Minutus

And of course, now we know what your remedy is.

Joy Lucas

www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 9/19/03 2:24 PM, Albert at hahnemannian444@yahoo.com wrote:

Well, I seem to be a homeopath who can identify low- and high-potency
pseudo-homeopathy, otherwise called a Hahnemannian.

Who the hell are you, bub?

And, no, that ain't the quote I'm looking for from Hering, but good
try, Charlie!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Oh, goodie!

This and the analysis I am just peachy anxious to hear.

Speak, oh wise priestess of the Vithoulkas Priesthood.

Show us again how to do homeopathy, and be sure to fail to again
quote Hahnemann or a Hahnemannian, oh wise priestess.

I am all ears.

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Joy Lucas wrote:
potency

Albert,

If you can express yourself without profanity and insults, it may turn out
that you have useful thoughts to offer. Please save the gratuitous potty
talk for the privacy of your own bathroom.

But going back to ideas:

on 9/19/03 7:36 AM, Albert at hahnemannian444@yahoo.com wrote:
For curiosity, would this understanding also apply to e.g. allergies, such
as someone who has very extreme reaction to a common substance? In some
cases these allergies/sensitivities are certainly curable, and I would think
the same could be said of an uncommon reaction to a reasonably healthy diet
-- I'm making two assumptions here: (1) that the traditional diets
mentioned are "reasonably healthy", and (2) that most Pakistanis and etc. do
not have gastric problems. If an entire culture suffered from its own
traditional diet, I would think that the tradition would have changed...

For people eating diets that are at odds to their genetic makeup, or at odds
with what mankind has evolved to eat, that's different.
Um, you don't know that, as she hasn't given any cases...
Wow, Hahnemann talked about Vithoulkas? You are just full of surprises! He
must've had a heckuva time machine, LOL!

Okay, I assume you mean that on these pages H references mistakes that ...
um, that some then-extant sub-branch of homeopathy was making (Kentian???).
I would like to read the reference, but your edition evidently has different
page numbers from mine. (My page 121-22 is still detailing "Symptoms of
Latent Psora".)

misguided people", or something similarly bland and boring] told you and

Er, I've almost never heard anyone mention Vithoulkas on this list. Dunno
where you got the idea he's to blame for our present follies. Want to try
again?
If you can do it in a less liverish way, I would like your hear your
explanation. It's okay with me if you feel GV is not God, nor Hahnemann,
and if you'd like to explain why he's not even "classical", I would be
interested to hear. If we can do it as a grownup-type "discussion" rather
than as a hissy fit. Shall we try?

Shannon

Are you an example of successful treatment? If so (sigh), maybe I'll
reconsider polypharmacy...

Seriously tho -- insults, ridicule and abrasiveness are not effective
communication tools, and also not consistent with our goals here. Do you
think you could shift gears in the interests of better getting your message
across?
on 9/19/03 7:50 AM, Albert at hahnemannian444@yahoo.com wrote:

Okay.... We seem to have another hyper-cerebral, bad attitude,liver-
challenged "problem child" here. What do folks think about the best way to
respond? It's kind of fun to trade sniper fire (and ooooh, he brings some
nice ones to my mind), but it's not what we're here for, and it gets sooooo
distracting...

Anyone have thoughts?
Shannon
on 9/19/03 8:24 AM, Albert at hahnemannian444@yahoo.com wrote:

You are also a very rude and arrogant personality who does not deserve any time wasted arguing with.

Case closed, your mails are going directly where they belong, to the trash.

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

Okay,

Here comes a significant reply to a thoughtful response. It will,
of necessity due to time, be in parts, assuming I can find the time
to address each one.

Initially quoting me, on Fri Sep 19, 2003 at 12:01 pm, Shannon
wrote: "[Me:] 'This is what Hahnemann called an "avoidable disease
agent or influence."'

"[Her:] For curiosity, would this understanding also apply to,
e.g., allergies, such as someone who has very extreme reaction to a
common substance?"

