Kents incorrect interpretation of Miasms.


The IHM present the Hahnemannian view in its lectures and seminars with references and commentary.

HAHNEMANN’S MIASM THEORY AND MIASM REMEDIES
by Peter Morrell

The theory of miasms originates in Hahnemann’s book The Chronic Diseases which was published in 1828, around the same time that he decided to fix 30c as the standard potency for all homoeopaths. He declared that the theory was the result of 12 years of the most painstaking work on difficult cases of a chronic character combined with his own historical research into the diseases of man.

The three miasms given in that work are held to be responsible for all disease of a chronic nature and to form the foundation or basis for all disease in general. This latter aspect was then to receive considerable amplification from Kent. Kent was also able to clearly identify those remedies that relate to each miasm.

Though now generally accepted by most homeopaths without question, at the time, the theory was generally greeted with disbelief and derision from all but the most devoted followers. This can be explained in part by the primitive nature of medical science at that time, which was not really very willing accommodate any theory for the origin of disease, least of all such a grand and all-embracing one.

The word miasm means a cloud or fog in the being. The theory suggests that if 100% of all disease is miasmatic, then 85% is due to the primary and atavistic miasm Hahnemann called Psora. The remaining 15% of all disease he held to be either syphilitic or sycotic, being derived from suppressed Syphilis or suppressed Gonorrhoea. Hahnemann unlike Kent later attached no moral dimension whatsoever to the sexual nature of the two latter miasms. Kent of course, emphasised this a great deal. Which is hardly surprising in the somewhat Puritanical atmosphere of nineteenth century small town America.

Taking them in reverse order, we can depict the main characteristic features of each miasm.

SYCOSIS

This miasm is held to be responsible for many sexual and urinary disorders, and affections of the joints and the mucous membranes. Also those conditions worsened by damp weather and by contact with the sea. Thus arthritis and rheumatism, asthma, catarrhs, bronchitis, cystitis and warts are all regarded as partly or mainly sycotic in character. The wart came to be seen as the underlying archetype of this miasm as it is also held to be responsible for all warty excrescences and growths. Chief remedies are Thuja, Lycopodium, Natrum sulph, Causticum, Kali sulph, Staphysagria, Calc and Sepia amongst many others.

SYPHILIS

This miasm is held to be responsible for many diseases of the nervous system, the blood and skeleton as well as a range of psychological disorders, including alcoholism, depression, suicidal impulses, insanity, loss of smell and taste, blindness, deafness and ulcerations. It is also associated with many heart conditions, some vesicular skin eruptions and diseases that have a definite nocturnal periodicity. Chief remedies are Arsenicum, Aurum, Mercury, Phosphorus and Lycopodium, Nitric acid, amongst many others.

PSORA

The word Psora is derived from the Hebrew ‘Tsorat’ and Greek ‘Psora’ and means a groove or stigma. Hahnemann held that all non venereal chronic diseases are Psoric. That includes most diseases of a chronic nature, all skin diseases, most mental illness other than syphilitic ones, allergies, varicose veins, haemorrhoids, most dysfunctional diseases of organs and systems, etc.

He lists among others, catarrhs, asthma, pleurisy, haemoptysis, hydrocephalus, stomach ulcers, scrotal swelling, jaundice, swollen glands, cataract, diabetes, tuberculosis, epilepsy, fevers and suppressed urine as all being typically psoric manifestations. Plus, of course, the whole gamut of skin problems.

Chief Psoric remedies he suggests include Sulphur, Natrum mur, Calc carb, Arsen alb, Lycopodium, Phosphorus, Mezereum, Graphite, Causticum, Hepar sulph, Petroleum, Silica, Zinc and Psorinum amongst many others.

Hahnemann also claimed that Psora was the most ancient and insidious miasm, and that it was derived from skin eruptions of various types in the past, such as scabies (Itch), leprosy and psoriasis. These had been contracted by ancestors or in one’s own early childhood. The suppression of these conditions especially through the use of ointments he held to be the primary cause of Psora.

Kent, in his Lectures, then greatly enlarged upon the theory, proposing that Psora was the foundation of all other illness, without which mankind would be pure and healthy both in mind and body, as in the Garden of Eden. He thus regarded Psora as being equated with the ‘Fall of Man’ and with original sinfulness. He portrayed Psora in this highly moralistic light as also being the foundation of the sexual miasms that came later.

I think it is abundantly clear from these quotes that Kent took a very puritanical and moral line about the origins of disease within the human race and he apparently felt that Psora was equivalent to Original Sin or the Fall of Man.

Hahnemann also pointed out the origins of his theory and the remedies that he decided had the power to eradicate the symptoms of a particular miasm.

The lists of miasmic remedies that Kent gives on page 1406 of his Repertory are as follows:

SYPHILIS : Arg-m., Ars-i.ars-s-f., ars., asaf., Aur-m-n.Aur-m.Aur., bad., benz-ac., calc-i., calc-s., carb-an., carb-v., cinnb., clem., con., cor-r., crot-h., fl-ac., guai., hep., iod., kali-ar., kali-bi., kali-chl., Kali-i.Kali-s.lach., led., Merc-c.Merc-i-f.Merc-i-r.Merc.mez., Nit-ac., petr., ph-ac., phos., Phyt.sars., Sil.staph., Still.sul-i., sulph., Syph.thuj.

SYCOSIS : Agar., alum., alumn., anac., ant-c., ant-t., apis., aran., Arg-m.Arg-n.aster., aur-m., aur., bar-c., bry., calc., carb-an., carb-s., carb-v., caust., cham., cinnb., con., dulc., euphr., ferr., fl-ac., graph., hep., iod., kali-c., Kali-s.lach., lyc., mang., Med., merc., mez., Nat-s.Nit-ac., petr., phyt., puls., sabin., sars., sec., sel., Sep.sil., Staph.sulph., Thuj.

These are exactly the same as the lists given on p86 of Speight’s work on the miasms.

Hahnemann lists the following as Psoric remedies in the Chronic Diseases:
agar, alumina, ammon carb, ammon mur, anacardium, antimon crudum, arsen alb, aurum, aurum mur, bar carb, borax, calc carb, carbo an, carbo veg, caust, clem, colocynth, conium, cuprum, dig, dulc, euphorbium, graph, guaj, hepar, iodium, kali carb, lyc, mag carb, mag mur, manganum, mez, mur ac, nat carb, nat mur, nitric acid, nitrium, petroleum, phos, phos ac, platina, sars, sepia, silica, stannum, sulph, sulp ac, zincum.

