Then he recommends hardening by means of exposure in the open air, where one gradually removes all the heavier articles of clothing and substitutes lighter ones, because:
For all these experiments care is required in forming the habit; one has to begin with slight things and go on to more important ones, but must always break off slowly and gradually.
In the “Handbook for Mothers,” Hahnemann insists that the infant be hardened with cold water. He opposes the habit of those days of washing the new born infant with tepid water and wine, by saying:
As nature does not bring forth anything fermented, it is incredible that the use of an artificial fluid can be useful to the life of its creatures. For the same reason, the precaution of making the water warm first is not altogether necessary. Indeed there are many nations who wash their newly-born children in the rivers or in the sea without any hesitation.
One can however, commence with tepid water and leave it off gradually. Children have to be frequently washed, their uncleanliness makes this necessary If they are only dried without washing their skin chafes. As they grow stronger, the water should be used colder until eventually they may be washed in summer and winter in cold, or even in icy-cold water. In order to avoid exposure to harm, the greatest care must be taken to diminish the warmth so gradually that it may be imperceptible. When this bathing has once been introduced, it must not be discontinued except under great stress, as it will ultimately be found desirable to continue it throughout life. I do not consider this only from the point of view of cleanliness and health, but as a very useful means of becoming able to endure cold and warmth without danger.
In the year 1801, Hahnemann published in “Hufeland’s Journal of Practical Medicine”: “Fragmentary observations on Brown’s elements of medicine.” To refute a statement of Brown’s, that in long continued illnesses which are accompanied by debility, one ought to refrain from the use of cold water, etc., as this could only do harm, Hahnemann remarks:
Against his (Brown;s) exaggerated prohibition of cold water in asthenic diseases I put my experiences, which I have gained in common with others, for many years, when I knew no other specific remedy against old chronic diseases, I have frequently fought them quite happily by sponging with cold water, cold foot baths, and also by an immersions of a minute’s duration in water of 50* to 60*F. One case however, among the many is so extraordinary that I must not omit to mention it here. An elderly man, fairly vigorous, had for five years paresis of his left arm, with no cause to account for it. The movement which he could undertake with it were very feeble and limited and the sensitiveness of feeling was also much diminished. Once he went to visit some relatives who wished to give a small party, but who were unable to find anyone who would go and get the fish out of the tank which was frozen over. He went quietly outside, made a hole in the ice and, lying on it, spent almost an hour with born arms deep in the tank catching the quantity of fish required. He came and brought them to his host who was overjoyed, but he complained immediately of pains in his sick arm, which within a few hours became inflamed. The following day all pain and inflammation had disappeared, and he felt well and all the power of a healthy arm returned. The lameness was cured and remained so. To uphold Brown’s theory he should have remained uncured. Brown only saw the immediate effect of the remedy, as all short- sighted doctors do, but not the after effect which is the chief thing.
Thus Hahnemann wrote during his allopathic period! After he had established and organised his new teaching, he did not entirely turn away from treatment with cold water, although he restricted it very much and used it with great caution. In his “Chronic Diseases,” 2nd edition, Vol. I, page 176, he declares:
That he is sorry to have recommended electricity, through which abuse the remote appearance of enantiopathic help had been produced, while local applications of cold water of 10* R. was a much more homoeopathic method, that is by pouring cold water for one, two or even three minutes over paralysed parts, or by means of a cool spray over the whole body of from one to five minute’s duration according to the condition, sometimes daily, sometimes less frequently and at times more than once a day, combined with the appropriate internal treatment, sufficient exercise, and correct diet. Cold water in its first effect has the power of rendering the part of the body to which it is applied for a short time, less sensitive and less movable, and renders in this way homoeopathic help.
These are similar to the instructions and intimations which later Pfarrer Kneipp of Worishofen further elaborated in his cold water cure.
