West Nile Virus & Lyme Nosode/Dave

[David Little]

At 03:13 PM 8/12/2002 -0700, you wrote:

Dear David,

One must approach this subject with a balance that is in line with the
facts and experience. Hippocrates taught that there is rarely single
cause of an illness because most diseases are due to an etiological
constellation of factors. When it comes to infectious diseases these
etiological factors include the innate predispositions of the patient, the
level of virulency and exposure to the infective pathogen, and the time and
circumstances affecting the individual. The inner factor is the
susceptibility of the congenital constitution. The outer factor is the
nature of the infective agent, its virulency and the amount of exposure.
The circumstances that span the inner and outer regions are related to
physical and psychological stress at the time of expose.

As you think that germs are not part of the causal link in disease; are
you willing to drink water from a well that is contaminated with cholera or
lick up body fluids tainted with Ebola? Homoeopaths that believed that
germs are part of the causal picture of diseases like cholera include
Samuel Hahnemann who support the idea that infectious diseases involving
microorganism. That is why he called cholera an acute miasm. So your saying
Hahnemann, the founder of modern epidemiology, had fixed delusion on the
subject?

Hahnemann combined the Hippocratic concept of miasms with the idea of
animalcule (microorganisms) and developed the first coherent germ theory.
In Hahnemann’s time there were two major theories about the origin of
microorganisms, procreative generation and spontaneous generation.
Spontaneous generation taught that microorganisms have no parents and
appear only under certain conditions. The procreative theory is based on
the reproduction of species. During the cholera epidemic of 1831, Hahnemann
suggested that cholera was caused by “miasmic animated beings”. He
supported the idea that microorganisms are living creatures that propagate
offspring under suitable conditions.

"….the cholera miasm finds a favorable element for its multiplication and
grows into an enormously increased brood of those excessively minute,
invisible, living creatures, so inimical to human life, of which the
contagious matter of the cholera most probably consists."

The Lesser Writings of Samuel Hahnemann, Hahnemann, Dudgeon Edition,
Cure and Prevention of the Asiatic Cholera, page 758.

Hahnemann refuted the atmospheric-telluric theory by showing that
cholera was an infectious microorganism. This was well before Koch
(1843-1910) confirmed the source of cholera in Calcutta, India, in 1884.
Hahnemann studied the collective symptoms of cholera through letters and
prescribed three major remedies, Camphora, Veratrum and Cuprum. he also
suggested the Cuprum Met 30c could prevent cholera. The homœopathic
prevention and treatment of cholera saved the lives of thousands while the
allopaths lost most of their patients. This was because Hahnemann
understood the constitutional and causal theory in the right light.
Such ideas have been around since Bechamp and are important for
understanding the importance of *terrain* but should not be taken in a
one-sided manner. There is little doubt that in certain terrains and a
weaken immune system certain saprophyte germs become pathological.
Nevertheless, this is not justification for saying that germs play no role
in a disease such as cholera. Cholera is not a bacteria that is a
saprophyte commonly found in the human body that goes pathological. It is
innately virulent, pathological and potentially deadly. That is why we
support the development of homoeopathic prophylaxis, diet, hygiene,
sanitation, city and town planing, and other subjects related social
welfare. The outer and inner "terrain" must be made as healthy as possible
to prevent social diseases from spreading.

The etiological constellation related to infectious miasms is based on
susceptibility but does not exclude the pathological nature of malaria,
cholera, Ebola, TB, etc. Infectious diseases appear due to interdependent
origin that include the predispositions of the congenital constitution and
its susceptibility, the virulency and amount of exposure to the pathogen,
and the time and circumstances affecting the individual. We are speaking of
the science of medicine not whether one person is under the delusion that
another person is under a delusion because they do not share the same fixed
idea.

The healing arts demand flexibly and a holographic vision based on
interdependent origin of a number of factors. The one sided mechanistic
blames only the germ and the one sided naturalist blames only the terrain.
Hahnemann saw the susceptibility of the constitution and virulency of the
infectious miasms as interrelated and acted accordingly. No one has 100%
immunity to everything and infectious miasms change the terrain over time.
One can not look at these things in isolation.
The best food for thought is too avoid all extremes. If one reviews
diseases in general and infection in particular the etiological
constellation makes much more sense than the "got to be one or the other"
debate. This is not one of those situations that suits absolutes. Single
cause is not a complete system whether it is based on the host or pathogen
alone. These factors are part of the interdependent origin of the disease
that transcend simple one sided explanations.

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

[Dave Hartley]

Hi David,

Certainly I deserve this for pointing up only one radical excursion to one
side of the "middle path."


My recent (January) brush with "turista" disease after my trip to Mexico
suggests that I should decline the cholera water

[isali ben-jacob]

This seems to exemplify the two principles of oriental medicine with its roots in the writings of the Yellow Emperor's Inner Classic which dates around 200 BC. It asserts that natural law operates upon the cosmos, the human body, and the earth. And the second principle asserts the interdependent relationship between the mind, the chi(vital force) and the body, which is referred to as the three treasures.

With these two principles in mind the doctor of oriental medicine attempts to assess the status of the chi (vital force), the pathogenic influence, and its source in an attempt to arrive at a Dx.

David Little wrote: