To be a PERFECT SIMILIMUM, our selected drug should contain ALL the diverse types of chemical molecules that could produce ALL the diverse types of molecular inhibitions and symptoms in the particular patient, so that in potentized form it would contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required to remove ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions in him. If the selected drug does not contain ALL the diverse types of molecular imprints required for the patient, it will be PARTIAL SIMILIMUM only. In such cases, we can make a PERFECT SIMILIMUM by combining two or more PARTIAL SIMILIMUMS indicated by the symptoms.
If I am asked what is ‘similimum’, I would say ‘similimum’ is the drug that contains ALL the diverse types of chemical molecules that could produce ALL the diverse types of molecular inhibitions and symptoms in healthy organism EXACTLY SIMILAR to the pathological molecular inhibitions and symptoms existing in the patient before us, by binding to same biological target molecules that were affected by the pathogenic molecules.
Potentized forms of the perfect similimum would contain all the diverse types of molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance, which can bind to the diverse types of pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions caused by them in the living body.
MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics refers to a scientific hypothesis that proposes a rational model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics. This hypothesis was first proposed by myself.
According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.
Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.
According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and diseaes indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.
No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.
The old therapeutic system Hahnemann called as ALLOPATHY does not exist any more. It evolved into MODERN MEDICINE, parallel to the advancements of scientific knowledge. Modern Medicine is now gradually evolving into MOLECULAR MEDICINE.
MOLECUAR MEDICINE studies vital processes and diseases at molecular level, and deals therapeutics as an art and science of molecular level repairing.
MOLECULAR MEDICINE is the most advanced, most scientific and most recently originated discipline in modern medical science. It is a broad field, where physical, chemical, biological and medical techniques are used to describe molecular structures and mechanisms, identify fundamental molecular and genetic errors of pathology, and to develop molecular interventions to correct those errors.
MOLECULAR MEDICINE emphasizes disease and cure in terms of cellular and molecular phenomena and interventions rather than the conceptual and observational focus on patients and their organs common to conventional medicine.
MOLECULAR MEDICINE studies drug substances in terms of their molecular level structure and organization, and is more and more relying upon target-specific Designer Drugs synthesized by drug designing technology, supported by computer aided designing protocols.
Once the DRUG DESIGNING TECHNOLOGY realizes the scope of developing MOLECULAR IMPRINTS that could be used as therapeutic agents, MOLECULAR MEDICINE will ultimately evolve into MOLECULAR IMPRINTS THERAPEUTICS.
At that point, HOMEOPATHY will be recognized as an advanced branch of modern molecular medicine. as homeopathy is actually using molecular imprinted ‘water-alcohol’ supramolecular structures as therapeutic agents, even though it is not presently understood as such.
Molecular Imprinted Drugs Will Provide A Converging Point For Homeopathy And Modern Molecular Medicine:
In a far distant historical perspective, I foresee the possibility of converging of modern medicine and homeopathy into a universal molecular medical science of ‘drug-less therapy’, where only molecular imprints will be used as therapeutic agents.
Modern Medicine is gradually evolving into ‘Molecular Medicine’. Molecular Medicine studies vital processes and diseases at molecular level, and deals therapeutics as an art and science of molecular level repairing.
Molecular medicine is the most advanced, most scientific and most recently originated discipline in modern medical science. It is a broad field, where physical, chemical, biological and medical techniques are used to describe molecular structures and mechanisms, identify fundamental molecular and genetic errors of pathology, and to develop molecular interventions to correct those errors.
‘Molecular Medicine’ emphasizes disease and cure in terms of cellular and molecular phenomena and interventions rather than the conceptual and observational focus on patients and their organs common to conventional medicine.
Molecular Medicine studies drug substances in terms of their molecular level structure and organization, and is more and more relying upon target-specific Designer Drugs synthesized by drug designing technology, supported by computer aided designing protocols.
Drug Designing Technology has recently started exploring the possibilities of Molecular Imprinting in the development of target-specific designer drugs. They are now experimenting for developing bio-friendly imprinting matrices and imprinting protocols, so as to prepare artificial binding surfaces for pathogenic molecules that could be utilized as therapeutic agents.
Even though not yet recognized as such, homeopathic potentization is a process of molecular imprinting, where artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules are produced by imprinting drug molecules into water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrices. Homeopathy identifies pathological molecular errors and selects the appropriate molecular imprints through a peculiar technique of ‘comparing symptoms’, which is expressed as the therapeutic principle, ‘simila similibus curentur’
Most probably, modern molecular medicine and drug designing technology is in the new future going to explore the possibilities of water as a molecular imprinting medium as part of their search for novel substances to be utilized as imprinting matrix.
