Historical Use of Oils ** AT Courses

[Guest guest]

Hey Michael,

 

> > More than you might know .. the use of herbs is pretty close to

> > being a science .. the use of essential oils is light years away

> > from being one. There are a few tens of thousands of years of

> > tried and true use of the wild plants in nature .. by every culture

> > in the world .. but the use of essential oils for more than massage

> > and such has like a generation or so of concentrated use .. and even

> > then much of the information has been tainted like the fruits of a

> > poison tree due to lots of misinformation, disinformation, rumors

> > and marketing hype .. not to mention the honest or ignorant

> > extrapolation of information I mentioned in the other post.

> >

> I have a strong interest in ancient Egyptian religion and culture and

> have read that the Egyptians used large doses of essential oils for

> various purposes (one being embalming).

 

The Irish have also traditionally used distilled products for embalming

themselves. ;-p

 

> Is it possible that at some time in the distant past there was a

> science of using oils that has been lost?

 

Odds are against it .. unless we want to get into Chariots of the Gawds

and the tales of space visitors representing all the angels and wheels

and chariots of fire and such in the Bible. Though distillation has

been around (in a crud fashion) for a few thousands of years .. the use

of distilled oils was not the norm .. very expensive they were.

 

> For example the use of frankencense and myrrh has ancient roots,

> the biblical oils, etc.

 

Odds are 99% of better that they were macerated oils .. like the

American Indians used. Plants soaked in olive oil or bear fat or

whatever was available.

 

> > > I have been sniffing a lot of tree resins lately for respiratory

> > > relief (eucalyptus, tea tree, etc.)

> >

> > I think you mean you have been sniffing the oils from the leaves of

> > Eucalyptus and Tea Tree .. rather than the resins - correct?

> >

> Yes, leaves. Regarding inhalers and sniffing...Do you know how this

> works? Do enough of the properties of the oils enter the body through

> inhaling (from a hand held inhaler) to make a difference? It clearly

> has an effect.

 

Its generally about camphor .. and the idea of aromatherapy is the

introduction of the volatile molecules of plant extracts into the body

through the olfactory system, past the blood brain barrier and into the

lungs and then the blood stream. Matters not what instrument you use to

contain those molecules .. be it a bottle or a cloth or a cotton ball or

an inhaler .. they will enter thru the olfactory system.

 

> I'm wondering if the scent alone triggers some response or if it is

> some other action.

 

Yes and no. Scent comes from those volatile molecules .. reactions or

responses are physiological, psychological and emotional .. matters not

if one can smell or not to gain physiological or psychological benefit

from the introduction of chemicals into the system .. but they would

have to be aware of the odor to have an emotional reaction or response.

One of the oils that triggers many emotional responses is Rose Otto.

 

> > If you read Schnaubelt .. can't find his book now so I'm sure the

> name

> > is misspelled .. ;-p .. you might come up with such a conclusion;

> moreso

> > in respect to the pines .. but I think the answer is NO. All of the

> > therapeutic properties of essential oils are directly related to

> their

> > chemical components and there are no corners on certain forms of

> plant

> > aromatics having identical properties based on their structure.

> Many

> > essential oils can assist the immune system .. they've been given

> the

> > handle of immunostimulants.

> >

> I have read " Advanced Aromatherapy " and found it interesting. He does

> seem to be a specialist in the chemical components of oils and how

> they work in the body (or something to this effect) Has anyone on

> this list studied with Kurt Schnaubelt (I think he is the Pacific

> Aromatherapy Institute)? He seems to be the real thing in terms of

> the science of aromatherapy (as opposed to Young)

>

> Michael

 

Everyone is the real thing when compared to Gary Young .. but I would

NEVER place Kurt Schnaubelt at the top of the list .. personal opinion.

 

I would, however, place Martin Watt there .. and if one wants to cut

through the BS and hype they should consider his Advanced Clinical

Aromatherapy Course .. not only is it the most complete an accurate one

around (methinks .. and I'm joined in that opinion by many others to

include those who had taken other courses afore they took Martin's) but

it is the LEAST COSTLY one around. Total is $399 and you get a 10%

discount by going through me .. and an additional $13 rebate IF you own

or purchase Plant Aromatics.

 

Martins Course is at http://www.AV-AT.com/coursedetails.html

Plant Aromatics is at http://www.AV-AT.com/plantaromaticsavnp.html

 

And merely applying for his course is not sufficient .. he must approve

enrollment and sometimes the old Limey grouch turns folks down for this

or that reason. ;-p

 

Y'all keep smiling. :-) Butch http://www.AV-AT.com