Minutus

Nader Moradi wrote:
((((( But med IS "antisycotic"(sic) (and tuberculinic). I'm sure you will agree that an rx need not be idem of the infectious organism to bear similarity to a miasm. Sankaran's ideas about sycosis do not depend only on medorrhinum being an incorrectly identified nosode, which, if absolutely true, has been the case for some 120 years or more. And there must be a relation between Papilloma virus and Neisseria. However, I absolutely agree that Papilloma virus must be investigated, proven if not already, and used by not just Sankaran, but the whole profession which apparently
has inherited the result of a translation error by Hempel. And any adjustments to Sycotic picture must me made accordingly. Who has info on HPV pathogenesis or proving?
((((( Better, yes. I will reserve further comment until the proving and clinical experience of the virus is done, which is perhaps a worthy undertaking of the IHA.

All Regards,
Andy

Hi Nader,

If my repertorization and reading of materia medica suggests a remedy X,
which is not listed as addressing the miasm Y which i believe to be dominant
in the case, I would (if I am being that systematic, which would be largely
wishful thinking at this point) review the broader picture of remedy X and
make sure that it does include the types of processes which I see active in
my case, which I have judged to belong to Miasm Y.

As you say, the listings are incomplete--and in addition different
homeopaths have compiled lists which are not identical--so a list could not
be my final judge of whether the remedy is appropriate to the miasm.

One reason I find Will's observations useful is that, as I said, I was a bit
confused at finding the "representative remedy"/nosode (so I had thought)
for sycosis, to be so very similar to Tuberculinum. It puzzled me, and so I
was interested in his observation.

I do find classification of remedies based on related miasms to be useful,
tho as you say, the lists are incomplete.

Why do you feel that classifying remedies by miasm is not a good task, and
if it is not useful, why have so many well-trained and experienced
homeopaths done so, and taught so?

Shannon
on 11/23/04 11:24 AM, Nader Moradi at mn0021@issa2000.net wrote:

Dear Andy and Nader,

Your discussion is beyond my understanding, still perhaps you could clear some of my haze. I have several questions.

It appears that for Sankaran, the acute miasm (and for a Hahnemanian the psoric miasm???) are not passed through the generations? Why would we even consider these miasms if they were not significant on an intergenerational level?

There are many non-nosodes used as the primary remedy for the various miasms. Why do you focus on the disease nosodes in your search for miasms? What is the process of establishing proof that a miasm exists?

Are never-well-since and aliements-agg-by rubrics always related to specific miasms?

Many thanks for your discussion,
Ellen Madono
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ellen Madono wrote:
))) Greetings, Ellen. I think that Sankaran considers that all the miasms he describes are chronic in nature. Sankaran's "Acute" miasm is a chronic miasm which has a quality of sudden manifestations--he puts aconite, bell, stram, verat-a, arnica, crot-t, chocolate and other rx in this category. This is a unique class as it does not relate to an infectious disease, apparently--therefore in this case, Nader's point may be well taken--that this one is not of equivalent valence to a Hahnemannian miasm. Several of the remedies--Bell, Stram, (and hyos which Sankaran formerly
placed in this category)--are of Louis Klein's Hydrophobia miasm, which also has a sudden component, and is an infectious disease. So I wonder if this one is really in fact Hydrophobia.

Any miasm we are currently discussing will be "intergenerational"; as we are discussing chronic miasms. However, a major point of the discussion is in fact whether diseases which are acute in their original form can be transmitted by procreation and become extant and distinctly expressed in the next and future generations. Hahnemann says a slower paced, multistage disease is requisite to become a chronic miasm in the next generation. Sankaran, if his "miasms" are really the same "animal" as what Hahnemann defined, would say that even acute and subacute diseases can become
engrafted and then expressed in the procreated gametes and thus influence the offspring. So, this is the discussion and the heart of the question being posed.

