DIALECTICAL HOMEOPATHY REVOLUTIONIZES HOMEOPATHIC PRACTICE- DEFINING, CLASSIFYING AND GRADING OF SYMPTOMS AND FINDING SIMILIMUM
by CHANDRAN NAMBIAR KC
by CHANDRAN NAMBIAR KC
In accordance with the scientific understanding and explanation of homeopathic therapeutics provided by Dialectical Homeopathy, we have to re-examine the whole protocols of Case Taking, Classification and Grading of Symptoms, selection of similimum and its therapeutic application.
To be capable of following the logic behind the new method of classifying and grading of symptoms proposed by Dialectical Homeopathy, one should be familiar with its basic premises regarding the understanding of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and homeopathic therapeutics.
Since the perception of Dialectical homeopathy about the mechanism underlying the processes of disease and cure fundamentally differs from that of ‘classical homeopathy’, its ways of application are also bound to differ.
Dialectical Homeopathy explains ‘similia similibus curentur’ on the basis of modern biochemistry and molecular biology. According to this view, diseases are deviations in biochemical pathways caused by material level molecular errors in the organism. Apart from those of genetic abnormalities and nutritional deficiencies, these molecular errors are caused by inhibitions of essential biological molecules resulting from binding of molecules of exogenous or endogenous origin. These molecular level deviations are primary factors of diseases, which expresses through diverse groups of objective and subjective symptoms. Symptoms are actually the expressions of molecular errors as reflected in the consciousness of the person himself, or observed by the observers.
An individual may be same time having diverse types of pathological molecular errors in him, caused by diverse types of molecular inhibitions originating from genetic, miasmatic, nutritional, infectious, environmental, emotional, metabolic, iatrogentic and various such factors. Symptoms expressed by an individual actually represent such diverse types of pathological molecular errors happened in different biochemical pathways. More over, molecular inhibitions have a cascading effect, errors in one pathway leading to new errors in associated pathways. Diseases progress to new stages through this cascading mechanism. That shows, disease cannot be dealt with as a singular entity in the concerned organism.
According to Dialectical Homeopathy, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, by which three-dimensional artificial binding agents are prepared in water/alcohol medium, that can later bind to the pathogenic molecules having configurational similarity to original drug molecules. These ‘molecular imprints’ are the actual active principles of potentized homeopathic drugs. When these ‘molecular imprints’ are introduced into the organism according to the therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’, they would specifically bind to the pathological molecules having configurational affinity, thereby relieving the biological molecules. This is the molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.
We should understand ‘drug proving’ and materaia medica in a new light. Drug proving actually involves the study of ‘molecular errors’ that could be created in a healthy organism by introducing crude drug substances. When drug substances are introduced into the organism, independant constituent molecules contained in the drug substances interact with biological molecules and create molecular inhibitions amounting to artificial pathological conditions. These ‘molecular errors’ are expressed through diverse groups of objective and subjective symptoms, and systematically compiled in our material medica texts. The most important insight Dialectical Homeopathy introduces regarding ‘drug proving is that drugs are never ‘proved’ as ‘single’ entities. It is not the drug substances that interact with biological molecules, but the independent constituent molecules of drugs. Materia medica actually represents a collection of symptoms produced by the diverse types of molecular errors caused by diverse types of individual drug molecules being part of the drug substance. As such, a drug substance can not be considered as ‘single’ entities as ‘classical’ approach perceives. They are ‘proved’ as constituent molecules, potentizaed as individual molecules, and the potentized drugs act as therapeutic agents in capacity of individual ‘molecular imprints’.
According to Dialectical Homeopathy, ‘similia similibus curentur’ should be explained in the light of this new understanding regarding disease and cure. Meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’ now becomes, “pathological molecular errors can be removed using molecular imprints of drug molecules that were proven to be capable of producing similar molecular errors in organism in capacity of their configurational similarity”. This ‘similarity of molecular errors’ and similarity of ‘molecular configurations’ are determined in homeopathy by a very practical way of ‘similarity of symptoms’.
Now, we clearly understand the importance of ‘symptoms’ and ‘similarity of symptoms’ in the application of homeopathic therapeutics.
