Hello David,
Thank for your mail on Homeopathic Prophylaxis.
You say that susceptibility to acute miasm is based on the chronic miasms.
Isn't this different then Hahneman taught us?
Let me explain first why I asked this:
In Holland there is a Organon/ CD Teacher who tells that Hahnemann is
completely misunderstood by the Homeopatic community.
He teaches that a Psoric mineral remedy always should be the base of our
treatment, and all the rest: Sycose, Syphilis, acute etc. is complementary
treatment to that.
This according the way Hahnemann shows us in his book 'Chronic diseases'.
Only anti-psorics minerals like Sulphur, Calc, Sil, Ars are in his opinion
constitutional remedies.
I told him when you prescribe an individual anti-sycotic or syphilic, you
are also treating the underlying cause. You can define this of a mixing up
of two miasm: Psora and Sycose or Syphilic, but what is the use?
Banerjee explains our different approach of addressing the dominant miasm
with an individual anti-miasmatic remedy (instead of always opening with an
anti-psoric), by the fact that the influence of the Sycotic and Syphilic
miasms are much more important in the constitution, comparing to what
Hahnemann had to deal with.
This teacher also claims that plant remedies are no constitutional remedies.
He says that a constitutional Carb-v can't exist according to Hahnemann,
because that person would be dead!
I told him that in my opinion every remedy can be a person's constitutional
remedy and can act deeply accordingly when it is the simillimum, but he
keeps on telling me I'm not understanding Hahnemann, and I'am to Kentian,
although I told him that the individuality, just like the miasm etc., is
also a part to consider according Apf. 5 of the Organon.
I know most plant remedies have no great anti-psoric qualities, but I know
on a constitutional level they can act deep.
Just like you, I see the constitutional remedy as the base of our treatment
and the anti-miasmatic treatment as complementary treatment to that.
What's your explanation David, for our he likes to call: 'deviation' of
Hahnemann?
Kind regards, Piet
Immunizations (Homeopathic Prophylaxis)
-
David Little
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 11:00 pm
Re: Immunizations (Homeopathic Prophylaxis)
At 08:21 PM 4/18/2004 +0200, you wrote:
Hello Piet,
Much of Hahnemann's work is misunderstood by the homoeopathic
community but it is my experience that the situation is getting better and
today's practitioners have more understanding of the Organon, the Chronic
Diseases and the Lesser Writings that when I was a young student. No more
than 10 years ago very few were really even studying the Organon seriously.
Nevertheless, there is much more to study and bring up to date.
1. I don't think to link the susceptibility to acute miasms with the
predispositions caused by chronic miasms is contrary to the principles
introduced by Hahnemann After all, the Founder wrote on both
susceptibility and predisposition. As Hering said, "It is the duty of all
of us to go beyond Hahnemann in the theory and practice of homoeopathy".
While bringing homoeopathy up to date, however, one should discard the
universal principles on which it is based. They form a system of checks and
balances that make homeopathic a safe and effective healing art. This
includes similar cures similar, the single remedy, the minimal dose and the
potencies as well as the principles of individualization, etc.
It has become very obvious that those with the pseudo-psora TB miasm
are very susceptible to chest colds, respiratory flu, pleurisy, pneumonia,
strep throats, etc. Treat the underlying TB miasm and the person is no
longer as susceptible to such acute miasms. I have confirmed this in the
clinic many, many times. I have witnessed a similar pattern in the other
universal miasms. Cure is the greatest teacher.
2. Yes, Hahnemann considered psora to the number one universal miasm
in his time. That is why he began a majority of his chronic cases with
Sullphur and Hepar Sulph in Paris. Nevertheless, he did not always treat
psora first, especially where the symptoms of other miasms were dominant.
This can be confirmed by the LM case the Founder sent Boenninghausen in
1843. In this case Hahnemann treated the patient's syphilitic miasm first
with Mercury. You will find this case history in Boenninghausen's Lesser
Writings. The order of the miasms to be treated depends on the individual
case and the active, latent and dormant nature of the miasmic symptoms.
This has to do with the way dissimilar diseases repel, suspend and combined
into complex disorders. This is at the base of the idea of layers, etc.
