Nosodes, Sarcodes, Vaccines- A Comparative Study From MIT Perspective

NOSODES and SARCODES can play a major role in the management of CHRONIC diseases caused by MIASMS. It will be interesting to study these homeopathic medicinal agents in comparison with their allopathic counterpart, VACCINES.

Remember, when using the term MIASM, I always mean ‘chronic disease dispositions caused by off-target molecular bindings produced by antibodies generated in the organism against alien proteins such as infectious agents and vaccines’. It is basically different from the way ‘classical homeopaths’ understand and explain miasms.

Potentized homeopathic nosodes prepared from disease products are ‘molecular imprints’ in water-alcohol medium that can act inside the organism in a similar way as ANTIBODIES do. They can act as PROPHYLACTICS by binding to the invading pathogenic molecules and preventing them from attacking biological molecules.

Vaccines are disease products that can induce the organism to produce antibodies. Exactly, antibodies are ‘molecular imprinted’ native proteins, especially globulins.

Since antibodies are ‘molecular imprinted proteins’, the can remain in the system very long periods, and attack the surface proteins of invading microorganisms having configurational complementary relationship. That way, vaccines builds up immunity against specific diseases. Same time, these antibodies can cause various off-target molecular blocks, that my result in various pathological deviations known as ‘side effects’. That means, antibodies can PRODUCE chronic ‘miasms’ also.

Production of antibodies involves a natural process of ‘molecular imprinting’ similar to that happen during homeopathic potentization. Molecules contained in the vaccine substance creates spacial imprints up on native globulin proteins, inducing conformational changes in them. These ‘deformed globulins’ bearing spacial imprints of vaccine molecules are called ANTIBODIES’.


Since potentized nosodes contains only ‘molecular imprints’ in water/alcohol clusters, they will not remain inside the organism for long periods, and cannot cause off-target molecular blocks. Hence, potentized nosodes are safer than vaccines. VACCINES CAN PRODUCE CHRONIC DISEASES, WHEREAS NOSODES CURE CHRONIC DISEASES.

As such, molecular imprints contained in potentized drugs can provide prophylactic protection only for short periods. Life ling prophylaxis is not possible with homeopathy. It could be useful in epidemics

Classical concepts of ‘miasms’ and methods of ‘miasmatic analysis’ for selecting ‘anti-miasmatic’ drugs will undergo drastic changes when we accept the definition of homeopathy as ‘Molecular Imprints Therapeutics’. According to new approach, hahnemann’s concept of miasms is redefined as chronic disease dispositions due to ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions caused by antibodies formed against ‘alien’ proteins including infectious agents entering the organism. Most of these antibodies exist life-long inside the organism, causing diverse types of chronic diseases which include so-called auto-immune diseases also. To combat these chronic effects of anti-bodies, specific nosodes and other ‘anti-miasmatic’ remedies containing ‘molecular imprints’ that could de-activate these antibodies will have to be used. Anti-miasmatic ‘molecular imprints’ will have to be selected on the basis of infectious diseases, vaccinations and anaphylactic histories. Properly selected specific anti-miasmatic drugs will have to be used along with symptomatically selected drugs, especially in ‘total cure’ prescriptions.

Theoretically, ‘totality of symptoms’ include symptoms of ‘miasms’ also. I think ‘symptoms’ need not be the ‘only’ factor to considered if we have an exact understanding of ‘molecular level pathology’. Symptoms are only ‘one of the tools’ for identifying pathological molecular errors and selecting remedial agents’. When we know the ‘causative’ factors. we can prescribe without considering symptoms. Locating the ‘molecular errors’ is the primary concern, whatever be the tools we utilize for that.Theoretically, ‘totality of symptoms’ include symptoms of ‘miasms’ also. I think ‘symptoms’ need not be the ‘only’ factor to considered if we have an exact understanding of ‘molecular level pathology’. Symptoms are only ‘one of the tools’ for identifying pathological molecular errors and selecting remedial agents’. When we know the ‘causative’ factors. we can prescribe without considering symptoms. Locating the ‘molecular errors’ is the primary concern, whatever be the tools we utilize for that.

Materia medica of nosodes are much imperfect, and repertories do not represent them in due importance. Due to this limitation, we never get nosodes as similimum through symptomatic repertorization.

Not only past ‘illness’, we should also consider history of vaccinations and ‘allergies’, when we define miasms as antibodies against ‘alien proteins’.

