In conversation with an allopath recently I twitted him by referring to the specialization craze, that it seems as if a specialist is a person who studies more and more about less and less until he knows nothing about anything. He attempted to turn the tables on me by saying that that was exactly what Homoeopathy is. My reply on the contrary was that a homoeopath learns more and more to use less and less, so that he saturates nobody.


MY experience during the past seventeen years as a research worker in pharmaceutical and biological chemistry led me to investigate in the first instance the nature of the remedies used in modern allopathic medicine and subsequently a keen interest and deep scepticism urged me also to probe the results obtained by these methods. I was positively alarmed at the toxicity of many of the medicines generally employed and sadly disappointed with the results, and what I further learned to recognize by unmistakable symptoms, as harmful aftermaths.

The fact that every human being is endowed with a “vis medicatrix nature” seems to be consigned by orthodox medicine to the limbo of an everlasting oblivion. Some of the greatest figures in the art of healing both past and present have generally defined death as a “successful intoxication of the cells”. Although the findings of toxicologists are clearly stated in the literature on most important pharmaceutical preparations, these invariably find their way into the waste paper basket without ever being studied.

The fact is overlooked that any foreign substance, poisonous or otherwise, which is introduced into the body, must definitely be accounted for in every way as to the results or effects it has on all organs, tissues, blood cells, etc., in order to be rightly regarded as a rational system.

The impression in thus formed by carefully reasoned deduction and keen unbiased observation, that orthodox medicine, however modern its adherents regard it, is a system which mainly treats and alleviates symptoms and the majority of “cured” cases have been brought back to health not because of the remedies used but in spite of them.

In many cases it is positively astounding to learn and realize, purely from the chemical point of view, how much actual poison the body can combat, and successfully expel, and still function reasonably well for many a long year afterwards. The palmist may have referred to the marvellous recuperative powers of the body when he wrote “Truly we are fearfully and wonderfully made”.

Another point which must gauge the attention is the large percentage of prescriptions which every allopathic chemist has to handle every day which contain incompatible drug components. This every honest chemist will have to admit. The vexed question of metastasis remains a thorn in the side of the “Profession”.

Many of their foremost and boldest spokesmen frankly admit the danger and possible havoc created by treating a surface wound or ulceration with potent antiseptics to make it “disappear” only to cause possibly a more deepseated chronic ailment. No rational alternative however, is ever offered. Such violent interference with the course of nature must always be harmful.

I shall confine myself to the effects of two drugs which are considered by orthodox medicine as very important discoveries. Firstly Benzedrine (chemically B phenytisopropylamine sulphate (Isomyn Sulphate) 5 m. mgm per tablet) which is used in the treatment of narcoleptic states, low blood pressure,depression, and many other allied conditions.

This drug, from what I know of it, certainly has a most potent effect in exciting the sympathetic central nervous system for a duration of from five to eight hours about one hour after ingestion, but it has a tendency to paralyse the stomach nerves, temporarily raises the blood pressure, lowers blood sugar and exhausts the heart. The authorities have tired it in South Africa mental asylums, where one medical man stated that it brought about a condition of heartblock, or a similarity, in the majority of patients and had to be discontinued.

In certain American Universities where students styled the preparation “Peppills”,it was used to “stimulate brain power for cramming purposes” at examination times, the doctors had to sound a warning note against its use. Two further dangers from the use of this drug, from what I have seen, are inflammation of the blood vessels, especially in elderly people and a condition of anxiety neurosis in certain types of nervous persons.

There is also every reason to believe that it will induce conditions of thyrotoxicosis and general metabolic disturbances owing to overfunctioning of the sympathetic nervous system and incoordination of the endocrine glands, with its consequent bye-products of faulty metabolism, many of which are poisonous to the human organism, e.g. Indol, Skatol, Indican, acetic and di-acetic acid and in pancreatic malfunctioning acetone. A friend of mine who use this drug for about three or four months on medical advice developed what certainly appeared to be an angiosclerotica and cyanosis.

My homoeopathic suggestion to him was to use Cuprum Arsenicosum 6x and / or Secale 3x and Kreosotum 6x also Crataegus and Naja, if necessary. Another young man used Benzedrine at examination times and after only a few days complained of obstinate insomnia. A medical correspondent in one local daily paper correctly branded the drug as one which makes the user “burn the candle at both ends”, exhausting his vital reserves of energy. A student in an American University who also used it at examination time was shown his papers afterwards, when he saw to his great consternation that he had simply filled his papers from end to end by writing his name in a rather uncertain hand over and over again.

He was quite unaware of this lapse of memory and consequent repetition ad infinitum. It is a new drug and further harmful possibilities are bound to be revealed when it is better known. In South Africa the medical officer of health, Dr. Cluver, has caused the drug to be labelled “POISON” according to the Medical, Dental and Pharmacy Act 13 of 1928. Although strictly speaking from the point of view of this particular Act, it really is no poison it is nevertheless regarded as dangerous enough to be branded in the manner described. So much for this dangerous “discovery”.

The alkalinity (p.h. value) of the blood can be altered detrimentally by saturating the blood for a prolonged period with either acid or alkaline drugs. The preponderance of the alkalinity over the acidity of the blood is very slight. If the acidity of the blood is increased by as little as the difference between the acidity of distilled water and fresh water a violent reaction would be the result (distilled water being very slightly more acid than fresh water).

