Minutus

Dear Patricia,
In reading your response, unfortunately my point was kind of lost I
think, and your response gets into physiological and chemical processes
which are secondary to the animating forces in the body (which
biological "science" ignores, has no measurement mechanism for, and
frankly tries to snuff out any notion of when it comes up (eg Benveniste
persecution, etc ad nauseum (pun intended)). I was trying to point out
that nonchemical factors are likely to be what carries anger into the
milk. Non-chemical meant not of the "bond breaking" type ie more
"biophysical" or "physical chemistry"-as in Brian Connelly's paper which
was linked).

With no measured evidence that breast milk cannot be structured by human
emotion so as to elicit a response in a susceptible infant (extant in
that rubric), then it therefore cannot be ruled out. When I say
"structured" I mean imbued with a quality or pattern created in one
level up from the molecular level, ie in the macro structure. I did not
mention hormones, to the contrary what I was saying was that
conventional chemical analysis will not (necessarily) pick up any of the
changes in structure which (could) carry the information of human
emotion, because no chemical bonds are (necessarily) broken in that
transmission. Homeopathic remedies carry information without breaking
any bonds, merely structuring water. Because a remedy given to the
mother by mouth can reach the infant through the breast milk (no
chemical change there) I would say it is likely that emotions, and other
vital force "information" can be transmitted that way as well.

Andy wrote
In my opinion biochemical changes in mother's milk are not necessary to

Patricia wrote
I HAVE NO
PROBLEM WITH THE RUBRIC IN SO FAR AS IT IS ONE WHICH MAY HAVE CLINICAL
USE
IN SITUATIONS WHERE BREASTFED BABIES SHOW SIGNS OF ILLNESS WHEN THEIR
MOTHERS HAVE AN OUTBURST OF ANGER. HOWEVER IMO THIS WILL BE DUE MORE TO
THE
BABY BEING AFFECTED ON A VIBRATIONAL LEVEL FROM THE EXPRESSION OF ANGER
AND
NOT FROM SOME SORT OF HORMONAL EXPRESSION IN THE MILK. I REALLY DON'T
THINK
FROM WHAT RESEARCH
999 who has researched emotions imprint on milk using the all the proper
measurement tools?

HAS SHOWN ABOUT THE DYNAMICS OF HUMAN MILK THAT THIS IS
POSSIBLE AND I AM EVEN MORE CERTAIN THAT WHEN THIS RUBRIC CAME INTO OUR
LEXICON GOODNESS KNOWS HOW LONG AGO, IT CAME FROM OBSERVATION THAT
BABIES
SOMETIMES GOT SICK AFTER A MOTHER'S OUTBURST OF ANGER.

I THINK IT'D BE SAFER
TO ASSUME THIS WAS MORE A CASE OF THE BABY PICKING UP ON THE MOTHER'S
STATE
RATHER THAN DUE TO ANY CHANGE IN HER MILK.

999 I dont think it would be any "safer", it is probably a blind
assumption.

HOMOEOPATHS HAVE SOME QUAINT, ANTIQUATED NOTIONS REGADING MILK DUE TO
RUBRICS SUCH AS THESE WHICH IS WHY I "BUY" INTO THESE DISCUSSIONS.
IDEALLY,
I'D LIKE TO SEE US, AS A PROFESSION, GET MORE UP-TO-DATE WITH OUR
UNDERSTANDING OF JUST WHAT IS INVOLVED. THEN, MAYBE I WON'T GO TO
SEMINARS
TO HEAR EMINENT HOMOEOPATHS MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE "SHE WEANED BECAUSE HER

MILK WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH!" WE NEED TO BRING OUR UNDERSTANDING INTO THE
21ST
CENTURY AND NOT WORK FROM POSSIBLE/THEORETICAL SCENARIOS.

999 Completely agree. However, dont agree with a nonscientific approach
that involves ignoring vitalism and exalting materialism.

Thus IMO
possible
IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO DO THIS BUT WHAT EXACTLY WOULD WE BE LOOKING
FOR?

999 To know what one was looking for, one would first have to learn the
language and operation of the spectroscopy equipment and protocol being
used. Then measure the normal, then see if the anomalous produces a
spectroscopic anomaly. Have a large enough sample to make the results
meaningful. For that you will have to design an experiment (the engine
of science). Make a hypothesis, and try to disprove it. Look for
anomalies in spectroscopic pattern from the milk of various lactating
subjects who were made to develop a certain emotion in themselves and
dwell on it for a period of time appropriate to milk production
mechanisms. Have a control set of lactaters with no procedures added.

I AGREE THAT A VIBRATIONAL PATTERN CHANGE IS A POSSIBILITY BUT SUGGEST
THAT
IT WILL BE DUE TO THE WATER CONTENT AND NOT TO ANY OF THE
BIOCHEMICAL/IMMUNOLOGICAL COMPONENTS;

999 That is likely true. So what?

AND CERTAINLY NOT DUE TO ANY HORMONES.

999 I dont know the answer to that; it may or may not be a factor that
was not the point of my post.

AGREED;
BABIES WHO GET SICK AFTER OUTBURSTS FROM THE MOTHER ARE PROBABLY
REACTING
MORE FROM THE SUBTLE, DYNAMIC PERSPECTIVES THAT YOU REFER TO IN BOTH
PARAS
BELOW; IE THEY PICK UP ON HER "VIBRATION" ; THAT SHE MAY HAVE JUST
BREASTFED
IS PROBABLY IRRELEVANT FROM A HORMONAL/BIOCHEMICAL PERSPECTIVE BUT VERY
RELEVANT FROM AN ENERGETIC PERSPECTIVE. BABIES LIE ACROSS THE HEART
CHAKRA
WHILE BEING FED. .

999 Not sure what your blockage is to the possibility that there might
be structural changes in milk that are not chemical/hormonal due to
unusual emotions; when you do suggest that infant merely being in
bodily proximity is enough for transmission of emotion from the mother
(and I would agree wholeheartedly on the possibility of the latter, but
not discount the possibility of the former and would wonder why you
do). What is shown to be shielding the milk from that same energy?
ANDY, THE LIVER IS NOT MUCH INVOLVED IN LACTOGENESIS SO I DON'T THINK
THIS
SUGGESTION OF YOURS WILL "WORK".

999 What might be more germain to investigation of that theoretical
point is examining meridianal flows, and milk production according to
TCM physiology, which I strongly suggest you include in your research
and book if you have not already done so.

But from a material viewpoint, while I agree that the liver is not
directly involved in the distal process of milk production, it is
connected to every carbohydrate process in the body on a material
physiological level, at the proximal end by regulating blood sugar and
creating glycogen stores and releasing them. The liver is thus involved
intimately in the control of the supply of raw materials of carbohydrate
metabolism. So it could put its excess "stored anger" on the sugar in
that way. Totally theoretical, but your discount of the idea seems a
bit too strong.

But whether this theoretical line of reasoning is very important to the
logic of how anger as an emotional energy might enter breast milk or not
is rather secondary to the probability that every bodily product
(exhalation, urine, milk, sweat, etc) has the imprint of the producer.
This imprint is not in the chemical language, but is as a function of
the being that is animating the physical body. Homeopathic logic
equates the disease state with the matching pattern that will shift that
state) ie the "remedy state" of that person. Homeopathy matches it
through making a chemical into an imprint carrying information in a
biophysically stable state. So making an imprint is not difficult, and
probably is very much part of biological functioning (and most
terrestrial animals do move, so they do likely would succuss their
fluids whether this is important to function I do not know).

The "anger influence" need not be chemical in order to transmit morbific
or health-promoting influence. Why has mainstream science not found
miasms; and still views remedies as mere ultradilutions of a material?
Why do remedies work at all? These are biophysical, or more accurately
bio-metaphysical transmissions (since non-electromagnetic energy is not
"physical" in the sense that the "scientific" pantheon currently views
it, although it is certainly "nature"). Current chemical tests simply
aren't designed to pick them up. Why exclude a bodily product like
breast milk from being able to carry them?
I HAVE NO
PROBLEM WITH THE RUBRIC IN SO FAR AS IT IS ONE WHICH MAY HAVE CLINICAL
USE
IN SITUATIONS WHERE BREASTFED BABIES SHOW SIGNS OF ILLNESS WHEN THEIR
MOTHERS HAVE AN OUTBURST OF ANGER. HOWEVER IMO THIS WILL BE DUE MORE TO
THE
BABY BEING AFFECTED ON A VIBRATIONAL LEVEL FROM THE EXPRESSION OF ANGER
AND
NOT FROM SOME SORT OF HORMONAL EXPRESSION IN THE MILK.

