Before
coming to life experiences, I would like to rapidly summarise the consequences
of these four laws on diagnosis and therapeutics. This will be the moment
to talk about the personal shock – not at all biological but rather
intellectual – being largely at the origin of my determination to verify
these biological laws.
As far as diagnosis is concerned,
you will have understood that it does not only extend to the physical
lesions of the body , these lesions being the consequence of either an
active conflict or a solved conflict. A correct and complete diagnosis
is a diagnosis situated at the three levels of the triad psychism-brain-organs.
At the psychic level, it means the exact identification of the conflict,
the search for the moment and the colouring of the shock that made it
set on, as well as for its stage at the moment of consultation. At the
level of the organs, it means the observation of the tissue affected
and the decoding of the nature of its modifications considering the
two phases. For each of both levels – as for the cerebral level – it
is evident that the appreciation will not only be qualitative, but also
quantitative : the importance of the conflictual mass and of the organic
lesion for which one will appeal to the necessary examinations.
It is intentionally
that I take up last the examination of the cerebral level because this
one is generally not absolutely necessary. It is very useful as it allows
to precise the state of the conflict, showing differently on the scanning
when in the activity or the resolution stage ; it also allows detecting
the conflicts the investigations at both other levels would not have
shown. But it is the most difficult examination of the triad, requiring
a good experience, especially for the active conflicts. This is the
reason why I principally use it when symptoms show translating a cerebral
suffering due to the compression of the centre in reparation : it is
then that the transient oedema must be specifically treated.
One can more easily
do without the cerebral scanning, as in
the approach of the biological laws, the diagnosis is over-determined, a notion justifying some recalls. We have seen that the complete
disease evolves perfectly synchronically at the three levels. This implies
that the diagnosis elaborated at one of the three levels could theoretically
be sufficient and inform about what is going on at the two other levels.
I insist on the term “theoretically” because when limiting to one sole
tool, it implies a complete mastery, without one right of mistake. Let
us take an example for each of the tools used separately. The rigorously
conducted examination of the patient testifies of an active devalorisation
conflict concerning the maintenance of his position : one must find
an image on target in the cerebral marrow corresponding to the hip,
and an X-ray of the hip must show a non-painful decalcification. The
finding of a zona must lead to a solved conflict of impurity and to
an oedema in the relay situated at the cerebellum. The image of an active
centre in the right fronto-diencephalic area on a scanning must be accompanied
with a non-solved repugnance conflict with resistance and a hyperglycaemia,
i.e. a raise of the sugar level in the blood. But I would not advise
to stay too close to one of the three possible “readings” and, as far
as I am concerned, I systematically practise a cross-section between
the study of the conflict and the pathology. Only relatively seldomly,
when the person can not – or does not want to – talk about his conflict,
will I be satisfied with the sole examination of the lesion. And even
in this kind of difficult conditions, one may wangle to get it : if
I know that the affected tissue proliferates in the first phase and
that repeated examinations do not longer show any tumour extension,
I may conclude that the conflict is solved … as long as the situation
remains stable!
I will conclude the
diagnostic aspect by a little interlude : the personal shock I cited
a moment ago. It happened when I first met Dr. Hamer in February 1989.
We were three doctors and one patient, who was very much acquainted
with the German language. After a half an hour conversation, having
already brought up a number of interrogations, a fellow-doctor handed
Dr. Hamer a cerebral scanning, without giving him any further information
on the case, asking him what he saw on it. Embarrassed and eager, we
were awaiting the result of this experience, knowing that he could only
know the name, gender and age of the patient automatically appearing
on the clichés. He did not put any question but scrupulously examined
it with his magnifying glass. After about one minute, he gave the scanning
back to the fellow-doctor saying : “To me, this patient has a lung cancer,
more exactly a bronchial cancer on its way to solution. At this stage
he must be coughing and expectorating and he had had this kind of conflict
(Note : I do not remember the exact terms he used since we were not
at all acquainted with the jargon) which is now solved. So, that is
all I can see.” Interrogative, I look at the fellow-doctor who, as astonished
as I was, just said : “Highest degree!”. I insist : “But are you really
sure? Do you have the X-rays, the biopsy? Aren’t there any metastases
or other things?” He then extensively confirms that his patient only
has that lesion, that he possesses all related documents, and that everything
Dr. Hamer said was exact, including the conflict as the fellow-doctor
had questioned the patient on his problems. There I disconnected from
the conversation for a good while. I had been studying the so-called
alternative medicines for fifteen years and I had already seen lots
of things : interesting theories such as lucubrations, very useful medicines
such as more than dubious lures. But the “act” to which I just took
part, was above my comprehension! I was telling myself : either there
is a trick and one would like to know it even if it is expensive or
it is a seer, but a seer on scanning results does not roam the world
over. Or, if everything he said since the beginning is real and, if
we did not come for anything, we certainly still have much to learn.
How could this man, by simply seeing the scanning of the brain with
all the organs we have inside our body , make this diagnosis? He did
not have one chance in a hundred, even in a thousand. And ever since,
he has shown it numerous times. He, of course, masters the scanner very
well and is capable of telling you whether a conflict is active, in
solution, in balance or if it is only a glial cicatrise of an ancient
terminated conflict. That is the advantage of mastering the most rapid
of the three reading processes : without forgetting the two others,
it allows him to gain much time, especially by a better choice of the
pertinent questions to be put to the patient.
(Note : I add the
passage on the therapeutical consequences, I had forgotten that night)
On the therapeutic level, it will be faster since the treatment
derives from the diagnosis: one treats a disease according to the conception
one has of it.
On the psychic level, if the patient is in the first phase,
one will help him solve his conflict. And here, there is no recipe :
it is with him that one will look for the solution that
is most adapted to his case and the most concrete one.
When his conflict is solved, we will search together how to avoid re-stimulation
or the appearance of other conflicts that could compromise its reparation
phase.
On the nervous level, one will watch the consequences of a
too severe congestion of his cerebral centre ; a possibility, which
is only to be feared if the conflictual mass, has been too important.
The practitioner then has to detect the signs of suffering of the nervous
tissue and to control this complication, especially by a cautious use
of cortisone. And, of course, a maximum of rest and “peace”, i.e. avoid
all unnecessary stress, and, within the bounds of possibility, the situations
bringing him back in the environment of his conflict.
On the organic level, the matter will always be the one of
relieving his symptoms, whatever the phase he is in. But, in the second
phase, the criterion of choice will have to consider the fact that every
treatment must also aim at contradicting to the least extent the biological
reparation process.
I will end by insisting
on the necessity for a dialogue,
an explanation, information at all levels of therapeutics!
Even in the difficult or urgent cases, where one ends up considering
medicines with considerable side-effects, or a surgical operation, the
comprehension and the agreement of the patient are of capital importance,
as the act, as well as the medical discourse always have a consequence
on the patient’s resentment. Not taking into account this resentment
might entail new conflicts as we have seen when looking through the
biological laws.
