It's something that has always piqued my interest. You hear a lot about it, it is sometimes blamed on you (haha), it is gossiped about, healthcare has its hands full with it.
We, who consider ourselves normal, have little or no contact with it. It is a minority, and typical of minorities, it leaves us cold as long as it does not happen to us and/or it does not come near us.
So I ask myself: what then is normal? The imposed platform we have to move on? A learned pattern of expectation that we have ancestorally inherited? Who decides what is normal? And as we have heard several times, the new normal, a proposition forced upon us through brainwashing. But isn't the same with our upbringing? A kind of ancestral brainwashing? Or an imposed expectation pattern from our parents who didn't know any better at the time either.
Therefore, mental disorders are considered extreme if we compare it to what the average person feels and/or thinks to feel. I then ask myself whether not every human being could have mental disorders, submerged, silent and flowing in a long mild conflictative phase.
If we go back in time for a moment where the DSM-5 states what personality disorders are and how they should be treated pharmaceutically, it is based on a lecture by experts in various areas of psychiatry. They talk here about an abnormality in brain chemistry. This comes from biologists, neurologists, psychiatrists and other (fle) experts. Psychologists are already getting a little closer to it by stating that we need to look at childhood. Holistic thinkers speak of ancestral or even womb traits.
Germanic medicine teaches us that in schitzophrenic constellations there is a biological conflict in both hemispheres of the brain. And that it is an innate survival tactic of the body (see, of course, psyche-brain-body). Personally, I have known someone who was perfectly healthy until he was 17. He came back from a trip from Paris and was suddenly schitzophrenic. He is now 35 and is under heavy medication so he sleeps 20h a day. Every 3 weeks he can walk around for a day and then go back into hibernation, as I call it. The family also plays a crucial role in this. They don't want to take care of it and try to cover it up by sedating him. The pharma also makes a fair amount of money with this as the medication is not really cheap. The family then turns its back on him and sticks its head in the sand. This is just one example and certainly not unique in nature, unfortunately. I knew nothing about GNM at the time.
If you read through the constellations, described by Dr. Hamer, you will certainly recognize certain constellations that apply to you, some perhaps a bit more than others. Don't we all have a little bit of all the constellations within us? Or in other words, a mental disorder?
Don't we all have a little bit of different constellations in us, like hover-autism-mutism-marking-motor-casanova-bite-or kidney-collector-tube conflict? There are others, you know.
A therapist has a lot of work to figure out where the origins of those various, small or large, conflicts come from. It is by asking pointed questions that one gets close to the likely origin. I say probable, because to my feeling several conflicts are always active and interrelated. And then I am not talking about the underlying traces that are cause or effect. One can only resolve something when a disease raises its head.
In RG (regular medicine) one fights the disease, the evil, the body destroys itself. But as we know in the GNM we look at the cause of the disease, the origin of the conflict and the accompanying ZBS (Meaningful Biological Special Program). Something the RG does not do and also ignores. I have already tried to talk to an oncologist about this. He then said: aja... and it stopped there as if I was wasting his time. So don't argue with people who are not open to it, are against it, or think it's far-fetched. It won't get you anywhere. When I explain it to a person who consults me, it comes across differently, and sometimes you see a light go on: tense, I hadn't thought of it that way, and suddenly the picture turns out to be right. Should one then drop the whole RG and fully subscribe to the GNM? In my opinion, no. We need the RG, and vice versa it should be the same. But unfortunately, we still have a long way to go for that. Improvement is in sight.
I read recently that someone had cavities in his teeth and some inflamed gums, and knew what the bite conflict meant, and how to resolve it. Going to the dentist, according to him, was no longer necessary as he would ride out the ride in pain and smelly breath. I advised him to go to the dentist anyway and complete the healing process before and more harm would happen. Or other conflicts such as rejection.
As a patient, can one use RG to complete a healing process? If you are aware of the conflict, can grasp and convert the cause emotionally, is it necessary to let your body do the work in the long run while pains and discomforts make your life miserable?
I think that's one to think about.
If someone is diagnosed with cancer, may they choose the RG despite their knowledge of GNM? Isn't it then about your psyche's conviction directing your body whether to choose chemo or not? Can the GNM be a mental support in the healing process when one chooses Rg? Is it one's own reassurance or part of anxiety reduction to go easier into your own healing phase even though you know chemo is doing you more bad than good? Again, this needs some thought. Both are possible, I guess. In the Biology of Believe by Bruce Lipton can teach and understand a lot about this.
