Minutus

John wrote:
?? Radioactive in what sense? The usual meaning has to do with ejection of subatomic particles, brought about by the decay of atoms -- but I don't think that's what anyone has suggested about homeopathic, have they?

Joe's suggestion seemed very reasonable to me, that they exhibit the *primary* effect of the remedy (the "like" part of "like cures like"), but perhaps a basophil does not have a sufficiently (?)complex(?) or whatever physiology to mount the "secondary action" / healing response? I'm afraid I don't know much about basophils, and I haven't taken the time to look up what the granulation involves, or refers to. (Would be interested if anyone can explain for me!)

What interested me about it, was that it *does* seem to clearly illustrate the "like" part of "like cures like", and unfortunate that Vithoulkas missed that.
Would "isode" be the better word here?
Yep, I agree -- find it very interesting that *usual* "similar" works better clinically than "idem". I don't know *exactly* why that should be; after all the "idem" (same substance potentized) is more of a "similar" than "the same" -- after all, it's vastly changed in form, quantity, has been potentized, etc.
:-/ Well……
I think sometimes it does become important that we take stock of *why* we are doing what we're doing, and find the workable perspective. Sometimes being too much in sway of "the bigger picture" might lead to despair. Maybe better to leave "the bigger picture" "in God's hands", and bring what light and air we can, to each of our own small parts.

Nothing's gained by running oneself down into despair -- the glass is half-empty *and* half-full, and we each have to / get to decide, over and over and every day, whether to focus on what is gained, or on what is lost. My Hallmark moment? (self-talk…)

Vitoulkas is caught in his own web. His understanding of remedy action is flawed and he won't see it any other way because, well he is Vitoulkas!
His understanding of remedy action is not in accordance with the Organon.
A homeopathic effect is only observed when a stronger similar disease affects a weaker similar disease. This is plain 101 homeopathy. When this occurs the weaker disease is unable to sustain and expires. Then the VF is able to exert its action as per aph 9 and THEN only can healing take place. Read Organon.
If the remedy exerts its effect on a VF which is not affected by a similar disease state, then it exerts its full primary action, which we see in a PROVING. Then the VF exerts a secondary counter action.
Vithoulkas thinks the healing is based on the remedy causing an action on the VF which is opposite to the disease, he says in potency the action is opposite to the action of the crude substance. That is treatment by opposites, which is the law of palliation. He forgets that many proving symptoms come from exposure to crude substance, look at ars alb. for example.
The remedy acts homeopathically if it meets a similar disease, irrespective of potency. Provings in potency might bring out more subtle characteristics (primary action) but that's not a rule. Look at hydrogen, the 30 produced more mentals than the 200. It depends on the prover etc.
Vitoulkas won't see this because, he is Vitoulkas. And several homeopaths have followed his line of thinking without stopping to examine the reasoning themselves, including Roy.
Regards,
Paul
Sent from Samsung Mobile

Hello:
You wrote:
“Vithoulkas thinks the healing is based on the remedy causing an action on the VF which is opposite to the disease, he says in potency the action is opposite to the action of the crude substance.”
Can you explain more? I’m not sure to well understand.

Regards

Jean-Claude
De : minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Envoyé : dimanche 14 décembre 2014 08:58
À : minutus@yahoogroups.com
Objet : Re: [Minutus] BENNETH: The Covert Alliance between Homeopathy & Skepticism [w...
Vitoulkas is caught in his own web. His understanding of remedy action is flawed and he won't see it any other way because, well he is Vitoulkas!

His understanding of remedy action is not in accordance with the Organon.

A homeopathic effect is only observed when a stronger similar disease affects a weaker similar disease. This is plain 101 homeopathy. When this occurs the weaker disease is unable to sustain and expires. Then the VF is able to exert its action as per aph 9 and THEN only can healing take place. Read Organon.

If the remedy exerts its effect on a VF which is not affected by a similar disease state, then it exerts its full primary action, which we see in a PROVING. Then the VF exerts a secondary counter action.

Vithoulkas thinks the healing is based on the remedy causing an action on the VF which is opposite to the disease, he says in potency the action is opposite to the action of the crude substance. That is treatment by opposites, which is the law of palliation. He forgets that many proving symptoms come from exposure to crude substance, look at ars alb. for example.

The remedy acts homeopathically if it meets a similar disease, irrespective of potency. Provings in potency might bring out more subtle characteristics (primary action) but that's not a rule. Look at hydrogen, the 30 produced more mentals than the 200. It depends on the prover etc.

Vitoulkas won't see this because, he is Vitoulkas. And several homeopaths have followed his line of thinking without stopping to examine the reasoning themselves, including Roy.

