Minutus] RV and ICU case - Follow up question
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2018 4:43 pm
A short explanation for those who are not familiar with RV (Repertorium Virosom).
Using his medical knowledge of symptoms caused by various viruses, Dr Ardavan Shahrdar painstakingly developed this repertory which is based very much on common disease symptoms. For example Headache.
It looks to see which viruses may be involved and then which remedies relate to those viruses.
Those like Dr Nader Moradi who have become used to using this technique report that when the results of RV are combined with the results of normal repertorisation, they hit THE SIMILIMUM 80%+ of the time – so it has become an excellent tool.
Currently it only works on 32 bit computers – but work is in hand to develop it to work on 64 bit computers.
Hopefully one day we will get Dr Shahrdar to come to UK and teach us first hand.
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 03 October 2018 14:18
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] RV and ICU case
Dear Ellen,
As the case had mild fever, malaise, myalgia and mild coryza before going into comatose state this means that the case is miasmatic one.
In chronic diseases, too, if there is inflammation and signs of activation of immune system, one must think the case is misamatic one.
Of course Dr Shahrdar has an article on Miasmatic analaysis which I put it at the end of my answers.
TBE stands for Tick Born Encephalitis and INF for Influenza. Name of infectious disease is not important but the Patterns are of useful.
When we say the miasm of the case is TBE or INF we men that the pattern of patient state is similar to TBE or INFL and as similar is the main law of Homeopathy therefore understanding patterns are more important than the names.
Best,
Nader
Miasmatic Analysis & Individualization
Miasmatic Analysis & Individualization , An integrated approach
Dr Ardavan Shahrdar
March 2007
1. Miasmatic analysis is the process of referring to Genus Epidemicus of infectious states to complete the image which is needed for the selection of simillimum.
2. This type of analysis is actually based on the Hahnemannian definition of miasmatic prescription. In some schools of homeopathy, you may see different miasmatic categories instead of what is here called Genus Epidemicus. Here, the term miasm means infectious disease, as termed by Hahnemann.
3. By ‘infectious diseases’ I am not referring to ‘infectious agents’.
‘Infectious disease’ is the dynamic state following the stress caused by ‘infectious agent’. The infectious ‘state’ can persist without the presence of infectious ‘agent’.
4. Conventional medicine researches are usually focused on tracing the presence of infectious ‘agents’. In phenomenological study of the miasms, the dynamic picture of primary, latent and secondary phases of infectious state is studied.
5. The reason of emphasis on ‘infectious’ state is the empirical knowledge that most of the chronic diseases arise either following a primary infectious state or following reactivation of an underlying dormant infectious state. This dormant state may be inherited from either of the parents.
6. To understand the concepts related to formation of chronic diseases and their link to primary infectious states, please read my previous articles ‘Basic Principles in Treatment of Chronic Diseases’ parts 1-3 and "40 Points in Analysis of Chronic Patients" which are in the Minutus website library.
7. ‘Viral states’ seem to be the most important subtypes of the infectious states responsible for chronic diseases. This is confirmed by both conventional and also by phenomenological studies.
8. This does not mean that other types of infectious cannot be responsible for chronic diseases. Prion diseases, Mycobacterial and even Bacterial infections may lead to chronic diseases, too. But as the majority of chronic diseases seem to be related to viral infectious states, the project of study of Genus Epidemicus is initially focused on viral states.
9. The project of Genus Epidemicus will be continued with the study of other categories and updating the existing categories.
10. The role of susceptibility is not underestimated in miasmatic system of analysis. ‘Susceptibility’ is the outcome of presence of ‘reactive’, ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’ chronic patterns. Treatment of the ‘susceptibility’ requires a holistic knowledge of ‘effective causal complex’ in the formation of chronic diseases. For a better understanding of this subject, please read
my article “The Effective Causal Complex” in Minutus library.
11. The sign and symptoms related to about 60 viral states are gathered in my new book Materia Virosa version 1.0. The related antimiasmatic remedies are mentioned in each type of viral states. Repertorium Virosum (included in the book) and its software help you analyzing the symptoms and show the most probable viral states capable of inducing those symptoms.
12. Always the individualized analysis based on dynamic valuable symptoms ranks higher than mere miasmatic analysis. Miasmatic analysis shows its great value in cases with paucity of valuable symptoms and in many cases completes the image needed for finding the simillimum.
