Miasmatic Repertory

[andyh]

Nader Moradi wrote:
(((( You know as well as I do that this is a non sequitur. While fright may be a result of an event which sets off a latent miasm, is fright proximally the result of an infection? No. So why do you bring it into the conversation about Hahnemannian miasms when I ask you to substantiate your repetition that there are energetic states that cannot be passed on, a result for which you give no mechanism. Is never well since malaria the result of infection and is it an unresolved disease which is the definition of a miasm? Yes. Is the energetic state of the parent passed on
through the vital living principle of the gametes? Yes. Is there any reason that rabies miasm cannot be transmitted through gametes? You have given me no reason.

You miss my point completely and inexplicably, for some reason cannot respond to it cogently, and I cannot spend further time discussing it with you. What is clear as day but which you cannot see (that all energetic taints can be passed on--whether they are capable of producing a distinct miasmatic imprint on the next generation or not) is not something that you can apparently see enough to be able to debate, and you thus waste my time again. We thus (again) inexplicably cannot get by this point and continue with the MEAT of the discussion. If this is a result of a language
barrier problem, I am sorry that I do not speak your native language, but time is time. Sorry. Goodbye for now.

Best wishes,
Andy

[David Little]

At 05:03 PM 11/25/2004, you wrote:
Hello all,

Miasms are the unresolved affects of infectious diseases. These
affects of these miasms may be passed on to the next generation. A true
miasm by Hahnemann definition is not just *any* unresolved disease state.
These are simply never-well-since whatever symptoms. In my experience NWS
symptoms can also be passed to the next generation but they are not all
caused by miasms. A terrible unresolved fright in a parent might affect the
next generations but that is not a "miasm". It is an inherited emotional
complaint. The unresolved affects of malaria also has the potential to be
passed on to the next generation. This is an infection with a chronic
protozoan parasite. It is a miasm. If the mother is weaken, fevered, and
sickly her children are liable to be weaken, feverish and sickly. etc.

So Andy, I think the problems is simple this: miasms are the affects
of infectious disease. Not all NWS symptoms are caused by miasms. If the
NWS affects are caused by toxins, lack of nutrition, emotional or physical
trauma, and host of other possibilities may cause a chronic state but they
are not miasms. It is a matter of getting the terminology right.

Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

[andyh]

>

Nader wrote:
David Little wrote:
(((( Thanks, David. Yeah, I have no problem with the definition of a hahnemannian miasm as a taint from an unresolved infectious disease, which is transmitted to offspring not by pathogen but by derangement of the "spirit" of the gametes. Our recent minutus discussion has clarified that pretty well. And I also see no mechanism to block passage of never been well since states that have no overt manifestations, but are still unresolved illness and thus qualify as a miasm, if yet only identified, characterized, and utilized (in the case of Hydrophobia for example) by Lou Klein
and probably some others. I don't feel like minor miasms are insignificant. Here was part of my reply to what Nader had written above:

"...While fright may be a result of an event which sets off a latent miasm, is fright proximally the result of an infection? No.

Is never well since malaria the result of infection and is it an unresolved disease which is the definition of a miasm? Yes.

Is the energetic state of the parent passed on through the vital living principle of the gametes? Yes.

Is there any reason that rabies miasm cannot be transmitted through gametes?

(My answer is that there is no reason, and that the distinction that (according to Nader and Chris' research), that Hahnemann made between unresolved acute disease and unresolved chronic, staged, disease incorrectly ignores the effects of other miasms which may not be as obvious, but which are present in the genome). IMO and the opinion of Lou Klein Hydrophobia is one of these miasms, and it is not by any means minor. It may be equivalent to Sankaran's so-called "Acute" miasm, which seems to be missing an infectious precursor, and the remedies are similar for both of those
posited. Malaria also has to be significant, as does Typhoid and such continuous fever. AIDS miasm is also recognizable. There are many other ancient diseases which exist in genome as miasms IMO and we have only scratched the surface. I have a working hypothesis currently that these are discrete entities, and not just a result of interferometry, as it were between several of the better-characterized Hahemannian miasms.

