Minutus

Dearest Joy
We know for example from cases of Gonorrhoea which have been treated by antibiotics and then correct homeopathic remedy that the discharge returns. This discharge is devoid of the micro organism causing the Gon in the first place.
We also know about the susceptibility (the soil) which one needs to have to succumb to the 'disease' or effects of the micro organism.
But tell me - assuming that we have some one who is absolutely healthy will they catch measles without the micro organism for measles?

Before you answer, please let me just remind you of one of the first cases of ethnic cleansing - which was the newly arrived Europeans on American soil giving the blankets of people who had suffered from smallpox to the natives. The natives then caught smallpox which was new to the Americas.
We see the same pattern in the newly found tribes in the AMAZON and the great care that is now being taken so as not to pass on micro organisms - even of the flu which has killed many people in the Amazon region.
So you need the susceptibility and you need the 'causative' agent for the 'disease' to take hold.
With kindest regards

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joy Lucas
Sent: 22 November 2010 10:00
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Aph 81 - Organon 6
I think it is best to stay clear of metaphors, they muddy the waters, especially if you are still saying that the seeds are the morbific agents and that they are required because they CAUSE the radish, i.e. the disease.
You do not need the seeds as disease can be grafted. So isn't it better to stick with the disease metaphor.
Underlying miasms can be, in this way acquired, through grafting and in generations, when the micro-organisms that are associated with syphilis are no longer present - or are you suggesting that anyone showing sx of the syph diathesis will, under lab tests, show to have those same mirco-organisms present?
It is important to understand CAUSATION - Hahnemann wrote about Fundamental cause; Exciting cause; Maintaining cause.
The underlying miasm has to be aroused - NOT by the micro-organism but by one of the above causes. Are you saying then that anyone with the syph diathesis has the micro-organism as a maintaining cause.
Joy
http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com

http://www.streetcollege.co.uk
Dear Joy

So you have accepted that you need something from a radish to propagate it!

Of course susceptibility is important – neigh essential. This explains why when someone with flu sneezes on a bus, not everyone in the bus will get flu. The susceptible ones will and the others won’t.

Hahnemann clearly refers to the agents and I purposefully underlined the magic three words “variety of injurious agencies” (shame the underlining did not come through!).

Our susceptibility is the soil (which Pasteur admitted to on his death-bed) and the particular micro-organism etc is the seeds to get a particular named disease to establish itself in the body – e.g. chickenpox, measles, etc. Without the susceptibility the micro organism cannot do much! For example something like 10% of the population are carriers of the meningitis organisms (swabs from their throat will show this) but they are immune to it.

Also certain micro organisms are safe in one part of the body but not in others. Some are perfectly OK in the lower digestive system, but introduce them to the upper digestive system and the person could have a major crisis.

With my highest regards – as ever

Soroush
________________________________

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1153 / Virus Database: 424/3271 - Release Date: 11/21/10

You keep saying 'causing', and that is what I am challenging.

I don't think you can answer your own question about measles, with thoughts on suppression, mutation, damage to immunity through vaccinations etc and all that the modern world brings to our varying lifestyles and how it might have an effect on micro-organisms and I don't think anyone can answer it either. I do not know whether the science is there. All we can acknowledge is that micro-organisms exist. It is as weird and wonderful as how homeopathy works. But if you want to take the conventional micro-biologist and immunologist point of view then that's your choice of course but to what extent any one of us has any or all or many or few micro-organisms within us and what function they have is not at present entirely answerable by anyone.

Hahnemann continually talks about the 'wholeness' of the mix regarding the organism, morbid agents (and these can be other items and not just microbes, i.e. there are many 'sick making influences', as he calls them) vital force, sx, disease. He talks of their unity and not as separate issues. The cause never is nor can ever be the micro-organisms on their own.

When Hahnemann writes about infection he clearly says it isn't material nor is it mechanical, it is dynamic. A child with measles infects another not with material but through a conceptual influence and this is the same way that our medicines work 'each possessing its own specific energy to alter the well being through dynamic and conceptual influence.

