The system of dilution may have been carried too far and made too general by homoeopathy, but no limit has hitherto been set to the sensitiveness of the living patient and it can hardly be further doubted that Hahnemann has here touched upon a gigantic if as yet still incomprehensible discovery; only time will define the value of this discovery; only public homoeopathic clinics can decide this matter.
He finally points out the economic importance of the smallness of homoeopathic remedies by saying:
Considering the smallness of the homoeopathic doses a whole medicine chest containing a hundred remedies could comfortably be put in a letter-case, and as this complete chest would hardly contain one grain of substances and therefore be materially almost valueless, the homoeopathic physician finds himself in the pleasant position of administering to his patients immediately and free of charge the remedy prescribed which does not offend the senses. This is the most brilliant issue of homoeopathy from the point of view of State Science, because with one grain of China it can cure all the intermittent fevers of the whole human race from the time of Adam to the Day of Judgment, and thus a nation that had faith in homoeopathy could save the whole expenditure of medicaments, an expenditure which in Wurtemberg could be estimated at one million.
Dr. Griesselich, however, writes in the year 1848 (Manual of “Homoeopathic Therapy,” 121, page 185):
If we cast a glance upon Hahnemann’s whole conception of potentisation the unsolvable contradiction is to be found in the fact that on the one side he says natural disease requires only the smallest possible dose of medicine in order to be affected, and on the other hand he assumes an increase of the medicinal power which, if the first assumption is correct, is not only unnecessary but must be avoided, so that the artificial illness produced by the disease could not attain appreciable dimensions.
SUPPLEMENT 229
OPINIONS OF PRESENT DAY HOMOEOPATHIC PHYSICIANS ON THE THEORY OF DOSAGE.
Emil Schlegel of Tubingen asserts in his “Reform der Heilkunde,” page 45:
Hahnemann has-certainly to his own surprise-been carried very far on purely experimental lines into the refining of medicinal substances. We can assert to-day that the sciences of Chemistry and Physics in their progress have followed him to a large extent by discovering with their best and finest methods the proof of the possibility of an unusual splitting up of substances and other material, which still remains traceable. Professor Ostwald of Leipsic has followed up this question at the Homoeopathic Laboratory of Schwabe, and with his apparatus (see also Supplement 232) has arrived at the conclusion that for certain substances the billionth particle and even a further dilution could be traced with certainty. But Hahnemann who saw the human organism- the finest reagent as v. Grauvogl once said- saw also the reaction of substances which have been much further sub-divided; this is confirmed day by day. The question is difficult because on the one hand it is frequently hard to determine the turning point in a disease process and also because it leaves the possibility of spontaneous action open. On the other hand it is this turning-point which constitutes the proof of the reality of the dose of medicine; we, therefore, cannot deny that great caution is required. But I can assure you that the facts of experience are so palpable that they can leave no doubt in a normal intellect which has become acquainted with them. The efficacy of very high, inconceivably high, homoeopathic medicinal preparations is no longer subject to doubt for me and for many experienced physicians who have to deal with them.
On page 79 he says about the “increased power” of highly diluted medicines:
We cannot blame Hahnemann for desiring that by “potency” we should at the same time understand a kind of development of power or dynamisation. Many observations show that dilution of substance which has been carried very far affords room for new natural phenomena, for instance, the attenuation of gas in Geisler’s cylinders which leads to the known acceptance of a new condition of aggregation in matter, according to Crookes, who can form a conception of the possibility of a considerable increase of certain developed powers in highly attenuated matter, by assuming an unusual distance between the molecules which renders possible new mode of motion in the molecular movement. As regards the point of view of the efficacy of medicine, there is no need here for a specially increased dynamisation of matter, rather is it necessary to consider that the essential in the effect of the medicines is based upon retaining the definite affinity which is already the property of crude matter. This retention of all signs of individuality in their relation to the organic affinity is the basis of every consideration of natural laws in the action of homoeopathic remedies; in this respect highly diluted substances must have remained unaltered; an increased dynamisation, therefore, is hardly desirable, yet we may perhaps say that homoeopathic medicine will touch the organic parts with the same affinities as the crude substances but much more promptly so that although remaining the same electively, yet actively it possesses increased capacities or in other words: the same chemically, yet physically changed.
In another passage (page 98) he clothes his summary judgment of Hahnemann’s reform in medical prescriptions with the words of Dr. Ameke:
No book of history records, no work demonstrates, that any other physician has ever searched with such keen diligence to set right the theory of dosage as we find in this keen observer and indefatigable thinker, Hahnemann.
Dr. Stauffer writes in “Handbuch der Homoopathischen Heillehre,” of Kroner-Gisevius, section “Theory of Dosage,” Vol.II, page 200.
An abrupt denial (of the high potencies-R.H.) leads to nothing: he who limits himself to that commits a similar error as the old school medicine committed in respect to homoeopathy. Denial excludes every advance of knowledge. And yet to remain satisfied with a certain knowledge is equally objectionable. Therefore we cannot agree with Bahr, when he thinks that we should not trouble to make high potencies as the thirtieth potency is quite sufficient, and when he advises us not to use high potencies. We cannot and we must not agree with this opinion without further investigation, but here we must allow experience to judge, and place experiment above theory. For years I have treated asthma with Arsenic in low potencies when that remedy was indicated, but I must confess with unsatisfying results; I then tried the thirtieth potency and to my great astonishment the higher dilution achieved a striking result in the same patient. And again later, a patient came to me suffering from Bronchial asthma and the thirtieth potency of Arsenicum had only a transitory effect; I thought with Hering “ever higher” and gave Arsen. 200 and obtained a cure. Since then this high potency has given me the best services in many cases of asthma; I do not, however, intend to assert that it is a specific.
And on page 202:
The assertion that with the higher attenuation the effect of the medicine is increased because the strength of the medicine is potentised must be rejected. A medicine does not become weaker or stronger by dilution, it is merely unfolded and made finer in its specification. The higher the dilution the more clearly appear, in many remedies, the characteristics symptoms. It is true that the dose of medicine must stand in definite relationship to the individual and to the disease, if it is to develop its highest power. We can therefore establish the axiom: the Simillimum demands the smallest doses. Here also the Law of economy holds good as everywhere else in Nature. Of all helpful doses the smallest is always the best (Dahlke). Therefore the more certain we are of having found the right remedy the higher we can go with the dilution. But where the boundary lies in each individual case, that we must all learn from experience.
SUPPLEMENT 230
THE EFFECT OF HIGHLY DILUTED SUBSTANCES IN THE LIGHT OF MODERN INVESTIGATION.
During recent years a vast amount of scientifically sound proof has been produced in favour of the efficacy of the smallest amount of substances. In the German “Homoeopathic Periodical” (“Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Homoeopathie”) of 1922, Nos. 2 and 3, Dr. Meng of Stuttgart relates:
We know that the chemical combination and division of atoms is accompanied by electrical phenomena. Their carriers, the electrons, are two thousand times lighter than the lightest chemical atom; they are planets which revolve continuously around the sun, the atom nucleus, in established and calculable orbits. By means of the Quanten theory of Planck the atomical spectra have been investigated. In every atom of the ninety-two different chemical elements there are electrons of the same kind; the qualitative difference of the elements would, therefore only be found in the difference of the nuclei, their suns, which as regards mass and charge are different. The nucleus is positive and the electrons negative. The times of the alchemists are once more appearing since it has become possible to observe the disintegration of radium in two other gaseous elements (helium and radium emanations), since we know that helium and lead are derived from radium. Let us consider the development of a science which made it possible to prove that, for instance, the alpha rays are helium atoms which pass through their orbit at the rate of 20,000 km. a second.
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