Kurtz prefers the lower dilutions-Veith acknowledges the necessity of various dilutions-Kammerer prefers the higher dilutions, but gives stronger doses in acute diseases–Schmid always gives substantial doses-Watzke prefers the lower dilutions-His rules for the dose-He condemns the Jenichen preparations-Trinks lays down rules for the dose. The doses vary with the character of the remedy-And of the disease-Trinks practically an adherent of the lower dilutions-Schron prefers the lower dilutions-Ridicules the Jenichen potencies-Elwert prefers the lower-Helbig condemns an exclusive adherence to high or low dilutions-He gives large doses to drunkards-Vehsemeyer uses the lower dilutions-Schuler gives larger doses to drunkards-Noack condemns exclusivism-Goullon says the dose is to be regulated by the reactive power of the organism and the quality of the medicine-Lietzau recommends the pure tincture-Schneider opposes the exclusive use of the 30th-Wable prefers medium doses-he recommends much succussion-Kampfer prefers the lower and medium dilutions-He gives different medicines in different doses-He considers drunkards very sensitive to small doses-He gives massive doses in typhus-Hartmann does the same-J.O. Muller opposed to a uniform dose-Condemns the high potencies-Attomyr endeavours to find rules for the dose in the provings-Hering also looks to the provings for rules for the dose-Black is disposed to do so also-Koch makes the dose depend on similarity, susceptibility, and intensity-Stens prefers the higher dilutions- Griesselich prefers the lower dilutions, especially for acute diseases-Arnold thinks it is never necessary to go beyond the 6th decimal dilution-Mure claims the merit of the discovery of a posological rule-He lays down many rules for the dose-Nunez prefers the dilutions above 2000 for acute and chronic diseases- Cruxent’s grand astronomical rule for the dose-Scott’s rules for the dose-Great latitude of the remedial dose-Rarity of one dose curing where another had failed-Hahnemann erred in fixing on a uniform dose-Various circumstances determine the suitable dose- come diseases demand larger doses- Some medicines require to be given in larger doses.
IN continuation of the subject of homoeopathic posology, commenced in my last lecture, I now proceed to lay before you some few, more of the opinions broached on the subject by the most distinguished and influential of Hahnemann’s disciples. I should be taxing your patience too much to give a complete detail of all that these gentlemen have written on the subject, so I shall content myself with the briefest of outlines, in order to put you au courant with the ideas of the most eminent among the homoeopathic writers on the subject of the dose, so that, knowing what has already been written on the point, you may be spared the trouble of painfully excogitating afresh ideas that have already been thought out by others, or arrived at by a lengthened and careful experience.
The first of those who have written on the dose question who stands on my list for this evening, is Dr. Kurtz, (Hyg., iv.239; Jahrb. f. Hom., i. 83.) favourably known for several powerful and effective articles on homoeopathy of a valuable practical character. For him the dose is comparatively a very indifferent matter. It is the quality and not the quantity that produces the curative effect; it matters little, he thinks, what the quantity is, provided it is not so great as to overpower the vital dynamism by its too great medicinal or by its chemical action. In most cases he thinks it is safer to stick to the lower dilutions; he cannot deny that he was often seen the efficacy of the higher dilutions, but as often their total inefficacy; he will not deny the occasional occurrence of medicinal aggravations, but they do not seem to depend on the dose given, as they occur just as often from the high as the low dilutions. He believes that the aggravations, when they follow the administration of the higher dilutions, occur in consequence of the vis medicatrix being only excited by them to feeble reaction.
Dr. J.E. Veith (Hyg., v.432.) acknowledges the perfect necessity of the dilutions and triturations; the appropriate remedy, when minutely subdivided, acts much more excellently and is much more suitable to the functions of the capillary and nervous systems than the medicine in the grosser material forms. The impulse of the medicinal actions ought not to be more powerful than the vitality demands for its critical actions. The dilutions still retain their medicinal power in very high potencies. In his practice, the 18th is the highest dilation he uses. Dulcamara, sarsaparilla, sambucus, tinct. sulphuris, cannabis, ledum, rhododendron, rheum. etc., he gives in the pure tincture or 1st dilution; much, he says, may be done with sepia, calcarea, silicea, etc., in pretty high dilutions, even with the regulation 30th dilution.