Practical application of Dr Shahrdar's article

[Michael]

Dear Soroush,

As there is ALWAYS a cause of the problem, then
consequently we should ALWAYS try to uncover that
cause and deal with it as soon as possible in the
case. Maybe we do not usually pay much attention to
etiology?

Best regards, Michael

--- Finrod wrote:
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi Michael,

Until the *cause* of the problem is dealt with, it is apt to keep
coming back, or else the imbalance will show up some other (equally or
more troubling) way--so yes, we always want to deal with the cause.
But note that the "cause" could be as simple as good ol' "mistuned
vital force"--the overall (physiological and/or mental/emotional) state
of less-than-perfect functioning.

Basically, that's the difference between acute prescribing (deal with
the current problem) versus chronic prescribing (deal with the
underlying weakness), and the difference between palliation and cure.

Sometimes you need to do acute, or even palliative, prescribing before
moving on to deal with causes and underlying states, but moving on to
address "underlying cause" when you can. And--in prescribing as you
are, based on dreams and overall characteristics, that is just what
you're doing.
Cheers,
Shannon

[Michael]

Dear Shannon,

What will be the cause of good ol' "mistuned vital
force"? I guess Ardavan is writing exactly about it.
There must be a cause for everything.

Best regards, Michael

--- Robert & Shannon Nelson
wrote:
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com

[Shannon Nelson]

The cause of "mistuned vital force" could refer to an acute episode,
but in the context of *chronic* dis-ease, it's precisely what Hahnemann
referred to as miasmatic states / disease. And that's also the subject
that Ardavan is addressing.

All I meant, is that sometimes the "cause" of a chronic symptom is
simply the same "cause" as that of the overall chronic imbalance, which
is exactly what we are treating in "constitutional" (chronic;
miasmatic) prescribing.
Shannon

[Michael]

I think miasm is not the cause in itself. There must
be some dynamic disturbance (some stress, physical or
emotional) which wakes the miasm and leads to the
creation of chronic disease.
Michael

--- Robert & Shannon Nelson
wrote:
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com

[Shannon Nelson]

Okay. What word would you use for the *susceptibility* to that dynamic
disturbance, and to the pattern of response that emerges from it?
Because note, one person's "stress" is another person's "entertainment"
or simple fact. And that to the same stressor (bear, or loud noise,
or offensive neighbor, or ...) one may react with belligerence, another
with apology, another with amusement, another with confusion... Those
patterns of characteristic response (physical and M/E) are part of the
patterns that we've called miasm.

In absence of miasm (according to the theory, as I understand it), a
person should simply respond to the needs and opportunities of the
present, both physically and emotionally, without the mental/emotional
side-trips of delusion, expectation, fear, aversion; and without
physical detours such as overaction or underaction or lingering
effects, etc. That (characteristic patterns of less-than-ideal
response) was basically how Hahnemann defined chronic disease, which he
defined as effects of miasm. But all I can do is spout
theory-as-I-understand-it.

But what's your thought--what, then, would you prefer to call the
susceptibility to be lastingly unbalanced in characteristic ways by a
given dynamic disturbance?
Shannon

[Michael]

Hi Shannon,
I have some thoughts but I am not very well-versed to
express them in words. Maybe this quote from Ardavan's
article can explain what I think of this:

"When the organism encounters an unknown or partially
known stimulus, or the intensity of the stimulation is
more than what is expected from the power of
adaptability of the patient, or the patient is in a
low state of energy, the patient cannot use his
primary adaptive mechanism to maintain the homeostasis
and, instead, uses the secondary defense mechanism to
minimize the injury and to hide the original
unresolved state. The secondary functions of vital
force become activated to hide and minimize the
injury. This persistent reaction of the organism to
the underlying unresolved original state leads to
formation and persistence of the chronic picture. This
dynamic chronic pattern can be solved if the organism
re-experiences the original state and uses its primary
adaptive mechanism. Re-experiencing the original state
leads to adaptation if the process does not cause a
new shock and the patient has enough energy for
adaptation to what he or she was once unable to
adapt."

Best regards, Michael

--- Robert & Shannon Nelson
wrote:
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi Michael,
This describes failure to completely recover from an illness or injury,
in other words the onset of chronic disease. Do you see that as being
different from activation or acquisition of a miasm?
That's the role of the remedy (or other means of "like cures like").
In that Hahnemann specified that miasms are the result of infectious
disease, this sounds more general than that, but not really different.
Cheers,
Shannon

[Michael]

Hi Shannon,
Yes, this can be the moment of activation or
acquisition of miasm.
In the list Homeopathy_Open Suriya Osman suggested
discussing Ardavan's theory for better understanding.
I hope this will help to clarify the details of the
theory.

Best regards, Michael
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com