So called ‘allergies’ have to be considered from miasmatic point of view. Allergic sensitizations happen due to the interaction of immune system with ‘allergens’ which are in most cases alien proteins. Potentized allergens would contain molecular imprints of these alien proteins, and hence should be considered as nosodes.

Allergy is actually the reaction of organism towards an ‘alien’ protein entering the organism. Antibodies are formed as a mechanism for trapping, marking and destructing these alien proteins, which are harmful to the system as they are proteins that do not match to the ‘genetic blueprint’ of the organism. As such, we can say, allergy is the reaction of organism towards proteins that do not match to its own genetic blueprint. That is why they become ‘aliens’. Even ‘egg albumin’, ‘saliva’ or ‘serum’ of an animal belonging to another species become deadly poisons due to the mismatch of genetic blueprint and protein molecules.

You can see, the MIT approach makes the concept of ‘miasms’ much broader than classical approach. Instead of three miasms originating from three major infectious diseases that was widely prevalent during hahnemann’s time, now we can see all ‘chronic disease’ dispositions originating from antibodies formed against diverse types of ‘alien’ proteins. This approach help us to perceive so-called ‘auto-immune’ diseases from a new angle. It is known that many ‘auto-immune’ diseases such as psoriasis, vitiligo and chrohn’s disease actually begins after some infections or allergic sensitizations, which shows the currently accepted ‘auto immunity’ theory will have to be re examined. In my opinion, so-called ‘auto-immune’ diseases are also caused by off-target molecular inhibitions created by antibodies formed against alien proteins. In other words, auto-immune diseases are also ‘mismatic’ in origin, and can be treated with appropriate nosodes.

Obviously, re-evaluation of the concept of ‘auto-immune diseases’ in modern medical science is a very important implication of MIT definition of homeopathy.

Destruction of mutant genes and cancer cells involves production of antibodies also against the proteins synthesized by them. These ‘cancer antibodies’ will remain in the system even after ‘cancer cells’ are destroyed. These antibodies generated against ‘alien’ proteins synthesized by mutant genes can travel in the organism, migrate to different parts and may bind to various biological molecules having configurational affinity. Such ‘off-target’ bindings lead to molecular inhibitions of biological molecules, which amount to molecular level pathologies similar to any miasmatic chronic disease. That means, antibodies generated against cancer cells would act as ‘cancer miasms’, causing disease dispositions of chronic nature. Obviously, not only in persons of known history of cancer, but almost all seemingly ‘cancer-free’ people may carry cancer antibodies.

Cancer antibodies, or cancer miasms can be effectively combated using cancer nosodes such as ‘carcinocin’, ‘schirinum’ etc, which are potentized cancer products, which would contain molecular imprints of ‘cancer proteins’ as well as ‘cancer antibodies’.

Molecular imprints of cancer antibodies act therapeutically by competing with cancer antibodies in binding to the biological molecules, where as molecular imprints of cancer proteins directly bind to the cancer proteins themselves. Molecular imprints cannot interfere in the interactions of antibodies with cancer cells, as they are their natural ligands. That means, even while rectifying the ‘miasmatic’ effects of cancer antibodies, carcinocin nosode will not by any way reduce the anti-cancer fight of our immune system.

Defining ‘sarcodes’ is a very complex task, on which a consensus among homeopaths seems to be almost impossible.

I would go with the definition evolved from discussions on our group: “Sarcodes are homeopathic drugs prepared from healthy animal tissues and secretions that in crude form contain biological molecules having specific physiological functions in the human organism”

According to this definition, an animal product will not be considered a sarcode, if it does not contain some biological molecules that are integral part of vital metabolic processes of human organism. That is the dividing line between ‘animal drugs’ and ‘sarcodes’.

Sarcodes have a very notable peculiarity. They always exist in molecular form in the organism, and participate in various molecular interactions being part of different biochemical pathways. They become homeopathic drugs only when they are not administered in ‘molecular forms’, but as potentized forms above 12c. In molecular forms below Avogadro limit, they can be considered only as physiological products, not as homeopathic drugs.

Two questions have to be answered here:

1. If sarcodes are natural biological molecules having specific functional roles in human organism, how they become pathogenic agents, requiring the intervention of their own potentized forms or ‘molecular imprints’?

