Hahahaha, you got back to me a lot faster than most people! It took me months to really get through it and begin to realize how powerful it's implications were!
I have observed that people do NOT like when someone suggests that cancer could be a healing process. Like, they’re enraged and think you’re the stupidest person alive. What are your thoughts? I have read most of GNM and am generally in complete agreement. Sometimes I think they’re inaccurate with the specific cause of some conflicts, but they’re covering a lot of topics, so it’s acceptable. It’s a fairly easy for me to accept the cancer idea, because recently my Nanna at 91 was diagnosed with throat cancer, given a year to live, they did chemo and she died within a week. Genius doctors huh?
I have observed that people do NOT like when someone suggests that cancer could be a healing process. Like, they’re enraged and think you’re the stupidest person alive. What are your thoughts?
Tell me about it! It is only with the utmost delicacy that this can even be mentioned. I don't even like the words "healing process". That's not quite right as I see it. It's more of an "augmentation" followed by a "restoration". Never was the person in an "unhealed" state (but I do realize this is how it's referenced in GNM). If anything, the "cancer" (for most) puts the person into a superior state to accomplish improved oxygen intake, food digestion, milk production, sperm production etc.
I've found that if you yourself haven't had the particular dis-ease, it's not helpful to speculate too much. From my POV, all the conflict causes make perfect sense, which is why I find it hard to fault them. Every other so called "cause" pushed on us by mainstream medicine is so random, so imprecise, so imperfect as to render them utterly pointless IMHO. None of them fit the bill, least of all "a malfunctioning body). But when you think of a primitive brain psyche taking our FIGURATIVE thoughts LITERALLY, it all comes together quite nicely IMHO.
Which conflict cause(s) explanation do you find most doubtful?
Sorry to hear about your Nanna. It sounds like she lived a good life though! Sad to say, it was the chemo that likely took the final toll, as it so often does. There's a study out there somewhere that sampled over 10,000 people diagnosed with cancer across 20 years I believe. Anyway, those that had sought mainstream treatments (burn, cut, poison) lived on average for 5 years. Those who sought alternative treatments, or no treatment at all lived on average for 7 years. There was also a survey given to oncologists 10-15 years ago who were asked if they would take chemo if they were ever diagnosed with cancer. 75% said they would NOT do chemo. So there's that...
But I get it, convincing someone who has lived their entire life "trusting the experts" is darn near impossible. I've found that the only real chance you have is warming them up in advance by telling them you know EXACTLY WHY they have cancer, unlike their doctor/oncologist. In this way, you're somewhat leveling the playing field.
It's worth noting that many people do not verbalize their internal struggles so it would be impossible to know sometimes what someone was dealing with. In regards to your Nanna, assuming the diagnosis was correct (which it isn't always) perhaps she did receive some news that was "hard for her to swallow" in the months leading up to her chemo? It's also worth noting that she may have resolving or had recently resolved a "hard to swallow" conflict so it could have been something she had gotten over many years prior to as well. I don't put anything past these doctors today. Even though the good and trustworthy well outnumber the bad and untrustworthy, there are so many links in the chain of a "cancer diagnosis" and so many errors in their education and training.
Dr. Hamer plainly and boldly said that "cancer" doesn't kill people. And when you stop and think about it, an "abnormal growth of cells" quite obviously does not kill anybody. There are rare instances where a blockage of a vital process can occur which obviously requires surgical intervention. But this is rare, very rare. It's the "metastases" deception that scares people into the mainstream treatments.
Dr. Hamer says that cancer patients almost exclusively die of cachexia (wasting away) and enervation (loss of vital force, spirit, the will to live), both of which are brought on by poisoning and irradiating one's own body. That's a tough pill to swallow I realize. But from my POV, it makes a lot of sense. Just referencing that 5yr vs 7yr lifespan survey alone supports his assertion.
And it's also worth noting, that perpetuating one's psychological conflict without choosing to eventually release/allow/accept it, will also lead to death. This is not healthy. There is far greater power in the act of forgiveness/acceptance than virtually anyone realizes. Halting and reversing a cancer program (aka "remission") is just the tip of the iceberg methinks.
Food for thought...
Looking forward to hearing which dis-ease/conflict you find unlikely. I've been on the lookout for a clear and undeniable case where the GNM diagnosis doesn't work and I've yet to find one. And I'm not saying this isn't the case. I'm always open to adjusting my beliefs when presented with new evidence. It's almost unimaginable that Dr. Hamer could have gotten EVERYTHING right. After all, we're all only human.
