Relearning true homoeopathy

By Dr Guillermo Zamora.

This is a translation from the Spanish. It has not been cleaned up from my poor attempts and google from the Spanish. as I was afraid to lose too much of the meaning.

The full Spanish translation can be found at:


When you start your studies in homeopathy, either as graduate or undergraduate, you have no idea what is homeopathy; and when you have, you think that any school or college that offers courses “Hahnemannian” do so on the basis of its creator, Dr. Hahnemann.

It begins to study and as time passes, who had the desire to have studied something medically worthwhile, we engage in a kind of disappointment, noting that we had gotten into something quasi psychological and spiritualist. Using overlays that make teachers in relation to the claims of Samuel Hahnemann inherited from misinformation and lack of research, draw us to Hahnemann always sitting in an armchair by speculations on the principles of homeopathy. This, for those who enjoy speculation and believe themselves discoverers of something beyond human understanding, love to think of a Hahnemann that way. The truth is that, regardless of Hahnemann was also a polymath, he preferred grounded through observation and experience to obtain knowledge; so he said: “I believe more in the experience in my own intelligence.”

Far from the speculative, devious, philosophical, and lazy Hahnemann we paint at school, found through their writings rather a completely observer, recorder, active, experimental, scrupulous critic himself, trying to distort their own hypotheses. He, along with his best pupil, Dr. Boenninghausen, leave us a legacy that few are interested in studying; and in contrast, we find an educational system completely distorted what Hahnemann wanted to establish as a methodology into believing that Kent (and its derivatives) is in complete agreement with him.

After a while of graduates and after tinkering with estereotipándolos remedies with certain personalities of patients, peers, teachers and even parents, we begin to realize that our cup is full lowered effectiveness, if not very poor (at best, 30%, and that thanks to shots of luck). The best we can say is that our patients feel mentally better; like the work of a doctor was merely be a spiritual counselor or psychologist (that is with all due respect to professionals in psychology who I mean everything that has to do with personality disorders).

He had the privilege of meeting Dr. Gary Weaver, who with a distinguished career of over 30 years and having traveled the world visiting museums, libraries, and persons possessing original materials, has researched the true Hahnemanniana methodology. With great generosity, and aware of my interest in knowing the truth, he has shared with me his teachings and after a number of years of practice I am clear that what is taught as homeopathy Hahnemanniana in schools, ironically has nothing to do with Hahnemann simply because Kent did not follow its guidelines and therefore its methodology crowded with religious beliefs and moral prejudice is unsuccessful in most cases where it is applied. All I had to do to relearn and make a turn in my profession, was to accept the facts and teaching without prejudice, at the most consistent and appropriate tools.

Once one entrains on the rationale for Hahnemann, start noticing results. One begins to look more closely at the signs and most notable case and particular symptoms and begin to understand the correlation of their method to the structure, classification and organization of the rubrics in the repertory of Boenninghausen. The TPB is not only a repertoire, but a SYNOPSIS what the Hahnemannian method involves. Both teachers were in harmony and coordination to establish a guide for the homeopath to synthesize all that Hahnemann claimed and desired to convey.

In this sense, teachers accredited seminaries of the Institute for Homoeopathic Medicine, Dr. Gary Weaver, Vera Resnick and Dr. Guillermo Zamora, we use almost exclusively the Therapeutic Pocket Book 1846 (Version 2015 Polony & Weaver) in our daily homeopathic medical practice. And although occasionally one finds that the remedies may not seem the most suitable for the analysis, we find practical tools within the program to view Materia Medica and so do our homeopathic diagnosis.

On the other hand, the Institute for Homoeopathic Medicine has made public its disagreement with the deplorable situation which has led to homeopathy as a medical therapy but has also published for free key points of the truth of Hahnemann, doing translations and sharing material of great value to the homeopath who has a concern relearn and practice their profession from a medical angle efficient, safe, and accurate.

As a final thought, I express my deepest regret to conflict of interest we have closed the doors to impart methodology as defined according to Hahnemann. Some schools and laboratories in Mexico City in Guadalajara Jalisco and Oaxaca. They do not give back to IHM, they give to Hahnemann, and everything seems to indicate that his main interest is to continue autoerigiéndose as “Modern Gurus” and make policy through a medical system that only calls us to a target as indicates the aphorism 1 Organon of Medicine (6th edition.):

“The unique and important mission of the physician is to restore health to the sick, which is what is called cure”

One response to “Relearning true homoeopathy

  1. Pingback: Relearning Homoeopathy | Vera Resnick. Homoeopathic Consultant I.H.M

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.