The
measurements, given by the sonologist, in every case of correction of mullerian
dysgenesis (during the monthly scannings over the last 5 years), were
graphically recorded. It showed, in all cases, a rise and fall, in every
measurement, during correction. A sample graph is given below.
The graph shows the final measurement (be
it length, breadth or thickness),in comparison with the starting point, an
appreciable improvement, thereby proving that the medicines given, have been
beneficial to the patient, as the size of the nodules have grown. This change,
by itself, is welcome, since till date, there has been no record of growth
of uterine nodule. But, surprisingly, on further scrutiny, we find, that
the increase, is neither uniform nor does it show a plateau formation (which is
commonly seen), in between spells of growth. In other words, it is not a ladder
like growth with occasional landings. On the contrary, it shows regression at
many points, occasionally marked. This
is surprising and needs a scientific explanation.
Analysis :
Starting
Point.
The size of the nodule at the commencement of correction is
crucial for the study. The nodule, at that moment, could have been
(1) growing spontaneously,
(2) regressing, or
(3) reached the end point of spontaneous progress or regression (quiescent or standstill
stage), -all of which are possible.
In nature, spontaneous evolution is seen; but then, it offers
no explanation for the changes mentioned above (the regression). Similarly, if
we consider point (3), having reached the end point, it is unlikely to have any
impact on growth, as seen (moreover, having reached the nadir, unlikely to
manifest again). So, the only conclusion, that we can make, is, that it was in
a regressing phase and hence, retained its regressive element or factor at
the commencement of correction and showed it during correction.
Regression Factor.
In nature, we do have a regression
factor. In developmental defects of the mullerian tract, the combined incidence
of mullerian agenesis, mullerian dysgenesis and regression after eugenesis
is given as < 1 %. Regression after eugenesis produces various categories
depending on when the regression factor commences to act. So, there is a
factor, it has not been isolated or identified, till date. It can continue to
act, after birth also. Nature reveals anomalies - (both fusion & non-fusion defects),
segmental loss in the mullerian tract, presence of irregular segments,
functional regression (only about 20 % of female babies show withdrawal
bleeding), few cases of secondary amenorrhoea with no obvious infection,
premature menopause and menopause and finally, atrophy after menopause. Presence
of regression factor is evident from the mensurational regression seen, at
times, only in one dimension (unexplainable), during the serial scans.
Growth of Uterine Nodule.
Irrespective of the stage of the
starting point, there has been growth of nodule. Normally, in nature, genetic
drive is presumed to be the factor for spontaneous evolution on specific lines.
Hence, one possibility is that the genetic drive, which has been lying dormant
all these years, has been stimulated, by the medicines, resulting in the growth
of the nodules.
The Effect of Corrective Medicine.
Dr. Sreevalsan’s Regime has resulted
in growth of uterine nodule, in all aspects – size, shape, position (movement
towards the midline and anteversion), and development of cavity and lining and
finally, response to ovarian hormones (menarche). It, probably, has no action
on regression factor, as regression is still seen and it, may be safely
presumed, that, it is only, stimulating the genetic drive.
The
Interplay.
During correction, the interplay
between genetic stimulation and regressive factor and their relative stengths
(at any given moment) could be the deciding factor behind the manifestation
seen in the graphs. This is the only
explanation that fits the case under discussion. It may be a
presumption, but, is definitely, a viable theory. Only time and further study,
will prove its true nature.
THERE IS NO GREATER
SIGN OF IGNORANCE THAN BELIEVING THAT THE INEXPLICABLE IS IMPOSSIBLE. “
S.BILLARD.


