Do homoeopathic students do a preparation

The curability of tumors with homeopathic remedies


at the Rhein-Ruhr-Akademie Rogasch

for homeopathics & miasmatics



I. Introduction:

In spite of imaging processes and micro-invasive methods, conventional medicine has not made any significant progress in the treatment of tumors; steel, beam and chemistry are still used.

The treatment focuses only on the tumor, i.e. on the visible result, and not on the overall disease of the organism.

In oncology there is a shift towards viewing tumor formation as a disease of the entire organism. Nevertheless, this knowledge cannot lead to a cure, because there is no form of therapy available to positively influence the entire organism.

Impressive amounts of man power and millions of euros are spent annually to research tangible (material) causes for the uncontrolled growth. Chemical, physical noxae or viruses are still held responsible for the inactivation of tumor suppressor genes and differentiation genes or the activation of development control genes for tumor development.

Far too few people are aware that the living organism is a controlled system. Every organ, every cell, even every molecule receives its energetic control signal, which of course cannot be detected in the material level of the organism. The control center stands above the material level and must stand above it because it regulates matter.

Modern transplant medicine occasionally receives evidence of this existing control center for the whole organism in the aftercare of its patients. The so-called Bleyberg effect should stimulate thought: Bleyberg was the first to have a heart transplanted by Prof. Barnard. When Bleyberg died some time later, the autopsy found that his new heart was damaged in the same places and in the same way as his old heart. This Bleyberg effect was found in many transplant recipients. That should be proof enough that these new organs were constantly receiving the wrong control signals, and this again led to destruction. The relevant fault is therefore in the control center. This finding is now more than two hundred years old and was made by Dr. Samuel Hahnemann discovered. In §§ 9 - 11 of the Organon of the healing arts he describes this finding particularly aptly:

“In the healthy state of man, the spirit-like life force (autocracy), which animates the material body (organism) as dynamis, rules unrestrictedly and holds all its parts in an admirably harmonious course of life in feelings and activities, so that our resident, sensible spirit becomes this living, healthy mind Can use tools freely for the higher purpose of our existence.

The material organism, thought without vital force, is incapable of any sensation, no activity, no self-preservation; (It is dead and, now subject only to the power of the physical outer world, it rots and is again dissolved into its chemical constituents) only the immaterial being, which animates the material organism in a healthy and sick state (the principle of life, the life force) gives it all Sensation and causes his life's activities. "

When a person falls ill, originally only this spirit-like, self-acting vital force (principle of life), which is present everywhere in his organism, is upset by the dynamic influence of a disease-causing agent, which is hostile to life; only the principle of life, which is out of tune with such an abnormality, can give the organism the adverse sensations and lead it to such irregular activities which we call illness, for this force being, invisible in itself and only recognizable by its effects in the organism, only gives its morbid disgruntlement through the expression of illness in feelings and activities (the only side of the organism that is turned towards the senses of the observer and healer), that is to be recognized through symptoms of the disease and cannot make them known in any other way. "

From this we learn that illness is primarily an energetic disturbance of the life force and that the local changes in the body come about on the basis of these pathological control impulses. Real healing can then only proceed from the instance that has evoked it, the life force. Simply cutting off a tumor cannot cure the control center; on the contrary, it will encourage the body to form new growths. Dr. Burnett coined a brilliant metaphor for this: "But cutting away an apple does not cure an apple tree by making apples grow".

The life force is of a spiritual, dynamic or energetic quality and can only be influenced by dynamic or energetic means. The method developed by Hahnemann to dynamize or potentize the drugs, they are dematerialized and energized, and can thus affect the control center without being toxic or destructive at the same time.

With potentiation, the individual remedy changes not only substantially, but also qualitatively, i.e. it has to be used differently than a pharmaceutical. As long as a medium contains matter, it must be dosed according to the laws of chemistry, but if it is dematerialized and energized, it works according to laws that are valid and completely different in the energetic area. Hahnemann found in decades of research that only the medicinal product (both in low and high potency) has a healing effect that exactly matches the patient's symptoms. Each remedy used in homeopathy can, if it is "tested" on healthy people, artificially produce certain symptoms that are unique to this remedy. The examiner will determine symptoms in himself and the others that he did not have as a healthy person. It shows a so-called art disease. If one wants to extinguish a natural disease, then one has to create an artificial disease in the patient by giving a similar agent (simile), which cancels out the natural disease. Now it becomes clear why homeopathic medicines have to be selected so carefully. In Hahnemann's words: "In order to heal gently, quickly, reliably and permanently, in every case of illness choose a remedy which can arouse a similar disease (homoion pathos) than it is supposed to heal! " (Organon of the healing arts, Introduction)

However, not all symptoms of the patient can simply be used for the choice of remedy. Because many remedies are similar for a large number of symptoms, especially if they are so-called general symptoms. If someone has a flu, they will develop a lot of symptoms that are common with such an illness, such as tiredness, fatigue, loss of appetite, body aches, etc. Almost all patients with such an illness also have symptoms such as: and almost all remedies for curing such disease states produce these symptoms when tested. It is therefore difficult to choose the right remedy from the many remedies that come into question. Hahnemann found out very quickly how to make the right choice in this situation. In addition to the general and usual symptoms, each patient produces very individual and characteristic symptoms, and these are the most important for the choice of remedies. With this knowledge he formulates § 153 im Organon of the healing arts.

In acute illnesses these "more conspicuous, peculiar, unusual and peculiar (characteristic) signs and symptoms " still be very clear and lead directly to the choice of remedy.

