Category Archives: Admin Comment

Last dates in August 2009 available for 4 day IHM course

25th August to 1st October 2009. Single or multiple practitioners.

https://instituteforhomoeopathicmedicine.wordpress.com/2019/08/12/august-2019-four-day-course-for-entry-to-ihm-register/


SYNOPSIS program included in the price.

 

 

Advertisements

Teaching dates available in August 2019.

 

We still have open dates from the 21st till 31st August 2019 for the 4 day intensive and Register enrolment course.

Participants from all over the world come to train and learn the Hahnemannian methodology for case taking that gives great clinical success…

Just drop us a line on education@instituteforhomoeopathicmedicine.com

Train in lovely Seville Spain.

Some of our international members.

Register member Thailand.

 

 

 

Register member Estonia

 

 

 

Register member  Spain

 

 

Register member HongKong

 

 

Hahnemanns concept of illness.

Hahnemann’s concept of Illness. We need to look at this and see if or where our thinking deviates from it.

Hahnemann believed that the signs and symptoms of a case of illness represented an attempt by the body to heal itself. According to this view, the signs and symptoms do not represent the illness, but rather the reaction of the person to his illness. The illness and the reaction to illness are separate.

At first glance, this would appear to be at odds with the latter part of Aphorism 6.  “…………All these perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease.”

a little thought will clarify the apparent differences. Hahnemann is emphasising that the signs and symptoms exhibited by the patient are the true reactive process of the body which represent the individual disease per se, and not the named disease.

Therefore Hahnemann reasoned that physician should administer that medicine to the patient (which produced in the healthy signs and symptoms similar to those of the patient). In this manner, the natural attempt of the body to heal itself would be re-inforced, rather than neutralised or interfered with. Hahnemann called this treatment of illness with medicines produced in the healthy, symptoms similar to those of the ill.

Homoeopathy (Homois: Similar; Pathos: suffering).

If an ill person receives no treatment, he either dies, remains chronically ill or recovers. If he recovers, his pattern of recovery is like that of all sick persons and separate from his particular disease. As people become ill, old symptoms of previous illness often reappear. The symptoms move from non-vital organs, like the nose and throat, to more vital organs, like the kidneys and lungs. Then there is a period of crisis. Following this crisis, one by one and in reverse order of their appearance, the symptoms move from vital to less vital organs until the patient is well again. This natural response is called autotherapy.

Under homoeopathic treatment, an identical response usually follows, rather than the abrupt disappearance of symptoms or the introduction of new symptoms which often follows other types of therapy. Homoeopathy, from its inception, has been based on an inclusive, descriptive attitude towards the patient AND the medicine. The response of the patient is equally inclusive in relation to the natural course his illness would have taken without treatment.

 

 

International and Organized Skeptic Movement Against Homeopathy

International and Organized Skeptic Movement Against Homeopathy

By the ANH Communication Working Group.

HOMEOPATHOSIS, THE ORGANIZED PSEUDO-SCEPTIC MOVEMENT.

No one will be surprised at this point the certainty that there is an international crusade against homeopathy . Spontaneous? No, obviously not. It is not possible for the same modus operandi, the same media and institutional communication actions, as well as the same messages to be repeated over and over again and repeated in different parts of the globe for infused science.

No. Obviously it is no accident. The pseudo-skeptical movement, which embraces scientism as a new orthodox religion where everything that does not sound like a protocolized drug is considered blasphemy, has expanded as surprisingly as unnaturally.

The skeptical (or pseudo-skeptical) movement is an international, consolidated and well-financed network present in 54 countries worldwide. Its strong point is the English-speaking countries but they have found in Spain their own laboratory to try again and again different ways to approach, discredit and end complementary and / or unconventional therapies, especially with homeopathy. Until they have found the password and exported it.

But why homeopathy? Why invest so many resources, effort and money to end a therapy that does not reach 0.7% of the worldwide expenditure of OTC medicines and that is the equivalent to the pharmaceutical industry what Linux to operating systems?

Well for that. Because it is Linux and because pharmacoepidemiological studies such as EPI3, in France, conclude that patients treated by homeopathic doctors take 71% less psychotropic drugs, 46% less anti-inflammatory drugs and 57% less antibiotics, than those who only resort to conventional medicine . And all this with similar clinical results and without greater risk of complications (without loss of opportunity for the patient). Yes, they will tell us that precisely France is not a good example because the HAS has just concluded that homeopathy has not proved effective enough to justify its reimbursementbut we bring it here just because of that, because to obviate such clear and forceful results as these are proof not only of the bias of the evaluation but of the effect of the media controversy, in the words of France’s own minister of health , more typical of ‘ The Great Carnival ‘by Billy Wilder de Larra.

THE SPANISH INCUBATOR: THE FORMULA OF SUCCESS

Spain may be where the pseudo-skeptical movement has had the most activity, not only because of the variety of actions they have carried out but also because of the time they have invested.

In Spain, the reference group for the skeptical (pseudo) movement was created in the late 80s (1986) as a cultural and scientific association, whose headquarters are located in the Pamplona Planetarium. What began as a movement that sought to dismantle the UFO phenomenon, has evolved into a pressure group, with members as illustrious as the Spanish Minister of Science himself, Pedro Duque, who defend transgenics – where Monsanto , from Bayer, is king – while attacking homeopathy … paradoxical? We leave it to your assessment.

According to their statutes, their financial resources come from: membership fees, results of their activities, private donations (both private and institutional) and also accept public subsidies.

This movement logically has its spokespersons that share the functions among different associations: the Society for the Advancement of Critical Thinking (ARP), the RedUne Association (Network for Sectarian Prevention and Weakness Abuse) and APETP. Among the four associations (including Skeptics), the media and institutional cake is distributed.

As revealed by the digital platform BlastingNews in the news “ The success of the antihomeopathy movement that leads Spain ”, this organized movement has a busy media and institutional agenda that has allowed them, among other things, to influence public opinion as well as important organizations like the WTO and the Government of Pedro Sánchez itself. In this sense, in 2017, the WTO created the Observatory against Pseudoscience, having among its drivers, according to the document published by the WTO, the APETP, the ARP-SAPC and the Skeptic Circle. Just the same associations that appear as institutions that have advised the government in the Plan presented by the Ministries of Science and Health, in November 2018. Chance? No, causality.

However, the “guerrilla plan” and methodology of the pseudo-skeptical movement to corner homeopathy begins in academia . In Spain, for example, in five years, this movement has achieved that no public or private university offers training courses in this therapy. The procedure they have followed is simple:

STEP 1 . Make public and institutional pressure (something similar tried in France with the University of Lille, which suspended a training course in homeopathy but without success , since the Conference of Deans of the Faculties of Medicine and the Conference of Deans of Pharmacy wrote a statement joint in favor of training in homeopathy with an “objective approach” ).

STEP 2. Take the next leap, to professional institutions and societies. The method is the same as the previous one but, in addition, public opinion and the media come into play here. An example of this is the open letter to Maria Luisa Carcedo, current minister of health in functions, promoted by the four “skeptical” associations mentioned above and signed by some 400 health professionals against pseudotherapies and which erroneously included Homeopathy

We insist that “they erroneously included homeopathy as pseudotherapy” because this therapy is a medical , legal, social and scientific reality , which is also not in the list of 73 pseudotherapies presented by the Government in February 2019. And again we insist wrong to label pseudotherapy homeopathy, because after that open letter came another signed by 600 health professionals who claimed their right to prescribe or recommend homeopathic medicines in freedom and without pressure .

STEP 3. Once enough media controversy has been generated, the assault on the respective governments – local, regional and national – is a piece of cake.

Three simple steps that have been repeated in France : first the University of Lille, then a rostrum against complementary therapies signed by 124 doctors in a national media, then a similar report from the Scientific Council of the Academies of European Sciences (EASAC) against homeopathy, more media pressure , the French minister asking for a report from the HAS and the subsequent decision of the Commission with dyes of little rigor and impartiality .

OTHER EUROPEAN EXAMPLES

And history repeats itself … Now it’s Germany . Since it is fashionable, the president of the association that brings together doctors from Germany’s public health care (KBV), Andreas Gassen, has told the media that medical insurance should not cover homeopathic services to his patients. Strange question now brought to the debate when a little over half a year ago the president of the German WTO, Dr. Frank Ulrich Montgomery said that homeopathy is a complementary medicine that helps many people .

It seems that there is always someone who insists on igniting and maintaining a non-existent debate. It would be funny if it were not because it endangers the health and well-being of patients as well as their free right to choose the best treatment that suits their needs. The German case is paradigmatic since German insurers reimburse the cost of homeopathic medicine not because it is mandatory but because patients so demand it.

In Sweden , in 2011, several scientists and a nationally renowned astronaut (does that sound like it?) Contributed to the media controversy by carrying out sanitary irresponsibility as a public suicide with an overdose of a homeopathic medicine. This resource has also been used in Spain by several representatives of pseudo-skepticism, especially in social networks, with the sole objective of getting an audience.

Switzerland , on the other hand, is the most representative case in the lost art of doing things right. As in the previous examples, in 2011, the controversy led the Swiss Government to commission an exhaustive report on homeopathy that, today, represents the most complete evaluation of Homeopathic Medicine that a Government has published to date.

The Swiss Report concludes that homeopathic treatment is effective, safe and cost-effective, and that it should be included in that country’s national health program. In addition, approximately half of the population of Switzerland uses complementary and alternative medicine treatments and values ​​them positively. At older, approximately half of Swiss doctors consider complementary and alternative treatments effective. Although perhaps the most outstanding fact is that 85% of the Swiss population prefers therapies of this type and also choose that they are part of their national health program. At present, homeopathy is included in the Swiss national health system by popular referendum. In this case, fortunately RIGOR and OBJECTIVITY were imposed  The interests of the pseudo-skeptics and their plan of harassment of homeopathy were frog.

However, Europe is not its only objective. Since the skeptical lobby is international, it is not surprising that similar requests have landed, and almost simultaneously, in letter format, in the respective ministries of health of Peru and Mexico .

History repeats itself. And sadly everything presumes that it will be repeated in other American and European countries: talking about homeopathy is in fashion, and it seems that going against it even more: it makes you look fun among colleagues, it leads you to be trending topic on the Internet, it gets you a lot of likes and retuits. The medicine was never so frivolous. He never trivialized so much with the health of the patients. The professionals have never been so cynical; those who a few years ago were trained in therapies such as acupuncture and homeopathy, today are dedicated to give talks and participate in debates attacking furiously these same therapies.

There is no doubt that the consequence of all this is the erosion, erosion and unreal transformation of what is homeopathy among public opinion. We suffer from “homeopatosis”. And against this, the antidote is simple: professionalism and truthful information without prejudice. An example of a trusted health website to be recommended by everyone is Suma Homeopathy .

In short, defending homeopathy today has become, purely and simply, a matter of freedom. Because like homeopathy, in health we all add up, and that is why both professionals and patients should unite for a More Human Medicine.

Image

Ahuh.

When people who dont understand Homoeopathy speak for it. Thailand.

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE DEPARTMENT BACKS DOWN ON CLAIM AMID CRITICISM

THE DEPARTMENT of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine has backtracked from its claim that its homeopathic formula is highly effective for dengue-fever protection. 

“It’s just a supplementary measure that needs further research,” Dr Sun-pong Ritthiruksa said yesterday in his capacity as the chair of the department’s centre for herbal medicine, Thai traditional medicine, folk medicine and alternative medicine.

He spoke up after several prominent figures, including Chulalongkorn University’s lecturer Jessada Denduangboripant, raised questions about the claim.

Sunpong himself said last Friday that a homeopathic formula made from eupatorium perfoliatum 200C had been proved effective in preventing dengue fever. His agency is now handing out it for free.

“It’s 89.9 per cent effective,” Sunpong said last Friday, just a day ahead of Asean Dengue Day, as he cited findings from a journal.

Jessada then quickly argued that homeopathy was pseudoscience, something that the Public Health Ministry should not promote.

“The promotion can be dangerous,” he warned.

Dengue fever has hit more than 28,000 people in Thailand so far this year – up by 1.7 times from the same period a year earlier. Of them, 43 died.

Sunpong said he sought to support the use of homeopathy as a supplementary measure for protection against dengue fever.

He reiterated that to prevent dengue-fever infections, people still needed to focus on measures such as changing the water in flower vases weekly, keeping their home tidy, eliminating mosquito-breeding grounds and covering water containers.

Mosquitoes are the main carriers of dengue fever.

“I am worried that people may misunderstand what I said earlier,” Sunpong said.

He then clarified that eupatorium perfoliatum 200C was not for treating dengue fever.

“If patients develop symptoms that can be associated with dengue fever, [they should] go see a doctor to get treatment based on modern medicine,” he said.

Jessada said he had looked into several studies previously associated with the department and saw multiple flaws.

According to him, the efficacy rate cited for vaccines against dengue fever is not as high as the rate found by the department’s research, hinting at the possibility that the cited efficacy rate for eupatorium perfoliatum 200C might have been exaggerated.

