This article was first posted on the discussion group, www.lyghtforce.com in December 1999, in response to comments made by David Little.

The well-known uniformitarian therapist, David Little, has challenged on lyghtforce.com the fact that Hahnemann's medical system, Heilkunst, contains the use of homogenic remedies, that is, remedies chosen not on the symptoms (pathology or suffering of the patient), but on the specific disease irritation involved.

Mr. Little makes no bones about his views. He states that Hahnemann did not advocate the use of homogenic remedies within his medical system. A clear position, but unfortunately not one in accord with the evidence. My reply is in two parts: one, a reply to specific points raised by Mr. Little, and two, a detailed explanation of what Hahnemann said, using a comprehensive series of quotes from Hahnemann's works, so that list members may judge for themselves whether Hahnemann had homogenic remedies in mind as part of his medical system, Heilkunst.

PART ONE:
Mr. Little completely misunderstands the content of the quotes he uses to argue his case. They say exactly the opposite of what he contends, and anyone who takes the time to read them carefully and in context will readily see this.

First, Mr. Little claims that Hahnemann (and Raue) condemned the use of homogenic remedies for disease irritations as being allopathic in nature. He would like this to be the case because by tarring homogenic remedies with the allopathic brush he can ignore the issue. Strangely enough, the quotes he uses to support his position actually show the opposite of what he contends.

It is true that Hahnemann condemned the allopaths, not for the use of homogenic remedies, but only for their method of discovering (simply by chance, not on any principle) and using (used only crude doses which, because of the strong similar resonance, was highly dangerous) such remedies.

As the reader can see in Part Two, Hahnemann condemns the allopathic blindness to: a) the principles of medicine and b) to the proper use of homogenic remedies.

Next, Mr. Little introduces the idea that the homeopathic specific is based solely on the "totality of signs and symptoms of the mistuned vital force of the individual body/soul constitution". This is an enduring theme of his. It is the bedrock of the uniformitarian/reductionist approach to Hahnemann's multidimensional legacy. Everything gets reduced to this seductively simple formula. It sounds too good to be true and, indeed it is. Mr. Little's uniformitarianism produces greater confusion rather than greater clarity. It is the product of wishful thinking rather than of clear understanding. The implication Mr. Little wishes to give with this quote is that the concept of homogenic medicines being based on a specific relationship to the "disease irritation" is invalid. However, this is not what Hahnemann stated. It is true that in many contexts the symptoms of the individual who has a disease are to be taken into account. However, this cannot be reduced to the statement that ALL remedies for ALL diseases must be chosen that way. It is a fact that homogenic relationships exist and that in certain contexts of disease treatment, a remedy must be chosen on the basis of the principle of homogenicity or disease irritation, not on the symptoms. To claim otherwise is to create a stultifying uniformitarianism that destroys the rich genius of Hahnemann's complex medical system. As seductive as it may be, we cannot get at a better understanding by trying to make this system fit the particular cloth we bring to it.

Mr. Little next asserts that Hahnemann's statements on the issue of homogenics in the Introduction to the Organon are really "criticisms of the specifics of the old allopathic school because they did not include symptomatic indications". This is part of his effort to link the idea of homogenic remedies to allopathy, a kind of guilt by association. Yet again, this assertion is not correct. Actually, Hahnemann specifically acknowledged that the allopaths based their prescribing on symptoms.

"This sublime project — to find a priori an inner, invisible cause of disease — resolved itself (at least among the physicians of the old school who thought themselves to be astute) in a search **(under the guidance of symptoms, it is true)** for what might be supposed to be the probable general character of the case of disease before them." (Introduction), translation by SRD.

On a technical note, Mr. Little states that Hahnemann only uses the term "homogenic" in one place. However, we find FIVE references to the term.

One: Introduction, para. 21.

"The reliably availing ones could not have been any others than the specific ones; that is, medicines which were HOMOGENIC in their action to the disease irritation, whose use, however, by the old school was forbidden and tabooed as highly damaging because observation had taught that, with the so highly intensified receptivity for HOMOGENIC irritations in diseases, such medicines in the conventional large doses had proven themselves life-endangering."

Two: Footnote to para. 21.

"They have, however, long since forbidden the HOMOGENIC stimulants, the specific ones (homeopathic), as highly damaging influences."

Three: Introduction, para. 23.

"Accordingly, to cure in a direct (most natural) way by means of specific HOMOGENIC medicines, was not allowed, and could not be, since most of the medicinal actions were and remained unknown, and even if they were known, it would never be possible to divine the apt remedy with such generalizing views."

Four: Footnote to Introduction, para 27.

"...without suspecting, that the inflamed blood, a product only the acute fever, only of the morbid immaterial (dynamic) inflammatory-irritation, the latter being the only cause of this great storm in the vascular system, is to be abrogated by the smallest dose of a HOMOGENIC (homeopathic) medicine, eg., by a dose of a fine globule moistened with a decillion-fold diluted Aconite juice."

Five: Organon Footnote to Introduction, para 61.

"...instead of extinguishing the malady rapidly, without digression, without loss of vitality, with HOMOGENIC, dynamic, medicinal Potences leveled directly at the diseased points in the organism itself as Homeopathy does."

