THE TRUTH ABOUT VACCINES

New Publication
Homeopathy in Intensive Care
and Emergency Medicine
Homeopathy First Magazine
Best Vitamin C Drink 
Learn More With Caralyn 
Coupon SHOPWITHHWC

 

Homeopathy World Community

Creating Waves of Awareness

CHRONIC MIASMS ARE PROVEN FACT

Dr. M. A. Usmani

 

Usmani Resource Page

Copyright 2011-13/All rights reserved © Dr Usmani 
Contact author for permission to use

If Hahnemann had died without discovering the Chronic Miasms, someone else would have discovered them: might he be Hering, Boeninnghausen, Farrington or anyone from among the dignitaries of his learned disciples. As homeopathy was destined to survive as an alternative therapeutics, some definite concepts of disease were imperative for its application. No therapeutics can survive without incorporating a solid knowledge of the science of pathology. Without the knowledge of pathology no one can know the real meaning and the drift of the symptoms complex. So without a definite science of pathology no therapeutics can be valid. Without diagnosing a definite disease from the collection of symptoms, the totality of symptoms will remain a bouquet of incongruous shoots and flowers, without any definite pathologic red strand binding the whole.

It was this drawback that convinced Hahnemann that there must be some definite factor behind the presentable symptoms that is overlooked by simple symptoms covering under the law of similia. He was puzzled by the recurrence of the symptoms, times and again, after being annihilated by the similar remedy. So he concluded that similia is not all sufficient for acquiring permanent cure. There is definitely something that is not dealt with effectively with simple symptoms covering. So he postulated the theory of chronic miasms.

If homeopathic law of cure was the ‘apple of Newton’, the theory of miasms was the ‘theory of relativity of Einstein’. With the discovery of miasms homeopathy has got the solid foundation of pathology. But the homeopaths’ duty and ordeal has been redoubled thereby. In every chronic case he has to determine the miasm behind the symptom complex and also the organismic pathology on the basis of laboratory investigations. So the simple run of homeopaths that are being churned out by our institutions would fall very short of that standard.  These neophytes become an easy pray to the unfathomable lust of homeopathic pharmaceutical industry, the world over; and become patents mongers because of their inborn sloth. They have then no need to study miasms and no need to acquire knowledge of the science of pathology. These grave diggers of homeopathy—these pharmaceutical houses—make them self sufficient in every way. They are disgrace to the profession, and doing lethal disservice to homeopathy. But for the timely discovery of miasms by Hahnemann, homeopathy would have fallen to oblivion with a single nudge from modern medicine—nihil ad rem.  It was a moment of divination that the master found the inkling of the chronic miasms. Homeopathy stands and falls with the miasms.

Dealing and eliminating the self-limited diseases (I mean ‘acute diseases’) is no hall-mark of homeopathy. It is the success in curing the chronic diseases that homeopathy is known for. But it is the dealing in the former class of diseases that keeps the patients coming to the same doctor again and again. Acute diseases, or the acute ripples of chronic diseases, keep coming, in the same or different forms, and successful dealing by the doctor, by superficial homeopathy, makes the patient-doctor bond ever stronger, and the doctor more and more popular.

Miasms should be the basis of prescription in homeopathy, especially in chronic practice. Homeopathy stands and falls with the efficacy or defect of the theory of miasms. Modern technology and laboratory analysis and pathologic-o-histological investigations have laid bare many drastic defects and weaknesses of classical homeopathy. When homeopathy was discovered or conceived there were no modern means of diagnosing the diseases and checking the internal working of the body, viz. X-rays, Ultrasound, MRI, EEG, ECG, and legion others, even stethoscope and sphygmomanometer. So the totality of symptoms consisted of what the patient told and what the doctor discovered on his own with his unaided and unequipped senses.

Now I relate a case. A talented girl, aged 14, always getting distinction in exams and taking active part in school’s activities, as speech competitions, etc. She one day had severe headache which could not be mitigated by usual painkillers—her father, being a medical doctor, got suspicious of her complaint. He checked her B.P., and it was very high for her age. Investigations started. Blood tests showed high creatinine and urea. Ultrasound was taken, and it revealed that she congenitally had single kidney and that too was not working normally. She had no apparent symptoms of this gross pathology and congenital anatomical anomaly. Now classical homeopathy, prior to the discovery of the miasms, could not do anything here with this drastic paucity of symptoms. She does not confess that she is ill in any respect. She is wary of her parents anguish and their instructions for limiting her activities. Similarly, in another case, a patient of rapidly failing sight was diagnosed as having PDR (proliferating diabetic retinopathy), was to undergo routine laser treatment. During the process, he went into coma owing to brain hemorrhage. Detailed investigation revealed that a cancer was developing behind the retina of one eye, and that it got burst under the duress of laser therapy that caused hemorrhage.  

So we conclude that the totality of symptoms is comprised of: symptoms told by the patient plus symptoms discovered by the physician plus the pathologies discovered by detailed laboratory analyses. A homeopath is further expected to determine another factor: i.e. the miasmatic pathology of the case for comprehensively and successfully dealing the case. Mere symptoms covering of classical homeopathy won’t do. And as the patient has nothing to tell, as she doesn’t feel any malaise, the doctor would have no means to judge the progress of recovery except by repeated laboratory analyses and examinations of the patient.

Prescribing by miasms is a great stride in homeopathic practice. And zoic medicines are deeper and longer acting than the mineral and metallic, and the latter are deeper and longer acting than the herbal. From among the zoic medicines nosodic medicines are more germane for therapeutic purposes than any other. They give you the pathologic similimum—as if—as  the great Burnett has suggested. This would be the right and strongly indicated nosode, and would act as a broad-based prescription that can suffice singly and solely to wipe away the total morbid phenomenon; and can make you free from the need of any other therapeutic agent. It can even save you the drudgery of repertorization.

In my practice of chronic diseases almost 80% of the computerized cases remain, subsequently, unchecked and unused—the miasmatic remedy overrides all the jumble of symptoms included therein, in a miraculous way.   Never forget to determine pathological family history of the patient. A strong clue to the pathologic past of the patient saves some 95% of the drudgery for the search for the similimum. First determine the miasm and then go to the relevant anti-miasmatic drug-list and determine as to which, from among the listed remedies, is most close to the case, on the basis of similia, that bears the strongest similarity. Try to choose a nosode than a remedy from any other realm: e.g. chemical, mineral or herbal.

 

 

     

 

Views: 791

Comment by SARANG on January 14, 2014 at 10:25am

Excellent work and description. Very knowledgeable understanding. Simply great. Thanks a lot.

I believe that understanding MIASM if understanding the definate concept of disease process. The travel of the disease process i.e through Psora, then the progress of the disease in sycosis then to the degenarative changes leading to Syphylis. Here we can concentrate mainly on the exact structure which is involved then the Form the patient is throwing in terms of signs and symptoms and then the function which is hampered. Lastly the pace of the disease that is the Time axis. considering all these will help us to determine the MIASMATIC CLEAVAGE of the disease.

Comment by SARANG on January 14, 2014 at 10:26am

Comment by SARANG on January 14, 2014 at 10:29am

if we try to understand the disease pathology in this way the probably it might help us to understand miasmatic state of a person more nicely. We should take into consideration Family history and Past history of the patient.

Comment by Debby Bruck on January 20, 2014 at 3:02am

Your wisdom always welcome. Please tell us what happened with girl who had congenital problem with kidney and the coma patient with tumor near eye?

i can't imagine that the girl had absolutely no symptoms during her lifetime with which to find similimum. 

Comment by David Kempson on February 13, 2014 at 9:19pm

I agree with the spirit of this post. Diagnosis of the miasm, and incorporation of this diagnosis into the treatment of the patient, is absolutely vital to providing genuine long term health for a patient. I agree also that it is a problem seeing young practitioners coming out with the belief (often engendered by their teachers) that miasm is an optional and can be left out or included as they wish. That is assuming they were even taught anything valuable about how to use miasm in the first place.

There are a couple of points I disagree with though, and I use miasmatic theory extensively in my practice with good success.