Thanks for your reply. Is this close to correct then?
The mind-body conflict prevents certain cells of some organ from functioning [correctly].
The conflict increases in intensity, with more and more cells not functioning.
Eventually the organ is at risk of complete failure
The cancer biological program triggers to produce more cells to compensate and try to "save" the organism, giving it more time to resolve the conflict
I'm not sure why number of cancer cells can be so large - even more cells than the number of cells in the original organ, it seems. Are the cancer cells less efficient?
When the conflict is resolved, bacteria repair the damaged organ. The unneeded cancer cells simply die and are removed as waste.
When I said "inaccurate", I only meant that there could be more precisely described conflicts. Not that any were "incorrect".
For example, my specialty, due of course to my own conflicts, is the musculature. In published GNM literature, they list things as abandonment, self-devaluation, etc,, which are certainly correct. However, it's more like... every single moment in life that has created even the slightest negative experience, that one may have put aside for fear of looking at it, has a paralyzing effect on some musculature to some extent.
Resolving the conflicts isn't so much about understanding the categories, as taking the time to scan the musculature and the memory, and hone in on conflicts... you usually don't know what they're going to be until you consciously locate them in the body. (This is basically scientology... just I developed specific ways of moving the body to help the person feel and locate the conflicts, where as scientology is I suppose more of a therapy approach).
GNM gives an excellent list of categories and likely conflicts, though there is simply room for more specificity. And it also necessary to say that some conflicts can't be categorized -- they're simply random unique moments in your life that have some absurd preconceptual meaning.
However, none of what I'm saying invalidates the general idea, with which I'm in agreement.
It's impressive that you asked "Was she having trouble swallowing something?" Because that was indeed the complaint. She complained to my Mum that she was having trouble swallowing. She was getting very, very old and there was no doubt that death was soon, plus she fairly advanced "memory degradation". So perhaps she couldn't swallow that. She was certainly in denial about her memory not working. As you said, perhaps it could have been an earlier life conflict, though I don't suspect so.
PS: would you like to chat on skype / zoom / some VOIP? (Send me a direct message if so... I guess we're still in some public thread here).
Thanks for your reply. Is this close to correct then? The mind-body conflict prevents certain cells of some organ from functioning [correctly].
No. The psyche interprets the figurative/conceptual/mental conflict (e.g. "I can't swallow this", "I can't stomach this") as a LITERAL threat to the body's survival. As such, depending on the tissue type (endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) the psyche makes adjustments to IMPROVE the performance of the physical organ that pertains to the figurative conflict. In the "I can't stomach/digest this situation in my life" figurative conflict, the psyche interprets it literally and generates new, temporary cells (cancer cells) to improve your ability to digest food - much like say a snake having difficulty digesting a bone of a mouse it ate, for example. Make sense?
The ectodermal tissue actually works to widen, open, improve flow, improve movement, etc. by necrotizing tissue. A good example of this would be stomach ulcers. In this case, the psyche is increasing space/area for better digestion. During the conflict in this part of the stomach, ulceration occurs. After the conflict is resolved, the bacteria then replace the lost cells - which allopathy/oncology ALSO CALLS "CANCER".
The conflict increases in intensity, with more and more cells not functioning.
No. Cells are functioning BETTER, more EFFECTIVELY during the conflict in an effort to assist the body with resolving the conflict.
Eventually the organ is at risk of complete failure
Very, very rarely. Almost everybody "gets cancer" sometime in their lives. Those of us who never visit allopathic doctors manage quite nicely. Those who get "regular checkups" eventually have their's found. The key takeaway is, "cancer cells" are literally there to IMPROVE the organs function. The "complete failure" will only occur if the conflict has been active for an extremely long time, or an extremely intense shorter period of time, at which time, the cell augmentation threatens to prevent a natural bodily process from proceeding - like digestion, excretion, etc. But this is very rare.
The cancer biological program triggers to produce more cells to compensate and try to "save" the organism, giving it more time to resolve the conflict
Yes, this is more accurate. Simply put, the cancer cell augmentation happens to improve the function of the organ.
I'm not sure why number of cancer cells can be so large - even more cells than the number of cells in the original organ, it seems. Are the cancer cells less efficient?
