Dr. Roberts advise to homeopath that, a man who adopts the homoeopathic methods must be free from prejudice, and able to look fairly at disease conditions from a new angle….

***IF a physician would successfully practise medicine he must know, first, what is curable by medicine, and second, what is curative in drugs.

The physician must know something of the history of the development of the drug action; of the gradual experiments with the remedial substance upon healthy human beings and the data gathered therefrom over a long period of careful observations, which have been checked and verified again and again, both in experimental provings and in clinical use. The basis upon which this knowledge of drug action is built is a profound and basic element of homoeopathic procedure.

By the time the physician has become somewhat acquainted with these guides he is in a position to go forward and erect the structure of his future medical career upon a basis that is immovable, that does not change with every new theory that arises upon the medical horizon. If we look thoughtfully at medical literature over a period of years we find it one kaleidoscopic panorama of ever-changing theory and practice.

Homoeopathy, on the other hand, is ever capable of development, while the principles remain the same. Homoeopathy is founded upon principles that are again founded upon natural laws. These natural laws are basic, they are more eternal than the hills, for these laws were formulated before the hills came into being.

If a man follows where homoeopathy leads he must be able to follow those laws and to hold close to them, regardless of pressure or influence. On the other hand, the very principles which he follows stabilize him and make him sure in his work. This stability can be maintained equally well in chronic work, in acute cases or amidst the panics of epidemics of unknown origin, such as influenza, poliomyelitis; outbreaks of such conditions as encephalitis; for here, as in all other manifestations of illness, the fundamental laws remain firm and intact, and they are sufficiently basic to provide a sure guide to health.

A man who adopts the homoeopathic methods must be free from prejudice, and able to look fairly at disease conditions from a new angle. He must look at the patient as an individual, not as a disease, and he must treat the patient, not the disease. He must learn that the symptoms that under ordinary training would have been discarded as confusing the issue or as of no value are the very symptoms which, to the homoeopathic physician, simplify the case and provide the strongest clues to the surest method of assistance.

He must possess a sense of values, and be able to train himself to observe and interpret those signs which manifest themselves through the habits and circumstances of the patient, into indications for health-restoring medication which he has at his command.

In other words, he must learn to observe and record cases from the homoeopathic angle. The diagnostic viewpoint which has featured so largely in his training must here take a different place in his perspective. He must take time to trace the source of the disturbance and the remedy to fit the complete picture, always basing the process upon the sound rock of natural laws.

Homoeopathy opens up a vista of opportunities for continually seeking new fields for the demonstration of natural laws, for if, as we believe, these laws are fundamental, their application is universal, and had we the vision to see it we would be convinced not from its application in the field of medicine alone, but in every field of natural science and in applied science as well.

The vista in the field of medicine which is opened up for cure under the homoeopathic method of treatment is a wide one and cure is always accomplished with the least possible disturbance to the patient and in the gentlest manner, yet with the most profound effect on the whole individual. Homoeopathy is a system of medicine upon which we can depend to set the individual system in order, and the patient on the high road to recovery, if recovery is possible. If we fail, we may know that the failure is ours, in that we have not fully compassed the case or a knowledge of the remedies. In a field so vast, it is conceivable that not all available agencies have yet been developed; and our own ignorance may limit us in the use of those remedies which we already have, but those who study homoeopathy with an unprejudiced mind, and those who have practiced it faithfully and purely, can and do attest its unsurpassed results when conscientiously applied to the sick.

If chain is no stronger than its weakest link, we must examine the links individually, one by one, and not determine their strength or weakness by testing the complete chains as our first measure.

The very foundation of homoeopathic practice considers man not only as an individual, but as a complete unit in himself, of which all his parts comprise a well-balanced whole. Homoeopathy, therefore, does not consider any one part as being ill, but considers the manifestation of illness in one part in its relation to the whole man.

Medicine ideally has to do with the cure of disease, the building up of the individual, not overlooking proper hygiene and sanitation, but with a deeper view of the needs of the individual himself, once again considering his individuality. Probably homoeopathy stresses this view of the individual in relation to his environment and circumstances more than any other school of medical thought, for it takes into consideration not only his immediate heritage, but the more subtle and complex burden that is the heritage of long ages of struggling and developing ancestors. Homoeopathy seeks to relieve the individual as much as possible from the heavy burden of hereditary tendencies he carries, and to guard against increasing this load by enabling his vital energy to provide its own immunity against disease. Homoeopathy looks upon the health of the individual as a precious charge, and his return to health as almost certain if we but follow the fundamental laws.

Homoeopathy accentuates the study of the action of drugs upon healthy human beings, with little consideration of their action on the lower animals, for homoeopathy recognizes that it is only through a knowledge of their action upon man that we can obtain a correct perception of their applicability in disease. This is a field in which homoeopathy leads all other forms of medical thought, for no school of medicine has carried on, over such a long period of years, such intensive study of remedy reaction, nor has any such extensive experimental work been done with the results so faithfully recorded by such a large group of people, with the results so carefully checked by clinical application.

This can truly designated as scientific, for the results have been checked and rechecked, and the findings applied with unfailing success when the proper principles were followed.

The generally accepted concept of homoeopathy is that it is concerned chiefly with the law of similars. Indeed, the encyclopaedia gives as the definition of homoeopathy that it is a system of medicine based upon the law of similars. While for a concentrated definition this might serve, yet there is much more to homoeopathy than the law of similars, for it would be very incomplete did it not embrace much more than this. It might better be defined as a system of medicine based upon natural laws.

We need to get a more complete and comprehensive insight into the scope of these laws. There is danger of making a fetish of the faith in homoeopathy by expecting wonderful results where a proper understanding of these laws would deter us from attempting the use of homoeopathy. Sometimes even without a knowledge of these laws we obtain wonderful results, it is true, but we often fail by not carrying out the teaching of Hahnemann, to remove the cause of the disease where it is manifestly a mechanical trouble. Again, in the class of disease where malnutrition results from lack of the proper foods, instead of the lack of powers of assimilation, homoeopathy cannot be expected to take the place of the proper elements in the diet.

On the other hand, in the field of therapeutics by curative medicine there is no other absolutely curative assistance. Here homoeopathic laws reign supreme. To confuse the scope of each of these fields makes for misunderstanding and failure.

Homoeopathy considers the morbid vital processes in living organisms, which are perceptibly represented by symptoms, irrespective of what caused them. Homoeopathy is concerned only with disease *per se, that is in its primary, functional or dynamic aspect, not in its ultimate and so-called pathological results. With these we have nothing to do; these are not in any sense the disease but are the results of disease conditions. Therefore we must distinguish between the primary functional symptoms which represent the morbid process itself, and the secondary symptoms which represent the pathological end of disease.

The gross physical pathology such as we find in gallstones we do not prescribe for, but we do prescribe for the patient, being guided by the symptoms which began in the perversion of the vital process, which preceded and accompanied the ultimate development of the gallstones.

H.A. Roberts
Dr. H.A.Roberts (1868-1950) attended New York Homoeopathic Medical College and set up practrice in Brattleboro of Vermont (U.S.). He eventually moved to Connecticut where he practiced almost 50 years. Elected president of the Connecticut Homoeopathic Medical Society and subsequently President of The International Hahnemannian Association. His writings include Sensation As If and The Principles and Art of Cure by Homoeopathy.