In the sixth edition of the “Organon,” which Hahnemann prepared shortly before he died, and which has now been published by Schwabe, he rejects in a foot-note his former statement respecting the 285 mineral baths for dispersing skin eruptions, whilst ” the inner evil, not being cured, very often comes out on another part of the body, which may be of much greater importance to life and health.” In the end, paragraph 291, however, he calls baths of clear water partly palliative, partly a homoeopathic means of assisting the recovery of health in acute diseases, and in the convalescence of ultimately cured chronic patients. Tepid baths of 25* to 27*R. are useful for stimulating the sensitiveness and reactionary irritability of the fibres; cold water baths of (even) 10* to 6* R. he recommends for the convalescence of such chronic patient who lack vital heat. The repeated immersions which must be instantaneous at first, and of a low temperature, can by degrees be extended to several minutes.
In his letters to patients in later days, Hahnemann becomes if possible, even more careful in his instructions regarding the application of water.
To the Baroness mentioned before, who was suffering from nerves (Supplementary 37) he writes:
Cothen. 23rd June, 1829.
(Original in the possession of Dr. Dudgeon, London.)
A whole bath I cannot quite allow-it is of too great importance. You must only sponge yourself for two minutes in clear tepid water. To remain in the water longer is injurious to you.
And in a letter to Dr. Schreter of Lemberg “Neues Archiv., 1848., : Vol. 3. part 3, page 107) he says,:
Paris, 13 August, 1840.
In every century there have been people who have sung the praises of cold water exaggeratedly. Why Priessnitz has had such success for so many years with gluttons, drunkards, and people ill from effeminate living, is not sufficiently borne in mind by the doctors and the world. The good done by low diet, the elimination of coffee, tea and condiments, and the enforced walks in the fresh air, are not taken into account. All the resulting benefit is put down to cold water. This is the way in which want of judgment leads people into errors. Can one not see how old sinners whose recovery was retarded by gaiety, dissoluteness, and other sins, and who originally possessed a good constitution, are there forced to lead a healthy mode of life for their own good. Is not that the chief means of their recovery? And how many, who not depleted by wrong living, but actually suffering from long protracted illnesses, has not Priessnitz ruined in health by his exaggerated applications of cold water, and they have then crawled away deaf or blind? A good, especially a homoeopathic, physician has always at the right time, and in a suitable case, made an excellent use of cold water, without causing harm, Everything in its right place! The cold water is only a physical assistance to complete the cure of those who have been softened, during their treatment by the correct remedies.
SUPPLEMENT 39
THE REMEDY FOR SCARLET FEVER.
To Councillor Becker at Gotha: Dearest friend,
At last! you will think, and you are right. The times for removing are on Ascension Day and on St. Martin’s Day. I shall therefore only get out of this house, which I am renting, in five week’s time. It is now sold, and in any case no longer suitable for me. That I am not staying here in Altona or Hamburg you have already seen from my previous letter. Non-payment of debts, swindling and famine have here reached their highest record; I should grow tired of my life if I remained here. Having said the first I must kindly ask you to keep back Wetzel for me, until I write to you in five week’s time, “Here I am! Bring him!” You will have patience until then, won’t you?
I would like to know from you regarding the prepayment of fees. My little essay is in its final copy; but I do not know yet if the public has given it much attention, and shown enough of the faith and trust “which is so often misused.” to me (16) and to Heemrich (2) that makes 18 prepayments that have come in I am wondering if it will be more or less worth while to publish the little book, distributing a sample powder, at the same time, or should we delay such distribution, which I should prefer not to do. And yet might not someone scheme to prevent the further printing, as soon as the subscribed copies have been distributed? What I should like to add with my own hand, the printer will print without further consideration, and thus it will fulfil its intention. Everyone will now know of it, and the more cheaply he can procure it, no matter how unjustifiably, the more he likes to refuse recognition to the originator.
Richard Haehl was also an editor and publisher of the homeopathic journal Allgemcine, and other homeopathic publications.
Haehl was responsible for saving many of the valuable artifacts of Samuel Hahnemann and retrieving the 6th edition of the Organon and publishing it in 1921.
Richard Haehl was the author of - Life and Work of Samuel Hahnemann