Letters to the Editor
NATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOMOEOPATHY 2002 Sep / Oct VOL 4 NO 5.
Respected Editor,
Ref: Tubercular Miasm Issue, 3/2002 pg 197: Article on Tubercular Diathesis:
The Author, Dr L M Khan, has mentioned about the tubercular diathesis. It is clear from the discussion, what diathesis is? I suppose we agree with the definition: it is the vicarious balance between health (ie Normalcy, or constitution of the individual) and the disease (a well formed disease process, which then becomes a fixed pattern). Diathesis is known to us through signs and symptoms or clinical investigations ie uric acid diathesis, can be known from the vague joint pains and hyper uraecaemia or uric acid crystals in urine examination. This state is available before gout represents in its full blown presentation. In this process we should take those symptoms and signs which undoubtedly scientifically establishes the connection between diathesis and disease. The examples given of symptoms 1 to 7 these are not a universal expression for establishing the premorbid state before Tuberculosis as a disease develops. My experience of treating tuberculosis does not help me to accept these indications for diathesis of tuberculosis as disease.
Equally important point of view is in relation to
explanations about the Tub Miasm.
Right from its inception the theory of miasm has been gripped by controversies.
What Dr Hahnemann had started was a direction, a point of view needed to explain
the entire gamut of diseases the human race is suffering from. I suppose when Dr
Allen studied the aspect of Psora and the closeness of entity, but he
found there are issues which allows this entity to stand apart from the Psora
and that’s how he proposed the theory of pseudo-psora or Tubercular
miasm. He discovered a distinctly different form, function and structure for the
Tubercular miasm. The pattern was distinctively noticeable on the different
planes of spirit, mind and body. Its pathogenesis and pathology and its
therapeutic implications differed from that of Psora. The demand of the
situation has differed. One needs to look beyond the limits of venereal and
non-venereal understanding. To my understanding, one will find it immensely
difficult to explain the disease patterns on this, Aetio-pathological basis.
I will like to draw readers attention to the fact that "first local intentions take place, then it spreads all through the body. Thus the patient acquires the syphilitic or sycotic miasm". What is described is the development of disease- the different stages a disease passes through. Mere absence of infective organism should not allow us to diagnose this as miasm. For eg: Gonorrhoea, the disease, is not Sycotic Miasm. An untreated Gonorrhoea may also go into hibernation after the first infection at the local site, followed by quiescent phase till it finally surfaces as gonorrhoeal arthritis. In this inbetween stage there may be no germs, but the disease in still lingering, and is therefore still in disease stage and is not in the Sycotic Miasmatic stage. OR on the other hand, a state of Destruction eg Non-healing part of atopic ulcers will allow us to diagnose the Syphilitic Miasm which may be available in diseases like Lepromatous leprosy, Diabetes Mellitus, Syphilis etc. Aetio-pathologically they are different but ongoing destruction of tissues and non-healing part will put this situation in Syphilitic miasm. We need to differentiate the infections of diseases and miasm
One has to rise above this understanding of aetiology and
examine the patterns (effects). Finally this has its own deeper
therapeutic implications.
We need to examine the theory of miasm more scientifically and our inductions as
well as deductions should be logical and reasonably explainable and
understandable.
-Dr C B Jain, ICR fellow, Mumbai
Dr L M Khan from Calcutta:
Your thoughts and your personality are reflected through your editorial.
Your lectures, writing and the Journal is an echo of the spiritual blessing of
your mother, late Dr Sarla Sonawala.
Thank you for publishing my articles, even though one came to you through the email without my name. I have written about my concept of treating disease as a basic attitude to look after nosological tagging with holistic dimensions.
Editor: Thank you for you kind comments and blessings. Thank you also for sending some more articles. A few will be published in the next issue- Mercury.
About your article on Tubercular Diathesis: It is a coincidence that in this issue itself, Dr C B Jain has commented (see above). I hope you will clarify it for the sake of the profession and for our own clarity.
Dr S C Mishra writes from Jabalpur:
Thank you for publishing my article on Sepia in the 5/02 issue on
IHD. The photograph with it is not mine.
Editor: The photograph is of another Dr Mishra. Unfortunately there were 2 Mishra’s and the caption behind the photo, missed the initials. We are sorry for the mistake. We publish your right photo in with this issue along with your article on Trauma.
Dr Pran G Chaudhary, West Bengal
Corrects some mistakes in his article on Tub Miasm on pg 163: in response to
questions from Dr Mewavala.
Anti-miasmatic Medicine representation
Syco-syphilis: (Chim)
Syco-psora: Bar-c
Syphilo-psora: (bell)
Editor: There are few more corrections in the remaining script, ie changes of
grade of remedies to grade 2 or 1. Ask for a xerox copy of this from NJH.
