| E.D.B:
In this edition we are also in the company of Mark Moodie. Mark
is the driving force behind the web site Considera,
which we recommend all of you to check out. Before all the readers
dash to your web site, can you explain briefly what its purpose
is?
M.M. The primary purpose of the site is to collect and make
information available on the treatment of plants with dynamised
remedies. It started from the 'biodynamic' agricultural work of
Rudolf Steiner and Lilly Kolisko and then grew with cooperation
from the likes of Glen
Atkinson, Enzo
Nastati, and Vaikunthanath Das
Kaviraj. I was trying to find out if the positive reports
that were around could be trusted. I did some of my own trials and
realized that it would take a highly focused and dedicated lifetime
to approach a secure answer to that question and build a discipline
upon it. However, I thought that if many people were interested
in compiling their experiences, there was a chance to get some really
worthwhile indications.
Glen's unsolicited testimonial for his frost
protection was the report that really galvanized me into action
and got me excited about the use of dynamised substances to treat
plants, pests and even soils. The possibility of creating an effective
tool for productive farming, and one that is not harmful to the
environment, is something that needed to be tested, documented and
shared.
Glen Atkinson
has already convinced the market down-under of the efficacy of
diluted substances and many of his preparations are used by those
who don't care about its creation – they just want something effective.
Enzo Nastati in Italy is also working hard to clarify the theoretical
aspect of the preparations and building upon this to induce some
really remarkable effects on plants and soils. V.D. Kaviraj has
found his inspiration within the pure Hahnemannian or classical
homeopathic tradition and I’ve published his book- Homeopathy
for Farm and Garden. I now am working with Glen to get his preparations available in the
UK. We have them certified as 'permitted inputs' to organic and
biodynamic and land. I also help with making his preparations
in the UK and working to get the test information that clarifies
their capacity. Glen is coming to the UK in 2009 and if people
are around he is giving a public weekend course in Sussex from
the 20th to 22nd February entitled "A Unified View of the Agriculture Course".
I am also studying with Enzo and have been translating his works
into English. The big one on the desk is his commentary on Steiner's
original Agriculture Course. There are several books in English
now and about 80 in Italian, but the main one Hpathy might be
interested in is his 'New Basis for Potentisation'. His preparations
are only available to members of his Albero della Vita organisation
and I’m helping get these from Italy to the UK. He works at cost
with these, as it’s an ethical issue in the Steiner world of making
what you need available at cost, and what is not necessary can
be sold for profit - like the publications and a few other gadgets.
My website, Considera, is there to invite people from all over
the world to share their experiences, whether they are positive
or negative. I feel it may be very important that we bring all this
knowledge together. This would then eventually constitute a database
for dynamised substances for plants like the materia medica for
homeopaths. You have 200 years of advance on us agro-'homeopaths'.
I hope that the web, with its ability to reach so many people, will
make catching up go faster.
E.D.B.
If you make a materia medica based on 'cured symptoms', this is
very different from a materia medica based on proving symptoms.
That makes me wonder whether the applications of 'Belladonna' for
rust is more an 'herbalist' recipe than a homeopathic prescription
for a plant, which should be by nature 'individual'.
M.M. I was taught homeopathy
by Misha Norland in the 1980’s, and was a med student for three
years before that, so I have some exposure to the differences
between a prescription based on the isolated symptoms and a prescription
aimed at the context in which these manifest themselves. To really
answer your question goes rather deeper than I would really like
to go in a public space. The common ground of homeopathy and biodynamics
and more orthodox scientific endeavour is, "Does it work
on the ground?" That question is the one I am happy to work
on in public and is Considera's raison d'etre.
Considera is
like a big experiment to find out what works and what doesn't
work, where we should direct our research and what directions
appear fruitless. We may find out that Belladonna only effects
plant rusts in certain cases. It seems that there are differences
in plant reaction between the different continents: what works
in one continent does not always work in another. It is a data
accumulating project.
The more interesting
side for me is to answer the question – how can
an ultramolecular bit of water effect a farm? I am not happy with
some quasi-material answer about the 'nano-phase' or 'water clathrates'
etc. Coming to peace with this question and finding answers that
are potentially satisfying is what needs to accompany the trials
and data crunching, because it can feed back to improve the discipline
and not abandon it to trial and error – but it really does cut
one off from ones more orthodox scientifically-trained colleagues.
So I do that elsewhere.
However, coming
back to your question, it is from these other studies that one
comes to some model of plants and the difference between them
and humans, and then one can test the implications of this difference
for treating a person in a different way from plants and soils.
Sorry to be a little vague, but I guess I am a little protective
of what is culturally publishable and what just brings more heat
than light upon oneself. I'm sure most homeopaths know this dynamic.
E.D.B.