It means, Modern Molecular Medicine is slowly advancing towards the realization of a drug designing technology that homeopathy invented as ‘potentization’ and utilized for preparing therapeutic agents 250 years ago. It is based on this understanding that I try to propagate the concept that ‘Homeopathy is Molecular Imprinting Therapeutics- An Advanced Branch of Molecular Medicine.
In a far distant historical perspective, I foresee the possibility of converging of modern medicine and homeopathy into a universal molecular medical science of ‘drug-less therapy’, where only molecular imprints will be used as therapeutic agents. Instead of our present ‘potentization’, modern science may develop more sophisticated ways of molecular imprinting, that would enable us to produce therapeutic agents more specific and perfect than our present day ‘potentized drugs’.
May be be distant dream. But it is a dream based on scientific knowledge.
SEE HOW HAHNEMANN DEFINES THE QUALITIES OF A GOOD ‘PHYSICIAN’:
The physician’s high and only mission is to restore the sick to health, to cure, as it is termed. The highest ideal of cure is rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of the health, or removal and annihilation of the disease in its whole extent, in the shortest, most reliable, and most harmless way, on easily comprehensible principles.
To be “a true practitioner of the healing art.”, a physician should know “how to treat judiciously and rationally”. He should have “knowledge of disease”. He should have “knowledge of medical powers”. He should have knowledge of “choice of the medicine indicated”. He should have knowledge of “proper dose and the proper repeating the dose”. He should have knowledge of “obstacles to recovery in each case”. He should have knowledge of “how to remove” those obstacles. He should also know about the “things that derange health and cause disease, and how to remove them from persons in health”.
Each word in this definition is important. Every homeopath should honestly look into himself and examine whether he is at least earnestly trying to fit himself to this wonderful definition.
In modern knowledge context, definition of “knowledge of diseases” hahnemann proposed as a basic qualification of “good physician” inevitably should mean the understanding of biochemical processes involved in the ‘molecular level pathology’ of diseases.
“Knowledge of medicinal powers” should include the knowledge regarding the exact ‘active principles’ of potentized drugs, and the biological mechanism by which they produce cure.
“Proper dose and repetition” could be scientifically decided only if you know ‘what is the exact active principles’ of potenteized drugs we are using, and ‘how they actually work’.
“Knowledge of things deranging health” actually means scientific understanding of modern hygiene and nutrition.
Our practice will become “judicious and rational” as hahnemann defined, only if modern homeopaths attain at least that much of scientific awareness . Do you say “most of homeopaths” are equipped with these essential scientific knowledge to be qualified as ‘good physicians’?
I think, terms CHRONIC and ACUTE do not denote any special character of a disease, but it denotes physician’s subjective APPROACH towards a case he is dealing with. A physician can approach and deal with any case with a CHRONIC or ACUTE approach.
When physician tries to resolve only the most troublesome and immediate PARTICULAR complaints of a case, disregarding its CONSTITUTIONAL aspects, it is an ACUTE approach.
When he tries to resolve the same case with full regard to its CONSTITUTIONAL as well as PARTICULAR aspects, it is a CHRONIC approach. Way of case taking, collection of symptoms, heirachy of symptoms, weightage of symptoms, way of selecting drugs, dosage, mode of administration- every thing changes depending up on whether physician approaches the case as CHRONIC or ACUTE.
If you decide to you target only the most distressing PARTICULAR COMPLAINTS that represent some ABNORMAL conditions, you can work out a case by ACUTE approach. In this approach, you have to collect all the most prominent ABNORMAL BASIC SYMPTOMS you want to relieve, along with their accessories such as LOCATION, SENSATIONS, CAUSATIONS, PRESENTATION, MODALITIES, CONCOMITANTS etc. Add each BASIC symptom with its characteristic ACCESSORIES, to make a COMPLETE HOMEOPATHIC SYMPTOM, and find a similimum for it. If you get more than one COMPLETE SYMPTOM, you may get different similimum for each. Prescribe them.
