Disease is Different – The Biological Conflict (Part 4)
1 Comments


How does such a
Meaningful Biological Special Program start? Disease is Different
The Biological Conflict (Part 4) A person suddenly
experiences a situation in which a basic biological
need of theirs is threatened, one which is unexpected and is perceived as highly
acute-dramatic and isolating. That means, they unexpectedly
lose control of the situation, and feel alone with the threat. The situation
represents a so-called biological conflict for them, which will in turn,
initiate a meaningful biological special program. Whether the situation
fulfills these criteria for them depends on their individual
perception of the situation, which is determined
by their ideas and beliefs, abilities, education,
culture, social integration, the biological code
of the human species or respective animal and much more. A variety of things influence
these internal frameworks and they therefore probably
also act as the interface to many other health
promoting models. Someone who keeps his body
vigorous through healthy nutrition and sports, or who is always mindful and dissolves old rigid beliefs
through spiritual techniques, will be less likely to perceive
threatening situations as a biological conflict,
necessarily meeting all three criteria: unexpected, highly
acute-dramatic and isolating. The trigger
for an SBS is thus the subjective, conflictive
feeling of a situation, not what happened
objectively. While one person
perceives a situation as a Biological Conflict, the same situation
can be perceived by another person
as insignificant, exciting, or even funny. Take, for example,
suddenly losing ones job: If the person has
a good education, close friends with whom they can
stay for a while if necessary, financial security
from their family, as well as
a high self-esteem, the situation is certainly
uncomfortable for them, but will probably not
result in a Biological Conflict. If, on the other hand, they are
financially dependent on work, they have no family
to help them out, little education, making them
anxious applying for jobs, then they are in a position
to meet the unexpected, highly acute, dramatic,
and isolating criteria. This situation for them,
is much more likely to be perceived
as a Biological Conflict. Or take the example
of the elderly man who has to go to a retirement home
because of his wife’s passing. Let’s say he lived for 60 years
in the same house that he personally built,
his wife had cooked for him and he has always had difficulty
connecting with other people. Having to move
to a retirement home can therefore easily
be perceived as a loss of his safe environment
or as an existential fear. For others, the conditions
may be completely different. One has changed apartments
every ten years and makes
new friends easily. Another can provide
for himself and the grandkids live very close to the
retirement home. A third has been preparing
for this situation for years and has already chosen
a facility for himself with
especially loving caregivers. Therefore, there are no
biological conflicts for any of them. It is therefore impossible
to judge from the outside whether a situation will lead to
an SBS for a particular person, since every person is unique and
has very specific internal and
external framework conditions. Bypassing the conscious mind,
these factors determine whether a situation is
instinctively perceived as a Biological Conflict, and which special program
is then started. But conversely, one can always
be sure that each SBS must have been preceded
by a very specific, conflicting situation, even if the situation itself
is highly individual. Each Biological Conflict deals
with a certain kind of threat or instinctive feeling,
depending on which basic biological need
is threatened. This is called
conflict content, and determines
which SBS is started to solve the conflict, always
synchronously on three levels: psyche, brain and organ. In the psyche,
there will be compulsive thinking about the problem in order to find a solution as
quickly as possible. We can barely sleep
and have a hard time concentrating on other things. Changes in the brain
can be objectively assessed using
medical imaging techniques. Dr. Hamer made
extensive use of this possibility in his research, once he found that all persons
with similar organ activity also show visible changes
in identical locations in their brains. In the context of each more
intense SBS, a concentric pattern centered
on the associated brain relay is visible on the sectional
planes of CT images, a phenomenon known
as a Hamer’s Focus. Depending on the tissue type, there is an
increase or decrease in the function of the associated organ, which leads to
cell proliferation or cell loss, given unbiologically long
conflict times. There is always a logical
connection between each tissue and its conflict content: The bladder mucosa
for example, is sensitive and tells us
how full the bladder is. This enables urination; in the
animal kingdom, to mark ones territory. The content of the conflict,
therefore, is that you are unsure where your own
territory or its boundaries are, or where you can mark, so that
it is recognized and respected. The territory can be
for example, the apartment, the partner, the workplace,
a club, a car, etc. The voluntary muscles serve
to perform vital physical tasks. The conflict content of muscle
tissue is therefore about not being strong enough
to perform a motion. The sensation here is failure,
that is, for example, a narrowly missed goal
that was perceived as important, because the strength
was insufficient. At the psychic level of the SBS, timeline changes are
visible immediately after
the Biological Conflict. By contrast, at the organic
level, it may take weeks or even months
for functional changes to become problematic
cellular changes, which lead to
increased symptoms. This time lag led to the idea of “the psyche
as the cause of disease,” as one can often observe how a person
with an altered mental state eventually develops severe
physical symptoms. There is
in fact a connection between the psyche and the organ. However, the change
in the psyche is not the trigger of organ
changes; both are parallel symptom levels
of one special program that was started
by a biological, instinctively perceived conflict. Ideas such as “stress or bad
thoughts lead to illness” are therefore incorrect and may
lead to focusing effort on combating mental symptoms,
even though they are but part of the adjustment mechanism whose purpose is
to bring about a quick and effective solution
to the conflict. “Thinking away” the problem
is therefore not possible. The synchrony of the 3 levels:
psyche, brain and organ, enabled Dr. Hamer to precisely
research this model, and is an important foundation
for the science of New Medicine, because: If 1000 patients
experience a growing tumor of the liver cells, one must also find a Hamer’s
Focus in the brain stem of those same 1000 patients,
centered on the control center for the liver, as well as a psychological
feeling and behavior of starvation in each of them,
since at its root, we are dealing here with a
so-called “Starvation Conflict”. Correspondingly, you will find
a liver tumor in every patient showing a Hamer’s Focus
in their liver control center, and their
thoughts will be preoccupied with starvation anxiety. Theoretically, you should also
be able to deduce the other two levels
from the psyche. However, since the psyche
is not measurable, such conclusions
are extremely error prone and therefore
of little relevance. All this is encapsulated in the
First Biological Natural Law, which summarizes the following
three criteria: 1. Each Meaningful Biological
Special Program is activated by an isolating,
dramatically-felt circumstance. This shock is not something purely psychological,
as a simple mental contrariety; it is something that triggers an deep, instinctive
reaction. 2. The nature of the unconscious
sensation of the biological problem determines
which specific Meaningful Biological Special
Program (SBS) is activated. 3. The SBS always runs
simultaneously on the 3 levels
psyche, brain and organ. Until now, we have not had
a plausible explanation for why a particular person
has a specific symptom at a specific time
in their lives. We asked ourselves, “Why me?”,
“Why now?”, “Why this?” It was clear that symptom-based
therapies were developed and administered almost independent of the
personal circumstances of individual cases. By knowing the Meaningful
Special Biological Programs and the First Natural Law
of Biology, we and our tumor patient now
understand exactly: “Why me?”, “Why now!”
and “Why this symptom”. There are still some
open questions, such as the sidedness of the symptoms,
that is, left or right side. These will be explained
elsewhere. Up to this point, however, the
tumor patient does not yet know whether there are new, more
targeted ways of dealing with the symptoms, so that they can recover
as quickly as possible. Concrete first approaches to
this are provided by knowledge of the way an SBS unfolds, which will be discussed
in the next part.

One thought on “Disease is Different – The Biological Conflict (Part 4)

  1. Since today, the comment function is activated on multiple requests. I am pleased about a lively exchange among interested people, positive feedback and constructive criticism, but I will not be able to spend too much time in moderating. For individual requests simply use the contact option on the project website.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *