|
By
Roger Morrison
Copyright © 2003-2007,
Marlev
Homeopathy LLC.
All Rights Reserved.
Miasm is staging a comeback. After nearly sinking into oblivion,
Hahnemann’s concept is receiving tremendous attention in many
locations. Harry van der Zee published his, Miasms during
Labor describing the miasms in terms of Grof’s
psychological insights. Jeremy Sherr recently published his
scholarly book, Dynamic Materia Medica: A Study of the
Syphilitic Miasm. Rudolph Ballentine’s new book, Radical
Healing deals mainly with miasm. And Rajan Sankaran has been
slowly evolving his concept of miasm for the past 10 or more
years. Why this sudden rebirth of interest in the concept that
Hahnemann proposed 175 years ago?
A Little History
Hahnemann published Chronic Diseases in 1828, bringing to
the world his theory of miasm. Hahnemann had been grappling with
the question of the frequent failure of homeopathy in chronic
conditions. He writes, “Why, then, cannot this vital force,
efficiently affected through Homeopathic 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…?” (Chronic Diseases) In other words,
Hahnemann was searching for the reason that chronic cases
relapsed after benefiting from homeopathic treatment. He says he
began to consider this problem in depth from 1817 or 1817 and
after many years of thought and effort he came to the discovery
of miasm, “To discover this still-lacking keystone and thus
the means of entirely obliterating the ancient chronic diseases,
I have striven night and day, for the last four years, and by
thousands of trials and experiences as well as by uninterrupted
meditation I have at last attained my object. Of this invaluable
discovery, of which the worth to mankind exceeds all else that
has ever been discovered by me, and without which all existent
Homeopathy remains defective or imperfect, none of my pupils as
yet know anything.” (Letter to Baumgartner) He felt he had
unlocked a great truth. Eventually in 1827 he revealed his
theory to Stapf and Gross – his two closest students.
Hahnemann had a special understanding of the word miasm. Miasm
is understood to be a derangement of the vital force that
predates and is more fundamental than the current illness the
patient suffers from. The job of the physician is to try to
understand the whole of the true disease inside the patient –
not just its current manifestation. To do so he must “find out
as far as possible the whole extent of all the accidents and
symptoms belonging to the unknown primitive malady.”
Hahnemann felt that there were three of these primitive
maladies. He calls these miasms psora, sycosis and syphilis. Of
these three, he concluded that psora was the most fundamental.
“The monstrous chronic miasm of psora is immeasurably more
widespread, and consequently more significant….” (Chronic
Diseases)
Hahnemann believed that the miasms were both contagious and
hereditary. Especially psora he believed to be virulently
contagious. “The itch disease is, however, also the most
contagious of all chronic miasmata, far more infectious than the
other two chronic miasmata…. The miama of the itch needs only
to touch the general skin, especially with tender children. As
soon as the miasma of itch for example touches the hand, in the
moment when it has taken effect, it no longer remains local.
Henceforth all washing and cleansing of the spot avail
nothing.” (Chronic Diseases) After the itch appears on the
patient, it is almost always suppressed into the deeper parts of
the patient. The symptoms that then occur were considered by
Hahnemann to be “secondary” psora.
It was Hahnemann’s opinion that the external manifestation of
itch (or other signs of infection in the other two miasm) came
about only after the patient was thoroughly diseased by the
miasm. He felt that the miasmatic infection was communicated
almost instantly to the whole vital force. “The nerve which
was first affected by the miasma, has already communicated it in
an invisible dynamic manner to the nerves of the rest of the
body and the living organism has at once, all unperceived, been
so penetrated by this specific excitation that it has been
compelled to appropriate this miasma to itself until the change
of the whole being to a man thoroughly psoric…” (Chronic
Diseases) Thus he believed that the miasm is a dynamic,
energetic entity.
After laying forth these theoretic principles in his Chronic
Diseases, Hahnemann then goes on to describe in detail the
symptoms of patients infected with each of the three miasms. He
described in detail the known symptoms of syphilis and gonorrhea
(which he connected to figwarts). Then he gave a more in depth
description of psora and its main characteristics. Today very
few homeopaths have bothered to read the full list of symptoms
that Hahnemann ascribes to psora that goes on for over 25 pages.
Anyone who has made the effort will admit that they cannot keep
even a fraction of this extensive list of symptoms in mind. Some
homeopaths (see H. A. Robert’s Art of Homeopathy) tried to
clarify the main symptoms of psora. Most merely repeated
Hahnemann’s lists. Kent (Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy)
devotes two entire chapters to psora without ever specifying a
single symptom of the miasm – though his next two chapters on
sycosis and syphilis are quite illuminating about the
characteristics of those miasms. Boericke only mentions the word
psora under three remedies in his materia medica while listing
over 120 remedies as syphilitic! It seems clear that psora was
for many an elusive concept.
It should be noted that Hahnemann and other great homeopaths saw
the miasms as a living, spiritual force. They described
especially the Psoric miasm as something malign and almost
consciously destructive of mankind. At other times, homeopathic
authors have declared that the miasms could not have existed if
man was not already himself evil. “Psora is the underlying
cause and is the primitive or primary disorder of the human
race. It is a disordered state of the internal economy of the
human race. This state expresses itself in the forms of the
varying chronic diseases, or chronic manifestations. If the
human race had remained in a state of perfect order, psora could
not have existed. The susceptibility to psora opens out a
question altogether too broad to study among the sciences in a
medical college. It is altogether too extensive, for it goes to
the very primitive wrong of the human race, the very first
sickness of the human race, that is, the spiritual
sickness…” (Kent’s Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy)
But let’s return to Hahnemann and his Chronic Diseases. After
laying forth the symptom lists which would lead us to suspect
that a patient is either psoric, sycotic or syphilitic,
Hahnemann tries to give us clues as to how to cure the miasm in
the patient. The therapeutics were quite simplified for sycosis
and syphilis. Hahnemann states that Thuja is specific for
sycosis (that is any patient who is sycotic should be cured by
this remedy). Likewise he felt that Mercurius was specific for
syphilis. However for psora he gives a much more extensive list
of remedies which he called, “antipsorics”. This list of
remedies is essentially all of the remedies found in Chronic
Diseases except for Thuja and Mercurius. The remedies he
detailed as antipsorics were:
Agar. Alum. Am-c. Am-m. Anac. Ant-c. Ars. Aur. Aur-m. Bar-c.
Bor. Calc. Carb-an. Carb-v. Caust. Clem. Coloc. Con. Cupr. Dig.
Dulc. Euph. Graph. Guai. Hep. Iod. Kali-c. Kali-n. Lyc. Mag-c.
Mag-m. Mang. Mez. Mur-ac. Nat-c. Nat-m. Nit-ac. Petr. Ph-ac.
Phos. Plat. Sars. Sep. Sil. Stann. Sulph. Sul-ac. Zinc
From perusing this list one can easily see that of the 90 some
remedies then in use in homeopathy, many were not included here.
These were the remedies which Hahnemann either felt applied to
the “various acute miasms” (such as Belladonna for Scarlet
Fever) or he was uncertain as to which miasm they applied. These
undesignated remedies included:
Aconite. Ambra. Angustura. Argentum Nitricum. Belladonna.
Bismuth. Bryonia. Camphora. Cannabis Sativa. Capsicum.
Chamomilla. Chelidonium. Cicuta Virosa. Cina. Cinnabaris.
Cyclamen. Drosera. Euphrasia. Ferrum. Helleborus. Ignatia.
Iecacuanha. Ledum. Menyanthes. Moschus. Nux Vomica. Oleander.
Opium. Pulsatilla. Rheum. Rhus Toxicodendron. Ruta. Sambucus.
Spigelia. Spongia. Squila. Staphysagria. Stramonium. Sulphur
Iodatum. Taraxicum. Veratrum. Verbascum.
(It is interesting to note that many of the remedies on this
list are considered by Sankaran as falling into the acute or the
typhoid miasms – thus confirming Hahnemann’s excluding them
from the chronic miasm list – but more on that later).
Hahnemann instructed us to use one of these antipsorics when the
case had the features he had described for psora. Unfortunately,
Hahnemann never stated explicitly whether a remedy could belong
to more than one miasm – though no remedy is listed as
relating to more than one. Nor did he ever state that the
remedies he had listed as antipsoric were the complete list. Nor
did he ever suggest that any other remedies could apply to the
sycotic or syphilitic miasm than Thuja and Mercurius
respectively. These missing statements have left the
understanding of how to use the miasmatic concept in some
confusion.
One might suppose that homeopaths throughout the world would
have embraced Hahnemann’s discovery and proclamation about the
miasms with joy. This was not the case. Perhaps it was the
difficulty in understanding the nature of the psoric miasm from
the long list of symptoms that prevented its use. Certainly many
did not see any practical application of the discovery. Thus the
result was that the majority of the homeopathic world either
shrugged their collective shoulders or thought the 75 year-old
master was past his prime.