In the case of chronic diseases, it usually looks very different. Here, the choice of remedy often has to be based on other symptoms, because the similarities are not on the surface, but much deeper. The law of similars (similia similibus curantur) still applies, and § 153 is also valid, but the striking and unusual are no longer as obvious as with acute illnesses.

Hahnemann developed his theory of chronic diseases based on his experience that certain remedies in the treatment of chronic diseases only had a superficial or palliative effect. Severe chronic diseases such as asthma, rheumatism, neurodermatitis or tumor formation cannot be cured homeopathically without this knowledge.

From 1828 to 1830 Hahnemann wrote his teaching and published the work:"The chronic diseases". In it he postulates:

1. There are three chronic diseases:
Psora, Sycosis and Syphilis.

2. Of the many homeopathic remedies, there are only a few and very specific ones that can cure these diseases.

According to Hahnemann, chronic illnesses follow a certain pattern. In contrast to the acute illnesses, which have a beginning, a crisis and an end (good or fatal), the chronic illness runs inexorably into destruction.

The archetype of chronic illness for him was syphilis. It has a beginning with the infection, on which the organism sets a local evil after a short period of incubation. If this local evil disappears, then the disease goes into a latency stage, reappears at some point in the second stage, goes back into latency and so on .... It progresses in such an inexorably destructive manner.Interesting and of enormous importance for the treatment of chronic diseases is Hahnemann's observation that the respective local evils are of great importance as a temporary (but not sufficient) defense measure of the organism. The life force tries to bring the disease processes to the periphery of the organism, where they do not disturb central life processes. As long as this local evil remains untouched, the disease progresses much more slowly than with its suppression (removal of the local evil). Removal through surgery, ointments, or other measures rapidly accelerates the progression of the disease.

In addition to syphilis, there is a second venereal disease that follows the same pattern but has different effects: sycosis. It starts with gonorrhea. Sycosis also alternates between active and latency stages and progresses through the elimination and inflammatory stages to degeneration. The formation of warts and tumors of all kinds, including malignancy, is always a sycotic element.

The third chronic disease is not a venereal disease; Hahnemann called it Psora. He describes her as the mother of all diseases, i.e. H. without it there is no syphilis or sycosis or any other chronic manifestation. It always has to be there first, then the others can settle in too. Psora goes back to the infectious disease scabies and in its various stages can cause almost all symptoms.

Hahnemann also called the chronic diseases chronic or acquired miasms because they can be acquired through infection.

He added another disease: the drug disease (Organon Sections 74 - 76), the iatrogenic miasm. The bombardment of allopathic remedies as well as the use of violent, heroic medication "put the life force out of tune".

In § 75 of the Organon he writes about the treatment: “These messes of the human condition brought about by the alloeopathic art of calamity (worst in recent times) are the saddest, most incurable of all chronic diseases, and I regret that, if they have been driven too high, probably never Remedies for them seem to be invented or devised. "

According to Hahnemann, this doctrine was expanded to include a few essential points by subsequent homeopaths. They added the tubercular miasm, which goes back to the infectious disease tuberculosis, and found that the miasms can not only be acquired through infection, but can also be passed on to subsequent generations through heredity. The number of drugs that can be used to treat chronic diseases has been expanded to include some profound means after testing.

The chronic miasms psora, syphilis, sycosis, tuberculin and the drug disease are the cause of thousands of different diseases, each of which is given a different name in conventional medicine.

In the case of epidemic diseases, Hahnemann often observed that all sufferers needed a single homeopathic to cure them. Although they had different individual symptoms, these were only partial symptoms from the remedy picture of a single remedy. If the therapist finds out in such an epidemic disease after examining his first patients that they all need a remedy, then he has recognized the genius epidemicus and can even prescribe the appropriate remedy prophylactically.

As with epidemic diseases, Hahnemann was now looking for a single, deeply effective remedy for every “chronic disease” with which it could be cured. So he believed he could cure syphilis with Mercurius, extinguish sycosis with thuja and psora with sulfur. He then had to realize that you couldn't get by with one remedy for each miasm, but that there were several that could heal miasm-specific. But it became clear that out of the large number of homeopathic remedies (approx. 2,500) only a small group of remedies could be considered for healing a miasm. Only these remedies have the power to cure syphilis, sycosis, psora or tuberculosis. They are called antimiasmatics.

In the majority of cases, the patient has not just one, but two or more miasms in combination. As a result, the symptoms that occur become more and more severe and destructive. Tumor formation is a multimiasmatic process of at least three miasms, with sycosis in any case being one of the three. Since the miasms can also be inherited, it is understandable that children can also develop cancer.

Months and years must be estimated for the healing of the miasms, depending on the number of miasms present and the strength of their interdependence. In general, you have to remove the miasms one by one and start with what is currently active. In most cases, not all of the miasms involved are visible, only recognizable from the overall symptoms of the life of the patient and his ancestors, but one of them is on the surface. It manifests itself through discrete, but miasma-typical symptoms. If the displayed miasm is recognized, then further miasm-specific symptoms must be searched for in order to find the right starting remedy from the group of antimiasmatics. If you hit the right remedy, the case rolls up automatically, i.e. after a while, with steady improvement of the symptoms, new and different symptoms will appear that are typical for the next existing miasm and require a change to another remedy.

