Minutus

Hi Shannon,
The confusion about miasms has arisen out of incorrect interpretation.

Susceptibility always leads to contagion. Its the more susceptble one
is that allows the vital force to be deranged.
A predominantly psoric person, whcih menas that teh derangement in the
vital force is psoric in nature, will be susceptible to certain
infections and not to others (veneral).
And vice versa.

BUt there are 2 sides to the story.

But ONCE ONE CATCHES THE CONTAGION, then the effect of this particluar
contagoen REMAINS ON THE VITAL FORCE, because the effect of the
contageon is physical as well as dynamic.
In the case of contagions that affect a predominantly PSoric person
more easily, the vital force is still in a state of health to fight of
the infection adn regain its original state.
But if there exist underlying a multimiasmatic derangement of the
vital force that is so common today, the only way to CURE someone of a
particular contagion (acute) is to give a homeopathically simililar
remedy. Otherwise it casues an effect on the chronic miasm
(fundamental cause of the deranged vital force) that helps continue
its progression towards descruction.

Always, the effect of the contagion (MIASMA in Tafels translation of
teh CD) has to be separated from the Expression of the vital force
(miasm).

I wodner if I'm being clear in the whole depth of the concept here.
Leela
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Robert & Shannon Nelson
wrote:
miasmatic.

Hi Leela,
I think it's clear--if I've understood this right:
I assume you mean that susceptibility always *precedes* contagion?
Certainly we don't always catch the things we're susceptible to; a
tubercular person doesn't always catch tuberculosis, etc.--but you mean
that, e.g., they will not "catch" TB unless they have the prior
susceptibility, etc.?
And (if I've got you right) the more "miasmatically tained" (i.e.
"susceptible"(?)) the person is, the harder a time they will have in
recovering fully from any infection that *does* occur?
This seems a pretty subtle distinction! How (and why) do we
differentiate between these two; what *is* the effect of the contagion,
if not changes in expression of the VF?
Thanks!
Shannon

Dear Shannon

According to classic Homoeopathic theory, the mother of all susceptibilities
is psora.

When you have psora (an under function in all systems including immune) then
we are vulnerable to contagion.

And as soon as you have psora then you can possibly get all the other
miasms.

I too cannot differentiate between Miasma and Miasm . Perhaps Leela can
explain a bit more.
How would we see the difference in the patient in front of us?

Soroush

HI Shannon,
I'm sorry this reply is so delayed.
Yes I think you have the gist of things - but subtle homeoapthic
disctinctions needed to be clarified. I"ve answered below.
Leela

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Robert & Shannon Nelson
wrote:
interpretation.
mean

***Yes. Even someone with predominantly tubercular miasmatic
background will not necessarily develop frank clinical tuberculosis.
Some may develop only a primary focus that gets cured by itself.
There are so many presentatiosn of Tb its mind boggling and the
miasmatic background is the only way to explain this.
There are any number of factors that come into play for this and
David Little has ennumerated a lot of them in his mails that I just
read.
***Yes. We need here to make a distinctions between being suscptible
and hence having a suscpetibility to a disease
and the other homeopathic concept of "susceptibility" which we
observe as low, moderate and high in terms of potency selection based
on strength of vital force reactivity.
HOpe this does not add to the confusion.

in

***No, this is not necessary. The ability to recover has less to do
with the miasm and more to do with the "susceptbility" in homeoapthic
terms as I mentioned above.
It is the people with LOW susceptibilty (this is different from being
susceptible to infection) that have a harder time to recover becasue
of a weakened vital force in terms of energy depletion.
Wheras one with moderalte and high susceptibility of the vital force
will recover quickly inpite of having a stong miasmatic 'load'.

in the
particluar
person
fight of
of a
simililar
continue
of
contagion,

***The effect of the miasma/contageon depends on the type of
miasma/contageon - its inherent properties. These details can be
found in any textbook of Microbiology - modern medicine has done
extensive work in this regard. Some have the ability to only
cause "acute" effects, others have the ability to cause much more
descructive effects.
So the other side of the coin is the ability of the individual vital
force to deal with this. This ability is influenced by various
factors (Aphorism's 5-7 and footnotes), the deepest factor is the
individuals fundamental miasmatic makeup. SO we have the expression
of the vital force that is evident through signs and symptoms as
factual evidence of where the individual is on the road to disease or
health.

HEnce recognizing or knowing the type of contagion causing a disease
would only help in acute diseases in terms of prognosis for clinical
management.
Once we shift our paradigm to the homeoapthic concept of disease, we
don't need to be overly concerned about the contageon, except to know
that it existed in the past history or family history to predispose a
miasamtic expression or cause the miasmatic disease to progress.

The EFFECT of the contageon on the vital force is DYNAMIC. There is
no HUMAN way of reconginising this effect except through the signs
and symptoms that follow (physical and mental) - which either show a
movement towards health or towards disease as Herings observation of
NAture's Law of cure in tandem with the miasamtic progression
expressed as well.

Does that make the disctinction less subtle?
Leela

here.
understood
to
emphasize
accept,
specifically
psoric
susceptibility
same
although
inheritance
recommendation
any
the
special,
change
receive a