BURNS on the skin: repeated application of hot brandy, or essence of turpentine, sapo domesticus, internally administered, at the 12, 16 or 30 dilution.
VEXATION, with inclination to give away to anger, attended with shiverings and cold: Bryonia.
VEXATION, with indignation, sufficient to induce you to throw whatever you have in your hands: Staphisagria.
VEXATION, producing inward melancholy, sadness, or shame: Ignat.
VEXATION, with anger, violence, and passion: Chamomile.
RUPTURE: mostly Nux vomica.
NOSTALGIA, with flushing in the face and want of sleep: Capsicum.
OVERCHARGED STOMACH: diet and moderate use of coffee.
STOMACH OUT OF ORDER, with gastric fever, shiverings, and cold: Bryonia
DISORDERED STOMACH, with risings of similar taste, as the food it contains, nausea and vomitings; Anti. crud.
DISORDERED STOMACH proceeding from fat meat, especially pork: Pulsatilla.
CHILLED STOMACH, proceeding from fruits: Arsenic , Pulsatilla.
WOUNDS and contusions: Arnica
FRIGHT, mingled with vexation: Aconitum.
FRIGHT, followed by affliction: Ignatia.
FRIGHT, followed by dread: Opium.
WEAKNESS, proceeding from loss of blood and abundant secretions: Quina.
COLDS in General: Nux vomica.
DIARRHOEA, after taking cold: Dulcamara.
FITS OF SUFFOCATION, after taking cold: Ipec.
FEVER, HEAT, after taking cold: Aconitum.
PAIN AND TEARS, after taking cold: Coffee.
CORYZA, after taking cold, with loss of smell and taste: Pulsatilla.
SPRAINS AND DISLOCATIONS; sometimes Arnica , mostly Rhus.
AILMENTS after drinking too much wine: Nux vomica
I have now made known the various opinions of homoeopathic physicians as to the increase and repetition of the medicaments; and, by attentively considering these opinions, the reader will infallibly come to the same conclusion as I have. For, in spite of apparent contradictions of physicians, it is at last observable that they all recognize the same fact, that these questions must be determined for each separate case, and for each individual, according to the reactive faculties of his system.
All those who are unable to appreciate the fact that each and every practical improvement must emanate as a logical deduction from the grand law of similarities, have not understood broadly and completely the revolution which Hahnemann has effected in medicine.
Those, therefore, who may flatter themselves that they have introduced a reform in homoeopathy by giving extra doses, or by giving those doses of greater strength than those pointed out by Hahnemann, are, in my esteem, not only no reformers, but have not understood the labours of their chief, who has shown that every case is to be studied singly and treated by itself, and that doses are to be proportional to the torpidity or susceptibility of the patient.
Even if we suppose that it should be proved that the thousandth part of a grain is, in some rare cases, to be preferred to the decillionth, the law, "Similia similibus curentur" continues to serve as the directing star in the treatment.
This law, which points out the proper remedy to be used in every varied shade of disease, and to adjust the repetition of the dose to the manifestation of the complaint and susceptibility of the patient, - this law is the main-spring of the whole doctrine, and every improvement, to be practical, must be in accordance with it and based upon it. From this law have proceeded all the achievements of physicians against disease.
I may again repeat that Hahnemann, who at first prohibited the repetition of the doses, subsequently admitted that this precept was too absolute, and was also among the first to acknowledge the advantage of the repetition. Now, if he exclaims against those who wish to raise the dose too high, although homoeopathic, it is because he has ascertained that, in the vast majority of cases, high dilutions are sufficient, and that when they happen to fail, it is more frequently caused by an ill-chosen remedy, than by any want of power in the medicament. It is right to observe here, that a drop of the tincture which would moisten more that a hundred globules, is far from acting a hundred times more than a globule, - a curious fact which has not yet been clearly explained, and which I mention to call to it the attention of the physicians.
For my own part, I feel pride in acknowledging that experience sanctions me in coinciding with the opinion of the founder of our doctrine; a failure seldom occurs through a want of power in a medicament, but because it is not perfectly homoeopathic.
