Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Farrington, M.D.
A Course in Homeopathic Prescribing by Harvey Farrington, M.D. (1872-1958)
1. General
Lessons related to general principles and practices of Homeopathy and
Homeopathic prescribing
1.1. Homeopathy, Its Beginning
Lesson one, regarding the historical context of Homeopathy
The American Institute of Homeopathy defines a homeopathic physician as "one
who adds to his knowledge of medicine a special knowledge of homeopathic
therapeutics and observes the Law of Similars. All that pertains to the great healing
art is his by tradition, by inheritance and by right."
Homeopathy is a system of therapeutics based upon the Law of Similars as
expressed by the maxim "Similia Similibus Curentur" -- let likes be cured by likes.
When a patient presents a group of symptoms similar to those produced by the
administration of a certain medicine to a healthy human, that medicine is
homeopathically indicated and if prescribed in correct dosage will relieve or cure.
Calomel by its physiological action produces diarrhea, frequent bloody mucus
stools, increased secretion of bile and salivation. When these symptoms have been
produced by any other cause other than the administration of calomel (Mercurius
dulcis), very small doses of this medicine will be curative.
Again, Belladonna is indicated homeopathically when the patient presents dilated
pupils, violent congestion of blood to the head with throbbing headache, high fever
with hot red skin, cerebral excitement, dryness of mouth and throat, muscular
twitchings (symptoms such as are frequently met with in scarlet fever). Any
physician will recognize the above symptoms as well known toxic effects of
Belladonna.
There are many outstanding examples of this dual action of drugs in common
medical practice, but the observing student will note as he reads the Lessons of this
Course that the Law of Similars applies to all substances possessing medicinal
properties.
Homeopathy, or the "New School" of medicine, was founded by Samuel
Hahnemann. He did not discover the Law of Similars, but he was the first to give it
practical application to the art of healing. He collected and translated from previous
writings of all ages a mass of evidence to show that others before him, including
Hippocrates and Paracelsus, were aware of this law.
Samuel Hahnemann was a celebrated scientist and chemist and one of the leading
physicians of his time. He had graduated from the best medical schools and
received personal instruction under the physician to the Austrian Emperor, Freiherr
according to the Law of Similars produced better results than larger doses. In fact,
he found that large doses aggravated the sickness when exhibited in accord with
the Law of Similars. Continued experiments along this line led eventually to
potentiation.
This briefly is the history of the origin of the prescribing of minimum doses of
medicine in accord with the Law of Similars, guided by signs and symptoms of the
sick individual corresponding to similar signs and symptoms produced
experimentally by the remedy upon many healthy humans.
These experimental or clinical observations of drug action called "provings" by
Hahnemann were made under controls and in a most painstaking way. This was the
introduction to the medical world of "animal experimentation" and led the way to all
of the more recent developments of drug testing and standardization.
Among the outstanding early professional accomplishments of Hahnemann we shall
mention but one. During the scourge of Leipsic, when tens of thousands were dying
"like flies" from the Plague, and when every victim of the epidemic was committed
to the "dead house," Hahnemann with his homeopathic prescribing saved 183
consecutive cases (most of which were considered moribund).
Hahnemann did not work alone, nor were his discoveries accidental. He had as
associates many doctors who, like himself, had an intense yearning for the Truth
and who hoped to effect a change in the haphazard and futile methods of medicine
prevalent in their time.
Hahnemann and his associates were eminently successful in practice, and as might
be expected, jealousies and unjust criticism were not lacking. Traditional medicine,
then as now, was intolerant of new ideas and human welfare was secondary to
medical politics.
Throughout his long and busy life (he lived to be eighty-nine) he continued to study,
develop and practice the healing art according to the Law of Similars.
Hahnemann's loyal and devoted students continued his researches. Remedies were
"proved" on thousands of subjects and many volumes were added to the numerous
works of the originator.