If you decide to work out the case for a TOTAL CURE by CHRONIC approach, over and above the above mentioned BASIC SYMPTOMS and their ACCESSORY symptoms, collect all ABNORMAL symptoms related with the WHOLE PERSON, such as Physical generals, Mentals, Miasms, Family History, Chronology of complaints, Vaccinations, Previous diseases, Miasms, Allergies, Food habits, Addictions, Thermals, Dreams, Facial expressions, Gestures, Emotional background, Occupation, Working environment, Family relations, Personal relationships, Living environment- everything have to be collected if you are going to work out a case by CHRONIC approach. Repertorize by any of the conventional repertorization methods and find appropriate similimum.
When working with CHRONIC approach, I prefer to arrange symptoms into different SYMPTOM GROUPS such as PHYSICAL GENERALS, MENTALS, and different categories of PARTICULARS. Then I would find similimum for each group separately. If all groups cover same similimum, I would prescribe it. If different symptom groups indicate different similimum, I go for MULTIPLE drug prescriptions to ensure a TOTAL CURE of the PATIENT.
In ACUTE approach, ‘previous history’ is more or less ignored. Diseases are dealt with a similimum selected on on CAUSATION- LOCATION- PRESENTATION- SENSATIONS- MODALITIES- CONCOMITANTS.
In CHRONIC approach, ‘previous history’ of disease evolution is very important. If an acute complaint has a long PREVIOUS HISTORY, CHRONIC approach will be more suitable. To deal with CHRONIC approach, we will have to consider PHYSICAL GENERALS, MENTALS and HISTORY over and above CAUSATION- LOCATION-PRESENTATION- SENSATIONS- MODALITIES- CONCOMITANTS while making prescriptions. HISTORY includes genetics, previous infections, family history, vaccinations, emotional history, occupational history, environmental history etc etc.
MIASMS or ‘persistent off target actions of antibodies generated against infectious agents and alien proteins’ are the MAJOR factor to be considered in CHRONIC approach. Auto-immune diseases, prion diseases, proteinopathies or deformed protein diseases, vaccination diseases, immune-related diseases, ontological diseases – all these diseases belonging to this class of MIASMATIC diseases warrants a CHRONIC approach
Selecting Similimum Becomes Very Simple If You Look For Peculiar ‘Concomitant Symptoms’
CONCOMITANT symptoms are very important in deciding a similimum, since they will be always very peculiar to the PATIENT. Never ignore concomitants if they are peculiar. In most cases, concomitants will lead us to a right remedy or group of probable remedies. During case taking, we should be very careful for not to miss these valuable indicators of SIMILIMUM.
CONCOMITANTS mean potentially independant symptoms that appear as ADDITIONAL symptoms, along with or accompanying with a BASIC symptom. ALTERNATING SYMPTOMS as well as EXTENSIONS also may be considered as concomitants, as they also are ADDITIONAL symptoms appearing DURING, ALONG WITH or RELATED WITH the main BASIC symptoms. Concomitants are most helpful indicators for individualizing the patient by identifying the exact molecular errors working behind a particular symptom group, and for identifying the exact molecular imprints required to remove those molecular errors.
Concomitants are always explained by the patients as well as in repertories using terms such as ‘accompanied with’ ‘along with’, ‘during’, ‘alternating’, ‘extending to’, or ‘concomitant with’ itself.
For example, VOMITING during HEADACHE- here vomiting is a concomitant of headache. If it is HEADACHE during VOMITING, headache is the concomitant of vomiting. NAUSEA during headache, YAWNING during headache, BACKACHE along with piles, DIARRHOEA with COLIC, ABDOMINAL pain extending to back, ASTHMA with URTICARIA, ASTHMA alternating with URTICARIA, CORYZA during EATING, CHEST PAIN extending to FINGERS, HEADACHE with SLEEPINESS- we can cite thousands of examples for CONCOMITANTS from our repertories. Study them with special care, to be a successful prescriber.
MODALITIES are different from CONCOMITANTS. Modalities are not additional symptoms like concomitants. They are only factors such as CONDITIONS or TIME that ameliorate or aggravate certain symptoms. In some cases, CONCOMITANT symptoms may also MODIFY the basic symptoms by aggravating or ameliorating it. Such MODIFYING CONCOMITANTS are far more helpful in selecting a similimum even more than pure concomitants or modalities.