Sankaran's fungus/ringworm miasm is one in question. Fungus is certainly infectious, and certainly systemic in many cases, and certainly difficult to resolve. I know Will Taylor has speculated that "Candida" is a major miasm, perhaps even the true precursor of psora, since he is not convinced about scabies according to a lecture a few months ago. What is your opinion as to its status as a discrete miasm?
Best to you,
Andy

[Nader Moradi]

Dear Andy,

There is no need for you to learn my native language, the problem is that
you are impatient.
Like you I know that "fright" is not infectious agent but why I asked this
question?
Our miasm discussion has two part: 1- Criteria for being chronic miasm 2-
practical use of chronic miasms
For first part we concluded that passing from one generation to the next
generations can not be criteria for being chronic miasm as we saw that some
none infectious agent can affect next generation but can not be chronic
miasm because chronic miasms progress without treatment, therefore one
criteria for being Chronic miasm is being infectious disease.
Then you asked about NBWS and passing malaria effects to next generation, I
wanted to say that NBWS can not be criteria for chronic miasms as we have
NBWS and passing for next generation of other conditions such as "fright"
but this not enough for being chronic miasm, as "fright" activates latent
miasm (you said), I answer malaria activates latent miasm, too and can not
be classified as chronic miasm only based on NBWS and passing to next
generation.

Rgds,
Nader

[andyh]

Nader Moradi wrote:
((( Well, maybe, but about a *week* ago you said that malaria and hydrophobia were acute diseases and the pt either recovered or died and nothing in between. And that these were "acute" miasms and could not be passed on to offspring cause Hahnemann said so. You said that for this reason Sankaran miasms should not be called miasms. This interested me, and I have been trying ever since for YOU to substantiate that these "acute" miasms could not be passed on and develop as chronic susceptibilites of distinct type in offspring. I have asked you at least twice to substantiate
this claim, and you have ignored me. What do you want me to do, converse with someone who does not speak on point?

Nader wrote:
((( Fright is irrelevant as it is noninfectious and no one ever said it produced a miasm.
((( This is mostly unintelligible. Miasms can exist as a result of a disease experienced during ones life which was unresolved and grafted a layer over the inherited miasms which predisposed to get infected in the first place. If one procreates, that top-layer taint is passed on prominently, because one's gametes carry the signature of one's energetic state, in this case, of an unresolved disease, whether that be florid or Never Well Since. It was long ago established in our discussion that miasm is a noxious nonphysical entity and not a pathogen, but that the microbe is
opportunistic to the presence of that energy. You are making distinctions between "chronic" and "acute" ,miasms which I dont think are valuable. The key point about a miasm is that it is UNRESOLVED DISEASE, e.g. compromised immunity due to a burdening energy of particular quality and pattern, and which attracts particular opportunists and is an ECHO as it were of a previous DIAGNOSABLE NOSOLOGY, but NOT EQUIVALENT TO IT. Syphilitic miasm does not equal syphilis. It resembles it, but is a process which creates morbidity from an energetic burden, with or WITHOUT a microbial
burden present.

A miasm is either INHERITED, or is present because of a unresolved disease in the PRESENT LIFE. Either way,, the miasm results from an UNRESOLVED DISEASE. My present deduction is that it does not matter whether that unresolved disease is labelled a chronic one or an acute one, or subacute. In a given individual, the disease is unresolved, either by natural or iatrogenic means. This creates an energetic state which impairs the entire organism and causes progressive morbidity without the presence of microbes. Never Well Since = Miasm. The extent of Malaria in its later
miasmatic morbidity may be less florid than Syphilis. But it fan still be a miasm. Creating categories for "Chronic, Acute, Subacute" diseases is superceded by what happens in a given individual immune system and is passed on. Influenza of 1918 Never Well Since in many tens of thousands of future parents likely passed on a taint of which we are yet unable to discern when it shows up in the office because we have not yet characterized it. We are still dealing with a catch-all category of Psora--we need to further differentiate.

