The following is an illustration: In the study of a case in which Silicea had helped, the concordance of Silicea was used, together with the first part of the Therapeutic Pocket – Book. The rubric of “Localities,” in the Silicea concordance, was taken, then the various “Sensations” presented by the case, and, lastly, the special “Aggravations” in the case. These gave Calcarea as the remedy to follow. Not only did the materia medica, when consulted, confirm this, but also on exhibition, it proved to be the simillimum.
In another case with mental symptoms of Hyoscyamus, in which that remedy helped for a time, but finally failed to improve the case further, the concordance of Hyoscyamus assisted when used as follows:
The first rubric taken was “Mind.” Here Belladonna, Cannabis Indica, Stramonium and Veratrum album are the leading remedies, with Glonoine, Lycopodium and Opium next. As a skin efflorescence had recently developed the rubric of “Skin” was next consulted. These two rubrics gave Arsenicum 4, Belladonna, 6, Lycopodium 5, Phosphorus 2, Rhus 2, Sulphur 3.
Further study, in the materia medica, showed Lycopodium to be the remedy. it not only cleared up the eruption in proper order, that is, first, but soon the mental state also.
Another illustration of the use of the concordance is one in which lachesis was helping a joint case, but, after being exhibited in rising potencies, at last the patient failed to respond. Then in the Lachesis concordance “Localities” was taken. After that rubrics for the “Sensations,” “Modalities,” and “Concomitants,” that were present in the case then, were selected from the first part of the Therapeutic Pocket – Book. The resultant remedy – Pulsatilla – took hold at once and cured.
This was successful, of course, but the study could have been much shortened by taking just three rubrics in the Lachesis concordance, that is, “Localities,” “Sensations,” and “Aggravation, Time and Circumstances,” to use the rubric headings, as altered, in the T.F. Allen Boenninghausen. This gives Pulsatilla ahead of any other remedy – based upon the analytic value – as expressed by the different type.
I give this example in both ways because it shows the simplicity and rapidity with which the concordance can be used and also indicates how accurate the result may be.
There remains, then, to speak of those cases in which one makes use of the seventh rubric – tenth in Allen – which, as I have said, corresponds to each concordance as a whole and which I have called the concordance of the concordance.
In certain ill defined cases, that is, partially developed symptomatically, which may be said to have failed to localize, it is often the only rubric to use. One may yet enough suggestion from it alone, or it may have to be helped out, as it were, by other rubrics in the concordance or even, exceptionally, by the first part of the Therapeutic Pocket – Book, in a way similar to that I have already indicated.
The key to the special concordance to be used in a case consists in the name of the remedy last effective in that case. It matters not how this remedy was selected – whether by Boenninghausen, by some other repertory, or in some other manner or even as to the potency in which it was exhibited – the deciding point being that the remedy affected the case favorably, that is, it was homoeopathic.
Take a case coming from old school hands that has had, for example, either Ferrum or Colchicum (Colchicine). It may or may not be evident that the remedy has worked out its usefulness. It isnt necessary always to give one antidote, in such an instance, though that is one of the things to be considered. As the medicine has helped it is possible that if it be given in potency that there will be a further responses to it. If when the remedy be thus exhibited there is no reaction the concordance of that medicine may be of help.
Therefore in such a case there is a choice between these three procedures – that is, antidote, repetition in a different potency, or reference to the concordance.
From what has been said I hope it is clear that a concordance may be used in several ways. Particularly is it of value in selecting the “following remedy,” which it does with accuracy and with the minimum expenditure of time and effort. Also, because of its comprehensive grasp of the sequential relation of remedies, it is quite likely to suggest, in its workings, a medicine, to follow, which would not be thought of, without the aid of the concordance, except after laborious study, and which will be found, in the large majority of instances, to be the desired simillimum.
Those who use the Therapeutic Pocket – Book and, likewise, make use of its concordances, should add, if they have not already done so, the use of the eighteen groups of “concomitants.” They, too, are included in the Therapeutic Pocket – Book. These help to increase the accuracy of the remedy selection and decrease the time and effort required for its discovery.
As a paper of mine, in this subject, has already been printed, in the medical Advance, I will give only a short example here:
Take the case of an unmarried woman of thirty, whose menstrual flow comes too early, is scanty, bright, and without clots. All the associated symptoms – concomitants – which are hardly characteristic, occur before and after the flowing. During the flow, and in the interval between periods, she is free from symptoms.
The relief during the flow suggests a small group of remedies – a half dozen. Note, please, that in the working out the remedy, finally selected is one of the six, though the modality of amelioration during menses was not used in the study except infrequently. While Bovista (15), Phosphorus (17), and Sepia (15), cover this syndrome in Boenninghausen, Phosphorus most markedly, yet a reference to the materia medica shows Sepia to be the “most similar,” which is therefore given. The concomitant rubrics here are “before” and “after” menses.
This use of the concomitant rubrics makes available symptoms which would otherwise, from their commonness, be difficult to find in the repertories and which, if found, would, for the same reason – because they are common symptoms – be valueless for prescription purposes.
These common symptoms are available because of what may be called their mass, or concomitant, value. When grouped in this way under “concomitant symptoms” they thus collectively indicate a remedy, that is, a remedy which is more or less likely, as the case may be, to develop extraneous symptoms associated with various morbid states. The concomitant or mass value of each remedy, as estimated by Boenninghausen, is indicated in the concomitant rubrics, as is the remedy value in the rest of the Therapeutic Pocket – Book, by the different size of the type.
Boenninghausen speaks in regard to the rubrics of “Concomitant Complaints,” as follows: “Convinced of the importance of the symptoms which occur simultaneously with others, and form with them a group of symptoms, I have increased for a great many years the secondary symptoms in the Materia Medica Pura, by adding to them every secondary symptom occurring in my own experience, as well as in that of others, and their number has increased so incredibly, that I have been able to abstract from them general rules.
By these rules it is proved with great certainty that one remedy inclines much more than others to certain secondary complaints: that these last do not take exclusively this or that form, but that in general every kind of complaint which is at all related to the sphere of activity of the remedy, may be its attendant, although its true characteristic secondary complaints, attend it most frequently.
This discovery, proved by long experience to be true, has led me to bring the “Concomitant Complaints” together under one head, where the order of the remedies has again been pointed out by means of a different point; and whenever those secondary complaints require to be taken into consideration in the treatment of a case, they will have to be looked for among the peculiarities of the remedies, which are simultaneously indicated, in a greater or lesser number.”
It would seem that this explanation is as full and clear as could be desired.
The following list of these “concomitant” rubrics may be helpful, as they are renamed in the Allen Boenninghausen and many of them are, therefore, unrecognizable. The page number and the rubric heading under which they are given in the Allen edition follow in form thesis:
Mental – Concomitant Complaints (Drugs which have Concomitants of Mental Symptoms, p. 23).
Nose – Concomitant Complaints (Accompanying Symptoms of Nasal Discharges, p. 49).
Stool – Complaints Attending (Troubles Before Stool, – During, – After, p. 90).
Urine – Concomitant Complaints (Troubles Before. – At Beginning of, – During, – At Close of, – After, p. 100)
Menstruation – Concomitant Complaints (Troubles Before. – At Beginning of, – During, – After, p. 109).
Leucorrhoea – Concomitant Complaints (Accompanying Troubles of Leucorrhoea, p. 111).
