Here's that article, reposted here:
(this was originally sent to the lyghtforce list by Sheri Nakken, a nurse and homeopathic practitioner who also works as an investigative reporter).

Biological Weapons: Anthrax As Disinformation
A Biologist's Perspective
http://nov55.com

Propaganda on biological weapons including anthrax originates in the dark
cellars of government for the purpose of swaying the public to support increased
police powers. A terrorist threat is hyped or contrived, while military research on contagious diseases is concealed.

Disinformation in Media.
An example of the disinformation is an article in a news weekly which listed each of the supposed terrorist weapons and the cost of producing them. For $10-20,000, terrorists could supposedly kill hundreds of
thousands of persons with botulism toxin, anthrax, nerve gas, etc. "60 Minutes" had an 'expert' who said biological weapons could be produced in someone's back yard in a five gallon bucket. He said anthrax spores released from a boat on the Hudson River could kill four hundred thousand persons in New York City.

Anthrax is Trivial.

Here's the truth of the matter. Anthrax will never be used successfully as a terrorist weapon, and probably never as a military weapon. It has to be converted to spores suspended in the air, which is technically very difficult; and the lethality is nowhere near the terror that it is made out to be. It is not 100% lethal as often claimed. Wool sorters inhale anthrax spores in small quantities continually (150-700 per hour), and only if they get a large dose does an infection get started. It is not contagious.

Only US and Russia can Weaponize it.

To use anthrax as a weapon, it must be converted to a powder which can be
inhaled. Only the US and Russian militaries have succeeded in doing that. Even Iraq uses anthrax in liquid form, which is totally ineffective.

Humans are Seldom Affected.

Anthrax is a livestock pathogen. There are anthrax spores in the ground in rural areas, because they survive for about twenty years. They normally have no effect upon humans, because a few anthrax spores cannot create an
infection, and they do not come up from the ground in large quantities.

Cellular Limitations.

Anthrax is what's called a "gram positive" bacterium. This means it has the type of cell walls which are harmless, unlike the cell walls of "gram negative" bacteria, which attack tissue. Therefore, anthrax can only attack tissue by producing a special toxin which it excretes. One cell or spore
does not produce enough toxin to start an infection.

Studies have apparently determined that, typically, ten thousand anthrax spores must be inhaled to start an infection. That number might be someone's guess, but it is in line with the biology of the disease. It is the number which the military uses, and only the military has significantly
researched such questions. It uses gas chambers for animal tests.

Anthrax normally attacks the lungs, because it must lodge in vulnerable tissue. It can invade through other routes such as cuts or undercooked meat, but it only does so under third world conditions, and those routes
are not relevant to biowarfare.

Livestock eat from the ground, so they have their faces near the ground where the spores are, and they can inhale ten thousand spores. How does anyone get ten thousand spores into the lungs of humans?

Technical Obstacles to Weaponizing.

The first requirement would be to aerosolize the spores. The spores would have to be converted to a dry powder, because a liquid would create globs which would fall to the ground rather than staying suspended in the air.

To create a powder, the spores would first have to be washed several times in an array of very large and expensive centrifuges. Then a drying apparatus would have to be used; and it would require spraying a mist into a vacuum, which is how powders are created from liquids. Otherwise, everything globs up into hard rocks.

How do workers clean the equipment without getting spores everywhere? A likely procedure would be to enclose the equipment in a pressure chamber and steam sterilize it for several days. Such an operation costs hundreds of millions of dollars, considering related facilities and development.
Only countries do that, not radical groups, and not in five gallon buckets.

It won't stay in the Air.

Even in powder form, the spores would fall to the ground rapidly in the absence of wind. Anthrax is not adapted for airborne dissemination. It needs to stay on the ground until inhaled by livestock. So it would not stay in the air like mold spores but would fall out easily, about like
flour. In the presence of wind, the spores would be carried away rapidly
and would not stay in one place long enough for anyone to get more than a few inhaled.

Once the spores were on the ground, they would not affect humans significantly, because they would not come up from the ground in large enough quantities.

Foggers are Propaganda.

There is some talk about using liquids with fogging devices for dispersion of biological agents such as anthrax. It's not realistic. First, there is no mention of the purity that would be required to prevent globbing and plugging of nozzles. At least, a lot of expensive centrifuging would be required to remove debris.

Then agricultural spraying demonstrates that a mist drops rapidly to the ground. It does that because air can only hold a small amount of water, which causes sprays to precipitate.

Another problem is that spores would rapidly settle to the bottom of a liquid and form a gum due to sticky cell debris and their tendency to clump.

A chemical mist is different, because chemicals vaporize, while cells do
not. Cells in a mist would clump together as the liquid vaporizes. To create free spores would require very clean material, high dilution, ultra fine mist and a vacuum for rapid evaporation. Foggers can't do the same thing.

For these reasons, anthrax would be difficult to use; and it could hardly
kill more than a few hundred persons under the most ideal conditions, not the hundreds of thousands which are claimed. On top of that, antibiotics are effective for it during the early stage of the illness. It is not contagious for humans.

Glib Journalism is Unrealistic.

Innumerable journalists have been insisting that anthrax can be produced in a simple laboratory with little expertise. On the contrary, no countries but the U.S. and Russia can convert anthrax to a usable weapon. Iraq cannot.

Consider what the journalists fail to recognize. Growing a large quantity
of anthrax would result in a fermenter full of slop which is extremely slimy and viscous with large amounts of debris and metabolic products mixed with the nutrient medium. That slop has to be washed and converted to a
medium which will induce spores to form. Much research and knowledge would
be required to get a reasonable yield of spores. Then the cells would have
to be fragmented with something like a blender to get the spores out of the
cells. Then much differential centrifugation would be required to separate
the spores from the debris. Then spray drying of spores in a vacuum would
be required.

Accomplishing all of that would require the efforts several Ph.Ds. and much
developmental type research in addition to expensive equipment and a very large building. It isn't a matter of growing something in a kettle and pouring it into a rocket, as journalists and weapons inspectors seem to be assuming.

Grinding is Another Absurdity.

The latest contrivance is that terrorists might weaponize anthrax by drying
a slurry and grinding it to particles 1-5 microns in size. (The bacteria are 1 by 3 microns.)

The first problem is that the gunk would dry like glue; and after grinding, it would still be glue. Even if it were washed first, the bacteria would be sticky and would dry like glue.

The second problem is that bacteria do not tolerate grinding. They are as fragile as egg shells. Grinding is how they are broken apart for biochemical tests. Even if only 1% were broken, the result would be a
sticky gum, not a powder; and more like 99% would be broken before getting
5 micron particles.

Journalists keep mentioning how many anthrax spores can be put onto the head of a pin. It's not a question of how many can be put onto the head of a pin but how many can be put into someone's lungs.

Planes cannot Dust a City.

A scenario which is often mentioned is that someone might use a plane to dust a large city with anthrax during the night. It's unrealistic. First, no one in buildings would be harmed by anthrax. The few spores that entered buildings would settle on surfaces, and few would enter the air, and even fewer would be inhaled. At most, someone might inhale a few dozen spores
per hour. That's not the ten thousand that are needed.

Secondly, anthrax spores would not diffuse uniformly through the air like a
gas. They will either drop too fast or blow away. A few dozen persons might
be killed, but that's not the terror that is being hyped in the media. And more than anything, nobody is producing the spores in powder form but the U.S. and Russia.

Journalists seem to assume that an anthrax cell anywhere will kill someone someplace. Putting words alongside each other on a page is not the same thing as getting cells into humans on the ground. There are millions of
square miles of space on the ground which do not show up with the words.

Iraq did not Weaponize Anthrax.

Saddam Hussein is said to have produced anthrax. If so, the reason is because it is stable and easy to handle, not because it is effective when used. Iraq is unsophisticated to a point of ineptness in its approach to
biological weapons.

It is said that Iraq uses anthrax in liquid form and puts it in missiles in
liquid form. In liquid form, anthrax is almost as safe as cotton candy. Therefore, Iraq poses no anthrax threat.

In fact, military and UN inspectors only found two Iraqi warheads with anthrax in them (in liquid form). If Iraq had anthrax in an effective form, it would have had it in hundreds of warheads, as they did with nerve gas. So Iraq knew its anthrax was useless.

For about a billion dollars, Iraq could probably get enough experts together to develop anthrax as a weapon. But the reason why it doesn't is that researchers already know that anthrax would be next to worthless after it was developed.

The Whole Concept is Flawed.