In every chronic case he has to determine the miasm behind the symptom complex and also the organismic pathology on the basis of laboratory investigations.

I agree that the diagnosis of the pathology can be very useful. I don't agree that it must be determined in every case, and I have found that pathology can be cured without even knowing it is there. The primary usefulness of knowing the pathology is to be able to eliminate the common symptoms of the pathology so that the true peculiar symptoms can be brought into clear focus. However, many symptoms found in the general, mental, emotional or sensational spheres are not dependent on the name of the pathology and can be considered peculiar in and of themselves.

 

She had no apparent symptoms of this gross pathology and congenital anatomical anomaly. Now classical homeopathy, prior to the discovery of the miasms, could not do anything here with this drastic paucity of symptoms. She does not confess that she is ill in any respect. She is wary of her parents anguish and their instructions for limiting her activities.

 

I am not sure what kind of classical homoeopathy you are talking about, but even in that brief description you have given several possible mentals that could form the beginning of an analysis. "Says she is well when very sick" "Sensitive to the suffering of others" "Fear of having her freedom/independence limited". These expressions, when explored, could lead much further into a better understanding of her state, irrespective of the presence of physical pathology.

In fact this is without doubt one of the significant strengths of Homoeopathy. Our ability to perceive the disturbance in the vital force via different levels or spheres of human existence means we are not dependent on ferreting out the presence of pathology in order to put things right. This is not to say that knowing the pathology is there would not also aid us in treating the patient, but that cure can occur without this knowledge because we know that disease actually comes from the vital energy, and the vital energy's imbalance will be reflected in many different places in the patient's life.

As Debbie has stated, I find it hard to believe a patient with serious pathology has no other signs anywhere in their life or health, nor has any historical evidence of a disturbance in their vital force. I am not saying it is impossible, only that I am sure with careful attention to the past, to the generals, to the mentals, to the sensations, one could find the remedy through other symptoms than the pathological ones.

Of course, if you have pathology with few symptoms, not knowing it is there might make it difficult to know for sure you have cured it (obviously), so again there is definitely value in having investigations done.

 

Mere symptoms covering of classical homeopathy won’t do. And as the patient has nothing to tell, as she doesn’t feel any malaise, the doctor would have no means to judge the progress of recovery except by repeated laboratory analyses and examinations of the patient.

I agree, in the cases of some kind of serious pathology like this, regular examination of the pathology should be done to make sure you have found a remedy that is reversing the tissue changes as well. However, there are other signs that you have found the simillimum, clear signs such as movement in the hierarchy of symptoms from more important to least important, reappearance of old symptoms, reversal of the direction of the disease, changes in rigid behavioural patterns, and so on. I don't believe that examination of the pathology is the only valid method to measure progress and recovery. It is one method, and its value will depend on the particular case you have before you.

From among the zoic medicines nosodic medicines are more germane for therapeutic purposes than any other. They give you the pathologic similimum—as if—as  the great Burnett has suggested. This would be the right and strongly indicated nosode, and would act as a broad-based prescription that can suffice singly and solely to wipe away the total morbid phenomenon; and can make you free from the need of any other therapeutic agent. It can even save you the drudgery of repertorization.

If I understand correctly what you are saying here, I must disagree most strongly with this idea. This is the exact method many students are taught around the use of miasm - reliance on the nosode for treating the miasm independently of the rest of the case. In fact I have found this to be a very inefficient method for healing the chronic disease pattern. I have always found that the miasmatic diagnosis needs to be part of the remedy prescription, rather than being something separate you can treat on its own.  I rarely see the nosode cause such a dramatic improvement as you suggest UNLE$S it also covers the most pecular part of the case and especially suits the general/mental state (where this shows peculiarity).

I am also wary of any suggestion that repertorization could or should be avoided. This to me seems like a perfect way to miss the simillimum in any case.

