And I also notice / acknowledge that the chronic disease does not
*always* handle acutes etc. (although at least with *some* patients and
*some* remedies, according to Mangialavore et al., it will). My
remark, and the experience that lead to it, is simply that it *may*
work, and under some circumstances (such as I mentioned), may be
useful.
Yes, understood.
We can't know whether, had the pt been given Aurum for that flu, would
it have handled his flu *and* made further progress on the depression?
What I gather from certain people (e.g. Mangialavore and his students)
is that, *if* the Aurum is deeply enough suited to the person--not a
layer, not a similar (can Aurum do that? I have no idea!), then it
indeed might have. But absent JW's "alternate reality generator" (he
never got that on the market did he?
), we don't know about that particular case.
Sheri, have you read much of Mangialavore's cases? Are you familiar
with what *he* says about the matter? I understand the problem you
(and Dr. Luc) are having with the theory. But on this matter theory is
not all we have to work with. If you and he have examined
Mangialavore's work and found it wanting--in *effect*, not in
theory--then that would be very much of interest to me. But if not,
then I'll just have to leave it hanging on the "undecided" peg.
Yes, but that's not what's occurred in the cases I've mentioned...
Hm, I wonder who he's talking about??? I've never heard anyone make
*that* claim; only the claim that with *some* patients and *some*
remedies (i.e. those patients' very robust "constitutional" remedies)
that is the case; no other remedy has been needed, thru acutes and etc.
and etc., over many years.
If he's seriously interested, he should talk with Mangialavore. I
suspect, tho, that if it became a matter of "dueling theories" without
close look at the actual cases, no one would come away the wiser for
the discussion.
Best wishes,
Shannon