Some homeopaths claim that they can prescribe “without all these things”, on the basis of “behavior, temperament & personality” only. Can anybody decide the “behavior, temperament & personality” of a patient without observing and studying his SUBJECTIVE and OBJECTIVE symptoms? ‘Concomitants’ need not be always ‘physical’ or particular’. It may be ‘behavioral’, ‘temperamental’ or abnormalities in ‘personality’. If patient shows some ‘change of mood such as violent outbursts, weeping or anger during headache’, the mood changes are CONCOMITANTS of headache. If a patient ‘desires to sit in solitude’ during headache, ‘desire solitude’ is a CONCOMITANT of headache. If it is ‘weeping’ during ‘dysmenorrhoea’, ‘weeping’ is a CONCOMITANT of ‘dysmenorrhoea’. There is no scope for any confusion in this regard.
Any ABNORMAL objective and subjective symptom, that reflects any ABNORMAL molecular processes happening in the body that have to be corrected by using a medicinal agent, are to be considered by the homeopath in deciding an appropriate remedy for that patient. If anything ABNORMAL is there in his ‘behavior, temperament or personality’, it will of course provide a strong indication to an appropriate remedy. But remember, it should be an ABNORMAL one, or DEVIATION from normal, to be of worth consideration. NORMAL ‘behavior, temperament or personality’ indicates NORMAL physiological processes, where as we are looking for what is going ABNORMAL in him.
When I use the terms SUBJECTIVE and OBJECTIVE symptoms, that no way disregards ‘behavior, temperament or personality’. Every general, particular, mental, or physical symptom, including those of ‘behavior, temperament or personality’ come under the purview of ‘subjective and objective’ symptoms.
Some people accuse BOENNINGHAUSSEN has ignored mentals, generals as well as ‘behavior, temperament or personality’ aspects while defining TOTALITY in terms of ‘causations, locations, sensations, modalities and concomitants’. This accusation arises from incorrect understanding of boenninghaussen’s approach. CAUSATION may be physical or mental. LOCATION includes generals and particulars. SENSATIONS comprises of all SUBJECTIVE symptoms, including general or particular sensations as well as mentals. MODALITIES also include mental and general aspects of aggravations and ameliorations. CONCOMITANTS may be general, mental, physical, or particular. Boenninghaussen’s method no way disregards or ignores ‘behavior, temperament or personality’, but explains and classifies them with a different approach, more systematic, specific and scientific.
I have felt that boenninghaussen ignored or did not give due consideration to the PRESENTATION or APPEARANCE aspects of symptoms, such as general and particular physical appearance, type of discharges, type of eruptions, lesions, skin changes, hair, gestures, gaits, facial expressions etc etc. That is why I include a new category PRESENTATIONS along with CAUSATION, SENSATION, LOCATION, MODALITIES and CONCOMITANTS schema of boenninghaussen. I also want to stress the importance of ALTERNATING SYMPTOMS and EXTENSIONS under the category of CONCOMITANTS. By this way, I think I have updated boenninghaussen’s schema into more perfection.
Many young homeopaths ask me: “How to convert SYMPTOMS into RUBRICS?”
We get only ‘symptoms’ from the patients- that too in ‘their language’, and in very nontechnical ways. Converting those symptoms into the ‘technical language’ of materia medica and repertories is a very important work physician has to undertake before starting the successful search for similimum. In other words, we have to convert SYMPTOM into RUBRIC.
This job becomes very simple if you have a software that provides search options using MULTIPLE KEY WORDS.
Type one or more words that you expect to be part of rubric you are searching for. A few key terms of the symptom is enough. Type those words in search tool, and click SEARCH. All rubrics, belonging to any chapter of your repertory, that contain the KEY WORDS you used will be instantly displayed. Scroll down through the list and select a rubric that seems to be most appropriate to your symptom. Finished. Work is done. You need not worry how to convert a symptom into a rubric, or to which part of repertory it belongs!
For example, see how I am finding an appropriate RUBRIC for the SYMPTOM ‘headache relieved by vomiting’ into its rubric, I typed the key words HEAD, PAIN, VOMIT in the search tool of SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE and then searched. Following rubrics were displayed:
1. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Violent pains : With red face, vomiting and diarrhoea
2. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting
3. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting : Amel.
4. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting : After
5. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Burning : Vomiting, after
6. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Pressing : Vomiting amel.
7. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Tearing, rending : Vomiting, after
8. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Tearing, rending : Occiput : Vomiting
It is very easy for me to select the most appropriate rubric from this list. I selected the RUBRIC “[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting : Amel.”
We can reduce the number of rubrics displayed by using more key words, so that the list will be more specific.
This is how a good software helps us to convert a SYMPTOM into a RUBRIC, and locate it in the REPERTORY with in split-seconds.