999 I do not rule out proximity, but why do you rule out milk
transmission?
NOT FROM SOME SORT OF HORMONAL EXPRESSION IN THE MILK.

999 Did I say hormone? My discussion was just the opposite--that
non-chemical changes in the milk could produce effects in the infant.

The body will of course express unusual chemical phenomena as disease
ultimates when disease has progressed to that level, but this is was not
the point I was making. I was suggesting that focus on biochemical
physiology and ultimate processes will not solve your question about
that rubric, but that investigation of non-chemical life force
processes might.
Musings WHICH I APPLAUD...HOWEVER I'M ASKING ALL OF US TO TRY AND UPDATE

OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE COMPLEXITY OF HUMAN MILK AND NOT BE SO RELIANT
ON
SWEEPING GENERALISATIONS MADE A LONG TIME AGO WHEN THE KNOWLEDGE-BASE
WAS
DIFFERENT FROM NOW. I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE THROW OUT RUBRICS (IE THE BABY

WITH THE BATH WATER) BUT TRY TO LOOK ON THEM FROM A MORE ENLIGHTENED &
SCIENTIFIC
PERSPECTIVE.
999 Well, it is great to attempt to debunk a rubric when it may be
wrong. But ignoring the vital imprint that may occur on breast milk
(surprisingly seemingly espoused in your response) is not a scientific
approach. And focussing on what mainstream) "science" today focusses on
to the exclusion of what is equally or more important and connecting
that with "enlightenment" (again seemingly the message) is a bit of an
oxymoron. You suggested that chemistry is the litmus test, chemistry
the valuable, (but only one measurement) language of a medical system
that will typically not discuss life force in a whole 6 or 7 years of
professional education and will ostracize people who consider that it is
even a factor. The textbook view in biology has not yet incorporated
any multidimensional physics, cannot conceive of life force, does not
even consider measuring it as a factor. You know all this; and I know
the point you (probably intend) to make is that it is beneficial to
ground the rep/mm in (material) physiology and catch errors. Your
knowledge is extensive in the ultimated mechanics of
the topic at hand; but (you may be) overlooking to a degree what
is animating that process (through and through) and this may
bias you a bit; and bias seems to be what you are trying to correct,
not introduce. If I am incorrect in what I say about your perspective
then please forgive me. I say it only to give my honest opinion in the
hopes that it will be helpful.

Questioning information in the rep that is from the strictly
observational, inductive way that we all try to gauge the nature of the
vital force through signs, symptoms, attitudes, events must come from a
place of understanding that goes beyond todays textbooks I would assume
you will agree. Today's understanding of the mechanics of biology is
unbelievably sophisticated and financed lavishly by the rulers of the
planet, but is so myopic, material-bound, and unprincipled that a system
using unpatented natural subtle remedies and which recognizes the
underlying vital energies (what is really alive) is far superior in
creating actual healing. Yes? No? All information has value; but the
value of knowledge related to producing real healing results is far
greater. The generation of new knowledge about homeopathy had been
largely stalled for about 80 years and still has little money to back
it. Yet it does more real cure (and virtually no damage) than the
biochemical forcing methods of palliation and chemical immunology that
expend hundreds of billions annually and are the focus of great
institutions, and are the 2nd leading cause of death in the US..
My simple point was that until we can measure the mothers milk for the
TYPE of imprint that we observe happening (for instance) when a remedy
is made, then the question is open about whether a mothers anger can
affect the milk and elicit vomiting in a child.
BTW, the mothers milk would not need to necessarily be succussed to
imbue emotion, that was a thinking out loud corollary. But humans do in
fact walk, therefore any liquid within them does get succussed.

