Homeopathy as a paradigm shift

The Magician Who Could Not Make Homeopathy Disappear
http://www.naturalnews.com/034208_homeopathy_James_Randi.html


The Magician Who Could Not Make Homeopathy Disappear Home | About NaturalNews | Contact Us | Write for NaturalNews | Media Info | Advertise with Natural News Select a Topic… Breast Cancer Chlorella Fluoride Heart Disease HFCS Superfoods Spirulina

The Magician Who Could Not Make Homeopathy Disappear

Monday, November 21, 2011 by: Dana Ullman
See all articles by this author

Share (NaturalNews) A campaign of disinformation on homeopathic medicine has been very active in United Kingdom and in the United States, and my previous article at this website provided some detail about this effort.

Perhaps the leading opponent to homeopathy in the United States is the magician James Randi. Magicians use various tricks to make things disappear, and Mr. Randi is working hard at making homeopathy disappear… however, to be a successful magician one must learn to fool and deceive people, and Mr. Randi is performing his tricks to try to make homeopathy disappear. Thankfully, he has not been successful.

This short article is not meant to be exhaustive on Randi’s disinformation campaign against homeopathy but providing some overview of who he is and what he has said and done will hopefully shed light on the nature of his information and how trustworthy he may or may not be.

Please know that this review and critique of Mr. Randi is not an ad hominem attack on him. I have a great amount of respect for Mr. Randi as an entertainer and magician, and I’m sure that he is a quite lovely person to his friends, but whether he is nice or lovely or entertaining or competent is not the point of this article. Instead, this article reviews his actions, his priorities, and the causes that he has supported, all of which are reasonable and appropriate areas for critique and are not personal attacks on who he is.

James Randi, Magician Extraordinaire and Master of Deception

James Randi is a first-class magician who appeared many times on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson and who, more recently, has become famous for supposed “debunking” of various paranormal phenomena and “pseudoscience.” However, one must remember that in order to become an accomplished magician, James Randi became expert in having people look at one hand while he was creating “magic” (or clever deception) with the other.

Randi receives a lot of press because of his $1 million “challenge” to anyone who claims to provide hard evidence for homeopathic medicine or other “paranormal” phenomena. Although few serious researchers have taken Randi and his “prize” seriously, I participated in an experiment with which Randi was connected in 2003, and this experience taught me much about him. I should first say that I had no expressed desire to win his prize, and even if this experiment had a positive result, I would not have received any monetary award.

Mark Golden, a producer for John Stossel and ABC’s 20/20 program, asked me to participate in a merging of “reality television” and “science.” He asked if there was a laboratory experiment that could be conducted to prove that homeopathic medicines had biological activity (or not)….and to add a little more tv drama to it, Golden told me a successful result could lead to winning $1 million to a homeopathic organization from James Randi. I told him that there were several such experiments, but one study was particularly noteworthy because it was conducted by Professor Madeleine Ennis, a former skeptic of homeopathy who was a professor of biochemistry at Queens College in Belfast, Ireland. Further, I told this producer that three other universities had replicated her experiment (Belon, Cumps, Ennis, 1999; Belon, Cumps, Ennis, 2004).

I agreed to participate in the experiment if Professor Ennis conducted the study or served as a consultant to the study to assure that it was correctly conducted. The producer agreed. I was therefore flown to New York to be interviewed, and a month later the study was to be conducted. Professor Ennis is a highly respected researcher, and she told the producer and me that she had no interest in conducting a “TV science experiment,” but she would review the protocol of the researcher they chose to use.

When Professor Ennis was ultimately sent the protocol, she was shocked at what she received. This protocol was NOT her experiment (Ennis, 2004). In fact, it was clearly a study that was a set-up to dis-prove homeopathy. Ennis noted that certain chemicals used in the experiment were known to kill the specific types of cells that the experiment would be counting. Further, she listed egregious problems with this study (Ennis, 2004) and asserted that the “researcher” who created this new study had seemingly never previously conducted and published a study in his life. Actually, the researcher who created this study and who was to conduct it was a lab technician without a graduate degree and without any previous publication history.