However, I am convinced the choice among the various dilutions is not so material as one might suppose. The great point is to understand the disease, and to choose the remedy well. We then administer a feeble dose, from a fraction of a globule up to a few globules, or a fraction of a drop, and success is obtained from different degrees of dilution. Cases in which physicians will be justified in employing entire drops will be rare and exceptional. He will succeed best who is most skilful in proportioning the dose to the sensibility of the patient, and to the power of reaction which he possesses. As a guide he may take this rule, that the medicaments ought to be repeated in direct proportion to the progress of the malady, and in inverse proportion to the impressibility of the patient.
Whatever be the consequence of these questions, we think it right that they should be open to discussion. The law is invariable; but it is our duly to better its application; and, to that end, we shall continue to improve our materia medica, and the dispensing of remedies, as well as the repetition of them, in order that all these points may harmonize to the utmost with the law which the genius of Hahnemann as established beyond a doubt.
When examining, in my former work, the different modes of medical treatment, I stated that the homoeopathic method alone could be regarded as curative, because it alone acted in harmony with the vital powers in order to subdue disease. "Similia similibus curentur."
By administering medicines, on the contrary, in opposition to existing symptoms, - by taking for a guide the aphorism "Contraria contrariis curentur," physicians may for a time succeed in depressing the symptoms, but, in severe cases, they never succeed in destroying the disease.
In employing the mode of treatment, known by the name of the revulsive, they are just as far from obtaining a real cure, - they do not directly attack the disease, they merely divert the powers of life from the affected organ to a sound one, and they thereby lose or destroy their effort for the cure of the complaint. The cure consequently is delayed, if it be not prevented, or it is obtained with injury to the organs so violently acted upon.
I have returned to these theoretical truths, because the physician ought to understand them well, in order that his practice may always be regulated by them.
Accordingly, whenever a physician desires to accomplish a cure, he must administer the medicine which will produce symptoms analogous to those of the disease which has to subdue. Whenever he wishes merely to palliate the symptoms, he will prescribe medicines in opposition to them, or he will use revulsives for the purpose of diverting for a time the active symptoms to healthy organs.
As it is the business of the physician to cure the diseases, for which aid is required, and that by means the most prompt, effectual and safe, it follows that when once he has a distinct notion of the law of nature, which unerringly points out the remedy, he would be guilty of a double fault by adopting any other means; he would commit at once a scientific error and a moral offence.
But although the sole object of the physician is to cure, it is but too true that he frequently has the painful duty of attending the patient to the fatal close of a case which he cannot remedy.
Nothing can be more delicate, or more difficult, that the task of the physician under such circumstances. Ought he then to have recourse to the sole curative method, or ought he merely to apply the palliative?
As the disease may be thought to be beyond the reach of human skill, as it may even be a mortal one, it will be asked, why attempt a cure, why not administer palliatives in order to obtain temporary relief?
But who can assign a limit to the potency of art? Besides, when we employ palliatives, we discard every chance; we relieve the pain merely for an interval; it returns more severely than ever.
My opinion is, that even in cases which seem desperate, palliatives ought not to be employed; or if they be employed, it ought to be in great moderation. Such ought to be the case with Opium to lull pain, with purgatives to overcome obstinate constipation &c.
Perhaps the only exception to be made to the rejection of palliatives is when patients have long been accustomed to similar means of relief.
Indeed, when a person, accustomed to daily doses of Opium to assuage his sufferings, consults a homoeopathic physician, the latter, after prescribing a suitable remedy for the disease, ought not to deprive him of his twenty, thirty, or sixty drops of laudanum, but should prescribe its gradual diminution, until he shall finally be able entirely to proscribe the palliative.
He who for months and years has had recourse to purgatives or clysters, would be unable to abstain suddenly from such palliatives, if he experienced a shock by cessation. He must, therefore, skillfully graduate the disuse of such means, averse as they are to the radical cure of a disease, which can thereby be but palliated, instead of being subdued.
What I have just asserted respecting opium, purgatives and clysters, is applicable to every other kind of palliative; and it will probably be sufficient to settle every doubt as to this practical question.
In conclusion, I may say that the use of palliatives should be rare and exceptional, and an improved practice will render it less and less necessary. On the contrary, the employment of really curative remedies must be our rule, and therefore, the only method fully curative, the method of similars, will every day acquire more credit with the profession.
There are cases, indeed, in which the physician cannot at once open his treatment by the use of curative means; as when the patient happens to be completely insensible to the action of medicine. thus, in asphyxia, we are obliged to have recourse to stimulants, in order to revive the sensibility, before we dispense the proper homoeopathic remedies, which, like all remedies, can act only on the living organism.
Hahnemann affirms, that it is only in cases of extreme urgency, when life is in peril, and impending death leaves no time for the action of homoeopathic medicine, in diseases lighting suddenly on persons in perfect health, such as asphyxia, fulguration, suffocation, congelation, submersion, &c. that it is proper to begin by resorting to irritability and sensibility, by means of palliatives, such as slight electric shocks, clysters, strong coffee, pungent smelling salts, gradual heat, &c. As soon as by these means life is restored, those organs which maintain it, resume their regular action; because, in such cases, there is no permanent organic injury, but only a suspension or an oppression of the vital power, which, in other respects, is quite uninjured.
In pulmonary phthisis, when the patient has been long treated allopathically, or when he has been left unaided, the lungs are more or less impermeable to the air, as the stethoscope shews. In these case, the homoeopathic physician, before subjecting the patient to treatment, may with advantage employ revulsives directed to the parts congested, and only afterwards have recourse to curative treatment. Hahnemann has in these cases, always abandoned palliatives entirely, considering them as useless. Dr. Laurencet, however, reports a great number of cures of this disease by homoeopathic means, preceded by frictions on the congested parts. This physician considers frictions merely as palliatives which, serve only to disgorge the lungs, and give time for suitable medicines to act. It is with these cases as with others, where there is a mechanical obstacle, if I may say so, which impedes the reaction of the organism; and it is in such cases that homoeopathy employs palliatives.
The object of the physician in subjecting a patient to a certain regimen is, not to cure his disease, but merely to dispose his system to receive the salutary influence of an appropriate remedy.
Before prescribing for a patient any mode of living, the physician should, therefore, reflect what circumstances of this kind there are which may favour the use of intended medicaments and what circumstances may obstruct their effects.
The patient's regimen must be considered in two distinct relation; 1st, the things which the physician should advise; and 2d, those which he ought to prohibit. In order to direct his choice, and enable him to enter these in two corresponding lists, he must, as a general rule, recommend only such things as are nutritive and not medicinal - those which promote the most natural distribution of the vital power, and he must prohibit those which would throw it into disorder.
By having his mind impressed with these simple rules, the physician will be enabled to prescribe a good system of regimen for his patients; and it is under their guidance that we shall now consider this portion of our art.
We shall accordingly have to examine:
1. The ailments derived from the vegetable kingdom;
2. Those derived from the animal kingdom;
3. Drinks;
4. Spices;
5. The air and atmospheric influences;
6. Exercises - walking, dancing, carriage-riding, riding on horseback, gymnastic exercises.
7. Social amusements - the ball, the theatre and concerts;
8. The passions.
I shall devote a paragraph or two to each of these divisions.
The basis of most people's nourishment is undoubtedly borrowed from the vegetable kingdom.
Corn affords a species of food in universal use. Wheaten bread is, the most perfect of all alimentary substances, and therefore, a most nutritious and wholesome food. This is evinced by the feeling of strength and comfort which succeeds it use; and some degree of the same feeling is produced by every substance really nutritious, apt to assimilate with our frames, and free from noxious and medicinal properties. It is by contrary symptoms that we detect those substances, especially if taken too copiously, which are not simply nutritious, but contain stimulating or indigestible ingredients.
The potato is a wholesome and nutritious aliment, owing to its amylaceous fecula. The most simple mode of cooking it, as in England, is the best; the only precaution being to have it boiled by steam, instead of water, as it is more agreeable to the palate, and more digestible, when water is, as much as possible excluded.
Macaroni, vermicelli, semolino, sago, salep, arrowroot, potato fecula, rice, French bean, peas, lentils when well prepared, are excellent aliments; and it is chiefly among these, especially semolino and vermicelli, that the physician chooses the fittest aliments for a patient just convalescent, and whilst his frame is still too weak to endure more substantial food.
Very ripe melon, but in small quantities, may be allowed to patients, whose digestion is sound; but in case of weakness of the digestive organs, it ought to be prohibited.
Strawberries and gooseberries, when perfectly ripe or reduced to a jelly, raspberries, apricots, peaches, grapes, cherries, pears, applies, &c., in short, all fruits of a good quality, not sour, and perfectly ripe, in some cases baked or dressed with sugar, are very proper. The physician himself will, in particular cases, forbid any of these he may deem unsuitable.
Beef is, of all butcher's meats, the one generally found best adapted to the health of man; it perhaps best assimilates with our organs; and, as almost every nation prefers it, its consumption is greater than that of any other meat. We are less apt to grow tired of beef; all other kinds of meat, in spite of their natural relish, and the flavour they acquire in skilful hands, soon cloy the appetite and disgust the stomach, probably because they do not possess the same affinity with our organization. If we are under the necessity of continuing to eat them, disgust is soon followed by disorder of the functions. All other flesh, accordingly requires to be much more frequently varied and intermingled with other substances.
Mutton may almost be ranked along with beef, as it apparently assimilates readily with our organs.
Ham , in consequence of the preparation it undergoes, is more easy of digestion by a vigorous stomach than other kinds of pork; and, on that account, it may sometimes be allowed to the patient able to digest it; but it should even then be sparingly used.
The flesh of hare and roe-buck may very properly admitted into homoeopathic regimen. Being highly animalized, it is in every respect suitable.
The various kinds of poultry, pullets, hens, capons, turkeys, may be allowed during treatment; but as their flesh is not sufficiently animalized, and too mucilaginous, they must be used with moderation.
The woodcock, partridge, heathcock, pheasant, wild duck and wild goose, are infinitely better than the birds of the poultry-yard.
Both sea and river fish furnish wholesome food, very easy of digestion; and they are very properly given to patients, provided they are not too often used.
Fresh eggs are a very wholesome food, and may be prescribed in various forms; but hard eggs are unfit for use.
Of all the drinks which can be offered to a patient under homoeopathic treatment, there is none so good as fine fresh water. No other drink is so favourable to digestion.
In acute diseases, the physician will do well to order fresh water, or toast and water, slightly sweetened with sugar, milk and water, barley water, or gruel.
In chronic diseases, the same drinks are proper. Here, however, we may allow a good kind of weak beer to those habituated to it, or to stronger drinks.
Those who have been for years accustomed to wine, elderly people especially, cannot sometimes, without inconvenience, entirely relinquish it. Such people, therefore, may be indulged with a small quantity of good wine, largely diluted with water, - as in the proportion of from one-fifth to one-tenth of wine. But it is only to those to whom wine has become an habitual drink, that it is to be thus permitted.
Wine, however, may also be prescribed to prevent certain diseases, and to assist in remedying certain bodily states. Thus when a man has to endure great and unusual exercise, as a forced and fatiguing march, when he is heated with severe bodily labour, &c., the use of wine will always, at some cost of another kind, dispel his weariness, because the excitement of the vascular system produced by exercise, will be opposed by the vascular excitement from wine. - If, in such circumstances, the same person were to take a glass of water, he would obtain contrary result, by virtue of the law of reaction, explained in my first work. This law is consequently of great importance, even in regimen, and should be well known, in order that no wrong employment of it may occur.
Tea is less prejudicial than coffee, and for that reason, when not too strong, it may be permitted in moderate quantity to those accustomed to its use; but the immoderate use of strong tea, so common with many, should not be sanctioned.
If coffee be allowed during homoeopathic treatment, it must be in great moderation; and its toleration should be in favour only of those who have long been used to it. We have, indeed, seen many cases homoeopathically treated, wherein those who took coffee got well; but we may lay it down as a rule that the less that is taken of strong coffee the better; and this rule applied likewise to people in health.
Cocoa may be advantageously taken as a substitute for both tea and coffee at breakfast. It is a nutritive beverage, and very agreeable when properly made.
Chocolate, though less to be approved than cocoa, may very safely be recommended, if free from vanilla and all aromatic ingredients. It gives a sensation of heaviness on the first time of using it, or of recurring to its use; but this always disappears on the second or third time of employing it.
Home Contact Us Beginning Continue