Biological warfare is a flawed concept. The only route usually considered is airborne, because bombs and missiles create the delivery system. There is no disease in existence which is propagated in that manner. Even the airborne diseases require close contact with the source. The reason is
because wind disperses the agents too thinly, and gravity brings them down
too rapidly. Increasing the quantities massively will get a few persons,
but only a few.

And then, very few of the diseases which are mentioned as biowarfare agents
are suitable for airborne dissemination. Brucellosis is not. It is disseminated through body fluids. Plague is not. It is carried by insects from the blood of one animal to another. The insects do not pick it up from the ground.

Motives Tailor the Truth at every Level.

Biowarfare is promoted through a combination of ignorance and propaganda. The researchers, who should know better and often do, are getting paid to produce the agents, so they do not want to admit the futility of it. The nonresearchers cannot realistically evaluate the claims, and they have propaganda motives. They want to militarize society, and scare tactics go a
long way in that direction.

The only way biological warfare agents can be used in a significant manner to create disease is to inject them into the victims. If they are then contagious, they go a lot farther. The U.S. military has been focusing on contagious diseases. Since the water runs downhill in that direction, the
agents are or will be used in that manner. With the motives for population
control which the military has acquired, it can be expected to use its bio
agents in that manner.

The point here is not that large countries cannot make a lot of persons
miserable with biological weapons. It's that the small countries and
terrorists cannot do so on their own; and it cannot be done on a large
scale and in some magical way as described in the media.
*********************************************

The best thing for us to do as homeopaths is to be aware of the actual diseases which are being "hyped" as threats. The Merck Manual on-line has good descriptions of these illnesses (which should give you an idea about just how bogus a lot of what is being publicized right now actually is).

If there is some kind of "attack", be assured that most people in north america will present with nothing more than the symptoms of a cold or flu, with some variation. Only those susceptible will be in danger. You would of course take the case as usual and give the appropriate remedy.

Remember: the only truly effective biological warfare ever enacted was in North America--and it targetted the native people in Canada and the US with smallpox. The native people succumbed because they had been robbed of possessions and land on which to grow food to feed themselves; their food sources were eliminated; their water supplies were diverted and their access to clean water for drinking and washing was extremely limited; their entire cultural base was destroyed after wars were waged against them(in the US) and after they were robbed of promised treaty holdings (in Canada); and basically they were pretty much almost dead before being exposed to the virus anyway.

This does not reflect the condition most North Americans live in today. It would take a few decades of war, which would devastate our infrastructure and destroy our own ability to raise food for ourselves--plus a huge decimation of population through the war and a subsequent violent colonization--to create the kind of conditions necessary for biological warfare to have any serious effect on a people.

In fact, North America would have to be turned into...what Afghanistan looks like, or looked like, even before the US started bombing the country almost a week ago.

I think the most valuable remedies we'll need as homeopaths right now will be the ones for hysteria, created by an irresponsible media. A dose of Arsenicum, prescribed on the rubric "fear of impending disease" will do a lot more good for anyone than any nosode at all. I've already upped my stock of the remedy...


Here are some good links for further reference: (this summary, plus the above article, are reprinted from postings on the lyghtforce mailing list. Above URL was submitted by Sheri Nakken; following resource list submitted by Bernie Simon)

Eileen Nauman's site, http://www.medicinegarden.com/.

David Little recommended Homeopathic Therapeutics by Samuel Lilienthal, MD for
remedy differentials.

Divina

[ 12 October 2001: Message edited by: Divina ]

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine

Thanks, this is a very reassuring article and I will print it and share it as far and wide as possible.

I will say, a few people I know did get flu symptoms when they took the Influenzinum- that is something to consider. But it has been by far so much better for us to have used the nosodes- to me it doesn't matter if it is called "classical homeopathy" or isopathy, it is the results I am after. By far the most have benefitted as far as I can tell by visible results and their reports. The homeopath who trained me called himself a classical homeopath, but the description of classical does vary from homeopath to homeopath (see the discussion we had on that term a couple of years ago here on the BB!) We had those who called themselves classical because they did such and such, and others who called themselves classical because they didn't! I think the important thing is that homeopathy works, despite varying methods, and works better than anything else. Hahnemann was a genius, got it right, and his works are vital to study. However, if smallpox did get out and get widespread, I'd want to prevent it. Glad to have found homeopathy for my life!

[ 17 October 2001: Message edited by: Kescah ]

__________________
Kescah

If Anthrax is so hard to get, isolated, not a likely terrorism agent, why are new cases of Anthrax being report every day lately?

Now there is not only 3 in FL, but another case reported in NY. How did these people contract this disease if it is so unlikely for humans to get it in the first place?

Why now, amongst all the latest terrorist activity?

There's something very fishy going on!

I agree, JV, there is something odd about the fact that a major tabloid newspaper's publishing office has been the siting of at least one anthrax case (others were exposed but never actually developed the illness), and now someone at NBC. Gotta say, though, what I remember very vividly about my last trip to Florida was that you could not sneeze without tripping over some kind of military base--naval, airforce, armed force, what have you--throughout the state. Other than the military, I remember Florida is largely agricultural, with plenty of people raising animals on their farms as well as citrus fruit and vegetables. There are 2 likely sources for whatever's actually been "given" to people right there.

Personally, I think most people exposed to anthrax would develop the symptoms of a cold or flu. Possibly even a stomach flu type illness. It would come and go and no one would ever think it would be anything other than a flu. Who would think to take a test for anthrax? Probably no one...unless the person who might contract it were someone severely susceptible, such as someone extremely old and fragile, who smoked for a long time and suffered from something recurrent and chronic, like bronchitis, or emphysema. Then, when things were already so bad, and the lungs were already so compromised, someone might check to see if anthrax were possibly behind the suffering, leaving the population at large to believe that anthrax strikes only rarely, and when it does it is terrible.

But of course, right now, these particularly interesting cases are drawing a lot of attention. I bet they are selling a lot of newspapers for the Enquirer, and plenty of adtime for NBC and other media conglomerates, too. Convenient how that works, huh?

Just came home from the grocer's and drove for about 15 minutes to get home--during the trip, I heard this story repeated 7 times on NPR. Ironically, the scheduled programming which was continually interrupted by this "news" of an NBC employee's skin lesion (singular!) was a call-in show...the topic? Anthrax. Talk about overkill.

If I truly didn't know any better, I would believe people were dying, en masse, of a plague of biblical proportions, the way this is being reported.

As someone very learned said about this topic this morning, "take a deep breath and relax".

Divina

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine

Be assured, talking to all of you and reading your calm & collected opinions about recent & future biochemical attacks has helped tame my fears tremendously.

It is also soothing to encounter your relatively relaxed attitudes about ANY illness or disease and the apparent ease with which to treat it using homeopathy.

Thank you JVolkman for your invitation to learn more about homeopathy. I just may contact you sometime soon regarding the classes.

I have appreciated reading all of your input regarding this subject and I hope others have, as well. Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and opinions.

After reading all your posts. I want to give comments on each and every point which were raised by all our honourable members one by one. I know you don't want to listen. But I have the right to write. Just like copyright law.

Kescah!

You said :

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have immunised my family against flu’s with Influenzinum for 17 years and we have had almost no stomach flu in all that time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It does not mean that Influenzinum is working.

I know 100 of people who did not used Influenzinum in their entire life, but they never faced Influenza. For proving, one should require some clear cut scientific data. What is the procedure you can adopt for experiment Arrange some (at least 20) healthy persons, give them a dose of Influenzinum 1M and after a month or so exposed them against Influenza virus. If at least 80 to 90 % do not acquire the disease then we may say that the Influenzinum 1M is suitable as preventive medicine against Influenza.

You said :

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>We used Phos to prevent infectious hepatitis. When my husband was exposed, and he didnn’t get it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My dear Kescah. Phos is not only a preventive medicine against Hepatitis, but it is a Prophylactic Medicine against any kind of disease e.g. Hepatitis, AIDS, Mumps, Polio etc.

PHOSPHORUS COULD BE USED AS A HOMEOPATHIC VACCINATION AGAINST ANY DISEASE

The reason is that the person who is thinking about receiving immunisation against some disease (Hepatitis or others), the person might have the following symptoms. Fear of harmful infection diseases, that person will certainly show some kind of delusion. He might think that if he once got the infection he will never recover so he will think that vaccination is the best way to protect him against some infectious and life threatening diseases. If you allow me to analyse symptoms of person who is interested for vaccination. That person might have the following symptoms.


FEAR-DISEASE, IMPENDING…..Mind
THOUGHTS-DISEASE …………..Mind
THOUGHTS-FRIGHTFUL……….Mind
CONFUSION- ……………………Mind
FEAR-(In General)………………..Mind
FEAR-INFECTION,OF…………..Mind
ANXIETY-HEALTH, ABOUT…..Mind
COWARDICE ……………………Mind
DELUSIONS-(HALLUCINATIONS)…….Mind
DELUSIONS-SICKNESS,IMAGINES……Mind
DOUBTFUL-RECOVERY,OF……………Mind
SENSITIVE-OVER………………………..Mind

Here is the result after compilation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phos, Calc, Sep, Sulph, Acon, Ars, Ign, Ph-ac, Bry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Phos is No 1. So Phos may be 1st choice for building resistance power in the body against any epidemic or viral disease.

Snoopy

I think you have fear of Dr.MAS. You are addressing to Hans and talking to Dr.MAS. Let’s see.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Snoopy’s post 2nd para: Also, what is the point in giving a remedy for a disease that doesn't exist? What would you think if I said, "I just took Belladonna 10M to prevent Scarlet Fever!" That would be an abuse of a remedy, my body, and the concepts of homeopathy which are that you take a remedy when you're sick, or when there's a disease in the population, based on the totality of symptoms! There is no need for us to emulate allopathy's travesty of what it calls "preventive medicine".
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You used a word ”abuse” of remedy. Actually I have a very bad habit of thinking. Let’s analyse rest of your post. You raised some questions in your above mentioned paragraph. You already gave the answer in your 1st para of your post.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Snoopy’s post 1st para: we KNOW how to treat these diseases! My daughter got a rash disease when she was 4 years old; I gave her Rhus tox, and the next day it was gone! It was gone so fast, I didn't have a chance to find out what it was!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You prescribed Rhus tox to your 4 yrs old daughter having rash disease and you KNOW how to treat these diseases.

All your answer is embeded in this sentence which you quoted at the end of paragraph.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I didn’t have a chance to find out what it was!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This sentence prevails that when you prescribed the remedy to your daughter, at that time you did not any thing about your daughter’s disease. You just prescribed Rhus tox to your daughter without KNOWING the DISEASE. First you said your daughter was suffering from RASH DISEASE, then you said it was gone and you don’t find chance to clarify the disease. Now my respectable and honourable lady. There are approximately 378 rash diseases, 33 kind of rash symptoms (Kent) and 228 remedies for rash. You did not bothered to clarify the disease or kind of rash disease/symptom and prescribed rhus tox out of 228 remedies without KNOWING the disease or kind of symptom. THIS IS CALLED ABUSE OF REMEDY

I think homeopathic vaccination is not abuse of remedy. You completely KNOW THE DISEASE for which you are going to get immunization. You KNOW all the symptoms of a disease, which you are going to treat. You KNOW the remedy very well after symptom’s compilation. Hence vaccination through homeopathy is not abuse of remedy, when you are getting positive response of immunization against certain diseases.

I totally agree with your word “abuse of remedies”. Samuel Hahnemann and their followers also abused the remedies. Here are the list of doctors who abused the remedies and those who used to abuse remedies are called …………. You know better then me because you used quite hard words.

Scarlet Fever &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Belladona 1M (Practiced by Samuel Hahnemann)
Sore Throat &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Psorinum 1M (Allen Suggested this option)
Styes &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Psorinum 1M (Allen recommended this option)
Styes (Recurrent) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Sulphur 1M (Kent Preventive Prescription)
Measles &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Pulsatilla (Samuel Hahnemann also tried this option)
Mumps &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Parotidnum 30 (Dr. Wadia)
Virus of Any kind &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Kali mur (Dr.MAS)
Aids &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Streptococcin (Dr.MAS)
Small Pox &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Malandrium 10 (Schmidt)
Fever (Intermittent) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Ars a, Chin s, Sulph (Clark)
Hydrophoia &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Hydrophobinum, Scutellaria (Rafinesque)
Appendicits &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Psor 1M (Dr.MAS)
Abortion (3rd Months) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Sabina 1M (William Boericke)
Abortion (7th Months) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Sepia 1M (By Pierre Schmidt)
Abortion (Fright) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Acon Nap CM (Clark’s Interest)
Abortion (Threatened) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Sec cor (Clark’s suggestion)
Expected Convulsions (After Delivery) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Amvl Nit (Allen)
Abortion (Habitual) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Apis Mel (Credit to Clarke)
Premature Labor &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Aurum (Anshutz)
Miscarriage &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Vib Op (Boericke’s interest)
Abortion (Uterin Displacement) &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Vib Prun (Clarke)
Prevent Death During Delivery &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Cimic (Clarke)
Tonsilitis &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Psor 1M (Allen)
Poliomyelitis &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Physostigma 200 (Opinion of Weir)
Poliomyelitis &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Lathyrus 1M (Dr. W. K. Bond)
Preventive medicine against Dr.MAS Phos 1M (Dr.MAS)