Professor Ennis and I also learned that this same researcher had conducted the same faulty experiment for the BBC which sought to discredit homeopathy (BBC, 2002). The narrator of this BBC program explicitly asserted that this TV experiment was a “replication” of Professor Ennis’ previous study, though this assertion was sheer fabrication.

I then contacted 20/20’s producer, Mark Golden, to alert him of this problem, and he simply told me that he promised to “consult” with Professor Ennis, but he was not obligated to do what she (or I) wanted. Although I had assumed that working with a producer at 20/20 would assure high ethical and journalistic standards, I began to wonder if my assumptions were correct. As it turned out, I also neglected to realize the impact of working with a team connected to John Stossel, a reporter who was previously caught fabricating a “study” on organic foods that incorrectly asserted that there was no difference between organic and conventional foods (Dowie, 2001).

In Stossel’s commentary on homeopathy, he had the audacity to assert that the “university scientists who reviewed the test protocols and said they were ‘technically sound’ and ‘meticulously conducted.'” (Stossel, 2003) Although Stossel acknowledged on air that I objected to the study BEFORE it was started, he neglected to mention that the expert who his producer agreed to consult with this study had equally strenuous concerns.

It is more than a tad ironic that John Stossel frequently used and even popularized the term “junk science” on 20/20, and I began to wonder if he was engaging in it himself.

Prior to actually conducting this research, the researcher wrote me saying, “Without agreement by all participants on the manner of how things were done, the outcome of the experimentation is indeed virtually meaningless.” And yet, he and the 20/20 team continued to conduct this junk science experiment with an outcome that indeed was meaningless.

It is further confusing that neither James Randi or any of his many followers had ever commented about the quality of this study, even though they are known to ridicule virtually any and every study that has had a positive result from a homeopathic medicine. It certainly makes sense for a magician to want to expose frauds and charlatans. And yet, if Randi was truly serious about exposing frauds and charlatans, it is quite curious that he has chosen to go after alternative medicine rather than Big Pharma and Big Medicine when there are many more egregious frauds that occur regularly and with much greater impact on society.

It is inappropriate to say that Randi (or anyone) should not expose any type of fraud, but it is reasonable to ask: is there a “method” to decision to focus on one rather than the other? Even though Randi prides himself on uncovering frauds and hoaxes, he seems to turn a blind eye when he himself may be involved in what could be deemed a fraud or hoax.

As for Randi’s $1 million “prize,” one can and should look at the rules for this award that specifically give the James Randi Educational Fund (JREF) a clever way to avoid paying anything. Rule #4 asserts, “At any time prior to the Formal Test, the JREF reserves the right to re-negotiate the protocol if issues are discovered that would prevent a fair and unbiased test”. As it turns out, a more recent effort to test homeopathy with a protocol agreed upon by Randi and famous Greek homeopath, George Vithoulkas, was delayed so long by Randi that it led to the impossibility to the trial (Vithoulkas.com). In Randi’s defense, he does not wish to comment on the past or what he said or agreed to previously.

James Randi is not just a homeopathic and alternative medicine skeptic; he is also a climate change denier. A large number of his followers have had a seriously difficult time accepting his stance, and yet, these followers defend him by asserting that he is not really a “scientist” and cannot be expected to understand these complex issues (Pigliucci, 2009). These followers argue that Randi is competent enough to declare with certainty that many homeopathic and alternative treatments are “bunk,” and yet, like cult members, his followers ignore the fact that he is neither a scientist nor a physician and cannot be expected to understand the complex issues of the healing process.

Because it seems that James Randi has serious concerns about fraud and deception in medicine and science, it is remarkably surprising that he has been silent on the considerable fraud regularly committed by conventional medical and “scientific” researchers and by Big Pharma companies. However, Randi is a great magician, and he is a recognized expert at misdirection.

Because it seems that James Randi has serious concerns about fraud and deception in medicine and science, it is remarkably surprising that he has been silent on the considerable fraud regularly committed by conventional medical and “scientific” researchers and by Big Pharma companies. However, Randi is a great magician, and he is a recognized expert at misdirection.

The advantage of Randi’s climate change position is that he stands with and by Big Oil and Big Corp. To quote the Church Lady, “How convenient.”

James Randi himself seems to have become a victim (or an accomplice) to a deception in his personal life. Randi’s long-time companion, Jose Luis Alvarez, was arrested in early September, 2011, for identity thief (Franceschina and Burstein, 2011). This news story carries the additional irony that a master of fraud detection has himself been deceived (my personal condolences and my recognition that any person can be deceived). However, in this case, the man posing as Jose Luis Alvarez had, with Randi’s help and advocacy, once pretended to be a “medium” in Australia as a test of the “new age” community there. Randi and “Alvarez” got significant media coverage for this hoax. The old adage that people teach what they themselves need to learn seems to have special meaning here.

Medical Fundamentalism: An Unscientific Attitude

Brian Josephson, PhD, won a Nobel Prize in 1973 and is presently professor emeritus at Cambridge University. Josephson asserts that many scientists today suffer from “pathological disbelief;” that is, they maintain an unscientific attitude that is embodied by the statement “even if it were true I wouldn’t believe it” (Josephson, 1997).

Josephson wryly responded to the chronic ignorance of homeopathy by its skeptics saying, “The idea that water can have a memory can be readily refuted by any one of a number of easily understood, invalid arguments.”

In the new interview in Science (December 24, 2010), Luc Montagnier, who won a Nobel Prize in 2008 for discovering the AIDS virus, also expressed real concern about the unscientific atmosphere that presently exists on certain unconventional subjects such as homeopathy, “I am told that some people have reproduced Benveniste’s results (showing effects from homeopathic doses), but they are afraid to publish it because of the intellectual terror from people who don’t understand it.”

Montagnier concluded the interview when asked if he is concerned that he is drifting into pseudoscience, he replied adamantly: “No, because it’s not pseudoscience. It’s not quackery. These are real phenomena which deserve further study.”

Luther Burbank, the botanist and agricultural scientist, perhaps said it best:

“I have never known a clergyman or a professor who could be more narrow, bigoted, and intolerant than some scientists, or pseudo-scientists… Intolerance is a closed mind. Bigotry is an exaltation of authorities. Narrowness is ignorance unwilling to be taught. And one of the outstanding truths I have learned in my University (of Nature) is that the moment you reach a final conclusion on anything, set that conclusion up as a fact to which nothing can be added and from which nothing can be taken away, and refuse to listen to any new evidence, you have reached an intellectual dead-centre, and nothing will start the engine again short of a charge of dynamite… Ossified knowledge is a dead-weight to the world, and it does not matter in what realm of man’s intellectual activities it is found… Any obstinate clinging to outworn doctrines, whether of religion or politics or morality or of science, are equally damning and equally damnable.” (Buhner, 2004, p. 21)

If the subject of this article intrigues you, British chemist and homeopath Lionel Milgrom has written an excellent and detailed analysis of the myths that medical fundamentalists spread on homeopathy (and specific individuals who are the worst offenders) (Milgrom, 2010).

Thomas Kuhn, the great physicist and philosopher of science and author of the seminal “Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” asserted that “paradigm shifts” seem only outrageous or revolutionary to those people who have invested themselves in the old paradigm…but to all others, the paradigm shift is a natural evolutionary development to virtually everyone else. The deniers of homeopathy are simply “too invested” personally and professionally in the old medical and scientific paradigm, while the rest of us consider the maturation of medicine and science as long overdue.

It has been said that dinosaurs tend to yell and scream the loudest before their fall…and it seems that we are all witnessing evolution at work.

REFERENCES:

BBC, 2002. http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizo…

Belon M, Cumps J, Ennis M, Mannaioni PF, Sainte-Laudy J, Roberfroid M, Wiegant FAC. Inhibition of human basophil degranulation by successive histamine dilutions: results of a European multi-centre trial. Inflammation Research 1999; 48: s17-s18.

Belon P, Cumps J, Ennis M, Mannaioni PF, Roberfroid M, Ste-Laudy J, Wiegant FAC. Histamine dilutions modulate basophil activity. Inflammation Research 2004; 53:181-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/…

Buhner, Stephen Harrod. The Secret Teachings of Plants: The Intelligence of the Heart in the Direct Perception of Nature. Rochester, VT: Bear & Company, 2004.