If you accept this latter then you are well on the road to understanding homeopathy but what doesn't bode well is when you try to marry together conventional thinking in microbiology, immunology and homeopathy.

As for you last analogies - let's just work from the point of view that we all have the associated microbes of smallpox, 'flu and heaven knows what else within us and all they need to derange the vital force and present as sx is, 1) susceptibility (which will vary enormously from one individual to another), and 2) a causation BUT the causation is not the microbes but the trigger which brings to the surface the susceptibility, i.e. it is no longer latent. If you ask what could be the causation in your analogies, keeping in mind what Hahnemann wrote about Fundamental cause, Exciting cause, Maintaining cause, then dealing with unknown or unfamiliar races, other human beings and all the stresses that may have ensued, would have been or could have been the causation. Causative agent is not the microbe.

Joy
http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://www.streetcollege.co.uk

Dear Joy
I fully understand what you are saying. However, you cannot - repeat NOT, rule out the role of micro organism in the common diseases.
So as to push the point home, going back to syphilis (and Hn wrote a book on sexual diseases before the discovery of homeopathy) unless one has unprotected intercourse of some kind with a person who is infected with syphilis, one is not going to get syphilis. So some how, the micro organism of syphilis transfers itself to the next person and starts to replicate eventually being able to overwhelm the person.
Hn did not have access to present day's knowledge on micro biology and means of detection.
The fact that measles is able to go from one child to another and start to replicate itself, means to me that it is not a dynamic process but something that is 100% physical. The germs cannot come out of nowhere.
The cases of the smallpox with the native Americans or the flu with the Amazonians etc further proves the point.
That is why I asked, can some one in a sterile environment catch measles or other contagious diseases?

So far as the Native Americans were concerned, their environment was free of the smallpox micro organism - in other words, as far as smallpox was concerned they had lived in a sterile condition. Enter the dirty pox carrying blankets and things changed - irreversibly.
Rgds

Soroush

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joy Lucas
Sent: 22 November 2010 14:17
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Aph 81 - Organon 6
You keep saying 'causing', and that is what I am challenging.
I don't think you can answer your own question about measles, with thoughts on suppression, mutation, damage to immunity through vaccinations etc and all that the modern world brings to our varying lifestyles and how it might have an effect on micro-organisms and I don't think anyone can answer it either. I do not know whether the science is there. All we can acknowledge is that micro-organisms exist. It is as weird and wonderful as how homeopathy works. But if you want to take the conventional micro-biologist and immunologist point of view then that's your choice of course but to what extent any one of us has any or all or many or few micro-organisms within us and what function they have is not at present entirely answerable by anyone.
Hahnemann continually talks about the 'wholeness' of the mix regarding the organism, morbid agents (and these can be other items and not just microbes, i.e. there are many 'sick making influences', as he calls them) vital force, sx, disease. He talks of their unity and not as separate issues. The cause never is nor can ever be the micro-organisms on their own.
When Hahnemann writes about infection he clearly says it isn't material nor is it mechanical, it is dynamic. A child with measles infects another not with material but through a conceptual influence and this is the same way that our medicines work 'each possessing its own specific energy to alter the well being through dynamic and conceptual influence.
If you accept this latter then you are well on the road to understanding homeopathy but what doesn't bode well is when you try to marry together conventional thinking in microbiology, immunology and homeopathy.
As for you last analogies - let's just work from the point of view that we all have the associated microbes of smallpox, 'flu and heaven knows what else within us and all they need to derange the vital force and present as sx is, 1) susceptibility (which will vary enormously from one individual to another), and 2) a causation BUT the causation is not the microbes but the trigger which brings to the surface the susceptibility, i.e. it is no longer latent. If you ask what could be the causation in your analogies, keeping in mind what Hahnemann wrote about Fundamental cause, Exciting cause, Maintaining cause, then dealing with unknown or unfamiliar races, other human beings and all the stresses that may have ensued, would have been or could have been the causation. Causative agent is not the microbe.
Joy
http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com

http://www.streetcollege.co.uk
Dearest Joy
We know for example from cases of Gonorrhoea which have been treated by antibiotics and then correct homeopathic remedy that the discharge returns. This discharge is devoid of the micro organism causing the Gon in the first place.
We also know about the susceptibility (the soil) which one needs to have to succumb to the 'disease' or effects of the micro organism.
But tell me - assuming that we have some one who is absolutely healthy will they catch measles without the micro organism for measles?