Jessada explained that while eupatorium perfoliatum could reduce fever and boost the immune system, there was no clear proof that it could treat or prevent dengue fever.

According to the Disease Control Department, the main factors associated with fatal cases of dengue fever are living in communities hosting a large number of mosquito larvae, buying medicine for self-treatment, delays in seeking treatments from doctors, and having underlying illnesses such as obesity, diabetes and asthma.

Statistics compiled by the Disease Control Department show the number of dengue-fever patients this year is far higher than the number five years ago.

As of June 11 this year, dengue fever hit 28,785 people in Thailand. During the same period in 2014, the number stood at 10,670. The figures from the same period from 2015 to 2018 were at 24,248, 19,029, 13,961m and 17,302 respectively.

Image

David Bellamy

Thailand Seminar: June 27th and 28th.

A 2-day event covering 27th to 28th June 2019.

The price will be 13000 Baht (U.S.$400.)

We do not differentiate between medically qualified homoeopaths and lay homoeopaths. All are welcome. 

Contact Dr Krit for your place on 029829922,  0814982618. LINE:acantus, Email:acantusclinic@gmail.com

It will be a concentrated study of examining case taking and evaluation of symptoms collected in aphorism § 6 Sixth Edition:

The unprejudiced observer – well aware of the futility of transcendental speculations which can receive no confirmation from experience – be his powers of penetration ever so great, takes note of nothing in every individual disease, except the changes in the health of the body and of the mind (morbid phenomena, accidents, symptoms) which can be perceived externally by means of the senses; that is to say, he notices only the deviations from the former healthy state of the now diseased individual, which are felt by the patient himself, remarked by those around him and observed by the physician. All these perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease. 

Many practitioners prescribe on the totality of these symptoms and fail to apply aphorism § 153 Sixth 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 symptoms 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. 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.

We can see from 153 that reflection and finding the nucleus of the complete disease picture is required. The question is where and how?

So for this seminar, complete in itself, we will examine EXACTLY where to look for prescribing symptoms among the collected symptoms during case taking.

There are a number of different evaluation steps to obtain a correct homoeopathic prescribing symptom, and once found, gives surety of being a characteristic symptom of both the disease and the remedy. We will demonstrate this via a lot of cases and explanations. 

We will also show how to take cases via live presentations.

We will offer the SYNOPSIS software (Windows or MAC utilising Parallels discounted heavily from $799 to $499 for attendees)

The IHM is well known as a research and education body and has conducted seminars for over 27 years.

This seminar will give the chance for Thai Homoeopaths to be evaluated for inclusion in the I.H.M. Register of approved practitioners.  Each practitioner on the list has been taught by an I.H.M. official via training in our head office in Spain or by evaluation of their abilities

We have the First Thai practitioner to go on the Register. She has attended several seminars and has shown us her adherence to Hahnemannian principles. Her name will be added to the list in due course.

ccess to the resources of the I.H.M. for information and patient advice at all times.

The I.H.M. are the developers of the SYNOPSIS homoeopathic repertory program with the inclusion of the Therapeutic Pocket Book updated and revised 1846 edition of Boenninghausens work.  In practice, This has proved to be the most reliable indicator for the most suitable medicine. It took Vladimir Polony and Gary Weaver several years to compile and update.

 

garythai bio

Homeopathy Saved my Son’s Life

471px-Roger_Daltrey_(2008)

says Roger Daltrey, lead singer of The Who

In May, 2008, 64 year old Roger Daltrey – lead singer from rock band The Who– told The Times newspaper in England how homeopathy had saved his infant son from life threatening gastro-intestinal problems.

“I had a very, very dramatic experience with my son when he was nine months old. He had gastro difficulties, started throwing up, could not keep any food down and turned into skin and bone. At the hospital, they did every test to him, and in the end they just handed him back to me. My wife and I were in bits. My poor baby. The kid was dying. It was terrifying.”

Having heard of homeopathy, Roger searched the Yellow Pages and consulted a local homeopath who prescribed a remedy for his son.  Roger then described how within two days his son began to show improvement, and, “Within two weeks he was putting weight on, keeping the food down. The trouble recurred periodically for a couple of years, but he’s now 27, a fit and healthy young man.”

“The bizarre thing is that I’ve got a chiropractor friend in LA whose baby landed up in exactly the same state. He thought he was about to lose him. But I recommended homoeopathic remedies, and he recovered too. That’s God’s honest truth. Now I bet doctors would say, ‘Oh, they’d have got better anyway’. But I can’t believe that.”

Whilst a guest speaker in May, 2009, at The Prince’s Foundation for Integrated Health, First Annual Conference, held in London, Daltrey once again spoke about how distressing his son’s illness had been and the relief that came with homeopathic treatment.

Daltrey praised Prince Charles’ work as a supporter of complementary health therapies, and encouraged him to continue despite those who attempted to demean and detract from his efforts. He jokingly advised: “Don’t let the b*****ds grind you down!”

Roger Daltrey is among a long and distinguished list of musicians and singers who have spoken positively about homeopathy, from Beethoven, Chopin, and Schumann to the more recent Paul McCartney, George Harrison, Ravi Shankar, Jon Faddis, Dizzy Gillespie, Shirley Verrett, Pete Townshend, Bob Weir, Paul Rodgers, Annie Lennox, Cher, Tina Turner and Axl Rose.

C. v. BÖNNINGHAUSEN.Münster, 9th September, 1831

v.      Considering the innumerable surprising cures wrought through Homœopathy, in both acute and chronic diseases, this method of healing would doubtless find many more disciples in the medical world if its practices were not subject to some difficulties far from trifling. It is not only a time-absorbing, but also a troublesome business, to investigate carefully into all the characteristic features and peculiarities, and to gain perfect information concerning the present state of mind of the patient in every individual case of sickness, whether belonging to an epidemic or to the diseases sufficiently designated by name; and then the choice of a suitable remedy, on the principle of similars, according to its pure action, offers again new difficulties, and we are often entangled in such a mass of difficulties that it is not surprising if the less experienced homœopath, not to speak of the beginner in this method of healing, is not able to extricate himself. Without doubt, on this account, and also on account of the unsuitable selection of the remedy which frequently follows therefrom, is to be seen the reason why the latter does not accomplish the desired result. Every beginner will probably at times have seen, what in the case of experienced and observant homœopaths is recurring more and more rarely, that, even with very careful selection and apparent adaptability of the remedies, success does not always come up to the expectations, and at times no action at all or even an aggravation of the patient’s troubles ensues. In such cases we may safely depend upon it, either that the remedy given has been formerly misused in allopathic doses and on that account its symptoms have become habitual and very manifest, or that, on account of the oversight of one or more symptoms of the disease which would contra-indicate the remedy, its choice was a mistake and therefore without effect. In the former case there will be, as a rule, an increase in the patient’s sufferings, in the latter no noticeable

vi.     change will be observed; in the former case there must then be made an attempt to destroy the old drug disease by homœopathically selected antidotes, and in the latter case by a careful examination of the disease image, and by a circumspect selection of the remedy, the previous mistake should be rectified. It would betray a great want of logical sequence and would denote a contradiction in itself if one, from such experiences, were to form conclusions concerning the unreliability of the homœopathic foundation principle (similia similibus). For apart from the fact that almost everyone has ultimately had the opportunity to convince himself of one or the other of the above-named causes, there would still remain to be explained away the much more frequent cases in which such rapid and lasting cures are accomplished that they frequently surpass the expectations even of the physician himself. One would be obliged to set up the contention that there existed in nature no sound therapeutic principle, a contention which probably nobody would like to defend.

         Accordingly we would expect that to all physicians, honestly seeking after the truth, every labour, be it ever so trifling, must be welcome, if it serves to advance this (as the honorable Hufeland[1]terms it) “solely direct curative method,” namely, the homœopathic, and assists in the selection of the proper remedy. The compiler of the following tables has not hesitated therefore to consent to the many requests of homœopathic physicians, and even the urgent demand of the worthy founder of this science of cure, to make them known through the press, after having been kindly revised by Hofrath Hahnemann, and after making some changes and improvements on the form in which they had already been communicated in manuscript to the nearest homœopathic friends. Without laying a great value upon the work, which contains no more than a tabulation of that which is already known, it is intended to afford an easier comprehensive survey of some peculiarities of the remedies which have hitherto been proved on healthy persons, and to facilitate the work of those homœopaths who recognize the great importance of such a compilation. We need scarcely be reminded that in several reme-

vii.    dies, and especially those only partially and imperfectly proved, many uncertainties exist, and doubtless mistakes have occurred which only by further proving can be discovered and corrected. In the meantime only that could be used which we possessed, for Homœopathy never allows of hypotheses and suppositions, and never borrows from the realm of opinions,[2] but understands the art of securing out of the realm of reality the pure truth.

         The similarity which must exist between the natural disease and the pure effects of the homœopathic remedy, in order that the latter may be able to eradicate the former, must be complete in every respect. It is, therefore, not sufficient to have found a remedy which is able to excite similar sufferings to those about which the patient complains, and much less if this similarity be confined merely to general names (such as headache, toothache, bowel complaint, cramps and so forth), as some very ignorant persons indeed are not ashamed to falsely attribute to Homœopathy. If the selected remedy is to prove reliable and successful, its pure effects must be adapted to the entire group of symptoms present, the conception of the totality of the disease symptoms, and, therefore, not only the sensations and pains, but also the aggravation and amelioration of the symptoms according to time and circumstances and the mental condition of the patient must correspond to all these in the remedy with the greatest possible similarity. Only when the totality of the symptoms has been obtained with completeness and exactness and when among the proved remedies one is found which corresponds to the whole in similarity, or at least is in no way contra-indicated, may we be sure of the desired success, provided that the remedy has not been already misused in massive doses, and that now only so much is given, as, according to experience, is sufficient to accomplish the object.

         Those who are already acquainted with Homœopathy and have seen its wonderful effects in diseases of the most diverse kind need, in order to appreciate the preceding, only think of the

viii    peculiarites of the Küchenschelle (Anemone pulsatilla) and the Brechnuss (Strychnos nux vomica), the knowledge of which we must attribute to the immortal founder of the art. Out of the numerous symptoms of these two excellently proved polycrests a great number of disease images may be formed, corresponding as strongly to the one as to the other. Even that which we know as especially characteristic of both is nowhere so sharply demarcated as to prevent many symptoms from manifesting quite a similarity or even contradicting each other. If then without reference to the predominating peculiarities of each remedy a selection is made, it may not infrequently happen that the improper remedy is chosen, because according to a few fragmentary symptoms it seems to correspond more nearly to the present case of sickness. The mistake lies, not in the principle of the homœopathic method nor even in the manner of selection itself, but in beginning with an insufficient conception of the totality of the symptoms of the disease and the totality of the symptoms of the remedy. The Küchenschelle (Pulsatilla) has not a few symptoms in the morning, in the open air, and while moving, just as the Krähenaugen (Nux vom.) has several in the evening, in the room and during the rest of the body

[physical rest]

. If we then confine ourselves, unintentionally, only to these symptoms, we will find that we have selected an unsuitable remedy and cannot, therefore, see the hoped-for success. It is consequently of the utmost importance to become thoroughly acquainted with the characteristics and peculiarities of every remedy, and especially of the antipsorics. All of these possess the power to eradicate the sad conseqences of one and the same miasmatic evil foundation, and have, therefore, for the most part the same sphere of action, and there is between them a very great similarity in their effects. Notwithstanding each of them has its own peculiarities, just as the other medicines have, and never can one be used instead of another with the same favorable results. In the most surprising manner was this shown during the present year in the frequent intermittent fevers, which were for the greatest part apparently of a psoric nature, and could, therefore, in most cases be permanently and safely cured only by antipsoric remedies [3] Nearly

ix      all the antipsorics known up to the present time were then used, according to the similarity of their symptoms, without the possibility of giving a preference to one over the other, and, when a proper selection was made, especially based upon the symptoms occurring during the apyrexia, their great curative power demonstrated itself not only by the rapid disappearance of the fever and other symptoms of the disease, but also by the fact that every patient was cured, and of all those homœopathically cured not a single one suffered a relapse, a condition which most generally prevailed after the allopathic use of Peruvian bark.

         Of course to obtain a complete characteristic picture of the remedies, with the elimination of every uncertainty and half truth among the pure effects of the same, when it is often so very difficult to distinguish the primary effects from the after effects, can only be the result of united efforts and mutual communications, and, without a separate homœopathic hospital under the protection of the state, in which nothing but true facts may be gleaned and confirmed, the science can only progress slowly.[4] But until the time that the young science, which is even now rendering such great results, will see its most fervent wishes fulfilled, its disciples must not sit idle, but everyone is under obligation to contribute according to his abilities to its upbuilding, so that suffering humanity may become a partaker so much the sooner of the blessings of those discoveries which have already proven curative in manifold ways, and which promise immensely more.

         The following three tables contain a comparative survey of the action of all remedies, up to this time, proved with a certain degree

x       of perfection on healthy persons, according to the time of day, the position and circumstances and according to the conditions of mind excited by them. In all three the order of their rank is denoted by the first five letters of the alphabet, so that the letter a designates the most decided, predominating and manifest action, having nothing contradicting it; the letter cindicates that the remedy has an equal action with reversed time or circumstances, and the letter ethe last or most subordinate place. The letters b and ddenote the intermediate state, so that b approaches to the highest rank and dto the lowest. When no letter is given, it signifies that nothing has been found in the pure effects pertaining to that modality. This arrangement of the different degrees of value appeared to the author the most serviceable and comprehensive, and the number of the same entirely sufficient to denote the degrees properly.

         The compilation of the first table, which contains the aggravation or amelioration of the suflerings according to the time of day, gave us the most trouble, because the divisions of the day are not capable of being sharply defined and because there is a want of expressions in the general usage of language to define the various terms and limits. Especially is this the case in regard to the morning and the evening, whose limits are not uncommonly extended unreasonably, and then frequently a part of the night as well as fore- and afternoon is included in them. Without doubt, therefore, this table will consequently have to undergo the greatest number of improvements and corrections.

         The second table, which contains the action of the medicines in exciting (and aggravating) or ameliorating (and removing) their symptoms according to circumstances, could in the most of instances easily he arranged according to sure and clearly defined data. It was found soon after its compilation, that here, as well as in the first table, not every symptom without distinction could he taken into consideration, but that a selection had to be made among them, with the omission of that part of them which would have given incorrect results. The main rule for this selection was deduced from what the honorable founder of Homceopathy teaches in that connection in the prefaces to Kriihenaugen (Nux vomica), Ki2chensclzelle (Pulsatitla), Zaunrebe (Byronia), and Wurzelsumach (Rh us), compared with the symptoms of the remedies which con-

xi      firm. For this reason only the symptoms of the head, eyes, teeth, respiration and chest, limbs, and the general sufferings, night sufferings and fevers, were taken into account in the first two tables, and the other regions were only considered when, either on account of the small number or on account of a want of clearness, doubts remained. It is still necessary to note that under the word “Touch,” the heading of the second column of Table II., are also included scratching, rubbing, pressing, etc , and that the modality “Agg.” expressesboth the excitement [initiation] of a symptom and an aggravation, and by “Amel.” a ceasing as well as amelioration of the sufferings is meant. The rest of these two tables needs no further explanation.

         In the third table, which contains a comprehensive view of the various states of mind produced by the remedies, the first five letters of the alphabet have the same meaning as in the two preceding tables. In the rubrics the author has endeavored to observe the most suitable psychological order so as to facilitate comparison thereby as much as possible.

         In giving the names of the medicines in alphabetical order the systematic tabulation of Dr. Rückert, which probably no homœopath is without, is followed, excepting that the acids are always classified immediately according to their bases, both to denote their close relationship in therapeutic respects and because the finding of the former seemed thereby to be facilitated.

         In view of the use of these tables, it is scarcely necessary to remark that they are in nowise intended to introduce a generalizing method into homœopathic treatment. According to the almost unanimous contention of the most distinguished medical authors and practitioners much mischief has been wrought in allopathy just in this way, and consequently Homœopathy would have cause enough to avoid it even if its entire system did not already consist in the strongest individualization. Therefore, if we wish to proceed conscientiously these tables should only be consulted after the case of sickness has been carefully examined, and has been compared with the competing remedies, and then as it were to solve some still remaining difficulties, or as a test for the correctness of the choice made. The tables can in nowise

xii     give the most suitable remedy, but they will assist in the choice of the same and prevent the likelihood of an unsuitable remedy being selected.

         A diligent study of the pure effects of the remedies must ever remain the principal thing, but, as the beginner especially needs a “guiding string,” we hope he will not seek it altogether in vain in these tables. One may especially find in them, the author hopes, an aid in becoming more familiar with those medicines which vie with each other for preference in given cases, and especially the antipsorics, and to group them according to the similarity of their effects. …

         Finally, with the same intense desire after perfection that is everywhere so plainly seen in all disciples of the homœopathic healing art, it is as much to be expected as to be hoped for that the present effort may be closely examined in its details, be purified of unavoidable mistakes and errors, and thereby acquire the reliability which the subject itself deserves.