Dowie, Mark. Food Fight. The Nation. January 7, 2002. http://www.thenation.com/article/fo… Dowie, Mark. A Teflon Correspondent. The Nation. January 7, 2002. http://www.thenation.com/article/te…

Ennis M. Personal Communication, December 9, 2003. http://www.homeopathic.com/Articles…

Franceschina, Peter, and Burstein, Ron. Amazing Randi, renowned supernatural investigator, immerses in mystery about partner’s alleged ID theft. Sun Sentinel. September 15, 2011. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/20…

Josephson, B. D., Letter, New Scientist, November 1, 1997.

Ludtke R, Rutten ALB. The conclusions on the effectiveness of homeopathy highly depend on the set of analysed trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. October 2008. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.06/015.

Milgrom LR. Homeopathy and the New Fundamentalism: A critique of the critics. J Altern Complement Med 2008; 14: 589. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/…

Milgrom LR. Beware Scientism’s Onward March, 2010: http://www.anh-europe.org/news/anh-…

Pigliucci M. Rationally Speaking: In Pursuit of Positive Skepticism, December 17, 2009. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog…

Sikora K. Complementary medicine does help patients. Times Online, February 3rd 2009. Online document at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/li…

Stossel, John. ABC-TV 20/20. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/GiveMeAB…

Vithoulkas: http://www.vithoulkas.com/content/v…

Dana Ullman, MPH, is America’s leading spokesperson for homeopathy and is the founder of www.homeopathic.com . He is the author of 10 books, including his bestseller, Everybody’s Guide to Homeopathic Medicines. His most recent book is, The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy (the Foreword to this book was written by Dr. Peter Fisher, the Physician to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II). Dana lives, practices, and writes from Berkeley, California.

About the author:
America’s leading advocate for homeopathic medicine and author of The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy (Foreword by Dr. Peter Fisher, Physician to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II). Learn more about homeopathy and Dana’s work at http://www.Homeopathic.com or watch Dana’s videos at http://naturalnews.tv/Browse.asp?me…

Dana has authored 9 other books, including Homeopathy A-Z, Homeopathic Medicines for Children and Infants, Discovering Homeopathy, and (the best-selling) Everybody’s Guide to Homeopathic Medicines (with Stephen Cummings, MD).

Stay informed! FREE subscription to the Health Ranger’s email newsletter Get breaking health news + a LIFETIME 7% discount on everything at the NaturalNews Store Join two million monthly readers. Email privacy 100% protected. Unsubscribe at any time.

Articles Related to This Article:

Dispelling the Myths Surrounding Homeopathy

The Case for Homeopathic Medicine: Consider the Historical and Scientific Evidence

Interview With Dana Ullman, An Expert on Homeopathy

The disinformation myths against homeopathy

Fibromyalgia: science validates homeopathy (again)

Nobel Prize Winner Luc Montagnier Supports Science of Homeopathy

Related video from NaturalNews.TV

Your NaturalNews.TV video could be here.
Upload your own videos at NaturalNews.TV (FREE)

Have comments on this article? Post them here:

 people have commented on this article.

Related Articles:

Dispelling the Myths Surrounding Homeopathy

The Case for Homeopathic Medicine: Consider the Historical and Scientific Evidence

Interview With Dana Ullman, An Expert on Homeopathy

The disinformation myths against homeopathy

Fibromyalgia: science validates homeopathy (again)

Nobel Prize Winner Luc Montagnier Supports Science of Homeopathy

Take Action: Support NaturalNews.com

Email this article to a friend

Share this article on: NewsVine | digg | del.icio.us

Permalink to this article:

Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK, cite NaturalNews.com with clickable link.

Embed article link: (copy HTML code below):
Most Popular Today | Week | Month | Year

See all Top Headlines…

“Superfood Nutrition – Radiation Protection” with Mitchell May – Register below. Enter Your Email:

Now Available from NaturalNews.TV

Across the Web

More News…

Also on NaturalNews:

Health Ranger Videos
Activist music
CounterThink Cartoons
Food documentaries
FREE Special Reports
Podcasts Advertise with NaturalNews…