3. Most of the apsoric remedies in the Materia Medica Pura are plant
remedies. Most of the antipsoric remedies in the Chronic Diseases are
mineral remedies. The same is true in Boenninghausen's Repertory of
Antipsoric and Repertory of Non Antipsorics. Hering noted that there was a
very large number of minerals and elements in Hahnemann's antipsoric list
in the CD. He wrote of this in his preface to the American edition of the
Chronic Diseases. So yes, the mineral remedies are very important in the
treatment of psora and the constitution. They are the salts of life and are
at the root of the three worlds. Nevertheless, "all" the antipsoric
remedies in the Chronic Diseases are NOT minerals. There are plant remedies
like Lycopodium and animal remedies like Sepia in the list. They are also
very deep acting anti-miasmic and constitutional remedies.
Hahnemann suggested looking at the symptoms of minerals like Sulphur,
etc., and then reviewing remedies with similar symptoms in the plant and
animal world for antipsoric remedies. The problem with the above ideas is
an *absolutism^ that goes too far into the extremes of "every, all and
only". If one wants to treat psora first "all the time" that is too
absolute. To say psora is the most important in "every case" is too
extreme. If one says that "only minerals" can be constitutional remedies
that is going too far. The problem with this view is extremism. There are
some relative truths underlying the statements but they are being taken out
of context in a one sided manner.
Miasmatic cases are the meeting point of collective and individual
factors. There are certain universal patterns to the miasms because they
are diseases of common cause and similar symptoms that have affected
humanity for centuries. The miasm are collective disease that affect a
homogeneous group of sufferers. At the same time, the symptoms of the
miasms in an individual are dependant on the time and progression of the
personal case history as well as the constitution, temperament,
predispositions and environmental factors that influence the symptoms. This
represents individual conditioning factors that are unique. So each case
must be individualized by the nature of the causes, the order in by which
they were contracted, and the manner in which the signs, befallments and
symptoms are expressed. Each case has its own unique layers of causation
and symptoms that must be assessed. You can not treat all patients with one
fixed method based on preconceived a mechanical methods.
Hahnemann listed Lycopodium as an antipsoric remedy and it has been
used as a constitutional remedy many, many times. There are others also.
Hahnemann never said the above. Carbo-veg was one of Hahnemann's original
antipsorics. Using it as the "corpse reviver" is not its only use in
chronic diseases. Again, hyperbole to the extreme.
Yes, many of the plants like Belladonna or Aconite have not be found
all that useful in removing chronic degenerative diseases based on true
chronic miasms. The may, however, play a role as acute intercurrents when a
crisis disrupts the chronic treatment. Once again a relative truth taken to
an extreme where it becomes a one-sided absolutism. Hence it is no longer
true.
This gentleman has taken some good relative truths and make them
absolute falsehoods. That is the problem. There are always major and minor
aspects to any phenomena as well as exceptions to the rules. This is what
he has forgotten. First of all, what do we mean by a "constitutional
remedy". Taber's medicine dictionary defines "constitutional" as something
that affects the "whole" in that it is "not local". The term,
constitutional remedy, was used by Kent to describe remedies that are
commonly used to treat chronic diseases and miasms that affect the entire
human organism. He used this term to denote chronic treatment as different
than treatment by "acute medicines", which are more local by nature and
suitable for acute crisis. Hahnemann used the terms apsoric or
non-miasmatic and psoric or anti-miasmatic in the similar manner.
In my opinion not all chronic diseases are based on the inherited or
acquired affects of chronic miasms. If a chronic disease is based on the
suppression of the itch of psora Aconite must likely will not cure the
complete case. If a set of chronic symptoms is based on a remote fright -
Aconite just might cure the chronic symptoms that developed from that time.
So.......I believe it is best to keep an open mind. I have cured chronic
cases with plant remedies not normally considered deep acting. Anyone who
uses their repertory and materia medica well has done this with lesser
known plant remedies. One must keep an open mind as to what one can or can
not do to what. Why place absolute limits and restrictions on our
therapeutic treasury? Any remedy that affects of *whole mind/body complex"
and did not act only "locally" may be considered a constitutional remedy on
that patent. What happens in the clinic is the only real confirmation. .