Hering himself wrote: “What important influence can it exert
whether a homeopath adopts the theoretic opinions of Hahnemann
so long as he holds the principle of the master and the materia
medica of our school. What influence can it have whether a
physician adopts or rejects the psoric theory so long as he
searches for the most similar medicine possible?” This
attitude more or less summed up the majority opinion: simply
search for the simillimum and forget the rest.
Yet Boenninghausen wrote, “And yet the much reviled and
ridiculed theory of the three miasms laid down by the founder of
our Homeopathy is nothing else than a consequential application
of the doctrine of anamnesis of chronic disease, as this is most
plainly laid down in aphorism 5 and 206 of the Organon (5th
edition). It is therefore totally incomprehensible how this has
been so overlooked, unless other, by no means praiseworthy
motives, have been brought into play. For all the fair phrases
about the exact obedience to the fundamental principles of
homeopathic Therapy cannot deceive the experienced practitioner
and persuade him that he may at all times select the most
appropriate remedy by means of whole sheets of images of the
disease in which there is nothing therapeutically
characteristic.
“I do not wish to deny by any means that there may be perhaps
beside the three above mentioned anamnestic indications, and
beside the medicinal diseases, one or another additional miasm
to which may be ascribed a similar influence upon health.
Nevertheless such a miasm has not so far proved by means of
demonstrative documents and it must therefore be left to future
investigation. ” (Allg. Hom. Zeit Vol. 65). Thus
Boenninghausen makes two points: First he says that long lists
of symptoms often do not help us to find the simillimum –
something is missing which for him (and Hahnemann) is the
knowledge of the miasm of the patient and of our remedies.
Second he explicitly states that there may be other miasms
beside the original three mentioned by Hahnemann which he leaves
for future investigators.
There were many others besides Boenninghausen who took
Hahnemann’s ideas very much to heart. The most prominent of
these was HC Allen (not Timothy Allen who edited Allen’s
Encyclopedia) who wrote a three volume work entitled, The
Chronic Miasms. This work was to be the first of a series
of nearly religious writings and ideas about miasm. Allen gives
and alternate list of symptoms which correspond to the three
miasms and an alternate list of the remedies which apply. Thus
we see that there was no uniformity in the view about what
symptoms constitute a psoric or sycotic or syphilitic
constitution. There was thus no uniformity about which remedies
belonged to which miasm. Boenninghausen states, “… it is on
the other hand not to be denied that this circumstance has given
an additional difficulty to our practice, as we have not so far
any certain signs by which we can distinguish certainly the
domain of the one miasma from that of the other.” (Allg hom
Zeit Vol 65.). Thus theoretic squabbling became the norm. The 1st
aphorism was effectively thrown out of the window as homeopaths
argued abstractly about many facets of miasms.
For example a fierce debate sprang up about tuberculosis. Some
adherents said it was psora combined with syphilis. Others
argued just as certainly that it was sycosis and syphilis.
Almost no one dared to suggest that there might be a miasm that
Hahnemann missed. Like many of Hahnemann’s other ideas, his
pronouncements about miasm became almost gilded in bronze. No
one was allowed to alter or add to his lists of symptoms or
remedies.
There were some few who tried to improve upon Hahnemann’s work
on the miasm. For example Boenninghausen wrote extensively about
sycosis, adding many characteristic symptoms of the miasm (such
as the well know characteristic, fixed ideas) as well as many
new remedies to the antisycotic list (including Anac, Ant-C,
Puls, Sil and many others).
Thus we can see there has been almost no general agreement
about the need for the miasmatic concept nor the characteristics
of the various miasms.
This brings us to our next important point of discussion: the
remedies. The creators of our repertories were those most known
for their knowledge and experience in homeopathy. By looking at
the remedies they list for each miasm we can hope to learn what
they thought and how they used Hahnemann’s important
discovery. And yet when we look at several important repertories
we are struck by the differences and inconsistencies we find.
Below are the rubrics for sycosis and syphilis from Kent’s
Repertory (note that Kent does not have a rubric for psora at
all!).
Generalities; SYCOSIS: Agar., Alum., Alumn., Anac., Ant-C.,
Ant-T., Apis, Aran., Arg., Arg-N., Aster., Aur., Aur-M.,
Bar-C., Bry., Calc., Carb-An., Carb-V., Carbn-S.,
Caust., Cham., Cinnb., Con., Dulc., Euphr., Ferr.,
Fl-Ac., Graph., Hep., Iod., Kali-C., Kali-S.,
Lach., Lyc., Mang., Med., Merc., Mez.,
Nat-S., Nit-Ac., Petr., Phyt., Puls.,
Sabin., Sars., Sec., Sel., Sep., Sil., Staph.,
Sulph., Thuj.