Support NaturalNews Sponsors: Advertise with NaturalNews…

Most Popular Stories of 2011

FDA finally admits chicken meat contains cancer-causing arsenic (but keep eating it, yo!) Share Anti-foaming agent found in Chicken McNuggets Share Forensic evidence emerges that European e.coli superbug was bioengineered to produce human fatalities Share 14 signs that the collapse of our modern world has already begun Share True fact: A common ingredient in commercial breads is derived from human hair harvested in China Share Gardasil HPV vaccines found contaminated with recombinant DNA that persists in human blood Share Breaking news: Multi-agency armed raid hits Rawesome Foods, Healthy Family Farms for selling raw milk and cheese Share Fukushima radiation taints US milk supplies at levels 2000 percent higher than EPA maximums Share Shock finding: More than 75 percent of all ‘honey’ sold in grocery stores contains no honey at all, by definition Share 7 surprising things you’re not supposed to know about sunscreen and sunlight exposure Share CDC warns Americans to prepare for zombie apocalypse (really) Share What’s really in the food? The A to Z of the food industry’s most evil ingredients Share

 

The NaturalNews Store

Huge discounts on supplements, raw foods, botanicals and healthly personal care products. Save up to 50%! Click here to see the current sale items

Health Ranger Storable Organics

GMO-free, chemical-free foods and superfoods for long-term storage and preparedness. Bulk pricing! Shipping immediately. See selection at www.StorableOrganics.com

25 Amazing Facts About Food

This FREE downloadable report unveils a collection of astonishing and little-known facts about the food we eat very day. Click here to read it now…

 

Resveratrol and its Effects on Human Health and Longevity – Myth or Miracle.

Unlock the secrets of cellular health with the “miracle” nutrient Resveratrol Click here to read it now…

 

Nutrition Can Save America

FREE online report shows how we can save America through a nutrition health care revolution. “Eating healthy is patriotic!” Click here to read it now…

The Healing Power of Sunlight and Vitamin D

In this exclusive interview, Dr. Michael Holick reveals fascinating facts on how vitamin D is created and used in the human body to ward off chronic diseases like cancer, osteoporosis, mental disord

Interesting experiment in education

From The New York Times:

60 First Graders, 4 Teachers, One Loud New Way to Learn

An educational experiment in Brooklyn seeks to revolutionize both how students learn and how teachers are trained.

