Bowel Nosodes, My clinical experiences

MY CLINICAL EXPERIENCE:

In the previous article the six points are Paterson’s indications for the use of bowel nosode. At this point, I would like to share some of my personal clinical experience with the readers in their use. This may provide a different view on their usefulness under certain circumstances during the course of the patients’ homoeopathic treatment especially in treating chronic diseases.



Paterson used the nosode in high potency and the related remedy low. However, I am inclined to use high potency in a constitutionally prescribed remedy (e.g. Magnesium Fluoratum 1M) and low potency (12C and 6C) where bowel nosode are indicated, and only give these when necessary in relationship to the individual cases. They are not routinely prescribed. The reason for this is that I prefer to prescribe constitutionally and observe how the remedy works for the individual patient first. Often the indicated remedy works very well and acts deeply without having to resort to a nosode. There are cases that may be helped along by an appropriately selected bowel nosode even when the indicated constitutionally prescribed remedy has been working well for some time. In those cases there may be one or two symptoms persisting that are not touched by the constitutionally prescribed remedy though the prescribed remedy showing overall favourable improvement. Rather than trying to find another remedy that may cover those symptoms or repeat the same remedy prescribed previously, a dose of indicated bowel nosode may bring about desired amelioration and at the same time giving the necessary impetus that allows the prescribed remedy to continue to act in a therapeutic way.



The presenting symptoms of the patient may be repertorized (refers to Feldman – A Repertory of the Bowel Nosodes or A Treatise on Bowel Nosodes by Agrawal) to select one that is the most appropriate, i.e., covers mental, emotional and physical symptoms. While the bowel nosode can be extremely effective in “opening up stuck” cases, a word of caution in What Not to Do is extremely important.



1) Never mix bowel nosode - mixing of the bowel nosode could put a patient’s life in danger.
2) Never give a bowel nosode if the total count of non-lactose fermenting is more than 50% and never if the percentage is rising. In these circumstances the patient is, in fact, improving (Agrawal, 1995:15). The misuse of bowel nosode can cause violent reactions in patients.



With regard to the first “What Not to Do” rule, my personal experience in this was not something to be repeated by anyone. It has taught me to be cautious and not to trust a patient to follow one’s instruction. In a moment of lax judgment on my part I made the mistake in giving a patient two different bowel nosodes. I gave her a bowel nosode belonging to one group and then thought another one would perhaps be a better fit. Instead of taking back the nosode I had given her, I asked her to keep them in case they would be required at a later date. At the same time I also instructed her to only take these after consulting with me, six months down the track, otherwise do not take them.
The reason for my first mistake was because I was in the process of moving interstate and thought that if and when the nosode was needed it would be easier for both of us if she has it already in her possession. Second, she was a highly intelligent and articulate person, so I thought that she would follow my instruction to the letter. On the contrary, in her allopathic trained thinking, “the more the better". She took the first nosode (3x12C, one a day) and then a few days later the second lot was taken. The result was a severe allergic reaction that could have killed her. Whether her allergic reaction was the result from the mixing of bowel nosode was not possible to ascertain, it did however take her six months to recover from the ordeal after having to take many allopathic drugs.



Considering what is said here, the application of bowel nosode is extremely helpful when a case requires, one nevertheless must adhere to the cautions and the protocol in their use.
The second statement of "What Not to Do" is the reason for my inclination to give lower (e.g. 6C & 12C) potencies when using bowel nosode. It is well to remember that potentized homoeopathic remedies can alter the bowel flora. In this, the constitutionally prescribed remedy given may have already caused a positive change in the patient, which changed the B. Coli to non-lactose fermenting bacilli. If the percentage of the non-lactose fermenting bacteria is greater than 50%, the use of a bowel nosode is contra-indicated as the administering of it can bring on negative effects. The use of a low potency could avoid the possible violent reaction when one is uncertain about the effects of the constitutionally prescribed remedy. As such, the use of bowel nosode, for me, only applies when a case is not moving satisfactorily towards healing and when certain symptoms are not touched by the constitutionally prescribed remedy. Another indication for the use of bowel nosode is when the constitutionally prescribed remedy works at a deep level, showing marked improvement on the mental and emotional level, yet the certain physical symptoms still remain (e.g. hot flushes, profuse perspiration). Then a dose of an appropriately selected bowel nosode may bring about the desired amelioration. A bowel nosode given under these circumstances can give further relief (please refer to the article “A Case of Magnesium Fluoratum, Tilia Europaea, Scandium” published in the February edition). I have always used these in low potency and in the manner of an inter-current remedy. The results are very positive and allow the constitutionally prescribed remedy to continue its healing process.



CONCLUSION:

It is clear that the information on bowel nosode in their clinical use and investigation is scant. However, their role in healing the myriad of chronic disease conditions may yet prove to be important when there is greater knowledge of their use and healing properties become known to us via further clinical and laboratory investigations. Personally, I have only used these nosode in cases where they are indicated or in the manner of an inter-current remedy that could assist the case to move towards healing. I am inclined to think that there are homoeopaths who have used these nosode in their clinical practice with great success and may possess much more knowledge than is presently revealed. Therefore, the purpose of this essay is also to invite other homoeopaths to share their experiences in terms of great successes and spectacular failures like mine cited above. Moreover, I hope that what I have related of my own personal experiences can inspire others who have not known of the existence of the bowel nosode before now and may begin to experiment in their own clinical work.



References:
Agrawal, Y. R. (1995) A Treatise on Bowel Nosodes. Vijay Publications, Delhi, India.
Feldman, M. (1994) A Repertory of the Bowel Nosodes. B. Jain Publishers (PVT) LTD. Delhi, India.
Hawrelak, J. A. & Myers, S. P. (2004) “The Causes of Intestinal Dysbiosis: A Review.” Alternative Medicine Review.
Julian, O. A. (1999) Intestinal Nosodes of Bach-Paterson (Translated from French by Raj Mukerji). B. Jain Publishers (PVT) LTD. New Delhi, India.
Paterson, J. (1998) The Bowel Nosodes. B. Jain Publishers (PVT) LTD. New Delhi, India.
Sankaran, P. (1996) The Element of Homoeopathy, Vol. 1 (R. Sankaran Ed.). Homoeopathic Medical Publishers, Bombay, India.