THE CHANGES IN DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPEUTICS

Medicine is concretely practised in two aspects being diagnosis and therapeutics, both being linked: whatever the methods used, disease is treated according to how one conceives it. And seen from that angle, every medical approach is logical and coherent. So, it is logical to diet or to take drugs to lower the cholesterol level whenever the increase of this fat is seen as a risk factor for cardiac infarction. It is logical to propose an additional treatment of chemotherapy after the removal of a cancer in so far as it is considered to be able to spread all over in the organism. It is logical too to submit the patient to control examinations during the years following this removal since not knowing where the cancer comes from, nor at which stage it is (Is it evolving? Are there metastases forming? …), one can not track down an even so unexplained relapse. Finally, it is logical to detect seropositives thought to be endangered and who are, especially, death vectors for the others.

But these therapeutics appear to be completely unadapted as soon as the assumptions on which they are based turn out to be incorrect. The comprehension of the biological laws and their use lead to an entirely different attitude.

Cholesterol is a reparation mechanism of vascular fissures appearing in the conflictual phase but only coming up in the second one. A "cancer" is a tumour in the conflictual phase and the essential thing then is to help the patient solve his conflict, or a reparation tumour that will stop evolving if the conflict is not re-stimulated. One may know even before operating if the patient will relapse by examining the state of his conflict. Finally, detecting a seropositive is especially risking to provoke an Anxiety and Iatrogenous Devalorisation Syndrome.

Classical diagnosis is like examining the floating part of an iceberg: the examination – essentially descriptive – of all apparent symptoms without taking into account their origin, their links with the patient’s history and the universality of the suffering being. The change would consist in investigating the three levels of the triad in order to better understand all the manifestations and to see which phase of the disease one is in. Let us precise here that when examining the brain, the scanner is a very useful element since the disturbed centres are clearly marked with different images according to the stage of the conflict.

When establishing the more complete diagnosis, anamnesis is a leading, but so arduous, element: in case of an ancient, complex or severe disease, often hours of conversation will be needed where confidence and mutual respect are indispensable. The doctor only knows the laws and has his experience but only the patient knows what he has lived. And he will only tell it at his own rhythm and according to his own beliefs. Two examples among so many others: it is much easier to find the origin of a lung cancer than that of a cold because if one has not experiences half a dozen of dramatic shocks, one may have lived numerous small conflicts and which one set off the cold? The patient may have largely elaborated on his problems but it is only just before leaving the consulting room that he will make a brief and sometimes hesitating allusion to what turns out to be essential: will the practitioner understand that the track lies where emotion is expressed, and where he has to act as a detective before being a doctor?

Therapeutics derive from the complete understanding of the case, which allows to better know what one is exactly doing. Our intention is not to debate on the intrinsic value of one or another technique and a priori all therapeutic means may be considered. First, one has to know which phase of his disease the patient is in and, next, one has to "treat" him at the three levels: psychic, cerebral and organic.

On the psychic level it means to help him solve his conflict if it is not done yet. There are no ready-to-use "recipes" when facing the unique and personal psychic situation of the patient. It is also as a simple human being that the practitioner will act. Instead of technique, one might rather speak of human relation with everything it implies in matters of good sense, explanation, information, advice or suggestion, mutual discussion to find a practical solution, an availability, etc… But on the spontaneous scene of life, most of the conflicts are solved according to mixed factors: the individual has found the necessary resources within himself; he benefited from help of his familiars, circumstances have changed in his favour, etc… and seeing the more frequent incomfort in the auto-cure phase, he will more often be consulting in that phase. The attitude will then be to make him understand, to reassure him and to help him assume his new experience.

On the cerebral level, one will look after eventual complications due to the compression phenomena of the nervous tissue following the transient oedema in the repairing centre.

On the organic level, it may be necessary to call on various drugs or methods to relieve but avoiding to interfere too much in the reparation processes: for instance pain, too important or inconvenient infections (cf. 4^th law) and all the functional disorders risky for the patient. The surgical indication is an extremely delicate choice. Eventual urgencies do not leave any choice: a tumour causing an occlusion of the intestinal, respiratory, urinary, etc… passages or endangering life in the short term, will of course be surgically removed whatever the stage of the overall disease. But the "habit" to operate within a few weeks after the discovery of a "cancer which might generalise if we wait" is more than questionable.

Next to the vital urgency, and in both phases, surgical removal is most often contra-indicated, and even dangerous, because of the organic weakening and the mutilation conflicts it entails. The highest risk occurs after the solution of a major conflict because a general anaesthesia may seriously compromise the cerebral recuperation capacities (by worsening the intense vagotonia, normal in this situation). It is only after the complete achievement of the recovery that an intervention, for esthetical or comfort reasons, may be performed without risk.