J.B. Fraser, M.D., C.M., of Ontario, after some careful observations, is said to have found: The number of deaths from diphtheria have increased with the increased use of toxoid. Hew warns the parents before they have their children inoculated with toxoid: first, toxoid will not prevent diphtheria, second, toxoid may cause future trouble.
Again, since the introduction and increased usage of those products, tuberculosis is said to have increased 300 per cent among the negroes in the last five years. Insanity had increased thirty per cent in the last ten years. Heart disease among school children is reported to have increased from a fraction of one per cent to over twenty-five per cent. Sleeping sickness and infantile paralysis have spread around the entire world. And, in spite of the vaunted saving of infantile life since their introduction, according to a Washington dispatch, “Infantile mortality is among the list having an unusually large increase”.
I have merely recounted the above to see in any self-respecting homoeopath could be justly proud of homoeopathy had it presented so disgraceful and so criminal record! Said Herephelus” “Medicines are nothing in themselves, but the very hands of the gods, if used with reason and prudence.” Then why not stick to homoeopathy and the proven drug which can be used with “REASON and PRUDENCE”?.
Just what would happen were strict laws passed making the users and makers of those products, as they are now popularly used and forced onto an unwilling people, making those users and makers, criminally and financially liable and responsible for their false and misleading statements and the evil results arising from the use of those products?.
There is nothing magic about homoeopathic, it is merely a plain statement of FACT that is unable to transform into natural law any whim of man. The attaching of the name homoeopathic to any freak or popular method of therapeutics, or so-called preventives, cannot, and does not, transform that method into what the term homoeopathy stands for.
Neither can the term homoeopathic by any magic replace the accurately indicated drug by any serum, toxoid or vaccine, nor by any magic eliminate the evil results and deaths that arise from the use of those products, a something unknown to the properly selected and applied drug. Again, the Law of Similars demands that the similitude shall be to the individuals symptoms, and not to a name given merely to a pathological state. Nature likewise demands that all substances shall be prepared by the body before entering into the inner body. If we disobey that law, we do it out out peril, as the victims so regularly attest.
The allopath has entered on a trail with those products from which he dares not turn back for fear of elimination. then just why should we insist on entering on that same trail and dragging homoeopathy with us? Hahnemann knew exactly what he meant when he said, “The physicians high and ONLY mission is to heal the sick, etc.” He well knew that as soon as we stepped out of that sphere and launched out into an unchartered course, with unproven remedial agents, based on false theories and premises, of both cause of disease and the action of the agents used, to guide us through a vast trackless and dangerous forest, we will find ourselves on dangerous grounds, ending in gave detriment both to our patrons and ourselves.
If one does not believe that one has but to sit down and reflect on the above catastrophies and the present deplorable state and humiliating circumstances now surrounding modern medicine, and just what a disgraceful plight it is now in. Then just why attempt to drag homoeopathy into that mess? If we had stood by our guns from the pathy into that mess? If we had stood by our guns from the beginning, and not allowed ourselves to be stampeded, we homoeopaths would have been on top of the heap today and medicine would have retained the public respect.
Those of you who have read the report and discussions of the bill pending before the British House of Lords, to legalize osteopathy in England, will appreciate the final paragraph of that report, for the testimony against it was given by men who favor the above products. It reads:.
Lord Moynihans denunciation of osteopathy as a “spurious science” and as an object for “derision of all competent minds” may safely be left for posterity as an outstanding example of the intellectual obtuseness which reigned in High Councils of Orthodox Medicine in the year 1934. “Derision” may then be withdrawn from osteopathy and transferred elsewhere.
That applies equally well to the attitude of present day homoeopaths toward homoeopathy and the results of its researches, and will be viewed by posterity in that same light. TOLEDO, OHIO.
DISCUSSION.
DR. K.A. MCLAREN: The chief use that I have serum and vaccines is when an allopath says, “Look at the wonderful results we get from them”, and I say, “Yes, of course you get them, because they act homoeopathically.” That is about the chief use that have for them, to combat him in his arguments.
There appears to be at times the odd, brilliant result from giving a serum or a vaccine, and I think at that time it is really homoeopathic to the case, but at no other time is it homoeopathic to the case. It isnt administered homoeopathically, and in 99 per cent of cases the action it not homoeopathic, but in the odd per cent, or brilliant cure results, I think we should take the credit.
I want to thank Dr. Pulford for putting all that work on the paper. That is a wonderful paper, and it is something that we ought to discuss very openly, because sometimes in our prescribing we hunt around in our minds and say, “what can we do next? Is it worth trying this or worth trying that?”.
The whole trend today is to influence our minds toward trying to share it or a protein injection. I would like to hear some discussion on this.
DR. DIXON: The thought that come to may mind How are we combating serums and vaccines? The pressure is brought to bear to such a point that we have to make a definite stand. Day before yesterday a mother brought her little child in, saying she must report to the grade school within a week and submit to vaccination and the Schick test for scarlet fever. The mother asked me what to do about it. I told her to refuse to have either one done. In Ohio they cannot compel vaccination. I understand in some states they do. For years I have made a definite stand against it. I do not permit my patients (the school children) to be vaccinated or to have the Schick test. It is easy to slide out from under that and say there things can be done. I dont approve of sidestepping my responsibility that way.
It is a matter for your individual decision, of course, but I am always very proud to go on record that I dont approve of it, and have not allowed if for years, Oftentimes these pupils are excluded from school if there is a flurry of smallpox somewhere in the country or state. they keep them our twenty days, and then they have to be reinstated in their classes. My own son was kept out, I think about five times, as he went through the grades and high school. When he applied for a position in one of our local shops, they insisted on vaccination. Well, he wasnt vaccinated.
We have kept all those that have come to us for counsel free form it, and any man, in the state f Ohio, at least, can do that if he wants to.
DR. CAMPBELL: Diphtheria is, as you all know, a very grave disease occurring in young children. The question occurs to me whether or not it is better to have these children toxoided, it it does prevent diphtheria, and statistics at lest local statistics from our part of the country-seem to indicate that it does, unless it is just a coincidence that there havent been as many cases. I have been wondering whether it is better to have them toxoided to prevent the disease when the only treatment that is available to them, if they give it, is antitoxin. If the majority of our medical practitioners of homoeopaths are qualified to treat diphtheria the way we treat it, I would look with less favor on toxoiding children, but in Toronto the medical profession as a whole have toxoided thousands of children. So far as I have been able to learn, there have been no immediate untoward results, and the indications seem to be that it does prevent diphtheria. If you have ever seen a child, as most of us have, with virulent diphtheria, choking to death, you would give them toxoid rather than expose them to that risk, if you had nothing else to offer them.
DR. WAFFENSMITH: I want to call attention to the fact that in the Basic Board of Health Law in the state of New Mexico there is paragraph that gives equal recognition to the internal administration of variolinum as a prophylaxis against smallpox. In other words, it is legally recognized in the Basic Board of Health Law. It is possibly the only state in the United States that has it.
This paper appeals to me very strongly. Another fact that I wish to present is that in my experience in my travels among people of a low economic status where homoeopathy is very well known and established, there is a great demand on the part of the general public. It brings us back to the fact that after all, homoeopathy and our method of administration presents a most beautiful, simple and practical way of administering the indicated remedy. The difficulty with practically all of us is that we fail to select the proper remedy; but we can see from our past experience that when we have selected the remedy satisfactorily, conditions that are very virulent, suddenly lose their virulence and rapidly change to increased health, which, after convalescence had taken place, seems to put the patient in a better general constitutional and mental condition than he was before.
