Excerpt for MIASMS- The Killer Bodyguards by , available in its entirety at Smashwords


Killer Bodyguards!


Chandran K C

Copyright 2018 Chandran K C

A Smashword Edition

Chapter 1. Redefining 'Miasms'

Homeopathic understanding and management of ‘chronic disease’ is based on the concept of ‘miasms’. Hahnemann has provided detailed explanations regarding three types of ‘miasms’ such as ‘psora’, ‘syphills’ and ‘sycosis’. Theory of  ‘miasms’ and chronic diseases were developed during later part of Hahnemann’s life, when he learned from his clinical experience that medicines selected on the basis of similarity of symptoms as he advocated earlier offered only temporary relief to the most patients.

According to his theory of ‘chronic diseases’, ‘psora’, the ‘miasm’ of suppressed ‘itch’, is the underlying primary cause of all chronic diseases other than those of ‘venereal’ origin. ‘Psora’ is said to be the greatest obstruction to cure. Other two miasms, ‘syphilis’ and ‘sycosis’ are considered to be miasms of venereal diseases, ‘syphilis’ and ‘gonorrhoea’ respectively. Hahnemann considered ‘psora’ to be the most important and universal ‘miasm’. According to his theory, unless this ‘miasm’ or ‘disease poison’ is eradicated with appropriate ‘anti-psoric’ drugs, permanent and lasting cure cannot be attained.

The primary forms of expression of ‘psora’ is considered to be the itching eruptions on skin, that of ‘syphilis’ un-healing tissue destructions like malignant ulcers, and that of ‘sycosis’ warts and condylomata.

Symptoms of primary ‘psora’ include the different types of itches and eruptions that appear on the skin. Hahnemann considered the ‘miasm of psora’ to be inherited through generations of human kind.

Now, let us try to analyze the concept of miasms and chronic diseases in the light of scientific understanding of molecular biology, ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’.

Human organism is constantly exposed to the attacks of various types of exogenous and endogenous foreign molecules and ions. They may bind to the complex native biological molecules, thereby deforming their configuration and making them incapable of participating in the normal bio-chemical interactions. As per scientific view, this phenomenon underlies the molecular basis of most pathological conditions.

If the pathological foreign molecules are of protein nature, native biological defense proteins having configurational affinity to these foreign proteins attaches to them, destroys and removes them from the organism as part of body’s defense mechanism.  During this defense process, some of the involved native protein molecules get configurationally deformed by the interaction with foreign molecules. Native protein molecules so deformed will be carrying the 3-D spacial impressions of the interacted foreign molecules on their periphery. These impressions exist as three dimensional pockets, having a configuration complementary to that of foreign proteins. These molecular imprinted proteins thus become incapacitated for their normal biological processes, and remain a burden in the organism. Antibodies actually belong to this class of such deformed globulin proteins, subjected to ‘molecular imprinting’ by foreign proteins.

Certain endogenic molecules and ions such as hormones, neuro-chemicals, and other metabolic byproducts such as super-oxides, when circulated in excess, may   also attach to various bio-molecules other than their natural targets, and induce configurational changes in them.

These deformed native proteins may circulate in the system, and accidentally attach to various bio-molecules having complementary configurational affinity, thereby creating various molecular errors and pathological deviations.

Configurational changes happening in enzymes of protein nature involved with genetic expressions and DNA synthesis may ultimately lead to various types of proteinopathies, or may result in mutations happening in genetic substance itself, with subsequent hereditary diseases. If the enzymes involved in genetic expressions get deformed by molecular imprinting, it may affect the process of normal protein synthesis, and produce related pathological conditions. It may be noted that heavy metal ions and certain poisonous substances such as alkaloids and organophos chemicals also can inhibit the enzymes associated with DNA synthesis, and create genetic errors.

Obviously, modern scientific knowledge regarding subjects such as antibodies, proteinopathies, genetic expressions, molecular imprinted proteins, etc., were not available during the era of Hahnemann, when he undertook the study of chronic diseases. Had he understood the exact bio--molecular basis of these phenomena, he would have provided a theory of chronic diseases entirely different from that he had formulated.  At that time, it was the wonderful insight of the  great genius of Hahnemann that enabled him to observe the deep-seated factors playing behind the  chronic diseases that he called ‘miasms’. During that period, even before the appearance of antibiotics modern microscope, most dreaded diseases such as eczema, leprosy, syphilis and gonorrhoea were rampant in europe. He observed that in spite of the various crude forms of treatments available then, these diseases continued their manifestations during the whole life span of patients. Naturally, his theory of chronic disease was more involved with the long term effects of these diseases. He used the term ‘miasm’ to describe these chronic disease factors. By the term ‘miasm’, he really meant ‘disease poisons’. The miasm of ‘itch’ (and leprosy) was called as ‘psora’, the ‘miasm of syphilis as ‘syphilis’, and that of gonorrhoea as ‘sycosis’. Now, based on modern scientific knowledge, we can say that ‘miasms’ are the antibodies or ‘molecular imprinted proteins’ created in the organism due to the interaction of native proteins with various bacterial, viral or fungal toxins of protein nature. Various environmental allergens, and certain endogenous molecules and metabolic bye-products may also imprint up on native defense proteins and convert them into chronic ‘miasms’.

Antibodies produced in the organism against scabies (itch), leprosy, and tuberculosis belong to same class, and give positive reaction to ‘tuberculin’ antigen tests. This indicates that toxins released by these bacteria have certain similar molecular groups in them, and the molecular imprints or antibodies against those groups also have certain configurational similarities. Actually, these ‘molecular imprints’ belong to the ‘miasms’ of ‘psora’ described by Hahnemann. Homeopaths already know that potentized ‘tuberculinum’, ‘bacillinum’, and ‘psorinum’ play a wonderful role in the treatment of scabies and other skin eruptions, and the chronic conditions related with them.

It may be interesting to observe that toxins released by bacteria belonging to mycobacterium group, are molecules containing ‘sulphur’ in their active groups. The presence of sulphur-containing amino acid called cysteine is responsible for this factor. During infection, bacterial toxins bind to the biological molecules of organism using this sulphide group. Naturally, ‘molecular imprints’ or antibodies of these bacterial toxins will have complementary negative configurations of this ‘sulphide’ groups. These ‘molecular imprints’ can attack various bio-molecules in diverse bio-chemic pathways, resulting in different types of constitutional diseases of ‘psoric’ nature. We already know that the antibodies produced against bacterial skin infections may attack heart, kidney, brain, and other vital organs causing different types of diseases. Streptococcal and staphylococcal antibodies formed against acute throat and teeth infections may attack synovial membranes of joints, endocardial linings, and valvular structures of heart. During drug proving, sulphur also binds to the same molecular targets as the sulphur-containing bacterial toxins. The similarity between certain symptom groups expressed by these bacterial infections and the homeopathic provings of sulphur may be specifically noted. Here we get the scientific explanation for the observation of Hahnemann that potentized sulphur is the most important ‘antipsoric’ medicine, or ‘The King of Antipsorics’. It is already known that the amino acid called ‘cysteine’, which contains ‘sulphide’ groups, play an important role in almost all molecular interactions in the organism, involving protein molecules. It may be the reason for the appearance of so many symptom groups, involving almost every organ of the body, in the homoeopathic proving of sulphur. Potentized sulphur can compete with the molecular imprints or antibodies, in their interactions with biological molecules, and act as a most powerful ‘anti psoric’ drug.