The exact molecular errors underlying a state of pathology and the biochemical deviations arising there from could be determined and compared with that of drug substances only by a careful and judicious observation and analysis of ‘symptoms’. Subjective and objective symptoms are the only indicators by which we can identify the molecular errors underlying a pathological condition.
Classifying and grading of symptoms is a very important step in homeopathic case study and selection of similimum. So far, homeopaths were taught to classify symptoms first into ‘physical’ and ‘mental’, considering 'mentals' as decisive factors in selecting similimum. This method of classification is based on the theory that diseases originate in the level of 'vital force', and the concept that ‘mind’ is primary to ‘body’. Dialectical Homeopathy thinks just the opposite. Material ‘body’ is ‘primary’, and ‘mind is ‘secondary’. Disease and cure are material phenomena, drugs are material, therapeutics is a ‘material art’, not a ‘spiritual’ one. Diseases and cure happen at molecular level, not ‘spiritual’ level.
‘Symptoms’ produced by drug proving and diseases may be mainly of two types:: Subjective or Objective. According to the approach of Dialectical Homeopathy, differentiating ‘Subjective’ and ‘Objective’ symptoms is the primary step in the classification of ‘symptoms’.
‘Subjective Symptoms’ are the symptoms ‘felt’ or experienced’ by the individual, without the involvement of sense organs. The micro-level pathological molecular errors are first experienced subjectively, by the faculty of ‘consciousness’ of the individual, without the involvement of sense organs. The cascading effects of even minute molecular and cellular level deviations would be transmitted to the associated brain centers through the mediation of internal signaling system and neuro-endicrine system. This mechanism initiates certain molecular processes in the brain, which is ‘experienced’, ‘felt’ or ‘sensed’ by the consciousness as diverse groups of ‘subjective symptoms’. As such, study of ‘Subjective Symptoms’ can be used as an effective way of understanding the exact molecular errors underlying the pathological deviations.
‘Objective Symptoms’ are those ‘observed’ by the patient himself, or by the onlookers around, with their sense organs aided or un-aided by accessory means. Observations through physical examinations and laboratory investigations also belong to this class. ‘Observed Symptoms’ also reflect the ‘molecular errors’, but only those which have advanced into gross observable magnitude. ‘Objective Symptoms’ may also be associated with certain ‘Subjective Symptoms’, which give indications to the actual micro-level processes behind. Observing objective symptoms along with associated subjective symptoms help us to identify the exact molecular errors, which is necessary for selecting appropriate similimum.
A. SUBJECTIVE SYMPTOMS are classified into ‘Subjective Mentals’ and ‘Subjective Physicals’.
‘Subjective Mentals’ can be further divided into ‘Subjective Mental Generals’ (SMG) and ‘Subjective Mental Particulars’ (SMP)
‘Subjective Physicals’ can be further classified into ‘Subjective Physical Generals’ (SPG) and ‘Subjective Physical Particulars’ (SPP).
B. OBJECTIVE SYMPTOMS are classified into ‘Objective Mentals’ and ‘Objective Physicals’
‘Objective Mentals’ can be further divided into ‘Objective Mental Generals’ (OMG) and ‘Objective Mental Particulars’ (OMG).
‘Objective Physicals’ can be further classified into ‘Objective Physical Generals’ (OPG) and ‘Objective Physical Particulars’ (OPP).
After classifying symptoms according to above plan , we can work out the case using any of the three methods discussed here:
I. SUBJECTIVE-OBJECTIVE METHOD:
1. Subjective Mental Symptoms
2. Subjective Physical Symptoms
3. Subjective Mental Particulars
4. Subjective Physical Particular
5. Objective Mental General
6. Objective Physical General
7. Objective Mental Particular
8. Objective Physical Particular
II. MENTAL-PHYSICAL METHOD:
1. Subjective Mental General
2. Subjective Mental Particular
3. Objective Mental General
4. Objective Mental Particular
5. Subjective Physical General
6. Subjective Physical Particular
7. Objective Physical General
8. Objective Physical Particular
III. GENERAL-PARTICULAR METHOD:
1. Sybjective Mental General
2. Subjective Physical General
3. Objective Mental General
4. Objective Physical General
5. Subjective Mental Particular
6. Subjective Physical Particular
7. Objective Mental Particular
8. Objective Physical Particular
Chandran Nambiar K C
To be capable of following the logic behind the new method of classifying and grading of symptoms proposed by Dialectical Homeopathy, one should be familiar with its basic premises regarding the understanding of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and homeopathic therapeutics.
