Miasm Theory? Your opinion

[Homeo Bond 007]

"when Hahnemann developed MIASMS theory, it was "not homeopathy" according
to his first definition of homeopathy" (Taken from Shanon statement)

I think Shanon has very reliastic approach.

Yes ! exactly the totality criteria differs with miasm theory and also with
similia similibus law. Please discuss!
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp

[David Little]

At 07:27 PM 3/14/2003 +0000, you wrote:
Hello,

Hahnemann most certainly transformed his concepts of causation and
group and individual diseases in 1828 but I don't think the miasm theory
overthrows the basic principles of Homoeopathy nor Similia. It only
extended these principles into new areas. According to Hahnemann miasms are
based on contagious social diseases (Inherited and acquired) that are of
common causes and similar symptoms that affect a homogenous group. The way
Hahnemann collected the symptoms for psora was through a group anamnesis (a
collective case) based on the suffering of many patients over an 11 year
period. The symptoms recorded under psora are the collective symptoms of
the miasm in a large group of sufferers. In aphorism 101-103 Hahnemann
discusses how to investigate a chronic miasm. He clearly states that we
must study the symptoms of the disease in many patients and make a
collective group picture. This is the same in acute and chronic miasms.
This method can be applied to new miasms also.

On this basis Hahnemann searched for remedies that were similar to
these collective group symptoms. The antipsorics are *similar to psora*
because they possess the group symptoms of the miasma as it is expressed in
many differing constitutions. Although Sulphur was Hahnemann's principle
antipsoric remedy it was not the only antipsoric remedies he tested. He
introduced around 50 chronic antipsoric remedies in the Chronic Diseases in
1828. Over the years the number of antipsoric remedies has increased. So
within the collective symptoms of psora there are individual patterns of
symptoms that individualize *which* antipsoric the patient needs. One case
may need Sulphur, another Calcarea, and another Lycopodium, etc. This is
the usage of both the collective symptomatology of a homogeneous group
suffering from diseases of common cause and similar symptoms as well as the
individualization of a particular patient within the suffering group. Such
methods certainly do not lie outside the principles of Homeopathy and Similia.

For the above reasons, it is my opinion that the miasm theory only extended
the principles of homoeopathy into new areas rather then overthrew them.
Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi David,

You said:
By "social diseases" I assume you mean venereal diseases?
I had never been aware that this was part of the definition. Could you give
me a reference quote to puzzle over?

Does that mean that tubercular and cancer are not "real" miasms, and what
about the slew of other proposed "new miasms" -- leprosy, acute, and I
forget what all else I've heard proposed... How do you see these fitting
into H'n's miasm theory?

Thanks!
Shannon

[Tanya Marquette]

i think by 'social' H may have meant contagious

[David Little]

At 07:27 PM 3/18/2003 -0500, you wrote:

Hello,

By social diseases I meant universal miasms that are epidemic and
contagious from person to person. Some endemic miasms have zoological hosts
and are not universal because human beings do not transmit them person to
person. They are limited to the areas of the zoological host. This
includes Malaria, Lyme, etc.. Sycosis and Syphilis are venereal diseases.
Psora is a non venereal skin disease usually transmitted passed by human
contact. You may find discussions about these topics in The Chronic
Diseases in the theory part.
Hahnemann spoke of acute, half acute and chronic miasms. These are all
disease of common cause and similar symptoms that affects a homogenous
group. Acute miasms are infectious diseases with quick onset that are self
limiting. They come in two forms i.e. those that usually attack only once
in life time (measles, mumps, etc.) and those that can be suffered again
and again (cholera, typhoid, flus, etc). You may find these definitions in
aphorism 72 the Organon. Half acute miasms have a longer incubation period
than acute miasms. Hahnemann's example of a half-acute miasm in the Chronic
Diseases is rabies, which many take longer periods to manifest its symptoms
in human beings. Chronic miasms are life long and are not removed unless
they are cured. This includes psora, sycosis and syphilis. Hahnemann never
limited the number of miasms. He only stated that these were the most
common in Europe during his life time. He left the method for taking a
group case for chronic miasms in aphorism 101-103 of the Organon.