Equipped with the knowledge accumulated by modern science in recent years, we are now in a position to provide satisfactory answer to the centuries old riddle of ‘miasm’ and ‘chronic diseases’.  There is no further scope or space for metaphysical speculations any more.

In recent years, we have heard a lot about researches on a certain class of disease causing agents, called ‘prions’. Prions are deformed complex protein molecules acting as pathogens. Prions were invented during the research on ‘scrapie’ or ‘mad cow disease’. The actual mechanism of normal protein molecules turning into ‘prions’ has not been well understood yet. Recent studies on the molecular basis of Alzhiemer’s disease, also indicates to the role of deformed proteins in its pathology.  Molecular changes associated with normal aging process also have to be examined from this stand point. In my opinion, these issues can be solved from the viewpoint of ‘molecular imprinting in proteins’. More studies are required in this direction.

This is an era of vaccinations. Every human being is subjected to a series of vaccination protocols from the moment of birth, to protect from various diseases. We have to worry about the unknown long term after effects of these vaccinations. Live or attenuated viruses are introduced into the organism to produce antibodies against pathological infections. Actually, this process induces ‘molecular imprinting’ of native proteins, with the foreign proteins contained in the vaccines. Obviously, the molecular imprints or antibodies thus formed, shall act as ‘miasms’ in the organism. If this type of molecular deformity happens in proteins associated with DNA synthesis or genetic expression, it may result in serious genetic abnormalities.  It is high time that we realized this dangerous possibility associated with vaccinations. All these deformed proteins created by vaccinations, act as ‘miasms’, and throw humanity into a sea of complicated chronic diseases much beyond the level observed even by Hahnemann.

Presumably, sulphur potentized above 23C, shall contain molecular imprints of sulphur. Antibodies against sulphur-containing bacterial toxins being molecular imprinted proteins, may contain some groups on their molecular periphery, imprinted with similar spacial configuration as potentized sulphur. Hence, potentized sulphur can compete with these antibodies in binding with bio-molecular targets. At the same time, we should not forget that these antibodies or deformed proteins may contain various other active sites not similar to sulphur. Hence, potentized sulphur may not be capable to antidote all the pathological properties of antibodies.

At the same time, if we could prepare potencies of antibodies themselves, those molecular imprints shall be exact negative complements of those antibodies. They can completely antidote the appropriate antibodies, due to their exact configurational affinity. Homoeopathic Nosodes such as psorinum, tuberculinum, syphilinum, medorrhinum etc., belong to this class. Appropriate nosodes may antidote the ‘miasms’ perfectly.

In Para 12 of CHRONIC DISEASES, Hahnemann says: "PSORA has thus become the most infectious and most general of all the chronic miasmas". I WONDER HOW AN IMMATERIAL "MIASM" BECOME "INFECTIOUS". That means hahnemann talks about a 'psora' th...at can be got transferred from person to to person as INFECTIONS. We have to believe that we will get infected with 'PSORIC MIASM' by some sort of physical contact with a 'PSORIC' person. ANY OPINIONS?

If PSORA is "immaterial" and "dynamic", and if it is MOST INFECTIOUS as hahnemann says, it would be transferred from a PSORIC man to a NON-PSORIC man in a "dynamic" way, without the mediation of any "INFECTIOUS MATERIALS. I have no idea abo...ut the mean distance between persons required for such a "dynamic infection" of psora to happen. Some people say that "dynamic drug powers" can be transferred to distant places. Can PSORA also can infect "dynamically" from person to person who are at very distant places?

Due to infections. For example, let us consider PSORA. It is the antibodies formed against ITCH caused by SCABIE MITES. These SCABIES MITES carries mycobacteria on them, and that is why TUBERCULIN TEST is positive for scabies, tuberculosis and leprosy patients. Their antibodies are similar. ALL COMES UNDER PSORA



I was pointing to the pathogenic role of antibodies. We already know a lot about the havoc antibodies create by their off-target actions up on biological molecules. Most of the chronic effects of infectious diseases are understood to be caused by the antibodies generated. And also those hundreds of serious auto immune diseases, where antibodies are the real pathogenic agents. Hahnemann defined miasms as 'chronic disease dispositions' created by 'infectious diseases. Only way by which acute infectious diseases can cause life-long chronic disease dispositions are through the existence of antibodies. That is why I say 'miasms' are 'chronic disease dispositions' caused by 'antibodies' formed against infectious diseases. The belief that antibodies have only a 'protective' role is not right. For example, the chronic crippling pains remaining life long after chikunguniya is caused by antibodies. Can we say antibodies have only protective role here? We know various chronic diseases dispositions caused by vaccinations, which we call vaccinosis, which are actually pathogenic actions of antibodies. I have also pointed earlier to streptococcus antibodies causing cardiac problems and kidney problems. There are already studies regarding the role of antibodies in causing diabetes. Still would anybody say antibodies have "only protective role"?

Now coming to the question "how antibodies can they produce diseases". Exactly, antibodies are globulin proteins subjected to molecular imprinting by bacterial/viral toxins, which are called antigens. The antibody has a unique part known as "paratope" (a structure analogous to a lock) on it, that is specific for one particular "epitope" (similarly analogous to a key) on an antigen, allowing these two structures to bind together with precision. These "paratopes" of antibodies are the result of molecular imprinting. Using this binding mechanism, an antibody can tag a microbe or an infected cell for attack by other parts of the immune system, or can neutralize its target directly (for example, by blocking a part of a microbe that is essential for its invasion and survival). Apart from that, these antibodies can bind to native biological molecules having structural groups similar in configuration to the "epitope" of its antigens. This can be compared to the damaging of a lock by inserting a wrong key with some similarity to original key. Such bindings cause molecular errors, which cause various pathological conditions. This is the real molecular mechanism by which antibodies act as "disease causing agents". You can learn this phenomenon better if you update your immunology and biochemistry. I am saying pure scientific facts, not my inventions.