13. Not all the symptoms that a patient presents are valuable symptoms.
Considering the totality of symptoms does not mean the mechanical adding of all the symptoms of the patient to a clipboard and repertorizing the symptoms. Before choosing the symptoms related to the active dynamism, a careful study should be done to find the valuable components. (Read the article, 40 points in analysis of chronic patients)
14. If there are enough valuable symptoms which reflect the primary state beyond the picture of the chronic ailment of the patient, mere individualization leads to selection of the simillimum and there is no need to do the miasmatic analysis. Miasmatic analysis in such cases can add to our knowledge of Genus Epidemicus remedies and show possible remedies which may be added to the antimiasmatic lists later. Absence of a remedy in related antimiasmatic remedies, prescribed according to ‘valuable’ symptoms of the patients does not show that the prescription is not a sound one.
15. But this is not the case in many cases suffering from chronic diseases.
The chronic patients may show many symptoms but those symptoms may not be related to the related dynamic chronic patterns and may be also the result of ‘static’ and ‘reactive’ underlying patterns (Read the article, The Effective Causal Complex).
16. In the cases with paucity of valuable symptoms two type of analysis should be done. First, individualized repertorizing of patient’s symptoms without considering the miasmatic group and then again repertorizing the patient’s symptoms by Repertorium Virosum to find the related miasm (EBV, HPV, HSV-1, DHF, PLV,?).
17. After the above two analyses, the top ranked remedies in the result of individualized repertorization should be compared with the antimiasmatic list of the high rank related miasm. The remedy which covers both in a high rank should be selected as the simillimum.
18. The remedy selected following above procedure is actually the simillimum for the patient and not a remedy used as a miasmatic remedy in the sense of an intercurrent remedy. The only basic principle in homeopathy is Simila Similibus Curentur and all procedures should help us to prescribe the simillimum. Here in miasmatic analysis we are actually completing the image
of the patient’s dynamic alteration referring to Genus Epidemicus.
19. If a remedy ranks high both in the result of individualization and in the miasmatic remedies of the related miasm, you can confidently prescribe it.
20. If a remedy in the result of individualization repertorization ranks high but low in the antimiasmatic group of the related miasm, the selection should be again based on the result of individualization.
21. In the opposite condition, where a remedy ranks low in the individualization and high in antimiasmatic group, a careful study in material medica will help you to show if it is rational to ignore the individualization result and prescribe according to the ranking of miasmatic analysis. It is better to have an inclination toward prescribing according to the antimiasmatic remedy in this condition.
22. If there are no shared remedies in the individualization result and the antimiasmatic list and the result of the individualization ranks high, the prescription should be based on the result of individualization and the remedy should be considered as a possible undefined miasmatic remedy.
23. If there are no shared remedies in the individualization result and the antimiasmatic list and there are no high rank remedies in the individualization result to be confidently prescribed, the first high rank remedies of the antimiasmatic group should be considered and prescription should be based on one of these remedies which seems much more suitable according to clinical experience, constitutional features, etc. The remedy prescribed according to this condition is either the simillimum or a close partial simillimum. If it is a partial simillimum, it will induce accessory symptoms as the guide for later evaluation of the case. In this case, the above procedure should be repeated.
24. If there are no indicators to choose between the higher antimiasmatic remedies, the first antimiasmatic remedy should be prescribed (For example, Thuj for HPV, Merc for HSV-2, Gels for PLV, Nit-ac for EBV, Phos for DHF,?).
This remedy is again either the simillimum or the partial simillimum.
24. If there are two or more shared remedies, the above comparisons should be done for each remedy and the best ranking should be considered.
25. This is not a complicated process! If you exercise it in about 10-20 cases, you will do it in few minutes.
26. The project of ‘Genus Epidemicus’ is an everlasting research which keeps the epidemic data and their related remedies being updated continuously. It is great to see that with updating these data and using them in case analysis we are helping the patients suffering the chronic conditions, more than the day before.
27. This is actually the Hahnemannian way of miasmatic prescribing. The difference is in the updated epidemiological data and detailed specified antimiasmatic groups.
28. You can use the current available techniques introduced since the birth of homeopathy by the pioneers and also by the contemporary great homeopaths to do the individualization analysis. But, referring to Genus epidemicus with the above procedure, helps you to choose the best simillimum.
29. When you use this type of analysis, the process of individualization and miasmatic analysis will become integrated and gradually you will feel that they are not actually two different processes.
30. All is about finding the simillimum finding the hidden or partially hidden dynamic state beyond all the symptoms related to secondary defense mechanisms, static constitutional features, reactive patterns, medicinal derangements,?. and prescribing according to this underlying primary altered state to choose the best simillimum.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Ellen Madono ellen.madono@gmail.com [minutus]"
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 10:15 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Minutus] RV and ICU case
Using his medical knowledge of symptoms caused by various viruses, Dr Ardavan Shahrdar painstakingly developed this repertory which is based very much on common disease symptoms. For example Headache.
