Susceptibility, Reaction and Immunity



Such victories over disease are a hollow mockery from the standpoint of a true therapeutics.

We do not have to seek far for illustrative examples: Professor James Ewing, of Cornell University Medical College, in a lecture upon *Immunity (1909) called the problem of the endotoxins “The stone wall of Serum Therapy”, He said.:

“The effort to produce passive immunity against the various infections by means of sera may fail in spite of destruction of all the bacteria present in the body, by reason of the endotoxins thrown out in the process of bacteriolysis resulting from the serum injections.

“The action of endotoxins of all kinds is similar there is a reduction of temperature *but an active degeneration of the organs a status infectious. Thus sterile death is produced where cultures from the organs and tissues show that the bacteria in question have all been destroyed; *but the animal dies.

“This problem of the endotoxins is at present the stone wall of “Serum Therapy”.

Prof: Ewin cited the case of a patient who received injections of millions of killed gonococci for gonococcic septicaemia; the temperature came down to normal, but the patient died. He continues; “An animal whose serum is normally bacteriolytic may on immunization, lose this power; the bacteria *living in the serum, but not producing symptoms.

“Thus, a rabbit’s serum is normally bacteriolytic to the typhoid bacillus, but the rabbit is susceptible to infection. If however, the rabbit is highly immunized the serum is no longer bactericidal, *the typhoid bacilli living in the serum, but the animal not being susceptible of infection. The animal dies”.

“It seems therefore that the effort must be made in the future to enable *the tissue and the bacteria to live together in peace rather than to produce a state where the serum is destructive to the bacteria”.

These are strong and significant words from the highest authority on pathology in America.

In the case cited by Prof.Ewin we see the destruction, partial or complete, of susceptibility of the normal power of the organism to react to the stimulus of either the sera or the bacilli.

In the case of total destruction of the susceptibility death followed. The condition of the patients in whom destruction was only partial may be better imagined than described. A rabbit or a man, whose fluids and tissues are in such a depraved or vitiated state that typhoid or other virulent organisms live and thrive in them without producing symptoms, and who will no longer react to a powerful serum, is not in a state of health to say the least. It is a condition which reminds us of the scathing words of Jesus; “Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, *but within are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness”.

The use of antiseptics in the treatment of disease, or surgically (in the field of operation), is another means of impairing or destroying normal susceptibility.

Articles have appeared in leading medical journals of the dominant school (Boston Surgical Journal, and the Therapeutic Gazette) in which it was pointed out that the use of antiseptics in the treatment of tonsillitis increased the inflammation, prolonged the disease and retarded convalescence. It was explained that by diminishing the number of bacteria in the crypts which were generating toxin, the period required for the formation of the requisite amount of anti-bodies was unduly prolonged. They had just waked up to the fact that the living organism, even if diseased, has some means of self-protection and that, other things being equal, the automatic formation of the antitoxins and anti-bodies in the organism goes on at about an equal pace with the generation of toxins.

The destructive action of the antiseptics upon the living tissue cells and phagocytic leucocytes of the host-otherwise the patient-was also pointed out as contraindicating their use by these discerning authorities. In destroying these bodies we are destroying the physical basis of life itself. We slay our best friends. They further showed that the depression of vitality thus caused resulted later in increase of fever and cervical adenitis, due to the increased absorption of toxins. What they failed to see and explain, however, was *that the increased fever and inflammation were in reality the manifestation of that vital reaction or resistance on the part of the organism, which is the means by which the real, natural curative antibodies and antitoxins are produced, and that this should never be interfered with.

Inflammation and fever are not evils *per se. They are merely the signs of normal reaction and resistance to an irritant or poison by which nature protects herself. They are not enemies to be resisted, but friends and allies to be co-operated with in the destruction of a common enemy.

Inflammation and fever mean simply greater vital activity, more rapid circulation, respiration and oxygenation, more rapid and through elimination of waste or toxic substances, and the concurrent formation of natural antitoxins and antibodies by means of which recovery is brought about.

Pain, inflammation and fever are not the real disease nor the real object of treatment. To view them as such leads logically and inevitably to mere palliation or suppression of symptoms, than which there are no greater medical evils. It is based upon a false and illogical interpretation of the phenomena of disease which mistakes results for causes.