I should point out that Sankaran posits that each remedy has only one dominant and characteristic miasm, even those remedies that are multimiasmatic. This is a new concept, and central to his system of "triangulation". It is my sense that Nader feels, as some others do---that Sankaran has imposed a set of semiologic criteria to construct his categories which are not necessarily correlated with the infectious influence he assigns. Some feel that the categories may not be "natural". In particular, there is the question of whether acute diseases are capable of becoming dominant
as miasms in the offspring. So, getting at these questions is the intent of the discussion, to try to determine if Sankaran's system works well because it is describing semiology on the level of miasms, or some other plane of criteria, since Rajan used not only empirical observations as did hahnemann, but also computer analysis of typical remedies --in order to build the categories and their indications.

Psora is the first of Hahnemann's chronic miasms, and by definition is transmitted. One of the points of the discussion is that Hahnemann did not complete the differentiation of the "hydra-headed" or multivalent psora into other component infectious origins, and used it as a "catch-all" category. It is possible that people like Sankaran, Klein, Norland, and others are doing this differentiation by defining the infectious connections, which are more subtle than those of the miasms we are mostly familiar with already, and whose characteristics are florid in the succeeding
generations, affecting morphology and becoming quite obvious in the loci of pathology that appears.
(((( The nosodes will be the "bellwether" of the miasm, the defining pattern. However, not always the only or even the primary therapeutic remedy seen. For example, if we can say that Malaria is in fact plausible as a chronic miasm, then the characteristics of the actual disease itself and of its pathogen itself are by definition seminal. We could see another characteristic totality for the case--a remedy which might also be in the category of that miasm (a la Sankaran)--but otherwise has no connection. For example, the famous one, China (cinchona) as one of the cardinal
remedies for subjects expressing periodic complaints typical of unresolved malaria. Or Berberis-vulgaris. In Sankaran's system just as elsewhere, the nosode Malaria ____ (eg tropicalis) may be used as an intercurrent or for malaria miasm cases in which carefully selected remedies fail to act, and the malarial influence makes the picture that of the nosode itself.

So the short answer is that the miasm is defined as an unresolved disease that is passed on by the spirit-like vital force of the gametes and becomes a part of the life of the child in gestation and beyond. Therefore we try to relate pathogen and disease to syndromes which appear in chronic disease as part of the nature of a being---which by Hahnemann's theory became extant via energetic transmission of complexes of "ghost" versions of original diseases that humankind (or animals) have experienced in the bloodline. Hahnemann's CD theory explains why we get sick, and why we get
sick the way we do---a kind of "unified theory" in medicine. However, an incomplete one, since there are many chronic diseases that we have not the confirmation of the etiological original disease and its later indications. Finding all these connections could help solve the patterns of many chronic diseases which are not easy to cure homeopathically (CFS, Cancer, etc etc). Miasmatic classification is in fact a cornerstone of Sankaran's plant system,, by which miasm, kingdom, and "vital sensation" (which relates to taxonomic group at a particular level) can be "triangulated" to
find remedies with almost no proving--because the miasm was identified--at least the "miasm" according to the semiological system Rajan has defined, and which seems to work very well. Is Rajan's system actually reflecting the reality of the infectious to later generational chronic disease connection that was as clear cut as (for example)-syphilis? Hahnemann posited that multistage original diseases were necessary to engraft a recognizable influence on the next generations. Are there lesser miasms that also do this, even "acute" diseases that create "never well since" --more
subtle than the multistagers like syphilis, sycosis, tuberculosis, etc.?

These are the questions at the root of the discussion.

written:
What is the process of establishing proof that a miasm exists?
(((((( Perhaps others will chime in too, but I would say it is seeing in clients a pattern that is more "macro" in themes than the pattern which leads to the individual remedy. IN other words, themes rather than necessarily individual symptoms, although these can also indicate a miasm. Knowing the miasm may in some cases lead to the remedy. My sense is that homeopathy is heading toward being able to more usefully employ miasms with more reliablity as more of the extant miasms are identified and characterized. In Sankaran's system, and now even in Scholten's periodic chart
system, miasms are coming into play more and more to provide another critical criterion for the successful prescription. One can many times find remedies by the pattern match without knowing the miasm, but using a miasmatic framework provides another benchmark another context, and it is a natural context, since it involves the actual forcing functions behind the individual expression.