Tumor formation and cancer are always symptoms from the end stage of the miasms. Unfortunately, the individual symptoms of a patient, which according to § 153 des Organon a choice of remedies is best, the closer the disease gets to the end stage, the more and more it decreases. There are also local symptoms that are caused by the tumor or tumors, but only very rarely are characteristic signs and symptoms to be found. In most cases, the pain character cannot be evaluated either, since large amounts of analgesics are used. If you are lucky, the patient's history shows a way to go. Burnett and Clarke provide many case reports in which several vaccinations, some of which were not even "tackled", had taken place in the years prior to the onset of tumors, and therefore they were able to be successful with thuja as the main remedy.

With the above statement "Tumor formation and cancer are always symptoms of the disease from the end stage of the miasms", a significant problem arises in homeopathy. The drug pictures are based on the drug proving on healthy people, and it is understandable that no one is willing to carry out drug proving for years or decades until tumors develop. Instead, clinical experience must help here. Burnett describes in Chapter IV of his publication "The curability of tumors with drugs" an impressive story of how animals became drug provers by accident.

"Dr. G. Wilkinson once went on vacation to Iceland and observed that the animals that grazed in the pastures on which the fine ashes of Mount Hekla fell suffered from huge maxillaries and other exostoses. Being a follower of the scientific system of medicine established for us by Samuel Hahnemann, he brought Hekla Lava home and it has always been used successfully to heal ailments similar to those that cause them in is able to. "

This proves that a pathological anatomy can be used as the basis for prescribing according to homeopathic principles in the treatment of tumors with medicines. Burnett describes this procedure as extremely important because many reject it, claiming that the totality of the symptoms alone must serve as the basis for a true homeopathic prescription. This case also proves that animals can be used as examiners - of course only because of the pathological anatomy.

Hahnemann had already found out that not all, but only certain remedies have the power to heal miasms. And he also knew that in the case of combined chronic miasms, only one remedy seldom brings success, but a well-balanced sequence of remedies is necessary in order to achieve healing. This is especially true for tumor formation and cancer. His successors have been able to add some far-reaching remedies to the range of homeopathic remedies through new tests and clinical trials. The nosodes play an important role in this, and cancer nosodes in particular in the treatment of tumors. J.C. Burnett in particular has repeatedly made the requirement of a tumor-effective agent that it must not only be a symptomatic simile, but primarily a pathological simile. By this he meant that it must have the strength to intervene in the pathological conditions, i.e. in the final state of an illness. For this reason he tested and used a number of cancer nosodes, some with excellent results.

A chronically out of tune vital force gives wrong control impulses to the tissue that the organism can produce malformations such as tumors, is a sign of the presence of a combination of chronic miasms, it is of secondary importance whether a tumor is benign or malignant. If the benign tumor is located in a corresponding location, e.g. in the brain, it is just as lethal.

An American working group led by Dr.Mary Stark came to a fascinating conclusion at the beginning of the 19th century. These researchers examined strains of Drosophila melanogaster, the classic experimental animal in genetics. Among these was a strain in which one in four male offspring in the developmental stage was eaten up by a tumor. The tumor tissue was cancerous. They wanted to find out if there was anything that could cancel or interrupt this series of deaths, but they found nothing. Then homeopathic remedies were tried. For this purpose, the tumor-eaten flies were potentized up to the 30th and 200th potency (from the 12th potency the Loschmidt's number is exceeded) and a solution of it was added to the feed to various colonies of this strain. Other colonies were given Arsenicum album 30C and 200C, and still others were given one by Dr. Boger recommended mercury compound. The mercury compound did not result in any change in the tumors of the fruit flies. In the potentized fly, from the 6th generation onwards, the regularity of tumor death (every fourth male offspring) was interrupted, only one or the other died. In Arsenicum album, on the other hand, tumor death was completely eliminated in some colonies after the fourth generation, and in others after the third generation. Mendel's laws were broken by energetic means. The hereditary predisposition to tumor formation has been eradicated. But it took the right remedy, and it took three or four generations. With great caution one can say that there will also be cases in humans that are so deeply rooted that one life is not enough to eradicate the hereditary malfunctions.


II. Main part:

Hahnemann (1755 - 1843) left his posterity with his doctrine of chronic diseases an ingenious and great concept of healing possibilities. At that time, however, only a few saw it that way, because the chronic diseases aroused a lot of attention and also rejection not only among conventional doctors, but also among homeopaths. They agreed with Hahnemann when it came to the teaching of chronic diseases in general. They accepted syphilis and sycosis as chronic venereal disease, opinions differed again on the treatment, but this was not the basis for the rejection of Hahnemann. It was his Psora teaching that bothered them. That there should be only one non-venereal chronic disease in addition to syphilis and sycosis, that all the various non-venereal symptoms should have only one root, that was the stumbling block. Even many of his students turned away from him.

He claimed that psora is the oldest and most widespread chronic disease, and that seven eighths of all chronic ailments arise from it, only one eighth he attributes to syphilis and sycosis. His aim was to find a single, common "root" from which these ailments arise for all the innumerable chronic ailments that people can suffer from. He expressly says that it is like an epidemic disease: the patients suffer from various phenomena, and official medicine gives these phenomena various names and considers them to be different diseases, but in reality the cause is only one disease, the you have to meet with their “specifics”. There was a time when Hahnemann started the cases he suspected psora was behind with Sulfur, but he discovered that there were more antipsorics available. So by far not all homeopathics are able to have an antipsoric effect, only the approx. 50 that Hahnemann in "The chronic diseases" Volume II - V describes.

Hahnemann even goes so far as to say that someone who is free from psora, syphilis and sycosis is absolutely healthy and can lead a life without disease and without destruction.