Here is the remedy which have the ability to compel any virus to go to incubation period and stop producing disease symptoms and replication. VANADIUM (Dr.MAS) Vanadium has not only the ability to kill the virus but after four to eight week of treatment, the virus will be gone to incubation period. After that the virus will not harm the body organ and as well as the patient and will not produce any viral symptom. If you want to kill the virus use KALI MURIATICUM.

Be remain a witness only

--------------------

Man changes every minute from his birth to his death. Day changes into night and night changes into day. Seasons change every year. Emotions change, moods change, ideas change, theories change and even the medical ways are changing with the passage of time. At one time Homoeopathy was in full swing in the USA and at present it is nearly extinct. Only Scrichman is there. One out 50. Orthodoxy is changing into revisionism. Hahnemannian Homeopathy is changing into Scientific Homeopathy. Yet we are fighting over dolls like children instead of ACCEPTING new ideas and approach. New principles are making their own space. Whether you will ACCEPT or not. They are affecting environment. The mission of Hahnemann in discovering Homoeopathy was to cure mildly, quickly and permanently. So you can adopt any procedure for this purpose.

CHANGE is the law of Nature.

Dr.MAS
Chief Executive
World Homeopathic Computer Club www.homeoweb.net
drmastalk@doctor.com
drmasvoice@hotmail.com

Hi Dr. Mas,

You said:


It does not mean that Influenzinum is working.

I know 100 of people who did not used Influenzinum in their entire life, but they never faced Influenza. For proving, one should require some clear cut scientific data. What is the procedure you can adopt for experiment Arrange some (at least 20) healthy persons, give them a dose of Influenzinum 1M and after a month or so exposed them against Influenza virus. If at least 80 to 90 % do not acquire the disease then we may say that the Influenzinum 1M is suitable as preventive medicine against Influenza.

I say:

I had a husband, 3 stepsons, 2 sons and a daughter, and the baby boy. We had all had the stomach flu regularly all our lives. I clearly remember that, it was no fun. It suddenly stopped when we began to use the influ, in all of us, for the last 17 years. No coincidence there, that is scientific enough for me!

You said :
My dear Kescah. Phos is not only a preventive medicine against Hepatitis, but it is a Prophylactic Medicine against any kind of disease e.g. Hepatitis, AIDS, Mumps, Polio etc.

PHOSPHORUS COULD BE USED AS A HOMEOPATHIC VACCINATION AGAINST ANY DISEASE

The reason is that the person who is thinking about receiving immunisation against some disease (Hepatitis or others), the person might have the following symptoms. Fear of harmful infection diseases, that person will certainly show some kind of delusion. He might think that if he once got the infection he will never recover so he will think that vaccination is the best way to protect him against some infectious and life threatening diseases. If you allow me to analyse symptoms of person who is interested for vaccination. That person might have the following symptoms.


FEAR-DISEASE, IMPENDING…..Mind
THOUGHTS-DISEASE …………..Mind
THOUGHTS-FRIGHTFUL……….Mind
CONFUSION- ……………………Mind
FEAR-(In General)………………..Mind
FEAR-INFECTION,OF…………..Mind
ANXIETY-HEALTH, ABOUT…..Mind
COWARDICE ……………………Mind
DELUSIONS-(HALLUCINATIONS)…….Mind
DELUSIONS-SICKNESS,IMAGINES……Mind
DOUBTFUL-RECOVERY,OF……………Mind
SENSITIVE-OVER………………………..Mind

Here is the result after compilation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phos, Calc, Sep, Sulph, Acon, Ars, Ign, Ph-ac, Bry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Phos is No 1. So Phos may be 1st choice for building resistance power in the body against any epidemic or viral disease.

