Rx thuja 30.
October 2nd.- The warts have quite disappeared; her scalp is a mass of scale, and “all the hair is going.”
Rx Bacill C.
November 20th.- No warts; scalp is improving; flatus bad.
Rep.
May 10th. -Rep
July 2nd.- Pains in the joints of fingers.
Rx Thuja 30.
August 6th.- Head better; fingers painful.
Rx. Psorinum CC., which finished the cure.
The remarkable cure of the old standing warts struck me very forcibly; not that curing warts by Thuja is at all new or unusual, but to cause any growth of any kind so ever to disappear right away under the influence of any drug whatever in the thirtieth-centesimal dilution is a marvellous thing to me, and not the less marvellous because it has been done so often by so many for the past two or three generations.
Why did I give Thuja? Tradition, and also because the lady in question had been in her day three times vaccinated, the last twice unsuccessfully. And an unsuccessful vaccination means, to me, that the virus has been taken up by the organism and there lies latent for future ill- the organism having failed to react.
Diagnosis and prognosis.
The fundamental idea underlying this little work is that an absolutely healthy woman changes without any ills or ailings whatever, and therefore, a normal woman, married or maiden, who has no disease or disease taint, has nothing to fear from the change of life The period will cease as it began, almost imperceptibly; it just leaves off, and there is an end of it.
But unfortunately very few women are truly free from disease and taintless; no doubt there are such, but these do not throng our consulting-rooms. A medical man is hardly a fair judge of the number of really normal persons, for the very sufficient reason that such individuals need no physician, and rarely come to him. There is, however, a large class of people whom I would designate as more than healthy, i. e.., whatever may bee wrong with them, they are loud and voluble in persistently declaring that they are always quite well and wonderfully healthy, and all their ancestors from Noah on have been perfectly well and quiet free from any disease. So far as they will confess they are, in regard to health, absolutely holy.
The wise practical physician knows at once that this is all fudge, and gives no credence to their statements; on the contrary, he at once suspects that the most grave constitutional disease lurks behind in these health- holy boasters, whose statements are commonly entirely mendacious. A gentleman once brought his little daughter to suffering from scrofulous ophthalmia, and, said he, she has had it over a year, and I cannot understand it, as we are all so healthy, and my father lived to be nearly ninety. Now I happened to know from the old gentleman himself, who was formerly my patient, that though he himself did indeed live to be nearly ninety years of age, still all his very numerous brothers and sisters died young of tuberculosis in one from or another.
Bacillinum cured the scrofulous ophthalmia in three months, and the fond father commented on the cure thus: ” I knew there could not be very much the matter, as we are all so healthy, and my father lived to nearly ninety.
A young lady was recently brought by her mother to me for haemorrhage of the lungs, and was thought to be doomed to die of phthisis of the lungs, two physicians of repute having given this prognosis. Said I ” What sort of health-histories have your people; is there any consumption in your family? ”
“Oh, no! We are all wonderfully healthy; there was never any consumption in our family.”
The true history being, as I happened to know, this- Her own mother died of cancer of the bowels; her eldest brother has asthma; her father had haemorrhage of the lungs as a young man; her third brother died of rapid phthisis; her eldest sister died of tuberculosis of the pelvic organs; her second sister has very severe eczema and disfiguring rheumatoid arthritis; her third sister is actually under my treatment for tumor of the breast with deeply retracted nipple; while her youngest brother is suffering from a huge lipoma.
So much for this example of the wonderfully healthy ones.
However, given a really pure-blooded normal woman, I contend that the change of life is a purely negative process in a pathological sense. Why, then, do we think and speak of the change of life almost as if it were of necessity a dangerous, mysterious period that all women do and should dread?
The reason is that most women are not quite normal, and their abnormalities are for the most part inherent diseases that may be observed in them any time from puberty to menopause and afterwards. As before observed, the cessation of the monthly PURIFICATION fully explains the whole series of morbid phenomena. Take any half-dozen cases ill-health at the change of life and you will readily trace the troubles back often even to the period of dentition, and almost always to the commencement of the period.
I constantly trace such climacteric troubles to gout, rheumatism, cancer, consumption, and venereal affections from a parent down through the daughter’s life. Thus consumptiveness will show itself at puberty as painful and excessive, or deficient menstruation, and ending as cancer at the change of life — cancer and consumption often alternating in succeeding generations; a small patch of eczema at puberty not infrequently means scirrhus at the menopause. As I have before pointed out (Tumours of the Breast), the various tumours of the breast commonly have their seat of origin in the womb of ovaries; and holding this view, I have succeeded from time to time in curing very many such tumours in women at all periods of life, and notably at the change of life.
Thus recently the Baroness X. telegraphed to me from the Hague that her doctors there had diagnosed Interstitial Mastitis of her right breast, and urged an immediate operation. I wired back forbidding the operation, saying that medicines would cure it. Her lady-ship appeared in my consulting room two or three days thereafter, and I found the diagnosis correct: the right breast being pretty uniformly infiltrated and hard.
Under Scirrhinum C. the breast became quite normal within two months; but it then became manifest that the real origin of the trouble still persisted, and lay in the pelvic organs and this pelvic root trouble I am now treating. I can afford to forgive certain insolent remarks of a very prominent medical brother at the Hague: he knows no better, and what he does not know of interstitial mastitis is not knowledge.
What on earth is the use of ablating a breast for a swelling that has its root-life in the female pelvic organs? I cull the following from the Homoeopathic World of July 1st, 1897. The author is Dr. John H. Clarke, editor of that useful journal, and to whom I offer my heartfelt thanks for appreciating the work of a brother homoeopath, notwithstanding that he is a homoeopath. For, strange to say, our british homeopaths are ever ready to swallow anything and everything from an allopathic source; but sit up o’ nights a to damn anything done by a professed homoeopath. Oh! the misery of he vulgar Brodklauberei.
The Distant Origin of Tumours of the Breast
Dr. Clarke says; “Since my last article was written there has appeared in the medical Journal a report of a paper by Dr. Beatson of Glasgow, read at a meeting of the British Gynecological Society, with a discussion thereon which deserves very special attention. The best report appears in the Medical Press of March 24th and May 15th and I propose to make lengthy extracts. The point brought out is one dealt with fully by Dr, Burnett in his well-known work on Tumours of the Breast, and as Dr. Beatson’s paper from such an eloquent commentary on Dr. Burnett’s words, I cannot do better than make a quotation from them here as a sort of text.
” To begin with,’ says Dr. Burnett (p.160), ‘ the tumours in the female breast are very rarely primary to the breasts, but are most commonly produced in the breasts much in the same way that the organ is enabled to perform its natural function of suckling the human offspring, i.e., the part is rendered physiologically active from the ovarian sphere. Whether this view of the origin of mammary tumours has ever been promulgated before I do not know- in my case I have it from my own observations in practical life. Usually there is some disease or irritation in the lower part of the body, either arising primarily there, or else expressed there holopathically………. The one point I here insist upon is that mammary tumours do not usually arise from a cause existing primarily in the breasts themselves, but the cause is usually in some other more or less remote part of the organism, most frequently in the ovaries.’
“In quoting from Mr. Beatson’s paper it must be understood that it is in the clinical observations that the value of it lies, and not in the method of treatment he pursues. The removal of the ovaries for disease of the breast is in my opinion quite devoid of justification, even if there were no possibility of medicinal cure. And it will be noticed that it is only in cases pronounced to be “inoperable,’ so far as the breast is concerned, that he other operation is advocated. It is difficult to see how any one who realizes that the origin of breast cancer is often in a remote and apparently undiseased organ can advocate the excision of the breast as a cure; but the straits to which old-school pathology and treatment are driven are sufficient to account for almost any inconsistencies,’
Burnett was one of the first to speak about vaccination triggering illness. This was discussed in his book, Vaccinosis, published in 1884. He introduced the remedy Bacillinum. He authored twenty books, including the much loved "Fifty Reason for Being a Homeopath." He was the editor of The Homoeopathic World.