To France, Italy, Spain, England, and the United States went homeopathic
physicians, each one an apostle and a teacher. Later to Brazil, Colombia, Argentina
and other South American countries this "New School" found its way: to Mexico and
Central America it advanced with higher civilization: to Egypt and other civilized
parts of Africa; to Australia and to Asia; to India where today it clalms millions of
adherents. With higher civilization and broader learning Homeopathic medicine has
kept pace.
At the present time there is an unprecedented demand for doctors trained in
homeopathic prescribing. Although the graduates from homeopathic medical
colleges are doubling in numbers annually, demands are not one-tenth supplied.
Answer the question "why?" in your own way.
That people fundamentally believe in the internal administration of medicine in
sickness cannot be successfully contradicted; that they are always ready and
anxious for the more harmless, the more pleasant, the more certain and effective is
also true.
Homeopathic prescribing does not conflict with surgery, physical therapy, manual
therapy, suggestion or other non-medical measures. However, homeopathic
prescribing of properly prepared and standardized remedies is supreme in the field
of internal medicine.
You shall soon be led to see the raison d'etre of Homeopathy and to understand how
it must be adopted by any physician fully awake to his responsibilities and
possibilities.
As the Course unfolds it will reveal a broader conception of disease and its
management, and help you to become more proficient in your chosen profession.
The extensive experiments of Dr. August Bier of Berlin University proved the three
cardinal requisites of a homeopathic prescription.
1. The single remedy (given alone).
2. The similar remedy (Similia Similibus Curentur).
3. The minimum dose (the smallest amount necessary to produce curative action).
Dr. Bier explains the above by saying that
(a) all of the cells of the body are not sick;
(b) the finely subdivided remedy goes past the healthy cells because they have no
attraction for it;
(c) the sick cells have less resistance and are more responsive to stimuli. The
minimum dose affects these hypersensitive sick cells and stimulates them to
reaction. The similar remedy induces normal reaction. If the remedy is dissimilar its
action is not curative.
(d) only single remedies produce guiding indications for the similar remedy. Iron
(Ferrum) produces definite symptoms. Phosphorus produces a different group.
Phosphate of iron (Ferrum phos.) produces symptoms of both iron and phosphorus
but in addition has a distinctive action not found in either of its components. The
characteristic symptoms produced by Ferrum phos. mark it as a distinctive single
remedy.
* * * The Hahnemannian concept is that disease primarily is a disturbance in the
vital force or guiding energy which governs and regulates all the organs and parts of
the body. In health this vital force maintains normal growth and coordination of all
organic functions. When, from some disease-producing cause, this force becomes
disturbed, sickness or disharmony of function results. The causes of disturbance
may be infections, injuries, exposure, climatic conditions, violent emotions, errors in
diet, or others.
How are symptoms produced? A symptom is a deviation from the normal. It is
produced in exactly the same manner as a normal phenomenon, but is the result of
a stimulus that is the product of dysfunction of some of the body's parts. For
instance, failure to menstruate is a sign or symptom of pregnancy. It also may be
caused by old age, disease or fright. Haemoptysis may be a symptom of pulmonary
tuberculosis but is by no means always of tuberculosis origin.
Objective and subjective signs and symptoms are alike of physical origin. All
symptoms are efferent responses, voluntary or involuntary, or efferent impulses
purchaseing in nervous centers.
Bien etre and malaise are expressions of physical conditions. Prodromes are
symptoms just as much as are eruptions, fevers, or discharges. Apprehensiveness,
melancholy, tearfulness, loquacity, suspicions, delirium, delusions, fears, emotions,
hysteria, propensities, and even tedium vitae are symptoms -- deviations from the
normal.
Symptoms and signs are by no means always pathognomonic of certain diseases. A
patient with more than one disease may have symptoms not clearly identified with
any one of them.