To discover the true psoric remedies we must add together the remedies listed in the Repertory for a range of ‘psoric’ conditions. This means checking carefully all the symptoms and repertorising for all of them, gradually building up a master list of remedies that fit Psoric conditions. This exercise was highly recommended by Kent as a sure way of fixing in the mind the remedies of a particular miasm. It is also an excellent introduction to the miasms generally and is good for revision purposes. With computer programs like Radar and Cara this task become a lot easier than it was in Kent’s or Hahnemann’s day.

Taking some of Hahnemann’s list of psoric conditions given above we can find the corresponding remedies as follows:

Phthisis (Kent p879) : Acet-ac., Agar., ant-t., ars-i., ars., bar-m., brom., bufo., Calc-p.calc-s., Calc.carb-an., carb-s., carb-v., card-m., chlor., con., dros., dulc., elaps., ferr-i., ferr-p., fl-ac., graph., guai., Hep., hippoz., Iod., kali-ar., Kali-c.kali-n., kali-p., Kali-s.kreos., lac-d., lach., led., Lyc.med., merc., mill., myrt., nat-a., nat-m., nit-ac., ol-j., ox-ac., petr., ph-ac., Phos.plb., Psor.Puls., samb., sang., Senec.seneg., sep., Sil.Spong.Stann., still., sul-ac., Sulph.Ther.Tub.Zinc.

Hayfever (Kent p326) : Ail., All-c.ars-i., ars., arum-t., Arund., bad., brom., carb-v., cycl., dulc., euphr., gels., iod., kali-bi., kali-i., kali-p., lach., naja., Nat-m., nux-v., Psor.puls., ran-b., Sabad.sang., sil., Sin-n.stict., teucr., wye.

Diabetes (Kent p691) : Acet-ac., all-s., alumn., am-c., aml-n., arg-m., ars., benz-ac., Bov.calc-p., calc., camph., carb-ac., carb-v., chel., chin-a., chin., coff., colch., conv., cupr., cur., elaps., ferr-m., Helon.hep., iris., kali-chl., kali-n., kali-p., kreos., lac-d., lach., lact-ac., lec., lith., Lyc.lycps., lyss., mag-s., med., morph., mosch., nat-s., nit-ac., op., petr., Ph-ac.Phos.pic-ac., Plb.podo., rat., sal-ac., sec., sil., sul-ac., sulph., Tarent.Ter.thuj., Uran., zinc.

Varices lower limbs (Kent p1223) : Ambr., arg-n., Arn.ars., calc-f., calc-p., Calc.carb-s., Carb-v., card-m., caust., clem., crot-h., ferr-ar., ferr., Fl-ac.graph., Ham.hep., kali-ar., kreos., lac-c., lach., Lyc.Lycps.nat-m., plb., Puls., sabin., sars., sil., spig., sul-ac., sulph., thuj., vip., Zinc.

Eczema (Kent p1312) : Alum., am-c., am-m., anac., ant-c., arg-n., Ars-i.Ars., astac., aur-m., aur., Bar-m., bell., bor., brom., bry., calad., Calc-s.Calc., canth., carb-ac., carb-s., carb-v., caust., Cic., clem., cop., Crot-t., cycl., Dulc., fl-ac., Graph.Hep., hydr., iris., Jug-c.Jug-r.kali-ar., kali-bi., kali-c., kali-chl., kali-s., lach., Lappa-m., led., lith., lyc., merc., Mez., nat-m., nat-p., nat-s., nit-ac., Olnd.Petr., phos., phyt., Psor.ran-b., Rhus-t., rhus-v., sars., sep., sil., staph., Sul-i.Sulph.thuj., viol-t.

Psoriasis (Kent p1316) : Alum., am-c., ambr., Ars-i.ars., aur., bor., bry., bufo., calc-s., calc., canth., carb-ac., chin., clem., cor-r., cupr., dulc., iod., iris., kali-ar., kali-br., kali-c., kali-p., kali-s., led., lob., Lyc., mag-c., mang., merc-c., merc-i-r., merc., mez., nit-ac., nuph., petr., ph-ac., phos., Phyt.psor., puls., ran-b., rhus-t., sarr., sars., Sep.sil., sulph., tell., teucr., thuj.

Herpetic skin eruptions (Kent p1312) : Acet-ac., agar., alum., am-c., ambr., anac., anan., apis., ars-i., Ars., aster., aur., bar-c., bar-m., bell., berb., bor., Bov.bry., bufo., cadm., calad., Calc-s.Calc., caps., carb-an., Carb-s.carb-v., caust., chel., cic., cist., Clem., cocc., com., Con., crot-h., crot-t., cupr., cycl., dol., Dulc.Graph., grat., hell., hep., hyos., iod., iris., kali-ar., kali-c., kali-chl., kali-i., kali-n., kali-p., kali-s., kalm., kreos., lac-c., lach., led., Lyc., mag-c., mag-m., manc., mang., Merc., mez., mosch., mur-ac., nat-a., nat-c., Nat-m., nat-p., nat-s., nit-ac., nux-v., olnd., par., petr., ph-ac., phos., plb., psor., puls., ran-b., ran-s., Rhus-t., rob., rumx., ruta., sabad., sars., Sep.Sil., spig., spong., squil., stann., staph., sul-ac., Sulph., tarax., Tell., teucr., thuj., valer., viol-t., zinc.

The idea is then to compact this data down by deleting all those remedies that only occur once or twice and then totalling up all the scores until we get a master list of 40 or so highest scoring remedies. It is these that are the major Psoric remedies. In essence, this is the method Hahnemann himself used to establish both the miasms and their corresponding remedies.

Since the 1950’s it has been claimed that Tuberculosis and Cancer have developed into new miasms in their own right, most probably as offshoots of what Hahnemann termed the ‘Hydra headed Psora miasm’ (The Chronic Diseases, p14).

