Minutus

Hi Andy,
What kind of technology is being used to photograph the aura? Far-infarred photography will photograph heat. Why does it cost so much?
Blessings,
Ellen

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

on 1/29/06 5:55 PM, Kathryn Ellen Madono at kemadono@ybb.ne.jp wrote:

(( Hi Ellen, it is as I recall explained loosely (it is proprietary) through
links at the biolum weblinks given:

Links to Remedy Confirmatory Technology in use in Classical Homeopathy in
one London Clinic for 6+years
http://www.biolumanetics.net/tantalus/H ... lumanetics
Validreflection.htm
http://www.biolumanetics.net/tantalus/G ... nation.htm
http://www.biolumanetics.net/tantalus/A ... netics.htm
http://www.biolumanetics.net/tantalus/t ... online.htm
http://www.biolumanetics.net

There is a site of the inventor you can reach via the homeopathy site.

The invention is proprietary. But to answer your question, it is not
infrared -- it is not likely electromagnetic. There are fields that are not
electromagnetic which are known as longitudinal (or some call scalar
fields). These are well known, just not to mainstream science . The
bioliminal field is probably a field of this type. This is similar to the
fields of the nonphysical bodies. Bathing the body in such a field (the
inventor calls "bioliminal" field) and taking polaroid photo shows the
coherence of the nonphysical aura via an interaction of the field with the
emanations of the biofield of the person. It is not a photo of the aura like
a Kirlian (white etheric body); or aura (colored astral body) camera takes.
A different type of process than either (kirlian uses very strong EM fields)
-- I dont know about astral (the colored photos obtained at health fairs).

n bioliminal photography, degree of coherence of the biofield is correlative
with the coherence of the reflected photons that reach the camera. This
coherence level has been shown to correlate to health. Just holding the
correct rx will alter the coherence of the photo to the degree that the
photo attains relative clarity where it was blurry. Degree of clarity is
proportionate to degree of similarity or degree the rx is resonant as shown
by later results. So it becomes an independent and reliable test of rx
without administration. Been around for at least a decade. Used in London
classical homeopathy clinic for 6+ years.

The inventor has developed his own system of therapeutics used in a clinic
in New Jersey and uses the device integrated with that system. But the
London classical homeopathy clinic uses this device as described on the
website to avoid missed prescriptions and optimize homeopathic treatment.
cost?The inventor like anyone else probably wants to make a living. He has
something unique.

Hope that helps.

Best,
A

No wonder the opponents of homeopathy have a good time - if we keep
insisting that our practice is based on 'guesses' and we need such
technology to back up our guesses (instead of the usual study
procedures available to us, or is that terrible hair shirt mentality I
am promoting) - what a shame we have to resort to this and muscle
testing and pendulums and sticking pins in books etc to prescribe. Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.blogspot.com
http://homepage.mac.com/joylucas/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If you took the best homeopaths in the world (from The Hair Shirt
School of Classical Homeopathy), added Biolumenetics technology to
their practice, doubled their accuracy/cure rate in so doing,
cut the time to correct remedy by half or 2/3,
improved the reputation of homeopathy worldwide,
which allowed homeopathy to continue vs. disappear
in the next hundred years, the technology
just might be worth further examination...

Of course if full-cure rates were already running 80%+,
doubling that would be out of the question...

Even a prexisting 51% full-cure rate would make the doubling goal
impossible.

But seriously, brightness/clarity/coherence
as key elements of healing or cure
would seem to be intuitively self-evident,
especially after seeing the photos coupled with remarkable case
resolution (even using the lesser known remedies unknown to
many homeopaths).

Such a brightness/clarity/coherence (integration/UNITY)
could quickly trump considerations about polarities (DUALITY).
Carol
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/willis_protocols
Articles, blog, links, not a discussion group.

I agree with this whole heartedly.
Homeopathy stands or falls on its own- Moreover the less we associate
ourselves with proprietary technologies and things that smack of
"fringes" the better. We are not out of the woods ourself - even now-
and this is the reason I have always said that Homeopathy should not
get into the same tent as "Alternative Medicine" There are many
"alternatives" than "medicine" in there and Homeopathy to survive as a
"medical" science needs to be as vigilant of corrupting itself with
alternative medicine as it needs to be not to corrupt itself with
regular medicine approaches.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Joy Lucas wrote:
proprietary)
site.
that
similar to
camera
EM
holding
of
in
living.

Hi H2002 and Joy,
Do you feel that these methods should not be used (regardless of
whether or not they improve outcomes), or rather that the boundaries
between these and "homeopathy" should be kept clear?
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well, both really. Homeopathy doesn't need these 'fringe' methods and
if anything they do a lot to 'embarrass' homeopathy in my opinion and
that without any discussion as to the reliability (or lack of it) and
the encouraging of taking short cuts as we begin to move a way from sx
similarity and move towards image similarity. The implications are
frightening. Best wishes, Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.blogspot.com
http://homepage.mac.com/joylucas/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well, I certainly agree there are problems!
Personally I feel squeamish about having "homeopathy" equated in the
mind of "the public" with such (?) unproven and
even-weirder-than-what-we've-*already*-got technologies. I am also
biased (in favor of the stance that "homeopathy" should(?) mean
"homeopathy according to Hahnemann--at least more or less!) by my own
past experiences with the EAV/Voll and computer approaches, which were
confusing and disappointing--and these are *already* considered
homeopathy by many (they were my first introduction to the term).

But I have to disagree with your assertion that "homeopathy" has no
need for anything like that. Personally, if I had the wherewithall
(read "money"), I would certainly get into it, and would drag along my
several long-term failed cases. And I would have it done on myself. I
would have taken Julian (sob).

I heartily share your worry that this sort of "short-cut" could lead to
lazy teaching and sloppy learning--why spend hours and years reading
materia medica, learning analysis methods, etc., if all you need to do
is turn on a machine? (Tho from my brief skim of the biolumanetics
site it seems they're not able to scan zillions of remedies at a time;
that the machine does *not* get them off the hook of doing good
prescribing, it just gives quicker feedback [minutes instead of weeks /
months] as to suitability of the choice.)

So--I agree about the problem of "embarrassment", but IMO the question
of results should be truly crucial in deciding what stance to take. As
in the allopathic world availability of fancy equipment should never
take the place of clinical skill--each has its sphere of
importance!--yet that is exactly what has been happening, or so I hear
over and over! No doubt we have a very similar risk/benefit issue
here!
Best,
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Robert & Shannon Nelson wrote:
Turn on a machine and photograph 3000+ remedies in one session.

Next session, do the same thing.

If you use only the remedies commonly known in Hahnemann's
day, say 100+ remedies, that would save a lot of time.
Not!

Rigorous classical training allows you to skillfully
narrow down the remedy candidates, get in the ballpark.
Put your best candidates up there, then add a few
lesser known remedies in the same plant family, or at
the same miasmatic level, or neighbors on the periodic table,
or ...?
A limited number of remedies (up to 12?) are then
photographed with the patient as confirmatory or quality control.
Anyone afraid of the unconventional, or embarrassed by it,
probably shouldn't be a homeopath.
What's embarrassing about what I'll call "coherence imaging"?
Coherence imaging (CI for short) is no more wild than magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI). How many people today understand
MRI well enough to explain it? Very few, yet it's commonly
accepted and respected, even sought after. Wikipedia
has an interesting introductory article on magnetic resonance
imaging - the initial presentation is very vague, with later
detail not easily understandable by even most educated persons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging

Carol Willis
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/willis_protocols
Article archive in Files, blog, Links, not a discussion group.

Hi Carol,
Basically I agree with you. The devil is in the details!
However, as I think I said, if this technology is in fact successful, I
will be eager to see it flourish!
Best,
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]