It is not denied that in the majority of cases it is some particular lesion or local upset that makes a patient seek medical attention in the first place. But that lesion should only act as a pointer to draw the attention to the individual himself. Any remedy naturally must cover this local lesion-but it is not on the lesion that a remedy is selected. A remedy first a patient when the symptoms and signs of his general condition are found in that remedy. And no remedy can cure unless all the signs and symptoms agree.

And let me stress that a cure is reasonably sure, no matter what the morbid condition, provided pictures can be matched. The physicians task then boils down to searching for the drug picture that can match the disease picture his patient presents. You can understand that the fuller these pictures are the easier it should be. The drug that the materia medical reflects as giving the nearest similar picture would be the indicated remedy.

Now, this idea of similars in medicine is not peculiar to the homoeopathic school. It is the principle on which immunization is based as you are all well aware. Very small amounts of similar things are used-e.g. cowpox vaccine for smallpox. Notice that they are not the same but similar things.

Exactly the same principle applies in tackling the various allergic troubles, and notice further that only extremely small amounts of allergins are necessary. So it is nothing new to you that similar pictures cancel out and that minute doses are used- the notion that similars cancel out is so fundamental to the principles of the homoeopathic school that I ask you to allow me to go over some well-known ground again for the sake of emphasis. By similars one means, of course, two similar biological processes, however caused.

For instance, it is common knowledge that many different pollens, though of the same group of flowers, can cause exactly the same process in the victim. These pollens then would be similar in one sense. Note that any one from the group could be used, as long as they are from the same group each will have the same antidoting powers.

I would ask you to mark another point in these familiar cases of allergy, It is the question of dosage while on the one hand it is the gross allergins that cause the upset it is the minute amount of any similar allergic that has the power of antidoting it. One might put it that the physiological action of a sensitizing agent finds its antidote in the homoeopathic action of any similar agent. And you see here that there are two actions that cancel out because they are similar and, of course, acting in opposite directions.

Allow me to refresh your memories about a law relating to all this. You will recall that the Arndt Schultz Law lays it down that the minute will antidote the gross-if they are similar. Let me remind you that Weber showed how ether increased the viscosity of protoplasm while very weak solutions decreased it. This discovery followed Ewarts observation that ordinary solutions of anaesthetic arrested protoplasmic streaming, while very weak solutions accelerated it. Anaesthetists among you will be interested to see in this a probable explanation to account for the excitable stage of anaesthesia induction.

Many of us use emetine-and so it is of interest to point out how small doses constrict arteries, while large doses dilate them. Numerous examples could be quoted-but of course please remember that for the Law to apply it is only necessary to have similar things-and it is not confined simply to allergy.

The homoeopathic school extends the law far beyond the ordinary conception of allergy. I will attempt to explain this because it is practically a key principle in Homoeopathy.

No one will dispute the statement that it has always been medicines great concern to seek the causation of disease so as to apply some means of preventing it. And, when some disease has set in, the aim is to try and check its development. Various rationales have been adopted and the most successful have been along the lines of antidoting principles, so as to allow the body to bring its own mechanism into full force.

Now it has become increasingly evident that many causes can produce the same effect and that many effects can result from the same cause. How many causes are there for say, a bruise, and how many effects can that bruise cause. There are many causes necessary to produce a certain disease. Why is it that one person can be immune to a disease while another falls a victim when both are exposed to the same cause?

A. Taylor Smith