I'm not sure this is even possible. But I don't know. That would be one heckuva "mass" if it would become larger than the organ itself. I think these situations are extremely rare. But presumably, the soul/spirit may not wish to carry-on within the body if the psychological turmoil can't be overcome. In fairness to your question, I don't have a good answer as to why the psyche is unable to recognize that the continued cell proliferation will eventually be fatal to the organism. It's a good question I don't presently have an answer for.
When the conflict is resolved, bacteria repair the damaged organ. The unneeded cancer cells simply die and are removed as waste.
"Damage" is not the right way to describe this. Think of cancer cells as "temporary augmentations" to improve performance. During the conflict active phase, the body produces an equal amount of TB mycobacteria whose job is to eat and dissolve the cancer cells after the conflict is resolved. This is how and why people are often found to have "inactive" TB mycobacteria in their bodies but don't have "Tuberculosis" itself. In reality, "tuberculosis" is the PCL-A/B healing phases of "lung cancer". That's all it is. **To wit, different types of bacteria are produced for different organs. TB are primarily for lung, liver and kidney.
For example, my specialty, due of course to my own conflicts, is the musculature. In published GNM literature, they list things as abandonment, self-devaluation, etc,, which are certainly correct. However, it's more like... every single moment in life that has created even the slightest negative experience, that one may have put aside for fear of looking at it, has a paralyzing effect on some musculature to some extent.
Right. You should review the "sympathicatonia" symptoms and look back at your own events in life. The restless mind, cold extremities, poor appetite, insomnia, etc. This period is the "intense" conflict active phase. The psyche reacts by making adjustments related to the conflict. In your case, if the body is left alone, its role is to strengthen the musculature or bones to avoid a future conflict event. This is a unique characteristic of the "Cerebral Medulla" and "New Mesoderm" conflict programs. The "benefit" or "biological purpose" in GNM terms, comes at the end of the final PCL-B healing phase. Unlike cancers, where the benefit is immediate.
GNM gives an excellent list of categories and likely conflicts, though there is simply room for more specificity. And it also necessary to say that some conflicts can't be categorized -- they're simply random unique moments in your life that have some absurd preconceptual meaning.
The subjective nature of one's perception is one of the most fascinating aspects of the whole modality. How you react to something is not the same as how someone else may react. It's an astonishing thing to witness. You must develop extremely sharp listening skills when consulting with someone. A few months back I consulted over the course of several months with a woman who had some pretty severe back pain. Her osteopath diagnosed here with several minute spinal fractures in the thoracic region. She was scheduled for a $100K surgery to repair them. But miraculously, she stuck it out with me and kept talking. About two weeks later, with the surgery coming up in another two weeks, she opened up and told me about an annual trip she and her lifelong friends take every year to a resort destination. This year, she was uninvited because she chose not to get vaccinated, while are her friends took the jab. As she was talking to me, those magic words slipped right out of her mouth; she said, "I just felt crushed" that they would exclude my and my husband about such an absurd thing. I asked her to elaborate on this and she said it bothered her for months, that she lost some sleep over it, and spent a great deal of time trying to come up with an appropriate way to let her friends know how unfair it was and how badly it made her feel. And there it was - "crushed". The spine is what gets "crushed".
Needless to say, I explained all this to her. I especially explained that the breakdown and repair of the periosteum is one of the most painful things to endure. But I told explained this is what had happened and would happen. The next week, she cancelled that surgery, and what followed was about 3-4 months of pretty intense pain as the spinal bones repaired themselves. I told her she' feel stronger than ever before when it was complete. And by gosh, she reported to me about a month ago that she feels better than ever and has zero back problems now. I don't know who was more shocked; me or her!
It's impressive that you asked "Was she having trouble swallowing something?" Because that was indeed the complaint. She complained to my Mum that she was having trouble swallowing. She was getting very, very old and there was no doubt that death was soon, plus she fairly advanced "memory degradation". So perhaps she couldn't swallow that. She was certainly in denial about her memory not working. As you said, perhaps it could have been an earlier life conflict, though I don't suspect so.