For measurement, I suggested the type of spectroscopy that Jim and
Cinnabar mentioned being used in India; there may be other methods but
this one looks very good because people with economic interests trust
it, so it likely works. True science does not rule out the vitalistic
portion of the universe, and also uses the proper devices to measure
it. Insistence that chemical changes in the milk would be necessary
to validate that rubric shows a difference in approach that departs from
a vitalistic understanding. I doubt you depart from that in deed, but
perhaps your thinking does sometimes because you are trying hard to
improve homeopathy, and have such a thorough grounding in material
physiology and chemistry that you focus on that avenue as litmus test.
Nonphysical physiology is only really taught in Asian systems of
medicine. Homeopathy really operates on vital energies, not on the
ultimates, and systems like the physiology of meridianal flows, and the
5 stages of change, for example should probably not take a back seat.
Patricia, my intent on responding was to make some musings to
contribute to your analysis. I did not expect nor intend for protracted
discussion which would, if continued, be not very useful for me, as I
have not the time nor the interest. I have my opinion, and you brought
up the question, and are the one contributing info on milks to the
profession. I intended to assist you in a small way. I have made my
attempt to contribute to your investigation of the rubric you
discussed. I probably won't spend more time responding on it. I hope
you understand the point I was making, and if you then disagree, so be
it.

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

Dear Andy, from a homeopathic point of view (and my interest doesn't go too
far beyond that) surely we can count clinical observations and experience,
poisonings, provings etc to be the necessary measured evidence you speak of
and thus definitely rules the effect of emotions in to the equation.

Best, Joy

www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 2/28/04 8:40 AM, andyh@mcn.org at andyh@mcn.org wrote:

Dear Patricia,
In reading your response, unfortunately my point was kind of lost I
think, and your response gets into physiological and chemical processes
which are secondary to the animating forces in the body (which
biological "science" ignores, has no measurement mechanism for, and
frankly tries to snuff out any notion of when it comes up (eg Benveniste
persecution, etc ad nauseum (pun intended)). I was trying to point out
that nonchemical factors are likely to be what carries anger into the
milk. Non-chemical meant not of the "bond breaking" type ie more
"biophysical" or "physical chemistry"-as in Brian Connelly's paper which
was linked).

With no measured evidence that breast milk cannot be structured by human
emotion so as to elicit a response in a susceptible infant (extant in
that rubric), then it therefore cannot be ruled out.

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

Dear Patricia,
Probably some of this will seem like a rant. Please forgive me, but I
still don't feel the main point was yet fully comprehended.

==============
Patricia Hatherly wrote:

****** A focus on water perhaps means a that the situation is being
viewed from a chemical vantage, when a more biophysical one would reveal
the possibility of transfer of the emotion directly to the child. If
anger is transferred to the child and is able to elicit nausea, than
the milk IN TOTO carries that signature--the water, the sugars, all
other constituents. Anger is a vital energy, as shown by the physiology
of TCM and by our experience on occasion of palpable "anger in the
air". It is a pattern of energy, and can be demonstrated scientifically
as such. Homeopathic remedies are carriers of biophysical patterns which
impact the vital forces, thus must be more or less equivalent to them in
biophysical quality. We give homeopathic remedies using many carriers-
water, sugar, glycerine, alcohol, etc etc (Hering even used paper). We
even observe that the glass of a vial will preserve the signal in a
dried-up vial of liquid remedy. All of the constituents of milk down to
the last molecule would be affected if milk carries anger to the infant,
eliciting nausea. It would not be a chemical phenomenon, but a
biophysical one.

================
Patricia wrote in part:
To my mind this rubric:

STOMACH: vomiting, child vomits milk, after nursing, mother's anger
after:
calc-c; cham; valer

is one of the several pertaining to breastfeeding that doesn't make
sense to me.
I know of no research that shows that human milk undergoes some sort of
biochemical change due to any emotion in the
mother and I fail to see how it could.

Andy wrote in part:
In my opinion biochemical changes in mother's milk are not necessary to
make a baby gastrically sick (eg elicit nausea or vomiting) (from her
anger).

****I am not commenting on your work through extensive clinical
experience that has led to your hypothesis about this rubric--you may
well be right that it is a proving and a reaction to allergens. And
also that the mother may not be producing a biochemical to mediate the
vomiting (although I do not rule out a chemical, who has looked for one
after designing an experiment which involves emotions?).

But the mechanism certainly COULD be biophysical, just as is the action
of a remedy, which we all know can reach the child easily through the
milk after being given to the mother. It is not a big stretch to realize
that probably most of what the mother puts out in vital energy goes into
the milk, not excluding her emotional patterns, even to the point of
making the milk distasteful to the child or cause symptoms.

