Morbillinum and the development of Nosodes

I'm afraid I've set the bar very high by choosing to talk about Morbillinum [1], as it's a special product, belonging to the nosode class - i.e. a dynamization of a pathological product. It is impossible to rationally prescribe this class of drugs without having fully understood homeopathy, otherwise we would regress to the level of magical thinking, which would consist in giving the identical to treat the identical.

Introduction

All symptoms

This kind of simplistic view has even been elevated to a system such as "sequential therapy", which consists of administering series of dynamized vaccines to the patient, on the assumption that these injected substances alone would be responsible for all ills, and that administration of the vaccine in dynamized form would magically act like a stroke of eraser to somehow "remove" the vaccine from the organism. This ignores the fundamental notion of the totality of symptoms, which includes physical constitution, intellectual temperament, etiology, miasmas, suppressions, all likely causes, events, chronic diseases, medications, immunizations, iatrogenic diseases, traumas and their signs and symptoms, which are reviewed in their order of appearance (Organon § 5, 6,7,8). To complete the picture, we add the patient's objective signs and subjective symptoms, as well as the search for obstacles to recovery.

Susceptibility

Secondly, these practices misuse the notion of individual susceptibility, a fundamental concept completely unknown to conventional medicine, which still believes, for example, that mere contact with a viral particle can make you ill. When individual susceptibility is innate, we speak of idiosyncrasy: "fatty foods make me sick", "I can't stand having my head exposed to the cold", and so on. But the abuse of chemical substances, whether sea salt, tobacco, a vaccine or any allopathic drug introduced into the body on a daily basis, will eventually induce susceptibility to the said substance [2]. In this case, administration of the homeopathically prepared, i.e. dynamized, substance will almost certainly provoke a strong flare-up of symptoms, a reaction on the part of the vital force that will delight the half-homeopath who prescribed it, seeing it as proof of the patient's recovery. Some patients will even be delighted to see themselves so affected, thinking that this is the manifestation of the drug's curative action. But in reality, all that has happened is a violent experiment with no benefit for the patient.

Vaccine

A third point, which will have escaped no one's notice, is that administering a pathological product to treat the same pathology is akin to the idea of a vaccine. Knowingly or unknowingly, all doctors who practise drug prophylaxis practice homeopathy. It's by giving people an attenuated disease similar to the one we want to preserve them from, a real medicinal disease, that we immunize them against it. In this case, by giving a healthy man a benign condition similar to smallpox, we immunize him against the disease.

It all began with variolization, a technique common in the Greek community of Constantinople in the ^18th century, probably imported from Circassia [3], but already known to the Chinese. By exposing very young children to smallpox, it was hoped to attenuate the impact of the disease, which was likely to develop benignly. This notion of attenuating identical disease by way of prophylaxis is an admittedly monstrous form of homeopathy through identicality. There was about a 1-in-50 chance of dying from it. It was in 1721 that Lady Montagu, wife of the English ambassador to Constantinople, introduced the procedure to the upper echelons of English society[4] and tried variolization for measles and even syphilis, [5] using convicts to conduct experiments. Here we find the dubious ethics of the allopathic approach.

On May 14, 1796, Edward Jenner vaccinated James Philips, the 8-year-old child of his gardener, with cowpox[6] and, a few weeks later, variolized him, deliberately exposing him to the wild virus of smallpox. Jenner's questionable ethics would later be exacerbated when it came to maintaining the cowpox pustule from arm to arm: never mind, children from orphanages would be used. The fatal risk drops to around 1/200, but for the first time the notion of population and related statistics appears. Once politics and industry are involved, the whole thing becomes a veritable ideology that sweeps away everything in its path[7] The term "vaccination" is fraught with meaning, for by dint of injections under the pretext of prevention, we are really talking about the gradual transformation of humans into submissive, reactive cattle, and considered as such by the authorities - as the Covid affair has shown us.

Right from the start, we find the seeds of the totalitarian messianism of classical medicine: it doesn't matter who the individual is, as long as "science" progresses - everything must bow to the ideal to be achieved and imposed on all. In fact, when I say "science", I also mean the advent of the first large-scale health business[8]. After two centuries of fraud [9], coercion and other manipulations, culminating in the worldwide apotheosis of Covid and the crime against humanity of forced injection of experimental gene treatments, I ask [10]: can anything good come out of allopathy?

Arthur Koestler had already answered this question in Le zéro et l'infini : "There are only two conceptions of human morality, and they are at opposite poles. One is Christian and humanitarian, declaring the individual sacred, and asserting that the rules of arithmetic should not apply to human units - which, in our equation, represent either zero or infinity. The other conception starts from the fundamental principle that a collective end justifies all means, and not only allows but demands that the individual be subordinated and sacrificed to the community in any case - which can dispose of him either as a guinea pig to be used in an experiment, or as a lamb to be offered in sacrifice."

Time to talk homeopathy

Now that I've got it right, I need to stitch it up! But how to describe such a vast and complex image in a few words? Homeopathy can only be called such if its cardinal principles are observed:

1) Like cures like,

2) single dose,

3) minimum quantity,

4) the dynamized remedy.

Like treats like, dynamization, non-material contagion

The reason why homeopathy - which was undoubtedly pioneered by Hippocrates - has been applied only marginally since the dawn of time is that the administration to a patient of a substance capable of producing a state similar to his own causes an absolutely terrible reaction of aggravation. As we saw above, the subject then has a particular affinity, an intense susceptibility to the substance capable of mimicking his condition. Literally, the totality of the patient and the potential of the drug attract each other with extraordinary force. This phenomenon escapes common sense, because routine allopathic administration of substances that have nothing to do with the patient's condition does not provoke this kind of reaction, and large, ever-increasing doses have to be administered.

Only Hahnemann had the idea of attenuating matter by successive fractionations, thus discovering the world we would today call energy, through this process of dynamization. An eminent chemist who kept up a correspondence with Lavoisier, Hahnemann was well aware that he was discovering a new continent. The Founder writes (note to §249):

"Experience proves that it is almost impossible to reduce the dose of the perfectly homeopathic medicine sufficiently for it not to produce a noticeable improvement in the disease for which it is appropriate (§160 and §279)."

He writes further (§269):

"The homeopathic system of medicine develops for its own special use an entirely new and hitherto untried procedure, which releases and liberates the immaterial medicinal virtues inherent in raw substances. By this means alone, these substances acquire medicinal virtues and an immeasurably penetrating efficacy, even those which in their raw state show no sign of any medicinal action on the human body".

Homeopathy transforms the worst poisons into medicines. It unifies the notions of disease and medicine, since medicine is merely an artificial disease. For example, the dynamization of infectious germs transforms them into a new medicinal substance, correlated with the signs and symptoms of the disease they cause.

Totality of symptoms and vital force

The homeopathic drug produces a dynamic contagion - i.e., energetic and immaterial - felt by the patient's vital force, because there is a predisposition to feel this influx[11]. Thus, a toxin administered in weight doses poisons everyone; the dynamic signal is only perceived if it meets the right conformation in the patient. This is the famous question "Does alcohol make you drunk?", which cannot be answered without the two interrelated factors of alcohol quantity and the subject's susceptibility.

These fundamental dynamic notions - first expounded by Hahnemann around 1796! - are still rarely taught, let alone understood. It is regrettable that few doctors develop their own sense of observation in front of their patients - they are even taught that their point of view is worthless. 12] Yet the notion of a totality of symptoms makes perfect sense: when a person is ill, whether acutely or chronically, a totality of symptoms presents itself to the observer. It is made up of :

• Common symptoms of acute illness - acute myasma in our jargon
• Common symptoms of chronic active miasm (see below)
• Possibly pathognomonic signs of the disease[13].
• Objective and subjective symptoms specific to the patient - not forgetting symptoms reported by family and friends, and
• The patient's characteristic signs[14].

The first question that springs to mind is: what are we to think of a medicine that arrogates to itself the right to treat a single symptom extracted from this totality? This arbitrary approach is compatible with the Taylorization of an industry, but runs counter to the science that the proponents of today's medicine claim to believe in.

The second is more subtle: if such a totality exists and is maintained as such, then it must be attributed to a fundamental cause upstream of the organs. In other words, the presence of a totality of symptoms automatically leads to the notion of an energetically disturbed vital force. The signs and symptoms we observe are produced by this energetic disharmony, which is not directly perceptible - illness is the indirect imprint of an energetic disharmony. 15] Corollary: only a dynamic influx can truly heal a pathology.

A third question arises here, but it goes beyond the scope of our article: if the organism "deems" it useful to maintain a given set of symptoms, what is the overall impact of suppressing one or more of them through an artificial chemical process?

Hostile dynamic influx

We've finally reached the heart of our Morbillinum presentation! Physics has accustomed us to the notion of duality between wave and particle. Depending on the experiment, the same observed object behaves in a wave-like or corpuscular way - as in the case of light, for example.

The old, purely materialistic approach to medicine still considers the germ alone to be responsible for disease. The work of the late Professor Montagnier, confirming Hahnemann's discoveries, has shown what we call the dynamic aspect of contagion: a germ is also associated with a dynamic imprint. We call this imprint miasm - a Greek word meaning "filth".

On the acute level, countless living organisms "vibrate" with their energetic imprint, these are the acute miasmas. Montagnier has shown that a germ-containing solution carries a vibration that can be recorded and re-emitted, making possible the digital transmission of bacterial DNA. 16] It is highly probable, although I can't prove it, that it is first the dynamic influx that is felt when we fall ill, and then the germ develops in the organism. This is an elegant way of explaining the notion of incubation period. It also explains how a dynamized dose of Bryonia, for example, can render a patient perfectly apyretic in just a few hours, whereas all the blood cultures were teeming with pneumococci. A whole new dynamic - quantum? - needs to be created.

On the chronic level, Hahnemann showed that all chronic diseases result from the transmission to offspring of the energetic imprint of infections that the organism is never able to rid itself of. Tuberculosis, syphilis, certain forms of gonorrhea and the suppression of scabies represent the 4 known chronic miasms. Not content with revolutionizing medicine, Hahnemann created the first form of epidemiology in history.

A patient of tuberculosis descent, for example, will be mentally unstable, with an aversion to routine and a strong need for change. Physically, he or she will be thin but with a healthy appetite, prone to allergies, and now to autoimmune pathologies. All these symptoms are common to this chronic miasm. Acutely, an illness that rapidly progresses to seriousness indicates the activity of a chronic tubercular miasm. In this way, the chronic miasm, grafted onto the vital force like an energetic parasite, is able to influence the course of an acute phenomenon.

As is often the case, the distinction between acute and chronic is purely academic. The invasion of the organism by an acute miasm can leave a permanent imprint. This creates an energetic stratum which expresses itself through its own symptoms, and which prevents any progress towards healing even if the indicated medication is administered for the totality of the symptoms. This is where nosodes shine, with Morbillinum at the forefront, as it was not uncommon for severe measles to either cause complications or induce a chronic condition from which the patient never recovered.

The development of nosodes [17]

One of the direct consequences of Hahnemann's publication of Chronic Diseases (1828) was the development of the use of miasmas as dynamized remedies for the treatment and prevention of disease. Shortly after the publication of the book, Hering carried out the first proving of Psorinum on himself. The contents of a scabies blister were thus the first nosode to be experimented with.

Hering is credited with a major expansion of homeopathic Materia Medica. Dudgeon [18] reports that Hering created seven new categories of homeopathic remedies.

1. The use of venoms from insects, snakes and other venomous creatures (animal poisons).
2. The use of remedies obtained from miasmas (nosodes).
3. The introduction of dynamized miasmas and morbid secretions taken directly from the patient (auto-nosodes).
4. The use of homologous organs, tissues and secretions as remedies (sarcodes).
5. The use of products prepared from dynamized miasmas in the prevention of infectious diseases (Homeo prophylaxis by nosodes).
6. The study of the periodic table and the chemical and nutritional elements present in the human body (biochemical relationships).
7. Hering suggested dynamizing seeds of weeds or dangerous plants to destroy them, and using dynamizations of animals or insects to eliminate and prevent infestations of these dangerous species (public health measures).

One of the most important things to remember is the "heroic" nature of nosodes. They are diseases responsible for millions of deaths, and their picture is well known. For this reason, we have at our disposal a wealth of information on such disorders, as they are diseases of frequent etiology and similar symptoms, affecting large groups of populations. A study of epidemic infectious diseases provides a great deal of information, as they behave like a natural nosode experiment.

Dr. Swan, who experimented with Medorrhinum, was asked whether it was legitimate to use nosodes that had not been experimented with in the homeopathic sense. His answer was that miasmas had achieved a natural proving of infectious diseases on a very wide variety of constitutions. Consequently, miasms are responsible for pathological states that are similar to what they cure, including their rarer complications.

For this reason, a remedy like Morbillinum (the measles nosode) has cured meningitis, lupus erythematosus, conjunctivitis, and spontaneous abortions when symptoms are pleasant. All these conditions are similar to the complications caused by the measles miasm in the general population.

We prescribe nosodes on the basis of the "natural" experience of the disease they provoke, but we need to test them on healthy subjects, in dynamized form, to know their full potential, their complete picture. Unfortunately, this has not yet been done, not by a long shot!

Hering had noticed that certain symptomatic features of nosodes were related to their indications. He defined the calling symptoms of nosodes as follows:

• Never well since such an infection. Sometimes a person never fully recovers from an acute illness resulting in constitutional symptoms. The effect of this acute miasm remains imprinted in the vital force, forming a layer of "disharmony" in the defense system. This new, stronger stratum represses the constitutional image and impedes healing.
• Lack of response to well-indicated remedies: well-chosen remedies fail to act, suspend their action, or merely modify symptoms.
• Permanent change in symptoms.
• Fragmentary images of constitutional remedies: sometimes, there are very few symptoms on which to prescribe. This situation occurs in defective, pauci-symptomatic cases, where a strong miasmatic layer has suppressed the constitution's ability to show symptoms. Apart from pathological and miasmatic signs, there are few elements on which to base a constitutional prescription. This condition may be due to a combination of traumas, miasms, suppressions and adverse drug reactions.
• Regional miasmatic signs with few characteristic symptoms. The case is so blurred that it boils down to local manifestations with no characteristic features that would allow a conventional medication to be prescribed.

Indications for Morbillinum [19].

I hope you'll forgive me for the above, as I feel it's essential to understand what we're doing when we prescribe a nosode. I can't stand it any longer when homeopathy is reduced to some kind of "alternative medicine" or other galimatias on the level of Madame Soleil's horoscope? If homeopathy finally brings the long-awaited revolution in medical treatment, it demands rigour of mind, perseverance in work and intellectual honesty.

Prophylaxis of epidemic measles

Before mass vaccination - and I can't dwell on that barbarity - Morbillinum was an easy-to-prescribe preventive with excellent results. Its administration to an entire class prevented the first case from contaminating the others. Here, Morbillinum satisfies susceptibility to the acute measles miasm, which it closely resembles. With epidemic susceptibility extinguished, natural disease can no longer affect the vital force. The indication for nosodes as prophylactics is absolutely immense.

Neurological sequelae or complications of measles

Everyone will have understood that the genius of the drug is related to the after-effects of measles, in cases where the acute illness has had such a strong impact on the organism that its imprint remains.

It may be the only drug capable of achieving results in SSPE (subacute sclerosing encephalitis). Early symptoms of SSPE may include poor school performance, memory loss, temper tantrums, dizziness, insomnia and hallucinations. Sudden convulsions of the arm, head or body may follow. It's a dreadful condition with no known medicine in old medicine. In homeopathic literature, there are proven cases of recovery with Morbillinum.

Guillain-Barré syndrome Guillain-Barré syndrome is one of the classic complications of MMR vaccines, for example, and is an excellent indication for Morbillinum, provided we can reach the hospitalized patient.

The cerebral tropism of the virus makes Morbillinum the drug of choice whenever a child develops a fever fever after vaccination. In this case, it should be prescribed systematically, and there's a chance of curative action where ordinary paracetamol will only mask the fever.