Since the perception of Dialectical homeopathy about the mechanism underlying the processes of disease and cure fundamentally differs from that of ‘classical homeopathy’, its ways of application are also bound to differ.
Dialectical Homeopathy explains ‘similia similibus curentur’ on the basis of modern biochemistry and molecular biology. According to this view, diseases are deviations in biochemical pathways caused by material level molecular errors in the organism. Apart from those of genetic abnormalities and nutritional deficiencies, these molecular errors are caused by inhibitions of essential biological molecules resulting from binding of molecules of exogenous or endogenous origin. These molecular level deviations are primary factors of diseases, which expresses through diverse groups of objective and subjective symptoms. Symptoms are actually the expressions of molecular errors as reflected in the consciousness of the person himself, or observed by the observers.
An individual may be same time having diverse types of pathological molecular errors in him, caused by diverse types of molecular inhibitions originating from genetic, miasmatic, nutritional, infectious, environmental, emotional, metabolic, iatrogentic and various such factors. Symptoms expressed by an individual actually represent such diverse types of pathological molecular errors happened in different biochemical pathways. More over, molecular inhibitions have a cascading effect, errors in one pathway leading to new errors in associated pathways. Diseases progress to new stages through this cascading mechanism. That shows, disease cannot be dealt with as a singular entity in the concerned organism.
According to Dialectical Homeopathy, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, by which three-dimensional artificial binding agents are prepared in water/alcohol medium, that can later bind to the pathogenic molecules having configurational similarity to original drug molecules. These ‘molecular imprints’ are the actual active principles of potentized homeopathic drugs. When these ‘molecular imprints’ are introduced into the organism according to the therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’, they would specifically bind to the pathological molecules having configurational affinity, thereby relieving the biological molecules. This is the molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.
We should understand ‘drug proving’ and materaia medica in a new light. Drug proving actually involves the study of ‘molecular errors’ that could be created in a healthy organism by introducing crude drug substances. When drug substances are introduced into the organism, independant constituent molecules contained in the drug substances interact with biological molecules and create molecular inhibitions amounting to artificial pathological conditions. These ‘molecular errors’ are expressed through diverse groups of objective and subjective symptoms, and systematically compiled in our material medica texts. The most important insight Dialectical Homeopathy introduces regarding ‘drug proving is that drugs are never ‘proved’ as ‘single’ entities. It is not the drug substances that interact with biological molecules, but the independent constituent molecules of drugs. Materia medica actually represents a collection of symptoms produced by the diverse types of molecular errors caused by diverse types of individual drug molecules being part of the drug substance. As such, a drug substance can not be considered as ‘single’ entities as ‘classical’ approach perceives. They are ‘proved’ as constituent molecules, potentizaed as individual molecules, and the potentized drugs act as therapeutic agents in capacity of individual ‘molecular imprints’.
According to Dialectical Homeopathy, ‘similia similibus curentur’ should be explained in the light of this new understanding regarding disease and cure. Meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’ now becomes, “pathological molecular errors can be removed using molecular imprints of drug molecules that were proven to be capable of producing similar molecular errors in organism in capacity of their configurational similarity”. This ‘similarity of molecular errors’ and similarity of ‘molecular configurations’ are determined in homeopathy by a very practical way of ‘similarity of symptoms’.
Now, we clearly understand the importance of ‘symptoms’ and ‘similarity of symptoms’ in the application of homeopathic therapeutics.
The exact molecular errors underlying a state of pathology and the biochemical deviations arising there from could be determined and compared with that of drug substances only by a careful and judicious observation and analysis of ‘symptoms’. Subjective and objective symptoms are the only indicators by which we can identify the molecular errors underlying a pathological condition.