That a vital emotion has the power to create health or illness is highly
likely, given that this rubric exists and others like it throughout the
repertory which link emotions of all kinds with illness. Examples for
anger (others could be given for grief, joy etc):
NOSE; EPISTAXIS; general; anger, from (K336, G283) (1)
STOMACH; VOMITING; general; children, in; nurslings, in, from anger of
mother affecting milk (1)
STOMACH; BOENNINGHAUSEN; agg.; anger (15)
ABDOMEN; LIVER and region of, ailments of; anger, from (1)
ABDOMEN; PAIN; general; hypochondria; right; anger, agg. (2)
ABDOMEN; PAIN; general; liver; colic, gallstones; anger, from (2)
ABDOMEN; PAIN; cramping, griping; anger, from (4)
ABDOMEN; BOENNINGHAUSEN; agg.; vexation, anger (4)
STOOL; BOENNINGHAUSEN; agg.; anger (1)
STOOL; BOENNINGHAUSEN; agg.; emotions, anger, fright, etc. (19)
BLADDER; PARALYSIS; general; anger, from (9)
FEMALE; ABORTION, miscarriage; anger, from (SRIII-451) (3)
FEMALE; INFLAMMATION; uterus, metritis; perimetritis, parametritis;
anger, from (1)
FEMALE; LOCHIA; suppressed; anger, from (K724, SRIII-518, G617) (2)
FEMALE; MENSES; general; anger brings on the flow (K724, SRIII-525,
G617) (2)
FEMALE; MENSES; painful, dysmenorrhea; anger, from (SRIII-556) (3)
FEMALE; MENSES; suppressed; anger, vexation, from (K728, SRIII-570,
SRIII-573, G620) (13)
FEMALE; PAIN; general; uterus; menses; agg.; during; anger, from (1)
FEMALE; PAIN; cramping; uterus; menses; agg.; during; anger, from (1)
RESPIRATION; ARRESTED; general; anger from, children in (1)
CHEST; HEMORRHAGE; anger, from (K833, G704) (1)
CHEST; MILK; suppressed; anger, from (K838, SRII-619, G707) (1)
CHEST; PAIN; general; upper; breathing agg.; deep, from anger (1)
CHEST; PAIN; stitching; upper; inspiration agg.; deep, from anger (1)
CHEST; PALPITATION heart; anger, from (K874, G738) (7)
CHEST; BOENNINGHAUSEN; agg.; anger (7)
BACK; PAIN; general; spine; anger, from (1)
BACK; PAIN; general; dorsal region; scapulae; right; anger, from (1)
BACK; PAIN; general; lumbar region, lumbago; alternating with; anger
with himself (1)
BACK; PAIN; sore, bruised, beaten; dorsal region; scapulae; right;
anger, from (1)
EXTREMITIES; BOENNINGHAUSEN; lower limbs; agg.; anger, vexation, etc.
(6)
FEVER, HEAT; ALTERNATING; chills, with; anger, from (1)
FEVER, HEAT; ANGER, paroxysms brought on by (K1281, G1057) (10)
FEVER, HEAT; CONTINUED fever, typhus, typhoid; anger, from (1)
FEVER, HEAT; INSIDIOUS fever; anger, from (1)
FEVER, HEAT; MILK fever; anger, from (1)
GENERALITIES; ANEMIA; impaired production of red blood cells; iron
deficiency, from, chlorosis; anger, from (2)
GENERALITIES; CATALEPSY; anger, from (SRII-60) (3)
GENERALITIES; CHOREA; anger, from (1)
GENERALITIES; CONVULSIONS, spasms; epileptic; during epileptic paroxysm;
mind; anger, morning, child (1)
*****Probably no additional chemical in the milk is necessary to create
the vomiting. That is not to say that there could not be an additional
chemical; or that the anger does not cause a material change in the milk
(as might be expected); and not to say that endocrine glands to not
secrete based on emotions and thus put hormones into the blood and thus
milk. Only that it may not be necessary for there to be a chemical
mediation in breast milk to create the observed response (which
homeopaths thought clearly enough connected to anger to include in the
symptom index as such). Vital force can create instantaneous functional
illness by itself, as it is the homeostatic mechanism, and interruption
of it is seen in outwardly manifest symptoms sooner or later.

The phenomenon in this rubric may be instead due to provings of herbs,
it may be due to mere proximity to angry mother as you aptly point out.
The chemicals of Chamomile or Valerian herbs could be present in the
milk to cause vomiting, (as you hypothesize) .