There is a small downer in this progressive thought, he speaks unmistakably when he speaks of syphilis, sycosis and psora, always only of these diseases as acquired diseases. He says nothing about the fact that they can also be passed on to subsequent generations and that their appearance can be changed in the process. This fact had to be postulated by his successors, although it is known that Hahnemann dealt with the possibility of heredity of chronic diseases after 1828.

Subsequent generations of homeopaths discovered from their experiences and observations in practice that syphilis, sycosis and psora also exist in hereditary forms. Some of the rules that Hahnemann gave for the treatment of chronic diseases only apply to acquired chronic diseases and are therefore not easy to adopt. Many of the signs and symptoms that he assigned to the acquired psora must, if they occur hereditary, be assigned to other chronic miasms.

This further development is not intended to diminish Hahnemann's work, but one must also admit that his successors have expanded the limits of homeopathy considerably.

James T. Kent (1849 - 1916), a well-known student of Hahnemann, healed syphilis in a completely different way and assumed that Hahnemann could not cure real syphilis with Mercurius. But perhaps he overlooked the fact that Hahnemann always said that one had to proceed differently with syphilis complicated by psora. Kent was convinced that certain infectious diseases (scarlet fever, whooping cough, typhoid, etc.) were not simply erased by homeopathy, but had to take their course, only in a weakened and abbreviated form. The homeopath must guide his patient through all stages of the infectious disease, and must prescribe each time according to the symptoms present, and the disease will progress very quickly and easily. It is clear from Kent's notes that his first steps into the realm of heredity, especially in syphilis and sycosis, are well beyond what we know of Hahnemann. He just never spoke of hereditary - chronic illness, but used the term constitution. This term created a lot of confusion and hampered research into hereditary-chronic diseases. After Hahnemann's death one no longer spoke of chronic diseases, although the term had a diagnostic and therapeutic content.

Hahnemann defined chronic illness (or chronic miasm) as follows:

§ It is an infectious disease.

§ It has a run-up and inexorably progresses through various stages up to destruction.

§ The life force cannot produce any reactions towards it that would lead to a crisis, but can only appease the illness through the development of local evils.

§ It can only be cured by very specific homeopathic remedies.

§ Your model is syphilis with its stages and latency phases.

The homeopaths gave up this clear definition and adopted the everyday concept of constitution from conventional medicine. When you consider where this term has already been used, down to the unspeakable constitutional types, it is no wonder that this term caused some confusion. But it is not just confusion: constitution contains something static, it includes disposition, and this also includes eye, skin and hair color and coarse or fine bone structure, etc. And so so-called constitutional features have crept into the symptom series of some drugs, It should be suggested that, for example, Pulsatilla is suitable for blonde, blue-eyed, mild women, although Pulsatilla is also used successfully by Indians. The real basis of a homeopathic remedy is the collection of signs and symptoms, and they must be pathological, that was Hahnemann's teaching. Unfortunately, the term constitution has crept into linguistic usage, and one has to ask oneself what is meant by it when using it:

§ Are it natural features like red hair?

§ Is it a certain homeopathic constitution type that stands for a certain remedy?

§ Is it the innate predisposition to certain diseases?

§ Or is it the presence of chronic hereditary diseases?

Henry C. Allen (1836 - 1909) had thoroughly studied Hahnemann's theory of chronic diseases and also applied it to acute diseases. Before he got his book "The remedies for fevers" published, he had dealt with all forms of fevers for years. He realized that the very serious febrile and life-threatening diseases only take place on the basis of hereditary psora and tuberculosis. The more pronounced the psoric miasm, the more dangerous and deadly the disease was. He believed fevers to be acute exacerbations of chronic miasms, and therefore the underlying miasm must be identified and treated. The family history is decisive for him, and in difficult cases it provides him with the most important therapeutic clues for the means required. In doing so, he establishes the hereditary-chronic diseases quite naturally and incidentally.

John A. Allen (Friend and student of H.C. Allen) also describes the miasms in their heredity and creates a doctrine of the hereditary-chronic diseases, where he clearly and unambiguously states that the chronic miasms can be passed on by genetic means. When chronic miasms are passed on to the next generation or the next but one, an event can occur that J.H.The first thing that was described to all of them was that two miasms can combine to form an inseparable unit, so that a new miasm arises. If psora and syphilis are perfectly combined by hereditary transmission, then he spoke of pseudo-psora or tuberculosis, as such a hereditary miasm. YES. Allen says that the prima causa morbi of a case must be found and dealt with. This means that especially with hereditary-chronic diseases the search for miasma-typical signs and symptoms is the most important thing for the choice of remedies. Kent’s principles do not apply here, who want to have the totality of the symptoms taken into account.

In the case of acquired chronic diseases, it is not so difficult to determine the miasma-typical signs, because the infection or the primary effect can usually be determined and the miasm is then known. In the case of hereditary-chronic diseases, the practitioner largely depends on the help of the patient and his family. The difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that in hereditary-chronic miasms the same signs and symptoms can appear as in the acquired ones, but do not have to. In heredity, they can all occur at the same time or they can also be in latency. And entirely new signs and symptoms can appear that are unique to heredity.

Usually we find the chronic diseases side by side in a person when there are several miasms. Usually only one miasm is active while the others are silent, but they can all be in latency. For healing purposes, Hahnemann gave the instruction to treat psora first in the presence of psora and syphilis, but this only applies to acquired miasms. In the case of hereditary miasms, it has been found that it is better to treat the overlying or active miasm first, which is offered by the fact that its symptoms are most prominent. In this way, miasm by miasm can be shed away. If a patient has acquired an additional miasm in addition to his hereditary miasms, then this must be treated first because it is grafted on and lies on top.