http://nyti.ms/gPZBHE

Get The New York Times on your iPhone for free by visiting http://itunes.com/apps/nytimes

~~~~~
Jeff Korentayer DMH
www.twitter.com/jkorentayer
natural health

Sent from my iPhone

“Arcanum goes to the movies” : The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

We just saw this powerful movie, this evening, which is multi-layered, but a profound study of the destruction and terror at the heart of the sick-end of our "civilization", or the patriarchal schism running through the heart of our modern consciousness.  I understand that the novel it is based on is also extremely well done.  Definitely not for the squeamish (some very graphic scenes), but very powerful for those that can handle such content and discharge it afterwards in a healthy way.

Posted via email from Jeff’s assorted wanderings through the world and the web

“Song of Childhood” by Peter Handke (From The Film “Wings of Desire”, dir. Wim Wenders, 1987) « Peter and the Hare

When the child was a child
It walked with its arms swinging,
wanted the brook to be a river,
the river to be a torrent,
and this puddle to be the sea.

When the child was a child,
it didn’t know that it was a child,
everything was soulful,
and all souls were one.

When the child was a child,
it had no opinion about anything,
had no habits,
it often sat cross-legged,
took off running,
had a cowlick in its hair,
and made no faces when photographed.

When the child was a child,
It was the time for these questions:
Why am I me, and why not you?
Why am I here, and why not there?
When did time begin, and where does space end?
Is life under the sun not just a dream?
Is what I see and hear and smell
not just an illusion of a world before the world?
Given the facts of evil and people.
does evil really exist?
How can it be that I, who I am,
didn’t exist before I came to be,
and that, someday, I, who I am,
will no longer be who I am?

When the child was a child,
It choked on spinach, on peas, on rice pudding,
and on steamed cauliflower,
and eats all of those now, and not just because it has to.

When the child was a child,
it awoke once in a strange bed,
and now does so again and again.
Many people, then, seemed beautiful,
and now only a few do, by sheer luck.

It had visualized a clear image of Paradise,
and now can at most guess,
could not conceive of nothingness,
and shudders today at the thought.

When the child was a child,
It played with enthusiasm,
and, now, has just as much excitement as then,
but only when it concerns its work.

When the child was a child,
It was enough for it to eat an apple, … bread,
And so it is even now.

When the child was a child,
Berries filled its hand as only berries do,
and do even now,
Fresh walnuts made its tongue raw,
and do even now,
it had, on every mountaintop,
the longing for a higher mountain yet,
and in every city,
the longing for an even greater city,
and that is still so,
It reached for cherries in topmost branches of trees
with an elation it still has today,
has a shyness in front of strangers,
and has that even now.
It awaited the first snow,
And waits that way even now.

When the child was a child,
It threw a stick like a lance against a tree,
And it quivers there still today.

Posted via web from Jeff’s assorted wanderings through the world and the web

The Rape of Europa : Movie Review

I discoverd this afternoon that I have possessed an average, and fairly naive understanding of the history of war, as being simply the battle over land, resources, and borders.  While there is a grain of truth to this, the documentary film The Rape of Europa very powerfully opened my eyes to a dimension of WWII that I was virtually clueless about.  The film is based on the books The Rape of Europa: The Fate of Europe’s Treasures in the Third Reich and the Second World War by  Lynn H. Nicholas and Rescuing Da Vinci: Hitler and the Nazis Stole Europe’s Great Art – America and Her Allies Recovered It by Robert M. Edsel.

The film is a re-telling of the history of WWII in terms of the systematic theft and/or destruction of art and cultural artifacts that the Nazi’s engaged in.  In fact, the Nazi’s had been visiting museums and galleries throughout Europe in the years preceding WWII in order to catalogue the locations of all the art pieces that they planned to capture for themselves (For Hitler’s private collection as well as the state’s).  These targets were actually a large factor in determining when and where the Nazis struck in their drive through Europe, one city and country after another.

There are many dimensions of meaning packed into this film, and I would like to offer a few of my observations from a Heilkunst perspective.  It is clear to me now that these activities were based fundamentally on an assault of, and theft of the generative power of these nations and cultures.  The title of the film, itself, references “rape” as the driving force of the war – a term directly referencing an assault on the generative power. What was portrayed in many instances in this film, was the incredible efforts of a people to hide and protect their works of art, often at the risk of life and limb.  France, for example, anticipating the Nazi attack, completely emptied the Louvre in Paris, and hid all the artworks in various castles in remote regions of the French countryside.  Under distress of invasion, an organism or nation will organize itself to protect that which is most valuable (More or less noble organs).  The collective (Ontic) identification with an art collection is a function of the nation-soul or nation-spirit, and drove many to incredibly heroic acts.  In the rescue operations at the end of WWII, the search for and recovery of these art pieces which were referred to as “refugees” – a reference again equating the life- soul- and spirit- containing capacity of art.  Other aspects of the film portrayed the “civilian” nature of art and heritage buildings, in the sense of the generally accepted conventions of war proscribing their direct attack, and how this was sometimes used as a tactical measure, much like a hostage-taking.

There was a scene early in the film which illustrated Hitler’s desire for a purified cultural and artistic milieu – by simultaneously stealing those works of art which fit the Nazi ideals, while purging entire cultures (both people and artifacts) which did not.  I found it interesting that Modern Art was purged, as it was considered to be degenerate due to its perversion of the artist’s ability to perceive and portray nature exactly.  This was (unconsciously) a gesture to destroy the emerging cultural consciousness of the supersensible realities behind nature (our inner world), which is the new subject matter of Modern art (or “art after nature”).  The importance of Art and its history is that it embodies the history of evolution of consciousness – and an erasing of history is one of the most powerful acts in attempting to control people (as illustrated beautifully in Orwell’s 1984).  The purging of Modern Art was an unconscious tactic of the Nazis to block the evolution of consciousness from attaining the emerging capacity for supersensible perception and cognition.

The official web site for the film contains a number of video clips, and still photos from the film, and interviews with the writer and director.

Hahnemann on the highest principles of medicine

This first excerpt below from Hahnemann clearly explains the need for a rational, rather than empirical medical science, as well as the fundamental importance of treating the cause of disease first, whenever possible, rather than ignoring it in the name of trying to temporarily calm down the symptoms, (and falsely attempt to gain popularity by trying to please the patient superficially), while the disease meanwhile embeds itself more deeply into the human organism. The ethical choice here is clearly to address the deeper cause of disease, when possible.

The second excerpt below is from the Organon of Heilkunst (aphorisms 64 and 68), where Hahnemann explains why some healing reactions are gentle, and others can be quite dramatic. Essentially, he points out that in the cure of a natural disease, the life force is able to draw on the exact opposite state, which is available to draw on from nature, and therefore there is no noticeable healing reaction. However, in the case of a non-natural disease (such as a shock or trauma, use of a prescription drug, or a false belief that has impregnated that human organism, etc.), since there is no opposite state in nature of such a disease, the life force must instead exert its superiority over the disease (stimulated by the remedy based on similar resonance), and can be quite dramatic by comparison. By analogy, think of the difference between the gentle maintenance that is needed on a well-treated car, when the owner follows the manufacturers’ suggested schedule, versus the major repairs that would be needed on a poorly treated car, which was driven to the point of the engine seizing.

In other words, it is not Hahnemann’s blueprint for cure and its methods which are to blame for some of the more dramatic or uncomfortable healing reactions that can be experienced, but the exact nature of how disease affects the human organism. In other words, Hahnemann didn’t make up these rules, but only observed them in their pure form in nature.

It is OK on a personal, individual basis to choose any healing modality that is deemed most suitable and desirable (individual freedom of choice and responsibility for consequences), however, it is inexcusable from an ethical, rational scientific point of view for the medician to ignore the laws of nature and how they operate in a given state of ill health, and what is called for in the highest good of the patient when they are seeking specific advice from a medician. Of course, informed consent is always requisite here.

Without further ado, let’s hear from our guest of honour:

From The Curative Powers Of Drugs by Dr. Samuel Hahnemann:

If I mistake not, practical medicine has devised three ways of applying remedies for the relief of the disorders of the human body.

The first way, to remove or destroy the fundamental cause of the disease, was the most elevated it could follow. All the imaginings and aspirations of the best physicians in all ages were directed to this object, the most worthy of the dignity of our art. But, to use a Spagyrian expression, they did not advance beyond particulars; the great philospher’s stone, the knowledge of the fundamental cause of all diseases, they never attained to. And as regards most diseases, it will remain for ever concealed from human weakness. In the mean time, what could be ascertained respecting this point, from the experience of all ages, was united in a general system of therapeutics. Thus, in cases of chronic spasms of the stomach, the general weakness of the system was first removed; the convulsions arising from tapeworm were conquered by killing that animal; the fever arising from noxious matters in the stomach was dissipated by powerful emetics; in diseases caused by a chill the suppressed perspiration was restored; and the ball was extracted that gave rise to traumatic fever. This object is above all criticism, though the means employed were not always the fittest for attaining it. I shall now take leave of this royal road, and examine the other two ways for applying medicines.

By the second way, the symptoms present were sought to be removed by medicines which produces an opposite condition; for example, constipation by purgatives; inflamed blood by venesection, cold and nitre; acidity in the stomach by alkalis; pains by opium. In acute diseases, which, if we remove the obstacles to recovery for but a few days, nature will herself generally conquer, or, if we cannot do so, succumb; in acute diseases, I repeat, this application of remedies is proper, to the purpose, and sufficient, as long as we do not possess the above-mentioned philosopher’s stone (the knowledge of the fundamental cause of each disease, and the means of its removal,) or as long as we have no rapidly-acting specific, which would extinguish the variolous infection, for instance, at its very commencement. In this case, I would call such remedies temporary.

