the patient that I will share at the end of the episode.

The case is of a gentleman in his 60s, suffering from chronic headaches since his early teen years. The headaches are worse in the autumn with cold nights and warm days, come on in the wee hours of the morning, and ameliorate with motion and being upright, in addition to caffeine. The history included a move between extreme climates, and a distinct memory of getting a first headache with a blast of cold air conditioning.


I chose this case was because


  1. the modalities were so distinct and the physical complaint very clear. In this way, I felt it was like the cases from the Clinical Case Project, because of that clarity.
  2. Although I saw patterns in the case- between the client’s M/E state and his chief physical complaint, I didn't see them as essential to finding a remedy… though in the end, the wholeness of the patient in this respect was clear to me.


So this was one point of our conversation- the extent to which character factors into case analysis and remedy choice.


This is a perennial question in homeopathy, I think, and it’s asked in different ways with different words, like personality, or trying to drill down exactly what constitutes constitution. I think it’s also one of the main points of contention between homeopaths- what do we prescribe on? what can we include, what must we leave out? what constitutes the totality? what bigger analogies to we consider or not? There are some very strong opinions on this matter, with impressive references and arguments.


Roger has his ideas- he says them here and he’s said them before. For myself, the question of whether character matters in a case has come to depend on the case.  There are many pieces to consider when analyzing a case and choosing a remedy, and sometimes character- or disposition if you like- is as part of that. And sometimes it’s not. 


I do think it’s an important and interesting realm of our practice to explore, however, especially because we see positive results in a range of approaches, so I don’t think that circle has been squared yet. Consider keynote prescribing- which is not always a bullseye, but can be incredibly effective in certain cases. With single sx. prescribing, character and disposition are not an aspect. And of course, it’s not just character or no character. Analysis is much more complex than that.


But anyway, I did think about this when choosing to present this case because it felt like a case where that aspect was flexible and it truly could be looked at in multiple ways.


Another point that came up for me in working this case myself and in discussing it with Roger is knowing which rubric to choose when there are multiple that fit the symptom, but you aren’t quite sure which one is the best- do you take the biggest, most inclusive and generalized?


I know this comes up again over and over in nearly every case that we discuss together, and I think that speaks to the fact that while the ‘guidelines’ if you will, are clear, each case presents a completely different opportunity to apply them, and I always feel at the need for clarification.


What if there are 5 rubrics that all say essentially the same thing in different order- take them all and combine? is there really one that is better than the others as the most characteristic?


Roger used a Christmas Tree analogy- or really, any fir tree i guess- and listen out for that because it’s a nice visual to think about.


He assured me that overlap in the rubrics and remedies is OK


We debated whether actions that *prevent* a condition from occurring are the same as amelioration? We did’t come to a consensus on that


We geek out there for a nice little bit on rubrics for amelioration standing or sitting… that was fun. i was happy to have found a couple of good ones that Roger hadn’t found- yay me! But also, this was something that was harder for me to do on the clinical project cases because i didn’t have the same grasp of the cases as i do for one of my own.


And then we talk about the ideal number of rubrics- it’s kind of like hunting down the origins of some myth or legend for me…. there is definitely a strong message that less is more that i have picked up along the way…but here’s Roger telling me the opposite and soothing my frantic mind when i’m choosing rubrics and the little voice is saying in my head- stop! you have too many! you’re being redundant!!


We also touch on using time rubrics, which i’m always hesitant to use because i often feel like i cant’ find the hour breakdown that i want, and i wonder if they are too specific anyway, to choose a rubric of a 3 hour time block.


In the end despite the revisions we did to our lists in talking to each other, we came up with different repertorizations. The remedy I picked came up in a higher place than Roger’s.


I share the remedy I prescribed at the end, and I have some follow up information to share before I close the episode-



The first three weeks on the remedy were very promising, with an aggravation of headaches and emotions in the first week, but a simultaneous relaxing of back pain- which did not come up in the rep. call nor was it something i considered other than the cervical tension- to the point that the patient found he did not need to do his standard morning stretches.


After the first week, there was a huge breakthrough in an emotional issue that he had not been able to move through, and then the headaches began to ameliorate. No headaches when he expected them and a couple that moved on without the usual interventions, which almost never happens.


This last week there was an issue that seemed to antidote the progress and set the whole improvement a step back. By repeating a lower potency- 30c- at regular intervals, he saw some quick relief and felt the positive shift again. 


At this point, I can see that the remedy choice is only one part of this healing, managing the case well is going to be paramount, figuring out the potency and dosing, but also the patient is used to self medicating in various ways and so those measures will be potential obstacles to cure to contend with.


If you haven’t listened to episode E019 Taking a Case Inventory, you might listen to that. This case made me think about the Circle of Practice that I created, where I take into consideration both aspects of the patient- what’s happening in their life, their understanding of homeopathy, etc. against the realm of myself as the prescriber- ability to manage the case appropriately, and using that whole picture as reference. This is a case where I can really feel like my px. might be very good, but the patient needs some specific guidance, or I could lose him.



This is the last Rep with Roger episode for the year. Roger is happy and willing to remain a returning guest on the podcast for 2018, which I am so happy about. Ii’m thinking about changing it up a bit- the cases are great, but there are other aspects to get at the repertory, so if you have any questions or particular aspects that you struggle with ,i would LOVe to hear about them so we can plan some shows accordingly.



Next month I’ll be presenting my multi-part series on the Homeopathy One conference, which i am still processing and allowing to settle, so i’m looking forward to creating those pieces for you all. It was a really good time, I had the chance to reunite with some great friends, meet a loyal listener- Hi Irma!!- and of course revel in some high level homeopathy with some masters who I may never see again. all in all, it was a huge treat to spend the week in Bruges.


Not to mention the fact that I connected with several people who I am really excited to bring on the podcast next year- 2018 has been taking shape in my mind and dreams and if YOU have any requests for guests and topics, now is the the time to share them as I begin to pencil in the calendar. Shoot me an email at OR message me on the Facebook page.


Thanks and until next time- stay well and be observant!


Oct 10, 2017

There are a lot great homeopaths who have contributed greatly to our Materia Medica in a variety of ways, but when I realized that I wanted to start bringing more MM into the podcast- I thought about calling the person who wrote the book I reach for the most- Frans Vermeulen, the creator and author of Prisma….


Frans graciously agreed to talk with me, shortly after he and his wife Dr. Linda Johnston, moved to Texas.


Now, before I make some short remarks about our conversation, I want to make sure we’re all on the same page about who Frans Vermeulen is, and what he has contributed to our Materia Medica. I’ll save the biographical details for him, as he shares them in our conversation.


Publication wise, he has published


Prisma- as I mentioned- and the

The Concordant Reference, first and expanded Second Edition


I’d like to share a review by Will Taylor, commenting on these two references:


Franz Vermeulen's Prisma is - first of all - a beautiful book. Care in creation is what we've all come to expect from a work of Vermeulen's, and this offering merely brings that expectation to a new level. While the author's Concordant Materia Medica has become the gold-standard of a luggable reference to our medicinary - fodder for the 'left brain' of our art - Prisma strikes off in a new direction, as a resource for the right-brained appreciation of our materia medica. It is often far too easy for us to regard our remedies as little white pellets with unpronounceable names and incomprehensible lists of symptoms. Vermeulen counters this loss with detailed descriptions of the substance in the natural world, folding in generous volumes of insight from anthroposophy, folklore, mythology, toxicology and eclectic use.

While the Concordant is the hands-down winner for succinct comprehensiveness in describing the symptomatology of our remedies, Prisma turns to the task of bringing the most essential of these symptoms to life. In the Main Symptoms sections, carefully-selected narratives from the provings, cases or classical teachers expand the meaning of individual symptoms. One can begin to imagine that Ernest Farrington, Constantine Hering or Margaret Tyler were reading over your shoulder and expanding on each point. Vermeulen's Concordant is one of the few books of which I own 2 copies -one at the office, one at home so as never to be without it. Prisma, I am certain, will join that honor.

Will Taylor, MD


The Synoptic Reference 1 published in 2012

covers 500 remedies including polycrest and rare, new and small remedies.

Synoptic Reference 2, published in 2015

240 Plants

172 Animals

88 Minerals

49 Organic compounds, chemicals and drugs

30 Nosodes, sarcodes and biochemicals

16 Fungi

11 Imponderables


208 Traditional and 398 New Remedies


Materia Medica based on 732 Provings from 29 countries


Monera Kingdom- Bacteria and Viruses- Spectrum MM Vol. 1

History of bacteria, viruses & diseases

· classification & relationships

· Scientific data

· Provings old, new & redone


Kingdom Fungi- Spectrum MM Vol. 2

write up:

Vermeulen’s library of books about fungi expanded from one single book to 80 during the course of his research. As the homeopathic materia medica of fungi is far from complete, most of the information is synthesized from other sources. In the past, the fungi have been grouped into the Kingdom Plantae, and sometimes as ‘excrescences of the earth!’ Now, however, particularly with the means of DNA testing, it is important that these organisms, and also the fungus-like moulds and yeasts, take their place in their own Kingdom. We must desist from making any comparison between the plants and fungi.


Fungi, the second book in the Spectrum Materia Medica series, continues the fastidious research and production standards that we expect of Emryss Publishers. As well as being a valuable materia medica, it also makes fascinating reading.


Synoptic MM 2, of 348 small remedies


and - not last, and certainly not least-


PLANTS_ a 4 Volume set, co-authored with Linda Johnston

This major work details over 2000 individual plant remedies classified in 150 botanic families. Drawing on a wealth of information from provings, clinical observations, herbal uses, folk lore, mythology, botany, personal accounts, toxicology and other sources, the authors weave an in-depth, coherent picture of each botanic family and its members. Each family’s themes and organ system affinities are discussed, supported by the plants’ chemical composition, physiological and pharmacological effects. In addition, for each plant remedy, Plants, lists the number of rubrics in modern repertories, as well as phytochemical composition, official and common names, botanical descriptions and distribution.


Combining the clarity and detail for which Frans' work is renowned with Linda's years of clinical experience promises to deliver a definitive text on plant remedies.



plus articles, DVDs, and probably much more *not to mention* what sounds like a couple of his biggest projects to date that are still in the works, that he shared with me before we wrapped up.


And you’ll hear that we tried to wrap up the call at least 3 times, but it was hard to stop talking! I felt like I had *barely* scratched the surface of my curiosity and questions for an individual who has been immersed and dedicated to our MM for over 25 years on top of 20 years of clinical practice.


—— You also might note that we actually don’t talk that much about materia medica, in terms of remedies. Frans asked me to send him a list of questions or topics in advance, which I was happy to do, though in truth we did not stick to them past the standard first question- how did you find homeopathy? When I talk with guests for the podcast, I want to connect and understand the person and follow whatever interesting thread happens to come up.