When you start perceiving potentized drugs in terms of diverse types of hydrosomes or ‘molecular imprints’ as the ‘active principles’ they contain, you will realize that all controversies over ‘monopharmacy/polypharmacy’ issue become totally irrelevant.
SIMILIMUM essentially means a drug substance that can provide the specific molecular imprints required to remove the particular molecular errors that caused the particular disease condition in the particular patient.
Since ‘multiple’ molecular errors exist in any patient in a particular point of time, expressed through ‘multiple’ groups of symptoms, he will inevitably need ‘multiple’ molecular imprints to remove them. If potentized form of a ‘single’ medicinal substance can provide all those ‘multiple’ molecular imprints, that ‘single’ drug substance will be enough. If we could not find a ‘single’ drug substance that contain ‘all’ the ‘multiple’ molecular imprints required by the patient as indicated by the ‘symptom groups’, we will have to include ‘multiple’ drug substances in our prescription. It is the constituent molecular imprints contained in our particular prescription that matter.
Important point is, we have to ensure that our prescription supplies ALL the diverse types of molecular imprints required to deactivate all the diverse types of pathogenic molecules working in the patient, as indicated by the diverse groups of subjective and objective symptoms expressed by him. If we could find a SINGLE drug preparation that could supply all the molecular imprints required by the patient I am dealing with, we can use that SINGLE drug preparation only. If we do not find such a single drug, we have to include as many number of drug preparations as required, in order to provide all the molecular imprints needed to remove all the molecular errors in the patient.
SINGLE/MULTIPLE drug controversy never bothers if we understand this scientific approach proposed by MIT, as we start thinking in terms of molecular imprints- not drug names. Actually, a drug become ‘single’, if it contains ‘single’ type of molecular imprints only. IF a drug contains more than one type of molecular imprints, it is a COMPOUND DRUG, even if it is known by a ‘single’ drug name, prepared from a ‘single’ SOURCE material, kept in a ‘single’ bottle, consumed as a ‘single’ unit for ‘drug proving’, or considered by ‘masters’ as ‘single’ drug.
When we consume NUX VOMICA Q, it is absorbed into the blood as various individual chemical molecules contained in it. It is these individual chemical molecules that interact with various biological molecules. Different molecules act up on different biological targets according to the molecular affinities of their functional groups. Biological molecules are inhibited, resulting in errors in the biochemical pathways mediated by those biological molecules. Such molecular level errors in biological processes cascades into a series of molecular errors, which are expressed through various groups of subjective and objective symptoms.
It is obvious that what we consider as the SYMPTOMS OF NUX VOMICA are actually the sum total of different SYMPTOM GROUPS, representing entirely different molecular errors produced in entirely different biological molecules, by the actions of entirely different chemical molecules contained in NUX VOMICA TINCTURE.
We have to remember, there is no such a thing called nux vomica molecule- only individual chemical molecules contained in nux vomica tincture. Each constituent molecule has its own specific chemical structure and properties. They act on different biological targets by this chemical properties.
Each individual chemical molecule contained in nux vomica acts as an individual drug. That means, NUX VOMICA is not a SINGLE drug, but a COMPOUND drug.
Homeopaths may find it difficult to accept this fact, as it contradicts with their beliefs as well as the lessons they are taught. But it is the scientific fact.
From scientific point of view of pharmaceutical chemistry, a DRUG is a biologically active unit contained in a substance used as therapeutic agent.
IT is the structure and properties of that chemical molecule that decides its medicinal properties and therapeutic actions. If such as substance contains only ONE type of biologically active unit, it is a SINGLE drug. If it contains different types of biologically active units, it is a COMPOUND drug.
It is obvious that most of the drugs we use in homeopathy – especially drugs of biological origin and complex minerals- contain diverse types of biologically active units, and hence they cannot be considered SINGLE drugs.
Molecular imprinting happens as individual molecules, and as such, potentized drugs prepared from a SINGLE drug substance will contain diverse types of molecular imprints representing the diverse types of individual constituent molecules contained in the substance. Those molecular imprints also act as individual units when applied in the organism. Hence, potentized drugs prepared by using a complex, seemingly single drug substance is actually a COMPOUND drug, containing diverse types of biologically active units, or ‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTS’.
IF you still cannot realize the meaninglessness and utter folly involved in talking about SINGLE DRUGS, it is the blindness caused by your dogmatic learning and lack of scientific awareness. I cannot help you for that!