But if the fundamental cause of the disease, and its direct means of removal are known, and we, disregarding these, combat the symptoms only by remedies of this second kind, or employ them seriously in chronic diseases, then this method of treatment (to oppose diseases by remedies that produces an opposite state) gets the name of palliative, and is to be reprobated. In chronic diseases it only gives relief at first; subsequently, stronger doses of such remedies become necessary, which cannot remove the primary disease, and thus they do more harm the longer they are employed, for reasons to be specified hereafter.

I know very well that habitual constipation is still attempted to be cured by aloetic purgatives and laxative salts, but with what melancholy results! I know well that efforts are still made to subdue the chronic determination of blood of hysterical, cachetic, and hypochondriacal individuals, by repeated, although small venesections, nitre, and the like; but with what untoward consequences! Persons living a sedentary life, with chronic stomachic ailments, accompanied by sour eructations, are still advised to take repeatedly Glauber salts; but with what disastrous effects! Chronic pains of all kinds are still sought to be removed by the continued use of opium; but again, with what sad results! And although the great majority of my medical brethren still adhere to this method, I do not fear to call it palliative, injurious, and destructive.

I beseech my colleagues to abandon this method (contraria contrariis) in chronic diseases, and in such acute diseases as take on a chronic character; it is the deceitful by-path in the dark forest that leads to the fatal swamp. The vain empire imagines it to be the beaten highway, and plumes himself on the wretched power of giving a few hours’ ease, unconcerned if, during this specious calm, the disease plants its roots still deeper.

But I am not singular in warning against this fatal practice. The better, more discerning, and conscientious physicians, have from time to time sought for remedies (the third way) for chronic diseases, and acute diseases tending to chronic, which should not cloak the symptoms, but which should remove the disease radically, in one word, for specific remedies; the most desirable, most praiseworthy undertaking that can be imagined. Thus, for instance, they tried arnica in dysentery, and in some instances found it a useful specific.

But what guided them, what principle induced them to try such remedies? Alas! only a precedent from the empirical game of hazard from domestic practice, chance cases, in which these substances were accidentally found useful in this or that disease, often only in peculiar unmentioned combinations, which might perhaps never again occur; sometimes in pure, simple diseases.

In order to ascertain the actions of remedial agents, for the purpose of applying them to the relief of human suffering, we should trust as little as possible to chance; but go to work as rationally and as methodically as possible. We have seen, that for this object the aid of chemistry is still imperfect, and must only be resorted to with caution; that the similarity of genera of plants in the natural system, as also the similarity of species of one genus, give but obscure hints; that the sensible properties of drugs teach us mere generalities, and these invalidated by many exceptions; that the changes that take place in the blood from the admixture of medicines teach nothing; and that the injection of the latter into the blood vessels of animals, as also the effects on animals to which medicines have been administered, is much too rude a mode of proceeding, to enable us therefrom to judge of the finer actions of remedies.

Nothing then remains but to test the medicines we wish to investigate on the human body itself. [Hahnemann goes on to explain the importance of doing provings on healthy human beings, rather than gathering sporadic information empirically, as cures occurred by chance, when the remedy properties cannot be accurately determined from a sick individual, as when tested on a healthy human being.]

64. During the initial-action of the artificial disease Potences (medicines) upon our healthy body,
our Living Power appears (as seen from the following examples)
to comport itself purely conceptively (receptively, passively as it were)
and thus, as if forced, to allow the impressions of the artificial Potence
impinging from without to take place in itself,
thereby modifying its condition,
but then, as it were, to rally again
and a) to generate the exact opposite condition-state,
when there is such a one (counteraction, after-action),
to this impinging action (initial-action)
in equal degree to that which the impinging action (initial-action)
had on it by the artificial morbific or medicinal Potence,
and according to the measure of the Living Power’s own energy,
— or, b) when there is not an exact opposite state to the initial-action in nature,
the Living Power appears to strive to assert its superiority
by extinguishing the alteration actuated in itself from without (by the medicine),
in place of which it reinstates its norm (after-action, healing-action).

68. Experience shows us that in homeopathic cures
following the uncommonly small medicinal doses (§275-287)
which are necessary in this curative mode,
and which were just sufficient, by similarity of their symptoms,
to tune-over the similar natural disease
and to expel the natural disease from the Feeling of the Living Principle,
some small amount of medicinal disease still continues on alone initially
in the organism occasionally after extirpation of the natural disease,
but, because of the extraordinary minuteness of the dose
the medicinal disease disappears so transiently, so easily and so quickly by itself,
that the Living Power has no more considerable counteraction to take up
against this small artificial mistunement of its condition
than the counteraction of elevating the current condition up to the healthy station
(that is, the counteraction suitable for complete recovery),
to which end the Living Power requires but little effort
after extinguishment of the previous morbid mistunement.
(See §64 B)