Homeopathy

Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 00:47:49 +0100

X-To: TheWork@zz.com

Subject: Homeopathy

To: TheWork@zz.com (Multiple recipients of The Work)

Reply-To: TheWork@zz.com

Sender: TheWork-owner@zz.com
 

Let's try to get some points clear on this subject, so that we may not enter into an endless circle.

1) Homeopathy is not just a matter of dilution. Homeopathy involves dilution AND potentization (or dinamization; hope these are the right words). If you just dilute something without potentizing it, you do not come up with an homeopathic preparation.

So, you take 1 part of NaOH and solve it in 9 parts of a solvent made of 25% alcohol and 75% water (just by way of example -other substances and proportions would apply according to method), AND then you shake it. Thus you get the D1 preparation of NaOH. If you do not shake it, you do not get a D1 at all. Several methods of potentizing have been researched, instead of the shaking. Potentization can also be achieved subjecting the solution to ultrasonic waves, ultraviolet rays, and other. These can also achieve a dinamization of the solution, but evidences are that the shaking method is the best.

Reserach has also evidenced that a few shakings achieve only a small dinamization. The more you shake, the more you dinamize the solution, up to a limit. This limit marks the highest dinamization attainable. You may go on shaking forever, but the solution wouldn't be the more dinamized any longer. So, THEN, you need to dilute.

You take 1 part of D1 and 9 parts of the hydroalcoholic mixture, dilute _AND_ shake. You get a D2 of NaOH. And so on.

2) The research by anthroposophical scientists has also come up with some very interesting conclusions about this subject:

2a) The effects of homeopathic preparations follow a sinusoidal pattern. One of the most astounding books you may ever read is perhaps "Agriculture of Tomorrow" by Kolisko. It is full of illustrated experiments. Among them there are those of plants to which homeopathic preparations were added. You have a control plant, of normal size. Then you have photos of plants, each of which has been treated with a different dinamization, and that in succession: you see a plant treated with D1, the next with D2, next one with D3, and so on. Now, the D1 plant is a bit higher than the control. D2 is a bit higher than D1, D3 higher than D3. And so on until D6. D7 is lower than D6, and D8 lower then D7. And so on, until D11, which has the same height than the control plant. D12 is lower than the control, and D13 still lower. And so on until a minimum at D15. From then on, the plants begin to be a bit higher than the precedent again. And the curve repeats itself... Wether the maximum is attained at D6 or at any other degree of dinamyzation, depends on the plant and the preparation. I'm just giving these figures as a way of example.

2b) That homeopathic preparations made with different degrees of dilution should be compared according to degree of DINAMIZATION rather than of dilution. If an experiment such as the former were to be done with centesimal preparations (1 part diluted with 99 parts of solvent) instead of decimal ones (1 part to 9 parts), one would get the same curves, the point in the curve for a D15, for instance, corresponding to the point for a CH15, even if the DILUTION for a CH15 corresponds to a D30 (namely, 10E-30). This is a most important conclusion, showing the importance of the potentization process. Each repetition of the potentization process gives you a new degree of potentization, irrespective of the diluting proportions.

2c) It was found by anthroposophers, however, that a D dilution is the more effective one. Besides the ordinary D and CH dilutions, you might perform the homeopathic preparations with any proportion: 1 to 7 (let's call these A), 1 to 234 (let's call these B), etc. A D17 would have the same effect (the same point in the curve as for the 2a section above) as a CH17, a A17, a B17, etc. But the D17 would have a more pronounced effect. A maximum in the curve is higher for a decimal preparation than for any other degree of dilution, etc.

2d) It should be noted that at the very low levels of dilution, more or less up to 10E-8, which corresponds to a D8 and a CH4, the former does not apply very accurately. A D30 has the same effect than a CH30, only stronger. But a D4 has a somewhat different effect than a CH4, just because of the level of dilution. It just happens that a D4 has a low level of dilution, 10E-4, and at these low levels the presence of substance still counts. At a 10E-8 level of dilution, the substance doesn't count, generally speaking, because it is only in micro quantities. But at a 10E-4 level of dilution, the solved substance is still at ponderable levels, and acts as such. This applies to a D4, but a CH4 has a level of dilution of 10E-8, and thus acts already as a true homeopathic substance, without "substantial" interferences.

3) It is usually assumed by homeopaths, that the higher the degree of dinamization, the less physical, the more spiritual the effect.

4) Also, that the dose of remedies at a low degree of dinamization has a less lasting effect, so the dose is repeated more frequently. As the degree of dinamization increases, so the repetition of the dose should be delayed accordingly. You might be told to ingest a dose of D6 3 times a day, but a dose of D30 only once in a week.

5) Also, that low degrees of dinamization are more for acute and boldily related conditions, high degrees for chronic and psycho-spiritual conditions. (Personally, "spiritual" is the kind of word I would MOST sparingly use, but I shall attain myself to the terminology of others.)

6) The "similia similibus curantur" is the most traditional approach, and the only approved one by the most orthodoz practitioners, but there are other approaches which may be as logical, sound and effective as that one. Even if I do most certainly not buy everything R. Steiner said (and did), it is precisely with THESE kind of things that anthroposophy is quite reliable, so the following anthoposophical assumption deserves at least a second thought (I do not think there are photos for this!) They have developed a complete theoretical study on the effects of homeopathized metals, which follows the traditional attributions, and establishes polarities: Silver-Moon/Lead-Saturn, Quicksilver-Mercury/Tin-Jupiter, Copper-Venus/Iron-Mars, Gold-Sun standing in the middle. Each of the planet's energies is divided into 2 currents. For instance, Moon, as astrologers should know, rules duplication. A plant is made of branch after branch, leaf after leaf, in an unending duplication process most formally structurated. Thus, the relation of the vegetable kingdom with Moon is evident. Also with the etheric forces, which are the forces behind the strong vitality and structurization present in this kingdom. If you insert a filter paper into a solution of silver nitrate, the solution rises through the paper. You let it dry, and you may see some structures forming on the paper. These structures would vary according with the Moon's astronomical situation (phase, aspects to other planets, etc). Also, according to season. In February and March, when vitality forces are the lowest, almost no structures appear. As Spring time comes, the forces are powerful indeed, and so is the structures formation. All kind of curious experiments may be done with different metallic solutions which reflect their situation in the Heavens. Now, Moon also rules nails and hair, which in a way are quite the opposite to what we have dealt with formerly. They are not very vital, but rather a "dead end". These are ruled by the 2nd current of the Moon. You may have a condition related to the Moon, and you shall be given silver, but on a low dinamization degree (D6 to D8) or on a higher one (D20) according as to wether you need to be supported in your 1st or in your 2nd Moon current, respectively. A D12 or D15 would have a balancing effect. Of course, this reminds one of the curves made by the Koliskos when treating plants with succesive degrees od dinamization, which show that several factors need be taken into account when choosing the degree of dinamization. If you get poisoned by lead, you won't use a D7 for instance, but a D30, which inverts the 1st Saturn current, and helps you get rid of the lead. Anthroposophical physicians do not use high potencies (200, M, 20M, etc.) as they believe these act on too high a level, afecting the soul itself -in the way they understand it.

7) A way of preparing homeopathic remedies, coming from the radionics area, gives much food for thought. It is the Malcolm Rae's method. By radiesthesic methods, with a pendulum, points in a circle are determined for a particular substance. If then you just put your hydroalcoholic dilution media in the centre of a circle where those points have been indicated, you get an homeopathic preparation of that particular substance, without using it substantially at all. Sort of magic!

--------------

Now, as for the questions arisen:

* Bruce/Jenny Bartlett wrote: "One idea behind homeopathy is that, the more dilute the preparation, the more energized it is, and the more we respond to it on the etheric or astral levels instead of the physical level. (If that's true, why wouldn't distilled water be infinitely energized?)"

A dilution without dinamization (shaking) brings no homeopathic result. Thus, distilled water, which might be described as an infinite dilution, is not energeized, homeopathically speaking, because no dinamization process has been applied to it. In homeopathy we should not talk of degree of dilution, but of degree of dinamization -a D15 being equivalent to a CH15 because of having undergone 15 dinamization processes, even if the degree of dilution is much higher for the CH15. And I may agree that the higher the degree of dinamization, the subtler the level of action of the preparation.

*Daniel complains about me saying that homeopathy is physical, while he says it is entirely energetic. I think there must be a misunderstanding on what I may have said. It is true I still hold to the opinion that "form cannot exist by itself alone in the realm of the body, only in the realm of archetypes, or pure form" to which Daniel comments "In my awareness and experience, this is not correct. The remedy works on the level of the auric field. Some people just wear their remedies, they are so sensitive their auric fields pick up the vibration of the remedy and they can be healed as such." True that if you are sensitive enough, you may feel the remedy by just putting your hand on the flask, or even by thinking of it! But I feel Daniel may be seeing a contradiction where there is none. That form cannot exist by itself alone, but always be the form of something, even as you may not consider anything without a form, I feel it is too obvious -just barebones logic. I have no problem in agreeing with Daniel that homeopathy works in an energetic manner. What I say is the interaction of that energy with you auric field, to use Daniel's terms, develops according to its own laws. And these are still the laws of body realms, not of consciousness, because physical body, etheric body, astral body, mental body -they are all bodies. In the realm of consciousness, a message doesn't build up. Once you know something, you know it forever. But in the energetical realms, the level and repetition (call it dosage to sum up) of impacts has a significance. Our auric field, does not know -that belongs to a higher level- it just responds. The energetical balance of your auric field may be corrected if it is out of balance, by the appropriate homeopathical remedy. But it might also be impaired if the dosification is not appropriate. The analogy of the message, which Daniel uses to signify that it is the same to receive it once or a 100 times, I do not find it appropriate to the subject, because that would only pertain to realms where measure does not count, the realms to which a true action belongs, not reaction. But those are the realms of consciousness, and consciousness is above the levels of the auric field. The energetical levels at which homeopathy operates are not those levels, but levels at which measure still counts. Thus, intensity of dose, and delay in time between doses (both measures) do have a bearing on the effect produced. Our auric field is not God. It may be healed or damaged. The divine part in us, may not be so.

* I said "the higher the dose, the higher the impact", and Daniel says: "That I know and agree with. Giving a 200CH is more powerful a message than giving a 30 CH or a 9 CH. No probs." It is a pity than once he agrees with me, it is because he may have understood what I say in a different sense that I meant it. I was not refering to the degree of dinamization but to dose. It wouldn't be accurate to say that a 200Ch is more powerful than a 9CH, as they act on different levels. The 9CH is more powerful in the physical, the 200CH is more powerful on subtler levels. "The higher the dose, the higher the impact", those were my own words. I did not say "the higher the degree of dinamization, the higher the impact". I would like to ask Daniel to stick to what I say, when trying to comment it, because he is once and again deriving conclusions about what I say which I have not really said.

Now, let's get to the ORMUs scene. Daniel suggested the ORMUs being homeopathic, and perhaps it should be clarified what is meant by this. Whatever the right or wrong of our explanations of homeopathy, I'm pretty sure any practitioner of homeopathy would tell you that ingesting a whole tube is not the same as ingesting just 1 granule -and not very recommended, besides. And thus, I have to forward the disgusting idea that if the effect of ORMUs were not dependant of dose, then there would be a placebo effect involved. And, of course, they would not be alchemical substances, as these depend on dose -2 drops of an aurum potabile in a glass of water may serve you well; 10 drops, you are not going to enjoy the effect.