It is interesting to note that even though hahnemann described PSORA as a miasm caused by ‘itch infections’, he did not limit this ‘itch’ to scabies alone. He included leprosy, fungal infections and various other other similar ‘itch’ producing skin infections as the causative factors of psora. It is obvious that he was talking about a ‘class of infections’ as causative agents of PSORA. We know that all these infections produce ‘antibodies’ in the organism by a process of ‘molecular imprinting of native proteins’ with the infectious toxins. Although the natural targets of these antibodies are the infectious agents themselves, antibodies move in the organism freely and may bind to different ‘off-target molecules having configurations similar to natural targets. Such off-target actions of these ‘antibodies’(molecular imprinted proteins or malformed proteins) may cause diverse types of ‘molecular errors’ in various biochemical pathways, resulting in different chronic diseases that we consider belonging to PSORA. According to my view ‘miasm of psora’ includes all antibodies that can trigger a series of molecular interactions that would prompt the ‘regulatory proteins of gene expressions’, to induce the genes to synthesize various ‘inflammatory’ molecules. That is why PSORA is considered to be a miasm behind INFLAMMATORY diseases. According to this interpretation, PSORA is not a single miasm, but a CLASS of miasm or a CLASS of antibodies that can induce genes to produce proteins that would cause inflammatory changes in the system. We can see, all diseases and their symptoms hahnemann included in PSORA exactly fit to this interpretation. LET US SUM UP: A CLASS OF ANTIBODIES AND MALFORMED PROTEINS ARISING FROM MOLECULAR IMPRINTING OF NATIVE PROTIENS WITH A CLASS OF INFECTIOUS TOXINS ARE THE “MOLECULAR CARRIERS OF PSORA”. THESE ANTIBODIES INDUCE THE GENETIC SUBSTANCE TO PRODUCE INFLAMMATORY MOLECULES, THEREBY RESULTING IN INFLAMMATORY CHANGES IN THE ORGANISM.

In the same way as PSORA, we can see that SYCOSIS is a CLASS OF MIASM, consisting of antibodies created by by gonorrhoea, human papiloma virus, vaccinosis etc.These antibodies induce GENETIC SYSTEM to produce INDURATIONS, WARTY GROWTHS AND TUMORS in the organism.

SYPHILITIC miasm consists of a class of antibodies and malformed proteins that induce GENETIC SYSTEM to produce molecules that may cause CELLULAR DESTRUCTION, NON-HEALING ULCERS, NECROSIS etc.

There may be thousands of miasms (antibodies and malformed proteins) in the organism. But all these diverse miasms could be broadly classified into PSORA(INFLAMMATORY), SYCOSIS(INDURATIONS), and SYPHILIS (CELLULAR DECAY). Thus we can say, there exists THREE CLASSES OF MIASMS

Chapter 2. Is Miasms Genetically Inherited?

Some people points to Aphorism 81 as an “evidence” to “prove” that Hahnemann

considered miasms as “genetically inherited”. This aphorism is the most “powerful evidence” they produce in favor of “genetic theory of miasms”.

Let us see what HAHNEMANN says in Organon: Aphorism 81:

“The fact that this extremely ancient infecting agent has gradually passed, in some hundreds of generations, through many millions of human organisms and has thus attained an incredible development, renders it in some measure conceivable how it can now display such innumerable morbid forms in the great family of mankind, particularly when we consider what a number of circumstances contribute to the production of these great varieties of chronic diseases (secondary symptoms of psora), besides the indescribable diversity of men in respect of their congenital corporeal constitutions, so that it is no wonder if such a variety of injurious agencies, acting from within and from without and sometimes continually, on such a variety of organisms permeated with the psoric miasm, should produce an innumerable variety of defects, injuries, derangements and sufferings, which have hitherto been treated of in the old pathological works, under a number of special names, as diseases of an independent character.”

In this aphorism, master says about psora: “this extremely ancient infecting agent has gradually passed, in some hundreds of generations, through many millions of human organism”.

He is talking about an “infectious agent” that “passed through generations”. He has explained in “chronic diseases” how this “infectious agent” “passed through generations of humanity”, in various forms of “skin infections” such as “leprosy, scarlatina, scabies” and many other forms. Can we infer that by using the word “generations”, he was talking about “genetic inheritance” of leprosy, scarlatina, scabies and other infectious agent”? He only meant that those infections were carried down through ‘generations’ of humanity as “infectious agents”, not as “genetic material”. If somebody talk about “inheritance of property rights through generations”, would anybody interpret it as “inheritance of property rights as genetic material”? How can “infectious agents” of itch, syphilis and gonorrohea can be “inherited through genes”?

Further, Hahnemann has said about transfer of psora from “nurse to infant”, “mother to infant from womb and genital tract”, “between family members”, “physician to patient”, “physical contacts” and many other modes. Can genetic materials be “inherited” through these modes?

The problem is, our modern ‘miasmatic analysis experts’ have made us think all diseases in terms of ‘miasms’. The moment we mention a disease or symptom, or name of a drug, they start talking about ‘prominent miasm’, ‘tubercular spetrum’, ‘polymiasmatic’ and such phrases. The most funny thing is that ‘analysis’ of two experts never agree. They are confused, and make others confused. When talking about ‘miasms’ ahnemann was concerned only about ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agent’. He asked to consider the presence of chronic ‘infectious miasms’ in cases where the diseases are not belonging to nutritional, environmental, occupational, iatrogenic and such causes. He used the term ‘faulty living’ and ‘faulty drugging’, which contain all these. In his perod, he knew nothing about ‘genetic causes’, and he did not mention those group of chronic diseases. Since he expressly said about miasms as ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agents’, we can include ‘genetic diseases’ also in ‘non-miasmatic’ category. In fact, all chronic diseases, which are not mediated by ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions caused by ‘anti-bodies’ formed in the body against ‘exogenous’ proteins, belong to ‘non-miasmatic’ category.

Chapter 3. Master's Logic Behind Theory Of Miasms’

For the last few weeks I was once again into an in-depth re-learning of ‘Chronic Diseases’. While carefully going through the initial paragraphs of that great text (Para 1 to 7),  I was trying to follow the exact thought process of Dr. Samuel Hahnemann through which he finally arrived at his theory of ‘chronic diseases and miasms’.

Imagine the desperation and hopelessness Hahnemann experienced over the disappointing outcome of chronic diseases treated on the basis of his original theory of ‘similia similibus curentur’.  Listen these words: “their beginning was promising, the continuation less favorable, and the outcome hopeless.”

Hahnemann confesses: “homeopathy failed to bring a real cure in the above-mentioned diseases, and to gain an insight more nearly correct and, if possible, quite correct, into the true nature of the thousands of chronic diseases which still remain uncured, despite the incontestable truth of the Homoeopathic Law of Cure, this very serious task has occupied me since the years 1816 and 1817, night and day”.