It's hard to say without a thorough and deep consultation, as evidenced with my above story. That information didn't come out of her mouth until she was well past her conflict and she had never brought it up to me before until I prodded her quite a bit about what she viewed as "meaningless aspects of her private life". It never even occurred to her to mention this. All she could think about was her previous covid, the time somebody yanked her arm trying to help her out of a car, a few days of heavy coughs, etc. She was only thinking of "physical events" that would have been the cause. And don't mistake me, sometimes those quite obviously are the cause of bone/muscle problems. But this notion of "degenerative" issues without any obvious cause is where GNM wins the day.
Anyway, you would have needed to get her to open up about her situation and what she was unhappy about. It could have been something as simple as that she didn't want to eat such-and-such a meal every Wednesday night, for example. It sounds simple and trivial, but that can be all it takes. She didn't like the menu one night of the week, and as that day approached, she dreaded it but there's was nothing she could do about it.
The moral of the story is, you would be taken aback by what people reveal when they open up. Just last week I worked with a woman who had a bad case of hemorrhoids. For women, this is typically an "identity conflict" which mirrors the male "territory loss conflict". As it turns out, her husband had put their house up for sale, which sold almost immediately. But they couldn't find a suitable new home that following month. She was very stressed out about it. It was only after the buyers couldn't sell their home, that they were able to rescind the contract. Her hemorrhoids kicked in three days later (healing phase). Out "identities" are very much tied to our homes/apartments.
As to "self-devaluation" conflicts, they run such a wide expanse well into the thousands. That's just an overarching conflict "category". But typically, depending on the body part/region, you can narrow down the nature of the conflict. I'm working with someone now who has Parkinson's disease now. She does not like what I'm telling her, although she was forced to agree with my assessment (she lost her business). In the case of Parkinson's that affects the hands (most commonly), the self-devaluation conflict is either "something I could not hold onto" or "something I could not let go of". Hopefully you can see the mirrored aspect of this. In any case, the "biological purpose" is to, quite literally, STRENGTHEN THE HANDS, so as to hopefully not "lose hold" of anything else in the future. Unfortunately, the medication she is on is short-circuiting the process, in addition to her rejection of allowing the hand-shaking to proceed without interference. Parkinson's patients are trapped in what is known as a "hanging-healing". As the epi-crisis begins to arise, which is "re-living the conflict", they retreat away from the memory of it and sedate or distract themselves away from allowing it to arise. The longer this goes on, the more difficult the resolution. This is effectively what a "chronic illness" is - a hanging healing.
PS: would you like to chat on skype / zoom / some VOIP? (Send me a direct message if so... I guess we're still in some public thread here).
Sure. Gosh, I haven't used any of those apps in so long. I'll have to see if skype even works for me any longer. Lemme check into it and get back to you.
BTW - all good questions from you above. I'm not meaning to be rude or dismissive in any way. I hope you don't take it that way. I pretty much had the same understanding of GNM for the first 6 months I was looking into it as you do now. It wasn't until I really started to dive in that it all started coming together for me. It took a good year for everything to start to sink in. The basic takeaway of GNM is that your psyche is quite primitive, exclusively wired for survival, and cannot distinguish the literal (old brain) from the figurative (new brain). Thus, everything we call "dis-ease" is really a "restoration".
Hahahaha, you got back to me a lot faster than most people! It took me months to really get through it and begin to realize how powerful it's implications were!
Cheers
I have observed that people do NOT like when someone suggests that cancer could be a healing process. Like, they’re enraged and think you’re the stupidest person alive. What are your thoughts? I have read most of GNM and am generally in complete agreement. Sometimes I think they’re inaccurate with the specific cause of some conflicts, but they’re covering a lot of topics, so it’s acceptable. It’s a fairly easy for me to accept the cancer idea, because recently my Nanna at 91 was diagnosed with throat cancer, given a year to live, they did chemo and she died within a week. Genius doctors huh?
Tell me about it! It is only with the utmost delicacy that this can even be mentioned. I don't even like the words "healing process". That's not quite right as I see it. It's more of an "augmentation" followed by a "restoration". Never was the person in an "unhealed" state (but I do realize this is how it's referenced in GNM). If anything, the "cancer" (for most) puts the person into a superior state to accomplish improved oxygen intake, food digestion, milk production, sperm production etc.
I've found that if you yourself haven't had the particular dis-ease, it's not helpful to speculate too much. From my POV, all the conflict causes make perfect sense, which is why I find it hard to fault them. Every other so called "cause" pushed on us by mainstream medicine is so random, so imprecise, so imperfect as to render them utterly pointless IMHO. None of them fit the bill, least of all "a malfunctioning body). But when you think of a primitive brain psyche taking our FIGURATIVE thoughts LITERALLY, it all comes together quite nicely IMHO.