Initially, it will be a pattern that is not amenable to a remedy, as in the cases of syphilitic miasm that hahnemann could not cure until he discovered the syphilitic valence of mercury, gold, and other remedies of that miasm. So, incurable cases beg the identification of the themes that lead by back-calculation to the infectious disease in the predecessors that led to the later miasmatic expression. This is a sleuthing process, akin to multigenerational epidemiology--which ferrets out the sources and roots of human suffering. These roots combine with the genetic foundation
and the incarnating soul to yield the individual simillimi for each individual client.
(((((( Since a never well since an infectious disease is by definition an unresolved illness, then such a layer is a miasm. It was pointed out by David Little that layers also come about via trauma or triggering cause other than infectious disease which activate an existing chronic miasm in the client that was heretofore LATENT. In that case (eg never well since car accident) no new miasm layer is present, but only an eruption of a susceptibility that was always present into florid symptomology and suffering.
All regards,
Andy

Greetings Andy,

You are very easy to understand when you are addressing the beginner student. An admirable quality. Thank-you for your reply.

I think that you are saying the proof of the miasm lies in the logical process and it's results. Thus, the proof is clinical evidence. Has there been any organized effort to look at the clinical evidence of various "miasmatic theme" authors and their followers to "test" the hypothesis? Perhaps you are laying out the type of cases that would be significant for such a study (ailment from cases, vague sx with mainly thematic indications...., parallels between chronic acute cases and for example the Louis Klein's Hydrophobia cases).

Do you know the names of the books or articles where Louis Klein and Norland discuss these miasms?
-------------------------
Andy wrote:
(((((( Perhaps others will chime in too, but I would say it is seeing in clients a pattern that is more "macro" in themes than the pattern which leads to the individual remedy. IN other words, themes rather than necessarily individual symptoms, although these can also indicate a miasm. Knowing the miasm may in some cases lead to the remedy. My sense is that homeopathy is heading toward being able to more usefully employ miasms with more reliablity as more of the extant miasms are identified and characterized. In Sankaran's system, and now even in Scholten's periodic chart
system, miasms are coming into play more and more to provide another critical criterion for the successful prescription. One can many times find remedies by the pattern match without knowing the miasm, but using a miasmatic framework provides another benchmark another context, and it is a natural context, since it involves the actual forcing functions behind the individual expression.

Initially, it will be a pattern that is not amenable to a remedy, as in the cases of syphilitic miasm that hahnemann could not cure until he discovered the syphilitic valence of mercury, gold, and other remedies of that miasm. So, incurable cases beg the identification of the themes that lead by back-calculation to the infectious disease in the predecessors that led to the later miasmatic expression. This is a sleuthing process, akin to multigenerational epidemiology--which ferrets out the sources and roots of human suffering. These roots combine with the genetic foundation
and the incarnating soul to yield the individual simillimi for each individual client.

Blessings,
Ellen Madono
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Andy, I think many homeopaths are already doing what you say about
themes because initially it is often a group/theme made up of individual sx,
none of which, if chosen alone, would be reliable in locating the
simillimum, but grouped together within a theme, such as 'anticipation'
completely sum up the case.

At this point you might be able to recognise an active miasm, although it
can be misleading to name it too soon. For example, taking again
'anticipation' - you cannot decide between Lycopodium and Arg nit and to
confuse things more there seem to be equal sx throughout the case of both
remedies but there is a slightly stronger essence of sycosis because of some
growths under the skin and you choose Argentum because of its sycotic traits
but it transpires to be the wrong rx, but the prescriber persists along this
miasm simillimum, insisting only on remedies that are in that group.

I can see lots of pitfalls with this although I am sure many are working in
this manner with excellent results, but I think we need to know our remedies
first and foremost over and above the miasms which help, as you say, to give
context to a case.

Best wishes, Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com

disorders
discriminate
scholarly
of
and
their
of
may
a
effects on the progeny. The patient's family would be asked to do thorough
research. Otherwise, the chances of finding the toxins would most likely
require intuitive means.
miams
the hearing loss.
tautopathy. And using tautopathy if it is not indicated and not successful
is unlikely to harm the patient anyway. This would particularly be the case
when it is weighed against the gravity of the complaint, even if one is not
sure of whether it is a drug toxicity problem or an activated miasm.
that would throw weight, perhaps, toward an activated miasm. This would
more especially be the case if the concomitant effects were not registered,
known side effects of the allopathic intervention which preceded the hearing
loss.
and no miasm is clear), then the tautopathic is a reasonable test by trial
and error in 30C to see if a reaction of any kind ensues.
Dear Andy,

Thanks a lot for answer but IMO the easiest way to differentiate the
man-made and physician caused
diseases, and diseases based on the chronic miasms is disease pattern, in
first type we do not see the progression of the disease but in the latter
type as it is dynamic in nature then it progresses.

