In one of my previous paragraphs, I have already alluded to such cases and presented one of the means of overcoming this difficulty. Careful study of the endocrine dysfunctions of your patient is essential. Once we know the nature of the pathologic gland or, better, the dominant gland of the individual, we can hope to solve our problem. This determination is often not a simple task; nevertheless, a broad general comprehension of the endocrine balance will help in the classification of your patient.
This determination having been made, we now proceed to give the patient small doses of the gland. Personally, I would prefer the lower potencies, as the 30th, for this class of patient. After a period of week, longer or shorter, the true basic symptomatology of your patient will develop. After this we can prescribe our remedy. It is interesting in this connection to note that with a small minority of these cases, the endocrine prescribed will clear up the entire case for you. In most cases, however, a true similimum is necessary to obtain a complete cure.
Another invaluable means of treating chronic cases lies in the use of the nosodes. With these, I have had a limited experience. I have, however, been fortunate to observe the actions of Tuberculinum, Bacillinum and Psorinum. The action of nosodes is based upon present-day conception of Vaccine and Serum therapy. Like the latter it has been proven, that they increase the opsonic index of the body, but unlike vaccines, it is unnecessary to poison the body by injecting deadly germs into the system. The homoeopath has a further advantage with the use of his nosodes, in that he can individualize the cases in which the nosode is necessary and not indiscriminately inject poisons into everyone. These nosodes are very valuable when properly indicated and must be borne in mind by the chronic prescriber.
Generally stated, the nosodes are indicated where we lack individualistic symptomatology. This lack of symptomatology plus the chronic taint or diathesis which we can ascribe to our patient will help us prescribe the nosode. For example, let us say we have an old suppressed gonorrheal case, having been treated by injections, and now ten years later he suffers from rheumatoid affections. The patients no definite symptomatology and we are sure that his present complaint is based on this old taint. Such a patient, given a dose of Medorrhinum, will quickly respond. Often the old G.C. flow will return and recovery ensues or else we can then properly prescribe for our patient. Similar examples can be given, using Psorinum, Syphilinum, and Tuberculinum.
In view of the last few paragraphs, in which I have especially alluded to some of our more modern ideas in homoeopathic practice, in relation to the chronic case, it would here be worthy to mention the old Miasmatic theory propounded by our founder. Briefly stated, according to this, each true chronic case is based upon three general dyscrasia or taints which inhabit us. These are Syphilis, Sycosis and Psora. Hahnemann claims that all true chronic diseases are possessed of these miasms. Such a conception, though archaic of expression, still holds sway today. We moderns speak of the Chinese as being a syphilized race, meaning a luetic dyscrasia is inherent to the entire race.
We often state that the white race will, in the near future, be tubercularized. And such a conception of disease was announced by Hahnemann. He, however, allowed of three great diseases and no doubt they are still our dominant diseases, with Psora holding the greatest sway of all. We immediately concern ourselves with these miasms when we remember that a remedy, to cure a truly chronic case, must not alone comprise all that I have already mentioned, but, in order that the cure be a true and lasting one, the remedy must bear a definite relation to the individuals miasmatic background.
In some of our very difficult cases, especially that type of patient who has made the rounds of many physicians, including homoeopaths, and in whom most everything has failed, another method of approach may be made. This is not new, in fact , very old, but it is through this that some of our old brilliant prescribers made their most successes, almost fabulous in its very essence. Men of the type of Hering, Boenninghausen, Allen and Lippe stand out primarily here. These careful old prescribers noted what I should choose to term the peculiarities of symptoms group complexes of individuals. For instance, they noted that certain people were peculiarly affected by the tides, others by proximity of certain stars, others by the moon.
There is no doubt that such tremendous forces as tides, stars, sun and moon must bear a relation to each individuals reaction. This, however, is not always demonstrable or observed, but in the more sensitive of our brethren such symptomatology can be observed. I have been fortunate to observe and hear discussions of such symptoms during the past year by an example in our dispensary work. When such symptomatology can be elicited in the chronic case, utilization of the symptom may bring you untold success. Silicea, Bufo, Argentum nitricum, all contain such symptomatology and careful study will reveal the presence of many more. Brilliant cures are reserved for the searching prescriber.
A prescription is now ready for our patient. The old question of potencies arises. Personally I have observed excellent results with the higher potencies and these alone I would choose to use. The higher the potency the more dynamic its reaction, and since homoeopathy cures only through its dynamic activity, the potencies alone should be used. Low potencies, as the 6th, can and may yield the action of the crude drug and may not arouse a curative reaction in chronic cases.
I always start the patient with a single powder of the drug in the 200th and supply the patient with sufficient placebos to carry him on during the intervals of visits. Upon each visitation, careful memoranda of the case should be made. It will be noted that the last symptoms improve first. We will also note that symptoms previously suppressed by palliative means will return. When such is the trend of our case, we can be reasonably certain that the case is on the road to a true recovery.
In conclusion, I can only re-emphasize the principle stated by Samuel Hahnemann in the guidance of a true prescription in every case-“in short, the totality of the symptoms must be regarded by the physician as the principal and only condition to be recognized and removed by his art in each case of disease, that it may be cured and converted into health”.
