From Tibb to Hippocrates, from Avicenna, Freud, Hahnemann, Pasteur and Beauchamp, to Fleming, to Hall. What did they know? What were they missing?
Many people throughout history who have tried to understand CURES. What can we learn from them?
When we ask Google, Bing, Grok, duckduck, Baidiu or other search engines to find a theory of cure, four names dominate, in various sequences depending on timing, the questioner, and other inscrutable factors. The names are Tracy Kolenchuk (that’s me) with the healthicine cure theory, Lydia C. Hall’s Care, Cure, Core theory of nursing, Samuel Hahnemann’s theory of like cures like, and Freud’s talking cures.
Notably missing are Tibb, Hippocrates, Galen, Avicenna (Ibn Sina), Louis Pasteur and Antoine Béchamp and Alexander Flemming. Also missing are conventional, western, allopathic medicine, and osteopathy, as well as any so-called alternative medical practices from Ayruveda, chiropractic, homeopathy, to Traditional Chinese Medicine. Not one of those provides, much less explores any theory of cure.
As this history is reviewed, it is important to understand, and recognize that the presence of a cured case does not require a theory of cure. Historical, and current medical practitioners have cured many illnesses – despite not having any theory of cure, often without even using the word cure or cured.
Greek/Roman Medicine: Before Hippocrates
Prior to Hippocrates – there were many documented cures and curers, who generally practiced without any theory of cure. Early theories of disease were based in local religious faiths. Many diseases were believed to be caused by the disapproval, sometimes even the malevolence of various gods, and curers often sought the favor or the assistance of those gods. At the same time, as today, most cases of illness were minor, easily healed or cured. These were simply ignored – either they were understood or not important enough to be caused by the gods.
As various practitioners to rationalized illnesses and cures, they produced simplistic, limited, often confusing, sometimes ridiculous theories of cause and cure. Even flawed ideas, concepts, and theories can lead to actions that address a present cause. Actions based on wrong theories are often followed by cures, because most cases are cured.
No theory is perfect, or it would not be a theory, it would be accepted fact.
Unani Tibb
Unani Tibb is an ancient system of medicine based on the four humors, and the teachings of Greek physicians Hippocrates and Galen, developed and documented by Avicenna. In China it is known as Urghur medicine; in Iran as Persian medicine; Anatolian medicine in Turkey; and European traditional medicine in Europe. However, none of these medical systems have documented a general theory of cure. Of course, neither has conventional western medicine.
Hippocrates – 460-370 BC
Often referred to as the father of medicine, the writing of Hippocrates are believed to be a collection of materials, not actually all written by one person. But that’s OK. We can treat the Hippocrates community’s products as one person’s writing, even when they appear to be inconsistent. No living thing is consistent. Rocks are consistent, because they are dead.
Hippocrates actually said little about cure. He is most famous for the Hippocratic Oath, which many patients mistakenly think is about them – “do no harm.” But when we examine the full oath, it is a promise to the medical profession, not the patient. The text says: “I will willingly refrain from doing any injury or wrong from falsehood, and (in an especial manner) from acts of an amorous nature, whatever may be the rank of those who it may be my duty to cure, whether mistress or servant, bond or free.”(Oath) The Oath was entry into the club, similar to the ummanu, who provided the royal family with medical care (physicians and exorcists), protection against demons and angry gods (exorcists and chanters), and whose access to the secret knowledge was hereditary, from father to son veritable scholarly ‘mafia’. (Enki)
Even without an actual theory of cure, the writings of Hippocrates come very close to the comprehensive view of the healthicine theory of cure. The Hippocratic Oath begins: “I swear by Apollo Healer, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses.” Apollo is the god of healing (as well as the god of the sun, light, music, poetry, prophecy, and archery. His son, Asclepius is the ancient Greek and Roman god of medicine and healing. Hygieia is the ancient Greek goddess of health, cleanliness, and sanitation, the goddess of caring. Panacea was the goddess of universal remedy, the goddess of drugs. Hippocrates’ focus was generally on cures and curing, as opposed to a general theory of cure, but we can see the basic elements of cure: healing (natures cures), caring (health, cleanliness, and sanitation), and radical cures (medicines and drugs, the universal remedies).
Hippocrates recognized that most cures come from nature, from healing, not from doctors, not from medicines.
