DR. GRIMMER: This paper is really too deep to discuss offhand, just from hearing the paper; there is too much to it. It is a beginning toward unlocking some of these problems about the miasms. Many men found the miasm theory very difficult to accept, especially the psoric miasm. They see enough of the other two venereal miasms to convince them that Hahnemann knew what he was talking about there; but they think that Hahnemann was a little bit far-fetched and speculative when it came to psora, perhaps because they took just one viewpoint. They confused Hahnemanns idea of psora with the itch mite. Hahnemann said that is only one manifestation.
Deficiency is a timely subject. We hear a great deal of all kinds of deficiencies nowadays. Isnt it true that every case of disease is some sort of deficiency? We may need the homoeopathic remedy; they are deficient in something, at least a functional disturbance. Anyway, that doesnt permit the organism to take up the things they need. It can be illustrated by Natrum mur. in a child that is dying with marasmus and he will get all the salt he needs, he will get more than he needs in fact; he will prefer the salt to the sugar bowl. Yet he goes on to a state of marasmus, and will die if doesnt get a potency of Natrum mur., which corrects the whole thing.
The same is true of lime. We hear a lot about the giving of calcium. You give the homoeopathic remedy, and the patient gets enough calcium out of the food that he is getting, that is, if it is within reason and a fair balance, and so forth.
DR. SCHWARTZ: It seems to me a paper written as Dr. Roberts has written it should make a great appeal to the regular school because they are doing so much work on deficiency diseases. There is so much that is being done in biochemistry and in the homoeopathic college, too, that they should be more willing to accept and to realize what has been done by homoeopathic medicine as it is being proved today along those very lines that are acceptable to them, that is from those fields that they themselves are working on. when presented and amplified, it would seem that what has long been known to the homoeopath (that he did get results) now are being proved in a way that should be acceptable to them, and they will admit that our medicine is scientific.
DR. MOORE: I was going to say something that Dr. Stearns had spoken about on this deficiency. He told me this morning about how these substances we give as homoeopathic remedies are not detectable before in the system by the electronic analysis,but after they are given, they are detectable for a very long period, perhaps four months. That is a deficiency idea from another angle which I had not heard expressed. I am very glad Dr. Stearns is here. He can speak of that himself.
This electronic work has come along quite in the line of pure scientific work on a high plane, and it is bringing us something very definite and very interesting.
DR. A. PULFORD: I presume I am a freak in homoeopathy, but I have never been able yet to accept those theories. It reminds me of the adage that, “Differences of opinion show quite clear, that the truth lies somewhere if you knew but where”.
There is one question that I would like to ask, and possibly it will help to solve some of this. When Hahnemann got his famous sycotic case, did he know beforehand that the Chamomilla was an antisycotic, or did he discovered that after he had prescribed?.
There is one thing that bothers me, and that is if those theories are absolutely accurate and correct, I wonder how I have existed over fifty-one years ignoring them and still unsolved.
DR. STEARNS: This paper is too comprehensive to discuss offhand and I would like to read it before discussing it. I admire the careful way in which he has prepared the paper. It is the result of much reading and much research.
I agree with his findings as far as they have gone but there is material for fifty papers in this one. I will just touch on the one point that Dr. Moore brought up, that is what our potentised homoeopathic remedies do. I believe that they enter into the body as an integral part of it just as I believe that some of the rare metals which have never been discovered in the body are in it in potentised form. I believe that everything of which this earth is composed is taken up by living things in more or less the same proportion as they occur in the earth.
DR. ROBERTS: In closing there is very little I want to say. I was rather surprised Dr. Pulford hasnt accepted the principles. Perhaps I misunderstand him. However, I feel that the psoric miasm or the psoric plane that has been described by Hahnemann was not the itch mite alone; it wasnt the effect of its constant infection that made an impress on the human economy in past ages any more than it was the results of any of the great plagues that came through on the earth. We get them yet. The great plague of influenza that we had has left its mark on people to a great extent. First, get the idea that Hahnemann had in naming the psora. Why did he choose “psora”? He chose it because of its meaning. It was originally from the Hebrew “tsorat,” which meant a fault, a pollution. It came down through the Greek, to Hahnemann calling it psora. That is must what has happened. There has been a defect produced in the offspring and can only be corrected by the similimum of the remedy to the similimum of the disease.
Many of the graduates from homoeopathic colleges do not grasp the dynamic concept of drugs, and for that reason always stay in the material plane, using only the crude drug or venturing into the low potencies occasionally. This is unfortunate for the efficacy of their work, for once this concept is grasped they realize that all potencies are valuable and useful, and they soon obtain a knowledge and power over disease little realized when viewed solely from the material plane. Especially is this true in chronic troubles, for the test of real skill is in the cure of chronic patients and the eradication of the chronic miasms. – H.A. ROBERTS, M.D. Principles and Art of Cure by Homoeopathy.
