Generally the rules of specific overrides general, and my argument is a specific statement is made that overrides the general.
The crutch of the matter is this sentience, that is under "Major Curse"
"You are affected normally by healing elixirs, potions, and other items."
Does the word "Normally" in this sentience mean "as if you had the minor curse effect" OR "as if you did NOT have this conditional status effect"?
In my mind "Normal" is default state when you have no conditional effects in play, default rules that apply to every character of any class. Sure, there are things that modify those rules but then you are now using specific rules rather than the normal ones.
You have to jump to the conclusion that "normal" equals "minor curse" when that isn't stated.
Either you assume the ambiguousness is a mistake and take a "rules as intended" approach or assume the placement & phrasing was intentional.
The best argument for the former is to say it this is a clarification, reminding the player that magic items are not creatures and therefore exempt from "you can't be healed by magical effects originating from other creatures" clause but IMO that is kind of obvious and could have been phrased in a much more clear way.
If they had intended it to mean the former, then it's redundant as the rest of the paragraph would have automatically made items behave that way.
Why is this non-rule clarification in the middle of a paragraph, where every other statement is a specific rule that overrides the "normal" rules?
You have to make an assumption that this is not a statement, when the rest of it is treated as such.
Why is a clarification of the rules for "Minor curse" under "Moderate Curse"?
It would make much more sense for it should be sitting in the previous paragraph.
You would have to assume the placement was done by mistake and not an intentional one.
It is also phrased like a standalone statement, that isn't conditional on anything else (beyond the definition of "normally"). You could move that sentience to it's own section and it would 100% work.
I think it is reasonable to take it as an intentional statement that is making a specific modification to the general "Minor Curse" rules within the context of magical items during "Moderate Curse".
Once the curse is activated, the "normal" rules no longer apply and you have to use the curse specific rules instead.
Similarly, when a barbarian rages, you are now using the barbarian rage rules (e.g. can no longer take concentrate actions) for the things specific to that and then the "normal" rules for everything else.
There are so many other ways it could have been phrased that would have made it clear
-"Remember - magic items do not count as an effect from creatures, but they do still take the status penalty from minor curse"
-"Your friends can still feed you magic items but they still till take the status penalty from minor curse"
-"Healing elixirs, potions, and other items count as healing effect, but are NOT magical healing from another creature".
-"You are affected normally by your curse when consuming healing elixirs, potions, and other items"