“It is nature that cures diseases. She herself finds the appropriate ways, without needing to be directed by our intelligence”. – Hippocrates
“The physician is often compelled to conciliate the mind of the patient while Nature is effecting the cure.” – Hippocrates. And he counselled others to cure without drugs whenever possible.
“Leave your potions in the chemist’s crucible if you can heal (cure) your patient with food.” – Hippocrates
Hippocrates often advised against fighting our natural curative processes with actions that reduce healthiness in the quest for a cure: “Our natures,” he said, “are the physicians of our diseases. We must refrain from meddlesome interference.”
Hippocrates was also well aware of the power of the patient’s belief in the doctor as a curative aid.
He advised doctors, to “use their authority and charisma, and the mystery of their esoteric knowledge, to heal. They must practice their art calmly and adroitly, concealing most things from the patient while attending him. … sometimes comfort with solicitude and attention, revealing nothing of the patient’s future or present condition.” He did not dismiss such successes as placebo effects, nor did he see any need to apologize.
His advice: “Cure sometimes; heal often; comfort always” was aimed at physicians, but encompasses the entirety of the theory of cure, although the sequences is different from that in nature.
Healing is the first cure, occurring naturally when injuries are present. Healing cures most injuries without conscious effort. Caring (comfort), the second natural cure, occurs often. We care for ourselves, and others, often with no curative intent. However, caring does cure some cases. Medicines, although often referred to as “cures,” rarely cure diseases. Most drugs are designed, manufactured, and marketed to address symptoms not cure-causes.
Hippocrates advised on the important curative powers of communities, medical and non-medical, of caring and curative actions by patients themselves, family, friends, and others: “Life is short, the art long, opportunity fleeting, experience fallacious, judgement difficult. Not only must the physician be ready to do his duty, but the patient, the attendants, and external circumstances must conduce to the cure.”
Hippocrates seemed aware of Lifestyle Cures, although he saw some as unnatural.
“For extreme diseases, extreme methods of cure, as to restriction [of the diet], are most suitable.” – Hippocrates
However, Hippocrates made no useful distinction between a radical one-time cure, which directly addresses a present cause, and a process or lifestyle cure, which is required to address an ongoing cause of illness. The same is true of most medical practitioners and theorists today.
Hippocrates was not a surgeon, and with regards to surgery, he was simply wrong, advising:
“What cannot be cured by medicaments is cured by the knife, what the knife cannot cure is cured with the searing iron, and whatever this cannot cure must be considered incurable.” – Hippocrates
The simple reality is that most cures, even most surgeries are not difficult, and not medical. Hippocrates knew that most cures come from nature, but then forgot, dismissed the easy cases. He naturally limited his view to difficult cases. Simple cases were not brought to his attention. Small wounds, cuts and bruises, even broken bones heal without medical attention. Most wounds are so small we forget them. We scratch away the flesh that contains a louse. We remove thorns, even porcupine quills without aid of a doctor. We can cut our own ingrown toenails, or get help from a family member. We don’t need a professional to puncture a boil, although it might be safer and more effective. Young children lose baby teeth through natural processes, adults need help. When the help comes from a doctor, it’s a “medical cure.” It’s only called medicine, only called surgery, only called a cure if we consult a doctor. Hippocrates, like modern medical authorities ignored most “cures” — they do not require a medical professional.
Hippocrates understood cause and effect, and stated clearly and simply:
“Sickness is not sent by the gods… find the cause, we can find the cure.” – Hippocrates.
“Diseases which arise from repletion are cured by depletion; and those that arise from depletion are cured by repletion; and in general, diseases are cured by their contraries.” – Hippocrates
and “One must know that diseases due to repletion are cured by evacuation, and those due to evacuation are cured by repletion; those due to exercise are cured by rest, and those due to idleness are cured by exercise.” – Hippocrates
However, he made no distinction between past causes, which cannot be accessed to cure, and present causes, the cure-causes of an illness. He also did not distinguish between status causes – like a deficiency, excess, or parasite, and lifestyle causes – like overeating and malnutrition.
To a certain extent, Hippocrates understood that the distinction between illness, cause, and cure is not always clear, advising:
“Give me a medicine that will produce fever and I can cure any disease.”
Hippocrates Summary
“Hippocrates was one of the first to declare that illness was caused, not by gods or evil spirits, but for biological reasons, and could cure itself by the same means.” – Camp, John Michael Francis, Magic, Myth and Medicine, 1973
Although Hippocrates did not create a summary, a general theory of cure, his writings provide many powerful understandings. Three failings are clear.