Despite the industry's titanic efforts to deny it, the relationship between autism and MMR is absolutely clear. I recommend reading Robert Kennedy Jr.'s website, Children Health Defense, to learn more about the subject. In these appalling family tragedies, the standard narrative is as follows: the child developed a fever after his first MMR, and the allopath on duty prescribed Doliprane. Nothing helped, the fever continued, so much so that at booster time the child was still feverish. Once the second injection was given, the fever disappeared, convulsions occurred and the child began to regress. All this should have been treated immediately with Morbillinum. Those who have not had these grieving mothers in front of them or in their arms, those who deny these obvious facts, are dangerous psychopaths and should do something other than medicine. In autism that has already developed, Morbillinum should be prescribed as an intercurrent drug, often with the effect of making the picture of a classical homeopathic drug appear more clearly.

Mucous membranes of the upper airways

We're often at a loss when there are no clear symptoms and the patient, adult or child, presents with nothing more than nasal and ocular catarrh and fever. Hoarse cough, altered voice, watery eyes. Diffuse bronchial rales. All in all, it resembles the onset of measles. Here, Morbillinum offers spectacular results, even though there seems to have been no apparent remedy indicated, since the case presents no characteristics whatsoever.
Morbillinum is remarkable in cases of asthenia, eye weakness, blepharitis or chronic conjunctivitis following measles.

Exanthema

The cutaneous manifestation that corresponds to that of Morbillinum is the macular exanthema that starts on the face or behind the ears. I remember a case of lupus erythematosus where, in desperation, I gave Morbillinum on the sole notion that the case had begun with a symmetrical saddle-shaped eruption on either side of the nose. I'm sure I'll be right in objecting that this is an almost pathognomonic sign of the disease, but in this patient's case there was the notion of a severe case of measles, which had kept him bedridden for weeks. The simple intake of a single globule of 200 provoked a fever of 39°, which was expected, and the patient was formally instructed to do nothing. After two days, these general signs ended, and then a sort of scaly desquamation appeared all over the body. Gnawing my teeth - the most difficult thing in medicine is to do nothing! - I waited for new signs to appear. The patient became increasingly hot, hungry even at night, and needed to uncover his feet at night. The Sulfur I had prescribed as a first remedy, without the slightest effect, worked brilliantly this time. Almost 20 years later, there is still not the slightest clinical or biological sign of lupus...

Tired, cough-prone children

Here we begin to see indications that are no longer necessarily linked to past measles. In other words, the substance's own picture is beginning to emerge. All those skinny, anemic children who cough at the slightest exposure to the cold, and who easily develop bronchitis, deserve at least one dose of Morbillinum. This is the kind of case where Tuberculinum would be indicated, but without the restlessness, the bad mood on waking, the head sweating and the exaggerated appetite. That's where Morbillinum comes in!

Clinical indications

The following indications for Morbillinum are derived from measles symptoms. Whether or not a history of measles is present is not a problem for prescribing; it's the tropism of the preparation that dominates.

• Recurrent miscarriage: here again, the patient does not present a clear picture, and the main complaint is the tendency to abort.
• Sudden worsening of active tuberculosis, or a tuberculosis infection that had previously been under control, then reappears. This indication derives from the affinity of the measles virus for the mucous membranes of the upper airways. I haven't had the opportunity to test it myself, but Indian literature abounds with cases.
• Chronic inflammation of the eye.
• Chronic otorrhea.
• Swelling of neck lymph nodes.
• Chronic inflammation of the periosteum or joints.

Conclusion

Industrial medicine is ready to vaccinate against anything and everything, as the Covid plandemic has once again confirmed. On the homeopathic side, the temptation is great for all those who have never studied homeopathy to prescribe nosodes at every turn, according to each infectious episode in the patient's history, for example. In both cases, the approach is wrong.

A germ can only thrive in an organism that's been deregulated beforehand. You don't get sick because you have pneumonia. You get pneumonia because you're sick. So it's inept to try to give the nosode of the acute miasm without understanding that you have to target the totality of the patient's symptoms - which you have to cover with a constitutional drug. In the best-case scenario, the nosode will limit susceptibility to the germ, but will not cure the general disorder that caused the susceptibility in the first place. Finally, the ultimate level of similarity, the patient's cure, to be complete, will require taking into account the chronically active miasm.

Whether it's a pandemic or an epidemic, homeopaths give us unlimited means to deal with any eventuality. A true homeopath is one who goes to his patients' bedsides with a smile!

As predicted by the great Ivan Illich [20], materialistic medicine armed with all-powerful technology has caused medicine to regress, and now it's back to where it started, when Hahnemann wrote (Organon, §1): " It is high time that those who call themselves doctors stopped deceiving poor human beings with their galimatias, and began at last to act, that is, to really help and heal."

Yes, it's high time things changed...

[1] Dr. Gross, one of Hahnemann's earliest disciples, prepared a remedy called Morbillinum from the blood of a small patient with simple measles, homeopathically diluted twice.

[2] This is even the procedure used in homeopathic experiments to make the subject sensitive to the substance being tested.

[3] This Chechen practice was introduced to better sell their pretty girls to Turkish harems.

[4] Often referred to as the English Madame de Sévigné, who wore neither a veil nor disguised herself as a man to visit Saint Sophia, Lady Montagu belongs to that category of extraordinary women who deserve to be better known. Much later, Mélanie Gohier d'Hervilly adopted the same lifestyle, disguising herself as a man to travel to Hahnemann's practice in Köthen, marry him and bring him back to Paris!

[5] At the time - and Hahnemann makes the same mistake - soft and hard chancre were confused, and it seems that variolization was carried out using germs from soft chancre, which is not syphilis but Hæmophilus ducreyi.

[6] Jenner was thus taking a step further the idea of Benjamin Jesty, who in 1774 deliberately contaminated his wife and sons with cowpox (bovine smallpox) to protect them from smallpox.

[7] Xavier Bazin's must-read "Antivax toi-même" is a fascinating account of the inconsistencies of vaccine medicine. "Introduction à la médecine des vaccins" by Michel de Lorgeril is another gem to have in your library.

[8] I suggest readers discover "L'apocalypse joyeuse", the remarkable book by Jean-Baptiste Fressoz, which provides a fascinating account of the dubious "arrangements" between industrialists and those in power, unknowingly describing the premises of the great Covid crisis.

[9] The vaccinia narrative is very appealing - and even Hahnemann was initially in favor of it, before realizing that the patient was being injected with lymph from many other sources in addition to vaccinia. When Jenner explained the principle to the Academy, just about all the veterinarians laughed, for they had seen patients who had presented with cowpox fall ill with smallpox all the same!

[10] "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" John 1:46.

[11] I'm obliged to paint a picture here, as the subject deserves hours of class time. See our school Planète Homéopathie, the only one to offer a complete study of the Organon.

[12] Instead of applying the Cartesian reasoning of the thinking subject who forms his own opinion, they prefer to be "informed" only indirectly through medical publications (mostly financed by pharmaceutical laboratories), confining themselves to a passive role that does not prevent them from vigorously criticizing anything that falls outside the scope of their knowledge.

[13] In other words, they are absolutely characteristic of the pathology. Pericardial rubbing on auscultation denotes pericarditis, erythema migrans Lyme disease, and so on.

[14] These signs alone are sufficient to choose the right homeopathic medicine. They have nothing to do with the pathology, or are the opposite of what is expected in the pathology. For example, cholera is not a febrile disease, yet the patients I treated in Haiti all complained of being too hot. Most of the time, the heat was described as being towards the left shoulder blade, which characterized Phosphorus. In certain cases of angina, the patient feels less pain when swallowing, which is the opposite of the norm, etc.

[15] See "Principles of the New Medicine", §11. In this first volume, I retranslate and comment on aphorisms 1 to 70 from the ^6th edition of Hahnemann's Organon.

[16] See, for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTHRZvyK9e4. A translation of the 2010 article can be found at https://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/montagnier-et-la-teleportation-87142.

[17] This chapter owes a great deal to David Little, my mentor on the subject of nosodes. To this day, he is probably one of the world's greatest homeopaths.

[18] In Conférences de Théorie et de Pratique homéopathique, pp. 141-175.

[19] I owe most of the data on Morbillinum to my friend Dr. Gaurang Gaikwad 's excellent book "Materia Medica of Nosodes & Sarcodes".

[20] See his book "La Némésis médicale".