It looks to see which viruses may be involved and then which remedies relate to those viruses.
Those like Dr Nader Moradi who have become used to using this technique report that when the results of RV are combined with the results of normal repertorisation, they hit THE SIMILIMUM 80%+ of the time – so it has become an excellent tool.
Currently it only works on 32 bit computers – but work is in hand to develop it to work on 64 bit computers.
Hopefully one day we will get Dr Shahrdar to come to UK and teach us first hand.
Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 03 October 2018 14:18
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] RV and ICU case
Dear Ellen,
As the case had mild fever, malaise, myalgia and mild coryza before going into comatose state this means that the case is miasmatic one.
In chronic diseases, too, if there is inflammation and signs of activation of immune system, one must think the case is misamatic one.
Of course Dr Shahrdar has an article on Miasmatic analaysis which I put it at the end of my answers.
TBE stands for Tick Born Encephalitis and INF for Influenza. Name of infectious disease is not important but the Patterns are of useful.
When we say the miasm of the case is TBE or INF we men that the pattern of patient state is similar to TBE or INFL and as similar is the main law of Homeopathy therefore understanding patterns are more important than the names.
Best,
Nader
Miasmatic Analysis & Individualization
Miasmatic Analysis & Individualization , An integrated approach
Dr Ardavan Shahrdar
March 2007
1. Miasmatic analysis is the process of referring to Genus Epidemicus of infectious states to complete the image which is needed for the selection of simillimum.
2. This type of analysis is actually based on the Hahnemannian definition of miasmatic prescription. In some schools of homeopathy, you may see different miasmatic categories instead of what is here called Genus Epidemicus. Here, the term miasm means infectious disease, as termed by Hahnemann.
3. By ‘infectious diseases’ I am not referring to ‘infectious agents’.
‘Infectious disease’ is the dynamic state following the stress caused by ‘infectious agent’. The infectious ‘state’ can persist without the presence of infectious ‘agent’.
4. Conventional medicine researches are usually focused on tracing the presence of infectious ‘agents’. In phenomenological study of the miasms, the dynamic picture of primary, latent and secondary phases of infectious state is studied.
5. The reason of emphasis on ‘infectious’ state is the empirical knowledge that most of the chronic diseases arise either following a primary infectious state or following reactivation of an underlying dormant infectious state. This dormant state may be inherited from either of the parents.
6. To understand the concepts related to formation of chronic diseases and their link to primary infectious states, please read my previous articles ‘Basic Principles in Treatment of Chronic Diseases’ parts 1-3 and "40 Points in Analysis of Chronic Patients" which are in the Minutus website library.
7. ‘Viral states’ seem to be the most important subtypes of the infectious states responsible for chronic diseases. This is confirmed by both conventional and also by phenomenological studies.
8. This does not mean that other types of infectious cannot be responsible for chronic diseases. Prion diseases, Mycobacterial and even Bacterial infections may lead to chronic diseases, too. But as the majority of chronic diseases seem to be related to viral infectious states, the project of study of Genus Epidemicus is initially focused on viral states.
9. The project of Genus Epidemicus will be continued with the study of other categories and updating the existing categories.
10. The role of susceptibility is not underestimated in miasmatic system of analysis. ‘Susceptibility’ is the outcome of presence of ‘reactive’, ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’ chronic patterns. Treatment of the ‘susceptibility’ requires a holistic knowledge of ‘effective causal complex’ in the formation of chronic diseases. For a better understanding of this subject, please read
my article “The Effective Causal Complex” in Minutus library.
11. The sign and symptoms related to about 60 viral states are gathered in my new book Materia Virosa version 1.0. The related antimiasmatic remedies are mentioned in each type of viral states. Repertorium Virosum (included in the book) and its software help you analyzing the symptoms and show the most probable viral states capable of inducing those symptoms.
12. Always the individualized analysis based on dynamic valuable symptoms ranks higher than mere miasmatic analysis. Miasmatic analysis shows its great value in cases with paucity of valuable symptoms and in many cases completes the image needed for finding the simillimum.