Through this conversation with Frans, we get that glimpse of how rich the history of our MM is, both from a specimen standpoint, but also in terms of its lineage and the tentacles that reach out and connect to other disciplines.

These are the tidbits of our heritage which I find to be so fascinating, and often only to be found by connecting with those who have dedicated years of their lives to the study.

Frans has offered us the fruits of his labor through his incredible library, and I’m so grateful that he joined me to share what often cannot be found in books.


But enough of my rambling…


before I switch to the interview


I also want to give you a quick heads up that

You will also hear some distracting back-ground noise on my end about 30 min. into the call…


I conduct these interviews in a small separate office we have at our home, and it dawned on me during our call that I had left the oven on before I headed out to take the call.


Frans and I were on the phone, rather than Skype, and so I continued the call while I took the short walk back into my home to turn off the oven, which was making a jolly little song, and I think my dog was barking.


So- I apologize for that distraction- otherwise the call was uninterrupted and the quality was great.



Sep 24, 2017


Hi Folks!


Repertory with Roger is back, with case #311 from his Clinical Case Comparison Project.


I open the episode with a snippet of the conversation with Roger where he responds to  my comment that there seems to be a bit of magic in this whole process.


Doesn’t homeopathy reek of magic? Especially when you see a Master at work. Like becoming musician or a martial artist, there are years that go into learning fundamentals before you begin to click into another gear and all of your fundamentals fuel a kind of intuitive ease and knowing that you simply cannot access without having put in that time.


The case we’re going to go over is:

Homoeopathic Recorder 1939, vol. 9., p. 32. Julia M. Green: Cases helped by unusual remedies


A slender, graceful woman of 35 years, unmarried, skin soft and smooth, has extremely poor inheritance. She seems to have both venereal miasms and psora mixed; never strong, always ailing. Some of the marked, recurrent symptoms: Swelling of eyelids, upper and lower. Itching edges of lids. Injection of conjunctivae. Aching eyeballs with photophobia, sensation of cold air blowing in them. Skin so dry must grease it; on face as if thick and tightly drawn. Throat: pulsations. Itching all over after shower bath. Spells of great nervousness in the night, as if she would lose her mind, shrieking, tossing arms about, could not control them, sensation as if she would fly to pieces. Back, upper dorsal: sensation of great weakness; aching, must support it with hands when sitting and in bed. Full of mucus; some in eyes, much in throat, stomach; leucorrhoea profuse. Hungry all the time but abdomen distended easily after eating. Swelling ankles, hands, as well as eyes and face. Taste bad; breath offensive.


xxxxx, given on symptoms of face and the hysterical symptoms at night, created a marked general improvement.



As always, I like to share some of the key take-aways for me that you can listen for throughout the conversation.


The first point springs off of a common point that comes up in these repertory conversations, the difference between using clinical vs. descriptive rubrics.


In this case, it was more knowing the *meaning* between what the rubric is saying and what is true to your case. It can be easy to go to the clinical rubric, but it may not be accurate to your patient.


We talked about my use of a rubric for ‘chorea’ vs. what Roger chose, ‘involuntary action.’






It’s about the importance of knowing the meaning of the words and the correct application to the case and patient.


One way to ensure this is to stay true to the descriptive approach, and away from clinical rubrics.


Another example is the use of a rubric to address the descriptor ‘drawn’ as applied to the skin …


This was again about details. I used a ‘Face- drawn’ rubric, but in fact, that ‘drawn’ aspect of the patient was in the skin.


Clarify exactly what part of the body, what aspect is being described.


We also touched on rubric size. With really small rubrics, Roger reminded us to think about how specific they really are, and think about how specific they are to the case. Match specificity… we must use rubrics with similar care and intention to those aspects we are pulling out of the case.


There’s another level of knowledge, use and understanding of the repertory beyond the ‘rules’ of using the repertory, which I referred to as a kind of magic :)


Roger says even before we get to the repertory and rules of the reperotry, there is what is going on in the case? - Which has nothing to do with the Repertory.


Knowledge- intuition- practical experience all play off each other.


Knowing what is happening in a case is our approach to analysis, and the kind of cases I’ve been doing with Roger are quite straightforward. We’re not talking about any kind of specialized analysis approach like periodic table, a sensation etc.


With these older cases, the write ups lack the kind of detailed mental / emotional, and life situation story that we are used to hearing. It may feel like- what are we basing the analysis on?


Part of what draws me to doing these cases is that they are ‘stripped down’ in a sense

though they provide enough information to work up the case.


If we are to be effective homeopaths, we must be able to shift and hone in on what’s essential in a variety of different cases, regardless of how they are presented. Provided they aren’t one-sided cases, the essential skills that we have to develop are the ability to pull out relevant information, and also discern a totality with that information.


These cases are hard for me- I’ll put that right out there. I’m used to the cases that I take, the types of cases that I take, and the abundance of information I use to analyze and figure out the totality.


I also dont’ rely only on the repertory to choose a remedy. I repertorize all my cases, usually a few different ways. The repertory provides a springboard, from which I consult MM; I might see a plant that leads me to look at others in the family… I might consult the periodic table in a more systemic way.


None of this is easily done with these cases… they lend themselves toward straight up repertorization only, and *knowing* that is a completely viable and reliable way to find remedies- big small and/or rare- is what brings me back to these exercises, to hone my own skills and continually push the edges of what i know and am capable of as a homeopath at this point.


Our connection was disrupted for a bit towards the end and we had to end and reconnect the call. When Roger returned, I asked him to read out the rubrics he chose for the case-


In another point, Roger suggested that herbs that have been used for medicinal purposes should always be considered for provings, rather than the ‘interesting’ ones that people tend to want to do


This opinion also expressed by Frans Vermeulen, who we’ll hear from next month-  and it was interesting to hear that opinion in both of these contexts.


I always recommend taking the time to try and work up the case yourself and see how you did. You can find a screenshot of Roger’s repertorization at this link to his Facebook page:




As I’ve said, next month I’ll be back with my interview with Frans Vermeulen- very excited to bring that to you all.


If you have a few moments, I’d love it if you took a moment to write a review for the podcast on iTunes, to help others find the podcast and decide if it’s something worth listening to.


As always, thanks for listening and sharing with your friends. Until next time, be well and stay observant!!


Sep 11, 2017

Hey everyone!

It’s great to be back, recording a new episode of 1M: a Homeopath’s Podcast.

It was great to have a reprieve from the monthly episodes- summer was full of great stuff both homeopathy oriented and just life here in Maine ,which is just about perfect this time of year.

Some fun serendipity is that we adopted a new puppy into our family and we actually went out to Chicago to pick her up. We went in June, just after I launched the summer bookclub reading Kent’s Lectures, and there we were in Chicago, which is Kent country….

And my summer was filled with Kent! About 25 homeopaths, students, and even a couple of parents who are super dedicated to using homeopathy in their families, read together and discussed Kent’s Lectures within a private Facebook group, and then a handful of us connected online every couple weeks to talk in person and have a more traditional discussion.


For some of us it was reading Kent for the first time, for others of us, it was a first time reading cover to cover, for others, it was a refresher. This made for a great mix of questions and discussion. Being summer, it was a busy time and folks dipped in and out and kept up as their lives allowed.


For me, being the facilitator, I had to keep up! Though the chapters in Kent were not long, it was a brisk pace reading 4-5 chapters per week. I think Kent’s Lectures benefits from a bit more time to digest. Even a couple weeks now after the final chapters of reading, I’m ruminating on all that absorbed in this reading of the book, cover to cover. Lucky for me, our year at the Baylight Center for Homeopathy, where I teach student clinic and philosophy, started up last weekend and so there was ample opportunity to reference Kent in student questions and reviewing our cases from last year.


SO- as a way to launch back into the monthly podcasts and create some continuity from my summer I thought I would pull out some of my Essential Insights from Kent’s Lectures on Philosophy—- as today’s podcast theme.


Maybe it will inspire you to re-read Kent, and it is a little gift to those in the bookclub - kind of a round up of the substantial points of discussion we had both within the Facebook group and in the webinar.


I haven’t forgotten about the yearly theme of ‘learning through failure,’ however and in many ways, Kent was an inspiration for that lens. I may have shared this quote already, but here is a classic Kentian thought that inspires my work:


“A physician advanced in years looks back upon many failures. The faithful homeopath recalls a man, a woman, a child and realizes that these - among his past failures- would now be simple cases. Prescribing the homeopathic remedy is such a process of growth and progress that it may be said that the best of the wine is saved for the last of the feast.’


ah- such a beautiful and true sentiment.


And of course, that process of growth and progress is not a passive one. And it’s not obvious and straight forward either. It’s not uniform and prescriptive for every homeopath. We each have our own process of growth and will progress at different rates and along different paths in our march to fulfill that one true mission of restoring the sick to health.


For me, really understanding homeopathic philosophy underpins all that I do. Without the philosophy, I believe we are simply energetic pharmacists.


And so- I wish you had been there, a part of our Homeopath’s Book Club, though I’m grateful to share with you the fruits of our discussion and hope it inspires you to track down your own copy to re-discover some insights of your own-

  1. Priors and Results, Primary and Ultimates


The concept of what is prior to a result, or what is primary and leading to ultimates is a theme that emerges again and again throughout the book.


One of the biggest learnings for me in reading Kent cover to cover this time- and I think can be missed if you only occasionally pick it up to read a chapter here and there, or to consult for a particular question- is that you miss the repetition of particular words and ideas and how  he embeds them throughout the book in different lectures.


For example, the idea of something that is ‘prior’ comes right in the first lecture.


Kent says:


“… Homeopathy perceives that there is something prior to … results. Every science teaches, and every investigation of a scientific character proves that everything which exists does so because of something prior to it. Only in this way can we trace cause and effect in a series from beginning to end and back again from the end to the beginning. By this means we arrive at a state in which we do not assume, but in which we know.”


He also foreshadows another concept that repeats over and over throughout the book- which is the idea of influx, or continuance, or as he says here ‘in a series from beginning to end.’


But- that is a later point, so I’ll stick with priors and ultimates.


In the first lectures, its’ about what are we treating, and driving home the message that we are treating the man, the individual who lives inside the body, NOT the tissues, NOT the house man lives in. The man comes first, the individual- the will, the understanding, the loves and hates. These things come first.


The distortion on this level is the disease, not the morbid tissue changes.


Ok- pretty basic.


Lecture 2 talks about the Organon aphorism on the Highest Ideal of a Cure. And to refresh you that verbiage, it says:


“the highest ideal of a cure is rapid, gentle, and permanent restoration of health….