Are you saying that we were treating a m/e problem and not a real threat of hepatitis? I am not sure what you are saying. My husband had eaten at a restaurant where one of the cooks had hepatitis, and the authorities broadcast that everyone who had eaten there should get a hepatitis injection. We opted to see our homeopath who gave him the Phos. It was not a mental/emotional condition, but following the advice of the public health department. Whether it prevented anything, I don't know. But he did not get sick, whereas when three of the children ate at a restaurant with the same situation some years earlier, they all three got hepatitis. It is highly contagious.

Are you saying that if you took Phos in an epidemic it would prevent illness sincerely? Or just the emotional hysteria?

Dr. Mas, I have just read your other thread discussing immunizations, and now I believe that you are serious that Phos is prophylactic for all epidemic conditions, but I don't understand why. What is the relation to the m/e symptoms you related?

[ 13 October 2001: Message edited by: Kescah ]

__________________
Kescah

Kescah, here's the answer to your question:

By using Phosphorus on a patient which is anxious and fearful about an impending disease, you are not "vaccinating" against anything.

You are not using the remedy as a prophylactic for any disease--you are using it as a remedy for a delusion: that a disease is impending.

If it works (its a big polycrest remedy, and it is being used as a kind of "blanket"--not very good prescribing, really) it will calm the patient down so he/she can get on with things without being so freaked out (and eventually weakened) at the thought of sickness. This lessens susceptibility.

See the difference? Its why I say people who are having anxiety about anthrax would do far better with, say, a dose of Arsenicum than they would with any "nosode" taken before there is any sign of disease. The problem is not the disease: it is the anxious, fearful, exhausted, numbed mental state of the patient who is terrified that he will suffer the disease. That mental state weakens the patient and could make him/her susceptible...to anything!

As for that old story about Hahnmann using Belladonna as a prophylactic against scarlet fever--he did so ONLY after treating a sufficient number of cases IN AN EPIDEMIC to determine a Genus Epidemicus remedy protocol for the disease. (To learn more about Genus Epidemicus prescribing, read the Chronic Diseases). Hahnemann was not so much using the belladonna as a "prophylactic" as he was concluding that the particular epidemic of scarlet fever had already dynamically influenced the population in which he was working. He was careful to determine the perimeters of the epidemic--was it limited to that place? That time? Was the same disease occuring somewhere else in the world?, etc. etc. Clearly, everyone in that place at that time had been exposed and would be affected--if not physically, then dynamically--by the scarlet fever. Therefore, everyone needed the appropriate remedy (to that specific epidemic) to treat the disease.

Like any genus epidemicus remedy for any particular illness, many cases must be taken and treated before a pattern emerges to elucidate the epidemic; so, belladonna may have worked very well in Hahnemann's experience for that epidemic of Scarlet Fever--but it may not always be the most effective remedy in any future epidemic of the disease. That will have to be determined at the time.

This is a much more complex understanding of the concept of "epidemic" than what you would imagine results in "vaccinations".

Divina

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine

Thank you Divina,

That's what I thought, that Dr. Mas was saying that my husband's mental state was being treated. And I can see that it would help to prevent illness. Let me ask a question on that, though. Since my husband was not having an emotional reaction (that I detected,) and he asked for a prophylactic based on the suggestion of the Public Health, and also due to the fact that my husband has never yet been a Phosphorus patient at any other time,was the Phos then possibly given as a general prophylactic against hepatitis- of use in other than Phos patients?

I do understand that constitutional treatment would help prevent illness. And that fear could contribute to illness.

I understand Genus Epidemicus perscribing.

Thanks for your help!

__________________
Kescah

I have no way of knowing what would have happened in your husband's case.

I haven't seen much literature in homeopathic books about prescribing prophylactically for a disease--unless it happened to be during a particular epidemic, as I said.

It could be your husband's mind was put at ease by taking something--anything--so the dose could have worked as a placebo. More likely, he got a dose of phosphorus and experienced some small changes as a result--nothing too alarming or disturbing, nothing really noticeable. Or, the dose of phos did nothing because your husband simply wasn't resonating with the remedy and potency used.

There is no way to tell. That is why this is not considered homeopathy: in order for this to be scientific, you have to be able to tell "what happened" in cases like this one. The best you can do here is conclude on a deduction. That alone disqualifies it from the definition of homeopathy.

Divina

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine