Generally, the slanderers of the theory of drainage speak against it without having practised it. It is not the case with us because we have always studied successively different schools of Homoeopathy, the unicist, pluralist, and the complexist, in order to find out the truth.
The Unicists, the most adverse critics of the practice of drainage may be very good homoeopaths but we say that the therapeutic results that they obtain are more slow and less complete than the results we obtain. In their arguments and criticisms there is a very curious respect for traditionalism. They are the staunch guardians of a wrongly understood Homoeopathy. But generally the critics of drainage that those who do not think like them, remain always a step inferior because they have not studied sufficiently deeply the Materia Medica. This belief is erroneous.
It is impossible to practise drainage and canalisation without a sound knowledge of Materia Medica and the relations of remedies. We do not believe ourselves to be at fault in supporting the serious and justified principles of Drainage and of Canalisation, because it will lead to an immense progress in the art of therapeutics.
(This article is translated fully, excepting a few lines, from L’ Homoeopathic Moderne, 2nd, year, No.2, 15 January, 1934).