Now, to restore means to go back, to something before.


Again, the idea of something *prior*


When treating disease, we must consider what comes before, and our end goal, our cure, is to bring them back to where they were before the state that brought the patient to our office.


In this same lecture he talks about those observations that we ascribe to Hering- symptoms moving in reverse direction (again, to what was before) and the layers of man,


“The FIRST of man is his voluntary, the second of man is his understanding, and the last is his outermost.”


Kent also gets into the effects of bacteria, in calling out the idea that bacteria cause illness and instead says “They will also tell you that a bacillus is the cause of tuberculosis. But they man had not been susceptible to the bacillus he could not have been affected by it. As a matter of fact, the tubercules once FIRST and the bacillus is SECONDARY. It has never been found PRIOR to the tubercle, but it FOLLOWS that, and comes then as a scavenger.”


Such references to the idea of first and last, prior and result are sprinkled throughout the entire book in this way.


What it tells us is that the concept is central to homeopathy as Kent saw it, in all aspects. From taking and perceiving the case, to susceptibility, to miasms- psora comes first and precedes the other miasms, there cannot be acutes without chronics and vice versa, the idea of a simple substance prior to a materia substance…


all of these things go together. it may be that they can be separated out in our minds as different concepts within homeopathic philosophy and application, but Kent strings them together with the simple- but profound idea- that there is what is prior and what comes after.



Which leads me to Insight #2


2) Influx and Continuance


What is primary and what is secondary or what is the result is a cornerstone of the lectures. Yet these points- primary and ultimate- are not floating in space with a cosmic unseen connection.


What is primary or prior, and what is the result or ultimate, is joined by the idea of influx, or continuance.


This phrase or synonymous phrases are also embedded in nearly every lecture of the book.


You heard it first in the initial quote I read- about cause and effect and a series running from beginning to end.


But this isn’t even introducing the idea. Kent is a master at planting seeds of concepts before turning them over in a direct reveal.


In Lecture 1 he says:


“Again take the nervous child. It has wild dreams, twitching, restless sleep, nervous excitement, hysterical manifestations, but if we examine all the organs of the body we will find nothing the matter with them. This sickness, however, which is present, if allowed to go uncured, will in twenty or thirty years result in tissue change… the individual has been sick from the beginning…


and later:


“From first to last is the order of sickness as well as the order of cure.”



This is the first introduction of the idea that if you see someone with no morbid sx. and then later see that person decades later, they will likely need the *same remedy* because disease is a progression. ‘Order’ implies not just 2 points: beginning and end, but a chain of events in a specific progression.


It’s a concept that points to what we should pay attention to in a case- what was happening when the ailments first started ,what was happening *before* the ultimates before us?


It also supports his plea to learn pathology and physical disease states- not because we prescribe on it- but because then you will know what you are looking at. IS this patient at the beginning or the end or the middle stage of the pathological stage of their disease? He emphasizes this quite a lot-


In Lecture 7 he says:


… Every curable disease presents itself to the intelligent physician in the signs and symptoms that he can perceive. In viewing a LONG ARRAY of symptoms an image is presented to the mind of an internal disorder. —-


An array is of course a display or an arrangement of multiple things … not just beginning and end, but what the course is between them. We see some patients at the beginning and probably fewer at the end, but most of them are in the middle. By knowing the progression of disease, but understanding that there is a first and last and an inbetween, we can identify where our patient is in that progression and that can and will inform our analysis and prescriptions.


The idea of continuance and order is brought up also as ‘flow’

the direction that disease flows- which is from inner to outer


“Disease can only be perceived by its results and it flows from within out, from center to circumference, from the seat of government to the outermost. Hence, cure must be from within, out.”


The idea of a progression is also applied to the types of disease we have:


“The acute miasma have a distinct COURSE TO RUN. They have a prodromal period, a period of PROGRESS and a period of DECLINE.”…


and contrasting that against the chronic diseases, which have no period of decline.


Now- I bring all this up not to tell you about the difference between acute and chronic, because we all know that. But to lift out the language Kent is using and this concept of flow and order because again, he repeats it within all the important concepts in the book. .


If we can see the relation between all of these things- how first/last, the idea of continuance- is present in all the various aspects of homeopathy, then we begin to understand the totality of homeopathy, I think. It becomes simple to us, it’s all working together. There’s no hard lines between philosophical concepts.


Just as we must grok the totality of our patient, and perceive what is first/last in the patient, what is the progression is, all of that forms the totality of the patient. And thus there will be only one remedy to match, when we apply the same concepts to the study of disease images, i.e. proving and materia medica.


But that’s coming!


I’ll wrap up this point with reading a selection from Lecture 8, which is where he really breaks down influx and continuance and order, and like i said- he had planted the idea right from the beginning- kind of primed you as a reader to take on the full concept.


p 68——


“What do we mean by influx? AS a broad and substantial illustration let us think of a chain. What is it that holds the last link of a chain to its investment or first attachment? At once we will say the intermediate link. What is it that connects that link? Its previous link, and so on to the first link and its attachment. Do we not thus see that there is one continuous dependence from the last to the first hook? Wherever that chain is separated it is as much separated as possible, and there is no longer influx from one link to the other. In the same way as soon as we commence to think of things disconnectedly, we lose the power of communication between them. All things must be untied or the series is broken and influx ceases.


Again, we see that man exists prior to his body, but as yet we do not see all the finer purposes of his being.”





#3 Distinction of Language


It became clear about 3/4 of the way through the reading when we got to the Lectures 29-31 that creating a glossary was in order.


Those Lectures- entitled Idiosyncrasies, Individualization, and Characteristics began to bump up against previous concepts like indisposition, circumstance, obstacle to cure and more.


Each of these concepts circles around each other like bumper cars, having similarities and connection, yet simultaneously retaining a unique meaning that helps make distinctions within a case.


Likewise, his discussion of vital force, simple substance, vs. soul… these are concepts that can be lumped together and passed off as perhaps the spiritual or dynamic aspect of homeopathy, but in fact retain very specific qualities according to Kent, and he takes the time to discuss them at length. It can be confusing and I found that by drawing out- literally with pen and blank white paper- I could discern the meaning of each one.


I’m not going to go into it al here- it would take the whole podcast. But I bring it up to encourage you, the next time you read Kent, if you find yourself glossing over words and concepts that seem similar but he is clearly using different words for - STOP. Take the time to piece out each one. look at them individually. and see the relationship between them.


Just like Kent repeats certain concepts- like influx/order and priors and results - for a reason, he also is separating out concepts and individualizing ideas that must be understood in their singularity, so that they can be perceived within the whole.





On a more specific note, Kent’s treatment and explanations of miasms also shined for me. Today, we have teachers presenting a vastly expanded concept and application of miasms as compared to Hahnemann’s original writings and Kent’s time.


I personally have held a lot of these teachings at bay, considering them, but not incorporating them fully into my practice, simply because I have had a hard time making the leap from the original 3- psora, syphilis and sycosis (though including cancer and tuberculosis)- to the more than ten now commonly accepted within various circles.


Ironically, within Kent I found what I believe to be the best justification and explanation for *why* it is appropriate to consider a greater number of miasms, and I’m looking forward to expanding my study and consideration of these miasms.


In Lecture 18, he states in the first paragraph:


“Psora is the beginning of all sickness. Had psora never been established, as a miasm upon the human race, the otter two chronic diseases would have been impossible, and susceptibility to acute diseases would have been impossible. All the diseases of man are built upon psora; hence it is the foundation of sickness; all other sicknesses came after.”


So here, he’s basically saying that because of psora, we are susceptible to all other diseases. Now, at that time, 2 other miasms were considered. But it stands to reason that if psora made humans susceptible to sycosis and syphilis, as well as all acutes, then there is potential for other miasms.



Further he says: “The three chronic miasms: psora, syphilis and sycosis, are all contagious. In each instance, there is something prior to the manifestations which we call disease. We speak of the signs and symptoms of a disease, we speak of the outcroppings of the symptoms when we speak of syphilis, but remember there is a state prior to syphilis or syphilis would not exist. It could not come upon man except for a condition suitable to its development. In like manner psora could not exist except for a condition in mankind stable for its development.’


So- again we see the concept of ‘prior’ and what came before.


What stands out to me, though is that considering this state- created by psora, that allows for the development of syphilis or sycosis, then it stands to reason that state that allows for the development of tuberculosis- which we accept is a miasm- and cancer…which we also accept as a miasm. ER-GO… it begins to feel illogical NOT consider leprosy, ringworm, malaria, etc.


Continuing in this vein, he says:


“All diseases upon the earth, acute and chronic, are representations of man’s internals. Otherwise, he could not be susceptible or could not develop that which is within him. The image of his own interior self comes out in disease…


This state has CONTINUED TO PROGRESS and it has accumulated and become complex. The original simple psora has added to it syphilis and sycosis, and THESE PROGRESS and have now effected a state, they have CONTINUED to effect a state in mankind, whereby the race is so susceptible to acute affectations that many of our citizens have every little thing that comes along, and every little epidemic of influenza brings them down with an acute attack… This was not done in one generation but has been accumulating on the face of the earth so long as we have a history of man.”


OK! So - while the emphasis in reading is mine, you can hear that Kent is again emphasizing the idea of progression and continuance, but in the realm of miasms.

Clearly he did not see them as a static state, but as a state that is growing generation to generation. It’s hard to conceive that Kent would say that miasms stopped after syphilis and sycosis were he to be confronted with the concepts that have developed around miasms in the last couple of decades.


It was only 100 years ago that Kent was alive; I think the miasms we consider today- that Kent did not- were there… I don’t think that the malaria or ringworm miasms have emerged only within the last 100 years. *However* I think the explosion of the world-wide population over the last 100 years, compounded with ever increasing suppressive allopathic drugs, of which he says=


“the miasms that are at the present day upon the human race are complicated a thousandfold by allopathic treatment”


Have contributed to the proliferation of the expanded miasms, which follows his theory that miasms complicate and progress.


Another piece that might explain why the recognition of other miasms and the development of that line of thinking was not happening in Kent’s time, could be coming from this passage:


“It does seems as if Homeopathy had become a necessity, but the kind of homeopathy that is preached in the majority of our schools will not check the progress of psora. The majority of the college teachers sneer at the doctrine of psora; they sneer at the miasms and continue in their efforts to establish homeopathy upon an allopathic basis…. no study is made of psora, but allopathic books are their textbooks.”


Kent was teaching in the final years of homeopathy here in America, while it was being diluted and extinguished by the American Medical Association. It seems it was a time of holding on for dear life, not a time of renaissance and expansion, which we know happened over 70 years later.





A very specific point that was made also in Lecture 20, the first on syphilis, in regards to the point of contagion.