Generalities; SYPHILIS: Arg., Ars., Ars-I., Ars-S-F.,
Asaf., Aur., Aur-M., Aur-M-N., Bad., Benz-Ac.,
Calc-I., Calc-S., Carb-An., Carb-V., Cinnb.,
Clem., Con., Cor-R., Crot-H., Fl-Ac., Guai., Hep.,
Iod., Kali-Ar., Kali-Bi., Kali-Chl., Kali-I., Kali-S.,
Lach., Led., Merc., Merc-C., Merc-I-F., Merc-I-R.,
Mez., Nit-Ac., Petr., Ph-Ac., Phos., Phyt.,
Sars., Sil., Staph., Still., Sul-I., Sulph.,
Syph., Thuj.
When we examine these two rubrics we see that fully 22 of the 89
remedies listed are in both rubrics (underlined).
Furthermore, compared to Hahnemann’s original 48 antipsorics,
31 are listed as either antisycotic or antisyphilitic by Kent.
Next we turn to Boenninghausen’s repertory.
Generalities; Constitution; PSORIC: Ant-C., Bar-C., Brom., Calc.,
Calc-P., Carb-An., Carb-V. Cupr., Graph., Hep., Iod.,
Kali-I., Lyc., Nat-C., Nat-M., Nit-Ac., Petr., Psor., Sil.,
Sulph., Tub.
Generalities; SYCOSIS: Apis, Arg., Arg-N., Ars., Calc.,
Caust., Dulc., Fl-Ac., Graph., Kali-S., Med.,
Nat-S., Nit-Ac., Sel., Sep., Staph., Thuj.
Generalities; SYPHILIS: Am-C., Aur., Carb-An., Cinnb., Iod.,
Kali-Ar., Kali-I., Kali-S., Merc., Nit-Ac., Phyt.,
Sars., Sil., Syph., Thuj.
Here we see there are only 8 remedies double categorized in two
miasms – somewhat more consistent than in Kent’s repertory.
Furthermore, Boenninghausen tries to correct Hahnemann’s
original list by reclassifying some of the original antipsorics
(eliminating some 32 of Hahnemann’s original 48 remedies and
adding 4 remedies to the list). Also of great interest is how
different Kent and Boenninghausen’s lists appear. Kent has 41
more remedies than Boenninghausen listed as antisycotics, and
only 15 of the remedies are on both lists.
Finally we can look at Knerr’s repertory.
General; Constitution; PSORIC : Ars-I., Calc., Graph., Hep.,
Kreos., Psor., Sulph.
General; Constitution; SYCOTIC: Aran., Aster., Med., Nat-P.,
Nat-S., Nit-Ac., Sars., Thuj.
General; Constitution; SYPHILITIC : Ars., Asc-T., Aur.,
Benz-Ac., Clem., Cor-R., Crot-H., Cund., Euph., Ferr-I., Fl-Ac.,
Guai., Kali-Bi., Kali-I., Merc., Merc-C., Merc-D., Merc-I-R.,
Mez., Nit-Ac., Petr., Ph-Ac., Phos., Phyt., Sars.,
Sil., Still., Sulph., Syph., Thuj.
If Knerr has eliminated even more of Hahnemann’s original 48
antipsorics, leaving only 4 of the original remedies. He adds 3
new remedies, of which two were not included by Boenninghausen.
Furthermore, Knerr lists only 8 antisycotic remedies, three of
which are not mentioned by Kent or Boenninghausen. He similarly
adds 9 remedies as antisyphilitic which are not listed in Kent
or Boenninghausen and does not list 7 of Boenninghausen’s 15
antisyphilitic remedies at all.
The three repertories only concur about 4 antipsoric, 4
antisycotic and 8 antisyphilitic remedies.
Thus we can see that there is almost no agreement about which
remedies apply to which miasm.
With all of this confusion about the meaning of miasms and the
remedies that can apply to the miasms, it is little to be
wondered that homeopaths stayed away in droves. Most
practitioners could not name more than a handful of remedies
that clearly pertained to a specific miasm. In my own training
in homeopathy, we paid very little attention to the miasm of
remedies except in glaring cases (that is, if the patient had a
history of gonorrhea and recurring gleet or warts, we would
strongly consider Medorrhinum, Thuja or Natrum Sulphuricum). But
of those frequent cases to which Boenninghausen refers as
“whole sheets of images of the disease in which there is
nothing therapeutically characteristic” we did not use and did
not know of the tool of miasm. And this was generally true of
most homeopaths from the time of Kent until the middle of the
twentieth century.
The next move forward was in the LIGA meeting of 1944. The
renowned Mexican homeopath F. Ortega put forward his concept of
miasm. He maintained the concept of Hahnemann’s original three
miasms (something nice about 3). However he attempted to make a
clear and simple delineation of the mental and physical
characteristics of each miasm, He described the main
characteristics of the three constitutions in this way:
Psora = inhibition
Sycosis = excess
Syphilis = destruction
The benefit of this simplified view of the miasm was that the
main thrust of the patient and his constitution could readily be
identified much of the time. Thus the practitioner could readily
categorize his patient into one of the groups. The concept
became widely accepted.
There were many inconsistencies with this concept. For example,
the remedy Aurum Muriaticum Natronatum had generally been
considered as antisyphilitic was famous for excessive tumor
growth (i.e. sycotic). The remedy Mercurius (which is
antisyphilitic) is often found to be inhibited in its
expressions (psora) where Sulphur (antipsoric) is often
audacious and flashy. So when the theory came against actual
remedies, we could see much variation.
Perhaps more importantly, we still had no clear idea of what
constituted a miasm – that is no clear definition of miasm.
And once again we are hampered by the fact that no consistent
agreed upon list exists for which remedies belong to the miasm.
Some further intellectual progress was made by Vithoulkas in his
book, Science of Homeopathy. Vithoulkas points out that
there is no reason (echoing the words of Boenninghausen) that we
are limited to three miasms. He states that rather than
postulate that tuberculosis is a combination of two miasms, why
should it not represent a fourth chronic miasm. Further,
Vithoulkas points out that the first step should be a clear
definition of miasm. “Based upon what has been said thus far,
we can now present a definition of miasms: A miasm is a
predisposition toward chronic disease underlying the acute
manifestations of illness 1) which is transmissible from
generation to generation and 2) which may respond beneficially
to the corresponding nosode prepared from either pathological
tissue or from the appropriate drug or vaccine.” (Science of
Homeopathy)
The work of each successive homeopathic scientist brings further
clarification of the basic concept brought forward by Hahnemann.
Thus, by the time of Vithoulkas’ writings we had three
characteristics for miasm:
Infectious – a miasm must be contagious.
Hereditary – a miasm or the susceptibility to a miasm must be
transmissible from parent to child.
Nosode – a nosode must be obtainable from the miasmatic
disease.
Vithoulkas stated clearly and for the first time that
Tuberculosis was a separate miasm since it fit all of these
criteria. He gave us a means for discovering new miasms. However
he considered miasm as mainly a way of looking deeply at our
science but did not consider the miasm to have tremendous
clinical application except in cases where the miasm was obvious
– and not always then. Thus by the end of the 1980’s we were
pretty much where Hering left us: What difference does it make
since we have to choose the similimum by the symptoms any way?
Most modern homeopaths in Europe and North America used
miasmatic relationships in only a limited way.
Finally in the 1990’s Sankaran made some logical and yet
revolutionary steps in the understanding of miasm. He created a
new paradigm for miasm. Specifically he made three rather
astonishing postulates:
1) Each remedy is assigned to a specific miasm and only one.
2) Each miasm was given extremely clear and tight defining
characteristics -- both physical and mental -- which are readily
identifiable in the homeopathic interview.
3) Each patient has only one miasm evident at any time.
The value of these postulates, if correct, is clearly enormous.
Most importantly from a practical standpoint, the ability to
eliminate from consideration all but the remedies assigned to
the miasm of our patient is of inestimable value. Just as we can
eliminate all warm-blooded remedies when a patient is very
chilly, we can limit the field of inquiry by knowing the miasm.
Furthermore, by knowing the miasm, we can understand the
emphasis of both physical and mental symptoms for each remedy.
In doing this, Sankaran and his coworkers assigned to date
nearly 250 remedies to specific miasms – each remedy being
assigned to only one miasm. For details of Sankaran’s work on
miasms, refer to his books, System of Homeopathy and Insight
into Plants.
So where do we stand today in our understanding of miasm? Many
homeopathic authorities have proposed new miasms – exactly as
Boenninghausen predicted. Foubister proposed a cancer miasm in
the 1950’s. In the late 1980’s Vakil proved the remedy
Leprominium. Sankaran has proposed four new miasms – bringing
the total of miasms currently discussed to 10.
He also added and defined three new miasms bringing the total to
ten. Here is the list as I see it at present. The name in
parenthesis is the person who first proposed the miasm as a
separate entity:
Acute miasm (Hahnemann) – also called the Rabies miasm by
some.
Typhoid (Sankaran)
Malarial miasm (Sankaran)
Ringworm miasm (Sankaran)
Psoric Miasm (Hahnemann)
Sycotic miasm (Hahnemann)
Cancer miasm (Foubister)
Tubercular miasm (Vithoulkas)
Leprosy miasm (Vakil)
Syphilitic miasm (Hahnemann).
How do we know that the remedies specified for each of these
proposed miasms actually belong?
Here the answer is strictly pragmatic and experiential. Since a
miasm cannot be seen with a microscope nor identified by any
laboratory test, it is necessarily an invention. No prover ever
volunteered the information, “I am feeling quite syphilitic
since I began proving this remedy.” Therefore the distinctions
of the miasm are useful only if they have clinical relevance –
that is if they help us to find the correct similimum. In a
sense, it does not matter if the proposed miasm is “real”.
If the definition of the miasm is clear and easily determined by
all trained observers in the patient, and the remedies can be
more easily identified by this grouping or categorization, then
the concept is useful. The proof, as they say will be in the
pudding.
How can there be so many miasms that were missed for so many
years?
Probably the answer lies as usual in language and terminology.
For example, many of the remedies that Hahnemann considered as
part of the acute miasm are now placed in the typhoid miasm by
Sankaran and his coworkers. And the remedies of the Tubercular
miasm were likewise grouped in the psoric and other miasms. It
seems to be more a process of differentiating useful
distinctions than unknown characteristics.
The question then becomes, “Are these refinements and further
differentiations useful?” Or is it just further theorizing?
The answer to that question must be made in the clinic – as
with all ideas and observations. For my part, I have been
working with Sankaran’s miasmatic observations and
categorizations for the past 5 years. I can state that my
results have improved substantially during that time. I consider
this work to be the greatest contribution to our science of the
past 20 years – that is since the pioneering work of
Vithoulkas.
Below is a rather shorthand summary of the characteristics of
the miasms and the most important remedies for each miasm. I
should note that these ideas are founded on Sankaran’s
approach but supplemented by my own experience – so please
take the mistakes below as my own and give the credit for the
original concept to Sankaran as his due.
Acute Miasm
Originally, these remedies were used during acute illnesses
such as scarlet fever, pneumonia and delirium. Later it was
found that they are useful in chronic conditions where the
sensation of the patient is identical to the sensation of an
acutely ill patient. The patient feels as if he were reacting to
a sudden, unexpected, life-threatening situation (illness,
attack, accident, etc). The patient is in an almost
“primitive” state usually accompanied by great fear and
child-like reaction. There is no compensatory mechanism except
fight or flight. He seeks reassurance and protection. Often
mania states require remedies from the acute or typhoid miasm.
Severe phobia disorders also frequently fit within this miasm.
Known Remedies f the Acute Miasm
Aconite. Arnica. Belladonna. Cactina. Calendula. Camphora.
Chocolate. Coffeinum. Croton Tiglium. Digitoxin. Elaterium.
Ergotaminum. Hydrogen. Hypericum. Lithium. Melilotus. Morphinum.
Oenanthus. Stramonium. Strychninum. Veratrum.
Nosode: Lyssinum. Morbillinum. Diptherinum.
Typhoid Miasm
Also known as the subacute miasm. Remedies in this miasm
were originally used for typhoid fever – that is high,
unremitting fever often associated with prostration from violent
diarrheas or other infections. The infections are slightly less
rapid in their onset (like all our descriptions of Bryonia) than
the remedies in the acute miasm. Now we find these remedies can
be useful in a variety of chronic conditions such as colitis,
Crohn’s disease, collapse states, psychosis. Patients in this
miasm who have acute or recurring psychotic breaks have good
prospects from homeopathic treatment. The patient feels himself
to be in an urgent, life-threatening situation requiring his
full capacity to survive. The patient is willing to use any
means to return to a secure position: Violence, scheming,
flight, lying, etc. Willful children who demand their desires so
strongly that parent’s cave in often require remedies from
this group. The patient’s goal is to conserve every resource
to combat the threat. Thus materialism and business struggles
are a strong component. The feeling is, “If I can just get
through this crisis, I have it made and I can rest.” He seeks
rest and a secure position.
Known Remedies of the Typhoid Miasm
Abelmoschus. Acetic Acid. Aethusa. Ailanthus. Anantherum.
Argemon. Asclepias Tuberosa. Baptisia. Benzoic Acid. Bryonia.
Carbo Animalis. Carbo Vegetabilis. Carnegia gigantea.
Chamomilla. Doryphora. Euphrasia. Gallic Acid. Gambogia.
Helleborus. Hyoscyamus. Ipecac. Lycopus. Mancinella. Nux
Moschata. Nux Vomica. Paris. Petroleum. Polystyrene.
Podophyllum. Pyrogenium. Rheum. Rhus Tox. Sacchrum Album.
Sulphuricum Acidum. Thyroidinum. Veratrum Veride. Viscum.
Nosode: Typhoidinum.
Malarial Miasm
In malaria, the situation is still less severe. The patient
is suffering but not in immanent danger for his life. Instead he
finds himself repeatedly accosted by highly uncomfortable
conditions. These conditions leave him weak and vulnerable
between the attacks. He is partially crippled by the condition
causing him to be dependent on those around him. His forward
progress is arrested as he deals with these harassing attacks.
For chronic conditions, the remedies of the malarial miasm feel
they are facing recurring attacks from life – they feel stuck
in a situation where nothing goes right and he is never truly
well. He can do little more than complain or act out. Patients
in this miasm often feel miserable and make those around them
miserable from their negative outlook. The patient especially
suffers with intermittent fevers, recurring hemorrhoids,
recurring or allergic asthma, migraines, neuralgia, rheumatism.
Known remedies of the Malarial Miasm
Ammonium Muriaticum. Angustura. Antimonium Crudum. Aurum
Muriaticum Kalinatum. Berberis. Boletus. Cactus. Capsicum.
Cedron. Chelidonium. China (and it’s salts). Cina. Clematis.
Colchicum. Colocynthis. Eupatorium Perfoliatum. Eupatorium
Purpureum. Iris. Kalmia. Magnesia Muriatica. Menyanthes. Natrum
Muriaticum. Peonia. Prunus. Ranunculus Bulbosus. Sarracenia.
Spigelia. Sumbulus. Verbascum.
Nosode— None.
Ringworm Miasm
Ringworm and fungal disorders are annoying but not at all
life-threatening. These conditions often get better very slowly
but slip back in at the first vulnerable moment. It is a
constant effort to combat the condition. The theme for ringworm
miasm is struggle against an external object but alternately
feeling optimism or pessimism. The patient often repeatedly uses
the word, “trying.” The feeling is that he must try and try
and yet he never quite gets there though never quite gives up.
Known Remedies of the Ringworm Miasm
Actea Spicata. Allium Sativa. Calcarea Fluorica. Calcarea
Silicata. Calcarea Sulphurica. Dulcamara. Fagus. Gossypium.
Magnesia Sulphuric Opunta vulgaris. Pseudotsuga. Rhus Venanata.
Sarsaparilla. Taraxicum. Teucreum. Upas. Veronica officianalis.
Viola Tricolorata.
Nosode – Ringworm nosode.
Psoric Miasm
The theme for psora according to Sankaran is struggle
against an external problem but with a feeling of optimism.
Paradoxically, since many of the remedies and characteristics of
psora have been differentiated into other miasms, few remedies
are left in this category. Many have noted the similarity
between Sankaran’s description of this miasm and his
description of the ringworm miasm.
Known Remedies of the Psoric Miasm
Calcarea. Cuprum. Ferrum. Graphites. Kali-Carbonicum.
Lycopodium. Niccolum. Sulphur. Zincum.
Nosode: None.
Sycotic Miasm
Gonorrhea is a condition that is not life-threatening but is
shameful and embarrassing. The remedies used to combat gonorrhea
and gleet also treat the ailments of suppressed gonorrhea. All
of the diseases that respond to this group of remedies are fixed
and intractable: They do not go away but they do not progress.
The patient spends a great deal of time trying to cover up or
compensate for the illness. Thus we have the well-known
characteristic of the sycotic miasm: secretiveness. The patient
is often riddled with guilt and insecurity. Inferiority complex
is a common finding in this miasm. The physical conditions often
center around the urinary or genital tract. Also common is
asthma, tumors and neoplasms, eczema, genital herpes.
Known Remedies of the Sycotic Miasm
Argentum Metallicum. Borax. Bovista. Calcarea Bromata. Cannabis
Indica. Caulophyllum. Crocus Sativa. Digitallis. Gelsemium. Kali
Bichromicum. Kali Bromatum. Kali Sulphuricum. Lac Caninum. Lac
Delphinum. Natrum Sulphuricum. Palladium. Pulsatilla. Sabadilla.
Sanguinaria. Silica. Thuja.
Nosode: Medorrhinum
Cancer Miasm
When a patient receives a diagnosis of cancer, it is obvious
that the condition is life threatening. The patient and the
family feel there is almost no hope but yet they do not give up.
They search high and low for a new drug trial, a new surgery, or
even a farfetched alternative like homeopathy. The feeling is
one of desperation, of holding on to hope with the fingernails.
The patient who needs a remedy from this miasm feels he must
carry out his life perfectly – one failure of duty, one lapse
in cleanliness, one cheat of the proper diet and all will be
lost. Perfectionism and the need for control with the feeling of
being strained to one’s very limit are the normal
presentation. Physically the cancer miasm is often found in
patients with a history of cancer but many other physical
ailments can be produced. Anorexia nervosa is often treated by
remedies of this miasm. Tumors of any sort, neurological
disorders such as multiple sclerosis are often found in this
miasm.
Known Remedies of the Cancer Miasm
Agaricus, Anacardium. Anhalonium, Argentum Nitricum, Arsenicum
Album. Asarum. Baryta Arsenica, Bellis Perenis, Calcarea
Arsenica, Calcarea Nitrica, Causticum, Conium. Ferrum Arsenicum,
Ignatia, Kali Arsenicum, Kali Nitricum, Natrum Arsenicum,
Nitricum Acidum, Opium, Physostigma, Ruta, Sabina, Staphysagria,
Tabacum, Viola Odorata.
Nosodes: Carcinocin, Scirrhinum
Tubercular Miasm
The feeling of the miasm relates to the ever encroaching and
eventually fatally suffocating infection. The patient rebels,
struggles, longs for freedom from his condition. He hurries to
live his life even as he intuits that it is burning away from
him. He feels the walls closing in upon him. His loved ones
cannot be trusted. He suffers from respiratory conditions,
persecution complex, deformative arthritis.
Abrotanum. Acalypha. Apis. Aranea. Arsenicum Iodatum. Atrax.
Balsamum. Brucea. Bromium. Calcarea Iodata. Calcarea
Phosphorica. Cereus Bonplandii. Cimicifuga. Cistus. Coccus
Cacti. Coffea. Drosera. Elaterium. Euonymus. Ferrum Iodatum.
Ferrum Phosphoricum. Fluoric Acid. Ginseng. Iodum Kali
Phosphoricum. Latrodectus. Magnesia Phosphorica. Mygale.
Myristica. Myrtus Communis. Natrum Phosphricum. Oleander.
Phelandrium. Phosphorus. Pix. Rumex. Salix Niger. Sambucus.
Senega. Succinic Acid. Tarentula. Theridion. Ustilago.
Verbascum.Vespa.
Nosode – Bacillinum. Tuberculinum (in all its
preparations). BCG vaccine.
Leprosy Miasm
Lepers have suffered enormously through history. The
condition is slowly progressive and eventually leads to death.
However, even more disturbing to the patient is the reaction of
those around him. He is reviled by his friends and community.
Where they looked at him with affection they now feel loathing.
This results in a desperate state of self-disgust and
self-hatred. He feels contempt with his condition and towards
himself or others. He desires to tear, mutilate or bite himself.
He suffers from suicidal thoughts or impulses, depression,
morbid obesity.
Known Remedies of the Leprosy Miasm
Agraphis. Aloe. Ambra. Androctonus. Aristolochia. Aurum
Sulphuricum. Azadirachta. Baryta Iodata. Baryta Sulphurica.
Cereus Serpentinus. Cicuta. Coca. Codeinum. Comocladia. Curare.
Cyclamen. Fumaria. Gratiola. Homarus. Hura. Hydrastus.
Hydrocotyle. Indolum. Kola nut. Lac Defloratum. Laurocerasus.
Ledum. Mandragora. Mephites. Ocimum sacntum. Rhus glabra.
Secale. Sepia. Skatolum. Solanum Tuberosum Aegrotans. Spiraea.
Nosodes – Leprominium. Psorinum.
Syphilitic Miasm
Syphilis was an inexorable death sentence in the
pre-antibiotic era. The condition is utterly destructive –
either physically or mentally. Extreme nihilism marks the
patient in the uncompensated state. The diseases are destructive
of bone and tissue leading eventually to death. The patient
reacts to his illness or his perceived life situations as though
under a death sentence. He is prone to feelings of violence and
revenge. Suicide or homicidal feelings are common. Destructive
addictions often result. Physical conditions include advanced
cardiac conditions, aortic disease, aneurysm, alcoholism.
Known Remedies of the Syphilitic Miasm
Alumina. Anagallis. Aurum. Cenchris. Clematis. Crataegus
Echinacea. Elaps. Hepar Sulphur. Hydrocotyle. Lachesis.
Lathyrus. Leptandra. Mercurius. Origanum. Osmium. Naja. Platinum
Plumbum. Plutonium. Psilocibe. Stillingea.
Nosode -- Syphilinum
Roger
Morrison
|
Top
Back