Stimulants and Depressants. :-Prof. James C. Wood, veteran surgeon and author of Cleveland, Ohio, in a letter to the writer, dated February 20, 1922, following the publication of this article in the Homoeopathic Recorder, wrote as follows:

“There is one remedy you have omitted in your discussion of shock, namely, strychnia or nux vomica. Crile in his experimental work on shock has shown that is almost impossible to differentiate true shock from strychnia poisoning. As a result of his experimentation surgeons have pretty largely discarded strychnia in the treatment of shock, Crile proving that they are killing more than they are curing by full doses of strychnia in dealing with the same. On the other hand, I am using it in small doses with the greatest possible advantage, showing conclusively, I think, its homoeopathicity in shock”.

It seems to be pretty well established that alcohol, the typical and perhaps most commonly used stimulant, adds nothing to the physiological forces of the body. It takes of what might be called the “reserve fund” of organic force and use it up a little faster than nature would otherwise permit. It acts like the whip to the tired horse, not like rest, water and food, which nourish, strengthen, repair and replace worn-out tissues. Its action on the brain and nerves is well known. Many have seen, on the dissecting table, the characteristic watery, contracted brain of the chronic alcoholic.

We know the power of alcohol to harden and shrivel and devitalize organic tissues. Its power to paralyze the vaso-motor system is seen in the flushed face, congested capillaries and ruby nose of the inebriate. We are aware of its inhabiting effect upon the sensory nerves, by which it makes its victim insensible to the impressions of heat, cold and pain, so that, in extreme intoxication, he falls on a red-hot stove and is burned to death, or staggers into a snow bank and freezes to death without knowing it.

All these things define the nature and measure of power of alcohol to decrease or destroy normal susceptibility.

Less only in proportion to the amount used is its influence to lessen susceptibility when used as a stimulant in disease. Here, as in all other realms, the law holds good; “Action and reaction are equal and opposite”. Stimulation and depression are equal and opposite. Whip the exhausted horse and he will go on a little ways and then drop. No amount of whipping will start him up again. He soon reaches a point where his susceptibility to that kind of a stimulant is exhausted. Overstimulate the weakened or exhausted patient and the same thing will happen.

This is not to say that there is no place for physiological drug stimulants in the healing art, but only to point out that the place which they legitimately fill is an exceedingly small one and rarely met. Certain rare cases of typhoid fever, diphtheria, and perhaps a few other similar conditions, may be benefited by very small doses of pure brandy and tided over a crisis by that means when they might otherwise die. But the amount of stimulant necessary to accomplish that end is extremely small. More than the necessary amount will assuredly hasten death, because the margin of strength is so small the least waste by overuse may prove fatal:

The proper use of stimulants in the type of cases referred to was once illustrated by Dr. P.P Wells. In a critical case of typhoid fever which he saw in consultation, the patient had suffered a severe hemorrhage from the bowels, was very weak, nearly unconscious and had a *soft compressible pulse. Dr. Wells directed that six drops of brandy be put into six teaspoonfuls of milk and the whole given in three doses of two teaspoonfuls each, at intervals of two hours; to be repeated if reaction did not follow. The effect was surprising. Reaction quickly followed and the patient made a rapid recovery.

Stuart Close
Stuart M. Close (1860-1929)
Dr. Close was born November 24, 1860 and came to study homeopathy after the death of his father in 1879. His mother remarried a homoeopathic physician who turned Close's interests from law to medicine.

His stepfather helped him study the Organon and he attended medical school in California for two years. Finishing his studies at New York Homeopathic College he graduated in 1885. Completing his homeopathic education. Close preceptored with B. Fincke and P. P. Wells.

Setting up practice in Brooklyn, Dr. Close went on to found the Brooklyn Homoeopathic Union in 1897. This group devoted itself to the study of pure Hahnemannian homeopathy.

In 1905 Dr. Close was elected president of the International Hahnemannian Association. He was also the editor of the Department of Homeopathic Philosophy for the Homeopathic Recorder. Dr. Close taught homeopathic philosophy at New York Homeopathic Medical College from 1909-1913.

Dr. Close's lectures at New York Homeopathic were first published in the Homeopathic Recorder and later formed the basis for his masterpiece on homeopathic philosophy, The Genius of Homeopathy.

Dr. Close passed away on June 26, 1929 after a full and productive career in homeopathy.