Homeopathic Remedies for Cancer

The great difficult in advanced cases of cancer is the inability to obtain therapeutic individualization of symptoms. They have the pathology and all the common symptoms that go with it, but they are not sufficient to make a good homoeopathic prescription….


The more I study cancer, the more I prescribe for cancer, the more I am convinced that the earlier we start prescribing for cancer the more better our results will be. sometimes it is astonishing the result we get in very late cases, but these are exceptions far from the rule. We relieve their pain and suffering an improve their general health and increase their days; there is no question about that. A for curing, it is very rare in advanced cases.

In the early cases, were there is just the state of incipiency, where you have already the beginning cachexia and pain, and in some cases quite a little pathology beginning to show-small nodules of the breast and characteristic glandular involvement-you will be astounded what careful prescribing will do in most of these cases.

Cancer is a condition, the outgrowth of very low states-to use the language of Dr. Kent-and undoubtedly made up of all the miasms plus drug, serum and other irritation. I am convinced that all those factors enter into the admitted increase of cancer. Treatment by the “old school” is just as it was twenty years ago, in spite of the fact that their losses are appalling. They have made some apparently exceptional cures. In my practice I have never seen the cure of cancer by any of these methods; I have seen a lot of harm done, I believe they shorten the life of the patient, and I believe they deprive one of the ability to prescribe successfully with a homoeopathic remedy, such as Bellis pureness or Cadmium iodide.

You will need an antidote of radium and x-ray in potency. Cadmium iodide, Fl-ac. and Silicea have been my best remedies for the painful effects of radium burns. Both produce, as you know, obliteration of the capillary circulation.

The great difficult in advanced cases of cancer is the inability to obtain therapeutic individualization of symptoms. They have the pathology and all the common symptoms that go with it, but they are not sufficient to make a good homoeopathic prescription. They tell you about cancer, but they tell you only in a very general way of a group of remedies.

The experiments of Crile, his bi-polar theory of living processes, have been very interesting to me. He states that the cancer cell has made a change from its normal bi-polar polarity to that of a positive polarity,. That is exactly what we find in our electronic reactions. Not only is the cancer cell positive, but the patient’s whole blood stream is electromagenetically positive where cancer predominates. We know where the mixed miasms come in and where we have sycosis and syphilis mixed with cancer other polarities may be present.

My experience has been that there is not a case of cancer without a tubercular background. It grows on a tubercular soil. It is the miasms wherein the blending of all the other miasms result.

Pathology is often the only thing you can obtain. In such cases one must go back in the beginning of life, and trace it step by step, his sicknesses, reactions to environment, the history of things that have come upon him by way of accident, and irritations- mall those things, including vaccinations and serums-and better still, the history of his immediate progenitors and his immediate family.

We are all familiar with the crude animal experiments that Dr. Maud Sly of Chicago University has been doing; she has been able to blood cancer in mice families and out of mice families simply by selective mating. These facts establish the inherited causation as a basic causation and many of our allopathic friends are willing to acknowledge that; not all of them, but many do accept these results as evidence that cancer in its incipiency or in its fundamentals is inherited, at least the cell tendency. I prefer to use the word “tendency”; I don’t think a person has top die of cancer because his father and mother had it, but he has that tendency, and that is what you have to consider in the study of the case for a remedy, especially in those cases following injury where they have apparently been in fair or robust health and suddenly after the trauma a lump comes into the breast, in some cases painful and some not. We have two remedies part excellence in such conditions-there are others, but these are the two outstanding remedies that are worth study and consideration.

One of them is Bellis perennis, where there is more or less inflammation and soreness-much like Arnica; but we have the glandular involvement which is not so marked in Arnica. Bellis perennis is better given than Arnica.

Mauritius Fortier-Bernoville
Mauritius (Maurice) Fortier Bernoville 1896 – 1939 MD was a French orthodox physician who converted to homeopathy to become the Chief editor of L’Homeopathie Moderne (founded in 1932; ceased publication in 1940), one of the founders of the Laboratoire Homeopathiques Modernes, and the founder of the Institut National Homeopathique Francais.

Bernoville was a major lecturer in homeopathy, and he was active in Liga Medicorum Homeopathica Internationalis, and a founder of the le Syndicat national des médecins homœopathes français in 1932, and a member of the French Society of Homeopathy, and the Society of Homeopathy in the Rhone.

Fortier-Bernoville wrote several books, including Une etude sur Phosphorus (1930), L'Homoeopathie en Medecine Infantile (1931), his best known Comment guerir par l'Homoeopathie (1929, 1937), and an interesting work on iridology, Introduction a l'etude de l'Iridologie (1932).

With Louis-Alcime Rousseau, he wrote several booklets, including Diseases of Respiratory and Digestive Systems of Children, Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Rheumatism, treatment of hay fever (1929), The importance of chemistry and toxicology in the indications of Phosphorus (1931), and Homeopathic Medicine for Children (1931). He also wrote several short pamphlets, including What We Must Not Do in Homoeopathy, which discusses the logistics of drainage and how to avoid aggravations.

He was an opponent of Kentian homeopathy and a proponent of drainage and artificial phylectenular autotherapy as well.