Or (as homeopaths thought they observed), the mothers anger was
transmitted to the susceptible cham, valer, or calc-p child, and this
susceptibility was removed with cham, valer, or calc-p, depending on the
other sx in the case.

I am ONLY responding again because I hear a mode of thinking that
appears to too much ignore the way that vital force operates and thus
discounts that anger could conceivably be transmitted via vital fluid
and cause symptoms in another. This attitude may mistakenly discount
the empirical observations of past homeopaths and may imply that these
empirical observations were either antiquated or unscientific, which
they may be in certain instances; but the notion that emotions can be
transmitted through breast milk and create symptoms in the infant should
not be included in the category of either unscientific or antiquated
unless definitively disproved.

If a remedy can be passed through the milk, then it is likely that an
emotion can as well, and by similar or identical mechanism. Biophysical
signatures and their transmission explain the rubric. If there is an
error in the rep, then it must be proven to be an error rigorously, and
one may well be able to do that with evidence. However, saying it
could not happen because it would require a chemical mediator is leaving
out the vital mechanism (for instance, the mechanism of all the above
rubrics which show how anger transmitted in the body affects health).
We could not logically try to stuff a vitalistic therapeutics into a
materialistic model. Thus we cannot dismiss the possibility that
emotional signature transfer is possible through breast milk
nonchemically, when a remedy which effects the vital constitution
reaches the child in that same manner.

Thus even if your hypotheses about this rubric are correct, I would not
discount the idea of energetic transmission.

A chemical paradigm cannot be used to try to disprove a biophysical
phenomenon which is already shown to happen in the parallel process of
giving remedies to mothers which are transmitted to infant.
I suggest applying energetic tests as well as physical tests to the
validation or elimination of such rubrics.

Homeopathic observations (like the ones you are so good at observing in
clients) are science in action. Not always instrumented ---better if
they are if a measured parameter is discrete and relevant. One must
measure the right parameter and look in the correct quarter. Assuming
that anger cannot influence the milk to the degree of nausea in the
suckling infant if no hormone/chemical change may rely too much on
"chemical" thinking, and for homeopaths that heal by stimulating vital
forces which suffuse the organism through meridianal pathways, not
bloodstream or nerves; via biophysical means, not chemical; this is
incongruous.

One type of proper instrument for measuring the biophysical signature of
a substance has apparently been found in that Indian hospital that uses
a spectrophotometer to verify the quality of pharmacy remedies. To make
a scientific conclusion in disproving previous homeopathic observations,
it may be best to reproduce that instrument and design an experiment
oneself using lactating women or lead students to do it.
Biophysical/biometaphysical phenomena can be investigated with the same
rigorousness as chemical phenomenon. Vital forces are NOT hocus pocus
or fantasy, but REAL FORCES, observable and able to be investigated just
like all the rest of nature. And plenty of this investigation has
occurred, one just has to look outside of the religion of the
newtonian/einsteinian paradigm which is correct in itself but only
examines part of nature. There is no reason to sweep the less obvious
part of nature under the rug just because we live in a culture which has
a religion posing as science which says that vital energies do not
exist. To do so is not science, and sells vitalistic therapeutics like
homeopathy and TCM WAY SHORT.

This is why I am spending time responding.

======================
===============
Of course we don't know exactly what physical and metaphysical processes
are involved in eliciting a proving response so this is a subject best
avoided (musings-wise)
*****Why say "of course"? This is a "dodge" that vitalistic medicine
can no longer afford to make. To be scientific, the specs and protocol
on that spectrophotometer (not that expensive an instrument) could be
sought to allow measure of the milk in an experimental context as
outlined in the previous post I made on this topic, and present the
results. Or do experiments in other clinical situations. Organon
paragraph 1 should not dissuade people from investigation of the
invisible. Its main intent, IMO was to keep people focussed on the
empirical task of the equating of subject data with proven remedy data.

Even without doing instrumented measurement, enough is known to make
speculations that are better than material explanations if they are
based on (good) empirical evidence. Otherwise we are selling energetic
medicine short.
**** To investigate this scientifically, we ideally should not appear
to be biased toward breast milk as if it was a "sacred cow" whose
"reputation" should not be tarnished. What would happen if it was
definitively proven that breast milk can sometimes be "toxic" enough to
cause vomiting in the child (via emotional content not chemically
detectable)?

Would this "tarnish" breast milk as a substance?

