A Brief Study Course in Homoeopathy



Great care must be taken in potency selection of certain very deep acting remedies in serious chronic cases. For instance, Kali carb. in gout, Sulph., Sil., Tub., or Phos. in tuberculosis; psor. in asthma; and Arsenicum and Lachesis in many conditions. These remedies should be carried in the 30th potency even by those who give almost entirely the higher degrees.

REPETITION.

The single remedy is the third member of the essential homoeopathic trilogy. The reason for this is obvious: only one remedy can be the most similar at any given time with the condition of any given patient. If the physician can not decide between two remedies he has not gotten the totality of the symptoms, or the remedies which he has chosen are merely superficially akin to fragments or aspects of the case. Furthermore, the simillimum is a personality having a rhythm, one might almost say a permeating aura of its own, and in the fleeting instant of its administration it takes complete possession of the patient, thereby buoying up the vital force so that it can carry on the restorative process.

To have two or more remedies would be to introduce two separate rhythms, partial and disharmonious factors. Moreover, if more than one remedy be used the doctor cannot know which element was curative and one source of future guidance is thereby obscured. Lastly, since only one remedy can possibly be proved at a time, so only one can cure at a given moment. Some mongrel homoeopaths when in doubt give mixed prescriptions. This means that they are merely prescribing symptomatically, one remedy for one symptom or organ, and another for another.

Each of these if homoeopathically chosen may wipe out the fragmentary illness at which it was aimed but that which is profound, total, and primal, of which all these symptoms are but manifestations and will remain untouched and simply crop out through other channels as subsequent symptoms. Other half-hearted homoeopaths, and even some with a wide knowledge of the materia medica but a relatively feeble grasp of the philosophy alternate remedies. This practice can not be too strongly condemned as it seesaws the patient into temporary ups without real progress.

Many modern French homoeopaths give a main deep acting remedy and one or more so-called drainage remedies with it, the chronic remedy in high potency and the drainage remedies in low potency, the idea being that the drainage remedy opens up an outlet for the exodus of the disease. These drainage remedies aim at the production of a discharge or the stimulation of the secretory organs, etc. This is a recent variant and does not appear in Hahnemann, the old masters, or Kent, and the self-styled purists of today do not approve of it.

The subject of the intercurrent remedy may well be mentioned here. Many pure Kentians hold that there is, or should be, no such thing, and that when, after a series of potencies of the same remedy, a new remedy is called for to stir up or develop the case, this is not an intercurrent but at that moment the simillimum.

There is some division of practice as to whether the single remedy should be given in one or more doses. The high potencies favour the single dose, although two, three or more doses of a high potency may be given at short intervals every four, eight or twelve hours especially in very acute cases with fever as the increased metabolism, so to speak, eats up the remedy fast. in such slow diseases as typhoid high potencies may also be repeated close together, but in every instance it is an absolute rule that when favourable reaction sets in the administration of the remedy must cease.

So long as improvement is visible in the patient himself the remedy should not be repeated. Not only there is no need of “more of a good thing” but a repetition of a remedy which is still acting successfully defeats itself and actually hinders cure. Very occasionally, however, we have found that when a certain potency is aiding somewhat a higher potency of the same remedy will lift the case to speedier cure. In this connection it is of interest to mention the theory of double dosage recently promulgated by Gordon of Edinburgh.

Gordon gives his remedy in two doses, eight hours apart, the first dose of a lower and the second of a higher potency of the same remedy. For instance,Phos. 200 at bedtime and Phos. 1M on rising. This has not yet been sufficiently tried out for unqualified acceptance. Some of the masters use a lower potency after a higher one and claim good results. This seems in accord with the order of the progress of disease, from within and above, outward and downward. This has been even less used than the other method and we have no statistics as to whether these cases would have done as well or better on the lower potency originally.

Another method of multiple dosage which almost amounts to divided single doses is that of plussing. “Plussing” means dissolving your dose in a third of a glass of water, taking two teaspoonfuls, throwing away most of the rest, adding water up to the original quantity, stirring and succussing and again taking two teaspoonfuls as the second dose and so on. This raises the potency very slightly between each of the doses, gives somewhat wider range or plane, and is particularly indicated in stubborn and refractory cases.

If very low potencies are used in ordinary acute illness, repeated doses are necessary until improvement sets in in most cases, for instance, a decompensated cardiac case calling for Crataegus might need two drops of tincture in water night and morning for a week. Where there is more pathology than vitality this might open the case better than a single high potency dose of Crataegus, although this latter might follow later.

Bryonia 3x should be given as pellets or in water at intervals of one to four hours according to the pace of the case, in acute cases calling for Bryonia, by low potency men. We would whole-heartedly advocate a single dose of Bryonia high under the same conditions. So much for the administration of the first dose or doses prior to the setting in of a favourable reaction.

Next comes the problem of when to prescribe again. The rule here is never repeat or change the remedy while the patient himself is improving When the improvement has apparently ceased in acute diseases you may need to repeat the same remedy in the same or a higher potency or, if your remedy was not a true simillimum, you may need another remedy to round out the cure.

You must be sure that the cessation of improvement is not due to the emotional mechanical or hygienic cause or merely to the aggravation or out- cropping of single symptoms. In chronic work you should wait some time, from three or four days to two or three weeks or more, as the vital force has cycles even on the upward grade, and true curative action must not be interrupted until it is certain that the reactive force is exhausted. Kent admirably stresses this in his injunction “to watch and wait”.

As to the interval between repetition or prescriptions this may vary from a few minutes to a year or more and is entirely dependent on the general amelioration of the patient. When you have had true improvement and particularly, if, in chronic cases, you have observed the working of Herings law of cure, sit tight. More cases are bungled by too frequent repetition then by anything else. In this connection it is of course necessary to know which are the long acting remedies, although we have known of the good effect of Bryonia 30 one dose continuing two years in a chronic condition.

Every student should own the little pamphlet by R. Gibson Miller on The Relationship of Remedies which gives approximate duration of action, but the only true guide to the duration of action of any remedy in a given potency on any patient is the cessation of the patients general sense of well being. in general, if you are a good prescriber, one dose, single or divided as above, should cope with brief acute diseases to be followed at the termination of the disease with a chronic to set the economy in order. If a change of remedy is indicated in acute disease there will often be a reversion or return towards the close of the disease to the primary remedy.

The subject of the second prescription and of aggravations will be taken up in the next lecture. It remains only to say a word here about the place of Placebo in prescribing. A famous doctor said that “Sac. lac. is the second best remedy.” Patients who understand homoeopathy deeply may often be content with a single dose at long intervals without Placebo, but it is good policy to give even these a single powder of Placebo at every visit.

Most patients require medicine often, not only so that they feel that something is being done but so that they may have powders for emergencies and it is not only honorable but necessary to give plentiful Placebo. It is wise to train the patients to take powders or pellets as Placebo which are similar in appearance to the actual remedies, and not to give them the tempting brown, pink and green blank tablets.

Elizabeth Wright Hubbard
Dr. Elizabeth Wright Hubbard (1896-1967) was born in New York City and later studied with Pierre Schmidt. She subsequently opened a practice in Boston. In 1945 she served as president of the International Hahnemannian Association. From 1959-1961 served at the first woman president of the American Institute of Homeopathy. She also was Editor of the 'Homoeopathic Recorder' the 'Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy' and taught at the AFH postgraduate homeopathic school. She authored A Homeopathy As Art and Science, which included A Brief Study Course in Homeopathy.