APPLIED HOMOEOPATHIC PHILOSOPHY



The effects were startling. The boy became seriously ill, and because he was unable to come to the office it was necessary to make a house visit, although he lived at some distance. The prescription here was placebo, because his illness was nothing more than a severe aggravation, from which he recovered and has maintained a most excellent state of health.

In this case the deep-acting remedy over-shot the mark completely, while a comparatively superficial remedy such as Bryonia effected a profound change in the boys condition, even in the 1000th potency.

While the potency question is always regarded as one to develop much discussion, with the principles in mind and experience as additional evidence, one can hardly avoid mention of potency when dealing philosophically with the treatment of disease syndromes. The analysis of cases referred to brought this question to the fore.

One queries why the seemingly indicated remedy failed to work properly when administered in the 1000th potency, and upon restudy of the case and the remedy, the results of the administration of the same remedy in the 9M. potency were so brilliant? Evidently the minimum was not at first administered.

In dealing with the question of potency one cannot fail to consider the question of released energy. If, as has been demonstrated, many substances give off electric charges, even in minute measurements, we cannot doubt but that the energy released by potentization is a factor of considerable weight in this potency question. Scientists have told us that diffusion governs both adsorption and imbibition (Liepatoff) and the smaller the difficulty accessible inner surface the quicker is the adsorption (Freundlich).

We must remember that these findings have developed from physical experimentation, and not on the living human mechanism, which must be infinitely more delicate through its psychological and emotional reactions.

Therefore, in dealing with disturbed functioning of our human patients, whether this be mental or physical, or both, we cannot fail to consider the dynamic disturbance that we do not find in purely laboratory experimentation. There is that delicate balance that we must consider which does not enter into consideration in the same light in dealing with physics and chemistry alone; this condition must have a parallel in consideration of the drug preparation to be used.

If we wish a physiological action from any drug, we must find this in the suitable preparation; but we cannot expect that massive doses will have the same permeative results on the whole organism as a finely divided, potentized preparation. Here again we find Maupertius law governs, for here it is not physiological action we seek; rather, we seek to effect a change in nature of the disturbance, a return to health; therefore our quantity must be the least possible.

Homoeopathic philosophy, applied in our every-day work, gives us a reason for the faith that is in us; it provides us a sound basis for procedure as well.

Suppose we have selected our remedy, that it has been administered in a seemingly suitable potency, and we have recorded definite results from it. After a time the condition returns in part. What shall be our next step? Here too we must consider the sound basis for procedure along the lines laid down by the master-thinkers and early homoeopathic scientists.

How does the condition return ? In whole or in part? If as a whole, are the symptoms as bad as before? Perhaps a repetition of the dose is required. Or is there only a part of the symptomatology manifesting now ? Here we must ask ourselves what part. Our early teachers gave us the solution to this problem in the law of direction of cure, and over a century of use has proved it sound: CURE TAKES PLACE FROM ABOVE DOWNWARD, FROM WITHIN OUTWARD, FROM AN IMPORTANT ORGAN TO A LESS IMPORTANT ORGAN, AND IN THE REVERSE DIRECTION OF ITS ONSET.

If our treatment of a case of rheumatic fever sees the patients earlier symptomatology clearing, but his heart becoming involved, we know at once that our remedy selection or our potency was gravely wrong (other conditions being equal), and the patient is proceeding away from the direction of cure. If, on the other hand, he is still in pain but the pain is moving from above downward, and clearing as it goes, we may be sure he is proceeding toward cure, and with our proper understanding and cooperation he will attain it.

If our ability and understanding in healing the sick has no more sound basis for procedure than the results of random experimentation, we are in no better position than the physician of the dominant school. If we have no comprehension of the practical value of the basis of our homoeopathic philosophy we are not truly peculiarly scientific basis for our school of medical thought. But there is a value to homoeopathic principles that gives to our school all the truly scientific procedures for diagnosis of the dominant school of medicine plus a sound and truly scientific basis of reason for therapeutic procedures; and still more, a definite basis of reason for therapeutic procedures; and still more, a definite set of principles that, when thoroughly understood, will perfect our prognosis and comprehension of each individual case that we may meet in practice.

We have not the ability, as yet, to cure every case of sickness we meet. That we shall ever reach this stage of perfection is beyond our hope or expectation, for there are so many elements entering into consideration of each case, and so much individual lack of comprehension of simple facts, that this possibility is hampered from the very start. But with our sound principles to guide us, and with the determination to see as clearly as possible hindrances to cures as well as the true picture of each individual case, we can go forward knowing that our homoeopathic principles can be applied in practical ways for our guidance and to the best good of our patients.

DERBY, CONN.

Miss I. M., age 45. Occupation: secretarial work, and drives her auto about fifty miles almost every day.

Chronic long-standing colitis. Constant uncomfortable feeling in left side; always a sensation as if there were something in there, causing discomfort. Soreness in front part of abdomen seems to be connected with a spot in the lumbar region; she has had this for years.

Cannot eat acid-forming foods. Constipated; it takes different forms.

Aches from iliac region under liver down abdomen.

Lameness in right knee and right arm, better from Lactrodextrin. Right eye sore, hurts to turn it.

Not always rested; feels tired inside.

Gaertner 200; after about six weeks treatment is much improved.

Another case like the one previously reported.

Miss A. S., lawyer living in another state, had been treated by homoeopathic physicians in another state but without relief. Gaertner 200. After about two weeks she wrote: “My whole life has been changed. I feel fine, am able to drive my car now, and take care of my legal practice again.” We heard from her after about a year, and she reported she continued well.

–VIRGINIA M. JOHNSON, M.D.

H.A. Roberts
Dr. H.A.Roberts (1868-1950) attended New York Homoeopathic Medical College and set up practrice in Brattleboro of Vermont (U.S.). He eventually moved to Connecticut where he practiced almost 50 years. Elected president of the Connecticut Homoeopathic Medical Society and subsequently President of The International Hahnemannian Association. His writings include Sensation As If and The Principles and Art of Cure by Homoeopathy.