- Hippocrates simply ignored cases of illnesses that are easily cured. Most cases of illness are easily cured without medical authorities. In his work Hippocrates saw only the difficult cases, and naturally assumed they represented the entre spectrum of illnesses and their cures.
- Although advised “Epilepsy among the young is cured chiefly by change—change of age, of climate, of place, of mode of life,” Hippocrates was generally unaware of the concept of a lifestyle cure, a preventative cure, a process cure. We should not be surprised. Although lifestyle causes and lifestyle illness are recognized today, lifestyle cures are not. Most lifestyle cures are the responsibility of the afflicted individual – who is often not even a patient.
- Hippocrates, and other medical practitioners of his time, studied the four humors: blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile: the body. Although Hippocrates understood that diet and environment were illness causes and cures, he paid little, if any attention to causes and cures of illness in the mind, the spirits, or the communities of the patient. The cures of these causes are still largely outside of the medical realm today.
But perhaps most important, Hippocrates recognized that a cured case is anecdotal and that there are a variety of cures for specific diseases, “And even if he were to suffer, the cure too would have to be one. But as a matter of fact cures are many.”
Galen: Claudius Galenus of Pergamum,129–200 CE
Galen’s medical theory of the Theory of the Four Humors expanded on the teachings of Hippocrates, which dictated that the body’s four essential fluids—blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile— need to be in perfect balance to avoid illness.
Galen’s focus was on cures, not on cure. He expanded the Greko-Roman theory of causes, the theory of four humors, which were totally based on diseases of the body. Anatomy was his calling and most of his work was treating injuries. Perhaps his perception of cure was limited by his successes. He communicated no theory of cure, perhaps because he was too busy, having too much success curing.
Ibn Sina: Avicenna – 980-1037
Ibn Sina ( c. 980 – 22 June 1037), commonly known in the West as Avicenna was a preeminent philosopher and physician, often described as the father of early modern medicine, the father of medicine in the Muslim world, Avicenna challenged the medical systems cure denial of cured cases, something that persists in today’s modern medical practices.
“Of this it might be said that Medicine would not suffer by candidly acknowledging its (miracle cures) occurrence through her leading voices. Not to do so exposes her to disrepute in the minds of those who have experienced the cures, or have personally met with such cases.” (Avicenna’s Canon).
Avicenna had some understanding of the difference between status and lifestyle illnesses, advising that
“Note that some states are labile, and others are stable or fixed. Labile states are more or less easily curable, but fixed states are very difficult to resolve or cure. State. —We must distinguish carefully between cause, disposition, state, habit, and symptoms.” but failed to recognize that cause, disposition, state, habit and symptoms might each be causes of illness.
Avicenna often placed a focus on curable vs incurable diseases – frankly, offering nonsense claims like: “Diseases are curable or incurable. A curable disease is one which offers no resistance to treatment. An incurable disease is one in which there is some impediment to complete cure, so that whatever the doctor applies, the desired effect is not reached.” In similar nonsense, he advised, “The lucky physician sees the patient at the end of the disease ; the unlucky physician sees the patient at the beginning of the disease.”
Avicenna said, “Some diseases turn into new ones, and so themselves disappear. This is very satisfactory. One disease becomes the medicament for curing another.” – just as Hippocrates advised about fever sometimes being a cure.
Avicenna had advice for complex cases, where one illness caused another, and for emergency illnesses, which must be addressed quickly. “When several maladies occur together we should deal first with that which fulfils one of the following three conditions: 1. When the one must be cured before the other can be relieved. 2. When the maladies are related as cause and effect. 3. When it is absolutely essential to deal with one of the maladies.”
For poorly understood cases, he advised letting nature run its course, “When you do not know the nature of a malady, leave it to Nature; do not strive to hasten matters. For either Nature will bring about the cure or it will itself reveal clearly what the malady really is.”
Avicenna is remembered for his cures, not for understanding. He provided almost nothing to support any general theory of cure. He recognized the power of a lifestyle cure, but not as a cure concept: “Sometimes one may advantageously arouse his sense of shame, making him blush, and so leading the sick person to avoid what is harmful for him.”
Other Practices:
There are many other practices of medicine, however, none from Greko-Roman to modern medicine, has a functional, much less a generally accepted definition of cure, much less any theory of cure.
Chinese Medicine
Chinese medicine claims many cures, but, like modern medicine, cured is simply undefined. There is no theory of cure in ancient or modern Chinese medicine, known as TCM or Traditional Chinese Medicine. In addition, diseases and health are also too poorly defined to be studied scientifically. In place of the four humors of Greko-Roman medicine, Chinese medicine offers the mysticism of Yin and Yang, of Qi, and Five Elements: Wood, Fire, Earth, Metal, and Water.
Many of the instructions to cure, are cryptic nonsense where even the disease is not defined: “Since Qi will be high or low, disease can be distal or proximal, syndrome internal or external, and treatment moderate or drastic, which is determined by the medicinal Qi to take effect adequately.” (Yellow Emperor)
The Yellow Emperor’s Classic of Medicine — Essential Questions contains the word heal once, healed once, and healing not at all. Most cases of illness are cured by healing, but the classic tomes of Chinese medicine, simply ignore healing cures. Likewise, because all cures come from the physician – little attention is paid to caring cures, of community cures.
Chinese medicine today appears to be moving towards, or perhaps following in the footsteps of western medicine, which treats only recognized symptoms and diseases with approved products and no definition of cured. What is not defined cannot be achieved.
Ayurveda: Indian medicine
Ayurveda is a holistic system of medicine in India with over 3,000 years of history. that takes a natural approach to all aspects of health and well-being. In India, Ayurveda is a recognized medical system.
However, the words cure and cured are simply not defined in Ayurvedic medicine. (Ayurveda Encyclopedia), making it impossible to develop a theory of cure, much less a comprehensive theory of cure. When researching Ayurveda, we also need to be aware that the word “healing” is generally used for “medically curing,” whereas in the healthicine theory of cure, healing is defined as the curing of injuries that occurs without medical intervention. This type of healing is not discussed in, for example, the Ayrveda Encyclopedia.
Ayurveda also speaks of vikriti, the elementary causes of illness, but the phrase is completely different from elementary causes and illnesses discussed in the healthicine theory of cure. Vikriti describes the dynamic states of a person’s doshas—Vata, Pitta, and Kapha—as they respond to lifestyle, diet, stress, seasons, and environment.
In the theory of Ayurveda, “All diseases are caused by aggravation of the doshas.” (Vata, Pitta, and Kapha— physical, mental, and emotional well-being.) Ayurveda, as currently practiced, makes no attempt to, and cannot logically develop into a comprehensive theory of cure.
Other Theories of Cure?
Do any theories of cure exist in history? When we google, bing, duckduck, use other internet research tools to find theories of cure – outside of the healthicine theory, there are three notable findings, in chronological sequence: homeopathy’s claim of Like Cures Like, Sigmund Freud’s talking cure, and Lydia Hall’s Cure, Care, and Core theory. Let’s examine each of them in turn.
Like Cures Like: Samuel Hahnemann 1775-1843
The first law of homeopathy: the Law of Similars, or Like Cures Like: “the principle that a substance which produces certain symptoms in healthy people can cure the same symptoms in the sick” (Hahnemann Revisited) was created by Samuel Hahnemann when he discovered that cinchona bark could induce, in a healthy person, the same symptoms it would cure in the sick person. Like cures like does not apply to illnesses or disease, it applies to the cure of symptoms. As a result, like cures like is not a theory of cure. A theory of cure must be applicable to any and all cases of injury and illness. Most symptoms are not illnesses, not diseases. When we look at a comprehensive list of diseases in the International Classification of Diseases – most are simply out of scope of the Like cures Like concept.
However, we need to maintain awareness that homeopathy, like many non-theoretical cure concepts, actually cures many cases of illness in practice. In medicine, the weakness of the theory does not necessarily translate into poor performance.
Talking Cure: Sigmund Freud 1856-1939
Anna O., a patient of physician Josef Breuer experienced relief from her symptoms through talking during treatment, discussing her repressed traumas. This was later termed the “talking cure” by Anna herself.
Freud’s developed this cure into a practice, using techniques such as free association, encouraging patients to speak freely about whatever came to mind.
Talking cure is a very specific method of curing a very specific type of disease. It is not a theory of cure and has never been presented as a general theory of cure. It is simply not relevant to most diseases, not even to most cases of mental disorder. At the same time, The talking cure techniques continue to be used in and to influence modern psychotherapy.
