So, to pick up on our fictitious family who is giving marijuana to their autistic child, what does this story look like now, in light of a review of these principles? The first given in such a case, is that the medicine being prescribed is of a crude, unrefined dose, and so if it happens that the autistic child is actually suffering from a cannabis-like disease, then this would be a potentially dangerous instance of the law of similars being prescribed, producing anything from mild side effects and toxic build-up, to more dramatic consequences, including the possibility of death. Ironically, in this case, the medicine will cure the disease and kill the patient at the same time.
On the other hand, if the child’s array of diseases contributing to their autistic condition does not contain a Cannabis-like disease, then the application of this medicine will be on an Allopathic basis (ie, no known principle), and will cause degrees of suppression and/or palliation. While palliation is necessary in certain cases at a certain point in time, the overall effect in the progress of such a case is that it either stalls or even regresses at this point. When the goal of treatment is to actually improve the patient’s overall state of health, such a use of medicine is highly counter-productive.
So even in the first scenario, where the patient does have a Cannabis-like disease state behind their condition, the use of medical marijuana is still a much inferior medical approach than would be the use of the same given in a homeopathic potency.
All of the cries for “more research” into the medical use of marijuana will never produce much of any new insight, as long as such efforts are not based on an understanding of such basic principles of cure versus suppression, as well as a correct application of dose and potency.
The other major problem with such Allopathic ways of thinking about the issue, as I’ve hinted above, is that there is completely lacking an understanding of the difference between a mere condition label, versus a true diagnosis of a specific state of disease. In other words, to conduct any research on what is effective for “autism” is merely serving the illusion which is the condition, or generic label, rather than honing our skills to diagnose the unique array of diseases specific to each individual case. Lacking in this understanding is another key conceptual error which leads almost all conventional medical efforts into a default mode of Allopathic, or unprincipled prescriptions of medicine.
For these reasons at a minimum, Heilkunst cannot condone the use of “medical marijuana” for autism, or for any other abstract condition label. Even if it is decided to use it for palliative purposes, it is critical that there is a larger overview of the case, and strategy for properly treating all the true disease layers, at the same time as the interim palliative means are used.
- Why Heilkunst Medicine Can’t Condone the Use of Medical Marijuana (part one)
- Heilkunst on TV : Lie To Me