Kind Regards,
Nader

Ellen Madono wrote:
****** True science is working hypothesis tested by empirical experiment, and also allows for serendipitous result to create new working hypothesis to be further tested, and so on. That is the process. Prejudice destroys true science. So I am agreeing with you
***** Only what these authors mostly discuss in their seminars from their own clinical experience which led them to postulate and characterize the miasms.
****** I dont have a lot of case evidence, just enough to provide some clues to hypothesize.
****** By Misha I meant his proving of AIDS and discussion of the miasm. I am sure he has a miasmatic theory and other miasmatic contributions, as he is an erudite person who started in on homeopathy very early on in the modern era (probably mid- 70's) and is one of the inheritors and torch carriers of homeopathy in the UK. A person of high quality. He probably has stuff on this in his books, but I have not had chance to get these or read--these would be useful. He undoubtedly teaches his ideas at his school in Devon. I was priveleged to attend one seminar with him circa '94.

By Lou Klein--I heard him speak on hydrophobic miasm circa '94 via a seminar. Lou is also an original thinker, level-headed practitioner who uses anything available, and good teacher. I will post these notes on the hydrophobic miasm when I have a chance--especially if people will comment on them and tell me if they think that Sankaran's "Acute" (chronic) miasm could possibly actually be Hydrophobia/Rabies. I think the latter to be likely, and I hypothesize that this miasm is at the root of "ADD"/hyperactivity in children, and possibly of at least one form of vaccinosis (or
possibly only when it is coupled in a complex with Sycosis); and possibly of autism, although have no absolute evidence of that yet---it is just that the remedies frequently (not of course exclusively!) applicable (stram, Bell, (hyos-klein), lach, lyssin, etc) fit the inveterate neurological restlessness of ADD -which is often also present in autism.

Klein has written one materia medica book, and there is a second one to come out in the near future, I am told. He has done many new provings at his school, and are all available in pdf format on his luminos website. Other than this, Lou's seminars are where he gives info.

If anyone has notes of any of (especially)- Lou Klein or Misha Norland seminars, please email me privately.
Andy

J Lucas wrote:
(((( Dear Joy, I agree that MM is first and foremost, and homeopathy can only be done successfully when the pattern in a medicine is known so that it can be recognized in cases. The individualizing is the most important factor, and the miasm complex may be too abstruse to see, and may be irrelevant because the picture of the case is clearly pointing to a remedy. But when it is useful to utilize Sankaran's system of more miasmatic distinctions, however, then that may be the only way to solve a particular case, as many of the rx involved have almost no materia medica, and the
prescrip is done using the inference in triangulating kingdom, taxonomic "sensation" and miasm. The issue is in pushing the envelope. I agree that choosing an rx on miasm or kingdom or supposed "vital sensation" one thinks one perceives can be a pitfall as much as a boon in an unresponding case. I think the miasmatic side has far to go before it becomes optimally useful and close to completion--and thus more reliable as a context.

All the best to you,
Andy

Andy wrote:
"seed" and "egg" IS an "unresolved disease state"(!). Do you have any
better definition than that, Nader? Chris? Thus NEVER WELL SINCE is a
MIASM in the parent. WHY do you maintain that this cannot be passed to the
offspring just like any other miasm? Please tell me. If syphilis is *truly*
resolved and not suppressed,, then the miasm of at least that bout of
syphilis in the present time parent is not passed on to the children. If it
remains unresolved, then it IS passed on . My guess is that you
from being passed to the offspring? What is the mechanism which blocks that
transmission?

Dear Andy,

In patient with a history of NEVER WELL SINCE "fright" ,do you say that
"fright" is miasm,too?

Best,
Nader