| Not many papers have appeared on this subject, perhaps
the best one is by Dr. Lippe, which
was first published in the Organon, and later reprinted in the Medical
Advance.
The object of giving a remedy is to temporarily incite a similar
action in order that a
dissimilar permanent reaction may ensue; this lies at the basis
of all cure, and is self-evident.
While all cures follow their lines and are more quickly and certainly
made by giving the
most similar remedy, it does not imply that potencies are absolutely
essential thereto; for crude
medicines and extra-medicinal methods may and frequently do cure
after the same manner; to
this we should not be blind.
Such cures however are of their very nature generally partial
and finally need a deep acting
antipsoric to perfect them.
In many cases the delicate poise of the life force reflects like
a mirror, more or less of the
image of every remedy given; these are very difficult to cure, a
complete picture, the single dose
and a long wait being absolutely essential to success; here we need
all our tact, to hold the patient
until the proper response appears, a single mistake will surely
ruin the whole case.
Another class is masked by insusceptibility and slow reaction,
these may require a frequent
repetition of the remedy until a decided _ movement is inaugurated,
which will then be
powerfully carried forward to its termination by the life force
which then acts slowly but surely.
Every case is a new study, requiring a determination of the character
of the vital reaction, hence
the practical utility of the single dose is most apparent; it enables
us to feel the pulse of the whole
organism, as it were, and thereby judge what manner of man we have
to deal with. A slow and
gentle cure is the acme of our ambition, failing in this, it enables
us to feel our way and estimate
our surroundings preparatory to the next move.
The second prescription is always of the greatest importance,
too often we are apt to look for
a different remedy, when in fact the new symptom complex is only
a variation of the older
image, and requires repetition of the former remedy in a different
potency; having carefully made
up our mind as to the indicated remedy we should be slow to change,
always thoroughly testing
the chosen medicine in the scale of potencies as well as in the
repetition of the dose, before
abandoning it for another. Remedies typify patients and phases of
disease, hence to speak of
specifics is harmful in the highest degree. We all know that when
the constitutional remedy for a
given patient has once been finally worked out, it will cure almost
any disease which may attack
him, even although these later symptoms may seemingly be the opposite
of those previously
removed, for it must be remembered that these later manifestations
are also in all likelihood
alternate effects of the drug already in use; it were therefore
folly to change the prescription, such
a course will only end in confusion and defeat. A great danger lurks
in the hasty prescription, it is
a great troublemaker and mixes up our cases, hence the watchword
is wait, wait until the full
picture appears, then prescribe and your success will be pronounced
and permanent. Many men
learn this slowly or not at all, they also never cure any one.
The pace of remedies and the combined organs which they affect,
is one of the greatest
importance, some act quickly and run a rapid course like Aconite,
Glonoin, Belladonna, etc.,
others develop their effects slowly and act deeply like Calc. c.
and Sulphur, they dip deep down
into the tissue building processes and modify every cell action;
these have been aptly called
antipsorics and are doubly suitable to chronic diseases, although
acute ones may also demand
them; snake venoms and some acids act rapidly and disintegrate the
affected parts, this is
especially true of Crotalus and Sulphuric acid.
DISCUSSlON
H. C. Allen, M.D.: Here is one of the most important
topics for all of us:. the repetition of the remedy. I think that,
as a rule, we make more mistakes in this than in any other part
of the practica1 act of curing. We frequently fail by a too frequent
repetition of the dose. To know when to repeat and how to repeat
requires a master in the aft. Dr. Lippe once made a statement in
my hearing that I thought the most audacious I had ever heard. He
said that if he could visit a case of diphtheria the first time,
before anybody had had a chance to spoil it, and make the first
prescription, he would generarly cure the case with one remedy and
often with one dose. .I went to Philadelphia and stayed there a
month to see Dr. Lippe do it. At that time I was giving two, three
or four remedies at a time or in alternation. I saw Dr. Lippe clear
up serious cases of illness over and over again in pneumonia, bronchitis
and so on with a single prescription. Not always, but often. The
secret is first to find the remedy and then to know when to repeat
and when to refrain from repeating. It is in this, that skill is
manifested; this is the work that marks the difference between the
artist and the bungler.
J. H. Allen, M.D.: That is where the majority
of Homoeopaths stand; they can prescribe properly as far as the
first prescription is concerned, but they know nothing of action
and reaction; the very things that must take place in order to effect
a cure. The man who selects a remedy on the symptoms and then after
giving it, knows how to wait and to watch intelligently is a master
both in prognosis and in curing. But it is not the individua1 that
S doing it; it S the law that does the work. If we understand this,
we will not meddle and interfere with the working of the law bur
will stand aside and give the law a chance to effect its miracles.
If we will but prescribe the right remedy and wait long enough,
we can do wonders in those old chronic cases that are the despair
of any but the proper therapeutics. There is no more beautiful thing
than to watch the slow unfolding of a cure in a chronic case.
Wm. P. Wesselhoeft, M.D.: I think that the physician
who takes the time and care to make the first prescription right,
and who selects the remedy only after sufficient study, will always
be inclined to respect the pains that he has taken, and not be likely
to spoil all that he has done through too frequent repetition or
by change of remedy. It is almost the universal mistake of beginners.
They inherit from the old school and from materialistic science,
the idea that we must pepper our patients every two hours with medicine.
It seems to be that every one has to learn the lesson for him or
herself and nobody can give it to another.
Pretty much all young prescribers have to go through the same
experience and suffer the
same disappointments before they learn to do better. I have frequently
tried to impress young
men with the idea that it is necessary to give the medicine time
to work but I do not believe that it
does much good; they have to learn it from bitter experience. It
is one of the hardest things to do
to keep the fingers away from the bottles. As our experience grows
wider it becomes less and less
necessary to repeat the dose.
|