Miasms

[alpha_panthera1]

You should have read the more complete quote that Mrs. Rottler mailed
on Monday. In that piece he does indeed compare himself with others
and does by no means claim to have been unaffectable from ailments in
general. The quote is also to be seen in the context of his CD
textbook from which it is taken, wherein he writes in detail about the
miasms and how to diagnose them. He just extended his vast experience
in such diagnosing to his own person. If in the various ailments of
his lifetime he does not recognize the symptoms, why should he have
diagnosed himself with it; just to avoid to stick out or to trouble
future generation readers ? Maybe you were just in need of some icon
to revolt against ...? ( And btw did you read this book of his
? )
Panthera
--- In minutus@y..., "Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD." wrote:
arrived
people

[Simone L.A. Hogan]

S,

Sure can:

"by an accurate comparison of the state of health of
all such persons with myself, who, as is seldom the
case, have never been afflicted with the psora, "

which can be found on at the following URL:#

http://www.homeoint.org/books/hahchrdi/hahchr04.htm#P40

He is not the *only* one, but one of a few, by his
reckoning.

Cheers,
Simone
=====
Simone Hogan
www.homeopathyaustralia.com

http://careers.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Careers
- 1,000's of jobs waiting online for you!

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

Not only did I read Gaby's full quote, I also read it many times before
in Hahnemann's books, with whom BTW I am pretty well acquainted.

I still maintain that there is nowhere any real explanation of his
affirmation; we all keep saying that it is very difficult or even
impossible to diagnose or treat oneself as we do not have an objective
view of ourselves. Why should that not apply to H himself?
If you know of any information that can confirm that he was
"miasm-free", I would be very interested to hear about it. If it is just
what he said about himself, it is nothing else than an autobiographic
piece of information and should be taken exactly for what it is worth;
it is not H's usual well researched and experimented teaching.

As for your remark about revolting, I have no icons and no idols to
revolt against, I have done that a long time ago and am totally free of
masters, gurus and other directors. I learn from others and with others,
but I can think for myself without parroting anybody.

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".

[Zaidee]

Dear Simone,

I wonder if the source of this claim could also be mentioned!!!

Sincerely,
Zaidee

Message: 13
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:19:22 +1100 (EST)
From: "Simone L.A. Hogan"
Subject: Re: Miasms
--- Robert&Shannon wrote:
He did not claim he was the "only" one, but one of a minority.
=====
Simone Hogan
www.homeopathyaustralia.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Simone L.A. Hogan]

Which claim are you referring to, Zaidee as there are
two in the attached text!!!

Hahnemann indicates he is free of any miasm (which is
seldom the case) in his book "The Chronic Diseases
...".

The other claim was made by Rochelle, I believe.

Simone

--- Zaidee wrote: > Dear
Simone,
=====
Simone Hogan
www.homeopathyaustralia.com

http://www.yahoo.promo.com.au/hint/ - Yahoo! Hint Dropper
- Avoid getting hideous gifts this Christmas with Yahoo! Hint Dropper!

[Zaidee]

Dear Simone,

Sorry, as I got the reference in one of the following digests. I was
curious about Master's claim being free of all miasms. Thanks for the
reply. Take care.

Sincerely,
Zaidee

Message: 16
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 18:00:12 +1100 (EST)
From: "Simone L.A. Hogan"
Subject: Re: Re: Miasms
Which claim are you referring to, Zaidee as there are
two in the attached text!!!
Hahnemann indicates he is free of any miasm (which is
seldom the case) in his book "The Chronic Diseases
...".
The other claim was made by Rochelle, I believe.
Simone

[Rochelle]

If it was to do with Miasms I doubt it was me!!!

Regards
Rochelle
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.422 / Virus Database: 237 - Release Date: 20/11/02

[Shannon Nelson]

Oops, what did I say? Was I supposed to do something

Shannon
on 11/26/02 8:53 PM, Simone L.A. Hogan at ozhomoeopathy@yahoo.com.au wrote:

[Simone L.A. Hogan]

Rochelle,

Apologies. You were right, it wasn't you.

Zaidee,

The other poster was Shannon.

Regards to you both,
Simone

--- rochelle wrote: >

=====
Simone Hogan
www.homeopathyaustralia.com

http://www.yahoo.promo.com.au/hint/ - Yahoo! Hint Dropper
- Avoid getting hideous gifts this Christmas with Yahoo! Hint Dropper!

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Colleagues

In reading the exchanges on Miasm, it has helped as a revision to clarify
some points in my mind, so I would like to share them with you.

I think there is a problem with terminology. In fact David Little directly
points to this issue at the end of his last msg.

For this reason, I just like to give the following definitions:
(If you disagree, please definitely comment)

Please remember that Miasm was defined originally as a 'fog' induced
disease. Hence malaria was thought to be because of the fog of the marshes.

Acute disease = A set of symptoms which may be regarded as an epidemic
disease, either the patient survives it or dies of it. (eg cholera, measles,
or meningitis)

In the Organon pls see also references to peculiar miasm, infectious miasms,
and especially "acute miasms which recur in the same manner (hence known by
some traditional name)." Aph 73.
These require the administration of one specific or selection from just a
few remedies to cover the specifics of the disease symptoms - pls see Aph
241

Chronic Miasm = Aftermath of an infection which leaves a lasting chronic
impression and is capable of being passed on for many generations.
In today's terminology, when Miasm is mentioned on its own, a chronic
miasm - eg psora - is being referred to.

Chronic disease = A set of symptoms that last the remaining life of the
patient - the patient either dies of it or with it.

Acute within a chronic or acute of a chronic = This is a 'flare up' of a set
of symptoms and is not an epidemic disease. This is the reason for the
symptoms responding to the administration of the chronic remedy.
[Joy gave us the example of curing an acute with the chronic remedy, unless
she can prove otherwise, most probably she was talking of acute of the
chronic and not an acute in terms of an epidemic disease like cold or flu -
although the patient may have reported flu like symptoms.]

It is important for homoeopaths to be able to know clearly the difference
between an acute of a chronic and an acute as in an epidemic disease.

We also need to understand causes of disease:

We have Fundamental Cause [These are the inherited (miasmatic) and
environmental causes with which we are born]

Maintaining causes - Environmental and nutritional etc factors which
adversely affect us.

Initiating Cause. These are the things that are clearly seen as the start of
the current phase of symptoms.
Where we have a situation that the person has NBWS chill, heat, flu;
vaccination, grief, fright etc. In such cases, effectively the initiating
cause has awoken a latent miasm.
So these are not miasms in themselves (as Nader rather tongue-in-cheek asked
in case of fright) but the beginning of the reawakening of a latent miasm.

I look forward to your comments
Kind regards

Soroush