Minutus

Dear Peter,

thanks for answering.
Whatever email-program you are using...in any case it's difficult for me
to sort it all out because of the additional CRs (carriage returns) and
the CAPS etc.

BTW: are you by chance planning to come to Berlin in early May, for the
LIGA-congress? Would be nice to meet you there and continue a little bit
of talking from person to person.

I'll comment on my own post and your answer:
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
I found Peter Chappells approach really interesting - though of course
I too have no idea HOW his remedies were really made. From Didi Ananda's
response, from what I read on his website and from his powerpoint
presentation I gathered that there really could be something behind, as
some of the figures were quite impressing when it came to getting a
curative or partial curative response.

Peter:
I THINK THE RESULTS ARE MORE THAT QUITE IMPRESSIVE
I THINK A SOBER ASSESSMENT IS THAT THEY ARE OUTSTANDING
THE STATS DON'T REALLY SHOW REALITY
REALITY OFTEN IS FOR PC1 THAT WITHOUT THE REMEDY THEY WOULD BE DEAD

Reply Gaby:
It's great that you seem to have so wonderful results. So far I've only
seen a little bit of the statistics.
But please bear in mind, that by no way I was up to questioning your
results.
I only tried - and still try to - deal with the question:

*** Is it homoeopathy***?

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Q: Is it homoeopathy?
A: Till now I don't think so.

Peter:
WELL HAHNEMANN DID NOT DISCUSS THE META PRINCIOPLES UPON
WHICH HOMEOPATHY EVOLVED OR ARRIVED
HE DID NOT THINK ON THAT LEVEL.
CLEARLY LIKE CURES LIKE IS CORE AND THAT GOES BACK 100S OF
MILLIONS OF YEARS
I CAN PROVIDE MY DEDUCTIVE REASONING FOR THIS LAST SENTANCE
BUT IT'S A BIT LONG FOR HERE
ITS IN THE BOOK
APHORISMS 100+ STATE FOR A EPIDEMIC DISEASE TREAT TOTALITY
READ MICROBIOLOGY
MY CONCLUSION IN A NUT SHELL IS THAT ALL DISEASES ARE
SYBIOTIC RELATIONSHIPS OF MICRO ORGANISMS=MIASMS=EPIDEMIC DISEASES
THAT'S A BIG LEAP OF THOUGHT BASED ON MODERN SCIENCE
IT'S A BIG STEP, I CANT PROVE IT, BUT TO ME ITS ALMOST INDISPUTABLE
THEREFORE APHORISM 100+ APPLIES TO ALL DISEASES
Reply Gaby:
Similia similibus curantur/curentur. Yes, that's one of the main points.
But another one is the: How do we arrive at the knowledge to be able to
compare, the characteristic symptoms of the remedy and the
characteristic symptoms of a patient or a prevailing genius epidemicus
(BTW: for all the readers on the list: Even in English it should be
GENIUS epidemicus, having nothing to do with Genus, which is a
completely other sort of thing.).

Your method differs in this part. As you term it: reverse-engineering.
It may work, of course. It may even be a break-through in medicine.
But I friendly but stubbornly insist, that this way of preparing alone
doesn't make it homoeopathic.

And deductions and conclusions are often difficult to prove .... it
takes time to establish a new rule or law. (And of course, discussions
with sceptics can't be avoided - and in my opinion shouldn't be. They
are helpful to test ones own arguments, and see where there still are be
holes or too fragile bridges that need to be fixed.)
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Aph. 141: " The tests with remedies of the healthy medical doctor upon
himself remain the most preferable ones."

Peter:
YOU ARE WELCOME TO DO THIS
MANY UNHEALTHY HOMEOPATHS ALREADY HAVE TO GOOD EFFECT
PROVINGS NEED DOING
ITS NOT MY SKILL
I ENCOURAGE IT
ONE INSIGHT IS INCLUDED AT END OF THIS

Reply Gaby:
I had already decided to get a bottle of the remedy, simply out of
curiosity. And I will test it on myself. In nearly all my provings I
have experienced at least one so well-cut symptom, to be able to
differentiate it from other remedies. So this will be, as every other
remedy, an interesting experience.

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Aph. 143 - 145: "Only out of the exploration of the pure effects of
remedies on healthy persons a true Materia Medica develops."

Peter:
THIS IS TRUE BUT IT EXCLUDES OTHER WAYS OF DEVELOPING KNOWLEDGE OF
REMEDIES HAHNEMANN DID NOT FORSEE

Reply Gaby:
May be. So if the explorations of the pure effects are done in another
way than the 'normal' homoeopathic way, why is there the need to call it
'homoeopathic'?
Why not coin another name for it, so that not only practitioners as well
as lay people are able to see that there are differences?
I do see of course what PC1 and homoeopathy have in common,
mathematically spoken like 2 intersections: some parts are used by both
of them, but you didn't use ALL of the pillars, that are necessary to
term something homoeopathy.

