Minutus

Dear Isali

Thank you for your kind thoughts.

Of course other remedies have the power of strengthening the VF to get rid
of what needs to be chucked out.

I had a case of a lady with heavy bleeding and short cycles etc. During
case taking I discovered that she had been wearing an IUD for many years and
in fact the story of change in menstruation could be traced back to it.

I suggested that she should seriously consider having it removed.

I then proceeded to prescribe her the indicated remedy which was Lach.

She rang after a couple of weeks to say that she had had a period and the
IUD had been expelled.

This does not touch on the Robin Murphy's story of a sil. case where the
whole cancerous breast sloughs off but it still has me in wonderment at the
power of homoeopathy!

It is truly humbling.

Soroush

_____________________________________

Message: 11
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:02:46 -0500
From: "isali"
Subject: Re: Silica - Sheilagh Creasy

From: Finrod
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 2:34 PM
Subject: [Minutus] Silica - Sheilagh Creasy
the
had
bone
a
the
we
system
by
but
my

If

Hi Soroush, I hope your most recent season of celebration brought good
offerings to you. On the subject of Sil and its propensity to 'expel', I
wonder whether a more generalised notion of expulsion might find merit. I
wonder if there may be made a substitution without loss of intention of
meaning for the word excretion for expulsion. Wherein the intention is to
describe the function of elimination as a physiological action normal for
the VF. As such all remedies will tend to expell with Sil being more
profound in its action and with a differing profile of action.

Always looking forward to your thoughts,

regards, isali

Greetings Soroush. So, to my query, would you then find acceptance for
viewing expulsion as an action of excretion; ergo, a physiological action?
My reading of your post could infer such, and my clinical experience
confirms it. I ponder this as an issue because such a notion is not part of
the oriental medical paradigm as such; however, it does appear to be valid.
Therefore I seek to find its placement within my construct so as to embelish
it and expand its range or my range via synthesis with other paradigms.

Your thoughts kind sir will be most appreciated.

From: Finrod
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 8:49 AM
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Digest Number 845
and
the
such
that
the
in
to
headache
not
organ.
accepted.
shall

Hi Isali,

An interesting thought, to equate expulsion (expelling non-self) with a kind
of excretion (expelling ... what? unwanted "self", or "unwanted products of
'self'"...). In both cases we are getting rid of something unwanted...

In what category would Oriental medicine put it?

Shannon

on 12/16/02 8:19 AM, isali at isali@bellsouth.net wrote:

Greetings Shannon, hope Robert is doing better.
The issue for which I'm seeking address is whether in viewing function we
may find acceptance for the words expulsion and excretion to be sufficiently
proximal in action so as to be viewed the same energetically. If we may
find agreement with that notion then the allopathic view of physiological
function has synthesis with our mutual perspectives of oriental medicine and
homeopathic medicine. If valid then this is means by which I find synthesis
amongst differing paradigms, and would then begin to allow our common
utilisation of the Matrix as defined allopathically without diminishment of
either of our paradigms. On the contrary, it would broaden our range of
application. It brings forth the notion of the physiological functions of
excretion, inflamation, depostion, impregnation......necrosis
Your thoughts?
From: Robert&Shannon Nelson
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Digest Number 845
kind
of

action?
part of
valid.
embelish

rid
During
years
the
the
the
_____________________________________
of the posts and asked her to comment.
Sil
of
in
through the most convenient path to the body.
that we
very
the
that in
system
and
to corrode.
headache
re-examined by
rejected, but
transplant
answer
not
organ.
accepted.
Which shall
advisable.
Soroush

isali writes:
I
I
to
for