I can't really say whether the constitution or maims comes first?
First in whom, when and why? In some case this is like asking "what came
first - the chicken or the egg?" One cannot separate one from the other.
Some disease states seem to be based on a mixture of unique causes that
make the case truly individual. Other cases are based on the characteristic
symptoms of the collective miasms. If the case is of an individual nature I
treat the patient by the essential nature of the totality of the individual
symptoms. This remedy may be called the constitutional medicine or a remedy
for the chronic disease-Gestalt. If the characteristic symptoms of the
collective miasms dominate the signs and symptoms I use the characteristic
symptoms of the miasms to find the anti-miasmatic remedy. The differential
between individual and collective disease patterns is an important part of
my case taking. So I can't say which comes first or what is the fundamental
or complementary method. That depends on each individual case.
An absolutist stance that denies the presence of major and minor
factors as well as exceptions to the rule is that which deviates from
Hahnemann's teachings. There is no always, never, or only. A good idea
taken too far becomes a bad concept. Whatever happen to the theory of
relativity? There is no absolute truth but God - everything else is
relative and depends on time and circumstances and the position of the
observer.
Sincerely, David Little
PS. I stand by my statements that one must not forget that careful
constitutional and anti-miasmatic treatment is the basis of good
prophylactic treatment. Chronic treatment removes susceptibly and
predispositions to infection and increases vitality. If there are specific
dangers to a child or adult then complementary specific prophylaxis with
genus epidemicus remedies and nosodes can be administered. Look
realistically at the dangers and act accordingly. Educate the parents abut
the true statical realities and tailor that prophylactic measures to the
suit the patient, time and circumstances. The truth usually overcomes fears
based on untruth. If the fear a parent an obstacle to dealing with reality
that is a symptoms of a pathological state. Treat that also (if possible).
---------------
"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
Hello Piet,
Much of Hahnemann's work is misunderstood by the homoeopathic
community but it is my experience that the situation is getting better and
today's practitioners have more understanding of the Organon, the Chronic
Diseases and the Lesser Writings that when I was a young student. No more
than 10 years ago very few were really even studying the Organon seriously.
Nevertheless, there is much more to study and bring up to date.
1. I don't think to link the susceptibility to acute miasms with the
predispositions caused by chronic miasms is contrary to the principles
introduced by Hahnemann After all, the Founder wrote on both
susceptibility and predisposition. As Hering said, "It is the duty of all
of us to go beyond Hahnemann in the theory and practice of homoeopathy".
While bringing homoeopathy up to date, however, one should discard the
universal principles on which it is based. They form a system of checks and
balances that make homeopathic a safe and effective healing art. This
includes similar cures similar, the single remedy, the minimal dose and the
potencies as well as the principles of individualization, etc.
It has become very obvious that those with the pseudo-psora TB miasm
are very susceptible to chest colds, respiratory flu, pleurisy, pneumonia,
strep throats, etc. Treat the underlying TB miasm and the person is no
longer as susceptible to such acute miasms. I have confirmed this in the
clinic many, many times. I have witnessed a similar pattern in the other
universal miasms. Cure is the greatest teacher.
2. Yes, Hahnemann considered psora to the number one universal miasm
in his time. That is why he began a majority of his chronic cases with
Sullphur and Hepar Sulph in Paris. Nevertheless, he did not always treat
psora first, especially where the symptoms of other miasms were dominant.
This can be confirmed by the LM case the Founder sent Boenninghausen in
1843. In this case Hahnemann treated the patient's syphilitic miasm first
with Mercury. You will find this case history in Boenninghausen's Lesser
Writings. The order of the miasms to be treated depends on the individual
case and the active, latent and dormant nature of the miasmic symptoms.
This has to do with the way dissimilar diseases repel, suspend and combined
into complex disorders. This is at the base of the idea of layers, etc.