13. Not all the symptoms that a patient presents are valuable symptoms.
Considering the totality of symptoms does not mean the mechanical adding of all the symptoms of the patient to a clipboard and repertorizing the symptoms. Before choosing the symptoms related to the active dynamism, a careful study should be done to find the valuable components. (Read the article, 40 points in analysis of chronic patients)
14. If there are enough valuable symptoms which reflect the primary state beyond the picture of the chronic ailment of the patient, mere individualization leads to selection of the simillimum and there is no need to do the miasmatic analysis. Miasmatic analysis in such cases can add to our knowledge of Genus Epidemicus remedies and show possible remedies which may be added to the antimiasmatic lists later. Absence of a remedy in related antimiasmatic remedies, prescribed according to ‘valuable’ symptoms of the patients does not show that the prescription is not a sound one.
15. But this is not the case in many cases suffering from chronic diseases.
The chronic patients may show many symptoms but those symptoms may not be related to the related dynamic chronic patterns and may be also the result of ‘static’ and ‘reactive’ underlying patterns (Read the article, The Effective Causal Complex).
16. In the cases with paucity of valuable symptoms two type of analysis should be done. First, individualized repertorizing of patient’s symptoms without considering the miasmatic group and then again repertorizing the patient’s symptoms by Repertorium Virosum to find the related miasm (EBV, HPV, HSV-1, DHF, PLV,?).
17. After the above two analyses, the top ranked remedies in the result of individualized repertorization should be compared with the antimiasmatic list of the high rank related miasm. The remedy which covers both in a high rank should be selected as the simillimum.
18. The remedy selected following above procedure is actually the simillimum for the patient and not a remedy used as a miasmatic remedy in the sense of an intercurrent remedy. The only basic principle in homeopathy is Simila Similibus Curentur and all procedures should help us to prescribe the simillimum. Here in miasmatic analysis we are actually completing the image
of the patient’s dynamic alteration referring to Genus Epidemicus.
19. If a remedy ranks high both in the result of individualization and in the miasmatic remedies of the related miasm, you can confidently prescribe it.
20. If a remedy in the result of individualization repertorization ranks high but low in the antimiasmatic group of the related miasm, the selection should be again based on the result of individualization.
21. In the opposite condition, where a remedy ranks low in the individualization and high in antimiasmatic group, a careful study in material medica will help you to show if it is rational to ignore the individualization result and prescribe according to the ranking of miasmatic analysis. It is better to have an inclination toward prescribing according to the antimiasmatic remedy in this condition.
22. If there are no shared remedies in the individualization result and the antimiasmatic list and the result of the individualization ranks high, the prescription should be based on the result of individualization and the remedy should be considered as a possible undefined miasmatic remedy.
23. If there are no shared remedies in the individualization result and the antimiasmatic list and there are no high rank remedies in the individualization result to be confidently prescribed, the first high rank remedies of the antimiasmatic group should be considered and prescription should be based on one of these remedies which seems much more suitable according to clinical experience, constitutional features, etc. The remedy prescribed according to this condition is either the simillimum or a close partial simillimum. If it is a partial simillimum, it will induce accessory symptoms as the guide for later evaluation of the case. In this case, the above procedure should be repeated.
24. If there are no indicators to choose between the higher antimiasmatic remedies, the first antimiasmatic remedy should be prescribed (For example, Thuj for HPV, Merc for HSV-2, Gels for PLV, Nit-ac for EBV, Phos for DHF,?).
This remedy is again either the simillimum or the partial simillimum.
24. If there are two or more shared remedies, the above comparisons should be done for each remedy and the best ranking should be considered.
25. This is not a complicated process! If you exercise it in about 10-20 cases, you will do it in few minutes.
26. The project of ‘Genus Epidemicus’ is an everlasting research which keeps the epidemic data and their related remedies being updated continuously. It is great to see that with updating these data and using them in case analysis we are helping the patients suffering the chronic conditions, more than the day before.
27. This is actually the Hahnemannian way of miasmatic prescribing. The difference is in the updated epidemiological data and detailed specified antimiasmatic groups.
28. You can use the current available techniques introduced since the birth of homeopathy by the pioneers and also by the contemporary great homeopaths to do the individualization analysis. But, referring to Genus epidemicus with the above procedure, helps you to choose the best simillimum.
29. When you use this type of analysis, the process of individualization and miasmatic analysis will become integrated and gradually you will feel that they are not actually two different processes.
30. All is about finding the simillimum finding the hidden or partially hidden dynamic state beyond all the symptoms related to secondary defense mechanisms, static constitutional features, reactive patterns, medicinal derangements,?. and prescribing according to this underlying primary altered state to choose the best simillimum.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Ellen Madono ellen.madono@gmail.com [minutus]"
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 10:15 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Minutus] RV and ICU case