Someone has said, "All that a doctor can find out about his patient, by all the means
at his command, is often insufficient to make a clear diagnosis." It is a fact that our
best diagnosticians are incorrect in more than 50% of their diagnoses. Even
laboratory findings cannot always be relied upon. Correct logical reasoning must
always prevail.
Some signs and symptoms (departures from the normal in function, appearance,
sensation or behavior) are characteristic of certain definite diseases, while others
cannot be ascribed to any definite disease or pathological process.
Many symptoms are often met with, such as "worse before a storm"; "relieved by
warmth"; "aggravated by motion"; "better in damp cold weather"; "fear of death";
"worse from the least draught or cool air"; "better lying on affected side"; "cannot
bear the smell or sight of food". These are definite symptoms resulting from some
abnormal functional condition and not necessarily from pathology.
Even when unable to interpret these and other like phenomena in terms of definite
disease, should we disregard them? No more than we should disregard
pathognomonic symptoms in the making of a diagnosis. Each change from the usual
and normal in function, appearance or sensation of the patient comes from a cause
whether we are able to determine and define it or not. The causative factor may be
an individual characteristic of the patient. Later, you will find that symptoms
unattributable to definite pathology are most often the determining factors in
selecting the homeopathic remedy.
The fact that the homeopath takes cognizance of symptoms per se, whether
indicative of any known disease or not, enables him to correct the condition before
definite disease results; and still more important, he is able to combat new diseases
that have never been heard of before. For instance, ear abscess is prevented by
removing the congestion and inflammation that lead to it. Pneumonia if taken in its
inception may sometimes be aborted. Influenza, or the epidemic later called "flu"
which created such havoc among the soldiers in the United States camps and in the
army overseas, was treated symptomatically with surprising success by the
homeopathic physicians while others were absolutely impotent because they did not
know what caused the infection nor did anyone understand the pathology.
Therapeutic nihilism (the travesty of medicine) originated with that group of
pathologists (not practicing physicians) who sought to identify every disorder and
disease with definite anatomical changes. They led clinicians to study disease only
in this relation. The fact is that anatomical changes are resuits of disease and not
the disease process itself. Disturbed physiology always precedes pathology but does
not always produce it. Therefore, symptoms present themselves, before and during,
as well as after the formation of pathological end-products or tissue changes. The
homeopathic prescriber utilizes all signs and symptoms but recognizes their relative
importance.
Hahnemann was the first to systematize symptoms and call attention to their
importance in treatment as well as in diagnosis. He proved that each drug invariably
produced its own peculiar and characteristic group of symptoms when administered
to healthy persons. These characteristic symptoms he called guiding symptoms
knowledge of the homeopathic materia medica and the genius and therapeutic
action of remedies.
To know how to adapt these remedies to the morbid states of the patient one must
have at his command a knowledge of how to examine the patient and how to elicit
symptoms, how to interpret the various changes that follow the administration of a
remedy; of dosage, repetition and sequence of remedies.
The knowledge of what each remedy will do is contained in the lessons on materia
medica which constitute the major portion of the Course.
One of the principle reasons why Homeopathy has not been more generally
accepted is that many of those who essayed it disregarded these essentials. Many
conscientious physicians have undertaken to use remedies prepared according to
homeopathic formulae, only to cast them aside as worthless because of failure to
appreciate the importance of homeopathic fundamentals.
Disease naturally falls into two classes, acute and chronic. The acute diseases run
through a certain limited course and may terminate favorably without remedial
measures if the patient possesses sufficient vitality and resistance. Chronic ailments
are not self limited but persist throughout life unless successfully treated in accord
with the Law of Similars. Any remedy acting curatively in a chronic disease acts
homeopathically.
Hahnemann practiced for a number of years before he fully realized the
fundamental differences between acute and chronic diseases. However, with his
usual sagacity, he noticed that although he was able to overcome such ailments as
common colds, croup, whooping cough, pleurisy, pneumonia, dysentery, scarlet
fever, in many patients he observed recurrences of groups of symptoms which
disappeared after treatment only to return in the same or different form, and that
the patient's general health was not permanently improved. This led him to the
conclusion that there must be some unrecognized underlying factor responsible for
chronic disease in general as well as these apparently acute manifestations and
that they were only the outcroppings of some sub-latent chronic miasm.