First off, it seems that all or at least most allergies are
iatrogenic. I had this notion a few years before reading a
contemporary Hahnemannian state it in the CLASSICAL HOMOEOPATHY
QUARTERLY about 15 years ago, and I have yet to disprove it with an
exception. That is to say, this kind of thing is very difficult to
prove consistently since it requires we unravel the cases back
through time (ala the time-element of Hering's Law of Cure).
However, we are hardly so consistently successful with today's
patients 1) because it so damn difficult to consistently do
homeopathy correctly over a long period of time with each patient,
2) because of allopathy and insurance companies having such an
extreme cartel over medicine and 3) because many people move much
more frequently today than before such that many of them exit our
multi-year therapeutics before such conditions can be identified as
the causes they seem to be by manifold confirmations. Nonetheless,
it has so far always been my finding with allergies in cases under
successfully curative treatment over a year or more that they were
precipitated as a dynamic suppression, disordering or complex side
effect of allopathic therapeuetics, usually with their damned
drugs. We therefore have to keep this in mind, for iatrogenic
diseases are generally very long term and complicated disorderings
that often do not have immediate causal manifestations perceptible
without understanding how chronic diseases increase in intensity and
complexity over many years and decades. Allopaths of course do not
presently, at least generally, hold with us in this, but the great
many masterful explanations of this by Hahnemannians from the
beginning have thoroughly established this occurs, and "allergy" is
apparently one of the words allopaths have adopted to explain these
mysterious sensitivities that can clearly be so deep as to be
inherited. I do not like to discuss allergies without this
connection being made, but that should suffice an introduction of
the subject.

We cannot avoid these allergens without extreme care, but this is a
different matter from gastric disturbances from poor diet, for we
are with allergies talking about actual disease symptoms amenable to
disintegration homeotherapeutically.

Perhaps I should also have stipulated, given your rather brilliantly
insightful penetration into the reality of usual desensitization
with cultural foods (another question altogether), that we can only
know for sure whether such things are "avoidable disease agents and
influences" by removing them. Stipulated in particular, if we
remove the cause (i.e., constantly spicy foods) and the gastritis
goes away, it can safely be said that they are avoidable and are not
actual disease symptoms. This seems to have been an oversight in my
response, which I can only explain arises due to my irritation with
HPHs not being able to identify characteristic/uncommon symptoms and
thus failing to effectively practice homeopathy (THE CHRONIC
DISEASES, p. 121), that being just one example.

Here the question of poisoning also comes into play, which is
essentially also where allergies come in, and it quickly becomes
very complicated. On the one hand, poisonings are similar to acute
diseases in many ways (I will assume this is understandable without
being specific), and the astonishing findings of obscure Indian
homeopaths having saved near-dead snake-bite victims cannot be other
than shocking to us since ultramolecular drugs are thereby
antidoting chemical poisonings. That still astonishes me that such
an extreme example of poisoning has been neutralized by
homeotherapeutics, toxicology not generally being thought of as our
realm but readily rendered so by this evidence. On the other hand,
we need to recognize that iatrogenic poisonings are readily rendered
into chronic diseases by organisms whose etheric pattern or so-
called "vital force" is no longer integral. Allergies are just one
example of these long-term side effects. Indeed, it may turn out
that many or all autoimmune diseases are iatrogenic, just as many
Hahnemannians and HPHs have held in all periods.

Those are my initial thoughts on this very serious and important
issue; it is not complete. I would therefore not quote myself here
since I did not give a lot of thought to it, but I also do not
believe I've made any mistakes or left any significant gaps in the
subject. It nonetheless unfolds into a very large subject, so this
could only be considered an overview if one finds it accurate. I
will be interested in thoughtful corrections or additions to the
subject, for allergies REALLY bug me as a constantly manifestation
of the allopathic scourge in the same way as are most recurrent
headaches and other common annoyances that are then only further
suppressed and complicated.

Dear Albert

It appears (sadly) that you seem not to understand one of the basic rules of
Life:

Respect is something one must have in order to get!

As for the "rules" of homoeopathy? Well, that's another matter. However,
"discussing" them is contingent upon the former.

Patricia Hatherly

Thank you to Bob and Shannon.

I thought I was the only one on this news group that felt Albert needed to see a Homeopath.

Sorry Albert, it was too much for me to take.

Reference the below, I think we need to collaborate and prescribe for 'the ills effects of miscommunication' chuckle!!!