The Kent School attaches great importance to the fact that if several miasms are present, they remain separate, even if they form a complex. With the right remedy, the complex is separated and the miasms can be treated individually. This belief is contrary to J.A. Allen's doctrine of the pseudo-psora (tuberculosis) is a purely hereditary chronic disease in which the two elements psora and syphilis are fused together. It has its own signs and symptoms and medicines of its own. The attempt to make the psoric parts disappear with a suitable antipsoric and the syphilitic parts with a suitable antisyphilitic agent fails. Only a suitable anti-tuberculosis drug will eliminate both.

Everyone considered the pseudo-psora to be the most dangerous of all combinations, because it can produce the worst and most dangerous conditions if a sycosis is grafted onto it.

Since J.A. The tuberculosis line has become an indispensable part of the minds of homeopaths. Of course there were other variations after that, like Pierre Schmidt, who sees the tubercle line as a combination of psora and sycosis.

If psora can bond with syphilis, why shouldn't it, in certain cases, also combine with sycosis? The practical decision about what type of connection is must be made in each specific case from the family history and the symptoms of the patient. However, this case must not be confused with the already mentioned grafting of an additional acquired miasm to an already existing tuberculous line.

There are other burdens on the ancestral side, which can also be passed on hereditary, e.g. a vaccination burden or other iatrogenic manipulations, and affect the offspring. The more such hereditary facts add up, the worse the patient's illness becomes. If then suppressive measures are added, it is not surprising if the disease turns malignant.

Suppression of their local evils can have catastrophic consequences for both acquired and hereditary miasms. Psora is also extremely sensitive to drug manipulation, although there is a possibility of drug disease in all organisms. The sycosis is also extremely sensitive to operations, instrumental manipulations, vaccinations and blood transfusions. Syphilis also against operations, but above all against the artificial closure of drains, e.g. fistulas, ulcers, "runny ears" etc.

One who applied all these findings about hereditary-chronic miasms with great success in the treatment of tumors, without theorizing much about them, was J.C. Burnett. First, however, the term “unilateral disease” needs to be examined in more detail, since tumors are one of the unilateral destructive diseases.


Unilateral disease

A unilateral disease describes the presence of a disease that shows only one side of itself, i.e. only one symptom or one sign, although it is certain that a complex disease is hidden behind this one symptom. It is in latency and is therefore not discernible or tangible. Like an iceberg floating in the ocean. Only a ninth of it can be seen above the surface of the water, while the far greater part is hidden under the water. It is the same with one-sided diseases. We know that there are more symptoms dormant, but they cannot be used diagnostically or therapeutically. In § 173 des Organon Hahnemann expresses it as follows: “Only those diseases seem to have few symptoms, and therefore cure more difficult to accept, which can be called one-sided, because only one or a few main symptoms stand out, which obscure almost all of the rest of the rest of the coincidences. Most of them belong to the chronic ones. "

Risch describes a case from his practice in the book "The Hereditary Chronic Diseases". A student came to him because of a completely curled, split, and twisted nail on his right big toe that was also festering ugly. The young man had been suffering from this nail for a long time, after two operations it kept growing back, hurting and festering. The anamnesis did not reveal any possible solutions. The man was healthy from head to toe, from head to soul. The ancestors also did not provide any usable information that would have contributed to finding a remedy. After the few local symptoms, Risch gave Silicea LM 18. When the patient came back a few weeks later, only the suppuration had stopped, nothing had changed or had been added. Of course, the patient received Silicea and then other remedies, up to and including the famous Magnetis polus australis, which is said to be specific for ingrown nails. The toenail remained steadfast until the young man gave up treatment and Risch suffered defeat. A one-sided illness like her in the Organon stands.

It wasn't long before a young man joined Risch again, this time a worker with terrible facial acne. The same thing again: the man seemed perfectly healthy and there was nothing to be found in the family history. Various medicines, including the tried and tested acne remedy, Kalium bromatum, were used in vain. On a trial basis, Risch gave the young worker tuberculinum, since facial acne can be a tubercular symptom, and the acne went away. This case proves the statement: "The one-sided diseases are mostly chronic". One even has to add: They mostly belong to the hereditary-chronic diseases.

A good therapist should always be aware, however, that mistakes in taking the case on the part of the patient (withholding certain things) or on the part of the practitioner (failure to find out all signs, symptoms and facts § 175) can falsely turn a case into a one-sided disease .

If you are confronted with one of the rare but “real” one-sided illnesses, then you will find the Organon a solution for that too. Section 176 ff Hahnemann says that several steps must be taken one after the other. In such a case there are one or two local symptoms and these must be taken as a starting point when choosing a remedy. Rarely will this remedy produce the appropriate artificial disease to erase the present evil. In most cases, however, the ingestion of the remedy from the patient's symptom series will lead to symptoms, i.e. signs become clear that were very weak or not fully developed or not at all. In § 181 it is explained that these newly arisen symptoms were caused by the administered agent, but that they are not test symptoms. These are phenomena that this body and this disease were already capable of; they had to be lured out by the medicine, so to speak. With the additional and then possibly complete symptoms, a second precisely fitting remedy can be found. However, after the first remedy has taken effect, Hahnemann demands that the case be taken again, in which above all the condition as it is now must be recorded.