TB is a "real" miasm because it is contagious and has three stages of
progression like all chronic miasms. Homoeopaths often called TB miasm
"pseudopsora". Sankaran wrote of the leprosy miasm but Hahnemann considered
leprosy to be a manifestation of ancient psora not a separate miasma (refer
to CD). The same may be said of Sankaran's ringworm miasma and all other
tinea infections of the skin. These are all species of psora mentioned by
Hahnemann in the chronic diseases. Most cancers are not infectious or
transmitted person to person, and therefore, these cancers are not miasms
per say. Some cancers are caused by suppression of miasms and mixed miasms
that have formed a complex disease that may or may not be potentiated by
carcinogenic agents. Almost anyone who is heavy exposed to radiation will
get cancer. Cancer is an end product that can have many different causes.

Sincerely, David
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

[Feras Hakkak]

Hello Shannon,

Some time ago I had correspondences with Paresh
Vasani, a student and colleague of Rajan Sankaran.
Once I asked him about the miasms they speak about.
What I understood from his answer was that they do not
use the word "miasm" for a chronic disease caused by
some infection ... but they use it only for mere
classification. They had better use another word to
avoid misconceptions.

Here is my question and his answer:

Q: Do you consider the miasms only for classification
of remedies or you understand them as Kent or
Hahnemann do?

A: The miasmatic concept as treated here is not a
theory of causation but convenient classification of
some practical utility. ( ref - The substance of
Homoeopathy - by Dr Sankaran)

Best regards,
Feras Hakkak

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com

[Shannon Nelson]

Thankyou Feras, that's helpful!
Are you able to explain any more about how he is using the word -- what
defines the "classification" of miasm remedies, or what remedies he
classifies so, or ??

Best,
Shannon
on 3/19/03 2:11 PM, Feras Hakkak at f_hakkak@yahoo.com wrote:

[Feras Hakkak]

Hello,

The complete explanation is in Sanakaran's "The
substance of homoeopathy" where he describes the idea
according to his concept of disease (delusions). Also
a brief summary is in the appendix of his book "The
soul of remedies". I have only the latter and maybe
those who have the electronic copies can send the list
some related parts. However, I try to write a little
about that in my next post.

Sincerely,
Feras Hakkak

--- Robert&Shannon Nelson
wrote:
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com

[David Little]

At 12:11 PM 3/19/2003 -0800, you wrote:

Hello all,

I tend to agree that the use of the word "miasm" for anything and
everything leads to confusion at times. I believe Hahnemann is the father
of modern epidemiology and follow his teaching on the miasms in this light
by bringing them up to date. Why change definitions? There is a difference
between a Hahnemann's miasms and a diathesis, syndrome, or condition. It
would be best to leave Hahnemann's definition alone and use terms that are
more descriptive of what one is saying.
To Hahnemann miasms were infectious diseases of common cause and similar
symptoms that affect a homogeneous group of sufferers. There are also non
miasmatic disease that can form diseases of common cause and similar
symptoms like strong environmental influences, poisonings, endemic and
nutritional deficiencies. Hahnemann spoke of some of these in his Lesser
Writings. There are also psychological states like group hysteria and mass
panic, etc.. All of these conditions can be studied by the group anamnesis
and a group of remedies that affects this homogenous group can be
discovered. This aspect has not been stressed enough in modern homoeopathy.
Hahnemann had two types of case taking methods. The individual anamnesis
for unique diseases affecting a person and the group anamnesis for disease
cause by common causes that affect a homogenous group.
Hahnemann's entire work, The Chronic Diseases, is a study of the
importance of etiology related to infectious diseases of common cause and
similar symptoms. The motto of the Chronic Diseases is Cessante Causa-
Cessant Effectus i.e to remove the cause is to remove the effect. I
support the use of genus groups to study human beings and their diseases.
This includes five homoeomeries found in the Mappa Mundi, types of
constitutions, temporary and innate temperaments, acute, half-acute a
chronic miasms, diathesis, characteristic syndromes as well a the remedies
of the mineral, plant and animal worlds. Nevertheless, the over use of the
term miasm for any and all complaints does not maintain the integrity of
homoeopathic pathology. I listen to lecturer who said that he had a patient
that got a miasm from watching to much TV and another from eating too much
junk food. Does that mean we should have a televisionosis or junkfoodosis
miasm? I think not.

Best, David
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000