A comparison of the symptoms derived using a radionically prepared remedy with the existing materia medica : a triple-blind proving of a well proven homoeopathic remedy

Abstract

AIM The aim of this study was to determine whether a radionically prepared remedy would elicit symptomatology similar to the existing materia medica of the same remedy during a triple-blind proving.

METHODOLOGY This homoeopathic proving of a radionically prepared remedy in 30C-equivalent (CR) potency was of a true experimental design, conducted in the form of a randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Thirty proving participants (20 verum and 10 placebo) were selected according to defined inclusion criteria, and were closely monitored by the researcher throughout the proving to ensure prover compliance and wellbeing. Data was collected in the form of prover journals, in which provers recorded their symptoms experienced over the pre-proving observation period, the duration of the proving and the post-proving observation period.

The proving symptomatology was collated into standard materia medica and repertory formats, following the CHROMA-Prove© method. Twenty keynote rubrics were selected according to criteria, which included symptoms ‘Grade 2’ or higher, PQRS (peculiar, queer, rare, strange) symptoms and general symptoms, and were subjected to repertorial analysis using RadarOpus software program (version 1.38). The nature of the proving substance was unblinded only after an estimation of the substance by repertorial overlap was made by the principal researcher, following which qualitative and quantitative comparisons of the proving materia medica and repertory were made against the existing materia medica of the same remedy accordingly.

Results The proving of the radionically prepared remedy produced observable symptoms that resulted in a total of 332 materia medica entries, which translated into 563 rubrics distributed across 32 chapters. Five repertorial techniques were applied to the twenty rubrics selected and the researcher was able to correctly identify the radionically prepared proving substance, which was revealed to be Cantharis vesicatoria.

Conclusion From the results of this study, it was evident that the proving of Cantharis vesicatoria 30CR produced symptomatology that was sufficiently characteristic to enable the researcher to correctly identify the remedy. The repertorial and materia medica comparisons to the existing materia medica of Cantharis vesicatoria, however, highlighted several similarities and differences that need to be explored further in order to bridge the observations and questions posed in this study.