3. Most of the apsoric remedies in the Materia Medica Pura are plant
remedies. Most of the antipsoric remedies in the Chronic Diseases are
mineral remedies. The same is true in Boenninghausen's Repertory of
Antipsoric and Repertory of Non Antipsorics. Hering noted that there was a
very large number of minerals and elements in Hahnemann's antipsoric list
in the CD. He wrote of this in his preface to the American edition of the
Chronic Diseases. So yes, the mineral remedies are very important in the
treatment of psora and the constitution. They are the salts of life and are
at the root of the three worlds. Nevertheless, "all" the antipsoric
remedies in the Chronic Diseases are NOT minerals. There are plant remedies
like Lycopodium and animal remedies like Sepia in the list. They are also
very deep acting anti-miasmic and constitutional remedies.
Hahnemann suggested looking at the symptoms of minerals like Sulphur,
etc., and then reviewing remedies with similar symptoms in the plant and
animal world for antipsoric remedies. The problem with the above ideas is
an *absolutism^ that goes too far into the extremes of "every, all and
only". If one wants to treat psora first "all the time" that is too
absolute. To say psora is the most important in "every case" is too
extreme. If one says that "only minerals" can be constitutional remedies
that is going too far. The problem with this view is extremism. There are
some relative truths underlying the statements but they are being taken out
of context in a one sided manner.
Miasmatic cases are the meeting point of collective and individual
factors. There are certain universal patterns to the miasms because they
are diseases of common cause and similar symptoms that have affected
humanity for centuries. The miasm are collective disease that affect a
homogeneous group of sufferers. At the same time, the symptoms of the
miasms in an individual are dependant on the time and progression of the
personal case history as well as the constitution, temperament,
predispositions and environmental factors that influence the symptoms. This
represents individual conditioning factors that are unique. So each case
must be individualized by the nature of the causes, the order in by which
they were contracted, and the manner in which the signs, befallments and
symptoms are expressed. Each case has its own unique layers of causation
and symptoms that must be assessed. You can not treat all patients with one
fixed method based on preconceived a mechanical methods.
Hahnemann listed Lycopodium as an antipsoric remedy and it has been
used as a constitutional remedy many, many times. There are others also.
Hahnemann never said the above. Carbo-veg was one of Hahnemann's original
antipsorics. Using it as the "corpse reviver" is not its only use in
chronic diseases. Again, hyperbole to the extreme.
Yes, many of the plants like Belladonna or Aconite have not be found
all that useful in removing chronic degenerative diseases based on true
chronic miasms. The may, however, play a role as acute intercurrents when a
crisis disrupts the chronic treatment. Once again a relative truth taken to
an extreme where it becomes a one-sided absolutism. Hence it is no longer
true.
This gentleman has taken some good relative truths and make them
absolute falsehoods. That is the problem. There are always major and minor
aspects to any phenomena as well as exceptions to the rules. This is what
he has forgotten. First of all, what do we mean by a "constitutional
remedy". Taber's medicine dictionary defines "constitutional" as something
that affects the "whole" in that it is "not local". The term,
constitutional remedy, was used by Kent to describe remedies that are
commonly used to treat chronic diseases and miasms that affect the entire
human organism. He used this term to denote chronic treatment as different
than treatment by "acute medicines", which are more local by nature and
suitable for acute crisis. Hahnemann used the terms apsoric or
non-miasmatic and psoric or anti-miasmatic in the similar manner.
In my opinion not all chronic diseases are based on the inherited or
acquired affects of chronic miasms. If a chronic disease is based on the
suppression of the itch of psora Aconite must likely will not cure the
complete case. If a set of chronic symptoms is based on a remote fright -
Aconite just might cure the chronic symptoms that developed from that time.
So.......I believe it is best to keep an open mind. I have cured chronic
cases with plant remedies not normally considered deep acting. Anyone who
uses their repertory and materia medica well has done this with lesser
known plant remedies. One must keep an open mind as to what one can or can
not do to what. Why place absolute limits and restrictions on our
therapeutic treasury? Any remedy that affects of *whole mind/body complex"
and did not act only "locally" may be considered a constitutional remedy on
that patent. What happens in the clinic is the only real confirmation. .
I can't really say whether the constitution or maims comes first?
First in whom, when and why? In some case this is like asking "what came
first - the chicken or the egg?" One cannot separate one from the other.