I was really wondering about the dedication of our master living totally “occupied” with the “very serious task” of gaining “an insight more nearly correct and, if possible, quite correct, into the true nature of the thousands of chronic diseases which still remain uncured”. That too, the whole “years of 1816 and 1817, night and day”.

Have you ever thought about the mental state of our master when he observed that patients “treated with such medicines as homeopathically best covered and temporarily removed the then apparent moderate symptoms” failed to make a permanent cure? His disillusionment to notice that the treatment on the basis of therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’ only “produced a kind of healthy condition, especially with young, vigorous persons, such as would appear as real health to every observer who did not examine accurately; and this state often lasted for many years.”?

Hahnemann also had to witness the bitter truth that “the re-appearance of one or more of the ailments which seemed to have been already overcome; and this new condition was often aggravated by some quite new concomitants, which if not more threatening than the former ones which had been removed homeopathically were often just as troublesome and now more obstinate.”

Hahnemann says: “when such a relapse would take place the homeopathic physician would give the remedy most fitting among the medicines then known, as if directed against a new disease, and this would again be attended by a pretty good success, which for the time would again bring the patient into a better state. In the former case, however, in which merely the troubles which seemed to have been removed were renewed, the remedy which had been serviceable the first time would prove less useful, and when repeated again it would help still less. Then perhaps, even under the operation of the homeopathic remedy which seemed best adapted, and even where the mode of living had been quite correct new symptoms of disease would be added which could be removed only inadequately and imperfectly; yea, these new symptoms were at times not at all improved, especially when some of the obstacles above mentioned hindered the recovery.”

Imagine how much desperate the master would have felt to observe the following situation:

“The return and repeated returns of the complaints in the end left even the best selected homoeopathic remedies then known, and given in the most appropriate doses, the less effective the oftener they were repeated. They served at last hardly even as weak palliatives. But usually, after repeated attempts to conquer the disease which appeared in a form always somewhat changed, residual complaints appeared which the homoeopathic medicines hitherto proved, though not few, had to leave un-eradicated, yea, often undiminished. Thus there ever followed varying complaints ever more  troublesome, and, as time proceeded, more threatening, and this even while the mode of living was correct and with a punctual observance of directions. The chronic disease could, despite all efforts, be but little delayed in its progress by the homeopathic physician and grew worse from year to year.”

“It was a continually repeated fact that the non-venereal chronic diseases, after being time and again removed homeopathically by the remedies fully proved up to the present time, always returned in a more or less varied form and with new symptoms, or reappeared annually with an increase of complaints.”

“This was, and remained, the quicker or slower process in such treatments in all non-venereal, severe chronic diseases, even when these were treated in exact accordance with the homoeopathic, art as hitherto known.”

Hahnemann sums up the issue in these questions:

1. “Whence then this less favorable, this unfavorable, result of the continued treatment of the non-venereal chronic diseases even by homeopathy?”

2. “What was the reason of the thousands of unsuccessful endeavors to heal the other diseases of a chronic nature so that lasting health might result?”

3. “Why then, cannot this vital force, efficiently affected through Homoeopathic medicine, produce any true and lasting recovery in these chronic maladies even with the aid of the homeopathic remedies which best cover their present symptoms; while this same force which is created for the restoration of our organism is nevertheless so indefatigably and successfully active in completing the recovery even in severe acute diseases?

4. What is there to prevent this?”

Hahnemann says:

“The answer to this question, which is so natural, inevitably led me to the discovery of the nature of these chronic diseases.”

We know, this inquiry led Hahnemann into the formulation of what we now learn as “Theory of Miasms  and Chronic Diseases”. He arrived at this answer utilizing the scientific knowledge available to him at that time.

Homeopathic medicines selected on the basis of 'similia similibus curentur' were "indefatigably and successfully active in completing the recovery even in severe acute diseases" and troublesome "venereal" diseases such as syphilis and gonorrhoea . But such a tratment plan was not effective in curing "chronic diseases of non-venereal" orgin. WHY? This was the question that hahnemann wanted to answer.

We can now witness Hahnemann logically analyzing this issue before him in the following statements:

“Homoeopathic physician with such a chronic (non-venereal) case, yea in all cases of (non-venereal) chronic disease, has not only to combat the disease presented before his eyes, and must not view and treat it as if it were a well-defined disease, to be speedily and permanently destroyed and healed by ordinary homoeopathic remedies but that he has always to encounter only some separate fragment of a more deep-seated original disease.”.

Here the master introduces the new concept of “separate fragments of a more deep-seated original disease.”. He says the homeopathic physician should not “combat only the disease presented before his eyes”, and must not “view and treat it as if it were a well-defined disease”.

At this point, we will have to go back to Hahnemann’s Organon-Aphorism7. He says:

  “Now, as in a disease, from which no manifest exciting or maintaining cause (causa occasionalis) has to be removed, we can perceive nothing but the morbid symptoms, it must (regard being had to the possibility of a miasm, and attention paid to the accessory circumstances) be the symptoms alone by which the disease demands and points to the remedy suited to relieve it - and, moreover, the totality of these its symptoms, of this outwardly reflected picture of the internal essence of the disease, that is, of the affection of the vital force, must be the principal, or the sole means, whereby the disease can make known what remedy it requires - the only thing that can determine the choice of the most appropriate remedy -and thus, in a word, the totality2 of the symptoms must be the principal, indeed the only thing the physician has to take note of in every case of disease and to remove by means of his art, in order that it shall be cured and transformed into health.”

We can see that In ORGANON itself, even while saying “the totality of these its symptoms, of this outwardly reflected picture of the internal essence of the disease must be the principal, indeed the only thing the physician has to take note of in every case of disease and to remove by means of his art”, Hahnemann had explicitly indicated about “exciting or maintaining cause has to be removed”, “regard being had to the possibility of a miasm”, and “attention paid to the accessory circumstances”.

That means, according to Hahnemann, “causative factors”, “miasms or infectious toxins”, and “accessory circumstances” also should be considered along with “totality of symptoms” in deciding a treatment plan for a patient.

It is clear that the apparent failure of chronic diseases with homeopathic treatment on the basis of “similia similibus curentur” was due to the neglect shown by the profession (including the master) towards “causative factors”, “miasms or infectious toxins”, and “accessory circumstances”.


“The great extent of this is shown in the new symptoms appearing from time to time; so that the homeopathic physician must not hope to permanently heal the separate manifestations of this kind in the presumption, hitherto entertained, that they are well-defined, separately existing diseases which can be healed permanently and completely.”

While saying “homeopathic physician must not hope to permanently heal the separate manifestations of this kind”, he is a bit deviating from his original theory that the “totality of the symptoms must be the principal, indeed the only thing the physician has to take note of in every case of disease and to remove by means of his art”, asserting the importance of “causative factors”, “miasms or infectious toxins”, and “accessory circumstances”.

Obviously, theory of ‘miasms and chronic diseases” is an expansion and re-invention of what he earlier said in aphorism 7, and got ignored by the profession for along period.

He recognizes here that there existed a “presumption, hitherto entertained”, that all those diseases which were so far treated on “totality of symptoms” were “well-defined, separately existing diseases which can be healed permanently and completely”, which led to the failures so far happened.


“He, therefore, must first find out as far as possible the whole extent of all the accidents and symptoms belonging, to the unknown Primitive malady before he can hope to discover one or more medicines which may homeopathically cover the whole of the original disease by means of its peculiar symptoms. By this method he may then be able victoriously to heal and wipe out the malady in its whole extent, consequently also its separate members; that is, all the fragments of a disease appearing in so many various forms.”

Before finding the “totality of symptoms”, the physician “must first find out as far as possible the whole extent of all the accidents and symptoms belonging, to the unknown Primitive malady”.

At this point, Hahnemann proposes the idea that this unknown “primitive malady” must be of “miasmatic” origin.


“But that the original malady sought for must be also of a miasmatic, chronic nature clearly appeared to me from this circumstance, that after it has once advanced and developed to a certain degree it can never be removed by the strength of any robust constitution, it can never be overcome by the most wholesome diet and order of life, nor will it die out of itself. But it is evermore aggravated, from year to year, through a transition into other and more serious symptoms, even till the end of man's life, like every other chronic, miasmatic sickness; e. g., the venereal bubo which has not been healed from within by mercury, its specific remedy, but has passed over into venereal disease. This latter, also never passes away of itself, but, even with the most correct mode of life and with the most robust bodily constitution, increases every year and unfolds evermore into new and worse symptoms, and this, also, to the end of man's life”.

“Not unfrequently phthisis passes over into insanity; dried-up ulcers into dropsy or apoplexy; intermittent fever into asthma; affections of the abdomen into pains in the joints or paralysis; pains in the limbs into haemorrhage, etc., and it was not difficult to discover that the later must also have their foundation in the original malady and can only be a part of a far greater whole”.

See, how hahnemann systematically arrives at the concept of “miasm of psora” as the “primitive malady” underlying the chronic diseases.

Chapter 4. ‘Itch’ And Miasm Of 'Psora'

According to Samuel Hahnemann, the "miasm" of PSORA is the cause of a wide range of chronic diseases. He explained PSORA as the residual chronic effects of INFECTIOUS AGENTS OF ITCH.

If anybody has least doubt whether or not hahnemann was talking about the ‘miasm of psora’ as originating from ‘infection of itch disease’, kindly read this part from ‘Chronic Diseases’-Para 37:

“Psora (itch disease), like syphilis, is a miasmatic chronic disease, and its original development is similar. The itch disease is, however, also the most contagious of all chronic miasmata, far more infectious than the other two chronic miasmata, the venereal chancre disease and the figwart disease”.

“But the miasma of the itch needs only to touch the general skin, especially with tender children”.

“No other chronic miasma infects more generally, more surely, more easily and more absolutely than the miasma of itch; as already stated, it is the most contagious of all. It is communicated so easily, that even the physician, hurrying from one patient to another, in feeling the pulse has unconsciously inoculated other patients with it; wash which is washed with wash infected with the itch; new gloves which had been tried on by an itch patient, a strange lodging place, a strange towel used for drying oneself have communicated this tinder of contagion; yea, often a babe, when being born, is infected while passing through the organs of the mother, who may be infected (as is not infrequently the case) with this disease; or the babe receives this unlucky infection through the hand of the midwife, which has been infected by another parturient woman (or previously); or, again, a suckling may be infected by its nurse, or, while on her arm, by her caresses or the caresses of a strange person with unclean hands; not to mention the thousands of other possible ways in which things polluted with this invisible miasma may touch a man in the course of his life, and which often can in no way be anticipated or guarded against, so that men who have never been infected by the psora are the exception. We need not to hunt for the causes of infection in crowded hospitals, factories, prisons, or in orphan houses, or in the filthy huts of paupers; even in active life, in retirement, and in the rich classes, the itch creeps in.”

I think we have to study the INFECTIOUS AGENTS OF ITCH in detail, in order to understand the MIASM OF PSORA. Then only we can realize why Hahnemann considered PSORA as the mother of CHRONIC DISEASES

Scabies (from Latin: scabere, "to scratch"), known colloquially as the seven-year itch, is a contagious skin infection that occurs among humans and other animals. It is caused by a tiny and usually not directly visible parasite, the mite Sarcoptes scabiei, which burrows under the host's skin, causing intense allergic itching. The infection in animals (caused by different but related mite species) is called sarcoptic mange.

The disease may be transmitted from objects but is most often transmitted by direct skin-to-skin contact, with a higher risk with prolonged contact. Initial infections require four to six weeks to become symptomatic. Reinfection, however, may manifest symptoms within as little as 24 hours. Because the symptoms are allergic, their delay in onset is often mirrored by a significant delay in relief after the parasites have been eradicated. Crusted scabies, formerly known as Norwegian scabies, is a more severe form of the infection often associated with immunosuppression.

The characteristic symptoms of a scabies infection include intense itching and superficial burrows. The burrow tracks are often linear, to the point that a neat "line" of four or more closely-placed and equally-developed mosquito-like "bites," is almost diagnostic of the disease.

In the classic scenario, the itch is made worse by warmth and is usually experienced as being worse at night, possibly because there are fewer distractions. As a symptom it is less common in the elderly.

The superficial burrows of scabies usually occur in the area of the hands, feet, wrists, elbows, back, buttocks, and external genitals. The burrows are created by excavation of the adult mite in the epidermis.

In most people, the trails of the burrowing mites show as linear or s-shaped tracks in the skin, often accompanied by what appear as rows of small pimple-like mosquito, or insect bites. These signs are often found in crevices of the body, such as on the webs of fingers and toes, around the genital area, and under the breasts of women.

Symptoms typically appear 2–6 weeks after infestation for individuals never before exposed to scabies. For those having been previously exposed, the symptoms can appear within several days after infestation. However, it is not unknown for symptoms to appear after several months or years. Acropustulosis, or blisters and pustules on the palms and soles of the feet, are characteristic symptoms of scabies in infants.

The elderly and people with an impaired immune system, such as HIV and cancer sufferers or transplant patients on immunosuppressive drugs, are susceptible to crusted scabies (formerly called "Norwegian scabies"). On those with a weaker immune system, the host becomes a more fertile breeding ground for the mites, which spread over the host's body, except the face. Sufferers of crusted scabies exhibit scaly rashes, slight itching, and thick crusts of skin that contain thousands of mites. Such areas make eradication of mites particularly difficult, as the crusts protect the mites from topical miticides, necessitating prolonged treatment of these areas.

In the 18th century, Italian biologist Diacinto Cestoni (1637–1718) described the mite now called Sarcoptes scabiei, variety hominis, as the cause of scabies. Sarcoptes is a genus of skin parasites and part of the larger family of mites collectively known as "scab mites". These organisms have 8 legs as adults, and are placed in the same phylogenetic class (Arachnida) as spiders and ticks.

Sarcoptes scabiei are microscopic, but sometimes are visible as pinpoints of white. Pregnant females tunnel into the stratum corneum of a host's skin and deposit eggs in the burrows. The eggs hatch into larvae in 3–10 days. These young mites move about on the skin and molt into a "nymphal" stage, before maturing as adults, which live 3–4 weeks in the host's skin. Males roam on top of the skin, occasionally burrowing into the skin. In general, there are usually few mites on a healthy hygienic person infested with non-crusted scabies; approximately 11 females in burrows can be found on such a person.

The movement of mites within and on the skin produces an intense itch, which has the characteristics of a delayed cell-mediated inflammatory response to allergens. IgE antibodies are present in the serum and the site of infection, which react to multiple protein allergens the body of the mite. Some of these cross-react to allergens from house-dust mites. Immediate antibody-mediated allergic reactions (wheals) have been elicited in infected persons, but not in healthy persons; immediate hypersensitivity of this type is thought to explain the observed far more rapid allergic skin response to reinfection seen in persons having been previously infected (especially having been infected within the previous year or two).  Because the host develops the symptoms as a reaction to the mites' presence over time, there is usually a 4– to 6-week incubation period after the onset of infestation. As noted, those previously infected with scabies and cured may exhibit the symptoms of a new infection in a much shorter period, as little as 1–4 days.

Scabies is contagious, and can be spread by scratching an infected area, thereby picking up the mites under the fingernails, or through physical contact with a scabies-infected person for a prolonged period of time.  Scabies is usually transmitted by direct skin-to-skin physical contact. It can also be spread through contact with other objects, such as clothing, bedding, furniture, or surfaces with which a person infected with scabies might have come in contact, but these are uncommon ways to transmit scabies.  Scabies mites can survive without a human host for 24 to 36 hours.  As with lice, scabies can be transmitted through sexual intercourse even if a latex condom is used, because it is transmitted from skin-to-skin at sites other than sex organs.

The symptoms are caused by an allergic reaction of the host's body to mite proteins, though exactly which proteins remains a topic of study. The mite proteins are also present from the gut, in mite feces, which are deposited under the skin. The allergic reaction is both of the delayed (cell-mediated) and immediate (antibody-mediated) type, and involves IgE (antibodies, it is presumed, mediate the very rapid symptoms on re-infection). The allergy-type symptoms (itching) continue for some days, and even several weeks, after all mites are killed. New lesions may appear for a few days after mites are eradicated. Nodular lesions from scabies may continue to be symptomatic for weeks after the mites have been killed.

Scabies may be diagnosed clinically in geographical areas where it is common when diffuse itching presents along with either lesions in two typical spots or there is itchiness of another household member. The classical sign of scabies is the burrows made by the mites within the skin. To detect the burrow the suspected area is rubbed with ink from a fountain pen or a topical tetracycline solution, which glows under a special light. The skin is then wiped with an alcohol pad. If the person is infected with scabies, the characteristic zigzag or "S" pattern of the burrow will appear across the skin; however, interpreting this test may be difficult, as the burrows are scarce and may be obscured by scratch marks.  A definitive diagnosis is made by finding either the scabies mites or their eggs and fecal pellets. Searches for these signs involve either scraping a suspected area, mounting the sample in potassium hydroxide, and examining it under a microscope, or using dermoscopy to examine the skin directly.

Symptoms of early scabies infestation mirror other skin diseases, including dermatitis, syphilis, various urticaria-related syndromes, allergic reactions, and other ectoparasites such as lice and fleas.

Mass treatment programs that use topical permethrin or oral ivermectin have been effective in reducing the prevalence of scabies in a number of populations. There is no vaccine available for scabies. The simultaneous treatment of all close contacts is recommended, even if they show no symptoms of infection (asymptomatic), to reduce rates of recurrence.  Asymptomatic infection is relatively common. Objects in the environment pose little risk of transmission except in the case of crusted scabies, thus cleaning is of little importance.  Rooms used by those with crusted scabies require thorough cleaning.

A number of medications are effective in treating scabies, however treatment must often involve the entire household or community to prevent re-infection. Options to improve itchiness include antihistamines.

Scabies is one of the three most common skin disorders in children along with tinea and pyoderma. The mites are distributed around the world and equally infects all ages, races, and socioeconomic classes in different climates. Scabies is more often seen in crowded areas with unhygienic living conditions. Globally as of 2009, it is estimated that 300 million cases of scabies occur each year, although various parties claim the figure is either over- or underestimated. There are one million cases of scabies in the United States annually. About 1–10% of the global population is estimated to be infected with scabies, but in certain populations, the infection rate may be as high as 50–80%.[Scabies is one of the three most common dermatological disorders in children.

Scabies is an ancient disease. Archeological evidence from Egypt and the Middle East suggests that scabies was present as early as 494 BC. The first recorded reference to scabies is believed to be from the Bible (Leviticus, the third book of Moses) ca. 1200 BC.  Later in fourth century BC, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle reported on "lice" that "escape from little pimples if they are pricked"; scholars believe this was actually a reference to scabies.

Nevertheless, it was Roman physician Celsus who is credited with naming the disease "scabies" and describing its characteristic features. The parasitic etiology of scabies was later documented by the Italian physician Giovanni Cosimo Bonomo (1663–99 AD) in his famous 1687 letter, "Observations concerning the fleshworms of the human body." With this (disputed) discovery, scabies became one of the first diseases with a known cause.

Scabies may occur in a number of domestic and wild animals; the mites that cause these infestations are of different scabies subspecies. These subspecies can infest animals or humans that are not their usual hosts, but such infections do not last long.  Scabies-infected animals suffer severe itching and secondary skin infections. They often lose weight and become frail.

The most frequently diagnosed form of scabies in domestic animals is sarcoptic mange, which is found on dogs. The scab mite Psoroptes is the mite responsible for mange. Scabies-infected domestic fowls suffer what is known as "scabies leg”.  Domestic animals that have gone feral and have no veterinary care are frequently afflicted with scabies and a host of other ailments. Non-domestic animals have also been observed to suffer from scabies. Gorillas, for instance, are known to be susceptible to infection via contact with items used by humans.

Please listen to this:

"Archeological evidence from Egypt and the Middle East suggests that scabies was present as early as 494 BC. The first recorded reference to scabies is believed to be from the Bible (Leviticus, the third book of Moses) ca. 1200 BC." Now we can understand why hahnemann said PSORA has been inherited through "GENERATIONS OF HUMANITY" up to our period. Even now most of us get infected with ITCH in early life, and ANTIBODIES are formed in our body, which is the exact material basis of all those diseases we consider of PSORIC MIASM

Please note this also:

"Globally as of 2009, it is estimated that 300 million cases of scabies occur each year, although various parties claim the figure is either over- or underestimated. There are one million cases of scabies in the United States annually. About 1–10% of the global population is estimated to be infected with scabies, but in certain populations, the infection rate may be as high as 50–80%.[Scabies is one of the three most common dermatological disorders in children".Even now, in spite of all modern treatments and personal hygeine, this remains the most widespread disease affecting humanity. Imagine what would be the situation during hahnemann's period. NO WONDER, HAHNEMANN CONSIDERED PSORA AS THE MOTHER OF CHRONIC DISEASES.


"The symptoms are caused by an allergic reaction of the host's body to mite proteins, though exactly which proteins remains a topic of study". As part of this allergic response of our body to "mite proteins", antibodies are generated. "The allergic reaction is both of the delayed (cell-mediated) and immediate (antibody-mediated) type, and involves IgE (antibodies, it is presumed, mediate the very rapid symptoms on re-infection)". These antibodies remain life long in our body as CHRONIC MIASMS. Antibodies can attack OFF-TARGET biological molecules in various biochemical channels in the body, resulting in diverse types of CHRONIC diseases belonging to MIASM OF PSORA.

Latest available studies states that the SCABIES MITES carries different species of BACTERIA on their wings and body, and the toxins secreted by these BACTERIA are the the real molecular factors that give rise to allergic reactions during MITE infections. If that is true, SCABIES or PSORA will have to ultimately considered as BACTERIAL INFECTIONS.

Antibodies are native globulin proteins ‘imprinted’ with exogenous protein molecules entering into the organism from the environment, as infections, food, drugs, toxins or as part of any interactions with the environment. These exogenous proteins may come from bacterial/viral/fungal/parasitic infections that invade the body, bites and stings of insects and serpents, uncooked food articles, drugs like antibiotics and serum, vaccines, and so on. These exogenous foreign proteins, alien to our genetic constitution, are dangerous to the normal functioning of the organism, and have to be destroyed or eradicated. Body has a well organized defense system for this, which we call immune system. Foreign proteins are called antigens. Body prepares immune bodies or antibodies against these dangerous invaders. Antibodies are specific to each antigen, There are also polyclonal antibodies, which can identify different antigens. Antibodies are exactly native proteins of globulin types, which have peculiar molecular structure with an active group known as ‘paratope’ on its periphery. Active groups of antigen molecules are known as ‘epitopes’. Epitopes of antigens and paratopes of antibodies has a ‘key-lock’ relationship of configuration. They should fit exactly each other in order to happen an immune reaction. Paratopes of antibodies once interacted with epitopes of a particular antigen undergoes a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, by which the ‘memory’ of epitope is imprinted into the paratope of antibody. Even after the antigens are destroyed and eradicated by the immune system, these ‘molecular imprinted’ globulins, or antibodies exist and circulate in the organism, in most cases life long. This is the mechanism by which life long immunity is attained through certan infections and vaccinations. These antibodies, or ‘molecular imprinted proteins’ are very important part of our defense system, playing a vital role in protecting us against infections.

Same time, these ‘molecular imprinted proteins’ or antibodies plays a negative role also, which is what we call ‘miasms’. They can act as pathogenic factors. Whenever these antibodies happen to come in contact with a native biological molecule having a structural group of configuration similar to the ‘epitope’ of its natural antigen, its paratope binds to it and inhibits the biological molecules. This is a ‘molecular error’ amounting to a state of pathology. Diverse types of chronic diseases and dispositions are created by the antibodies in the organism. These pathological conditions caused by ‘off-target’ binding of antibodies or ‘molecular imprinted proteins’ are the real ‘miasms’ hahnemann described as the underlying factors of ‘chronic diseases’.

Obviously, identifying and removal of these ‘off-target’ molecular blocks or ‘miasms’ caused by antibodies or ‘molecular imprinted proteins’ is an important part in the treatment of chronic diseases. Observing and collecting the whole history of infections and intoxications that might have generated antibodies are important in the management of chronic diseases. History of skin infections, venereal infections, stings of poisonous creatures, vaccinations, serum/antibiotic treatments, sensitization with protein foods etc. has to be collected in detail and appropriate ‘anti-miasmatics’ included in the treatment protocols of chronic treatments.

Another important thing we have to remember is that we cannot permanently inactivate ‘antibodies’ using potentized nosodes or anti-miasmatic drugs. Our drugs may act in two ways. If the nosodes are prepared from antibodies themselves, they contain ‘molecular imprints of epitopes of ‘exogenous toxins’ or antigens themselves. These ‘molecular imprints can compete with the paratopes of antibodies in binding to biological molecues, and prevent them from creating ‘off-target’ biological blocks. Since ‘molecular imprints’ cannot successfully compete with the epitopes of antigens in binding with the paratopes of antibodies, our potentized drugs never interferes with the normal immune mechanism of the body. They only prevents antibodies from binding to ‘off-target’ biological molecules, and thus act as ‘antimiasmatics’.

If we are preparing nosodes by potentizing antibodies themselves, our drugs contains ‘molecular imprints’ of paratopes of antibodies. These molecular imprints can bind to the paratopes, thereby preventing them from interacting with ‘off-target’ biological molecules. Same time, they also cannot interfere in the interaction between antibodies and their natural antigens, which have comparatively increased affinity. In any way, potentized nosodes or ‘antimiasmatics’ will not weaken the normal immunological mechanism of the organism.

Since we cannot eradicate or permanently inactivate antibodies or miasms with our potentized drugs, we have to administer antimiasmatic drugs in frequent intervals, probably life long. This is a very important realization evolving from the understanding of ‘miasms’ as ‘antibodies’ or ‘molecular imprinted proteins’.

I think hahnemann included all 'itch' producing infections under the carpet of 'psora'. He mentioned about Leprosy, scarlet fever, scabies and many such 'infectious' agents as causative factors of psora. He talked about "three miasms", only because those three infectious agents were creating havoc in europe during his period. According to me, this classification of psora, syphilis and sycosis is not much relevant if we understand 'miasms' in terms of 'antibodies'.

Chapter 5. 'Miasmatic Analysis'- Confusion For All!

'Miasmatic analysis’ is the sum total of ‘confusions’ created in the minds of already ‘confused’ learners, by ‘teachers’ who are gravely ‘confused’ themselves. The final outcome is ‘Utter Confusion for All’!

Some homeopaths appear to be experts in 'miasmatic analysis'. Once a case is presented to them, they cannot avoid 'miasmatic analysis' of patients, drug substances or diseases. Instead of discussing symptoms and similimum, they would go on talking about miasms. It is funny to note that each ‘miasmatic expert’ would say there is no confusions if you understand it correctly. Then he would give his theories and ‘miasmatic analysis’. Then the next expert comes, and gives his theory and analysis, diametrically opposite to the earlier. He also says there is no confusions if you understand him correctly. I have never seen two ‘miasmatic experts’ talking about miasms in similar language. You give them a case for ‘miasmatic analysis’. Each would come with different analysis. AND YOU SAY, THERE IS NO CONFUSIONS!

I never seen two homeopaths explaining ‘miasms’ in same way. I never seen two homeopaths agreeing up on ‘miasmatic analysis’ of same case, same symptom or same medicine. Everybody talk differently. Is it does not indicate confusions? If you have any doubt on what I said, kindly post a case for ‘miasmatic analysis’ here. They would fight each other with their analysis. They would discuss strange concepts such as "psora merging into tuberculous spectrum", or "psora converting into sycosis and then to syphilis as disease advances". They would talk about 'tri-miasmatic' drugs, patients and diseases. I have seen it many times on this group. After all these intellectual exercises done, if you want to cure the patient, you have to find a similimum using symptoms! The simple truth is that appropriate similimum would cure even without any 'miasmatic exercise', if it is rightly selected.

One expert said: All individuals have all miasms, all drugs have all miasms, and all drugs have all miasms", One would say warts are sycotic, another say it is psoric. A clever one would say warts have all miasms! Then why should we worry about miasmatic analysis?

I never said that the understanding of underlying miasms has no role in homeopathic therapeutics. Miasms, or ‘Chronic disease dispositions’ caused by infectious agents’ have to be considered and antidoted with appropriate antimiasmatic drugss. But, the intellectual exercises happening in the name of ‘miasmatic analysis’ is making everything a mockery, and UTTER CONFUSION FOR ALL.

In my opinion, the confusion would end only when we reach a consensus on ‘what is miasms’. If you could agree with my explanation of ‘miasms’ as ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions created by ‘antibodies’ generated in the organism against ‘exogenous’ protiens such as ‘infectious agents’, all confusions regarding ‘miasmatic analysis’ would be scientifically resolved. Until that happens, this confusion will remain.

Every chronic disease that is caused by ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions created by ‘antibodies’ can be called ‘miasmatic diseases.

Let us consider a case of valvular heart disease caused by rheumatic fever. It was the antibodies formed against streptococcus sore throat infection that caused aarthritis, endocarditis, and valvular deformities. This chronic condition was caused by ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions created by ‘antibodies’. It is a ‘miasmatic’ disease according to me. Same way, we know about chronic fibromyalgia caused by ‘chikunguniya’ antibodies, nephropathy caused by scabies antibodies, many chronic diseases caused by vaccinations. We can give a lot of examples

If we deeply study immunology and immune related diseases, we can understand the real scope of concepts I am trying to explain. A miasmatic disease one that is CAUSED by ‘Antibodies’ existing in the body, which were created earlier against ‘exogenous’ proteins that invaded the organism.

For example, a streptococcus sore throat is only an ‘infection’, not a MIASMATIC DISEASE. But, the artthritis and endocarditis caused by the antibodies generated by that infection are ‘miasmatic diseases’. Am I clear, sir? That is why hahnemann said ‘miasm’ is a ‘chronic disease disposition’ caused by ‘infectious agents’. He did not say ‘miasms are infectious diseases’. Please note the real difference.

Starting from pre-natal life, different kinds of antibodies are generated in our body against diverse types of ‘exogenous’ proteins including infectious agents. Actually, these antibodies are protein molecules of globulin types, which get deformed by getting acted up on by antigens. The active groups of antigens (epitopes) imprints upon the active groups of globulins (peritopes), in such a way that the peritope of globulin is converted into a ‘lock’ exactly fitting to the ‘epitope’ of antigen, which is similar to the ‘key’. Real ‘defense’ mechanism of organism is based on this ‘key-lock’ relationship. The problem arises when the ‘antibodies’ circulates in the body and bind to ‘off-target’ molecules, which have active groups with configuration mimicking the real antigen. This ‘offtarget’ bindings results in inhibitions of involved biological molecules, making them incapable of executing their natural functions. This is called a pathological molecular error, which expresses as a disease, and disease symptoms. This is the mechanism by which ‘antibodies’ or ‘miasms’ cause diseases.

I hope I have provided a most scientific, most logical explanation for the phenomenon of ‘miasms’. If you cannot understand or accept this concept, we are sure to differ in our approach to miasms and ‘miasmatic analysis’.

To discuss this topic, first you have to read my notes carefully, without prejudice, with a willingness to understand. Then, you have to understand it, for which you will have to update your biochemistry. Then you have to think over what I said. Then only we can have a meaningful discussions. If you have no time to read and understand what I say, there is no meaning in ‘discussing’. Please approach this concept without prejudice, because this is something different from what we have already learned.

We always think about ‘antibodies’ as ‘defense molecules’. Same time we should realize that they can act as pathogenic agents through OFF-TARGET interactions. Please learn more about hundreds of ‘auto-immune’ diseases to understand the real gravity of havoc these ‘immune’ bodies can create in the organism.

The problem is, our modern ‘miasmatic analysis experts’ have made us think all diseases in terms of ‘miasms’. The moment we mention a disease or symptom, or name of a drug, they start talking about ‘prominent miasm’, ‘tubercular spetrum’, ‘polymiasmatic’ and such phrases. The most funny thing is that ‘analysis’ of two experts never agree. They are confused, and make others confused. When talking about ‘miasms’ hahnemann was concerned only about ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agent’. He asked to consider the presence of chronic ‘infectious miasms’ in cases where the diseases are not belonging to nutritional, environmental, occupational, iatrogenic and such causes. He used the term ‘faulty living’ and ‘faulty drugging’, which contain all these. In his perod, he knew nothing about ‘genetic causes’, and he did not mention those group of chronic diseases. Since he expressly said about miasms as ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agents’, we can include ‘genetic diseases’ also in ‘non-miasmatic’ category. In fact, all chronic diseases, which are not mediated by ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions caused by ‘anti-bodies’ formed in the body against ‘exogenous’ proteins, belong to ‘non-miasmatic’ category.

Continue reading this ebook at Smashwords.
Download this book for your ebook reader.
(Pages 1-29 show above.)