It’s a concept I had never heard before, and so it struck me, and also seemed very relevant for analysis of cases from a miasmatic point of view and making sense of symptom pictures.


Kent states:


“The books speak of the primary contagion as the only contagion in connection with the syphilitic miasma, but let me tell you something. Suppose we assume that the syphilitic miasm is a disease that would run for a definite time, and suppose that an individual has gone through with the primary manifestation and is told by his physician that he can safely marry; if he marry, his wife becomes and invalid; but she does not go through the primary manifestations, the initial lesion and the roseola, but she has the syphiloderma and the symptoms which belong to theater state of the disease. This disease is transferred from husband to wife, anti is taken up in the stage in which it then exists and from thence goes on in a progressive way. The woman catches it from the man in the stage in which he has it at the time of their marriage; she takes that which he has; if he has it in the advances stage she takes it in that stage; she takes from him the stage he has to offer.


This is equally true of psora and sycosis…. the three chronic miasms have contagion in the form in which they exist at the time. The state is transferred, so that one in the advanced states of psora will transfer to his good wife the psora which he has, and she takes it up and progress with it and adds it to her own, and it progresses in accordance with her peculiarities.”


I think what happened here for me in considering Kent’s words, was the clarification of concepts that I work with in homeopathy, but did not really have a source for.


  • hereditary miasms. Yes, of course I understand that miasms are hereditary, and when we hear about epigenetics for example, one being born genetically with a pre-disposition yet not necessarily an expression of a disease—-the idea of inherited miasms concurs with these scientific findings.



I had not been exposed to this concept of contagion at the state of manifestation. It makes perfect sense, but I would have not been able to articulate or put this into words myself. The whole idea of an inherited miasm was all jumbled together like a ball- here, here’s your miasm.


But the miasm is of course expressed through the *individual* and his or her peculiarities, as Kent says. It is *this* expression of the miasm that is passed on, as well as the stage it’s at, and not some amorphous miasma. Which is of course why we must individualize, and why homeopathy is what it is, and not allopathy, which gives ONE treatment for syphilis- operating under the rule the syphilis is syphilis. But we know, syphilis is not just syphilis. It is THIS person’s syphilis and must be treated uniquely as such.


The other concept it clicked into place for me is not the passing on of miasms, but the passing on of unresolved traumas, memories, etc. There was an article that was circulating for some time about the acceptance in conventional circles that the effects of trauma and memories can be passed on genetically.


I accepted this as a good, energy based practitioner should though it feels far more clear to me and understandable by considering that these memories and traumas could transfer in the same way that miasms do- and not just in a general way, but in the particular way that trauma and experience is stuck within the parent at the time of conception.





The lecture on susceptibility is almost a red herring.


I think that the concept of susceptibility is embedded in that which is prior or primary.


I began the chapter on susceptibility thinking that it would be more about that prior state, but instead the lecture emphasizes more contagion, potency, and dose.


What I came to realize in the course of reading the entire book and now in zeroing in on this lecture, is that susceptibility, contagion, and cure are like the 3 legs of a stool-


They each have a part to play- equal to each other, but distinctly important- in the seat of health.


Contagion comes in, we are susceptible to it. The Contagion has the cause- so consider this paragraph:


“In contagion- and consequently in cure- there is practically but one dose administered, are at least that which is sufficient to cause a suspension of influx. When cause ceases to flow in a particular direction, it is because resistance is offered for cases flow only in the direction of least resistance… now in the beginning of disease, i.e. in the stage of contagion, there is this limit to influx, for if man continued to receive the cause of disease- if there were no limits to the influx- he would receive enough to kill him…but when susceptibility is satisfied, there is a cessation of cause…”


So contagion and susceptibility could be viewed like a teeter totter- the other side can only dip down to the level that the other side allows.


Perhaps you remember playing on a teeter totter as a child. If you pushed very hard, the return to you depended on the strength of the individual on the other end, and the degree to which she pushed back and could resist. If she resisted little, then perhaps it would not even totter back to your side, she could again bounce down- little resistance but strength enough to push back some. She could offer no resistance, and slam down on the ground. She could offer strong resistance, and push the teeter right down.


Regardless, you can see the direct relationship between the two.


Cure comes in with the same idea- our susceptibility to the cure, to the remedy, the artificial disease that provokes our vital force to offer resistance.


Kent says:


“But cure and contagion are very similar, and the principles to apply to the other. There is this difference; in cure we have the advantage of change of potency and this enables us to suit the varying susceptibilities of sick man. … The degree of sickness cause fits his susceptibility at the moment he is made sick. But it is not so with medicines. Man has all the degrees of potentiation, and by these he can make changes and thereby fit the medicine to the varying susceptibility of man in varying qualities or degrees.”


Of course, this is one of the biggest blindspots in allopathic medicine- the gross administration of often one-size-fits-all potencies and doses, such as vaccines, antibiotics, etc.



I could probably go on and on with insights from Kent’s Lectures. Like a well tended multi-generational garden, each time you walk through you catch blooms you never saw before, sweet blossoms tucked in under large leaves that obscured your vision the previous time.


Now I say its’ YOUR turn! Pull out your Kent, read a Lecture or two, and share your insights with me! It’s almost 80F outside, and the trees are still green… we can stretch out the Homeopath’s Summer Bookclub if we really want to…


Thanks again for listening, for sharing with your friends and colleagues.


Folks, and I am so excited to share the next interview that I’m doing this Wednesday- a master of his craft… stay tuned, that episode will be coming up in October, just before I take off for the Homeopathy-One conference in Bruges, Belgium. If you are a new listener and havent’ heard the interview I did with both Rajan Sankaran *and* Frederick Schroyens back in May- well, please go back and have a listen, or listen again.


If you are coming to the conference, look for me! I”ll be documenting my experience and interviewing homeopaths who are willing to talk to  me about theirs, and all that will come together in a multipart series for November, for those of you who can’t make it, i endeavor to help you feel like you were!


I’ve got a Repertory with Roger interview from back in June that I still haven’t edited yet, I also hope to get that out as a second episode this month, so keep your eyes peeled for that as well.


It’s great to be back- and until next time, be well and stay observant!




Jun 10, 2017

When I began the podcast in January of 2016, I had a list of homeopaths who I knew I wanted to reach out to. Today’s guest, Shilpa Bhouraskar, was one of the first on my list. I had been following Shilpa’s blog and trainings through Homeoquest for a couple of years, and was impressed with the range of trainings she offered from teachers around the world, as well as her own writing and video tutorials.


I reached out to Shilpa and she graciously made time in her busy schedule and we recorded this interview over a year ago, actually, in March of 2016. I didn’t have a specific episode plan for it, so set it aside, and then I actually thought that I lost it in the depths of my digital files.


But as things happen, I wanted to offer another interview for this months’ regular episode, and I remembered my conversation with Shilpa and thought it was more perfect for this years’ theme of failure, than if I had published it last year. I don’t think the word ‘failure’ ever comes up in our talk, but Shilpa embodies the spirit of beginning again.

If you follow her work, then perhaps you have read her biography and know about her many moves, but listening to her tell her story of starting multiple clinics after graduating from full-time homeopathy school in India, moving between countries, stepping into teaching, is inspiring.

Her journey with homeopathy thus far has been the epitome of dynamic-


7 years of traveling, growth, exposure…


Willing to examine her results, utilize approaches she never thought she would use..


Building a new practice, clinic and community again and again...

Shilpa shares how working under different conditions exposes your varying skill levels, strengths and weaknesses, understanding, depth, and expectations…


We know that homeopathy can treat serious illness, because we have the clinical evidence. but many us never have the chance to see serious pathology shift with exclusive homeopathic treatment. Shilpa had the experience of facing serious pathology in her rural clinic and shifting it using homeopathy.


After moving to Australia and stepping into teaching, she created a system she calls ‘The Stages Template’ that encompasses the level of the practitioner, the case, the approach, and also the application of a remedy. It’s a dynamic vision, born from looking at what is not working, and what is needed to work.


I often talk about learning ‘homeopathically’- that is, matching our study to our unique needs as practitioners. Shilpa’s Stages Template is perfect for this, and she is explicit in saying so- identifying where her teachers and courses are, at which Stage, so that her students can decide whether that particular approach or teacher is in alignment with their own needs and level of understanding.


Shilpa’s online offerings fill a space- not for the new student, but practical for the homeopath working today, the challenges that come up in practice, offering specific trainings and teachings to meet the issues that come up.




How do we grow and have different experiences, without being world travelers, or the option to create multiple clinics? is that kind of exposure and opportunity possible?


Shilpa recognized that her situation, the moving and recreating something new and connecting and drawing on her own strengths, is an integral part to not only her ability to thrive as a homeopath, but to who she is. I love this because I think that THIS is what is true for all of us-not that we all need to go through the kind of location dynamic multi-faceted career that Shilpa has had, but that we all need to find where our unique strengths and talents intersect with our practice of homeopathy- and make space within our lives and our practice where those strengths and talents can grow and shine.


It may be teaching, it may be research, it may be creating gardens of plants in homeopathic use, or cartoon videos of remedy pictures or proving… I could go on and on. We each bring our own uniqueness to our practice of homeopathy and living homeopathically, and I loved interviewing Shilpa because she gave voice and experience to that idea so clearly and beautifully…she’s an inspiring example.


I loved re-listening to this interview and learning again from her story and the points we discussed about being open, and how our real training and learning begins when we *leave* our basic school programs and start to put those tools into action and see the results… and what we need to do in response to those results.


Be sure to check out Shilpa’s various webpages and her *free* online software.

Just a quick reminder that sign-ups for A Homeopath’s Book Club for Kent’s Lectures on Philosophy continue for another two weeks, with the Facebook group opening up June 23. If you haven’t checked out the details or are on the fence- visit my webpage for all the essential information and links to sign up. I hope to meet you there!



Jun 5, 2017

Roger Van Zandvoort is back for another installment of ‘Repertory with Roger’

this is Episode 20- a Case of Night Terror and Paralysis…

Each month Roger Van Zandvoort of Complete Dynamics joins me for a look at one of the cases from his Clinical Repertory Project. This month it’s a case of Night Terror and Paralysis by Elizabeth Wright Hubbard.


Usually I repertorize using CD, but because Roger has already been through these cases and added the remedy to the necessary rubrics, the remedy in the case often comes out quite high. This time, I wanted to use a different Repertory- Synthesis in my RadarOpus- to see if there were any differences and also for those folks who may not be using Complete Dynamics.

You can find where Roger posted the original case, a screen shot of his repertorization, as well as the discussion with other homeopaths from the original posting (12/2016) here:

 I’m always looking for ways to make these episodes really usable and practical, so if you have any suggestions as to how I can do that, please comment on the Facebook page, message me through the page or drop me an email at


 I like to pull out some of the key take-aways and best tips that came out during our conversation, so you can listen for them. I hope this doesn’t make the content repetitive, but instead allows you to take in the information in two waves.

First, the case: 

Homoeopathic Recorder Oct. 1957, p. 99. E.Wright Hubbard: Precision prescribing in acute cases

Lady of 74 has had hypertension for many years. Sudden loss of power of the right arm and leg with thick speech. Face and tongue drawn, blood pressure 230/140. Pupils sluggish, fibrillating heart. History of having a bowel complex. Rectal condylomata.

Symptoms: terror of the night; anguish and anxiety from sunset on; inability to sleep; hot not chilly.

Discussion: one symptom, the terror of the night, was so overwhelming that combined with the sleeplessness and rectal difficulty, after trying 2 or 3 other remedies, without success, the repertory was thrown to the winds and the patient given xoxoxoxooxo cm and peace reigned.

Since this is our fourth call, I believe, I’m getting better and some of the pitfalls and wrong choices I made a few months ago, I’m not doing now. So new issues came to light-

First off, in each call I think we’ve covered the idea of using general rubrics.

This came up again, but in a different way. I missed a rubric because I was looking for it in the local particular, which in this case was a mind symptom- and Roger pointed out that I could have looked for it in the General. Because it was a Mind symptom, I didn’t think to look for it in the Generals, as I usually associate Generals with physical symptoms. but in this case, it was such a significant modality, finding it was important.

So- again, if you cannot find the modality for the local, go to the generals.

Crossing is also an option to create a smaller rubric from larger ‘building block’ rubrics if you can’t find what you are looking for.


Recall that the mental symptoms that come *in conjunction* with physical complaints are of utmost importance.

Mind- Speech as mental issue ie, Speech, Rude


Speech as a functional issue - which is what came up in this case.


The Kentian repertory set up puts all speech/ talk rubrics under ‘Mind’ but Roger has separated them out, to accommodate the functional vs. the mental/emotional intent. Different repertories are set up differently, and if you choose to use a different reference, be aware of how they might be different from maybe what your standard book is. Also- the idea of a symptom of functional disorder vs. mental is just an important clarification to make anytime… In this case it’s speech, but in other cases it could be restlessness for example

One of my favorite parts, I’ll paraphrase this whole section-

Identify the signs of the vital force- the movement of energy. if you have a case where you only use phenomenon- objective and subjective symptoms such as sensations as if-

if you only use those, you have a kind of one-sided analysis

a poor analysis for the lack of specificity of the case

need to be careful in any repertorization

if you have modalities

left/right side

use them to make the analysis more strong

those- the modalities, alternative, sides, etc. es;. they indicate the dynamics of the case

the fact that the immune system is busy doing something

indicates an energy movement

important rubrics

all about energy movement

what is happening in the person- what is the vital force doing to protect itself an the person included.

You need to be alert in those sigs of pathology that indicate movement of energy”


Repertorizing can feel very flat, like we aren’t really capturing the case, more like a laundry list. but with this reminder, Roger is showing us how we can indeed capture some of the dynamics of the case, not just the look and presence of symptoms.

We also got into some technical features of CD, in terms of searching and using synonyms. This conversation came in the middle of the call, but I cut it out and tucked it at the end, so that if you are well versed in CD, you can choose to skip that part at the end. It also helped the flow, so we stayed with the symptoms of the case and relevant rubrics, and kept the technicalities at the end.


In the case, Hubbard writes that ‘she threw the repertory to the winds’ after giving a few indicated remedies. I thought this was interesting and commented on it. Roger explained that

Homeopaths used to read, make annotations, and actively studied and noted and made cross references in their publication and repertories, etc. This greatly enhanced their scope of reference. In an earlier part of our call, when we were just greeting each other and getting warmed up, Roger had commented that with applications such as Facebook, people often do not read articles to completion, or as deeply and attentively into text. We have such a tendency to skim and jump to the ‘next thing’ that we miss what is right in front of us.


This is one reason why I am offering A Homeopath’s Book Club, a group reading of Kent’s Lectures on Philosophy. Not just quotes or select passages, but the whole text, from start to finish. All 37 Lectures, covering the scope of practice from digging into our purpose in Lecture 1 and 2, The Sick and the Highest Ideal of Cure… through practicalities like Oversensitive Patients, Chronic Disease and Miasms, Examining the Patient and Record Keeping.


It’s an effort to emphasize quality over quantity… we have so much quantity these days- journals print and online, little blips and photos and twitter and websites… I personally love the access our digital technology has given us, both to each other and information, however it is up to us to pair that access and opportunity with depth and engagement.


Sure, you can read Kent on your own. I”m sure you have. Maybe you’ve picked it up several times. Maybe you’ve started it half a dozen times- maybe you’ve even made it through the entirety once or twice. When was the last time you talked about it, though? Discussed how the philosophy and Kent’s interpretation connects to your own clinical experience?


John Coleman, a writer for the Harvard Business Review, says, “discussing these books with a diverse group of friends or colleagues can expand the way you think. At Harvard Business School, one of the primary reasons for the case method of learning, where students read a case, or story, collectively and then debate it, is to make students more aware of the different perspectives people bring to any discussion and the ways in which those perspectives can deepen understanding and help a group reach a more rounded decision. Book clubs function similarly — they force you to engage on new and interesting topics, and they do so by listening to people who think differently than you. And because you know you’ll have to discuss a book with your peers, you’re likely to read more deeply than you might on your own.”


I hope that by opening up the Book Club to the entire, worldwide homeopathic community, we’ll have practitioners who have a diverse range of experience, treating different populations and using different approaches. Kent’s Lectures which cover essential points of the Organon are applicable to all homeopaths, but the perspectives we bring from our own practices will enrich and stretch the conversation.


The sign-ups are rolling in, and there is no cap, so the more the merrier.

Information and sign-up links can be found at

Sign ups are open right up until the start date- June 23rd, and the discussion will roll right on through August 31 on the private Facebook page, or you can opt to do the bi-weekly webinar based discussions to talk to others LIVE. I'll be there facilitating the discussions in both places. The calls are limited to 12, so I’ll open up as many of those as necessary.


Enjoy the show! 




May 18, 2017


You're invited! Please join me and other homeopaths from around the world for a Homeopath's Bookclub! 

if you’ve been listening to the show for the last couple months, you've heard me talk about this book club I’m planning for the summer.


Well, I’ve planned it, I created a couple webpages about it with details, and there’s a page where you can sign up! It’s all ready to go.

Kent’s Lectures on Philosophy is probably the homeopathic book I have toted around with me the most


It’s the most marked up- with notes in the margins, highlighting and underlining.


I find it to be like a Russian nesting doll- a new hidden surprise each time you peel back what you see on top.


But you know what makes those hidden surprises really meaningful?


Sharing them with someone else. Trading ideas and questions- looking at something in a new way.




why a book club? Well, for the same reason that I started a podcast.

I’m in a book club with friends who are not homeopaths, and it’s fun and all, but sometimes instead of fiction, I want to have a good conversation and exchange about homeopathy and homeopathic principles. Not just at the coffee and tea breaks of an occasional seminar…

not just a short exchange on a Facebook page


Nope- I want to dig into some of the best that homeopathic literature has to offer and talk about it and exchange ideas with other homeopaths who think about this stuff too…


Homeopaths who are practicing or have practiced and have seen philosophy in action…

or want to explore how to apply more homeopathic philosophy to their practice


This is a new endeavor. it’s not a class where you learn from an expert or senior practitioner

There’s no certificate at the end- just a deepening of each of our understanding of some of the essential elements of homeopathic philosophy…something we create together, from the collective breadth and depth of our own experiences.


If you’ve listened to especially the last couple podcasts, you’ll know that i’m a huge proponent of learning homeopathically- that is, finding out what YOU need to know to improve, and learning about THAT…not just what’s currently on offer.


How does the bookclub do that? well-


Regardless of how you practice, whatever approach you use, homeopathic philosophy runs through it. It doesn’t matter whether you practice the sensation method or straight up classical, you’re dealing with totality, remedy reactions, reading provings, drug reactions… all the building blocks of the homeopathic approach.


You can engage at whatever level feels right for you, and whatever chapters and lectures are most relevant to you and where you are right now in your practice.


Here’s how it will work-


I have divided up the book over 7 weeks- approximately 50 pages or 5 chapters per week. See the details here.


I’ll be creating a private Facebook group where I’ll post questions and quotes to jumpstart conversation, but it will be open to everyone to start their own threads about those parts of the reading that they specifically want to discuss.


Maybe you have a case that is a perfect illustration of some aspect of case taking or analysis- or a case that is stumping you and applying some philosophy might help you get some perspective


Ask someone who practices in a different approach that you, how they apply some of Kent’s ideas...

get clarification on parts of the lectures that dont’ make sense, or we need translate to ‘modern’ parameters...

so many possibilities we’ll create- together


The Facebook group will run-through August 31st.


There’s a one-time fee to join: $37, and there will be a stream of high quality, focused homeopathic discussion, right on your feed.


BUT Also-


If you want to discuss the reading with people, in real life, hearing voices and participating in a more classic book discussion, there’s an option to sign up for additional bi-weekly webinar style groups for a onetime fee of $93.


You’ll join me and the other participants LIVE at times we as a group choose that best fit the time zones. Groups will be limited to 12 participants, and conversations recorded and available to you for later listening, or if you miss one.


So that’s 2 ways to engage with your homeopathic colleagues- either daily in the private group, or via the webinar meetings.


You can find all the details, with the breakdown of chapters and links to sign up at my website-, click on ‘for Homeopath’s and in the drop-down menu you’ll find all the options. You can also find clickable links on the Facebook page.


I’m excited to hopefully connect with some of you who are listeners to the podcast, or maybe find the podcast through the book club.


if you’re in a study group- join together! you can meet in person as well and have yet another level of discussion.


wherever you are, however many times you have read Kent Lectures’ or not, whether you see one or 100 patients a week… I hope to see you there.




May 8, 2017

I believe the most effective study and training we can do is homeopathic to our own needs.

But how do we figure out what our needs are- homeopathically- for our own skills and practice to progress?

This episode- on doing a Case Inventory- is one step I’m taking to answer that question.

This is where I remind you that way back in that first episode of the podcast I likened these shows to inviting you into my studio where everything is in progress and a mess- and not my gallery where the finished pieces are hanging up for sale.

Because this episode and and next, on Case Inventory,  is pure experiment with a capital E.

I have an idea and I’m trying it out and inviting you to witness and if it grabs you- try it too.

Basically what I have done is look through my caseload over the last 2 years, give or take a few months, and pull out those cases that have gone cold- truly cold. Sometimes people come back years later, but in this case, these folks have not returned for treatment in many months or over a year, despite a reminder or prompt for a follow up.


Then, I have inventoried those cases.

I read through them, my case notes and my repertorization and follow ups if there were any, to see what stood out to me.

I started making a list of what I saw to be a potential issue, and as i read more cases, certain issues began to crystallize and a definite list began to develop, so I could scan the cases for what i seen in previous ones, but alert to any anamolies.


Distance- of time-  provides a perspective we don’t have when we’re in the middle.


Just like a practitioner who is just a couple of years deeper into practice than you can easily point out where you might have overlooked something or chosen a better rubric, YOU are not the same practitioner you were when you first took a case a year or 2 or even 6 months ago.

With that distance and more experienced eye, you can appraise your own work.


Now, the intention is not to fix it. It’s not to go back and re-work the case…at least, that is not an element that i have included in this experiment.

Nope, I just looked over the cases and made notes about what stood out to me.

To improve their form and performance, it is standard practice for athletes and teams to watch video clips of themselves and their games, to analyze their performance and use what they saw to train accordingly. There are businesses that have sprung up exclusively to deliver this service to athletes and performers and teams.


Does this sounds homeopathic?

It should. Because it is. It is yet another parallel application of the idea of similars- that seeing ourselves in another form provides the map to change.

This idea- of watching ones’ own actions and performance and the benefits therein- are what I want to capitalize on in my Case Inventory.

With just that time and space from the original engagement with the Case, I can witness my own process from an outside perspective and distance, and it has the potential to help me zero in and sharpen my skills, just like the athletes do.

I go over three cases from time past and identify issues for further study. 

The first case is of a child whose mother first approached me to help with allergy symptoms, but in the background was a very intense difficult family dynamic. Looking over this case, I could see how I struggled with grasping the totality, my repertorization, but also acknowledging that the family dynamics probably took over. 

In the second case, I was struck by how much I missed the mark on this young child with control issues, jealousy, and temper tantrums. I didn't repertorize appropriately AT ALL, and in this situation I likely had one or two shots to make a difference, or the family was going to pursue other options. And so they did. 

The last case I inventoried was of an adult woman with acute cracking, peeling fingers. Against the constitutional backdrop the remedy I gave helped the fingers, but didn't cure them, and also did not ultimately touch the deeper levels of pathology, with hormonal migraine headaches. 

I close the episode with a few choice quotes from an older interview with Lou Klein from the American Homeopath Journal, 2000. The quotes spoke well to the issues that I found in my inventory. 

Check out the work of Making Cases Count  a group that is providing a tool for the other side of this equation- assessment from the patient. 

Stay tuned for a promo soon about Summer Homeopathy Book Club: Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy by Kent. 

Thanks to all who support on patreon. Check it out and consider donating for as little as $1/month!


I leave you with a great quote by Jonathan Shore: 

“Our task as homeopaths is not to fix the nails, skin, or bowels, but to free up more vitality, to release the obstruction to the free flow of vitality at the deepest level we can reach. What is called for is that we take into account the whole, the organism as a unity, from the deepest to the most superficial.”


Take care, be well and stay observant. See you next time! 

Apr 29, 2017

Roger and I connected in March and went through 2 cases, E017 was the first one: The Case of the Restless Child, # 313. Today I’m presenting the second case we talked through that evening, #262, which I am calling ‘Sinus Attack’ for reasons which should be obvious.


A friend helpfully pointed out that giving the case and case number ahead of time would enable the audience to participate by doing the case in advance…which is such a great idea. I have included the text of the case below, but you can find it

here on Roger's Facebook page

(SPOILER: if you access the case through Roger's page, the remedy is included in the write-up) 

here on the 1M Facebook page 

You can work the case however you like, using Complete Dynamics, but of course any other software as well.

Since this was the 2nd case of the night and we had covered so many great points through the first case, this one went a bit quicker. 

As I have done in previous episode, I'm going to list a few bullet points of the main points covered. 

But first- the case. 



Homoeopathic Recorder 1934, p. 200. J.L. Kaplowe, Case reports

I. L., age 23 years, had been having sinus trouble for the past seven years; a sub-mucus resection two years ago brought no relief. With each attack there is severe throbbing pain in the region of the right frontal sinus and right eye; occasionally there is a sensation as though the skin over the frontal region is under tension; as the attack wears off, a numb sensation remains in this area. With this pain, he always feels warm in the upper half of his body, especially is there a warm feeling about the right eye. There is usually a yellow nasal discharge; five days before consulting me, the discharge suddenly stopped; the next day a severe attack of pain set in. The throbbing is < stooping, < light, < walking and jars of all kinds, < cold, > warmth. Noises give him the sensation as though the vibration struck him in the right eye. With the pain, it is difficult for him to keep his eyes open; he also feels drowsy. Most of the attacks begin in the morning, increasing as the day wears on, then decreasing as evening approaches. Occasionally the pain lasts all night or late into the night.

On March 10, 1934 xxx 2c. was given during a severe attack. Relief set in an hour afterward. On March 13, the pain returned; this time xxxx 1M. was given. There has been no return of the trouble since. Never in seven years has there been such a long period of freedom from attacks.


Points we covered:


Again, identifying and focusing on the deepest pathology. In this case, nerves vs. mucous membranes.

A distinction about choosing generalities when the pathology is really focused on one particular system. Because this case is localized to the face/sinuses, it's overkill to use rubrics from the overall generalities; choose the general rubrics of the local. 

Frontal sinuses means forehead. Another good reminder, as least for me, that my anatomy knowledge is not reliable, and when I’m looking for specific rubrics for parts of the body, I would do well to have my anatomy book nearby to check my assumption

As I was schooled on the sinus rubrics, I was also getting a lesson on the structure of the repertory. I remember having to learn the headings and the flow of the sub rubrics of the repertory but not until this conversation have I had a true appreciation of the structure of a repertory, and not only that, how understand that structure will sharpen one’s repertory skills. There’s a difference I think between knowing where to find things, and understanding how it works.


For example- and this may not be the best metaphor, but it was the first one that came to mind-  i can point out a half a dozen or so parts in my car’s engine and vaguey know what a mechanic is talking about when he or she refers to the starter or alternator, but if i knew each part and how and why it fits together as it does- such a bigger field of understanding opens up.


I brought up a couple of usability questions to Roger during the call- one I left in, the other I edited out because I thought in listening to it that it was hard to follow. But I”ll tell you what it is here, so you at least get the information. CD offers a feature that allows you to group symptoms and name them- so you can put all your sinus symptoms together, or your head pain or what have you. My question was about how to create those sx after you’ve picked the rubrics as opposed to before, and you can do that, using arrows on the left hand side, which will move the rubrics up and down and so you can move them to a newly created symptom- I guess kind of like a clipboard. But most important is probably the fact that it doesn’t change your outcome- its simply a usability feature that may appeal to your personal working style.


Though he did point out that you can weight those grouped sx differently, and that would affect your outcome.

Toward the end we talked about how well certain remedies score in the repertorization and Roger gives his recommendation for when to consider differentiating…which would be almost always unless there is huge difference in the percentages of your top remedies. That is something I have never really paid much attention to - the difference in the percentage of my highest remedy vs. my next highest, and I’m curious to see how looking at that influences my remedy differential. 




I will be back in May with a regular episode. I’m in the middle of a cool case inventory project with the goal of taking this idea of ‘failure’ and rather than looking at broad, overall places within the homeopathic process where we might fail, I’m trying to figure out, through looking at my own cases were *i* might be failing… and from that information, honing in on the skill that would be essential for me to develop to level up my practice.


In turn, I hope to create a template that YOU can use to inventory your own cases and go through a similar process…. because I am all about learning homeopathy, homeopathically.


Like case analysis, our study of homeopathy must draw from generals *and* paticulars, and those particulars are OUR OWN… and when we do this, we can find a true individualized practice, of homeopathic practice.


Also next month I will be opening up sign ups for my Summer Homeopathic Book Club, which will be a facilitated group reading of Kent’s Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy. You will be able to participate in a private Facebook group OR a bi-weekly web call, to talk with people IN REAL LIFE. IT’s going to be a good time, I am super excited about it.


So take care everyone, be well, and stay observant -

Apr 14, 2017

Welcome to 1M: A Homeopaths Podcast! A podcast created by a homeopath, for homeopaths.

This is a special episode of 1M….

About a month or so ago, I stumbled upon the website for Homeopathy-One, which I learned is a joint effort of Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens, who you likely know as the heads of two of homeopathy’s largest software companies that offer competing products: MacRepertory and RadarOpus respectively.  Together, however, they have co-founded this new non-profit , Homeopathy-One.


Their website introduces their mission, whose ‘sole purpose is to unite and strengthen the homeopathic community as a whole’


they go on to say-


Homeopathy-One offers a platform for leaders and followers of all schools of thought- traditional and contemporary - to come together, so that we can start to hear each other and find unity in diversity.


Shortly below this on the website, they offered an invitation to get in touch and involved and be a part of the movement…. and so I did!


I reached out to their contact with an invitation to talk to me, and all of you, about their effort- and…


What an awesome surprise it was to wake up to emails from both Frederick Schroyens and Rajan Sankaran agreeing to come on the show- and so here we are! We managed to find a time across 3 times zones to Skype and spent a great hour together talking about Homeopathy-One: how it came together, their intention and hopes for the organization, and especially their first major effort- the inaugural conference- Merging of Methods-  this October in Bruges, Brussels.


The conference line up is so inspiring, it’s hard to imagine a homeopath on the planet who would not consider it a treat to see- and I apologize for any name mispronounciations- : Frederick Schroyens, Jan Scholten, Jeremy Sherr, Jonathan Hardy, Laurie Dack, Marcel Candegabe, Massimo Mangialavori, Michal Yakir, and Rajan Sankaran, with Misha Borland MC’ing- all in one weekend.


Each featured homeopath will have the opportunity to present their unique approach with case examples for one-hour, followed by a 30 min. discussion in which the other presenters will offer how they would have approached the case… and to top it off, on the final day there will be a live case by Laurie Dack, followed by a discussion involving all the speakers.


It’s one thing for us, sitting in our individual offices, likely working in one particular method or another, but maybe musing about how this case would shake out if one applied the Sensation Method, or used the Periodic Table according to Jan Scholten… but quite another to witness the creators of these approaches collaborating together right in front of us.


If you can’t make it this year- don’t worry- they already have seeds planted for a follow up conference in 2018, with more internationally acclaimed teachers- including more women in homeopathy.