Which conflict cause(s) explanation do you find most doubtful?
Sorry to hear about your Nanna. It sounds like she lived a good life though! Sad to say, it was the chemo that likely took the final toll, as it so often does. There's a study out there somewhere that sampled over 10,000 people diagnosed with cancer across 20 years I believe. Anyway, those that had sought mainstream treatments (burn, cut, poison) lived on average for 5 years. Those who sought alternative treatments, or no treatment at all lived on average for 7 years. There was also a survey given to oncologists 10-15 years ago who were asked if they would take chemo if they were ever diagnosed with cancer. 75% said they would NOT do chemo. So there's that...
But I get it, convincing someone who has lived their entire life "trusting the experts" is darn near impossible. I've found that the only real chance you have is warming them up in advance by telling them you know EXACTLY WHY they have cancer, unlike their doctor/oncologist. In this way, you're somewhat leveling the playing field.
It's worth noting that many people do not verbalize their internal struggles so it would be impossible to know sometimes what someone was dealing with. In regards to your Nanna, assuming the diagnosis was correct (which it isn't always) perhaps she did receive some news that was "hard for her to swallow" in the months leading up to her chemo? It's also worth noting that she may have resolving or had recently resolved a "hard to swallow" conflict so it could have been something she had gotten over many years prior to as well. I don't put anything past these doctors today. Even though the good and trustworthy well outnumber the bad and untrustworthy, there are so many links in the chain of a "cancer diagnosis" and so many errors in their education and training.
Dr. Hamer plainly and boldly said that "cancer" doesn't kill people. And when you stop and think about it, an "abnormal growth of cells" quite obviously does not kill anybody. There are rare instances where a blockage of a vital process can occur which obviously requires surgical intervention. But this is rare, very rare. It's the "metastases" deception that scares people into the mainstream treatments.
Dr. Hamer says that cancer patients almost exclusively die of cachexia (wasting away) and enervation (loss of vital force, spirit, the will to live), both of which are brought on by poisoning and irradiating one's own body. That's a tough pill to swallow I realize. But from my POV, it makes a lot of sense. Just referencing that 5yr vs 7yr lifespan survey alone supports his assertion.
And it's also worth noting, that perpetuating one's psychological conflict without choosing to eventually release/allow/accept it, will also lead to death. This is not healthy. There is far greater power in the act of forgiveness/acceptance than virtually anyone realizes. Halting and reversing a cancer program (aka "remission") is just the tip of the iceberg methinks.
Food for thought...
Looking forward to hearing which dis-ease/conflict you find unlikely. I've been on the lookout for a clear and undeniable case where the GNM diagnosis doesn't work and I've yet to find one. And I'm not saying this isn't the case. I'm always open to adjusting my beliefs when presented with new evidence. It's almost unimaginable that Dr. Hamer could have gotten EVERYTHING right. After all, we're all only human.
Thanks for your reply. Is this close to correct then?
The mind-body conflict prevents certain cells of some organ from functioning [correctly].
The conflict increases in intensity, with more and more cells not functioning.
Eventually the organ is at risk of complete failure
The cancer biological program triggers to produce more cells to compensate and try to "save" the organism, giving it more time to resolve the conflict
I'm not sure why number of cancer cells can be so large - even more cells than the number of cells in the original organ, it seems. Are the cancer cells less efficient?
When the conflict is resolved, bacteria repair the damaged organ. The unneeded cancer cells simply die and are removed as waste.
When I said "inaccurate", I only meant that there could be more precisely described conflicts. Not that any were "incorrect".
For example, my specialty, due of course to my own conflicts, is the musculature. In published GNM literature, they list things as abandonment, self-devaluation, etc,, which are certainly correct. However, it's more like... every single moment in life that has created even the slightest negative experience, that one may have put aside for fear of looking at it, has a paralyzing effect on some musculature to some extent.
Resolving the conflicts isn't so much about understanding the categories, as taking the time to scan the musculature and the memory, and hone in on conflicts... you usually don't know what they're going to be until you consciously locate them in the body. (This is basically scientology... just I developed specific ways of moving the body to help the person feel and locate the conflicts, where as scientology is I suppose more of a therapy approach).