Perhaps you will say: That is terribly nitpicking if PC1 saves so many
lives, it doesn't matter what it is called, if the idea is based on some
of the clear homoeopathic principles.

Maybe nitpicking.
But I do have a passion for homoeopathy, what it is, what it was, and
the principles that it's based upon. So _I_ need the proving info.

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Aph. 269-271: " The way peculiar to Homoeopathy of preparing raw
medicinal substances to develop their curative power in the most
possible way. Dynamization."

Peter:
THIS IS ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY
WHEN POTENTISATION IS FULLY RESEARCHED AND UNDERSTOOD, BETTER METHODS
WILL BE FOUND

Reply Gaby:
That's speculation. We'll see what future will bring.

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
So if Peter has chosen the totality of symptoms, this is the
indication. But: Where is the proving on healthy persons that we base
our knowledge on?

Peter:
MY BEST CASES ARE BASED ON PATIENTS TELLING ME THEIR REMEDIES
I GIVE IT
THE RESULTS ARE STUNNING
THE MATERIA MEDICA RESULT IS FANTASTIC
SEE LATRODECTUS MAC IN EMTIONAL HEALING WITH HOMEOPATHY
I CHALLANGE YOU TO FIND A BETTER PICTURE OR PRODUCE A BETTER CURE

Reply Gaby:
What do you mean exactly? You mean people told you what they had as
remedies or what they thought they should receive????
---------------------------------------------

Gaby:
With the symptoms obtained it could be easily seen if/that PC1 was
really homoeopathic to Aids cases. Then PC1 can be called without doubt
a homeopathic remedy - and then it IS Homoeopathy.

Peter:
DON'T AGREE

Reply Gaby:
I think I'll wait for the provings to be published and look at symptoms
produced by myself. Then I will know more.
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Q: what if Peter doesn't do a proving of PC1?
A: Then strictly speaking: PC1 may be helpful for many cases of Aids
(something which could be proven by further studies), but it couldn't be
called a homoeopathic remedy. Same as complex-remedies just aren't
homoeopathy, cause what is in them hasn't had a proving.
Strictly speaking. Classical speaking. Hahnemannian speaking.

Peter:
NOT TRUE I THINK SEE ABOVE

Reply Gaby:
Here the two of us could stand debating endlessly (like ion those old
greec yards, where they mentally fought for hours..)
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Q: But PC1 would work in spite of that?
A: Of course. There are many things that have effects, as we all know,
positive effects, curative effects. But to be termed 'Homoeopathy' it
has to fulfill the criteria mentioned above.

Peter:
THIS CAN BE DEBATED
HOW MANY REMEDIES NEED PROVING BEFORE THIS NEW WAY IS VALIDATED?

Reply Gaby:
You mean: how many remedies produced in the Peter-Chappell-way need to
be proved to establish a rule or law, that these and all further
remedies produced in that way are homoeopathic to the totality of
symptoms chosen by you?
Can't tell. That's rather a question for a statistic expert with the
mathematical tools to calculate and extrapolate it.
And, of course: in any case there will always be exceptions to the rule.

Best,

Gaby

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gaby Rottler
Germany
rottler@curantur.de

http://www.curantur.de
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gaby Rottler wrote:

Dear Peter,

thanks for answering.
Whatever email-program you are using...in any case it's difficult for me
to sort it all out because of the additional CRs (carriage returns) and
the CAPS etc.

sorry i off load to word then paste i get garbled messages too

while i have a LOT to do its good to have a debate with your rationally and i find this debate really helpful

conversely those jy/tp like comments seem to make no sense to me, just opinions

BTW: are you by chance planning to come to Berlin in early May, for the
LIGA-congress? Would be nice to meet you there and continue a little bit
of talking from person to person. agreed but without an option to speak and an invite, with no real income not reality besides i will be in africa....

I'll comment on my own post and your answer:
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
I found Peter Chappells approach really interesting - though of course
I too have no idea HOW his remedies were really made agreed and no amount of speculation gets even remotely close. From Didi Ananda's
response, from what I read on his website and from his powerpoint
presentation I gathered that there really could be something behind, as
some of the figures were quite impressing when it came to getting a
curative or partial curative response.

Peter:
I THINK THE RESULTS ARE MORE THAT QUITE IMPRESSIVE
I THINK A SOBER ASSESSMENT IS THAT THEY ARE OUTSTANDING
THE STATS DON'T REALLY SHOW REALITY
REALITY OFTEN IS FOR PC1 THAT WITHOUT THE REMEDY THEY WOULD BE DEAD

Reply Gaby:
It's great that you seem to have so wonderful results. So far I've only
seen a little bit of the statistics.
But please bear in mind, that by no way I was up to questioning your
results.
I only tried - and still try to - deal with the question:

*** Is it homoeopathy***? ok

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Q: Is it homoeopathy?
A: Till now I don't think so.

