IN the past skin disease was far more frequent than it is now. The great diminution of skin troubles is due partly to increased cleanliness, the cheapness of soap, and such-like factors, but it is also, and largely, due to the free use of antiseptic skin ointments and washes, which are employed with or without doctors prescriptions. Even the most ignorant know that aspirin can be used for pain and that zinc ointment, sulphur ointment, tar ointment and numerous proprietary ointments will cause skin eruptions to disappear.
In my book Miracles of Healing and How They are Done, I have devoted a special chapter to skin diseases, in which I have pointed out that Hahnemann and many other great physicians of the past, both homoeopathic and orthodox, have condemned the free and reckless use of outward applications in skin troubles. The great physicians of the past rightly saw in a skin disease a curative effort of Nature.
The body endeavours to eliminate poisons in various ways, by producing a diarrhoea, an abscess, profuse perspiration, a skin eruption, etc. Many of the most serious diseases are accompanied by a skin eruption, such as measles, scarlatina, etc., and unless there is a vigorous eruption the patient may die. A vigorous outbreak on the skin, a violent sweat, a profuse diarrhoea, often saves the life of an apparently dying patient.
In my book I have quoted numerous cases from literature showing the dangerous results of treating skin disease by outward application, “driving it in”, as the old doctors used to stigmatise that unwise proceeding. I would now give a typical example which has just reached me. A Mr. J. H., writing from Rhondda, South Wales, has told me :.
“May I write you regarding my daughters complaint ? She is nineteen years of ago. When aged three months she was vaccinated. As the sores over the vaccination healed, wet eczema erupted over her shoulder, face and head. This continued until she was twelve months old.
She was then taken to Mr. B. of Plymouth, who healed the eruption by ointment and medical treatment. As the eczema disappeared, symptoms of asthma appeared, spasmodic in type, and becoming increasingly severe of late. Her heart appears to be strained by these attacks. They occur over periods varying from one to three months in spite of daily use of powders and Ephedrine tablets.”.
This case is typical of thousands. A suppressed vaginal discharge and a suppressed skin disease frequently cause the most serious sufferings and often death. If the poor child had been taken to a good homoeopath, a few doses of Thuja would have antidoted the vaccinial poisoning and the child might have grown up into a healthy, happy woman.
Instead, the vaccinial poison was “driven in” and the disease, which was refused an outlet on the skin, attacked lungs and heart, as happens so frequently. After eighteen years of suffering and maltreatment on orthodox lines the unfortunate victim of medical ill-treatment is seeking homoeopathic aid. Unfortunately by now, grave structural damage may have been done which no power on earth can repair.
If we study the great orthodox handbooks of dermatology, we find that practically the only treatment for skin disease consists in the outer application of poisonous ointments and washes, in suppression, to which, now, ray treatment of very doubtful value has been added. If we study the great handbooks on gynaecology we find that a similar policy of suppression is practised with regard to leucorrhoea, and the result is, of course, disastrous. A foul discharging drain should never be blacked.
A skin disease comes from the inside and should be treated from the inside. That is the homoeopathic rule. The unfortunate girl in Wales can probably be cured only if the old skin disease, suppressed eighteen years ago, is re-established, a feat which is by no means impossible to a good homoeopath.