59 symptoms and major conditions were selected and repertorised using Kent’s Rep. The symptoms were as follows:

TB (p879), TB incipient (p879), TB pituitous (p879), scabies (p1318), pso riasis (p1316), dandruff (p114), hair loss (p120), leprosy (p1314), cancer (p1346), cancer lupus (p1346), leukaemia (p1370), diabetes (p691), cataract (p236), blindness (p281), long sightedness (p280), short sightedness (p283), lack of reaction (p1397), takes cold easily (p1349), swollen neck glands (p474), indurated glands neck (p472), swollen tonsils (p469), swollen axillary glands (p880 1), buboes (p541), goitre (pp471), tooth decay (p431), deafness (p323), insanity (p56), asthma (p763), liver (p563), haemorrhoids (p619), itching anus (p622), offensive stools (p640), varicosities (p1223), numbness (limbs p1035), chilblains (p955), sweaty feet (p1183), offensive foot sweats (p1183), halitosis (p409), nasal crusts (p330), perianal moisture (p623), hayfever (p326), foul flatus (p618), cracking joints (p970), worms (p634), ulcers on legs (p1231), ringworm, Haemoptysis (p813), Hydrocephalus (p128), Stomach ulcers (p531), Scrotal swelling (p712), Jaundice (p1307), Dysuria (p656), Eczema (p1312), Psoriasis (p1316), Herpetic skin eruptions (p1312), Crusty skin eruptions (p1310), pleurisy (p836), epilepsy, swollen inguinal glands (p603),

These symptoms were chosen as they are in the list given by Hahnemann as of ‘latent psora’ or they are major diseases of modern life, which I have assumed to be predominantly more psoric than syph or sycotic. I have assumed, like Hahnemann, that they are derived from suppressed scabies, leprosy or plague. They are disorders mentioned in Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases as often being the products of suppressed itch, or they are skin disorders in their own right. To an extent one major justification for choosing these symptoms is that they have all increased during for choosing these symptoms is that they have all increased during this century, which many take to be a confirmation of the Psora doctrine. The symptoms come from Chronic Diseases pp52 77 and include the expanded list he gives plus those listed by Juncker. Also included are those symptoms as major past or present diseases. All of these are assumed to be broadly psoric in accordance with Hahnemann’s descriptions of the miasm.

If the symptoms used in this analysis are truly psoric; if Kent’s Repertory is generally accurate; if the scoring system adopted here is OK; and if Hahnemann’s list, expanded list, the assertions of Juncker and my own observations regarding Psorinum and conditions are all correct then the following remedies cannot be seriously considered as being truly Psoric remedies.

These are Am m, anac, ant t, arg m, aur m, borax, bovista, bromium, camphor, cantharis, carb ac, cistus, clematis, occculus, colchicum, colocynthis, crot h, digitalis, euphorbium, ferrum, ferr phos, guaj, kali chlor, kali nit, ledum, mag carb, mag mur, manganum, merc c, mur ac, nat ars, nat phos, platina, podophy, sang, sarsap, secale, selenium, spigelia, spongia, tarantula, veratrum. They are important remedies but they are not truly psoric.

This exercise now reduces Hahnemann’s original list of 47 antipsorics to 32. It is possible that Hahnemann based his list of 47 on what he knew about them at that time. He simply fitted maybe? the symptoms of latent psora to those remedies he had proved at that time. The result was his list of 47.

I believe the claims made above are correct and that the remedies listed are not antipsorics. If a remedy is incapable of scoring more than 22 points out of a maximum of 120, then it cannot seriously be considered to cover that range and depth of major human diseases and is thus NOT a very profound remedy. And to be considered psoric a remedy must be profound. It must cover the major diseases of humanity as well as the symptoms of latent psora.

The preliminary results of repertorisation can be given as follows:

agar, alum, anac, ant c, ant t, apis, arg m, ars, ars i, ambr, aur, bar c, bar m, bov, brom, bry, bufo, CALC, calc p, calc s, canth, carb ac, carb an, carb s, carb v, caust, cham, chel, chin, cist, cocc, colch, con, crot h, cupr, dulc, fl ac, graph, hep, iod, kali ar, kali ci, kali carb, kali i, kali p, kali s, kreos, LACH, led, LYC, mag c, mag m, med, merc, merc c, mez, nat ar, nat c, nat m, nat p, nat s, nit ac, nux, petr, ph ac, PHOS, phyt, plat, plmb, podoph, psor, Puls, sang, sec, sep, SIL, spig, spong, stann, staph, SULPH, sul ac, tarent, thuja, tub, verat a, zinc.

However, this is not the full results for the entire run. It just indicates the main thrust. There are many remedies here that fail to match up in range or depth to our expectations of a truly psoric remedy.

An alternative method using the page-length entry of the entry of each remedy in Hahnemann gives the following:

agar, alumina, am c, anac, ant c, ARS, aur, aur m, bar c, CALC, carb an, CARB V, caust, con, cupr, dulc, graph, hep, iod, KALI C, LYC, mag c, mag m, mez, nat c, nat m, NIT AC, petr, PHOS, ph ac, plat, SEP, SIL, stann, SUL, sul ac, zinc

Two other problem about miasms relate to a) where the miasms are stored and what they actually are and b) to how the miasms can be used in practice. On the first point it may be that the miasms are archetypes in the unconscious mind, or it may be that they are stored in the DNA or some other large molecule within the organism. These are just possibilities. Many would say ‘what does it matter?’

On the point about the use of miasms in treatment, many people routinely give the corresponding nosode. For example to a child born with syphilitic skin vesicles, they might give Syphilinum rather than the simillimum say Merc. This would tend to be seen as an inappropriate use of the miasm concept, as the simillimum is what the patient needs, not the nosode. The routine use of Psorinum, Medorrhinum and Syphilinum is in general frowned upon because it is the simillimum that the patient needs and that will cure. Certainly the nosodes can do good work, but it should be used when it be comes the simillimum not just routinely.

Problems

The miasm theory presents at least two main problems. The first is whether it is real or not and the second is how it has been variously interpreted in homoeopathy and how it continues to be interpreted in the clinical situation and for guiding and interpreting the unfolding of symptoms in a case receiv ing treatment. Clearly, if all chronic disease is miasmatic then surely all curative remedies must be miasmatic remedies. Thus Nux vom, Aconite, Bella donna and Rhus tox, etc cannot cure any chronic disorders. So what if they do cure such conditions? Does this prove the theory wrong or are they bigger remedies than people thought?

Another problem is whether all the so called ‘miasmatic remedies’ are really as important as they appear to be. How many people actually use Manganum, Iris, Am c, Am m, etc. Do such cases ever crop up in regular practice? If so, only very rarely. If they don’t correspond to many persons then why are they classed as Psoric? Could it not be that they are more likely ‘lesser remedies’ that ape some of the features of true psorics?

Maybe modern homoeopaths should more seriously question its validity. Though we do not have space here to discuss this in any great depth, the theory does present these two problems and all I can do here is to outline their nature.

The miasms doctrine has also become unfortunately and perhaps unnecessarily tangled up both with Hering’s Law and with Kentian metaphysics. Both of which are suspect on a number of grounds relating directly to actual practice. Hering’s Law claims that symptoms get better under treatment in the reverse order of their appearance, from top downwards and from centre to circumference. Is this true? Under the influence of deep constitutional ie miasmatic remedies the law should be confirmed in this way. What l ie miasmatic remedies the law should be confirmed in this way. What if it isn’t? Does that mean that the case is not cured or that the law is inaccurate? If the cure does not proceed in this way is it a true cure or merely a suppression? Is the remedy the true simillimum? Questions of this kind can lead straight into a wilderness of thorns and brambles where everything seems uncertain and painful!

Finally, on Kentian grounds the miasms and their remedies are regarded as ‘high homoeopathy’, the ultimate and only true homoeopathy, acting in that hallowed and rarefied realm of disease causation. This somewhat snooty view of homoeopathy has been questioned before. Is it a real claimant of the high ground or a pretender? Again, many years of observant practice are required to answer this question for yourself.

Sources:
Danciger, Elizabeth, 1993, Letter re Vital Force, The Homeoopath, 50, pp.92-4
Hahnemann, Lesser Writings
Hahnemann, 1828, The Chronic Diseases,
The Homoeopath, 1995, Long Term Treatment & Chronic Disease, Issue 59, pp.453-460.
Kent, James Tyler, c1900, Repertory of Homoeopathic Medicines, Jain
Kent, 1900, Lectures on Homoeopathic Philosophy
Kent, 1900, Lesser Writings, Aphorisms and Precepts, Jain
Miles, Martin, 1995, Homoeopathy In The 21st Century, Prometheus Unbound 2:1, Autumn 1995, pp.35-37
Morrell, Peter, 1984, Homoeopathic Health Revolution, The Homoeopath 4:3, London
Morrell, Peter, 1983, On the nature of life, The Homoeopath 3:3, London
Morrell, Peter, 1987, Psorinum, The Homoeopath, 6:4, London
Norland, 1991, The Roots of Suffering: Buddhism and the Miasms, The Homoeopath 11:3, Sept 1991, pp.77-82
Shemmer, Yair, 1993, Vital Force: a view to the future, The Homoeopath 13:2, june 1993, pp.66-70
Speight, Phyllis, 1948, A Comparison of The Chronic Miasms, C W Daniel Co

Seminar room.

With new tables and chaors we will be able to seat 17, However utilising what we have, I reckon 10 can sit comfortably. This was a 15 minute set up. We will get it more streamlined once the alterations are done.

seminarclinic room

This will be the new clinic room. Divide to go in, new desk, Osteopathic couch, and testing equipment.

First decision for the HQ.

This will be one of the rooms for a visiting lecturer or guest for the 4 day training for attaining membership of the IHM Register.

Yes, I was laid on the bed testing it.

guest

We move into the new HQ tomorrow.

Its all paid for. Finally.

We go tomorrow to facilitate the handover and collect the keys. Homoeopathy moves forward in the UK.

A 6/7 bedroom residential facility for people requiring observation for their health issues, a clinic and also our teaching centre for groups up to 16.

boyne-house-guest-house4

immaculate-but-homely (1)working lunchhouse front

Next week I will be overseeing a new door being put in and setting up the computer online system. I will also finalise the new website for the centre.

All go.

Why it all went wrong in the USA.

 

Modern homoeopathy is not the practice of Hahnemann.

 

“………There is no evidence that Hahnemann ever read any of Swedenborg’s writings. This was not the case, however, for Hahnemann’s followers, who not only referenced Swedenborg’s teachings but openly embraced homeopathy as their preferred system of therapeutics. They made the connection by concluding that disease was an aberration of the spirit and that all physical manifestations of disease had their counterpart in a spiritual disorder. Disease derived from intemperance and ungoverned mental passions that ate away at the “interiors” of a person and eventually destroyed a person’s “exteriors.”

The concordance between Swedenborg’s philosophy and homeopathy caused numerous Swedenborgians to become homeopaths. This included Charles J. Hempel, chair of materia medica and therapeutics at the Hahnemann Medical College of Philadelphia, who believed that the material substances that composed the living organism were activated by an immaterial dynamic force. Disease, which represented an abnormal condition in the organism, could be cured by those active substances in medicine that produced a dynamic change in the organism’s vital condition. Every true drug contained a dynamic force or property. In his explanation of the outward resemblance of drug symptoms to the symptoms of disease, Hempel substituted the phrase correspondentia correspondentibus curantur for Hahnemann’s similia similibus curantur—a remarkably clear indication of Swedenborg’s influence.

Oresme_Spheres
Doctrine of degrees: The greater the number of dilutions (in this case, on a scale from 1 to 200), the greater the potency of the homeopathic medicine; likewise, the higher the level of spiritual rarefaction (from the physical world to heaven), the closer one moves to the Lord.

The Englishman James John Garth Wilkinson was a homeopathic physician who edited many of Swedenborg’s treatises and authored a significant early biography of Swedenborg in 1849. He correlated Hahnemann’s infinitesimal medicines, particularly those from the third to the two hundredth dilution, to Swedenborg’s doctrine of degrees. Most homeopathic medicines are manufactured at the sixth dilution, but some of them are so diluted that they lack virtually a single molecule of the original menstruum. This situation appears to be no impediment to the homeopath, however, who insists that something must remain since homeopathy “works.” According to Wilkinson, there was a direct relationship between the higher potency that comes with successive dilutions and different levels of spiritual rarefaction, moving from the various parts of the body to the muscles, nerves, fibers, and membranes and finally to the brain, mind, and soul. He believed that the time was coming when the world of medicine would discover “new insights and capacities” as a result of Swedenborg’s spiritual accomplishments. The challenge was to redeem the medical profession of its materialism, open its mind to a more theological pathology, and use the law of correspondences to understand the condition of the body and the soul. For the New Church physician, the human body became a spiritual organism whose treatment required a carefully constructed correspondence between material science and revelation.

Hempel and Wilkinson were early bridge-builders between homeopathy and Swedenborgianism, but the principal catalyst for this conjoining of ideas was James Tyler Kent, professor of materia medica at Hering Medical College and Hospital in Chicago. He constructed a uniquely Swedenborgian approach to Hahnemannian medicine in his Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy (1900) by providing a full description of Swedenborgian philosophy and spelling out such relevant Swedenborgian ideas as a human being’s interior and external worlds, the influx from the internal to the external, and the dependency of the whole on the Divine.

Each of Kent’s medicines had a “personality” that corresponded to the constitution of the patient. Rather than treat the specific organ or lesion, Kent aimed his medicines at the pattern exuded by the patient’s soul. Kent’s grouping of patients by type was an echo of Swedenborg’s description of the spiritual realms, where he described communities of angels gathering according to their personality and function to form the organs of a vast Universal Human that made up the whole of the heavens. In his writings, Swedenborg characterized spirits as, for example, “angels of the kidneys” or “angels of the lungs,” ascribing these souls of the deceased with characters and functions that corresponded with those organs.

Kentian homeopathy spread abroad, attracting Margaret Tyler and John Weir in Great Britain, Pierre Schmidt in Germany, and Denis Demarque in France. Nevertheless, the Kentian penchant for the constitutional (whole-person) prescribing of word-pictures to characterize medicines became almost a high art form and quickly fell into the hands of lay practitioners who popularized them even more. Today, due in no small measure to Swedenborg’s influence, homeopathy has become a bifurcated healing system with one faction looking wistfully at a more disciplined and reductionist process, seeking to fulfill a complementary role alongside mainstream medicine, and the other, enthralled by a vision that calls attention to the body’s essential harmony with the unseen forces of the universe.

Scholars on Swedenborg: Homeopathy’s Journey into Swedenborgianism

Foundational knowledge is required.

I am always surprised, if not heavily saddened, when a homoeopathic guru presents a ‘new’ idea. Generally, the presented novelty will have been investigated by Hahnemann and rejected and the reason or rationale for the rebuttal will have been stated. This appears to not deter the gurus, and even worse the profession takes it on board quickly and endorses it.

Why?

Because in the main, they have not read Hahnemann or understood the concept and practice method of Homoeopathy. It started in Hahnemann’s day when he criticised ‘the mongrel’ half homoeopaths who use the medicines but did not follow the principles or protocols of application.

jt kentA little later, a spiritual dimension was introduced by the Swedenborg church which sadly has diluted the understanding of Hahnemann’s writings, and superseded by a Kentian approach in case taking.The I.H.M. have taken the approach to teach the practice of homoeopathy from its inception through the past two centuries and examine the continued success due to the adherence to the original principles. Time and world health changes have NOT diluted the efficacy of the Hahnemannian approach or changed the remedy provings. The use of modern vaccines and medicines, I would argue, have complicated treatments and made it a touch more difficult, but has not altered the approach to effecting a cure.

With the Kentian/Swedenborg method,, an almost psychiatric approach has developed that involves the personality of the patient and this is taken as the lead symptoms in direct opposition to Hahnemann’s instructions for case taking. He emphasised looking at what has changed and not the existing personal choices or preferences of the patient.
The I.H.M. teach homoeopathy from the foundation of the therapy and the development through the 6 editions of the Organon. This approach allows the studen/practitioner to have a knowledge base for differentiation between any proposed new methodolgy for practice and what is correct.

The beauty and practical usage of Hahnemann’s method is the knowledge of WHAT is happening in treatment, knowledge of WHEN to re-dose, and knowledge of the TIME to change a remedy and what to look for which would indicate a change is needed.

There are so many Hannemannian directions and pointers that never see the light of day in this 21st century simply because most practitioners are not aware of the depths of Hahnemann’s writings because a lot of modern teachers consider them old fashioned and out of date, and their personal conceptual ideas are more relevant. Most teachers who base their practice on Kentian philoosphy, teach in opposition to the directives of Hahnemann.

We teach only Hahnemannian homoeopathy. Our students and practitioners have the ability to be guided by their training and get the answers directly from the books so as to be sure their approach or question is correct.

In the final stages of completing the HQ property purchase. Soon.

Where is homoeopathy in the 21st century?

I think the answer to this lies both in the history of the therapy and in the understanding of why it came into being at its inception.

allopathyModern medicine as defined, uses its pharmacy to treat disease by suppression or divergence of the expression of disease as exhibited by the patient. For example, a headache is treated by blocking the pain with pain relief medicine without treating the actual problem. Skin problems are treated with suppressive ointments or cortizone etc.

Hahnemann in his studies accepted that working with the patients immune system, and applying medicines that could produce matching symptoms, allowed a guide for the immune response to ‘focus’ on the disease expression, and cure itself.

This fundamental difference in approach, irrespective of the therapy of homoeopathy, is a law of nature and can be applied in a myriad ways. Homoeopathy as practiced the Hahnemannian way is a method to match accurately substances that can produce the symptoms of the disease and thus be applied curatively.

I have a firm grasp on the law of similars as being the method to cure disease. It is at odds with mainstream medicine in the West and as such those of us who feel the same are ridiculed and ostracised.

So for a person wanting to practice homoepathy, there is a need to be convinced that it is the bodys immune system that cures and nothing else.

§ 10 Sixth Edition
The material organism, without the vital force, is capable of no sensation, no function, no self-preservation 1, it derives all sensation and performs all the functions of life solely by means of the immaterial being (the vital principle) which animates the material organism in health and in disease.

§ 11 Sixth Edition
When a person falls ill, it is only this spiritual, self acting (automatic) vital force, everywhere present in his organism, that is primarily deranged by the dynamic 1 influence upon it of a morbific agent inimical to life; it is only the vital force, deranged to such an abnormal state, that can furnish the organism with its disagreeable sensations, and incline it to the irregular processes which we call disease; for, as a power invisible in itself, and only cognizable by its effects on the organism, its morbid derangement only makes itself known by the manifestation of disease in the sensations and functions of those parts of the organism exposed to the senses of the observer and physician, that is, by morbid symptoms, and in no other way can it make itself known. 2
1 Materia peccans!
2  What is dynamic influence, – dynamic power? Our earth, by virtue of a hidden invisible energy, carries the moon around her in twenty-eight days and several hours, and the moon alternately, in definite fixed hours (deducting certain differences which occur with the full and new moon) raises our northern seas to flood tide and again correspondingly lowers them to ebb. Apparently this takes place not through material agencies, not through mechanical contrivances, as are used for products of human labor; and so we see numerous other events about us as results of the action of one substance on another substance without being able to recognize a sensible connection between cause and effect. Only the cultured, practised in comparison and deduction, can form for himself a kind of supra-sensual idea sufficient to keep all that is material or mechanical in his thoughts from such concepts. He calls such effects dynamic, virtual, that is, such as result from absolute, specific, pure energy and action of he one substance upon the other substance.
For instance, the dynamic effect of the sick-making influences upon healthy man, as well as the dynamic energy of the medicines upon the principle of life in the restoration of health is nothing else than infection and so not in any way material, not in any way mechanical. Just as the energy of a magnet attracting a piece of iron or steel is not material, not mechanical. One sees that the piece of iron is attracted by one pole of the magnet, but how it is done is not seen. This invisible energy of the magnet does not require mechanical (material) auxiliary means, hook or lever, to attract the iron. The magnet draws to itself and this acts upon the piece of iron or upon a steel needle by means of a purely immaterial invisible, conceptual, inherent energy, that is, dynamically, and communicates to the steel needle the magnetic energy equally invisibly (dynamically). The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles, that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic property.
In a similar way, the effect of medicines upon living man is to be judged. Substances, which are used as medicines, are medicines only in so far as they possess each its own specific energy to alter the well-being of man through dynamic, conceptual influence, by means of the living sensory fibre, upon the conceptual controlling principle of life. The medicinal property of those material substances which we call medicines proper, relates only to their energy to call out alterations in the well-being of animal life. Only upon this conceptual principle of life, depends their medicinal health-altering, conceptual (dynamic) influence. Just as the nearness of a magnetic pole can communicate only magnetic energy to the steel (namely, by a kind of infection) but cannot communicate other properties (for instance, more hardness or ductility, etc.). And thus every special medicinal substance alters through a kind of infection, that well-being of man in a peculiar manner exclusively its own and not in a manner peculiar to another medicine, as certainly as the nearness of the child ill with small-pox will communicate to a healthy child only small-pox and not measles. These medicines act upon our well-being wholly without communication of material parts of the medicinal substances, thus dynamically, as if through infection. Far more healing energy is expressed in a case in point by the smallest dose of the best dynamized medicines, in which there can be, according to calculation, only so little of material substance that its minuteness cannot be thought and conceived by the best arithmetical mind, than by large doses of the same medicine in substance. That smallest dose can therefore contain almost entirely only the pure, freely-developed, conceptual medicinal energy, and bring about only dynamically such great effects as can never be reached by the crude medicinal substances itself taken in large doses.
It is not in the corporal atoms of these highly dynamized medicines, nor their physical or mathematical surfaces (with which the higher energies of the dynamized medicines are being interpreted but vainly as still sufficiently material) that the medicinal energy is found. More likely, there lies invisible in the moistened globule or in its solution, an unveiled, liberated, specific, medicinal force contained in the medicinal substance which acts dynamically by contact with the living animal fibre upon the whole organism (without communicating to it anything material however highly attenuated) and acts more strongly the more free and more immaterial the energy has become through the dynamization.
Is it then so utterly impossible for our age celebrated for its wealth in clear thinkers to think of dynamic energy as something non-corporeal, since we see daily phenomena which cannot be explained in any other manner? If one looks upon something nauseous and becomes inclined to vomit, did a material emetic come into his stomach which compels him to this anti-peristaltic movement? Was it not solely the dynamic effect of the nauseating aspect upon his imagination? And if one raises his arm, does it occur through a material visible instrument? a lever? Is it not solely the conceptual dynamic energy of his will which raises it?

§ 12 Sixth Edition
It is the morbidly affected vital energy alone that produces disease1, so that the morbid phenomena perceptible to our senses express at the same time all the internal change, that is to say, the whole morbid derangement of the internal dynamis; in a word, they reveal the whole disease; consequently, also, the disappearance under treatment of all the morbid phenomena and of all the morbid alterations that differ from the healthy vital operations, certainly affects and necessarily implies the restoration of the integrity of the vital force and, therefore, the recovered health of the whole organism.
1 How the vital force causes the organism to display morbid phenomena, that is, how it produces disease, it would be of no practical utility to the physician to know, and will forever remain concealed from him; only what it is necessary for him to know of the disease and what is fully sufficient for enabling him to cure it, has the Lord of life revealed to his senses.
§ 13
Therefore disease (that does not come within the province of manual surgery) considered, as it is by the allopathists, as a thing separate from the living whole, from the organism and its animating vital force, and hidden in the interior, be it ever so subtle a character, is an absurdity, that could only be imagined by minds of a materialistic stamp, and has for thousands of years given to the prevailing system of medicine all those pernicious impulses that have made it a truly mischievous [non-healing] art.
§ 14
There is, in the interior of man, nothing morbid that is curable and no invisible morbid alteration that is curable which does not make itself known to the accurately observing physicians by means of morbid signs and symptoms – an arrangement in perfect conformity with the infinite goodness of the all-wise Preserver of human life.  

Contained within the words of Hahnemann above, is the rationale for curative action by the law of similars.

Homoeopathy as a therapy, is not a touchy feely ‘alternative’ support to allopathy. It is a self contained medical practice that utililises a proven method of eliciting a curative response from a living organism be it human or animal. Where the organism is CAPABLE of responding and repairing itself, the effects are wonderful and almost miraculous to observe. If the organism is not capable of repair, sometimes we have to let allopathy take the lead in life preservation.

One of the major stumbling blocks to homoeopathy being accepted, is the scoffing maintained toward the dilutions. However science is slowly proving the power of water to absorb the effects.

The other and far more harmful issue within our therapy, is that a large number of practitioners have not learned real homoeopathy from Hahnemann. As such, individuals who are feted as good homoeopaths are misleading with their lack of knowledge and charisma, and not with accurate directives from Hahnemann.

So, if you are a practitioner, examine what you believe and practice by comparing it with the Organon. You will be surprised……………

The members of the IHM individually and collectively hold to the tenets of Hahnemannian practice and work in accordance to his directives. One of the noted features of our training courses, is that all aspects of the course are based around comprehension of the medical works of Hahnemann and Boenninghausen, usually each aphorism is backed up or explained by other texts so as to facilitate a clear understanding of the sublect under consideration. We teach the relevance of the written directives via cases to demonstrate WHY it has to be a certain way.

For new students of homoeopathy, we ground the individual from day one in understanding the methodology and the rationale, and teach them how to view a case through Hahnemanns perspective. While we encourage experimentation, we have found that going against Hahnemanns tested and tried recommendations, always fails. We do not allow polypharmacy or the use of non homoeopathic treatments like the flower remedies.

A number of use use the LM potencies and can give pointers as to how to use them. I myself have used them more or less exclusively since 1987.

We will announce seminar dates to be held in our Eastbourne East Sussex HQ covering case taking, Materia medica understanding, Rubric understanding of the Therapeutic Pocket book etc. This is dependant on the UK government laws regarding numbers and rules for indoor teaching.

More to come.

Understanding the repertory of Boenninghausen.

I am often asked why I chose the rubrics for a case that I do. When Vladimir and myself spent the time to rewrite each rubric using the German original from the existing Allens Pocket Book and dictionaries of the 1800s to understand the meaning of medical knowledge in that era, we became familiar with the intent of each symptom as related to the Materia Medica. 

clemensmariafranciscusvonbc3b6nninghausenIn the three years it took to refine the work, we saw the errors introduced by Allen due to his lack of language skills in German. In fact, this point alone was one of the driving forces behind our desire to have an accurate overhaul of the Repertory.

I think it worth mentioning that the motivation for rewriting the TPB was solely for use in our private clinics. I had found that using the Allens version had proved to be more beneficial to my patients than any other Repertory to indicate the correct remedy. Originally I had played with the TPB back in 1983, but found it so different to Kent and apparently ‘simplistic’ plus I lacked knowledge regarding the methodology that it was placed on one side.

later, with a little more knowledge regarding its usage, I came to like its accuracy even in my clumsy use of it.

tpbpwA person who uses the TPB is a person who utilises the methology of Hahnemann. Boenninghausen incorporated the thinking and directions of the Master, and as such when used correctly, the remedies suggested are an accurate portrayal of how Hahnemann takes a case, and matches the patients symptoms accurately with the Materia Medica.

One incorrect complaint leveled against the repertory is that it is a ‘generals’ repertory and is not a specific local symptom repertory. We can demonstated how to use properly.

laptop2It was the most used repertory in German English and French from 1846 to late in the century, then due to Swedenborg influence in the USA homoeopathic sector, it stopped being printed.

Kents repertory is an amalgamation of 7 repertories and one or two booklets. The issue with that is that each individual repertory has its own methodology which is lost in the combination. 

Sadly the same problem exists with the Boger Boenninghausen repertory, where everything has been placed together from all the different sources of Boenninghausen. As a book of collated symptoms it is excellent… as a repertory, not so much.

We will do a one or 2 day course at the IHM HQ in Eastbourne when the restricitions are lifted going through the essentials of understanding the TPB for prescribing success.

A homoeopathic perspective regarding Ringworm.

This case presented was my own. Ive published previously but is worth retelling with added insight regarding the disease and susceptibility and the curative response.

A homoeopath following Hahnemanns directives treats “the disease”.The disease per se, is the collection of the production of the symptoms in a process, and also the fuller picture of the reaction to the infection via the individual exhibition of symptoms.

At the outset, let me state that I treated many cases of ringworm successfully. The TPB has these remedies under the Ringworm rubric. Sepia, Natrum carb, Natrum Mur, Clematis and Mag carb. For the majority of cases, I have found Sepia the remedy of choice.

One morning I awoke and took a shower, and felt a slight itch behind my right leg above the knee, and was met with the sight of several ring worm present. It must have been a quick onset as this was the first time I noticed. Also my left elbow was discoloured as in the video and had a scabbed area. If I pushed the expanded growth, I was deluged with a liquid pus.

After repertorising, I took Sepia LM 0/1 for 5 days one dose a day.

The Ringworm continued to grow and spread.

My pharmacist colleague suggested a cream to kill the infection and he said “it has never failed” in his experience. Well, fail it did.

My elbow continued to grow and discharge copious amounts of blood and pus.

Several remedies later, I realised nothing was working.

I decided to read through old journals seeking wisdom from the masters of old. Eventually I read Compton Burnett and his treatment for Ringworm.

“For years, in common with many others, I have been constantly in the habit of treating and curing ringworm by internal remedies with relative success. For all that I have thus far never had anything approaching to a clear notion of its true nature, and some of the cases would persist in not getting well ; and this lack of a definite idea of its nature, and also the uncertainty of its cure, is I believe fully shared by those who have thus habitually considered and treated ringworm constitution ally . It is due, let us say, to psora, but we have no clear conception of what psora is . 

This intrigued me, and I continued to read more as his intellectually honesty was refreshing.

 Psora needs to be split up into its  component  parts, no easy task ; it roots in the vague, its trunk and boughs run away into anywhere. The psora of the homceopaths seems somehow true, but it has no proper beginning, no definite course, and ends in patho­logical chaos.  Perhaps we study it in Hahnemann, and in the best writers on the subject, and after doing our best to master it, we rise from our_studies with no clear idea, and we finalJy decide to abandon psora as an intangible myth, and then we proceed with our clinical work ; but, before long, we stumble…

Compton Burnetts observations:

“…..-A whole family of children of dif­ferent ages had had ringworm for a full year, and the mother told  me on bringing them that she had already spent over £ 6·00 on medical fees for its cure, but in vain. All known remedies had been applied by the local doctors in two neigh­bourhoods, and several skin special­ists had worked hard at their poor heads, but to no avail. Their heads were shaved and their scalps were well scoured night and morning but still the ringworm persisted. Finally, a distant cottage had been hired, and the afflicted ones were there isolated, and the services of a noted ringworm curer of the non­ qualified variety had been secured; but these also failing, they were put under my care. I  have  had  no great cause to complain of the ho­moeopathic treatment of ringworm with our antipsorics-indeed,quite thecontrary-but it is a bit tedious at times.

Now their mother had been cured by me of incipient tuberculosis with the virus, and it occurred to me that  ringworm might be a manifestation of the tubercular kind, and so I forthwith put the whole lot under the virus, administered in the usual way, internally in dynamic dose; this I did all the more readily, as they all had numerous superficial palpable glands. And the result? In a very few weeks they were all well of ringworm and of the glands, and have thriven splendidly ever since. Something like a dozen bad ring­ worm cases have come to me since then, and they were all quickly cured by the virus, and in each case the general state has been greatly improved. No doubt some bacterio­logists will cultivate, some fine day, the germs of the ringworm; and astound the world with their subcu­ taneous injections. It is well that medical men should approach each subject from a different standpoint, as they serve to  correct  one another.

Since then I have systematically subjected almost all my ringworm cases to the influence of Bacillinum in high potency and infrequently administered.”

I have studied PSORA for many years. It is indeed an intangible, yet the concept of a disease strand from a single source makes perfect sense. I am of the unproven opinion that PSORA in its original infectious stage from its beginning, can be a multitude of disease progressions, all linked but with its own identity, for example, (skin diseases and Tuberculosis), and as the ‘expression’ of the disease has multiple manifestations, perhaps not obviously linked to its cause, it is indeed likely, possible and with hindsight that Ringworm is one such disorder.

When  I was 7 years old, a teacher in my school in Singapore was diagnosed with TB, and I along with my classmates had Chest X-Rays. I had one a year as they saw a slight shadow on a lung, but in the absence of other symptoms, after 5 years they gave up on the X-Rays and declared me free of the disease.

I sat and reflected on my health history. I could indeed trace a pattern of tubercular symptoms over the years. Sepia as a remedy has worked well for me in infrequent disorders, and it was no surprise that its symptoms matched the appearance of the ringworm.

However it did not work in this case. The elbow symptoms suggested a deep infection of the disorder.

Several weeks had now passed by.

As nothing was working for my condition, I decided to look at the proving of Bacillinum and Tuberculinum.

Differentials in the remedies-these are my findings along with others.

There are currently about 26 variants of Tuberculinum. They have mild variances of effect, yet the original Burnett Bacillinum is quite a different remedy altogether. I have used both and had success with them based on the symptoms below.

Bacillinum is a remedy affected by heat. Tuberculinum is affected by the cold.

The area of affection of Bacillinum is the lower lungs. Humid asthma. Wheezing and rattling. Patients getting a cold or cough, usually without any structural changes, the affection goes straight to the lungs.

Tuberculinum is the throat. Tonsilitis Rhinitis. etc.

Bacillinum has an affinity to fungal affections, especially Ringworm. The circular eruption has a venous plethora and sometimes can look bluish red from the blood. Bacillinum can cure deep fungal infections over a period of time.

Tuberculinum has affinity to the bends of joints, red and flushed looking. There is affinity to recurring cystitis.

Tuberculinum is very stubborn. Temper tantrums.

Bacillinum is irritable.

Both remedies are fearless and both remedies have fear of dogs.

T Bend of joints red flushed

B bat wing discoloration around nose.

lower respiratory

T Cystitis recurrent

B only respiratory and skin

T not to give in heart problems. ALWAYS check for heart issues

Especially in children

B ok in heart disease

both catch cold easily, like fresh open air, both get allergies

to dust and pollen

B vaccination causation

T suppressed skin sx

I made the choice to take Bacillinum 200c.

bacillinum discharge

After one day, I had a profuse nose bleed and discharged a large plug from my nostril. Several nose bleeds over the following few days.

After 2 weeks, i repeated the dose and the nose bleeds started again for 2 days. I noticed by the 3rd weeks the skin eruptions had started to fade. The elbow eruption started to reduce in size but the discharge was still present.

In the event it took only 4 weeks with two doses of the medicine to clear the skin of Ringworm and about 8 months for the deeper infection to clear. The elbow is discoloured a purple colour but has full elasticity and normal size.

I have treated 2 cases of Ringworm since and gave Bacillinum with a successful outcome.

My theory? Ringworm only affects person with tubercular diathesis.

Difficult cases. Leg unknown infection.

In Seville, Spain, a long time patient of my colleague Manuel went into hospital for several weeks after developing a strange leg infection. The skin was peeling and deep cracks appeared in the heel and ankle of the right foot. These photos were taken after being released from hospital.

Manuel asked Antonio and myself to come to the clinic and observe and offer suggestions. As you can imagine, walking was difficult and the lady was in a lot of pain.

We put her in the reception room as it was easier for her to sit there, and raised her leg onto another chair to view the issue.

We took an hour looking at it. I examined thoroughly, came to no conlcusion as to the cause, noted that the hospital treatment of antibiotics had reduced the infection a little but the problem persisted.

She cried when we touched the areas of skin that has peeled and the inflamed leg. Very painful. I asked what made it better and she said that nothing did.

leg1Going into the bathroom, I moistened a paper towel and came back and placed it on her ankle and top of her foot. She said how much it felt better. I touched the area and she didnt notice or complain as previously.

 

20170612_17385020170618_112850

Aphorism 153 indicates that we solely keep the view on the characteristic, the strange and the rare in the expression of the disease.

§ 153 Fifth Edition
In this search for a homoeopathic specific remedy, that is to say, in this comparison of the collective symptoms of the natural disease with the list of symptoms of known medicines, in order to find among these an artificial morbific agent corresponding by similarity to the disease to be cured, the more striking, singular, uncommon and peculiar (characteristic) signs and symptoms1 of the case of disease are chiefly and most solely to be kept in view; for it is more particularly these that very similar ones in the list of symptoms of the selected medicine must correspond to, in order to constitute it the most suitable for effecting the cure.

We also note, Hahnemann indicated the more ‘ striking’ symptom must be taken into consideration. On this basis, I took the following rubrics:

leg

I didnt add the locations, simply because MOST remedies are in leg and foot and ankle. I took the effect of the disorder on the person, ie the cracking of the skin in the ankle and heels, and the nature of the disorder in terms of the flaking of the skin. For me, the outstanding modality was the immediate relief from moistening of the skin.

Manuel saw the patient one week later and the patient was walking. The skin was healing, still red but healing. No more peeling and the cracks had gone. I saw her about 6 weeks later and apart from slight redness, everything was better.

Why 3 rubrics only.?

The choice covered the disorder in its entirety. The modality was a clear indication of the bodys response to the disease. The essential symptom of both in the disease AND the remedy. The TPB showed that only 23 remedies had that modality. Combined with the other two rubrics, Pulsatilla was the only remedy to produce both the amelioration and the characteristics of the problem.

153: for it is more particularly these that very similar ones in the list of symptoms of the selected medicine must correspond to, in order to constitute it the most suitable for effecting the cure. The more general and undefined symptoms: loss of appetite, headache, debility, restless sleep, discomfort, and so forth, demand but little attention when of that vague and indefinite character, if they cannot be more accurately described, as symptoms of such a general nature are observed in almost every disease and from almost every drug.