Not to mention you can stay in touch through a newsletter which is already in motion, bringing news and opportunities from around the world, or if you are inspired to bring homeopathy to an area in need, Homeopathy-One, as a non-profit, will be considering applications for funding support to help spread and strengthen homeopathy where it is most needed.


Once you’ve heard the interview, be sure to check out the website- where you can find more details about the organization, and especially about the conference- including short statements by the speakers, registration, accommodation, and special dinner planned for Saturday evening.


The registration is open, and from now until May 15 you can qualify for the early-bird pricing, of 450E. There is a reduced cost for ‘young people’ - homeopaths 28 years old and younger, for 300E.  There are also a limited number of reduced registrations for groups of 5 or more; you can contact them directly for more information.


Also, like and share their Facebook page


You can find the HOPE webpage, which Rajan mentioned, and some of the speakers have videos accessible, at


If you plan to come to Bruge, look for me there- I’d love to meet any listeners in person. I’ll be the one walking around with a microphone and recorder.


Take care, be well, and stay observant!

I'll be back next week with the April edition of Repertory with Roger... see you then! 

Apr 10, 2017

This is Episode 17, and today in our journey of learning through failure, I’m diving into case-taking.

If you think about it, what we do as homeopaths when taking a case is different than any other holistic or medical practice.


Like doctors, we want to know about the body- was ails it, what makes it better or worse, the quality of the pain, when it started, what started it, the medical history, effects of medications and so on.

Unlike a doctor, we care about *all* the physical symptoms, not just the ones that ail them.  We want to know their general physical disposition, and details about symptoms in addition to the chief complaint. Boy- do we want detail. And we listen.


Like a therapist, we want to know how the patient feels, emotionally. How do they respond to challenging situations in their life? what traumas and upsets have they weathered in life? How are their relationships? Do they get angry? about what? what does that anger look like? and so on.


Unlike a therapist, we do not counsel. We don’t interpret the trauma and subsequent behaviors and reactions. And *really * unlike a therapist, we may never re-visit some of those issues again.

Like a life coach, we might wonder about their aspirations and goals- and where are they in that journey? what holds them back?


But we do not give suggestions or exercises to improve themselves.


Like a spiritual guide, we ask about their dreams and fears and say more… say more… and what does that mean?


But we do not interpret for them.


Some homeopaths are all business, and some wander and weave and indeed the session can feel and *be* incredibly therapeutic. Some who have the knowledge and credentials may recommend supplements and include other therapies, many refer.


For the patient who comes in for some relief for their arthritis, and finds themselves recounting the pain of their parents divorce some 30 years prior, the experience is not often what they expected. Some patients feel they’ve divulged their entire life story and then some. Others might be suspicious and closed, uncertain of why dreams have anything to do with arthritis.


Homeopathic case taking is it’s own unique experience, for the homeopath and for the patient. But it’s ultimately where the healing begins. What we perceive in the hour or two hours that we initially meet or speak with a patient sets the trajectory, and while we can course correct along the way, providing the patient stays with us, we can never get back that initial meeting.

Is it possible to fail at case taking?

When i look back over my old cases, I can easily find holes where now I would gather more information. Places where I pushed for detail, that did not end up making a difference in my understanding of the case. Glossed over physical details that were important, in favor of the story.


In my students’ cases, I see the same types of things- no detail where there needs be, holes in physical symptoms, tangents that don’t add to the coherent whole.


I have no doubt that in a couple years, I will review the cases I am taking now, and find another group of what I will later consider to be mistakes and mis-steps.


How, then, do we become good, skilled case-takers?


How do we develop the capacity to be in the interview, making connections and picking up clues that guide us to where we need to go *in the moment*?


And what are we even looking for, anyway?


We are meant to take the case without prejudice. We are instructed to receive and perceive the case, thus it is important to remain open and not really *be* looking for anything. Once we start looking, we narrow our field of perception, and do a disservice to our patient and ourselves.

If you’ve been listening to the Repertory with Roger episodes, you’ll know that we’re looking at old cases from the Homeopathic Recorder. One of the most interesting aspects of this to me, is long-term successful prescribing in cases that are short compared to our modern cases, and also more heavily weighted on physical symptoms. Often even one mental symptom is not mentioned. These homeopaths used small remedies, as well as large ones.


How did our colleagues of 60 years ago know when they ‘had’ the case?

How did they advise new homeopaths and students?


— in the beginning, the learning curve for case taking is steep, and if you are under supervision, you may be getting good direct feedback.


but what about when you’re no longer a new homeopath? what about when you have 10, 15 years under your belt? Do you still need to pay attention to your case taking? How can you continue to improve and refine your case taking when you are no longer technically a beginner?


As I like to do, I plunged into the journals of my RadarOpus software to find some good writing. There’s a lot of good stuff in there.  I head to the material that was written before our contemporary methods, because in those writings is wisdom that can be applied across the spectrum.


I settled on an article by C.M Boger from British Homeopathic Journal- No 6

entitled ‘The Whole Case’

A quick bit of background on Boger, as either a first introduction or a refresh-

Dr. Cyrus Maxwell Boger was an American homeopath, a graduate of the Philadelphia College of Medicine, as well as the Hahnemann Homeopathic Medical College. He wrote several textbooks, journals, and translations. You likely have one his books on your shelf or in your software- most likely the Synoptic Key of Materia Medica or Boenninghausen’s Characteristics Materia Medica and Repertory.


I’m going to read the article and break it up with some discussion and my own applicable analysis. Essentially, it’s like studying out loud- taking in information from highly experienced predecessors, and then making connections to what I already know, and trying to take it up a notch.


You may hear Boger’s words and come to an entirely different conclusion, make a different connection, apply it to your own style and method of case taking in a different way- and that’s fantastic. As always, I encourage you to comment on the website or the Facebook page with your own thoughts about the topics in the show.


Before we dive into the article; please stick around at the end of the discussion for a few announcements- I’ll be posting an interview with Rajan Sankaran and Frederick Schroyens- together in an interview for the first time- in just ONE week; also, I’m planning something fun for the summer- here in the Northern Hemisphere-  a homeopathy book club! Let's get a whole crowd of us to read Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy by Kent! There will be a private Facebook group, and I'll be facilitating discussion. You can also choose to talk to people- live! in bi-weekly discussion groups via webinar. Whether you are reading it for the first time, or the 5th... join me! 

Another Repertory with Roger is on tap before the end of the month. 

Lots of good stuff happening around the 1M podcast you won’t want to miss!

Mar 24, 2017

This month I bring you another round of "Repertory with Roger".

If you missed our first round, this is a regular monthly component where Roger Van Zandvoort of Complete Dynamics and I look at a case from his Clinical Case Comparison Project. Roger chooses cases from the old Homeopathic Recorder Journal issues, and enhances his repertory by making sure the remedies in those cured cases are represented under their corresponding rubrics. In this way, he is expanding the CD repertory, and small and lesser known remedies are better represented and more likely to come up- all from reliable cured cases.


All of these cases are accessible on his Facebook page, and as always there will be a link in the show notes to that Facebook page, as well as the case.


I have gone through and chosen about a dozen cases, copied, pasted and removed the remedy information so that when I sit down to repertorize them, they are “blind” to me.


I apologize for the audio on my end, which has an echo. I hope it’s not too distracting to listen to… I’m going to do some troubleshooting to see what can be done to prevent that on future recordings. 


The case chosen for this month is a pediatric case, a young girl with restlessness keeping her up at night, with symptoms you likely run into in your own practices today- croupy cough, nasal obstruction, aggravations at night keeping everyone up! 

I chose this case because while many of the old Homeopathic Recorder cases might feel so different from the longer, more involved cases of today, this pediatric case felt like I could have taken it yesterday in my own clinic. 

Here's the write up of the case, as published in the Journal: 

Homoeopathic Recorder 1939, vol. 9., p. 33. Julia M. Green:

A child of five years, plump with firm flesh, light complexion, has many common symptoms and some unusual ones, e. g.: Tendency to mouth breathing. Nose stopped tight with mucus welling forth. Tonsils not large, uvula long, swollen. Grinding teeth in sleep. Perspiration free, head, neck, hands, feet. Desire sweets, rich foods. Cannot stand soap around nose, causes sneezing. Tendency to chest colds and asthma. Cough croupy, alternating with sneezing all night long. Wheezing all over chest. Dyspnoea accompanied by yawning. Extreme restlessness. Pulling hair, clapping hands, throwing herself, finally weeping. Itching all over so cannot sleep, very restless. Attacks of pain mid-abdomen, cramp-like, accompanied by nausea and vomiting. Aching legs prevent sleep, wants them rubbed. Itching eyes and nose, keeps rubbing them. Nose red; sore. xxxx has made this child over in six months; potencies from 2c. to 1M. to 10M. so far. She has milder attacks farther apart, is far less nervous, can sleep all night.


Before the call, I previewed some of the main points that came out of our discussion of how to repertorize this case, with suggestions that will hopefully help you in clinic. 


First- Determine the where the deepest pathology is- what tissues are affected?


In the heavily mentalized cases of the west, we can quickly become distracted by the story and emotions. But we must never forget the physical pathology- what is affected the most, and is of the most important. In a case where there are many symptoms, in order not to over repertorize, focus your rubrics on the deepest pathology.



To cover the specific symptom of your patient, choose the specific rubric that may be smaller- a sub-rurbic- but also choose the larger General Rubric. That way, you will not omit a potential remedy in the sub-rubric. By including the smaller more descriptive rubric- rather than only going with the General- you are more likely to push the smaller remedies to the surface.



The descriptive rubrics of the patient’s symptoms are always better than the clinically defined rubrics.  You will miss some remedies if you only rely on the clinical rubrics… the descriptive symptoms show you the dynamics of what is going on in the person- and that is what we are treating, the dynamic vital action of the patient.



Listen closely to the section where Roger talks about crossing three rubrics to give you a dimension to the final rubric that make it like repertorizing in 3D!

For example- two concomitants and a modality or direction-



Have you ever wondered when to use coryza, catarrh or discharge? Me too. Roger clears it up!

(pun intended!!)




The idea that an aggravation or amelioration can be - an often should be- looked at beyond face value. In this case, we talk about a nighttime aggravation, but *why* nighttime makes more sense if you consider the overall pathology of the case, rather than simply taking aggravation at night as a one dimensional descriptor.


I don’t spend as much time on these cases as I would my own, but it was a good reminder that the way I typically work a case- to find connections and themes across all dimensions of the case: generals, particulars, mentals, modalities, etc… to find the coherent whole, supports this idea.


The Bottom Line:

Understand what is happening in the case, that is the ‘red line’ that Roger refers to, and where the deepest pathology is.


And then, choose rubrics that represent that line, and when you may pick the smaller rubrics for the SRP’s or the exact sx of your patient, be sure to use some larger general rubrics as well.


