Case 1. Thuja: A lady who suffered from sycotic excrescences became reduced from repeated haemorrhages. When she would go for some time without the loss of much blood her totality of symptoms was similar to Thuja, but an exhaustive flow would add several symptoms to the original picture and mask the individuality of the true chronic disorder. One symptom in particular was a cold feeling in the left side of the head, another, cold damp feet. These would make a young man naturally think of Calcarea, but a closer study must result in a conclusion that Calcarea could only result in a failure to cure until Thuja had removed the sycotic nature of the disorder. The cold sensation is not found under Thuja, the case made a good recovery, because it was similar to the ruling feature of the case. Now because Thuja removed the individuality of a case with the cold left side of the head, it is no sign it will remove that symptom. It only shows that the individuality of a disease must be known; such information is best acquired by observation in the wilderness of symptomatology. The pathologist might score this as a victory for himself, but he only has learned it from a careful individualization of symptoms.
When the evidence of a chronic miasm is suppressed by a remedy corresponding to the acute or last appearing symptoms, after which the individuality of the chronic miasm will be manifested by its true expression or symptoms. These little things were well known to the great Hahnemann, and are taught in the Organon and Chronic Diseases.
No Homoeopathist can make a truly homoeopathic prescription when the individuality of a disease is unknown, or only partly known. The individuality can only be known by observing and knowing all the symptoms. When a woman calls for treatment with a pessary in her vagina, she will most likely fail to obtain a correct remedy because her symptoms are masked or changed so that the totality does not express the individuality of the disease. The pessary should be removed, and the disease permitted to express itself in the language so well known to every true Homoeopathist. After a week the symptoms will most likely express individuality, in its totality of symptoms, and then an appropriate remedy can be found. There is no other way known. These things were all known to the great Hahnemann. The ignorant pretenders use the supporters and smile at the Organon, and go on with their failures; they seem to glory in their ignorance of the true healing art.
The physician who does not individualize uses Morphine to stop the pain and reports his ignorance to the society, having the audacity to ask what remedy he should have used. The question asked, no less than the failure, shows that he is not acquainted with the teachings of the Organon. Each case must be studied with a view of its own individuality. The physician who is not competent to direct the appropriate remedy is not acquainted -with the individuality of his case; and with such ignorance of his, case, how can even a more competent physician inform him what an appropriate remedy might be? The questioner could not prescribe for him, own case as a general thing if he would individualize correctly. These are the ones who are wise enough to direct remedies on their knowledge of pathology, only to fail, and then have the audacity to ask for the right remedy to be pointed out.