Either an inherited or a Never well since state creates chronic disease, and if procreation occurs, this can be passed on to the offspring and result in chronic susceptibility and morbidity. This morbidity may be mainly psychological, but it is a state of being with a distinct character. This is the area that Sankaran has been investigating---the miasms which may not produce tertiary ulcers or wart overgrowths, etc.----but are miasms nonetheless and help define and contribute to the finding of a remedy or nosode which can remove the blockage.
(((( This is also mostly unintelligible. That fright cannot be a miasm under our definition is not in dispute, nor does including it in the discussion shed ANY light on whether malaria, hydrophobia, or any other chronic state due to Never well since any disease deemed "acute" , "subacute", "chronic", or *whatever* can be passed on to offspring or not. Fright can be part of a miasmatic EXPRESSION/Manifestation, (eg Hydrophobia (Klein) or "Acute" (Sankaran))--but it is not a miasm itself.

You are saying that Malaria cannot be a discrete miasm, but only an exciting trigger to an existing "chronic miasm" borne of a deeper, (assume "multi-stage" disease such as syphilis). The question of whether this is true, or whether Malaria for example can pass on a distinct pattern only referable to itself (as Sankaran posits) has been the whole point of the discussion, and you have not given me any evidence, only tautological statements, despite my asking at least twice.

Since I know that these states can be passed on, and you cannot refute it logically or understandably, that is why I now desist from the discussion. I have benefitted from the discussion, but now you are holding it up, and I dont want to spend more time on it. It is a complex topic, and language difference is creating an additional problem. I am sorry about this, but time is precious!

Sankaran's typhoid and malaria miasms remain very much alive to my mind as possible hahnemannian type miasms which cross the procreative barrier and become chronic in offspring. I still remain open to the possibility that they are not distinct entities. But Sankaran's empirically derived observations and definitions, BEAR OUT IN RESULTS IN his inferential "triangulation" system of Kingdom--vital sensation--"miasm"; AND I see no (and you have given me no) mechanism why the energy pattern of Rabies, Malaria, Typhoid, or other severe acute or subacute in a Never Well Since
scenario cannot be passed to offspring. Thus I remain of the opinion that Sankaran's "miasms" could be just that--miasms in the hahnemannian sense--albeit ones which are not as florid as true psora, syphilis, or sycosis. I feel Sankaran's type of analysis is moving in the correct direction, and that the surface has only been scratched. Further discussion about this is hampered by communication difficulty, apparently. Sankaran "Ringworm" miasm remains a question mark for me, but I find it plausible given the infectious nature, commonly unresolved nature, and systemic nature
of fungal infections. Sankaran "Acute" (a chronic miasm) miasm I am hypothesizing at this point for the purposes of further investigation may have hydrophobia (rabies) as its infectious precursor, for reasons previously discussed.

Thank you for an interesting discussion of miasms. I may be impatient, but I don't have time for discussions whereby for communication or other reason do not warrant the time spent. This one has run its course. Thanks.
Andy

[Ellen Madono]

Dear David and all,

I don't know how well I am following this discussion, but it would seem that the classical status of the 4 miasms also has to do with the degree to which a state has become imbedded or endemic to the human race. Many of us may have little chance of having come in contact with the disease state leprosy or malaria for many generations. Yet the mental emotional state of the leper seems feasible to me regardless of where we live and what diseases are common. The classical miasms are truly pandemic (as is cancer, aids, ...) So if we add in some of Sankaran's (and others) miasms, we really confuse the definition or at least my image of miasm, though we may help in the discovery of the homeopathic remedy. Is that justified? Or maybe we should be using another word besides miasm? Or that would add to the confusion?

Blessings,
Ellen

[Suriya Osman]

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Simon King wrote:
Nader
Papilloma

Hi Shannon
I think what Will said was that Med is not the nosode of Sycosis,,
sycosis being a term for a fig which means a warty kind of growth
while medhorrhinum being the substance made from the pus of a
gonorrhea patient is more of an inflammatory infection and not warty.
I would have thought that the HPV which causes venereal warts would
thus be more likely to be the sycotic nosode.

Correct me if I m wrong

regards

Suriya