After all, Hahnemann made us aware of the fact that we always and in every case - also with diseases that are not one-sided - have to pay attention to the reactions that occur after the administration of the remedy.Sometimes these indications from the organism can be decisive for the choice of remedy.

In this context it is worth mentioning that P. Schmidt takes the liberty of counting cases with too many symptoms as one-sided diseases.

Hahnemann puts in Organon two more phenomena, which he counts as one-sided diseases. He would like this to be treated differently than described in §§ 177-184. These are the local evils and the mental and emotional diseases. It is astonishing with what detail and accuracy he presents his doctrine of local evils in §§ 185-205. If the body produces a local evil, e.g. a rash, a wart or a boil, then this is a reaction of the entire organism. The organism is a large unit, inside and outside belong together inseparably, controlled by the life force. In § 203 he strongly condemns removing these local evils with external treatment, otherwise chronic ailments will develop. In order to cure this local evil, one needs not only the local symptoms, but the symptoms of the whole person, so that one can find a remedy that also affects the internal changes. But if only the local symptoms are present while the others are "darkened", as Hahnemann calls them, then we have a one-sided disease. These obscured symptoms may have existed in the past or were present in the ancestors, but are now important for treatment.

Other one-sided diseases are the mental and emotional diseases. Even back then, he made a distinction between exogenous and endogenous depression, and he counted endogenous psychosis among the one-sided diseases. Because, in his opinion, they are nothing more than physical diseases in which the mental symptoms increase to one-sidedness (§ 215). Actually there are only "complete" diseases that affect the whole organism with body and soul. For some reason, in some patients, some of the symptoms go into latency and only a small part remains active. This small part of symptoms becomes worse and more evident, and the disease becomes one-sided. This can only happen with chronic miasms. For treatment, not only the mental and emotional states, but also the former body symptoms are found in order to choose the right antimiasmatic. Many of these patients no longer have any original physical illnesses of their own, but were already born with depression. The previous, original physical disease therefore lies with the ancestors - a typical hereditary occurrence.

This model of one-sided diseases can just as easily be transferred to the somatic tissues. Instead of becoming one-sided in the region of the mind, one-sidedness goes into histology, and pathological tissue changes, tumors, and invasive neoplasms form. Then one can speak of a “one-sided destructive” illness. In these cases, the original “complete” illness has not necessarily passed in the patient himself, but has already passed with his ancestors, so that his symptoms alone are not enough to get behind the picture of what happened before. Since these cases are always chronic miasms that can be passed on hereditary, in almost all of these cases we have to look for the symptoms of the original disease in the ancestors. This theory is confirmed by the countless children who are already born with hereditary diseases and who develop neurodermatitis, juvenile diabetes and leukemia or other malignant neoplasms in childhood.

Unilateral destructive disease is a disease that Kent said was incurable. He did not use the term unilateral destructive disease, but from his essay "Why is cancer incurable?" it appears that he meant the same thing. He writes: "All curable diseases reveal themselves to the wise doctor through signs and symptoms "- so says Hahnemann. "Pathological conditions - like the patient - are incurable if there are no signs and symptoms, and as long as there are no signs and symptoms, they remain incurable. But the more the pathology progresses, the more the signs and symptoms decrease. This is evident in cancer, tuberculosis, diabetes, Bright’s disease and all organic changes in the body. In some cases the remedy once indicated by the mind and body symptoms will even cure in moderately advanced conditions; on the other hand, such a remedy will soon reveal that the patient has been ill for too long, and the pathology is too advanced, and the reaction is so weak that it quickly subsides and the remedy must be antidoped. "

The optimistic Hahnemann did not speak of incurability in this case, but Kent is fundamentally right in making this statement. In most cases of unilateral destructive diseases, the individual, homeopathically important and usable symptoms decrease as the pathology progresses. The symptoms of the whole person, of the individual, are lost, while those of the tissue changes spread inexorably. This makes it difficult or impossible to find a cure for the patient.

J. Compton Burnett (1840-1901) was undoubtedly a master in the treatment of unilateral destructive diseases, and his methods are unsurpassed to this day. In order to guarantee such a complex treatment, he made four demands:

1. Knowledge of the underlying miasm or miasms

2. the pathological simile

3. a ladder or series of resources

4. Organopathy


To 1. "Knowledge of the underlying miasm (s)":

If a case showed no symptoms and there were only symptoms, then he assigned these organic changes to the corresponding miasm and began treatment with the associated nosode. The prerequisite for this is that one knows which symptoms are caused by the individual hereditary miasms. This is a difficult task because some of the hereditary manifestations of the individual miasms can be similar or even identical to one another. True to his motto of hanging his hat on every nail he could find, this always resulted in an entry into the case, no matter how few symptoms it was.

