What are some differences between the ‘American’ and ‘European’ schools of thought?
The labels ‘American’ and ‘European’ are highly misleading actually, but to use them in the vague and undifferentiated way which they customarily are, one could say that the beliefs propagated by Jensen represent a mixture of turn-of-the-century (and somewhat judgmental) notions of pigmentation and iris color published by Felke, Liljequist, Thiel, Lane, Kritzer, and other Germans, along with (more importantly) the toxemia-based interpretation and treatment of illness developed by Hippocrates, Hering, Kellogg, Christopher, Collins, Shelton, and numerous others in the ‘Natural Hygiene’ schools of thought. A dominant theme in the Jensen protocol is the emphasis on facilitating outflow from the body of waste material through the five major channels of elimination (colon, kidneys, skin, lungs, and the lymphatic drainage system). This approach includes allowing and encouraging catarrhal release rather than suppressing it as an unwanted symptom. By combining iris interpretation with dietary and detoxification approaches to health, Jensen made Iridology practical and useful as a clinical methodology. The big contribution from Jensen was the emphasis on cleansing and natural foods as the pathway to health, and the use of the iris as a symbol of one’s health status. The main drawback to this approach was the implication that the iris can change in response to therapeutic treatment, a notion that has not been supported by any evidence. Meanwhile the detailed and scientific observations of the German researchers has led to detailed topographic mappings and a taxonomy of features which include many correlations. The primary emphasis in the ‘European’ approach is to identify constitutional type from iris structure, and this is an essential starting point.
MAIKONG IRIDOLOGY SOFTWARE Installation and operation