2. If the sarcodes are biological molecules being essential parts of living system, will not their physiological functions get negatively affected by the use of their potentized forms, since it is true that potentized form of a drug substance can antidote the biological effects of same drug in crude form?

Let us consider pituitary hormones. They play a decisive role in the whole metabolism of the organism, and hence called ‘master gland’. Pitutary hormones control many enzyme systems in our body. Then how can they act as pathogenic agents, requiring the use of potentized pituitary extract?

Next question is, when we use potentized pitutrin as a sarcode, will it not act as an antidote towards molecular forms of pituitary hormones and create dangerous consequences, by disrupting the whole endocrine activities mediated by pituitary hormones?

Pepsinum is very important in digestion of proteins. If pepsinum 30 is given to a person, will it create problems in protein digestion by deactivating pepsin molecules? If they cannot antidote pepsin molecules, how can they act as therapeutic agents?

Thyroid hormones play very important roles in metabolic activities in the living organism. Then how it can be pathogenic agents, requiring the intervention of potentized thyroidinum? Will not potentized thyroidinum hinder the biological processes mediated by thyroid hormones?

These are very pertinent questions we have to answer while trying to explain the science behind using of potentized sarcodes.

We can answer these questions only if we know the dynamics of molecular processes involved in biochemical interactions.

Every biological molecules, especially those belonging to hormones, signaling molecules(cytokines), neuro-chemicals, antibodies and enzymes being circulated in the organism enter into two types of chemical interactions: 1. ‘On-target interactions’ and 2. ‘Off-target interactions’.

‘On-target’ interactions are those happening between natural ligands and their genuine targets. Such interactions are essential part of vital processes through which biochemical pathways are carried unhindered. Natural ligands and their genuine targets interact through two stages: a). molecular identification and binding, which is effected by complementary configurational affinity between targets and ligands, b). actual chemical interaction, which is effected through perfect charge affinity between ligands and their genuine targets.

Off-target interactions are those accidentally happening between ligands and wrong targets having configurational affinity only. In the absence of exact charge affinity, no chemical changes occur. Such interactions are always ‘inhibitory’, temporarily or permanantly deactivating the involved biological molecules. Such ‘inhibitory’ off-target interactions inevitably lead to derangement in associated biochemical pathways resulting in pathological states.

‘Off-target’ inhibitions caused by biological molecules such as hormones, enzymes, antibodies, signaling molecules(cytokines) and neurochemicals are causative factors of a wide range of pathological conditions in human beings. Sarcodes, or potentized preparations of these biological molecules, which contain their ‘molecular imprints’ , can effectively remove these molecular inhibitions and thereby act as therapeutic agents. Here lies the importance of sarcodes in homeopathic therapeutics.

Then comes the issue of selective action of the potentized sarcodes. As any other molecular imprints, molecular imprints in potentized sarcodes also cannot interfere in in the interactions between natural ligands and their genuine targets which involves configurational affinity as well as charge affinity. Since molecular imprints act through configurational affinity only, they can interfere in only inhibitory ‘off-target’ interactions.

It is now obvious that thyroidinum 30 cannot interfere in the essential biochemical processes mediated by thyroid hormones, Pitutrin 30 cannot interfere in the natural actions of pituitary hormones. This principle is applicable to all potentized sarcodes. We can use potentized sarcodes above 12c without any fear of adverse effects.

Sarcodes can play a very important role in the treatment of diverse types of diseases belonging to metabolic, emotional, psychosomatic, and ontological factors. They can also be part of constitutional prescriptions

Author: Chandran Nambiar K C

I am Chandran Nambiar K C Author, REDEFINING HOMEOPATHY Managing Director, Fedarin Mialbs Private Limited Developer. SIMILIMUM ULTRA Homeopathic Software I am not a scientist, academician, scholar, professional homeopath or anybody with 'big credentials', but an old lay man, a retired government servant, who accidentally happened to fall into the deep waters of the great ocean of homeopathic knowledge during his fiery teenage years, and was destined to live a whole life exploring the mysteries of that wonderful world with unending enthusiasm. My interest in homeopathy happened very accidentally when I was only 20 years old UNDERGRADUATE ZOOLOGY student, through a constant relationship with a local practitioner who happened to be father of my classmate. I was a regular visitor in his clinic, where from I started reading BOERICKE MATERIA MEDICA and other homeopathic books, which helped me to cure myself my troublesome asthma that have been haunting me since my childhood days. I became a voracious reader of homeopathy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: