Hi SImon,
My answer that you read (before it was edited by me!) was to 'Syed Ali' who said:
"Peter's medicine PC1 is the combination of more than one remedies but peter proved them as single remedy hence homeopaths are calling it a single remedy."

My edited answer to that was:
Hi Syed Ali, Whatever information is available about PC1 is on the website. MAybe you can read that for yourself?
There is no proving and it is not made from any material substance.
Eg; the remedies Luna, Xrays.


I'm a little confused by what is read by people on the list and by those how come to this site (Otherhealth.com). Maybe Jonh can clarify sometime.
To answer what you asked:
Thank you for your intelligent and considered reply.

To clarify, for those that need it, the question implied, fairly
obviously, was whether there was any information that others may have
been privy to that wasn't on the site,
perhaps from those that have worked with him?

regards

I'm relieved you considered it "considered'! Syed Ali seems to differ very much on that. :)
Actually we have been in touch with Peter Chappel. He sent us his remedy free as we have been working on helping him get a proving on it as well as doing some controlled clinical studies.

the remedy, as David Hartly seems to have an idea, has an energy source. IT is what Peter likes to call a "pandemic" remedy. It is based on a collective energy pattern of the AIds syndrome. I may not be explaining this very well, but if you are in personal contact with him and when he is a little free he would be able to give a better explanation.

The problem is that his ORIGINAL website that gave a lot of detailed and information about all this has been very much editied and changed 2-3 times in the last year. I believe this is a direct result of what he has had to face with the multinational drug companies and vested interests who want to suppress anything that will interfere with the mindless selling/distribuytion and cocktailing of allopathic medicines that is going on. I think someone is advising him accordingly from the medico-legal perspective.

I hope this answers you somewhat.
Warm regards,
Dr. leela

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

Hi Mr. Syed Ali,
Maybe you can read my response to Simon above. Do I sound blank?

You're impressions could do with a lot of modifying - both on Peter Chappel, his remedy as well as me.
regards,
dr. leela

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

HEre is a disccusion on it that washeld more than a year back.
A lot of fighting and scepticism then as well.
HOpe it is of interest.
dr. Leela

Treatment of HIV/AIDS

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

PC1 is not a combination of other remedies
Because I have the experience of homeopaths and people generally jumping to conclusions as to what these new remedies are, seeking to put them into boxes they already know, rather than the more challenging task of opening a brand new box, here is what they are and what they are not:



There is no physical content, no physical source, they are not made from animal, plant or mineral sources, nor is it radionic or similar. It’s a completely new method.

This is unlike other medicines of homeopathy that are made from plant, mineral or biological sources. This is not an immune boosting herbal/mineral combination. It is a completely new invention, and nothing like it has been made before.

They cannot be classified as either a drug or an herb and should not be confused with such treatments. They do NOT fight a virus like a drug. Herbs and vitamins from plants and minerals do boost immunity, whilst they are taken regularly and do benefit patients, but they don’t change the ability of the immune system to manage and control diseases after use is stopped.

These new remedies do change the ability of the immune system to effectively manage the disease.

Each remedy is made as a mirror image of the disease, achieved by a new design concept. Initially a abstract mathematical formulation is constructed to represent the totality of the disease, spiritual, psychologically and physically, which is later transformed mathematically and made into a electromagnetic signal. This is then imprinted onto water to make the remedy and then transferred into a dropper bottle or into dry granules.

This is both new technology and cutting edge science. It’s a new paradigm, a new concept, a new invention. It acts to inform the macro-immune system as to how to manage and control the disease. Also key parts of the process of designing the remedy are currently a trade secret.

These new remedies are essentially a new style of remedy, having only pure energy content, and no physical substance at all, so are inherently safe. If you follow the instructions, recovery criteria, expert supervision etc everything will be fine. However if you abuse them, there are no negative effects except the aggravations might be severe (see also aggravations above).
It is believed to be the first time that this method of making a medicine by design principle has been used. This is then a truly unique advance.

What potency is it?
I prefer to avoid potency, as it’s a very unsatisfactory subject with no satisfying conclusions. Also the way homeopaths relate to potency is primitive

Designed remedies are a lot more powerful in my experience, and complete, so they do the job required.

I then just use repetition until the action needed is complete. This means stopping at the aggravation or keeping going through it, as experience dictates, or using it at every sign of relapse or as needed.

As I experience it, potency is not then a consideration. If the remedy stops acting, it’s more likely it’s the wrong remedy or something basic is wrong, like the patient has stopped taking it.

Below are some of my other reservations about potency.
• The effectiveness of a remedy is due to its potential (vital force), its healing currents, its power, its frequency domains, and its inner harmony to state just a few parameters. This is equivalent to volts, amps, power, frequency and coherence when describing electricity. To use just volts to describe electricity is very limiting and very incomplete. Likewise using potency to describe remedy strength is very incomplete.


• Potency is not a level playing field. When Puff Adder is potentised, that’s hundreds of times more toxic than Lycopodium in the natural state, how could it be that they are equal strengths? Where is the baseline in potency? As far as I can see it does not exist. There is no equal starting point.


• I feel fairly certain that the energy available from the remedy does not increase by potency. The volts=potency increases, but the power does not. I also feel intuitively that power is more important than potency.

• Maybe other healing is needed to unblock the way for any remedy that is truly indicated but not working, its not potency. It could be some sacral/cranial adjustment for example is needed.

• Often homeopaths say the remedy stopped working so they raised or lowered the potency, but that could be just the effect of repetition.

• When my new remedy is used for Chronic Fatigue for example, the first response of the homeopaths is that ‘the remedy’ the patient needs is now clear. With so many ceeds (chronic effects of epidemic diseases) - there are as many as there are epidemic diseases, homeopathy and all individual healing is like working through fog. Treating the disease is clearing the fog.

• We use any impediment to say it’s the wrong potency. But is that our real experience? Or is it that after the remedy works, then stops, that often no other potency works?

• Could it also be that the way the remedy is made is insufficient, that the potentisation process has not revealed the full power of the remedy? I think my new remedy making procedure create full power remedies.

• Could it be true that if the remedy is made at full power, any potency is effective?

While the above is by no means a conclusive set of arguments, I hope I have sown the seeds of doubt in the idea that potency is understood.

With these designer remedies I think the power is there, and potentisation could and will reduce that. Certainly I have feedback to that effect. I can’t be sure, but since it’s a top down approach, from spirit into matter, whereas potency is a bottom up approach, from matter into spirit, I think this new approach starts at the strongest energy and potentisation does weaken it.
This is for two reasons, maybe more. First, potentisation does not, in my brief clinical experience with these new remedies, reveal the full spectrum of the potentised remedies. Secondly, I don’t think potentisation is optimised in any way and must therefore be well below is possibilities. I think potentisation is incomplete and inadequate as a process. This can easily to demonstrated by using one of my new remedies in a well defined case where a potentised remedy has failed in any potency, yet is still indicated.
Peter Chappell

I would like deeply considered opinions on this idea below


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.

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
So, given these known relationships, is it still possible that there are two fundamentally separate things going on, mind states and ceeds?
If so, why is it we have the two joined together in homeopathy?

Is there a direct connection between mind states and pathological states?
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.

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.

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.

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.

If remedies only produce stresses upon the physical body, even if the pattern of functioning was predetermined to some extent by the ceed, without the ceed, would there be any pathology?

Syed.....

With no offence to you... When someone puts an article up quoting "homeopathy" and then offers something (be it good or be it bad) under the auspices of homeopathy, I can totally understand how somoneone will start (you use the word "jumping to conclusions") analyzing that and try to understand how it can possibly be related.

Perhaps if he advertised it as a Holistic, Wholistic Miracle cure.. or something of that nature, then people would accept it as it is instead of trying to fit this square peg into a round hole.

I become very defensive when we propigate holisitc items as being homeopathic. There's enough confusion out there. Call it what it is rather than calling it something and complaining that people are trying to catagorize it.

With due respect,

Timothy Snider

Quote:

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

Peter,

This really doesn't make sense to me at all....

You refer to the ceeds of disease and the archetypal relationships... I hope you are not comparing these archetypal relationships to people who have contracted the HIV virus.

I have worked in the field for a long time, and being a gay male myself I don't possibly see any connection between the way that a gay male contracts the virus and a drug user on the street. And how you could possibly infuse the similar archeypes into a remedial solution that will react with both people's vital force the same way.

I'm not doubting that your Miracle remedy might work. My point is that you are labelng it as homeopathy and it's not... by all definitions it's not homeopathic in principle. Maybe similar. But then vaccinations are similar to homoepathy too.

You are trying to bring rhetoric into your definition of homeopathy by using terms like "designer" remedy and then applying "it"... whatever "it" is in a homeopathic fashion and claiming "it" as homeopathic.

And as far as your arguments on potentization.... potentization is homeopathy... end of discussion... I understand your factors, but if you read the organon and chronic diseases - which were handed down by the founder so we would have a baseline understanding of the homeopathic principle and the homeopathic cure - then you will understand why potentization is homeopathy...

If you wish to come out of the etheric and discuss what is in your remedy other than mathatmatical formulas imprinted on a medium and then infused with hope and good will.. then perhaps we can have an discussion on homoepathic principles as it pertains to PC1 and 2... but as long as your discussion is strictly etheric then your claims need to be that it is wholistic or metaphysical in action... not that it's homeopathic.

Timothy Snider

Hello Peter
I need to really talk all of this through with others to get my head around
it. A lot of what you say sounds exciting, it is resonating at a deeper level than my newly qualified status (homoeopath) / mind set can fully absorb. Do you have experience of remedies causing pathology? And does this mean that we should not be using them?

You are right about us not understanding potency. I have graduated with a variety of theories. What completely blew up everything was a very successful homeopath on the last day saying that it did not matter if we got the wrong remedy / potency...Intent is what counts, we ARE the healers..bloody hell, did I really spent 10k and 4 years to be told that on the last day? And yet, when my new homoeopath prescribes, she gives me 3 pills, take one every hour, all 1M and I get a different reaction with each one. Took a 30 daily for 2 weeks and not so much as a slight proving..So you are right, we do not understand potency, and I have to trust my instinct.. As for CEED when we are conceived...I heard the voices of 5 of my 6 pregnancies just before any sperm was released. So, I am pro abortion, but I heard my babies voices, and I knew that even when we were using contraception, they wanted to come in. I also knew their sex (of all 6) without ultrasound etc. they told me. So whose generations were coming through? When I relax my mind, I know certain things, when I focus on it or question, I become confused. I know of people who can send healing energy, I've experienced it with one of my children.

Your maths equation only bothers me because I See it s such a masculine need to categorise and classify. how many female homoepaths have written on miasm layers, classifications, style of prescribing etc??

Anyway, I am wittering and you are a busy man. I salute the work you are doing, thank you for sharing it with us. You have given me much to think about and I hope that you keep us informed of your works progress. We are all energy!

Good luck, kindest thoughts and thanks

Caroline L Spear

PS I have not yet had an AIDS patient..I have only briefly read your web page and need to read it in more depth, but the great thing for me is, if I am not confident about prescribing a remedy, I know that I can turn to yours, equally, my patient may prefer to choose yours directly , and that is fine by me!
www.Free-Range-Education.Co.Uk The Book About Home Education :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by caroline spear I need to really talk all of this through with others to get my head around it A lot of what you say sounds exciting, it is resonating at a deeper level than my newly qualified status (homoeopath) / mind set can fully absorb. Do you have experience of remedies causing pathology? And does this mean that we should not be using them? You are right about us not understanding potency

Who's "us"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by caroline spear I have graduated with a variety of theories. What completely blew up everything was a very successful homeopath on the last day saying that it did not matter if we got the wrong remedy / potency...Intent is what counts, we ARE the healers..bloody hell, did I really spent 10k and 4 years to be told that on the last day?

Utter rubbish. I've had a number of "very successful homeopaths" with all the "intent" in the world MIS-prescribe for me. The correct remedy is the correct remedy. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by caroline spear And yet, when my new homoeopath prescribes, she gives me 3 pills, take one every hour, all 1M and I get a different reaction with each one. Took a 30 daily for 2 weeks and not so much as a slight proving..So you are right, we do not understand potency, and I have to trust my instinct..

"Instinct" only works with a long trail of experience behind it. If not, it's called "guessing".