By detecting the presence of ‘nanoparticles’ in the samples of homeopathic drugs, what did the IIT-B team actually prove”? They only proved that the ‘market samples’ of 6c, 30c and 200c are not much different from each other, and the manufacturers are fooling the profession by selling very low potencies (below Avogadro limit) with labels of ‘ultra-high’ dilutions! The research team also got fooled by conducting this research using these fake ‘ultra-high’ potencies.
I was most generously invited by the respected organizers to present a paper on Molecular Imprints Therapeutics at Global Homeopathy Summit in Mumbai to be conducted on 11th and 12th of April 2015.
Even though I have been looking for such an opportunity for MIT since long time, I finally. decided to turn down the invitation. Reason for my decision is very simple- the published list of speakers contain TWENTY EIGHT prominent personalities hailing from different parts of the globe, and belonging to various premier research institutions. TWENTY EIGHT speakers for TWO DAYS means FOURTEEN speakers per day.. Time slot scheduled for these speakers is 9 am to 6 pm on both days- means total 9 hours per day. FOURTEEN papers have be ‘presented’ and ‘discussed’ by NINE HOURS. One topic will get maximum THIRTY EIGHT MINUTES for presentation and discussion!
I do not expect the innovative idea of MIT could be presented and discussed by ‘thirty eight minutes’ in front of an audience tired of that much number of ‘speakers’ and ‘personalities’. I need minimum one hour to present the MIT ideas, one hour for discussions, and minimum 30 minutes to sum up the discussions, for my effort to be fruitful. Otherwise my travel from kerala to mumbai will be a waste of money, time and energy. That is why I decided to stay away from GHF summit, with all my gratitude to Dr Rajesh Sha. .
Dr J T KENT gives following very important advice in “What The Doctor Needs To Know”. I am sharing it here, as I think all young aspiring homeopaths have a lot to learn from this advice:
“The homoeopathic physician has no remedy for the name of a disease.
Homoeopathy is an exact science. It is based upon a natural law, and the true physician must prescribe in accordance with this law of nature.
Homoeopathy has no specific for any disease by name, but it has a true specific for each individual case of disease.
That is, Homoeopathy does not treat fever, or any other disease, in the abstract, but applies medicine to the individual personality in that condition which produces or causes fever.
To apply the homoeopathic remedy properly that condition of the individual patient must be known by the voice of nature speaking through symptoms.
The beneficent Creator has ordained that every diseased condition shall be made known by certain symptoms, and whenever that same condition is present that same set of symptoms will also be present.
Certain symptoms are always present in any given disease ; these point alone to the name of the disease.
In every given disease there is another class of symptoms peculiar to the individual and differing in some way from those of other cases of the same disease ; these symptoms show the individual characteristics of the patient and point unerringly to the curative homoeopathic remedy.
When these symptoms peculiar to the individual patient are known the homoeopathic remedy can be selected that will surely cure every curable disease, whether the disease be tumors, morbid growths, cancer or other skin diseases, or any form of chronic or acute disease peculiar to man, woman or child.
To accomplish this desirable result every case must be individualized, every symptoms from head to feet, must be given, every variation from positive health must be known.
Whatever is not as it should be is a symptom and must be recorded.”
What is a SYMPTOM?
Dr J T Kent says in LESSER WRITINGS- What The Doctor Needs To Know:
“Whatever is not as it should be is a symptom and must be recorded.”
It gives a perfect definition of ‘symptom’. WHATEVER IS NOTICED IN THE PATIENT THAT IS ‘NOT AS IT SHOULD BE.’. Means, anything that is not NORMAL is a symptom.
Haffkine institute, who is creating an aggressive media hype about their claim to have developed an “anti-TB homeopathic formula’ is expected to provide direct answers to the following simple questions:
1. What are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of this “anti-TB” drug, as you claim it to be prepared by a “molecular technique”?
2. What is the exact BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which this drug act upon living organism and produce a curative or “complementary”effect as you claim?
3. What is the ‘molecular process’ involved in potentization? As you claim to have developed a ‘new molecular techmique’ for potentization, you will be aware of it also, as a new ‘molecular technique’ cannot be developed without knowing the ‘molecular process’.
4. Is this a ‘single drug’ or a ‘combination formula’?
Take one or more existing TB nosodes, add them with some other ‘micro-organisms’ claimed to be potentized using some mysterious NEW ‘molecular techniques’, make a compound formulation and introduce it as a ‘standardized anti-TB drug’; then create an aggressive media hype as if a great ‘fundamental research’ has been done in homeopathy! That is being done by Haffkine Institute in recent days.