He made a thorough search of the history of disease and the recorded experiences
of others, seeking some common dyscrasias that were more or less universal.
There existed at that time a fairly good knowledge of the venereal diseases, syphilis
and gonorrhea. To each of these, as we do now, Hahnemann attributed many
chronic ailments. The basic cause of syphilitic manifestations he called the miasm
"syphilis"; that of gonorrheal sequelae, "sycosis"; that of chronic diseases (except
those due to drugs or poisons) of non-venereal origin, "psora". {Vide: Hahnemann's
Chronic Diseases, Vol. 1, p. 19.}
We do not attempt to explain the Hahnemannian concept of disease causation in
terms used in modern medicine. The language of today's accepted hypotheses may
seem quaint a hundred years hence. Nevertheless, Hahnemann's concept of
miasms is fundamentally substantiated by present day research.
Whether or not we use the terms "miasm", "psora" or "sycosis", and whether or not
we accept or reject Hahnemann's explanation of them, there still remains the fact
that the conditions he attributed to them actually exist. No other theory or
The suppression of any of the above or like diseases is followed by changes in the
resistance and susceptibility of the individual, and new expressions of deranged
vital force instituted which differ from those of the original ailment and are
frequently mistaken for new ailments.
Symptoms due to suppression may not be readily recognized by the novice,
especially in cases where they are delayed for months or years, as frequently
happens in venereal and other diseases. That they are in reality genuine effects of
the suppression can be demonstrated by the administration of the homeopathic
remedy selected on the totality of the symptoms and in accord with the Law of
Similars. The correct remedy will cause the original disease manifestations to
return.
Illustrations: Thuja Occidentalis has many times relieved rheumatism following
suppressed gonorrhea and caused the re-establishment of the urethral discharge.
Sulphur has often reproduced a suppressed skin eruption with relief of internal
disturbances such as bronchitis, asthma and diarrhea. Chronic headaches frequently
follow the application of local astringents to relieve offensive perspiration of the
feet. Silica relieves the head symptoms and restores the foot sweats.
The considerations of this lesson have been introduced in order to emphasize the
fact that since the homeopathic prescription is made from the totality of the
patient's symptoms, objective and subjective, it is necessary that the important
symptoms attributed to miasmatic origin be given their proper evaluation.
There is still another class of conditions which may be acute or chronic -- those
induced by the action of drugs and inoculations. Inappropriate remedies or drugs,
especially when taken in appreciable doses (either by order of the physician by the
patient on his own account, or by accident) poison the system, even though they
may effect the changes for which they were taken. An artificial disease is produced
which increases the task of determining the proper homeopathic prescription. For
instance, how could you expect to get a true picture of the patient's symptoms from
one who has for a long time taken bromides, "physic", morphine, quinine, sulphur,
aspirin, bromo seltzer, and the like? It is therefore frequently necessary to
discriminate between those phenomena which are the result of drugs and those of
the disease itself. The indiscriminate use of sleep producers, pain killers, headache
remedies, rheumatism cures, blood purifiers, cathartics, and the many selfadministered drugs and nostrums must be taken into consideration by the
prescriber and discontinued by the patient in order to facilitate or make possible the
selection of the similimum.
This lesson is to be studied in preparation for the messge of Lesson Four which
deals with the taking of the case, the evaluation of signs and symptoms, and the
relationship of pathology and diagnosis to homeopathic prescribing. As you will
have observed in the study of the lessons thus far, there are many prerequisites to
correct homeopathic prescribing. It is the purpose of the School to present to you
these necessary fundamentals and to guide you to accuracy of remedy selection
and eventually greater successes in your practice.