REMEDY REACTION



Then we have some cases with amelioration coming first and aggravation coming afterward. This amelioration comes on to last usually for three or four days; the patient seems to be better but at the end of a week or ten days all the symptoms are worse than when he first came to you. These are usually cases that have a great many symptoms. We find that, in spite of what we thought at first was a favorable reaction, the ultimate condition is unfavorable. Either we selected too superficial a remedy, that could act only as a palliative, or the case is incurable and the remedy has been somewhat similar but not completely so. In order to determine the cause of the reaction we must examine the patient and find out whether the symptoms related to the remedy or to the disease. Sometimes you will find the remedy was in error. You will find usually in these cases that the remedy was similar to the most pronounced symptoms but it did not cover the whole case, and therefore did not strike at the constitutional state of the patient. Here in evaluating the symptoms we missed the essential concomitants, and we based our prescription on the generals only. It may be that we have an incurable patient. It will be fortunate for such cases if the symptoms come back exactly as they were when you first saw the case, but the symptoms often come back changed. Then we must wait, and this will require patience on the part of the physician and co- operation on the part of the patient. It may be necessary to take the patient into your confidence, if he evinces sufficient intelligence to warrant it.

The higher potencies will set in motion in the vital force curative functions which will act a long time, because oftentimes in these chronic conditions it takes a long time to establish order, and the vital energy takes its own time to cure. During this process no medicine should be given.

In cases that are proceeding to a perfect cure, if the improvement continues for some times and then suddenly comes to a half, find out if the patient has been doing something that is against the rules of health or has interfered with the continuation of the curative action of the remedy. This will often be found to be the cause of too short a period of relief from the symptoms.

In the third observation you will remember there was a quick aggravation followed by a long amelioration. Note the difference here. You have just considered the amelioration, that was of too short duration. In instances where you have an aggravation immediately after the administration of the remedy, and then a quick rebound, you never see too short amelioration of the remedy. If there is a quick rebound, the amelioration should last. If it does not last, it is because of some condition that interferes with the action of the remedy. It may be something that he is doing deliberately and intentionally. A quick rebound means everything to the case. It means that the remedy is well chose, that it covers the condition of the vital economy; and if everything goes without interference, it will bring ultimate recovery.

There is this to remember: some remedies have an aggravation immediately after administration, and some have a sharp aggravation some little time after administration. For instance, *Phosphorus may have a sharp aggravation, but it rarely occurs under twenty-four hours after administration, and it may be forty-eight hours or longer, and it may last for some little time.

A word about the acute cases in conditions where you get a quick rebound and amelioration lasting for a few hours, only to have another aggravation, when the action of the remedy on the vital force is exhausted. The action of the remedy is much more quickly exhausted in the rapid pace of acute diseases than in the more moderate progress of chronic manifestations, and more frequent repetitions of the remedy may be demanded. The most satisfactory amelioration in acute cases is where amelioration comes gradually and takes an hour or two after the administration of the remedy before it is markedly manifest.

If amelioration is too short in chronic diseases it means that structural changes are taking place and have destroyed or threatened to destroy the proper functions of the patient. It takes close observation to discern these changes from the reaction of the remedy. However, one may acquire much help from careful observation of these indications in detecting the course and progress of the case.

Once in a great while you will find a full period of amelioration of the symptoms, yet no special relief of the patient. This you will encounter in cases where you have structural changes, where the patient will improve on the remedy for some time and then improvement will cease. They can improve only to a certain point, and then improvement can go no further. We meet these conditions where organs like the liver or kidneys are partially involved and can function only in part. The remedy may keep the patient comfortable, however; and by careful repetitions of the remedy at infrequent intervals the patient may be kept comfortable for a considerable period of time even though you will not be justified in expecting a cure.

There is another reaction that we find in some patients, and that is purely hysterical. They seem to prove any remedy you may give them and get an aggravation from it. This may be because of an idiosyncrasy for the remedy or because of too sensitive reaction of the vital energy. It may be almost impossible to do anything with them in a curative way, but it may be of inestimable help in proving a remedy. Before a remedy is used the constitutional condition of the patient should be very carefully noted. Write down the peculiarities of the patient in as much detail as possible, and then these observations should be deducted from the proving.

In a case where the symptoms found by careful questioning seem to be entirely adequate to cover the case and to warrant a good selection of the *simillimum, we may note a reaction where a great number of symptoms appear after the administration of the remedy. If these are a return of former symptoms that have been forgotten, it is an indication that we are on the right road to recovery and it is a truly homoeopathic action. Old symptoms reappearing we know to be a step in the right direction, because we know the condition is being solved in the homoeopathic manner, and by the law of the direction of cure: ***CURE TAKES PLACE FORM WITHIN OUTWARD, FROM ABOVE DOWNWARD, FROM THE IMPORTANT ORGANS TO THE LESS IMPORTANT ORGANS; AND SYMPTOMS DISAPPEARS IN THE REVERSE ORDER OF THEIR APPEARANCE.

If, however, these are actually a number of new symptoms, it is an unfavourable sign. Old symptoms reappearing are a step in the right direction, as we know; therefore a group of entirely new symptoms appearing after the administration of a remedy is evidence that we have made a decided step in the wrong direction. We have probably mixed the case.

We occasionally find another class of reaction after the administration of the remedy. In these cases, too, we find the appearance of new symptoms after the administration of the remedy, but in the first place these cases offered few symptoms for an adequate prescription. It is usually possible to get a complete symptomatic picture of the case if we take the necessary amount of care in taking the case, but we do occasionally meet cases where there is little presented in the way of symptoms, or the symptoms presented have little in the way of modifications as to modalities and concomitants upon which to base a satisfactory analysis of the case. Hahnemann deals with such cases in the *Organon, Paragraph 172-82. In these conditions where event he most careful case-taking fails to reveal an adequate basis for prescription of *simillimum, we may yet find that if the few symptoms are sufficiently well marked a remedy may be selected which will either eliminate the marked symptoms found in the first consideration of the case, with consequent general improvement, or there will be a development of more symptoms.

If there has been a general improvement, the first remedy was homoeopathic to the case, and not alone to the few symptoms presented on our first consideration. In the second instance, the first remedy was probably one of a group of similars, and it has severed to bring to light the other formerly hidden symptoms which were a definite part of the case. It has unfolded the case to us. In this instance, then, the closely related remedies to the one first administered will probably contain among them the *simillimum which will be the remedy to cover and assist most in curing the complete case.

Even in these observations we must be very careful to consider whether we have administered a similar remedy that has unfolded the case to us, or whether our selection has been so far from the similar that we have merely mixed the case.

Diseased states are progressive, ever developing deeper and deeper manifestations. Disease is destruction; cure is constructive development. Cure is always centrifugal, as growth is always centrifugal.

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.