No explanations given regarding the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES contained in this ‘ANTI-TB DRUG’! No explanations given regarding the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which this “drug” produce an anti-TB effect. Yet they claim it is a ‘fundamental research’ and a ‘historical invention’!
No explanations given regarding the NEW “molecular techniques” they used for potentization. Please remember, any “molecular techniques’ of potentization could be devised only if the exact ‘molecular processes’ involved in potentization is thoroughly understood. If Haffkine Institute has finally understood it, it will be the greatest fundamental research ever happening in homeopathy. But they do not make such a claim about such an achievement, or share such an information. Instead, they are creating media hype about an anti-TB “standardized formula” aimed for MARKETING in a big scale!
Kindly notice, they do not claim this NEW FORMULA will cure TB. They only “hope” that it will “complement” allopathic treatment! They are conducting “animal trials” to verify their “hope”! Is it not a joke?
Homeopathy will not be scientifically explained, only because some ‘reputed scientists’ belonging to some ‘premier institutions’ make a key note address in a ‘homeopathy seminar’ and gloss over homeopathy by interspersing with some off-hand remarks about terms such as ‘molecular theory’ or ‘nanoparticles’ that may attract some enthralled claps from the dedicated homeopathic audiences sitting before the dais.
Homeopathy will not be scientifically explained, only because some nobel laureates “support” or utter some ‘good words’ about homeopathy.
Homeopathy will not be scientifically explained only because ‘great personalities’ such as mahathma gandhi, nelson mandela, mother theresa or ‘royal family of britain’ used or recommended homeopathy prescriptions.
To be scientifically explained and recognized as a ‘medical science’, following questions should be answered and proved by SCIENTIFIC METHODS.
1. What is the actual process that happens during drug potentization, by which the medicinal properties of drug substances are retained in a medium diluted very much above avogadro limit?
2. What are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of homeopathic drugs potentized above avogadro limit?
3. What is the exact BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which the ‘active principles’ contained in the potentized drugs interact with the living organism and produce a curative effect as envisaged by the axiom ‘similia similibus curentur’?
Accepting the REALITIES and submitting to the LIMITATIONS of objective circumstances that are beyond our control will reduce the inner struggles and mental tension to a great extent. That is my experience.
One learned friend belonging to Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy,Mumbai. has asked me “do not distort the basics of homeopathy.”
He accuses me of “irresponsible comments” without any “peer reviewed papers published”, that “divert the inexperienced homeopaths or students into a wrong path”.
I hope somebody would tell me what are the “basics of homeopathy” that should not be “distorted”? Which are the “basics of homeopathy” that are proved by “peer-reviewed” researches?
According to the “basics of homeopathy” that should not be “distorted”, what happens during potentization? What are the active principles of potentized drugs? What is the exact biological mechanism of homeopathic cure? Kindly tell me, sir.
Sir, as per your profile info, you belong to Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy,Mumbai.
I would like to get some references from you regarding “peer-reviewed” articles based on which you are talking about potencies, drug relationships and repetitions.
Why you are so much particular about “peer reviewed papers” only for my ideas, where as you are following, teaching and practicing all sorts of unscientific ‘laws’, ‘principles’ and ‘theories’ without any scientific proof or ‘peer reviewed’ researches?
Did anybody ever ‘prove’ any one of the aphorisms of organon by any scientific method?
As a person belonging to ” Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy,Mumbai “, I would like to know what are your answers to the following fundamental questions of homeopathy:
1. What happens during potentization?
2. What are the active principles of potentized drugs?
3. What is the exact molecular level biological mechanism of homeopathic cure?
Any rational talk about drug relationship, repetitions, potencies etc could be done only on the basis of answers to these questions.
If you have no “scientifically proven” answers to the above questions, you are not ‘qualified’ to argue with me, which ever ‘research’ institute you belong to.
What Is The Key To The Successful Homeopathic Practice?
Practice homeopathy with minimum THEORY, with minimum ‘DON’TS’. Practice it with confidence- without any fear or foreboding.
COLLECT ALL ‘ABNORMAL BASIC SYMPTOMS’
CONVERT THEM THEM INTO ‘COMPLETE SYMPTOMS’ BY ADDING WITH THEIR ‘ACCESSORIES’ SUCH AS ‘CAUSATION-LOCATION-SENSATION-PRESENTATION-MODALITY-CONCOMITANTS’.
THEN SELECT ONE OR MORE SIMILIMUMS AS REQUIRED, USING ‘ANY’ OF THE VARIOUS METHODS APPROPRIATE FOR YOUR CASE.
