HOMOEOPATHY AND THE OD THEORY


For homoeopathy the acceptance of the Od doctrine affords further support. In our future laboratories a dark room should not be lacking. The sensitives, therefore, are everywhere. In mediaeval times they tortured the insane, holding them possessed of the devil. With advancing knowledge came the humane treatment. And for the many sensitive patients, a better knowledge will provide a more reasonable therapy.


It is delightful to wander through ones own country, but it is also beneficial to occasionally cross the border, and, ascending some far-seeing mountain summit, to look back upon the familiar picture, its hamlets, cities, rivers, lakes and hills. Thus today I would consider our scientific fatherland, homoeopathy, from the foreign viewpoint of the “Od” theory. Perchance we may behold vistas and see things hitherto invisible, and perfect our knowledge of Hahnemanns doctrine through that of Reichenbach to our own advancement and the healing of the sick.

Consideration of the relations of the Od theory to homoeopathy I have thus far found only in the had-book of Dr. A. von Gerhardt, where (pp.25-39 of the introduction) is an excellent exposition of the ergistic action of the homoeopathic dose from the Od standpoint. Elsewhere little mention of REichenbach is to be found among us, and yet I am convinced that no department of science has such close relationship with homoeopathy as the Od doctrine, and that homoeopathic physicians should be peculiarly interested in the recognition and propagation of this neglected discovery.

Reichenbach says in the preface to his work “The “present and future development of the laws of Od will work almost transmutation in many departments of medicine”.

Life processes hitherto unexplained here find solution, and many practical therapeutic measures appear in a new light. The action of our potencies can depend only upon what Reichenbach termed the “Od.” Let us see what the science of “Od” offers the homoeopath, and whether the results of this theory coincide with our views and experiences, recognizing our peculiar fitness to comprehend the value of Reichenbachs discovery.

I Sensitivity.

The reason why the OD doctrine is comparatively unknown lies in the fact that no mankind in general, but only the so-called “sensitives,” may feel and see (?) the Od.

This differentiation of mankind into “sensitives” and “nonsensitives ” is of great practical import. “The physician who does not recognize the powerful influence of the Od upon sensitives will frequently play a sorry role at the bedside,” says Gerhardt in the previously mentioned introduction, whose perusal I would commend to those interested, before they begin the study of REichenbachs works. Sensitivity is an exaggerated sensitiveness to stimuli. The sensitive with his hyper (nervous) perception is open to impressions not apprehended by the non- sensitive.

It is known that many physicians are able to diagnose infections such as scarlatina, measles, etc., by olfaction. Sensitivity is hyperaesthesia. But this has two sides; the hypersensitive nerve responds to stimuli that do not affect the normal nerve; the sphere of stimuli (Reizchwells) is enlarged. Stimuli of lesser action are termed hypostimuli; of similar action, parastimuli; of greater action, hyperstimuli. Men, according to their state of health or disease, exhibit differences in their reaction to external stimuli. What is hypostimulus to one, becomes parastimulus to another, and hyperstimulus to a third individual of great sensitivity.

The other side is, that stimuli normally perceptible and common to the healthy, act upon the hyperaesthetic or “sensitive powerfully and abnormally, a fact meriting the utmost consideration in pathology. Reichenbach was the first to utilize the delicacy of human sensitivity in the investigation of natures mysteries, and his results demand an entirely new comprehension of pathology and therapy.

In the domain of homoeopathy there is an ancient feud between high and low potentists, and each party believes that truth will die with it. Both accomplish genuinely homoeopathic cures. Upon this apparent confusion the concept of sensitivity alone shed light. The sensitive, hyperaesthetic, erethistic patient of the mentality must be handled with high potencies; the torpid, non- sensitive, robust, hypoaesthetic the low. Low potencies prescribed for the sensitive will aggravate. Each primary agg. is a proof that the potency was too low. On the contrary, high potencies administered to the non-sensitive are null and avoid.