==============

****If what scientific research has been done (if any) to show that
breast milk can transfer vital energies (such as happiness, anger, etc)
to create milk distasteful or "toxic" from the perspective of the child
has not been found, perhaps it resides in a different place. Chemical
research cannot disprove observations done in a realm where chemistry is
only one of the variables. Consideration of the other variables is
probably preferable to sweeping them under the rug because they have not
been published in "garden variety" journals.

There is research, (one example which is only in parallel) to show that
different emotions create different ratios in EKG patterns. (EKG is an
electromagnetic artifact of a nonelectromagnetic phenomenon (the vital
force which creates the heart beat cascade)). The human body itself, as
suggested by much of vitalistic theory (and contemporarily, for example,
by Glen Rein of Heartmath institute circa 1989) can be viewed as an
etheric (nonphysical energy) transducer, transforming "nonhertzian"
(nonelectromagnetic) energy into thought, chemoelectric, and thermal
energy. Ratios in EKG signatures are different for Anger, Sadness,
Love, as shown by Dan Winter in research done at Millard Fillmore
Hospital in Buffalo, NY.

That is evidence that anger has its own signature which differs from
love, and why it might create disharmony, and if transmitted through a
vital fluid to the child, create disharmony, even without altering the
milk.

I would guess if one looked (certainly not in any mainstream journal but
in the work of Abrams, Reich, TCM, Kirlian Photography, etc, etc and
contemporary people who have gone beyond the latter (ie vitalistic
healing publications or websites unfunded by materialistic scientific
paradigm) one could uncover evidence for emotional transmission which
alters substances nonchemically resulting in illness. Homeopathic
rubrics as previously quoted for Anger are empirical evidence which
alone could lead to that inductive conclusion. People doing good
science (the gathering of knowledge through the testing of hypotheses)
are not only under grants. People doing science without being fettered
by cultural religion (eg mainstream "science") are more likely to find
the whole truth or parts that are missed.

Inductive reasoning--a prime basis for homeopathy is just as--or
more---powerful than deductive. Inductive is not "unscientific" even as
it may often be waiting for additional evidence. The world of
"nonphysical" energy is the world of life and operates the material
chemistry. As David Little likes to quote from Hahnemann: "a dead man
needs no remedy". The material body and its forces are only chemicals
without animation. The vital forces can produce health, disease,
emotional energies, laying on of hands healing, etc, etc., All of it is
mediated via vital forces which are biophysical forcing functions, not
material molecules.

All the best,
Andy
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Andy

Thank you for your thoughtful reply and it most certainly isn't a rant.
There is much here to consider; and I'm sure all of us the group, including me, will think some more on the complexities of energy transfer.

There is much in this world that we do not fully understand and simply observe to "be so" and, to my mind, this realm of energy transfer is one of those things. However, like you, I think it is important that we delve more into the "whys" and wherefores" of this matter if only to make Homoeopathy and other energetic forms of medicine more "acceptable"; that's a survival issue I think.

As a Reiki Master I often use my abilites to send not only the Reiki energy to those at a distance but have honed a technique to do so with remedies and find it works very effectively. How it works I don't know but I accept that it does and am prepared to add it to the list of "carriers" you mentioned!

Babies certainly pick upon the subtle shifts in energy in their mothers and may produce pathological states as a consequence. I've observed that often (eg) in the Pulsatilla child with a fear of abandonment who produces pathology soon after the mother begins to even think about daycare or going back to work!

I think we've probably bored everyone to death by now with this exchange and the group needs to move on to consider the other topics on offer. My only hope is that with reference to the particular rubric I questioned, that group members will ponder on it and perhaps do a double-take and accept the possibility that something other than energy transfer might (also) be at work here.

with thanks and best wishes
Patricia
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Patricia,

I have been following this with interest. I would like to add another
dimension to the discussion, which somewhat goes along with something you said.

This has happened to me twice in the past 6 months, and I wonder how people
would explain it. I have had 2 patients who have gone over their expected date
for delivery; one by 12 days (to be induced on day 13) and another 3 days
late but waters broke (told to go in for induction). On both occasions, I told
them on the phone that they needed Calc.Carb. and arranged for it to be
collected. On both occasions, patients or partners did not turn up. In both cases, I
heard the following day that patient had gone into lablour 2 hours after
talking with me on the phone, and babies delivered normally at home.

Reagrds,

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