I appreciate the kudos, let's thank daily LM's for allowing me, at times, to compose well thought out responses.
I'm reading the gonorrhea thread and what Dr Shahrdar wrote. It will take a few more readings to fully understand, as a non-medical.
I would like to point out that HPV is associated with cancer, especially cervical cancer, which is why the Gardasil vaccine was created and is heavily promoted.
HPV is also being associated with large increase of oral cancer in men, usually of middle age and up but may lay dormant for many years, which is why Gardasil is being promoted for young men who are apt to not have the safest sex and may be exposed to HPV. Many dentists can now perform early oral screenings using rinses and UV light scopes to detect early malignancies, and they are finding these are on the increase having previously declined due to decrease in smoking, which previously caused most oral cancers. HPV related oral cancer is now surpassing that.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv-and-men.htm
http://www.menshealth.com/health/sex-cancer
Thus, I question how HPV can be the true cause of the sycotic miasm when it's only recently seen causing this large increase of oral cancer in those who are exposed and carry HPV?
Has cervical cancer been on the increase?
http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/cervical/statistics/
Statisically, cervical cancer is on the decrease due to early detection. But that would be accomplished by allopathic suppresion not homeopathic treatment thus other cancers should develop resulting from this suppression, and that also is being not shown as generally decreasing cancer rates.
You need to have a current HPV exposure in your body to develop this type of oral cancer. Not sure if there is much history on those who had HPV and later had children. HPV, like HSV, is currently considered uneradicable, thus even homeopathic treatment of an HPV acute infection doesn't mean you don't have the virus still in you. Has it been shown homeopathic treatment eradicates the virus in addition to acute effects? Meaning a previous HPV positive person now is HPV negative after homeopathic treatment?
What about the cancer miasm that was put out there by Foubister?
If HPV was causing the sycotic miasm, wouldn't there be lots of cancer developing in those whom we have been classifying, under Hahnemann's definitiion, as haivng the sycotic miasm inheritance, influence? Have we seen lots of cancer in previous generations that may now be considered due to HPV?
Personally, I have clearly been identified with two inherited miasmatic diseases in the sycotic miasm. Medh was my first remedy years ago, I have had and still have some keynote rubrics of Medh and because at the time it was LM and I was new to homeopathy it caused severe aggravation due to overdosing.
Would it have caused a severe aggravation of an existing miasmatic disease if it was an incorrect antimiasmatic remedy?
Just thinking out loud.
Regards,
Susan