Peter:
WELL HAHNEMANN DID NOT DISCUSS THE META PRINCIOPLES UPON
WHICH HOMEOPATHY EVOLVED OR ARRIVED
HE DID NOT THINK ON THAT LEVEL.
CLEARLY LIKE CURES LIKE IS CORE AND THAT GOES BACK 100S OF
MILLIONS OF YEARS
I CAN PROVIDE MY DEDUCTIVE REASONING FOR THIS LAST SENTANCE
BUT IT'S A BIT LONG FOR HERE
ITS IN THE BOOK
APHORISMS 100+ STATE FOR A EPIDEMIC DISEASE TREAT TOTALITY
READ MICROBIOLOGY
MY CONCLUSION IN A NUT SHELL IS THAT ALL DISEASES ARE
SYBIOTIC RELATIONSHIPS OF MICRO ORGANISMS=MIASMS=EPIDEMIC DISEASES
THAT'S A BIG LEAP OF THOUGHT BASED ON MODERN SCIENCE
IT'S A BIG STEP, I CANT PROVE IT, BUT TO ME ITS ALMOST INDISPUTABLE
THEREFORE APHORISM 100+ APPLIES TO ALL DISEASES

Reply Gaby:
Similia similibus curantur/curentur. Yes, that's one of the main points.
But another one is the: How do we arrive at the knowledge to be able to
compare, the characteristic symptoms of the remedy and the
characteristic symptoms of a patient or a prevailing genius epidemicus
(BTW: for all the readers on the list: Even in English it should be
GENIUS epidemicus, having nothing to do with Genus, which is a
completely other sort of thing.).

Your method differs in this part. As you term it: reverse-engineering.
It may work, of course. It may even be a break-through in medicine.
But I friendly but stubbornly insist, that this way of preparing alone
doesn't make it homoeopathic. agreed but the way of preparation is not core to homeopathy Similia similibus curantur/curentur is core, the rest is technology

provings and law of signature and clinical experience and laws of association (eg periodic table) are all valid ways in my opinion and experience at understanding the nature of a substance

they all yield the same result to a very high degree when we know all ways well, which is not so often, but enough to see the idea
And deductions and conclusions are often difficult to prove .... it
takes time to establish a new rule or law. (And of course, discussions
with sceptics can't be avoided - and in my opinion shouldn't be. They
are helpful to test ones own arguments, and see where there still are be
holes or too fragile bridges that need to be fixed.) agreed

well i say like cures like relates to the meta principle within which like attracts like marriage for example, like repels like, people you hate are like yourself as a rule, also both seen in magnetisism, and i think like creates like is part of this. i also think its self evident that reverse engineering does not contradict like cures like at all
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Aph. 141: " The tests with remedies of the healthy medical doctor upon
himself remain the most preferable ones."

Peter:
YOU ARE WELCOME TO DO THIS
MANY UNHEALTHY HOMEOPATHS ALREADY HAVE TO GOOD EFFECT
PROVINGS NEED DOING
ITS NOT MY SKILL
I ENCOURAGE IT
ONE INSIGHT IS INCLUDED AT END OF THIS

Reply Gaby:
I had already decided to get a bottle of the remedy, simply out of
curiosity. And I will test it on myself. In nearly all my provings I
have experienced at least one so well-cut symptom, to be able to
differentiate it from other remedies. So this will be, as every other
remedy, an interesting experience.

please remember if you do pc1 it contains multiple diseases so its better to prove a single remedy

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Aph. 143 - 145: "Only out of the exploration of the pure effects of
remedies on healthy persons a true Materia Medica develops."

Peter:
THIS IS TRUE BUT IT EXCLUDES OTHER WAYS OF DEVELOPING KNOWLEDGE OF
REMEDIES HAHNEMANN DID NOT FORSEE

Reply Gaby:
May be. So if the explorations of the pure effects are done in another
way than the 'normal' homoeopathic way, why is there the need to call it
'homoeopathic'?see above law of signatures corresponds to like cures like as does clinical experience

african traditional healing is also the place homeopathy is derived from (its in the new book, second similimum), except ATH is broader in scope, and they use all three means law signature, like cures like, clinical knowledge, in my observation
Why not coin another name for it, so that not only practitioners as well
as lay people are able to see that there are differences?

well maybe we should rename homeopathy ATH as its taken, albiet unconsciously from there and be strictly honest about its ancestry
i did consider this for quite a while, but i think its too close to call, and in fact, it will prove to be homeopathy
I do see of course what PC1 and homoeopathy have in common,
mathematically spoken like 2 intersections: some parts are used by both
of them, but you didn't use ALL of the pillars, that are necessary to
term something homoeopathy.
but then we have to consider whether there is more than one central column

Perhaps you will say: That is terribly nitpicking if PC1 saves so many
lives, it doesn't matter what it is called, if the idea is based on some
of the clear homoeopathic principles. no i dont say that thats just a type of blackmail

Maybe nitpicking.
But I do have a passion for homoeopathy, what it is, what it was, and
the principles that it's based upon. So _I_ need the proving info.

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Aph. 269-271: " The way peculiar to Homoeopathy of preparing raw
medicinal substances to develop their curative power in the most
possible way. Dynamization."

hahnemann used the remedies from the common allopathic materia medica and usage of 1800

see the merck manual of 1899 to see that there is a very high correlation allopathy/homeopathy 80%+ and which looks like a crude very of boerike.

potentiastion is not essential to homeeopathy, its just technology of the time, you could ditch this completely if you find another better way, and if we do, you will, i have

there is progress

Peter:
THIS IS ONLY ONE POSSIBILITY
WHEN POTENTISATION IS FULLY RESEARCHED AND UNDERSTOOD, BETTER METHODS
WILL BE FOUND

Reply Gaby:
That's speculation. We'll see what future will bring.

hummm give me the money and i will prove this point!!!

---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
So if Peter has chosen the totality of symptoms, this is the
indication. But: Where is the proving on healthy persons that we base
our knowledge on?

Peter:
MY BEST CASES ARE BASED ON PATIENTS TELLING ME THEIR REMEDIES
I GIVE IT
THE RESULTS ARE STUNNING
THE MATERIA MEDICA RESULT IS FANTASTIC
SEE LATRODECTUS MAC IN EMTIONAL HEALING WITH HOMEOPATHY

the patient said this remedy did not work

i said you must be a spider

she said then i am a black widow then

or i dreamt last night of winter crocus and that i must tell peter chappell this

or a parent about an ibecilic child 'she acts just like a queen bee'

etc
I CHALLANGE YOU TO FIND A BETTER PICTURE OR PRODUCE A BETTER CURE

Reply Gaby:
What do you mean exactly? You mean people told you what they had as
remedies or what they thought they should receive????
---------------------------------------------

Gaby:
With the symptoms obtained it could be easily seen if/that PC1 was
really homoeopathic to Aids cases. Then PC1 can be called without doubt
a homeopathic remedy - and then it IS Homoeopathy. remember pc1 is three separate remedies in one bottle - cheating i know but very effective in a world -Africa where tb, malaria and aids coexist simutaneously in many or most patients

Peter:
DON'T AGREE

Reply Gaby:
I think I'll wait for the provings to be published and look at symptoms
produced by myself. Then I will know more. find but trying just one remedy on a patient is more convincing it goes to the point the intelect does not reach
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Q: what if Peter doesn't do a proving of PC1?
A: Then strictly speaking: PC1 may be helpful for many cases of Aids
(something which could be proven by further studies), but it couldn't be
called a homoeopathic remedy. Same as complex-remedies just aren't
homoeopathy, cause what is in them hasn't had a proving.
Strictly speaking. Classical speaking. Hahnemannian speaking.

Peter:
NOT TRUE I THINK SEE ABOVE

Reply Gaby:
Here the two of us could stand debating endlessly (like ion those old
greec yards, where they mentally fought for hours..)
---------------------------------------------
Gaby:
Q: But PC1 would work in spite of that?
A: Of course. There are many things that have effects, as we all know,
positive effects, curative effects. But to be termed 'Homoeopathy' it
has to fulfill the criteria mentioned above.

Peter:
THIS CAN BE DEBATED
HOW MANY REMEDIES NEED PROVING BEFORE THIS NEW WAY IS VALIDATED?

Reply Gaby:
You mean: how many remedies produced in the Peter-Chappell-way need to
be proved to establish a rule or law, that these and all further
remedies produced in that way are homoeopathic to the totality of
symptoms chosen by you?
Can't tell. That's rather a question for a statistic expert with the
mathematical tools to calculate and extrapolate it.
And, of course: in any case there will always be exceptions to the rule.

Best,

Gaby

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gaby Rottler
Germany
rottler@curantur.de

http://www.curantur.de
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
bye

peter
Clinical Guidance for Homeopaths and Students of Homeopathy!
http://www.shahrdarhost.net/Clinical%20Guidance.htm
ATTENTION PLEASE:

The Minutus Group is established purely for the promotion of Homoeopathy 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.

****
ATTENTION PLEASE!!

If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send a message with the subject of 'Digest' to minutusgroup@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]