Strangely enough, he himself did not find that this applied equally well to the “lower potencies”, say up to 6c. but the curative value of potencies above these was well known. if they were given sufficient time to act. He had not found that the 3rd centesimal, or any of these lower potencies, had the curative effect which Dr. Wheeler had apparently obtained in the particular case he mentioned, or, at all events, he did not find results sufficiently definite to expect much likelihood of a cure from a single, or many, doses of these lower potencies.
The question of “the time of repetition” of remedies was one of the chief factors making for incredulity on the part of those investigating their science. He had therefore tried to reduce the time of repetition necessary for various potencies, to achieve beneficial results; for the more frequently a remedy can be repeated without destroying its curative value, the less difficulty the tyro has in comprehending it.
His experience justified him in saying that remedies in the 30th potency can be repeated every third day, while 100c and even 200c will act satisfactorily at intervals of week, though much longer than this may, in special cases, be required for either. He personally had not found any adverse effects from such frequent repetition. Above these potencies the length of the intervals was capable of almost limitless increase, in accordance with the reactions of the individual patient.
However, such a wide latitude was possible that he only offered the above as a working hypothesis to commence with, and to tread as delicately as possible on the beginners preconceptions. The necessity for this was evidenced by many enquirers being choked off by incredulity, before they had time to make any practical, individual, and convincing, experiments in homoeopathic prescribing, for themselves.
Dr. BLACKIE said that the question which she wanted to answer was the third question which Dr. Rorke had posed. She found that in cases of real organic change that is, in chronic disease often set up by some old-standing infective trouble a high potency would clear them up completely. She had had cases of rheumatoid arthritis and old sinusitis and conditions such as that which a 30c or 100c or a single dose of 10m had cleared up completely.
She thought also that in a very virulent acute illness a high potency was the only things to use. Personally she found there was not time to use a low potency. One other point: in treating out-patients whom one saw in large numbers and might not see again for perhaps a month one had to use low potencies unless one was absolutely certain of ones drug.
Dr. W.L. TEMPLETON said that to his mind power and potency were synonymous terms, power being developed through potentization. By dilution, they had been led to understand, potency or power was evolved. On the question of high or low potencies it is generally accepted that above 12c there is no molecular structure. There- fore above the 12c he would describe as high potencies, and below the 12c as low. But there were different opinions on that point.
Perhaps he might be allowed to ask the “examiner” a question: if no indications for a drug were present in the patient, on what grounds was the drug chosen? He had experimented a good deal on the subject of low potencies, and had felt that it could not be discussed purely as high and low, but that repetition must be brought in. For his own part, as a matter of general experience, he had found that when one gave the low repeated and obtained a certain result, that result did not last for as long as the other. The higher potencies so-called did, he believed, have a longer effect and a more persistent effect, though not necessarily a better one.
There were certain indications to the borne in mind. If one had structural change and gave a high potency, and it was a well matched case, one did run the risk of aggravation, and from the mercenary point of view of losing the patient. The other indication for low potency was when one had a case in which there were local indications. He thought that one was justified then in experimenting with low potency and in seeing what one could get out of it. If a speedy result was wanted in acute conditions one must go high. There were, however, cases in which that did not work out very well, the patient happening to be sensitive. But how one was to tell that a patient was sensitive was a difficult question.
These were, of course, exceptions to the rule. One exception was in cases of collapse, when it was a question of life and death, then he believed only the high would do the work. When there was no absolute rule the homoeopathist must judge by conditions, and when it was a question of speed it was necessary to take a certain risk.
Dr. P.G. QUINTON said that Dr. le Hunte Cooper had stated that he did not usually get much in the way of results with 3c. He himself did not usually use 3c. but he used 6c very often. If he were in a foreign country and could have with him only one potency he would select 30c. which was the best all round potency. He thought personally that the outstanding indications for very high potencies 200 and upwards were the mental symptoms so called. He was of opinion that results would be more readily obtainable with the high and the highest in preference to the low.
Dr. LE HUNTE COOPER explained that he got magnificent results with the third potency, but mostly palliative. What he had been speaking about were real cures.
Dr. GHAI said that, to begin with, he had to admit that his experience was rather limited, but what he had learned was this that in acute cases high potencies were necessary in order to get quick results. He remembered some cases of pneumonia and influenza where Phosphorus was the remedy, and it was given every three or four hours six doses, a quite clearly indicated remedy. On the following day the temperature had not gone down, the cough was still present, and the patient remained ill. Then the potency was raised to 100 or 200, and usually after three doses at three or four hours intervals the temperature came down and the patient was better.
Dr. Fergie Woods had mentioned Lachesis and Phosphorus being given in low and medium potencies. Lachesis might be given either in low potencies up to 12 or in very high potencies, over 200, but Dr. Tyler had always prescribed in the low to begin with, thereby causing aggravation to be much less or absent. In the chronic case with tissue changes aggravation was marked if the remedy was given in high potency, but was not marked if given in low. Again, as mentioned by Dr. Quinton, if the remedy was indicated by marked mental symptoms one expected better and quicker results with very high potency.
Dr. LEDERMAN asked what was actually a high potency. Everybody said one had to get used to the idea that it did act, but one could not say why. There was the physical theory of matter to be considered. The modern thinker said that matter was a picture only. It was a thing unknown, a concept only to give us something upon which to make certain conclusions. What was an atom? What were the protons and electrons? The modern physicist had given up the idea of defining of what reality consisted, or of what the world consisted. In view of all this he felt very much happier in using a high potency which he did not understand. What happened in the preparation of such a high potency? One could not picture it, and it did not matter.
Dr. AGNES MONCRIEFF said that as to the distinction between power and potency, she had always considered that this was governed by the physical low in which the sub-division of inert matter into its constituent ions was said to liberate its energy; that was potency and therefore the higher the potency the greater the power. Secondly, as to the meaning of high and low potencies, she believed there was a certain form of energy up to the 6th potency which changed at the 9th potency, and from that point of view 12c was the first high potency, everything above being high, and everything below the 9th low.
As for the indications for high or low potencies, she thought, as Dr. Fergie Woods had said, that the patient was very important. With infants and old people it was safer to use low potencies because their reaction to the drug, in the first place, was not sufficiently active. She thoughts the condition of the patient mattered a great deal whatever his age.
She recalled two cases when she was a resident at that hospital, one of whom she had “killed” with a high potency. This was a woman of about 40 with acute bronchitis and emphysema. She gave her Lachesis 10m, and she died in about six hours. She found afterward that she had had the 30 a year or two before, and had been very well for some years afterwards. She thought she gave her too high a potency.
In another case one of her chiefs had given a patient with a chest condition Silicea in high potency. It was thought to be a deep-seated pneumonia, and within 24 hours a deep abscess ruptured into the pleural cavity, and the patient died. She agreed with Dr. Blackie that organic conditions due to infective causes always improved best with a high potency, but organic conditions such as cancer, advanced cardiac disease, or tuberculosis were safer with the low potencies.