Seems so simple, doesn’t it?


But whatever you do- make sure it is, as Roger says a  “ Patien-tien” repertorization.


Thanks again for listening, and for all you do to support the podcast, sharing it with others and giving me feedback. 

You can support the podcast with a one-time or regular donation at


Subscribe through your podcast app of choice so you don’t miss an episode, and check out the show notes for links.


I’ll be back next month with a regular episode, diving deeper into how we fail, so we can rise up higher.


Until then, take care and stay observant! 

Mar 5, 2017

I am so excited to bring you today’s episode which I have called-  Failing with Anne Vervarcke. Anne is a Belgian homeopath, she’s been in practice for 30 years and brought a wealth of insights and experience to our conversation.  As well as being a long-time homeopathic educator, she is the creator of The Vital Approach. 


In thinking about guests to have this year as I explore the theme of learning through our failures, I considered homeopaths who have been innovative in their approach. I believe that innovation and experimentation are the cousins of failure, because when we don’t get the results we want, either through outright failure, OR knowing that we could do better, that feeds our desire and motivation to look more carefully at our process and try something new.


If you’ve been a long-time listener of the podcast, you might remember that in the introduction to the podcast - pre episode 1- i quoted quite a bit from Austin Kleon’s Steal Like an Artist.


Here’s a quote that goes well with my conversation with Anne. Austin Kleon writes-


“When we love a piece of work, we’re desperate for more. We crave sequels.Why not channel that desire into something productive?

Think about your favorite work and your creative heroes.

What did they miss?

What didn’t they make?

What could’ve been made better?


a wonderful flaw about human beings is that we’re incapable of making perfect copies.

Our failure to copy our heroes is how we discover where our own thing lives.

That is how we evolve”


I love this, because Anne practiced the Sensation method for years, but came to find that it needed tweaking. The results for her patients and also her students was not what she wanted. She needed to do something different- not a whole new method, but like you graft a new variety of fruit tree onto the scion of the old, she created the Vital Approach.

I dont’ know if Anne would see it that way, but I think all of the innovative approaches in homeopathy right now fit well with this metaphor of the new variety on the old scion-

the oldest scion of course being the original teachings and methods of Hahnemann. But from that, we now have a very diverse ecosystem indeed.

And i think you will hear in my conversation with Anne how we found much common ground, though I have a different approach that is unique to my way of working and influenced by the teachers I’ve had.

I’m looking forward to listening to this conversation many times over, and I hope you find value in it as well.

Check out more from Anne Vervarcke at her website:

Thanks again for listening. If you enjoy 1M, there are many ways you can support it-

share it with your homeopathic colleagues, like the Facebook page, or leave a review on iTunes.

You can also directly support the show- which will always be free, but can grow with your one-time or monthly donation for as little as $1/month at That’s


i’ll sign off with one more quote, and until next time, be well and stay observant!

From Kent’s Aphorisms:

“You must feel and see the internal nature of your patient as the artist sees and feels the picture he is painting. He feels it. Study to feel the economy, the life, the soul.”

Feb 4, 2017

Here I present nearly the full conversation Roger Van zan Voort and I had, discussing and repertorizing a case of Fagopyrum from H.Farrington,  published in The Homeopathic Recorder, 1953. 


The case is part of Roger's Case Comparison Project, and he shares about that in the call.


This episode, part 2, is for those who want to sink in and hear our full discussion of this case and the resulting repertorization. If you are interested in hearing some tips and key take-aways, check out part 1, where I pulled out some main points and added some personal commentary. 

Helpful links:

to support the show.

to like the podcast on Facebook and be part of the conversation

Roger's Complete Dynamics Facebook Page

for following the Case Comparison Project 


Thanks again for your support and time listening- 1M is growing and it's exciting! 

Next month: Anne Vervarcke of Belgium. 

Feb 4, 2017

Hey hey! 1M is back with the first full episode of the year in two parts: Repertory with Roger. 

As the theme for the year is failure, what better place to start than the repertory, that treasure trove of goodness wrapped in a maddening structure of hard-to-decipher rubrics and overwhelming choices??!! 

Because the rep. is such a fertile ground for failing and succeeding, I'll be re-visiting it regularly with these Repertory with Roger episodes. Roger is Roger VanZandvoort, of course, the mind behind the Complete Repertory and Complete Dynamics online software. 

Each month Roger will be joining me while we go head-to-head on a case from his Case Comparison Project. The CCP is the Roger's systematic effort to repertorize the cured cases from The Homeopathic Recorder, old and respected journals from the early 20thc. These cases are providing grounds for expanding both the repertory representation and materia medica for many remedies of all sizes. 

So here is how it's going to go down: I picked a case from his project and I repertorized it as I would, and then we discussed it. Roger gave me feedback on my rubric choices and several gold-nugget tips on how to make good solid rubric choices. 

This was our first call, and it was a long one! To help break up the long call, I split it into two. 

Part One: 

I pull out seven important points Roger made, and highlight those parts of the call and add some commentary of my own. You'll hear me read the case, and then rather than the rubric-by-rubric conversation, you'll get the big-take aways. 

Part Two: 

Our conversation, very lightly edited. Follow along with us as we go through the case, symptom by symptom and rubric by rubric. For true repertory nerds! 

My intention is to have *one* Repertory with Roger episode published mid-month, with the first weekend of the month dedicated to an interview or in-depth topic. March is already cued up. I interviewed Anne Vervarcke of Belgium this week and I can't wait to share that call. So many fantastic points and I love hearing how her practice has evolved and the development of her Vital Approach. 

Before I sign off- a HUGE thank you to Ellen Ulfelder, my first supporter on! Ellen your contribution is a real boost and I'm so happy to hear the podcast is valuable to you. 

If you would like to support 1M for as little as $1/month, or a one-time contribution, check out the page at:

If you haven't liked the Facebook page yet, I encourage you to do so. Check it out here:

I often drop some news about upcoming guests, or post some links that support or expand on topics of the podcast. 

Also, you can follow Roger's Case Comparison Project on Facebook- become a member of his community. 

Finally- here's the case we talked about, as it can be easier to read than to listen to. Thanks again everyone for all your support and listening! 

Homoeopathic Recorder Feb. 1953, p. 231. H. Farrington: Fagopyrum aesculentum
Mr. H. H. S., aet. 64, has been well all his life up to several weeks ago. He states, “ Had ten days of torture at the Mayos’ with no benefit.” Frequent attacks of ophthalmia, worse in the left eye and in the morning. Swelling and redness of the eye-lids. Sensation of dryness. Eye-balls feel sore, especially on looking around. Stars or pinwheels in the field of vision. Nyctalopia. Always catching cold; coryza, watery, slightly acrid with sen­sation of dryness in the nasal passages. Sneezing in a warm room. Often descending to the chest. Cough with white, tough sputum. Sensation of dryness in the mouth but saliva is not wanting. Dull pains in the region of the heart; stitching pains in different parts of the chest. Pulse rapid, full. Palpitation worse lying on the right side. Pulsating in one or the other temple, in the occiput or ver­tex. Ravenous appetite. Empty, gone feeling in the epigastrium. Not much thirst. Acrid, watery eructations. Great flatulence and distension of the abdomen. Dull pains in the region of the liver. X-ray reveals no gall­ stone. Dull pain in the left lumbar region. Cold feet; coldness of legs and feet frequently waking him at night; or, burning of the legs as though hot water coursed through the arteries. Burning of the feet at night in bed. Numb­ness of the hands, legs or feet, especially the toes. Crawling like insects on the skin of the legs. Hot flushes or extreme heat all over the body, often after sleeping for an hour or two or lying on the left side. Must un­cover and then he becomes chilly.
April 6,1947—Worse from cold and cold air. R/ Fagopyrum 30., g doses.
May 22, 1947—Better in every way; feet are now warm. Sac. lac.
June 5, 1947—Not so well; heart too fast. R/ Fagopyrum 30., 9 doses.
July 31, 1947
—Heart much better. Sac.lac.
October 27, 1947—Hot flushes at night after sleeping on the left side preceded by troublesome dreams. Night-blindness. R/ Fagopyrum 30., 9 doses.
December 2, 1947—Practically no palpitation or cold feet. Remarkably few colds. Sac. lac.
January 29, 1948—Slight recurring signs of coryza. Fa­gopyrum 30., 9 doses.
March 16 ,19 4 8 —Better in every way; no colds “ this winter.” Circulation of legs normal. Sac. lac.
June 10, 1948—Caught cold but it did not go to the chest. Sac. lac.
October 14, 1948—Sweats when covered too much. Palpita­tion worse. R/ Fagopyrum 30., 9 doses.
November 16, 1948—Good reaction from the remedy; pal­pitation better at once. Eyes much better. No night-blindness. Sac. lac.
December 30, 1948—Palpitation. Cold feet in bed. R/ Fago­pyrum 30., 9 doses. September 20, 1949—Has been quite well till a month ago. Left eye inflamed; night-blindness. R/ Fagopyrum 30., 9 doses.
November 3, 1949—Immediate results especially as to heart and eye symptoms. Has been free from colds for a year and a half. Sac. lac.
June 13, 1950—Three months ago, attack like gall stones. X-ray negative.
June 24, 1950—Palpitation lying on the right side. Numb­ness much better. Sac. lac. July 13, 1950—Improving. Sac. lac.
August 8, 1950—“Never felt better.” Sac. lac.
October 10, 1950—Palpitation after meals. Stitching in left side of chest. R/ Fagop
yrum 10m.
February 1, 1951—Chest pains gone. One slight attack of bronchitis. Flatulence worse for a few days. Less hungry but tenderness from clothing and some gnawing in the stomach. Sac. lac.
July 20, 1951—A few spells of flatulence and palpitation. Sac. lac.
September 23, 1951—Throbbing pains left temple and occi­put. Gnawing in stomach. No palpitation. Fagopyrum 10m.
May 30,1952—The headache soon disappeared and he seems quite well.
Jan 9, 2017

It's a new year, but not a new podcast anymore! I'm BACK, excited and inspired for another year of podcasting, homeopath to homeopaths. 

Rather than skipping around topics, this year I'm going to go deep with one topic, explored through the same great modalities of interviews, archives, materia medica talk, and inspiration from my own practice. 

The goal this year is to make the podcast be a treasure trove of information that is not only fun to listen to, but valuable to you as a practitioner.

Roger Van Zandvoort will be back as a regular guest to tackle cases with Complete Dynamics, and we'll go head to head, his repertorization against mine. How do you think THAT's going to go? ;) Subscribe so you don't miss an episode and find out. 

And what is that main topic for the year, you might be wondering? Take a listen. I think you'll be surprised. 

Be well, stay observant, and tune in! 


1 2 Next »