Regards,

Paul
Sent from Samsung Mobile

In a message dated 12/13/2014 8:47:37 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, minutus@yahoogroups.com writes:
John B: Shannon, I'm glad you and Tanya are challenging or at least asking me about this, and so thank you for sticking your head up and LOL braving what could have evoked a cranky response from an old crackpot like me I'm fully aware of the negative connotations of it, but I have thought long and hard about it, and whereas it may not sound right I have concluded that as novel and dicey as it may seem, it is an accurate term for the mode of operation of "homeopathic" drugs.

"Homeopathic remedies" are indeed radioactive, and this not just theory, it reportedly is a replicable observation made by Yvees Lagne and Rolland Conte et al in Theory of High Dilutions, p.137 (Polytechnica Paris 1996) and subsequent assays wherein they reported recording weak beta emissions on x-ray film from Potassium Iodine 2C and in later work from Natrum muratica 30c.
But as we should expect from a nuclear reaction, the radioactive index of wide spectrum emitters, what are essentially isotopes, is not confined to the upper electromagnetic spectrum, it also has been recorded in the 1 kH range by Benveniste and Montagnier. As early as 1906 Boericke and Tafel iconically recorded the outline of a key on photographic paper from a dilute of radium bromide; thermoluminescence of diluents of lithium chloride were discovered by Rey in 2002
http://www.apotheker.at/internet/oeak/n ... hysica.pdf
It should also be noted that the most popular physical assay of homeopathic drugs has been nuclear magnetic resonance, most notably Demangeat's http://www.homeopathyjournal.net/articl ... 7/abstract
It should also be noted that a radioactive index and nuclear nomenclature for "homeopathic remedies is entirely in accordance with Hahnemannian science, as he recognized that the action of homeopathic drugs was purely magnetic and beyond the capabilities of 19th century chemical analysis. A chemical reaction is in the domain of the electron shell; a nuclear reaction is in the nucleus.
I also must contend that ejection of subatomic particles is not brought about by the decay of atoms; rather "decay" is due to nuclear transduction from the background radiant field reorganizing the nuclear matrix in unstable media. The closest others have come to a nuclear explanation are Conte, Demangeat Joe Rozencwjag and Luc Montagnier, although their explanations appear to me to remain mostly supramolecular. Joe Rozencwjag is the only one I know of who has offered a piezo electric (electrostriction) explanation and it could be these explanations are not mutually exclusive.
No one I know of is discussing this, btw (except maybe Joe and John Harvey)
God, I'm tired . . I'm going to bed.
John Benneth

________________________________

________________________________

Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (12)
John Benneth, Homoeopath
PG Hom - London (Hons.)
http://johnbenneth.com
SKYPE: John Benneth (Portland, Oregon)
503- 819 - 7777 (USA)

Thanx Paul. I guess I am surprised as I studied with a person who was a follower of Vithoulkas—studied with him
and then ran his ‘school’ based on GV’s teachings. We were definitely taught primary/secondary reactions and law of
similars. My favorite example, even in the raw state is Rhus fox. Native Americans ate the tips of new shoots in the
Spring to build immunity. It is also one of the polycrests for poison ivy. We do have many remedies with same sx
in the raw and homeopathic forms. So when did GV come out with this position of his?

I also remember a journal that GV put out in which there was an article of a study by a physicist of some variety
where he took readings of the different frequencies measured from about 6 different remedies in 2 different potencies each.
That was pretty dramatic at that time (early-mid 1990’s?). Is this contradictory to GV today?

t

I also am baffled by this. Vithoulkas's classic "Science of Homeopathy" teaches primary and secondary action very plainly.
???

Regarding eating rhus tox. One of my older patients had been fed rhus tox as a child which did seem to stop his ability to errupt.
However he has been a patient of mine for the past dozen years. Highly susceptible to all of the rhus modalities - worse cold, worse first movement, better movement unless overdone, etc. I treated him with rhus tox in LM potencies for years but couldn't get him toaintain until Rhus v which took him to a higher level of health. ( I think I misidentified that remedy in a previous post awhile back)

Did eating the remedy in his childhood add a complete pathology on him all those years ago?

Sent from my iPhone

"Idem" and "Similar"....

The potentised "idem" relates only to the external factor, say a poison.
The "similar" relates to the individual patient's reaction to the poison.

The principle of Detoxification uses the "idem" in order to get rid of the poison or of its energetic imprint. It then leaves the true picture of the patient clear and obvious (generally...) allowing to treat the patient without any outside interference.

Joe.

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.

"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"

www.naturamedica.co.nz

That is interesting. I would venture a guess that the PI eaten as a child related to his constitution on some level.

I can also say that my PI sx are always thus fox which never worked. However. Rhus V has kept me functioning every
summer for about 10 yrs now. It is not curative for me, but sure beats 5 mos of torture.

t