To 2. "the pathological simile":

If there are already organic changes in a case of illness, Burnett demands a so-called pathological simile for healing. It is a means which can produce such organic changes on its own, as can be seen from toxicology or clinical experience. Hence his classification of homeopathic remedies into "children's pistols and cannons". This is in contrast to Kent's conviction, in which the agreement of the symptoms and above all that of the mood symptoms is the most important. Instead, Burnett demands a remedy that can produce tumors itself, or at least has clearly healed. He says that homeopathic remedies, which are only selected according to the patient's symptoms, very often only have a palliative effect, but have no healing power. They only get healing power if they correspond to the pathological process that takes place in the respective patient. If the patient's overall symptoms include this pathological process, then the remedy will be right. In many cases the patient's individual symptoms have little or no relation to the pathological changes. Burnett writes about this in his book "Tumors": „I cannot agree with the assertion that the disease is fully expressed in the symptoms, because it is not true: it may or it may not be so. It is not enough to cover the totality of the symptoms; for when this has been done we are only halfway behind us and then have to ask the following question: what is the true nature, the natural history, the pathology of the disease that we are thinking about? What caused it? Is the cause still present or has it disappeared? Is the chosen remedy capable of producing a disease similar to the one we have before us? Is it actually really homeopathic to the pathological process - consistently accordingly - and does it reach him from beginning to end? If not, then we are on the wrong track when it comes to really healing, not just alleviating. "

In connection with the question of whether a pathological process can be reached from start to finish, Burnett speaks of the so-called breakpoint of effect. If a remedy cannot completely cure it, then the point at which it has stopped working or is exhausted is the stopping point. Burnett makes things like these more understandable in extremely beautiful pictures: on page 23 ff "Tumors" he describes a case of a young girl and the story of a strong friend who cannot accompany him on all his dangerous journey. Therefore, after the friend has separated from him (breakpoint), he is robbed and killed.

To 3. "a ladder or series of means":

Another element that Burnett brought to the treatment of hereditary-chronic miasms was the treatment of remedies under the Law of Ladders. Burnett always employed several, sometimes even many, means (with the exception of one case which he mentioned in his book "Tumors" describes) one after the other, especially when treating tumors. He often compared this series of means to a ladder where every single rung is important in order to climb. But you can't say in detail which rung it was that brought you up. He believed that if you can't use a variety of means on a very difficult, complicated case, the case will forever remain incurable. Hahnemann also describes the one-sided diseases that several means are required to cure these cases. Of course, always with the caveat that the means have to be carefully selected. A tumor is a one-sided disease, and already a one-sided-destructive one, as it can almost only occur on the basis of hereditary-chronic miasms. So it was almost always clear to Burnett that he would not get by with one drug alone. He gathered all the elements of the case together: the primary miasmatic from ancestry, the secondary miasmatic from the patient's life, plus all the triggering causes such as vaccinations, operations, diseases, as well as all organopathic facts. He knew that the one-sided, destructive occurrence of the tumor is the result of many factors that must be reversed, and accordingly he determined his well-thought-out consequences.

Some homeopaths accused him of using the so-called ladders because they believed that every case of illness only needs one remedy, or that every patient only needs his remedy, but then we move away from individualization and approach the constitution again.


To 4. "the organopathy":

Burnett not only ascribed a certain importance to the individual organs, but he also gave them autonomy, in some cases even a supremacy. If he didn't have a nail to hang his hat on, then he got into the case through organopathy. Because even a one-sided, destructive event in the patient has a localization. Burnett was of course also of the conviction that in a hereditary-chronic case the corresponding organ was diseased due to the miasm and would be cured with an antimiasmatic. An organotropic agent given at the beginning or in between is supposed to relieve the organ and thus the entire body. He was of the opinion that an antimiasmatic treatment with higher potencies would be very stressful for the organism and that an organotropic remedy in mother tincture or very low potencies should be used for relaxation in between.

He dealt extensively with herbs that had special organotropic relationships and used them whenever a clear localization of the disease could be determined. In doing so, he granted the individual organs within the overall organism a certain degree of autonomy.

He also discovered a close relationship between individual organs, a synorganopathy. In such a case, the diseased organ is not the starting point of the one-sided destructive disease, but a completely different organ. To clarify, his theory of breast tumor development should be mentioned. He said that in the case of a breast tumor, the organs actually diseased are the uterus or ovaries, while the synorganotropic breast is only the organ of success. For healing purposes, drugs are then given to the triggering organs and not to the chest. Burnett had very good experiences with Aurum Muriaticum Natronatum, which has a clear effect on the female organs. Burnett suggested that synorganopathy is not limited to breast tumors.

Like Hahnemann, Burnett performed many drug provings on himself, previously unknown drugs. He then used these remedies according to the symptoms he noticed. Unfortunately, little is known about these exams.

The "Cooper Club", which at the time was a regular member of Dr. Clarke's house had three driving forces. Dr. Robert Cooper, with his gift for discovering new and useful medicines, Dr. James Compton Burnett, who had a knack for grasping their idiosyncrasies and possibilities and successfully applying them to the patients who besieged his practice, and Dr. John Clarke, who carefully recorded all of this and in his life as a lasting aid to posterity Dictionary of Materia Medicaresigned.

R.T. cooper developed a system for better testing of medicinal substances, especially herbal medicines, which he called arborivital medicine (Latin arbor = tree, vita = life).

Cooper’s teaching of arborivital medicine was based on his knowledge that there is a force in plants that acts in every way similar to a germinating force in the human body. If you want to use his method, he sets the conditions for you to start afresh to investigate both the effects of individual drugs and the individual administration of these drugs.

Dr. Cooper used to get his herbal medicines at their prime, not only in terms of the time of year but also the time of day. Armed with a small vial three-quarters full of alcohol, he secured his copy by dropping it there immediately. So he provided himself with a “mother tincture” that was as pure and unspoiled as possible. In numerous cases he then administered a single drop of this solution, at long intervals as the patient's condition required, and always waited until the stimulating effect of the remedy had been exhausted before repeating the remedy. Of course, he could not use highly poisonous medicines for this purpose or in this manner of administration; these had to be diluted to the third power of the decimal in order to be of use to the patient without endangering their lives.

