SYCOSIS
Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:13 am
Dear Colleagues
One of the problems facing homoeopathy is that Hahnemann wrote in German and
a lot of us read his writings in English - So we have had to rely on
translations. But what if the translations are not accurate??
A couple of months ago I had a discussion with my colleague Dr Nader Moradi
in Iran and he was asking me about the source Sycosis and immediately I
responded - as I had been taught - that it was from a Gonorrhoea infection
and then passed on from one generation to the other.
He disputed this and said what Hahnemann is describing is genital 'fig'
warts and all the associated symptom of urethral discharge (HPV infection).
A number of exchanges followed and I tried to do some more research on this
but failed.
I was listening to Will Taylor's conference and he mentioned that Heppel
translated 'Urethral discharge' as Gonorrhoea!
http://www.wholehealthnow.com/teleconferences.html
It seems that this presumption has fundamentally changed our notions of this
chronic disease.
Please consider and comment.
Also do we need to double check on all these old translations?
Regards
Soroush
PS - I am grateful to Dr Moradi for pointing this discrepancy to me in the
first instance.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
One of the problems facing homoeopathy is that Hahnemann wrote in German and
a lot of us read his writings in English - So we have had to rely on
translations. But what if the translations are not accurate??
A couple of months ago I had a discussion with my colleague Dr Nader Moradi
in Iran and he was asking me about the source Sycosis and immediately I
responded - as I had been taught - that it was from a Gonorrhoea infection
and then passed on from one generation to the other.
He disputed this and said what Hahnemann is describing is genital 'fig'
warts and all the associated symptom of urethral discharge (HPV infection).
A number of exchanges followed and I tried to do some more research on this
but failed.
I was listening to Will Taylor's conference and he mentioned that Heppel
translated 'Urethral discharge' as Gonorrhoea!
http://www.wholehealthnow.com/teleconferences.html
It seems that this presumption has fundamentally changed our notions of this
chronic disease.
Please consider and comment.
Also do we need to double check on all these old translations?
Regards
Soroush
PS - I am grateful to Dr Moradi for pointing this discrepancy to me in the
first instance.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]