 

In my practice of chronic diseases almost 80% of the computerized cases remain, subsequently, unchecked and unused—the miasmatic remedy overrides all the jumble of symptoms included therein, in a miraculous way.   Never forget to determine pathological family history of the patient. A strong clue to the pathologic past of the patient saves some 95% of the drudgery for the search for the similimum. First determine the miasm and then go to the relevant anti-miasmatic drug-list and determine as to which, from among the listed remedies, is most close to the case, on the basis of similia, that bears the strongest similarity. Try to choose a nosode than a remedy from any other realm: e.g. chemical, mineral or herbal

 

Again I would have to disagree with this method. I believe any attempt to find short-cuts is very vulnerable to error.

Comment by David Kempson on February 13, 2014 at 9:47pm

One thing I do want to say though, is that I believe there are multiple ways to get to cure, and that in fact flexibility in our approach is actually the greatest asset a practitioner can have. Homoeopathy needs to realise that, being an Art as well as a Science, there is going to be a certain amount of diversity in methods and approaches, and this can be celebrated rather than causing division. Many of us achieve cure for our patients using quite different methods. This is simply a truth about healing and shouldn't be seen as threatening in any way.

Comment by Dr. M. A. Usmani on February 20, 2014 at 7:11am

 

 

Criticism is always welcome; but the misplaced one should be corrected and set right. Mr. David Kempson’s criticism has vigor of a young devotee. Certainly after having a thorough seeping in the knowledge and spirit of a system one must talk with such a lively enthusiasm. But the bookish knowledge like a tight jacket gets torn at various places from the encounter with the practical reality. Prepossessions imbibed from the intensive bookish knowledge of theory get diluted when difficulties of practice teach the other way. Only practice opens the vistas to wisdom and vision. There is no blasphemy in science. Science is not faith. What is science today may become an errant nonsense tomorrow.

 

We say homeopathy is a science, and our daily practice corroborates our claim. But we have to prove this fact to the world at large. Our ‘Law of Similia’, a law for ourselves, is at best a hypothesis for the medical world: the medical science may prove it valid tomorrow, or never at all. Failure of this law in eradicating the disease totally and permanently compelled Hahnemann to peep behind the scene, and construct a theory of the Chronic Miasms. Even if finding the similia law practically true as curing a symptoms complex, on the basis of similarity, still it is very likely that they may not incorporate it in their extant therapeutics, because their therapeutics does not require it. Their methodology has changed, rather metamorphosed to quite another universe. Their pharmacology and therapeutics are basically changed. New advancements and discoveries in physiology, histology, pathology, histopathology, molecular pathology, diagnostic methodologies and elaborate techniques of laboratory sciences are simply amazing and stupendous.  

 

The practices of the dominant school have changed the trends of the people. Some 98% of patients now want allopathic cure (in the form of palliation), not the homeopathic cure, after which a kaleidoscopic tapestry starts unfolding (in the so-called reverse order), before the dazed eyes of the patient as a disgusting nightmare.   

 

My mission in life is to prepare people for the homeopathy of tomorrow, and restore Pathology to its rightful pedestal. Foreseeing this imminent cataclysm during the coming years, my try is to save homeopathic physicians by making them aware of the nonsensical nostrums of combination and patents hotchpotch that has flooded the homeopathic stores and pharmacies, the world over. Read my article: Gaspass Doctors.

 

David Kempson is advised to visit my page and read the following articles:

  • Homeopathic Compunction;
  • Cure Mania;
  • Curable vs Treatable;
  • Place of Pathology in Homeothreapeutics.

 

It’s not a smooth sailing to be a physician, especially homeopathic physician. Pangs of conscience never let you take a moment’s respite. Enthusiasm should be harnessed with the solution of practical difficulties in the field. Following the classical homeopathy with a fundamentalist spirit will take you nowhere. Science is not static; its ‘scientificity’ lies in its dynamism. 

 

Dr. Usmani
    

Comment

You need to be a member of Homeopathy World Community to add comments!

Join Homeopathy World Community

Search This Site

GET ➤ 
Cancer and Homeopathy
Best Vitamin C Drink
Enter SHOPWITHHWC
for $3 coupon

AGRO HOMEOPATHY

RADIO & VIDEO SHOWS

© 2018   Created by Debby Bruck.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...