Hence, if we would know the suitable potency we must first prove the sensitivity of the patient. Patients come with the gross mixtures of the “regular” school. If we give to the sensitive patient only low potencies, he soon arrives at the conclusion that “homoeopathic medicine is of no avail. I feel only worse,” and determines thereafter to flee all drugging. Upon the sensitive all drugs have action, and hence must be chosen with great care, and not too frequently repeated. Upon the non- sensitive the low similimum alone will have effect.

The often ridiculed “Drug-olfaction” is naturally efficacious only with sensitives. How infinitely, incredibly acute this class, is every page of Reichenbachs work shows. Hence it is of practical value for us to diagnose “sensitivity,” and Reichenbach aids us here in his book, “The SEnsitive and and the Non- sensitive.” (Wer ist sensitive, wer nicht?) Do not consider that such diagnosis is difficult. Sensitives are not rare, and in this neurotic age are daily becoming commoner.

“No village is so small that sensitives are not found therein. There are several methods by which sensitivity may be determined. These methods may be exploited with all sorts of procedures and instruments, and thus a scientific (?) atmosphere may be developed, but this is not essential. An empty had, a posture, a sign may, like a chemical reagent, determine the question; even these are not necessary; a simple inquiry intercalated into an oral examination may suffice. Even the presence of the patient is not required-knowledge gained from friends, family, an old servant, concerning the habits of the patient is enough to establish the diagnosis”.

Symptomatology of Sensitivity.

The first question is” does the patient sleep quietly or restlessly? Is the sleep restless even when in health? Nonsensitives, when well, sleep quietly all night, while sensitives are restless and given to insomnia. The more restless the sleep, the greater the sensitivity. Sensitives love solitude, and avoid crowds (agoraphobia); avoid handshaking. He who delays in freeing the grasped hand is surely non-sensitive-the sensitive withdraws his own quickly. In winter they prefer the porcelain stove (common in Germany) to the iron; the odpositive metal is disagreeable, the odnegative stone is not.

Even the odpositive mercury of morrows is obnoxious to the sensitive. They cannot bear the fragrance of flowers in their room at night. Moonlight in the room hinders sleep, makes them gay and lively. They prefer a cool dislike warm baths. Of foods they avoid fats, sweets, spices, but are found of bitter, sharp ailments (mustard, radish), acidulous substances as fruits, and especially salads, as lettuce. They like rare meats, raw eggs, milk warm from the cow. Chlorotic sensitives have peculiar longings for raw, unprepared nutriment (vide the Naturheilmethode. Natures cure). Tobacco is obnoxious, also wine and tea.

They eat moderately, prefer light breakfasts. Reichenbach says, “The sensitives turn from our hyperdelicate modern civilization back towards the primeval state of man. And since they are thus guided by instinct alone, it is apparent that nature with its negative force is stronger in them than in other men. One might well learn of them in the study of diet; consideration of their inclinations is instructive in teaching a more normal way of living; of better maintenance of physical and physical health. Hence, the study of sensitives offers us concepts of primary importance”.

Mercurial, restless individuals who can never keep still are sensitive. Leather shoes and gloves hinder the Od currents and are unpleasant; constrictive clothing obnoxious. Perhaps the beneficial effect of air-baths is largely due to the fact that the equilibrium of the Od emanations is left undisturbed. Anaesthesias, numbness of the fingers, arms, feet, legs are not uncommon as correlatives of hyperaesthesia. The uniformity of plains, prairies is displeasing. An unconquerable desire for change of work is born in them, hence they are nor suited to quiet, steady labor; to resolute, productive exertion; to steadfastness amid lifes adversities. Neurasthenia. Of colors, yellow displeases, blue is pleasing. Sensitives suffer much from headache, migraine, gastrosis, cramps.

Sensitives recognize the presence of those in ill-health. Even when the abnormality is not is not externally cognizable. The sick are more Odpositive than the well. If we think of the “sick atmosphere” of the tuberculous, that is enlightening. There are, as is well known, individuals able to prophesy weather changes. The reason therefore lies in the Od disposition of air and earth- surface. Many animals have a remarkable perception of weather changes (tree-toad, spider). Before the storm there exists an odpositive charge, which, with rain, passes over into an odnegative. Many patients are conscious of this, and during nocturnal storms fall asleep only when the rain begins to fall.

Krin