Louis Pasteur 1850-1895, Antoine Bechamp 1816-1908
Pasteur and Bechamp are often seen as competitors over the germ theory of disease vs the terrain theory of disease, although their understandings of disease are often misconstrued. by various theorists and practitioners
Pasteur studied infectious disease – and claimed that diseases were caused by infectious agents, germs. Today’s medical cures are totally restricted to infectious diseases, based on Pasteur’s theories. Cured, today, is defined medically and scientifically only for infectious diseases – to kill, remove, or disable the infectious agent. Cured is not defined medically, in any practice, for any non-infectious disease.
Bechamp, on the other hand, claimed that argues that the body’s internal environment—the “terrain”— determines health, and that germs are opportunistic byproducts of diseased tissue. Terrain theory, which sounds like and is a powerful concept, has been largely neglected. No dictionary, much less any medical dictionary contains an entry for “terrain” with respect to disease. Today, there are several expansions of the concept of terrain, with little cooperation, much less coordination. The healthicine theory of cure recognizes the concept of life terrain in body, mind, spirits, and communities.
However, neither Pasteur nor Bechamp developed any theory of cure. In fact, neither paid much attention to the concept of cures. The primary focus of both was on the prevention of infectious diseases. Pasteur promoted vaccination and other preventative measures like pasteurization, to limit exposure to germs. Bechamp argued in favor of improving the healthiness of the terrain, the flesh of the body, to prevent diseases.
From the theory of cure perspective, their work was limited to a focus on infectious diseases of the body. Most cases of illness and disease are not infectious, and most cases of infectious disease are easily cured in otherwise healthy individuals. Injuries, chronic diseases, mental disorders, and even diseases with non-infectious causes in diet and environment were not part of their studies.
Alexander Fleming: Penicillin 1881-1955
Alexander Fleming, along with Ernst Boris Chain and Sir Howard Walter Florey, won the only Nobel Prize ever awarded for a cure, “for the discovery of penicillin and its curative effect in various infectious diseases,” in 1945. It is interesting that today, more than 80 years later, no other medical or scientific CURE has been awarded a Nobel. Do cures exist?
However, like Pasteur and Bechamp, Flemming’s studied only a few infectious diseases. His award winning cure was a single product that, although it could cure many cases of infection, it could not cure all infections, and could not cure most diseases.
“Press publicity in the last few years has given many people the idea that penicillin is a panacea, but throughout the book it is emphasized that penicillin is not a “cure-all”. There are many of our most common ailments on which it has no effect.” (Penicillin)
Most cases of illness and disease are not caused by infectious agents. Of the top ten disease causes of death in the USA, heart disease, cancer, accidents (injuries), stroke, COPD (chronic lower respiratory disease), Alzheimer’s, diabetes, kidney disease, chronic liver disease, and COVID-19, only COVID is directly caused by an infectious agent, although COPD, kidney disease, and chronic liver disease can be the consequence of infections in some cases. Cured is not medically defined for any non-infectious disease, so no cures can be found, and no theory of cure can be tested.
Care, Cure, Core Nursing Theory: Lydia C Hall, 1906-1969
Lydia C. Hall’s writings, Care, Cure, Core Nursing Theory, is exactly that, a theory of nursing. It says almost nothing about cure, much less about a theory of cure. The basic concepts of Hall’s theory contains three independent but interconnected circles: the core, the care, and the cure, where:
- The core is the patient receiving nursing care.
- The cure is the attention given to patients by medical professionals.
- The care circle addresses the role of nurses and is focused on performing the task of nurturing patients.
Care, Cure, Core is an attempt to understand and facilitate a healthy nursing profession.
However, it contains no theory of cure, no theory of care (which often cures) and no theory of healing.
I suspect it rises to the top when we search for “theory of cure” because it contains the words CURE and THEORY in the title – and our intelligent computers, seeing no other references, fail to realize it is about a theory of nursing. Most cases of illness are cured without the need for doctors and nurses – and these cases are ignored by Hall’s nursing theory. Nursing, not cure is the subject of her writing.
CURES Today
Today’s modern medicine has no recognized theory of cure. Modern medicine’s concept of cure is so weak that the absence of a theory of cure is not noticed.
Today, cures are bureaucratically and legally defined as drugs, as products that have been approved. Claiming that an unapproved product or procedure can cure is simply illegal. The bureaucrats have taken over medicine. This rule is applied by every government in every country. Obvious cure claims, like water cures dehydration, or Vitamin C – in any natural or unnatural form, cures Vitamin C deficiency, are illegal claims, not permitted in actual product manufacturing or sale. (FDA)
Theories of Cause
Greko Roman medicine was, in theory, based on the theory of four humors: blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile, bodily fluids believed to determine health, temperament, and personality.
Chinese medicine is based, in theory, on the Five Elements: Wood, Fire, Earth, Metal, and Water corresponding to different organs, emotions, and seasons, as well as the the Yin Yang dual nature of reality – a simple truth and the inscrutable “qi” the circulating force of life. Disclosure: I have practiced Tai Chi for more than 40 years.
Ayurveda’s doshas: Vata, Pitta, and Kapha appear at first glance to be logical, but the closer we look, the more gaps and inconsistencies appear.
Samuel Hahnemann’s theory of like cures like addresses symptoms, not causes of disease – in theory, even as it cures in fact.
Louis Pasteur’s germ theory of disease has become dominant in modern medicine, even though it is not relevant for most cases of disease, and can lead to incorrect treatments for many cases of infectious disease. These errors tend to be dismissed or ignored.
Antoine Bechamp’s terrain theory, is a YIN to Pasteur’s germ theory YANG. It covers a wider span of illnesses than the germ theory, but it also ignores many, perhaps most cure-causes of illness and disease.
Healthicine Theory of Cure Causes: Present vs Past and Future
As we study causes of illness, we must distinguish between past, present. and future causes. Past causes are gone. They cannot be accessed to cure a case of disease. Future causes are not causing illness. They can be useful to prevent cases of illness, but cannot be accessed to produce cures.
Only a present cause of illness can be accessed, successfully addressed, to produce a cured status. Modern medicine ignores the concept of present causes.
Healthicine Theory of Cure Causes: Status vs Lifestyle
The theory of cure classifies elementary causes of illness into
status causes – attributes, status causes and injuries
lifestyle causes – process and lifestyle causes.
When a status cause is addressed, changed, the illness is cured. Attribute and status cures are one-time cures. If a bruise, hangnail, a shoe, a bacterial infection, or a nutrient deficiency is the cause of an illness, addressing the cause, making the necessary change to the cause produces a cured state. If the cause occurs again, a new case of illness might occur. No cause of illness causes illness all the time.
Lifestyle causes, however, are processes. They require ongoing cures. Starvation is a noun cause, a status, cured by eating food. Ongoing malnutrition, on the other hand, is a lifestyle cause, only cured with a healthy diet, an ongoing cure. A sore throat is a status cause usually cured naturally by healing. But smoker’s cough has a process cause and is only cured by a (negative) process – to stop smoking. Lifestyle cures must be maintained to maintain the cured status. Lifestyle cures are preventative cures, curing when illness is present, and preventing when it is not present.
The three causes of illness are illustrated in this image:
There are no clear distinctions between attribute causes and process causes, the distinction is determined by the cure. If an illness is cured by a one-time action, the cause was an attribute, status, or injury, a noun. If curing the illness requires an ongoing process to maintain the cure, the cause was a process or lifestyle factor.
Many illnesses are easily understood. An infection is a status cause, cured with a one-time cure, perhaps an antibiotic, perhaps our healthy immune systems, or sometimes by a surgical removal. Gingivitis, a chronic infections, requires a lifestyle cure. Overweight might be cured by a one-time diet. Obesity, cannot. It requires ongoing actions that must be maintained to maintain the cured status. Lifestyle caused illnesses are harder to cure.
Sometime cases of illness can be cured by either a one-time cure or by a process cure. In these situations, the cure determines the cause.
Causes and Consequences
Every living individual consists of a body, some kind of mind that remembers and decides, a life spirit, and lives in communities of like and unlike. Every living individual eats, lives, and excretes in an environment.
Causes of illness are present in deficiencies, excesses, and disharmonies of attributes and processes in the six domains of life, of health, and of illness: diet, body, mind, spirits, communities, and environments. Signs and symptoms of illness are negative consequences on the body, mind, spirits, and communities.
This image illustrates the entirety of causes and consequences.
It is important to understand that at each boundary, the distinctions can be unclear. We have no clear distinction between body and mind, between mind and spirits. Even our diet enters our bodies, and our human environments consist of many layers from cellular to tissue, organ, organ systems, and even our communities. Life is not trivial.