It should therefore not require much intelligence for even a layman to realize the deleterious effect of continued drugging, especially if the nature of the drug is, or faulty elimination makes it cumulative. Moreover, even if not cumulative, the alkaline buffer condition of healthy blood may become so strained as to be hopelessly hypersensitive or too depleted of reserve to cope with the fluctuations which normal blood has to encounter in every day life.

In the field of “chemotherapy” are the “sulfonamides” under various proprietary names and of varying chemical structures, which are derivatives of dye products further put to allopathic medicinal use especially since 1935, when Domagk announced what he called its “remarkable power of protecting mice against infection with virulent strains of haemolytic streptococci”. These types of chemical products are now regarded as “the treatment in puerperal sepsis, streptococcal and pneumonic infections, erysipelas, scarlet fever and the like”.

There is said to be some danger of cyanosis in certain patients who suffer from cirrhosis of the liver, renal insufficiency or general hepatic impairment. I have seen a case of a native girl suffering from acute tonsillitis who was treated with some similar preparation for two days, who eventually had a badly congested liver with severe signs of poisoning. She was in a bad condition when on my suggestion to her allopathic doctor who is a friend of mine, she took one dose Hepar Sulph. 6x and one Sulphur 6x and she became absolutely normal in about three quarters of an hours time.

This was an absolute surprise not only to the doctor attending but I must admit at that time even I was agreeably taken aback, as it was one of my first experiments by which I had attempted to rectify the baneful results of allopathic medication. This result has subsequently been verified. And so the racket continues.

Another established fact to bear in mind about this form of medication is that many chemicals used, although not poisonous in themselves, sometimes form the last links to complete a new chain of chemical structures, gastric or otherwise, so as to form ultimately a resultant poison in the body, i.e. the vicious circle is completed. The danger and uncertainty of the whole procedure does not require any further elucidation.

It is truly in some instances a case of killing the patient in order to destroy the particular colony of microbe infecting his body. The literature accompanying most poisonous pharmaceutical preparations quite ironically usually state that the “lethal dose is five or more times larger, for guinea pigs have been found to tolerate four times as much”, etc. any deaths have been recorded within the limits of these so called “safe dosages” quite apart from the question of curing anything or anybody.

When I considered all this I could not help feeling that Homoeopathy scores because it is a system which assists the body in keeping with its own laws and reactions, guided by symptoms, without causing drug saturation or poisoning of the blood or tissues even in the smallest degree. Coupled with this, detoxication must on the contrary ever remain the sine qua non in treating any diseased condition, especially the so-called “chronic” maladies.

As a descendant of the sturdy Afrikaans Voortrekkers (Dutch Pioneers) I have seen a great deal of the homoeopathic form of treatment amongst the Afrikander people in the Union of South Africa. Even during the Anglo-Boer War in 1899-1902 homoeopathic outfits were practically the only medicaments which our forefathers used. The strong and sturdy physique of our young people to-day, who were then babies in arms, are perhaps practical testimony to Hahnemanns form of treatment.

My aim is not indiscriminate destructive condemnation of every form of allopathic treatment, especially not surgery and substitution therapy, where absolutely necessary. On the contrary every aspect of rationality in any form of treatment is thoroughly appreciated.

Homoeopathic treatment may yet be much more generally acclaimed. Dr. Helmuth Husseryl, a medical man from Vienna, who is considered internationally famous is now in this country and declared in an interview “Scientific medicine, which has often become too academical has recently been given new and powerful impulses by medical outsiders (sic). To-day one hears of nature healing, treatment by laymen, vegetable healing, subjection to different forms of diet (raw food, saltless, vegetarian, fasting etc.) . . . and Homoeopathy.

It is wonderful how many cures are brought about by these methods (which I regard as crystallized common sense) especially in those cases where academical medicine is at a loss real wonder cures which can in no way be explained by the so popular suggestion.” He further refers to the forgotten giants of medical history as ” the neglected Bachs, Mozarts, Haydns and Beethovens of the art of healing, which are now again influencing modern medicine” (Vide The Forum South Africa, August 8th, 1938. Published by Central News Agency, Johannesburg, S.A.).

In conversation with an allopath recently I twitted him by referring to the specialization craze, that it seems as if a specialist is a person who studies more and more about less and less until he knows nothing about anything. He attempted to turn the tables on me by saying that that was exactly what Homoeopathy is. My reply on the contrary was that a homoeopath learns more and more to use less and less, so that he saturates nobody.

Unfortunately Homoeopathy is still largely regarded here as a cult or ideology. That this opinion is prevalent was also the opinion of the late Dr. Robert H. Fallon of Cape Town, who rendered yeoman service in the cause of this art. This veteran homoeopath who had about fifty years experience used to exhort in effect “Dont wait to label or christen the disease, commence treating immediately after carefully considering the whole of the symptom-complex”.

After having explored practically every avenue of various fields of medicine and allied subjects scientifically and in a common- sense manner the law “Similia similibus curantur” seems to me to be a keystone in the structure of the healing art.

Eben N. Pienaar