Before you answer, please let me just remind you of one of the first cases of ethnic cleansing - which was the newly arrived Europeans on American soil giving the blankets of people who had suffered from smallpox to the natives. The natives then caught smallpox which was new to the Americas.
We see the same pattern in the newly found tribes in the AMAZON and the great care that is now being taken so as not to pass on micro organisms - even of the flu which has killed many people in the Amazon region.
So you need the susceptibility and you need the 'causative' agent for the 'disease' to take hold.
With kindest regards

Soroush
________________________________

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1153 / Virus Database: 424/3271 - Release Date: 11/21/10

Dear Soroush
This is exactly the point I was trying to make several months back when I wrote about how I contracted hepatitis A (from my children who in turn had contracted it from someone they stayed with before we left Peru)
Everyone focussed on my (and the kids') susceptibility - but what interested me was that we all went down with hep A, one after the other (me last of all, two weeks later).
To me it is clear that a causative agent was also at work - agreed, we were vulnerable as our family had split apart, but nevertheless, there was a causative agent. Otherwise, I think we would have simply got ill in our own particular ways.
Liz
________________________________

Yes of course it's dynamic - how could it be otherwise? everything in this world is energy driven.
But there can still be a causative agent, which affects you dynamically, and then you exhibit symptoms of the disease.
In this way, miasms can also be passed to other people dynamicallly (e.g. through marriage, where the gonorrhoeal miasm can be passed to a partner) but in this case, as there is no longer a causative agent, the 'infected' perosn may exhibit symptoms/susceptibilities linked to the miasm, but without the original disease itself manifesting.
Liz
Liz

Then we cannot agree but you must realise that what you write is not how Hahnemann understood it.

Joy

http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://www.streetcollege.co.uk

You obviously did get in your own particular ways - hep a.

Astonishing that homeopaths still do not understand causation.
Joy

http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://www.streetcollege.co.uk

What is your understanding then of Hahnemann's writings on causations?

Joy

http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://www.streetcollege.co.uk

Also, just to ask you Soroush is what do you do when it comes to taking the acute case and you could ask about the wealth of potential causations. I am assuming then, from you have written, that you do not ask about this wealth of information that could be vital to the case and lead you to the simillimum quickly, and you just write 'microbes'- fully realsing that this doesn't actually contribute to the case analysis in any way whatsoever.

Joy

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote:

Dear Joy
I note that you are not responding to the direct questions I ask. I hope this is not Varun’s influence!
Of course it is the relevant totality of the symptoms that is important during case taking!
But I though this was a discussion about “variety of injurious agencies” which cause disease.
Unless one understand the causes of ‘epidemic’ or ‘contagious’ disease and the importance of personal and public hygiene, then we have not understood Hn’s instruction as to what it is that makes one a true practitioner of the curative ART.
Kindest regards

Soroush
________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joy
Sent: 22 November 2010 20:26
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Aph 81 - Organon 6
Also, just to ask you Soroush is what do you do when it comes to taking the acute case and you could ask about the wealth of potential causations. I am assuming then, from you have written, that you do not ask about this wealth of information that could be vital to the case and lead you to the simillimum quickly, and you just write 'microbes'- fully realsing that this doesn't actually contribute to the case analysis in any way whatsoever.

Joy

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com , wrote:

size=1 width="100%" noshade color="#a0a0a0" align=center>

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1153 / Virus Database: 424/3270 - Release Date: 11/21/10