Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell I would like deeply considered opinions on this idea below

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell Note ceed = chronic effect of epidemic disease c e e d There is the idea that remedies have a mind set and pathological features, a stiff emotions and stiff joints for example in Rhus Tox. There is another idea I have that no pathology can exist without the presence of ceeds. This is what I would like to discuss.

Interesting idea but how to prove, or even to acquire data on which to postulate?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell This second idea is that, if the human body was in its pure state of perfect genetics, no possible pathology could arise as there would be no imperfections on which to take root. However ceeds and mind sets have coexisted for millennia and maybe there is no separation now. We have very well established connections between remedy mind sets and well known pathologies. So clearly there is a link

I suggest that epidemic Dx have the potential to produce both an acute and a chronic mind state, nor may these be the same states.

Whether they persist depends on the usual ( susceptability, ability to overcome Dx etc.)

Unfortunately there is no clean slate top work from ( or is there?) So it can be difficult if not impossible to separate pre-existing mind states that were either just latent - or underexpressed - or undeveloped, - or due perhaps to appear in due course. ALL of which could be the sum inheritance from previous generations of ceeds.

One question to pose then as a starting point is why did the first human being to get ill from an epidemic, get ill from any epidemic Dx? To answer that we must try to imagine a time when humans were never ill, look at their circumstances and look for clues in history etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell Is there a direct connection between mind states and pathological states?.

Obviously but it looks as though perhaps you're asking more about etiology?

[QUOTE=Peter Chappell]There appears to be in the well detailed remedies like Rhus Tox, Sepia, Sulphur, Aurum etc. But supposing the ceeds only provide the soil and only certain types of minds can thrive in that soil, so that, as the journey of life starts at conception, each step of choices, like I see evolution, is along predetermined options set by the ceedic state, so that if you have a strong syphilic ceed, its only possible to develop Aurum and other well know syphilic remedy states, as these others just have no affinity. It means then that Aurum say will be selected as a natural choice out of a range of similar syphilic options.
The stresses that Aurum can set up all facilitated by the syphilitic ceed to take root, for example the mental depression can affect the testicles, and the option already exists in the ceed for testicular pathology to be established.
What I am say is that its possible to see the possibility that the remedy sets up the stress, and the ceed allows it to become pathological..[/QUOTE]

The 'remedy' sets up the stress? not sure I am with you here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell This seems possible, even likely, so it means that it’s possible to suppose that pathology is impossible without ceeds. That’s a very important possibility..

This point seems worth pursuing, that pathology is impossible without ceeds. But I still think we need to put ceeds under the microscope. Where do they come from, originally? ( I have my ideas on this)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell If we go back to Africa its possible to see very powerful archetypal relationships based upon animal passions, the male leader of the herd, the subservient females, and such like patterns running society. It’s easy to believe these have existed for all time. There are examples of female dominance amongst animals and female dominant options are also seen in people. My main point here is that the basic behavioural patterns date from our time as animals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Chappell These patterns can also be influenced by minerals, as is well known in the hard people living on dry, hard rock compared to their near neighbours who are soft and warm who live by he seaside. Likewise severe mineral deficiencies affect mind and body dramatically. So it’s easy to understand how minerals have influenced the human archetypes. Likewise, in wars and conflicts, terrible deeds, killing, torture, as well as often the consequences, starvation, loss of family, loss of culture, have further differentiated our inner emotional states and created deep panic states. When it comes to plants, surely there is some truth in the maxim you are what you eat, and my version, you are what you assimilate from what you eat (I personally vomit out poisons readily) so it’s easy to see that plants could also determine our mind states. All this is proven in homeopathic experience. However, it’s also possible to see very clearly that unresolved diseases leave imprints upon the human race, the wildness that follows gonorrhoea, the boredom and dissatisfaction that comes from tuberculosis, the destructiveness from syphilis etc. So all these have influence the development of our minds. Can we conclude anything from this? While all the above is true, does it mean that the actual pathology, as against a disturbance of function, for example a stiffness in mind resulting in a stiffness in the body, is possible without the intermediary of ceeds? Would the Rhus Tox persons joints degenerate without a syphilitic ceed? Would the joints inflame without a gonorrhoea ceed? etc.

I don't understand, are you asserting that remedies only produce stresses upon the physical body? I wouldn't agree with that.

I really think to answer your questions epidemic diseases need clearer definition as to what they actually are.


regards

Simon King LCPH MARH