From reading on the website Considera, it appears to me that the
work of Glen Atkinson and Enzo Nastati
has a very holistic nature to it. In human and veterinary homeopathy
we know how important it is to know every little detail of the patient's
personal sensitivities in order to achieve a true homeopathic prescription.
I suppose the same is true in agro- homeopathy, so how do you achieve
this? We can interview a client when his animal is the patient.
Can you interrogate plants? Can you interrogate a farmer to obtain
information on his plants or land just as you would do this for
the owner of an animal?
M.M. Well there has been some
real success just applying preparations to single, readily identifiable
syndromes. So we are having success with stinky slurry pits in
the UK with the same remedy – Glen's 'BdMax E7' for instance.
We get much less smell and the pits lose their crust accumulation
and the grass does not 'burn' when the muck is irrigated. However,
this same remedy can also be used where there is a general lack
of vitality in plants too. Another of Glen's preparations – 'BdMax
ZeroIn' has shown significant results bulking up roots but has
also been successful in stopping fruit from splitting at the final
maturation stage whilst allowing dry matter to increase and the
Brix rating to climb too. So these are along the line of a 'pill
for an ill' but that is, as much as anything, a way of trying
to get the growers up and running without having to get too deep
into non-standard science.
I guess another
way is to try and accumulate the same amount of information for
plant and soil homeopathy as for human or animal homeopathy. Interviewing
the farmer is part of this. The information is gathered more from
what might be called an alchemical point of view. This can be
used as a second line if the first shot is not successful.
That is where
the work of Hahnemann and Steiner meet. I have taken a little
flak for this work not being 'real homeopathy' and, in a way,
that is justified. However, I think it honours Hahnemann's undoubted
genius by not imitating him and assuming that he defined all the
parameters once and for all. Rather I think that Considera's work
and its debt to Steiner comes from drawing on the same sources
of inspiration as did Hahnemann. This is not something I can cover
well in a brief interview - it would take us a long, long way
down an interesting sidetrack - but is very stimulating and satisfying
for me. Just as you have to learn a new language to understand
and practice human/animal homeopathy in a reliable way, you can
get further by learning a way of viewing Nature beyond a Linnean
taxonomy, or physical-chemical assumptions - and thus learn to
use a different filter to view the world. I would refer those
interested to Goethe's work on plants and Wolfgang Schad's work
on the animal world. It can be learned but there's a little unlearning
for most of us too.
I still expect
a long battle ahead to win the hearts and - more so - the minds
of those who find it difficult to accept that there are other
ways to see the world around us than the reductionist, pure materialistic
approach that has prevailed in the last centuries.
E.D.B.
It was my impression that there must be another tool out there to
enable good quality agro-homeopathy and that there was maybe a key
in anthroposophic science according to Steiner.
M.M. Indeed, the work of Steiner
is a secure place to start, but it's not so simple to digest.
It now works for me but I'm sure there must be other disciplines
that would suit. And surely, there are others who are more lucky
and this work would come naturally with a kind of green thumb.
But yes, I would readily recommend Steiner's work to anyone with
deeper questions about this work.
E .D.B.
Where would the homeopathy and agro-homeopathy communities benefit
from each other's work?
M.M. One connection point between
the two is the fact that we work with some of the same principles
when preparing our remedies. Actually, there may be something
for homeopathic pharmacists to learn here. I know that Kaviraj
has tried interesting variations and Enzo has written a booklet
called 'A New Basis for Potentisation', which suggests some radical
practices and interpretations.
Of course agro-homeopathy
might also be a reliable field to prove the existence of the effects
resulting from our remedy preparation techniques. It is difficult
to conceive of orthodox scientists insisting that changes in plants
and slurry pits are due to the placebo effect.
An important
lesson that this new discipline can learn from homeopathy is that
this should, in my opinion, remain 'open source'. The benefit
of this, is that this tool is not patented and in the hands of
a few businesses for their shareholders' gain. Actually that cuts
two ways; it also means that there is no huge commercial pot from
which to pay for the research. It means that it is done little
by little, by amateurs, boffins and enthusiasts in between their
commercially productive activities.
E.D.B.
Thank you very much Mark for sharing some of your thoughts with
us. During our interview you pointed out a number of exiting and
successful uses of agro-homeopathy. I will direct the readers to
your website where they can find the details. There is also a forum
where they can discuss these issues with you. We hope your project
will be successful. We are also grateful for the contribution you
are making to bring our dynamised remedies into mainstream acceptance.
# # #Visit Mark Moodie at his website: http://www.considera.org/consintro.html
See Mark Moodie’s article Homeopathy for Plants in the July
08 issue of the ezine: http://www.hpathy.com/papersnew/moodie-homeopathy-plants.asp
|