He put forward the thesis that a tumor is caused by a germ that meets favorable conditions for its development in the body. The growth of the tumor is caused by a growth force. He observed a similar growth force in the plant world. As an example, he cites the seeds of a turnip (Brassica Rapa). The seed multiplies its volume by 17 million times until the turnip is formed. The resulting effect does not correspond to the original size of the seed, but to the relationship that exists between the seed and the soil in which it was planted.

If such a plant growth force is used in an organism in which a tumor grows, then these forces will cancel each other out or extinguish, as Hahnemann called it. But of course it has to be a plant-based growth force that has a homeopathic similarity to the growth force of the tumor.

Literally he says about it in "Cancer and Cancer Symptoms": “My opinion, in short, is that there is a force in living plants which, if applied in accordance with the laws of life to disease, will stop its progression and even cause it to dissolve. I also believe that while mineral substances require artificial preparations, dilutions, and triturations to better demonstrate such power, they are not necessary to prove the existence of a corresponding power in herbal medicines. I gave this power the name "arborivital" and the resulting effect "arborivital effect".

He goes on to believe that there are no proportions whatsoever between the disease process and the healing agent. He goes so far as to claim that if the healing power, which has the similarity relationship to the disease, is too strong, then the diseased tissue will dissolve too quickly and thus poison the patient because he cannot clear it quickly enough . It's just a matter of resemblance, it's not a matter of amount of substance. Therefore, the safest course of action is to act on the disease with a single dose.

In his book "Cancer and Cancer Symptoms" Cooper describes the case of a woman who suffered from cancer. Her right kidney was removed 18 months before he took on the case. The cancer reappeared on the surgical scar and around the bladder.

On February 10, 1899, he sent her a gift of Crocus sativa. Four days later he received the news that the woman who had previously suffered from constipation had developed extremely severe diarrhea the day after the drug was administered. She stopped eating immediately after it was admitted, and she felt terribly depressed and weak. Cooper realized that the disease could be explained by the disease and simply ordered large amounts of hot water to be sipped and to avoid morphine as much as possible. The huge cancerous tumor stretched from just below the liver to the pelvis on the right side. A body so full of cancerous tissue and with only one kidney left will hardly recover under these circumstances. Something beneficial was achieved, since the character and severity of the pain changed and the administration of morphine could be discontinued. Then he gave her Juniperus communis because of the polyuria that existed before the tumor was discovered. The effect set in motion was wholesome but burdensome, and one had to wait for the violence to subside. The woman was fine at the time of taking it; on September 3, she received Silphium perforatum. Immediately after the administration, the swelling began to gnaw pain, became constipated, the scar on the removed kidney began to become inflamed, and a discharge was noted after four or five days.This secretion gradually increased until a large opening was formed from which a large amount of clear liquid flowed out day and night from late September to the following December 11th. On the night of December 10th, she was so free from pain and suffering that her daughter, who had been caring for her incessantly all along, left her with the great hope that her mother's rest would be undisturbed. However, early in the morning (around 2:00 a.m.), she began to feel weak, and after about an hour she died peacefully and happily, with no trace of pain. This case showed that the life force was depleted by draining the disease, the outpouring, which was caused by the single dose of Silphium perforatum. This outflow would have been curative in the case of smaller amounts of cancerous tissue; that this was a positive reaction was shown by the freedom from pain, the shrinkage of the cancerous mass, which was very evident, and the general improvement in the patient's condition during this period. The proof that a force other than the cancer force was active here after the administration of the indicated drug was unequivocal for Cooper.

In the present book, of course, he describes many cases that led to a cure, but by not profound means. In any case, Cooper selected remedies with plant vigor that bore a homeopathic resemblance to the vigor of the tumor. He gained this similarity from the following criteria:

1. From the organotropic effect. From tests and the course of illnesses, he observed where certain plants had their first effect. In many cases, he used this organ-related effect as a symptom of choice for his arborivital medicine.

2. From the toxicology of the plant.

3. From symptoms of disease development as well as past and present symptoms.

John H. Clark writes in "The healing of tumors with drugs"that Burnett found an important group of curatives in nosodes, especially cancer nosodes. The cancer nosodes of homeopaths are mainly Scirrhinum, Carcinosinum, Durum, Mamillinum, Epitheliominum and Sarcominum. The first four are variants of the same nosode. Carcinosinum, Durum, Mamillinum are preparations by Burnett, and were named by him. Burnett tested it on himself and experienced that nasty, sinking, weak feeling in the umbilical region, which is typical of cancer nosodes, in a striking strength. One should not imagine that the cancer nosodes are specifics for the cure of each case. There are more ways than one way to cure cancer, but there is not one that is just right for all cases. In his experience, the nosodes are the most important class of all remedies, and their use should be better known than is the case even among homeopaths. Clark mainly used nosodes made from Burnett's specimens.

J.H. Clarke writes in the first chapter: "I have no doubt that cancer is contagious to a small degree and in a very slow way. That the contagious principle lies in the growth itself and in the secretion from the growth was confirmed by the power of the homeopathic nosodes that are made from it; ... Other evidence of the transmission of cancer are: the occurrence in married couples with a greater frequency than the law of chance would explain, and the presence of "cancer houses". He further wrote: " But cancer is a complex disease, and the formation of the tumor can be seen as the last chapter in an entire episode. Heredity plays an important role; Contagion - perhaps sometimes - does not play that important role; and other factors play an extremely important role at times, regardless of the other two it seems. Blood poisoning of all kinds can be a major contributor to causing cancer ”. 

AH. Grimmer