THIS IS THE PRIMARY SKILL YOU SHOULD MASTER.
Remember following points also:
– Use only 30C.
– Do not hesitate to repeat frequently.
– Do not hesitate to change remedies as indicated by symptoms .
– Do not worry about ‘single-multiple’ drugs.
– Do not worry about ‘drug relationships’- ‘inimicals’ or ‘antidotes’.
– Do not worry about ‘miasmatic analysis’.
– Do not worry about ‘suppression’.
– Do not worry about ‘aggravations’ and ‘bad effects’ of potentized drugs.
YOU WILL DEFINITELY SUCCEED IN YOUR PRACTICE!
Ultimately, your LIFE becomes meaningful and a success when your CONTRIBUTIONS to the society over-weigh your APPROPRIATIONS from the society.
DEMOCRACY is the measure of QUANTITY- not of QUALITY.
If anybody expect me to be a ‘faithful follower’ of any master, any idea, any system or any organization, I am sorry, they are going to be disappointed. I follow only my ideas, my visions, my convictions and my decisions. I will be with you only as far as I am convinced you are on the right path. The very moment you prove otherwise, I will say goodbye!
Ideas do not come from the blues. Any new IDEA is the ‘effect’ or continuation of existing ideas inherited from the previous generations. An IDEA becomes successful only if it serves as the ’cause’ of new ideas of future generations.
You need not pay any money or go for any ‘seminar’ to learn the real SCIENTIFIC HOMEOPATHY. Find some time to read the 250 plus articles published on www.dialecticalhomeopathy.com. It will be an experience more valuable and productive than hundreds of seminars. If you read all those articles carefully and try to clearly understand what are said in them, you will come out as a new man- a new homeopath empowered with a new vision regarding the theory and practice of homeopathy. You will become more confident, you will make better results, you will attract more patients, and your career will start blooming!
Some homeopaths seem to be afraid that homeopathy cannot exist without the support of concepts such as ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’. They seem to fear that the whole ‘belief’ system of homeopathy will collapse if those ideas are discarded or proved wrong. That is why they fight tooth and nail to defend those concepts by virulently attacking anybody who say that those concepts are unscientific and unnecessary.
Once you understand the concepts of ‘molecular imprints’ as well as the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure as explained by MIT, you will realize that homeopathy can not only exist, but will become much stronger and acceptable even without ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’.
Advancement of science during the last two hundred years since hahnemann left the scene has unraveled the molecular processes of life and diseases to such a level that we can now logically explain the fundamental principles of homeopathy on a new scientific basis that our master was unable to do due to the historical limitations of knowledge available to him.
We will be doing gross injustice to the great genius of Hahnemann, if we still continue to stick on to his historically obsolete unscientific explanations.
We should exhibit the intellectual courage to mercilessly discard the evidently irrational and unscientific parts of Hahnemannian homeopathy such as ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic energy’.
Same time, we should safeguard its inner kernel of the great natural therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and the therapeutic application of ‘molecular imprints’, which our master called ‘potentized’ drugs.
We should bravely replace the concept ‘vital force’ with scientific understanding of ‘vital process’ as explained by modern life sciences.
Homeopaths should understand, claiming homeopathy to be a ‘science beyond science’, ‘science of hidden dimensions’ or ‘spiritual science’ may help some persons to appear fashionable and ‘scholarly’, but all these futile ‘intellectual’ exercises contribute much in alienating this great therapeutic system from current main stream science.
MEDICAL PRACTICE involves the study and application of MEDICINES, substances that are ‘material’. Medicinal substances work by their ‘material’ structure and physico-chemical properties. There is nothing ‘immaterial’ or ‘spiritualistic’ in it.
Potentized drugs contain MOLECULAR IMPRINTS, which are supramolecular formations of water-alcohol molecules, and are ‘material’ structures. They act by their ‘conformational’ properties, binding to the pathogenic molecules and deactivating them. There is nothing ‘immaterial’ or ‘spiritualistic’ in it also.
A lot of “scientific seminars” on homeopathy are happening every year around the world. A lot of ‘reputed’ ‘experts’ and ‘researchers’ participate in these seminars and give scholarly enlightening lectures. At the end of the day, ‘science’ of homeopathy remains where hahnemann left it 250 years ago!! (If not taken a little more backward).
Only thing generated in these ‘scientific seminars’ are MONEY for the people behind- nothing else!