CURED
Cured is presently so poorly defined that we have no scientific or medical test of cured for any disease, independent of an approved treatment. Cured can only be documented as proven in a clinical study, where cured is defined as part of the study. Cured is undefined in actual practice, except for an infectious disease cured with an approved drug or surgery that kills or disables the infectious agent. Cured is not medically defined for any non-infectious disease, therefore not defined for any chronic disease, any mental disorder, any nutritional disease, any disease caused by flaws in diets, minds, spirits, communities or environments.
Drug marketers suggest, “ask your doctor about drugs X.” They don’t suggest asking about cures. Today, no doctor, no clinic, no hospital, and no medical system tracks cured cases of any disease. Cases cured by an approved treatment can, in theory, be tracked, but nobody bothers. Cured is simply not important to the system.
CURING
Curing, the process of bringing about a cure, cannot be defined, because cured is not defined. Conventional and medical dictionaries often define curing as healing and healing as curing – with no useful distinction between the two. (Webster)
The consequence, today, is that the word CURE itself is banned. Doctors are trained to avoid the word cure. They teach their staff to avoid the word cure. Medicines, even medicines that can cure infectious diseases, do not have the word cure on the label nor on the package insert. Lawyers specifically advise doctors to never use the word cure in their practice. (Baldwa)
It has not always been like this. In 1936, Elmer D. Brothers wrote in Medical Jurisprudence, “One who, for a fee, professes to cure disease by dieting his patients, regulating their exercise and using spectacles, must be licensed as a physician.” It’s time for a change, time to move towards curing, towards a comprehensive theory of cure.
CURE Today
Today, cure is simply not well defined. Many current and historical medical dictionaries simply do not contain an entry for, a definition of cure – even though the word is often used in the contents. No medical reference text contains a definition of cure. (MERCK)
No theory of cure is recognized by any of today’s medical practices.
Healthicine: Theory of Cure
The healthicine theory of cure encompasses all cases of illness and disease – their present causes, consequences, the signs and symptoms of illness, and their cures. It is a theory, not a practice. It is also a general theory that can be expanded to problems in any intentional system, but let’s focus on living things and their illnesses.
In the theory of cure, a case of illness is cured when its cause has been successfully addressed, when signs and symptoms of that cause fade and disappear, when healing has completed or stopped, when no more medicines for signs and symptoms are necessary. The cure proves the cause.
The inverse is also true. When a case of illness has been cured – its causes have been successfully addressed. A cured case is a cure, a result of a natural or intentional cure action which addresses the cure-cause.
To your health, tracy
Author: A New Theory of Cure
References:
FDA: “The disclaimer must also state that the dietary supplement product is not intended to “diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease,” because only a drug can legally make such a claim.” Structure/Function Claims | FDA
Webster uses healing to define curing and curing to defined healing. (WEBSTER)
- – “healing: the act or process of curing or of restoring to health” and,- “cure vb cured; curing vt : HEAL: a : to restore to health” (Merriam-Webster, 1995).
(BALDWA) “Nor shall he (any physician) boast of cases Operations Cures or remedies or permit the publication of report thereof through any mode.” – Mahesh Baldwa (et al), Legal Issues in Medical Practice, Vols 1 2, 2e , 2024
(MERCK) Cure is not defined in Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Treatment, 2011; Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, 2011; Lange’s Current Medical Diagnosis and Treatment., 2016; Ferri’s Clinical Advisor, 2019; DSM-5, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 2013.
Oath: “The Hippocratic Oath is the oldest and most famous ethical code in medicine, a pledge that defines a physician’s moral responsibilities to patients, teachers, and the profession.” and “One of the most common misconceptions about the Hippocratic Oath is that it contains the phrase “first, do no harm.” It doesn’t.” – What Is the Hippocratic Oath and What Does It Say? – ScienceInsights
Enki: Enki’s Seven Sages (Adapa/Oannes and the Apkallu): Humanity’s Cosmic Guardians, Asen Bondzhev
Yellow Emperor: The Yellow Emperor’s Classic of Medicine — Essential Questions, Jinghua Fu & Mingshan Yang
Ayurveda Encyclopedia: The Ayurveda Encyclopedia, Swami Sada Shiva Tirtha, 2007
Avicenna’s Canon of Medicine, Gonzalez, Cibeles Jolivette.
Hahnemann Revisited A Textbook of Classical Homeopathy for the Professional, Luc De Schepper
Penicillin: PENICILLIN ITS PRACTICAL APPLICATION, Under the General Editorship of PROFESSOR SIR ALEXANDER FLEMING