Archive for Homeopathy

The purpose of the foundation ‘Archive for Homeopathy’ is to develop a databank wherein cured symptoms with homeopathic remedies are collected in order to improve the repertory and materia medica. These symptoms can be already known for a certain remedy, or they can be new ones. Next to this the archive can provide information to anyone who wants to make a contribution to the spreading of homeopathy by lecturing, teaching, research or writings. To achieve this we will collect cases that were cured by homeopathy.

However, to get a more reliable materia medica and repertory we will have to be very meticulous with the information we get from cases. In order to make sure that the change in symptoms in a case is the effect of the remedy and not a placebo effect, great care has to be taken. Therefore we made a protocol with conditions that need to be fulfilled when cases are reported.

One will understand that in order to make such a project succeed, the support of a large group of practitioners will be necessary. Therefore we invite everybody to take part in the development of homeopathy, by sending in cases with changed or cured symptoms, including the characteristics on which the remedy has been chosen.

Examples of problems and mistakes in current repertories

Although J.T. Kent, who is responsible for the last major development of the repertory, asked to verify his repertory with well-kept records[1], this has hardly been done during the last hundred years. If homeopaths want to improve their results in practise, then a lot of attention has to be given to this subject, as J.T. Kent himself writes that his repertory is still in infancy¹ and a lot still needs to be adjusted.

The current information is a mixture of information with different reliability from several sources.

A few important examples of problems with Kent’s repertory:

• Lacking of sources

• Mistakes in symptoms
• Mistakes in writings or remedy names
• Unclearness of the use of the grades

Lacking of sources

By leaving out the exact source of a symptom it sometimes becomes impossible to check the information in Kent’s repertory, which is necessary if we look at the other flaws.

Unfortunately a lot of mistakes have entered the repertory, which is understandable looking at the amount of information that has been processed and the primitive means with which it had to be done. But for the homeopathic community there lies an important problem.

Here follow some examples to show the necessity of the archive:

Examples of mistakes in abbreviations

Examples of errors concerning the remedies are Anac. instead of Anan., Aphis instead of Apis, Opun-v. instead of Op. These mistakes might have entered the repertory after Kent made it, when it was reprinted, but nevertheless it has to be looked at.

Examples of mistakes in symptomatology

Mouth - pain - palate - walking agg. - sore (Kali-bi. as only remedy).

In the materia medica we only find the following in Allen’s Encyclopedia[2]: ‘Sore throat on waking, pain being at the palate; sore throat went away in the air.’. So most probably the word ‘walking’ has to be ‘waking’.

Mind - timidity - evening - bed – in (Kali-c. as only remedy).

This is mistake in the translation from German to English. The original German text from Hahnemann[3] says ‘Furchtsamkeit, Abends im Bette’, which means fearfulness in the evening in bed and not timidity.

Examples of unclearness of the grades

Although J.T. Kent himself gives clear instructions on how to use the grades[4], they appear as a very complex and unclear matter in the repertory. Kent gives the following explanation of the grades:

• The highest degree (printed in bold) should represent symptoms that were produced by most of the provers, being confirmed by reprovings and in practise. As Kent puts it ‘confirmed, by curing those states extensively, wherever administered, for years’.
• The second degree (printed in italics) is a symptom only seen in some provers, but is clinically confirmed.
• The lowest degree (printed in plain type) is for symptoms not often occurring in provings but that do stand out by intensity or peculiarity or that are clinically confirmed; also for symptoms that do not occur in the provings but that are clinically confirmed.

If we take now for instance the remedy Anacardium orientale that is in bold in the rubric ‘Head - Perspiration of scalp’, then we will see that it only occurred once in the proving and that Hahnemann³ himself did not mention it as a symptom cured by this remedy. The origin of this grading comes from the son of Clemens von Boenninghausen who updated his father’s repertory. But it is clear that it does not fit Kent’s description of a remedy in the highest degree.

Another example is Kali sulphuricum that is in bold in the rubric ‘Respiration – Rattling’. In the ‘Lesser writings’ of Kent we read that no other remedy is so competent to deal with this problem[5]. But in the provings this symptom never occurred. We do find it in Hering’s Guiding Symptoms as cured symptom[6].

A remark about this remedy in the ‘Homeopathic Physician’ from 1888 goes as follows:

‘Of Potassium sulphate we have practically no provings, as the scanty records given in the Encyclopaedia are useless. Clinically it has been recommended for loose, rattling cough, which hangs on after other symptoms have been relieved, when patient is worse indoors and better out in the air.’[7]

On the other hand, in the same ‘Lesser writings’ Kent writes that he has cured at least a hundred cases from adenoids with Tuberculinum bovinum[8], but the remedy is not in the rubric ‘Nose – Adenoids’. According to his own directions both remedies Kali sulphuricum and Tuberculinum bovinum should be in the first degree, in plain type, in the repertory.

All this is very confusing and proves that the grades in Kent’s repertory are not trustworthy at all and a lot of work needs to done to correct these.

Objectives of the Archive for Homeopathy

Collecting reliable information

The main purpose of the foundation is to collect reliable and evidence based material. To get this reliable information specific conditions are given which the cases have to meet. These conditions are only given to make sure that the change of the symptoms is due to the remedy and not a placebo effect or other influences. The main conditions are that the treatment is done with only one remedy at a time and that the follow up is over a long enough period. If a patient needed more then one remedy then it should be clear what action each remedy separately had. For more details about the conditions and the protocol see www.archiveforhomeopathy.com .

Procedure of the archive

Anyone can send in cases. On our website one can find examples of how cases should be sent in. There also is a format that can be downloaded and filled in. The following is an example of a case sent in via this format:

Format example 1

Intensity of symptoms is written in [1], [2] and [3].

Format example 2

Intensity of symptoms is written in [1], [2] and [3].

The foundation analyses the case and translates the symptoms into repertory language. It also puts other relevant information in the database, such as for instance potency, date of first intake and of the follow ups, remedy, intensity of symptoms, etc. The practitioner who sends in the information gets feedback over the case, an author reference and an id number for each case, so that in the future when more information is available about a case it can easily be added. Of course not every change has to be reported, but only the information that becomes relevant after a long enough period has passed.

By completing the database the repertory automatically will be updated. This repertory will in time be available via the website or if possible, periodically in cheap printed form.

Essential features of the repertory of Archive for Homeopathy

Dynamic

The information in the repertory is changed according to each case that is added. When new information is available through cases that are reported to the foundation, the rubrics and gradation of remedies will be changed instantly. The big advantage is that the information is not static, in the sense that it does not change for years or even decades.

Unprejudiced information 

Because the gradation is being calculated by ingenious formulas that use information of the cases added to the database, the information is impartial. It is not the opinion of one person, but it is the result of formulas and objective information. It is not a personal decision if a specific remedy should be in a certain degree.

Collective efforts

Because everybody can report cases (that meet the criteria) the repertory has the potential to grow very large in a very small time. It can be a project that is made by homoeopaths. Each homeopath can decide for him or herself how many cases they want to report. Just a small example to show how much information could be gathered: if each homeopath in The Netherlands would report one case each month, with about five useful symptoms per case, there would be about 50,000 symptoms after just one year. Imagine if each person in the global homeopathic community adds one case each month.

Non-profit

The Archive for Homeopathy is a non-profit organisation. This means on the one side that the results (repertory and materia medica) will be made available for free or for a price that covers the costs. On the other hand, there is no need to make decisions based on commercial aspects. We can focus only on quality and correct, reliable information.