Some disease states seem to be based on a mixture of unique causes that
make the case truly individual. Other cases are based on the characteristic
symptoms of the collective miasms. If the case is of an individual nature I
treat the patient by the essential nature of the totality of the individual
symptoms. This remedy may be called the constitutional medicine or a remedy
for the chronic disease-Gestalt. If the characteristic symptoms of the
collective miasms dominate the signs and symptoms I use the characteristic
symptoms of the miasms to find the anti-miasmatic remedy. The differential
between individual and collective disease patterns is an important part of
my case taking. So I can't say which comes first or what is the fundamental
or complementary method. That depends on each individual case.
An absolutist stance that denies the presence of major and minor
factors as well as exceptions to the rule is that which deviates from
Hahnemann's teachings. There is no always, never, or only. A good idea
taken too far becomes a bad concept. Whatever happen to the theory of
relativity? There is no absolute truth but God - everything else is
relative and depends on time and circumstances and the position of the
observer.
Sincerely, David Little
PS. I stand by my statements that one must not forget that careful
constitutional and anti-miasmatic treatment is the basis of good
prophylactic treatment. Chronic treatment removes susceptibly and
predispositions to infection and increases vitality. If there are specific
dangers to a child or adult then complementary specific prophylaxis with
genus epidemicus remedies and nosodes can be administered. Look
realistically at the dangers and act accordingly. Educate the parents abut
the true statical realities and tailor that prophylactic measures to the
suit the patient, time and circumstances. The truth usually overcomes fears
based on untruth. If the fear a parent an obstacle to dealing with reality
that is a symptoms of a pathological state. Treat that also (if possible).
---------------
"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
-
Sheri Nakken
- Posts: 3999
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: Immunizations (Homeopathic Prophylaxis)
I think you meant to include the word 'NOT' here????
" 1. I don't think to link the susceptibility to acute miasms with the
predispositions caused by chronic miasms is contrary to the principles
introduced by Hahnemann After all, the Founder wrote on both
susceptibility and predisposition. As Hering said, "It is the duty of all
of us to go beyond Hahnemann in the theory and practice of homoeopathy".
While bringing homoeopathy up to date, however, one should discard the
universal principles on which it is based. "
***One should NOT discard the universal principles******
thanks David
Sheri
sentto-1979499-20300-1082442712-homeopathycures=tesco.net@returns.groups.yah
oo.com
minutus-owner@yahoogroups.com
and educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations
regarding the individual suitability of the information contained in any
document read or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this
website and/or email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out
of their use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site
or its individual members be liable for any direct, consequential,
incidental, special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
subject of 'Digest' to minutusgroup@yahoo.com to receive a single daily
digest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath
Well Within & Earth Mysteries & Sacred Site Tours (worldwide)
Vaccination Information & Choice Network
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm
homeopathycures@tesco.net
ONLINE Introduction to Homeopathy Classes
ONLINE Introduction to Vaccine Dangers Classes
ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL
OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE
Voicemail US 530-740-0561 UK phone from US 011-44-1874-624-936
" 1. I don't think to link the susceptibility to acute miasms with the
predispositions caused by chronic miasms is contrary to the principles
introduced by Hahnemann After all, the Founder wrote on both
susceptibility and predisposition. As Hering said, "It is the duty of all
of us to go beyond Hahnemann in the theory and practice of homoeopathy".
While bringing homoeopathy up to date, however, one should discard the
universal principles on which it is based. "
***One should NOT discard the universal principles******
thanks David
Sheri
sentto-1979499-20300-1082442712-homeopathycures=tesco.net@returns.groups.yah
oo.com
minutus-owner@yahoogroups.com
and educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations
regarding the individual suitability of the information contained in any
document read or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this
website and/or email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out
of their use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site
or its individual members be liable for any direct, consequential,
incidental, special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
subject of 'Digest' to minutusgroup@yahoo.com to receive a single daily
digest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath
Well Within & Earth Mysteries & Sacred Site Tours (worldwide)
Vaccination Information & Choice Network
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm
homeopathycures@tesco.net
ONLINE Introduction to Homeopathy Classes
ONLINE Introduction to Vaccine Dangers Classes
ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL
OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE
Voicemail US 530-740-0561 UK phone from US 011-44-1874-624-936