GNM gives an excellent list of categories and likely conflicts, though there is simply room for more specificity. And it also necessary to say that some conflicts can't be categorized -- they're simply random unique moments in your life that have some absurd preconceptual meaning.
However, none of what I'm saying invalidates the general idea, with which I'm in agreement.
It's impressive that you asked "Was she having trouble swallowing something?" Because that was indeed the complaint. She complained to my Mum that she was having trouble swallowing. She was getting very, very old and there was no doubt that death was soon, plus she fairly advanced "memory degradation". So perhaps she couldn't swallow that. She was certainly in denial about her memory not working. As you said, perhaps it could have been an earlier life conflict, though I don't suspect so.
PS: would you like to chat on skype / zoom / some VOIP? (Send me a direct message if so... I guess we're still in some public thread here).
No. The psyche interprets the figurative/conceptual/mental conflict (e.g. "I can't swallow this", "I can't stomach this") as a LITERAL threat to the body's survival. As such, depending on the tissue type (endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) the psyche makes adjustments to IMPROVE the performance of the physical organ that pertains to the figurative conflict. In the "I can't stomach/digest this situation in my life" figurative conflict, the psyche interprets it literally and generates new, temporary cells (cancer cells) to improve your ability to digest food - much like say a snake having difficulty digesting a bone of a mouse it ate, for example. Make sense?
The ectodermal tissue actually works to widen, open, improve flow, improve movement, etc. by necrotizing tissue. A good example of this would be stomach ulcers. In this case, the psyche is increasing space/area for better digestion. During the conflict in this part of the stomach, ulceration occurs. After the conflict is resolved, the bacteria then replace the lost cells - which allopathy/oncology ALSO CALLS "CANCER".
No. Cells are functioning BETTER, more EFFECTIVELY during the conflict in an effort to assist the body with resolving the conflict.
Very, very rarely. Almost everybody "gets cancer" sometime in their lives. Those of us who never visit allopathic doctors manage quite nicely. Those who get "regular checkups" eventually have their's found. The key takeaway is, "cancer cells" are literally there to IMPROVE the organs function. The "complete failure" will only occur if the conflict has been active for an extremely long time, or an extremely intense shorter period of time, at which time, the cell augmentation threatens to prevent a natural bodily process from proceeding - like digestion, excretion, etc. But this is very rare.
Yes, this is more accurate. Simply put, the cancer cell augmentation happens to improve the function of the organ.
I'm not sure this is even possible. But I don't know. That would be one heckuva "mass" if it would become larger than the organ itself. I think these situations are extremely rare. But presumably, the soul/spirit may not wish to carry-on within the body if the psychological turmoil can't be overcome. In fairness to your question, I don't have a good answer as to why the psyche is unable to recognize that the continued cell proliferation will eventually be fatal to the organism. It's a good question I don't presently have an answer for.
"Damage" is not the right way to describe this. Think of cancer cells as "temporary augmentations" to improve performance. During the conflict active phase, the body produces an equal amount of TB mycobacteria whose job is to eat and dissolve the cancer cells after the conflict is resolved. This is how and why people are often found to have "inactive" TB mycobacteria in their bodies but don't have "Tuberculosis" itself. In reality, "tuberculosis" is the PCL-A/B healing phases of "lung cancer". That's all it is. **To wit, different types of bacteria are produced for different organs. TB are primarily for lung, liver and kidney.
Right. You should review the "sympathicatonia" symptoms and look back at your own events in life. The restless mind, cold extremities, poor appetite, insomnia, etc. This period is the "intense" conflict active phase. The psyche reacts by making adjustments related to the conflict. In your case, if the body is left alone, its role is to strengthen the musculature or bones to avoid a future conflict event. This is a unique characteristic of the "Cerebral Medulla" and "New Mesoderm" conflict programs. The "benefit" or "biological purpose" in GNM terms, comes at the end of the final PCL-B healing phase. Unlike cancers, where the benefit is immediate.