Classifying and grading of symptoms is a very important step in homeopathic case study and selection of similimum. So far, homeopaths were taught to classify symptoms first into ‘physical’ and ‘mental’, considering 'mentals' as decisive factors in selecting similimum. This method of classification is based on the theory that diseases originate in the level of 'vital force', and the concept that ‘mind’ is primary to ‘body’. Dialectical Homeopathy thinks just the opposite. Material ‘body’ is ‘primary’, and ‘mind is ‘secondary’. Disease and cure are material phenomena, drugs are material, therapeutics is a ‘material art’, not a ‘spiritual’ one. Diseases and cure happen at molecular level, not ‘spiritual’ level.
‘Symptoms’ produced by drug proving and diseases may be mainly of two types:: Subjective or Objective. According to the approach of Dialectical Homeopathy, differentiating ‘Subjective’ and ‘Objective’ symptoms is the primary step in the classification of ‘symptoms’.
‘Subjective Symptoms’ are the symptoms ‘felt’ or experienced’ by the individual, without the involvement of sense organs. The micro-level pathological molecular errors are first experienced subjectively, by the faculty of ‘consciousness’ of the individual, without the involvement of sense organs. The cascading effects of even minute molecular and cellular level deviations would be transmitted to the associated brain centers through the mediation of internal signaling system and neuro-endicrine system. This mechanism initiates certain molecular processes in the brain, which is ‘experienced’, ‘felt’ or ‘sensed’ by the consciousness as diverse groups of ‘subjective symptoms’. As such, study of ‘Subjective Symptoms’ can be used as an effective way of understanding the exact molecular errors underlying the pathological deviations.
‘Objective Symptoms’ are those ‘observed’ by the patient himself, or by the onlookers around, with their sense organs aided or un-aided by accessory means. Observations through physical examinations and laboratory investigations also belong to this class. ‘Observed Symptoms’ also reflect the ‘molecular errors’, but only those which have advanced into gross observable magnitude. ‘Objective Symptoms’ may also be associated with certain ‘Subjective Symptoms’, which give indications to the actual micro-level processes behind. Observing objective symptoms along with associated subjective symptoms help us to identify the exact molecular errors, which is necessary for selecting appropriate similimum.
A. SUBJECTIVE SYMPTOMS are classified into ‘Subjective Mentals’ and ‘Subjective Physicals’.
‘Subjective Mentals’ can be further divided into ‘Subjective Mental Generals’ (SMG) and ‘Subjective Mental Particulars’ (SMP)
‘Subjective Physicals’ can be further classified into ‘Subjective Physical Generals’ (SPG) and ‘Subjective Physical Particulars’ (SPP).
B. OBJECTIVE SYMPTOMS are classified into ‘Objective Mentals’ and ‘Objective Physicals’
‘Objective Mentals’ can be further divided into ‘Objective Mental Generals’ (OMG) and ‘Objective Mental Particulars’ (OMG).
‘Objective Physicals’ can be further classified into ‘Objective Physical Generals’ (OPG) and ‘Objective Physical Particulars’ (OPP).
After classifying symptoms according to above plan , we can work out the case using any of the three methods discussed here:
I. SUBJECTIVE-OBJECTIVE METHOD:
1. Subjective Mental Symptoms
2. Subjective Physical Symptoms
3. Subjective Mental Particulars
4. Subjective Physical Particular
5. Objective Mental General
6. Objective Physical General
7. Objective Mental Particular
8. Objective Physical Particular
II. MENTAL-PHYSICAL METHOD:
1. Subjective Mental General
2. Subjective Mental Particular
3. Objective Mental General
4. Objective Mental Particular
5. Subjective Physical General
6. Subjective Physical Particular
7. Objective Physical General
8. Objective Physical Particular
III. GENERAL-PARTICULAR METHOD:
1. Sybjective Mental General
2. Subjective Physical General
3. Objective Mental General
4. Objective Physical General
5. Subjective Mental Particular
6. Subjective Physical Particular
7. Objective Mental Particular
8. Objective Physical Particular
Chandran Nambiar K C
Post a Comment