The first one is syphilis, which everyone acknowledges is a chronic disease. The second one is gonorrhea. This was at a time when this disease was thought to be of no more consequence than a cold in the nose. Nowadays we know its disabling effects. Laboratory tests of this disease are positive in these chronic gonorrhoeal patients. That surely was an accurate observation on Hahnemanns part. These diseases are chronic from the first day of the infection.
Hahnemann also observed that there was another chronic disease, differing from either syphilis or gonorrhoea. He recorded dozens of symptoms that he said were an indication of this third chronic disease. Hahnemann named this third chronic miasm “Psora” or the “Itch.” Much confusion and severe criticism has resulted from the choice of these words. Again, unfortunately, we do not have a name to describe what this chronic disease really is. He taught that almost all of this chronic disease, in his day, came from suppressed itch. In fact he quoted from old school authority ninety-seven examples of chronic diseases that resulted from suppression of the itch. This, however, does not prove that all of this third chronic disease comes from this cause.
Constantine Hering wrote : “The shallow opponents of Homoeopathy and we never had any other–pounced upon the theory of the psoric miasm with the view of attacking it with their hollow and unmeaning sarcasms. Making Psora to be identical with the itch, they seemingly pretended that according to Hahnemanns doctrine that the itch was the primitive evil and that the doctrine was akin to the doctrine of the original sin recognized by the Christian faith.”.
It is high time that we get the idea out of our heads that all of the third chronic disease is due to suppressed itch. It may come from suppression of the symptoms of any acute infection. We recognize that in acute infections the disease runs a definite course. If the symptoms are suppressed or the course of the disease is interfered with, the patient is not doing well. The third chronic disease comes from suppressed symptoms of acute disease, and if the course of the disease is interfered with the patient is not doing well.
We are constantly suppressing the natural course of disease by various remedies in order to impress our patients with our superior knowledge that we can make symptoms disappear, regardless of the cause that produced the suffering. The disease is often “driven in.” This chronic disease is simply a struggle of the system trying to “throw out” the suppressed symptoms of the “miasm.” Some of the old school are unwittingly coming around to Hahnemanns teachings. They say that pain is the fire alarm of danger, but stopping the alarm does not put out the fire.
What we call chronic disease Hahnemann called the result of chronic disease. Apoplexy, angina pectoris an abscess at a tooth root, etc., are the results of a long process of chronic symptoms that he said lead up to the terminal result. Extracting an abscessed tooth will relieve the symptoms caused by the presence of the pus at the root, but does not cure the cause of the pus.
This is true of all our chronic diseases, as apoplexy, coronary disease, interstitial nephritis, etc. Our minds are so centered on the end results that we stop there. Anything farther back is unknown territory. The truth does not register. Instead of Hahnemanns theory of chronic disease being a horrid monster, it is simply going back to the original cause. We sense what it is, but we cannot explain it.
Hahnemann recognizes that there may be a combination of any two or more of these chronic diseases; also that acute diseases may be added to one or more of these chronic diseases. When an acute disease is not cured but runs into a chronic stage, we may be sure that there are one or more of these three chronic diseases back of it as a host. Hahnemann, Hering and others warned us that a skin eruption appearing when we are treating a chronic patient does not necessarily mean that the disease is being “driven out.” It may mean that an acute skin disease is grafted on the chronic patient.
Hahnemann had a wonderful knowledge of what symptoms constitute a chronic disease. It was not the work of a tyro. His knowledge has about become a lost art. What was as wonderful as his knowledge of chronic diseases was his immense knowledge of materia medica. He studied each symptoms of chronic diseases, and selected the remedies that are similar and curative for these symptoms. Too much credit cannot be given Hahnemann for this intricate and accurate study of the symptoms of chronic diseases and the selection of remedies to cure these symptoms. This list he called the “antipsoric remedies.” They are very deep acting, and are the ones to cure these cases. They have stood the test of time.
In treating these chronics, Hahnemann, Hering and others have given us the indications that the patient is progressing in a curative manner. They said that pain is relieved from above downward; the most important symptoms are relieved first; and that diseases are cured in the reverse order of their coming; cures take place from within outward. If there is a combination of two or more of chronic diseases a remedy must be given to break up this combination, and the diseases are to be cured separately. All this is terra incognita to almost all homoeopathic graduates. If we ever abandon the spirit of Hahnemanns teachings of similia, the homoeopathic school is doomed to extinction.
One more fact in Hahnemanns teaching will be mentioned. In writing of the cholera epidemic in 1831 he promulgated his method of producing immunity to cholera. He said in substance: get used to the “miasm”, which is probably minute animal organism, very gradually, first by standing at the door of a cholera patients room, then going into open air, and then gradually approaching the patient. Thus one “works up” immunity against cholera. This was not the first effort to produce immunity.
For a long time the method of overcoming epidemics of smallpox was to innoculate pus direct from a smallpox patient, but that treatment was too severe. More than thirty years before Hahnemann wrote of immunity in cholera epidemics, Jenner introduced the vaccination method. Some physicians are silly enough to say that this is not in accord with similia. It certainly is not contraria.
Hahnemann said that when one becomes immune to cholera he may also carry the miasm on or in his person to infect other people. In other words, he became a disease carrier. Judging from the criticisms at that time of his ideas, the medical profession did not accept his views. We now know that Hahnemann was correct. All immunity is established in principle by this method.
Pasteur by a very scientific method developed the treatment against rabies by this method or gradually getting used to the infection. Pasteur was only nine years old when Hahnemann wrote this about immunity. All of the immunization that is done today, and there is a great deal of it, is along the lines laid down by Hahnemann, and is done by using small doses of the “Miasm” and usually repeating the dose, and not by using massive doses as was the custom in innoculating against smallpox.
These are some of the “facts” and “fancies” of Hahnemann. No effort has been made to substantiate theories. Only such statements have been used as would help to get his ideas across to us.
Hahnemann was the first to prove the action of remedies on healthy persons. He also, by an arduous task, separated the acute remedies from the deep acting ones.
He understood immunity. He also established the fact that so-called healthy persons may be disease carriers and infect healthy persons.
He was correct in his statement of the chronicity of syphilis and gonorrhoea long before the medical profession accepted his ideas that gonorrhoea is a chronic disease.
Hahnemanns “fancy”, if it may be called that in describing the third chronic disease has much merit in it. It seems strange that, with all the thousand and one laboratory experiments that delve into the very minutest structure of the human body and into the innerds of all varieties of infection, our scientists cannot see anything but the results of disease. They cannot see the forest for the trees.
Modern treatment is largely based on the relief of the results of disease. There are not now many general physicians or specialists who have the intricate medical knowledge that Hahnemann had. In these strenuous days when almost everyone become a so-called specialist, and more often than otherwise suppresses the results of chronic diseases in a vain effort to cure the disease, it is refreshing to hear Carrel unconsciously confirming Hahnemanns teachings when he said “The more eminent the specialist, the more dangerous he is.”.
If truth shall prevail, then in the distant future, perhaps too far distant for the good of suffering humanity, the teachings of Hahnemann will be accepted by the medical profession.
HAHNEMANNS LIST OF SO-CALLED “ANTIPSORIC” REMEDIES.
Agaricus. Conium. Muriatic acid.
