In the November issue of THE HOMOEOPATHIC RECORDER there was an extremely interesting article on the “Potentiality of Drugs” as borne out by references to the work of Dr. Abrams, of San Francisco.
For almost two years the writer has began engaged in investigating the potency question under the Beit Research Fund of the British Homoeopathic Association. In connection with this the methods of Dr. Abrams came under review and it is felt essential that some of the findings of this work should be put before American homoeopathic practitioners.
The findings, it will be noted, are contradictory in some respects to those described by Drs. Woodbury and Baker; in others, they will be found far more in keeping with homoeopathic theory and practice. They involve a criticism of the theory of Dr. Abrams. The instrument known as the Reflexophone has been submitted to careful physical tests and it has been found that its true method of action is very different from that claimed by Dr. Abrams.
A paper presented to the British Homoeopathic Congress in June, 1922, describes these findings. The research work upon which they are based is in the hands of the Beit Research Committee. It is somewhat technical and involves a good deal of physical experimental work. For the benefit of our American confreres a summary of the findings is given.
The Abrams Reflexophone was investigated and it was found that it was not acting as a resistance, but as an inductance, in spite of the method of non-inductive writing used by Dr. Abrams. The sequel to this discovery was that the Abrams instrument, in conjunction with the human body, is simply a wireless instrument.
The term “vibratory rate” is empirical, but can now be regarded as, in a sense, true. It has, however, been proved that the measurement in ohms and the use of resistance terms, is entirely false and the value of the numbers on the instrument is simply to give a reading for the point at which the instrument is “in tune” with the energy produced by any specimen. The 25th of an ohm on Abrams Reflexophone do not in any way measure the potentiality of the energy, nor its intensity. They simply perform the part of fractional tuning to the oncoming wave. The readings quoted as designating the so-called potentiality of drugs, are simply designative of the points at which the Abrams Reflexophone is “in tune” with the wave of the drug.
It has been proved that the homoeopathic potencies are electrically active, but the varying readings of these potencies in their various forms, are due not to variations in intensity, so much as to variations in wave length. Each potency has been found by these new methods to contain a great number of varying wave lengths, and the differences between the potencies are minute differences between these wave lengths.
In the same way, the Abrams Reflexophone used with Abrams technique as a possible diagnostic instrument, is only of value where the energy of a particular disease happens to be “in true” with his unit readings. If the Abrams instrument is used in the correct manner as described in the paper referred to, it will be found that far more disease forces can be picked up, that better diagnoses can be made and far better results obtained if the 25ths ohms are used for fractional tuning.
However, when used in the correct way according to modern wireless methods, Abrams instrument fails on many occasions, owing to its poor inductance value, which is due to the faulty winding and also owing to the fact that waves may be missed because of the gaps between the studs.
The result of this research has been the production in Great Britain of an instrument known as “The Emanometer,” which, owing to its special method of construction, is a very efficient inductance and contains no gaps whatever in its tuning arrangement. With it, the same waves as described by Dr. Abrams can be picked up, but also, in addition, other ones of very great clinical value. Furthermore, this instrument demonstrates that there is no single were length for Tubercular disease, for example, but a great variation of wave lengths within a certain very limited range.
These minute differences in the Tubercular wave depend on the individual patient. In other words, this new instrument demonstrates the long-standing claim of homoeopathy that even a particular infection has the stamp on the individual upon it.
Further, now that it has been made clear by experiment, that the 25ths in Abrams instrument are merely of value for fractional tuning, the use of them to measure so-called potentiality, either of disease or of drug, is physically incorrect. Careful clinical investigation has shown that the 25th are of no value in estimating the intensity of the disease force. For those who know the Abrams instrument I cite a case:.