The subjective nature of one's perception is one of the most fascinating aspects of the whole modality. How you react to something is not the same as how someone else may react. It's an astonishing thing to witness. You must develop extremely sharp listening skills when consulting with someone. A few months back I consulted over the course of several months with a woman who had some pretty severe back pain. Her osteopath diagnosed here with several minute spinal fractures in the thoracic region. She was scheduled for a $100K surgery to repair them. But miraculously, she stuck it out with me and kept talking. About two weeks later, with the surgery coming up in another two weeks, she opened up and told me about an annual trip she and her lifelong friends take every year to a resort destination. This year, she was uninvited because she chose not to get vaccinated, while are her friends took the jab. As she was talking to me, those magic words slipped right out of her mouth; she said, "I just felt crushed" that they would exclude my and my husband about such an absurd thing. I asked her to elaborate on this and she said it bothered her for months, that she lost some sleep over it, and spent a great deal of time trying to come up with an appropriate way to let her friends know how unfair it was and how badly it made her feel. And there it was - "crushed". The spine is what gets "crushed".
Needless to say, I explained all this to her. I especially explained that the breakdown and repair of the periosteum is one of the most painful things to endure. But I told explained this is what had happened and would happen. The next week, she cancelled that surgery, and what followed was about 3-4 months of pretty intense pain as the spinal bones repaired themselves. I told her she' feel stronger than ever before when it was complete. And by gosh, she reported to me about a month ago that she feels better than ever and has zero back problems now. I don't know who was more shocked; me or her!
It's hard to say without a thorough and deep consultation, as evidenced with my above story. That information didn't come out of her mouth until she was well past her conflict and she had never brought it up to me before until I prodded her quite a bit about what she viewed as "meaningless aspects of her private life". It never even occurred to her to mention this. All she could think about was her previous covid, the time somebody yanked her arm trying to help her out of a car, a few days of heavy coughs, etc. She was only thinking of "physical events" that would have been the cause. And don't mistake me, sometimes those quite obviously are the cause of bone/muscle problems. But this notion of "degenerative" issues without any obvious cause is where GNM wins the day.
Anyway, you would have needed to get her to open up about her situation and what she was unhappy about. It could have been something as simple as that she didn't want to eat such-and-such a meal every Wednesday night, for example. It sounds simple and trivial, but that can be all it takes. She didn't like the menu one night of the week, and as that day approached, she dreaded it but there's was nothing she could do about it.
The moral of the story is, you would be taken aback by what people reveal when they open up. Just last week I worked with a woman who had a bad case of hemorrhoids. For women, this is typically an "identity conflict" which mirrors the male "territory loss conflict". As it turns out, her husband had put their house up for sale, which sold almost immediately. But they couldn't find a suitable new home that following month. She was very stressed out about it. It was only after the buyers couldn't sell their home, that they were able to rescind the contract. Her hemorrhoids kicked in three days later (healing phase). Out "identities" are very much tied to our homes/apartments.
As to "self-devaluation" conflicts, they run such a wide expanse well into the thousands. That's just an overarching conflict "category". But typically, depending on the body part/region, you can narrow down the nature of the conflict. I'm working with someone now who has Parkinson's disease now. She does not like what I'm telling her, although she was forced to agree with my assessment (she lost her business). In the case of Parkinson's that affects the hands (most commonly), the self-devaluation conflict is either "something I could not hold onto" or "something I could not let go of". Hopefully you can see the mirrored aspect of this. In any case, the "biological purpose" is to, quite literally, STRENGTHEN THE HANDS, so as to hopefully not "lose hold" of anything else in the future. Unfortunately, the medication she is on is short-circuiting the process, in addition to her rejection of allowing the hand-shaking to proceed without interference. Parkinson's patients are trapped in what is known as a "hanging-healing". As the epi-crisis begins to arise, which is "re-living the conflict", they retreat away from the memory of it and sedate or distract themselves away from allowing it to arise. The longer this goes on, the more difficult the resolution. This is effectively what a "chronic illness" is - a hanging healing.
Sure. Gosh, I haven't used any of those apps in so long. I'll have to see if skype even works for me any longer. Lemme check into it and get back to you.
BTW - all good questions from you above. I'm not meaning to be rude or dismissive in any way. I hope you don't take it that way. I pretty much had the same understanding of GNM for the first 6 months I was looking into it as you do now. It wasn't until I really started to dive in that it all started coming together for me. It took a good year for everything to start to sink in. The basic takeaway of GNM is that your psyche is quite primitive, exclusively wired for survival, and cannot distinguish the literal (old brain) from the figurative (new brain). Thus, everything we call "dis-ease" is really a "restoration".