Mr. Little also tries to frame the debate over homogenic remedies as a debate between the "classical" (supposedly pure) application of the law of similars and the homogenic (supposedly corrupted) one. This is an entirely false dichotomy. Homogenic prescribing is PART of the complete medical system discovered by Hahnemann. It does NOT REPLACE other applications of the law of similars. Hahnemann's medical system cannot be reduced to a single dimension of disease. Mr. Little accuses me of doing what he himself is doing. I have never stated that homogenic prescribing constitutes the whole of Hahnemann's medical system. It forms only a part. However, Mr. Little would have us believe that all can be reduced to the one dimension of the constitution.

The true dichotomy, then, is between UNIFORMITARIAN data collectors using their tenets but not Hahnemann's principles who try to conflate everything into one dimension of disease (the signs and symptoms of the constitution) and the MULTIFORMITARIAN system based on the multi-dimensional (metamorphic-pleomorphic) appreciation of the true nature of disease via principles as elucidated by Hahnemann in his genial work. This is where the real debate lies.

It seems that the only thing Mr. Little and I are agreed upon is the suggestion that "everyone read the entire introduction to see in what context Hahnemann used these terms". I would only add that everyone should read all the relevant passages. To this end I have included an attachment on the issue of homogenic remedies.

HOMOGENIC REMEDIES
Hahnemann raises the issue of specific relationships between a disease irritation and a remedy. He uses the term "homogenic" for this relationship. It is a little known and appreciated concept within Heilkunst, Hahnemann's complete medical system. It has important implications, however, for the treatment of disease.

Let's take a look at the concept and Hahnemann's development of it both practically and theoretically. The first reference is in the Introduction: 21.

"The reliably availing ones could not have been any others than the specific ones; that is, medicines which were homogenic in their action to the disease irritation, whose use, however, by the old school was forbidden and tabooed as highly damaging because observation had taught that, with the so highly intensified receptivity for homogenic irritations in diseases, such medicines in the conventional large doses had proven themselves life-endangering."

What is the context within which Hahnemann is raising this issue? Hahnemann is here criticising the allopaths for their empty speculations on material cause (as opposed to the true, dynamic cause).

He then elaborates in a footnote that if they had understood the true cause, they would have been able to discover the remedy to treat a particular disease (and here Hahnemann is speaking of true diseases — the dispute at this point is over the method of finding the remedy and of understanding the true cause, not over the issue of disease). Instead, because of their misunderstanding, their theories are arid and unfruitful the therapeutic plane, if not dangerous to the health of the patient.

16. a] 1.
It would have been far more suitable for sound common sense and for the nature of the matter if, in order to be able to remedy a disease, they would have tried to find the originating cause of the same as the causa morbi; thus would they have been able to employ with success the remedial plan which had proved itself helpful with diseases from the same originating cause, also with those from the same source, as for example, the same Quicksilver is to be helpfully employed with an ulcer on the glans after impure coitus, as with all hitherto venereal chancres if, as I say, they had discovered the originating cause of all remaining chronic (unvenereal) diseases in an earlier or later infection with the itch-miasm (with Psora), and had found for all of these a common remedial method with therapeutic regard for each individual case, then every last one of these chronic diseases could have been remedied. Hahnemann then goes on in the main text to criticise the allopaths for coming up with the general characters of disease (e.g., cramp, paralysis, fever, inflammation, etc.) as the cause of disease. These are false disease causes.

Hahnemann asks, after having criticised the nature of disease cause, where the allopaths expected to get the remedies for the "alleged general characters" of disease. He answers that "the reliably availing ones", that is, the ones that would work to cure diseases could only have been the ones that had a similar resonant relationship to the disease irritation, namely a homogenic remedy. Remember, Hahnemann is here talking about diseases with a common originating cause or source (see footnote above). He uses the term "homogenic" to describe this relationship. In a short footnote he says this was "called homeopathic", meaning that this is not the correct term (because not based on symptoms of the patient, rather on the disease irritation), but comes within the general scope of the law of similar resonance from which the term homeopathy first was coined.

Hahnemann states that where the allopaths discovered the homogenic relationship, they used crude doses and discovered that this killed patients. They became frightened, not understanding how to make the dose non-toxic, and outlawed the use of homogenic remedies. The allopaths also were unable to discover very many homogenic remedies because of their over-generalising about disease. It is clear, however, that the use of homogenic remedies does clearly cure directly and naturally, but that diluted and dynamised doses must be used for the cure to be safe.

21.
The reliably availing ones could not have been any others than the specific ones; that is, medicines which were homogenic in their action to the disease irritation, whose use, however, by the old school was forbidden and tabooed as highly damaging because observation had taught that, with the so highly intensified receptivity for homogenic irritations in diseases, such medicines in the conventional large doses had proven themselves life-endangering.

22.
However, of smaller doses and of most extremely minute doses, the old school had no inkling.

23.
Accordingly, to cure in a direct (most natural) way by means of specific homogenic medicines, was not allowed, and could not be, since most of the medicinal actions were and remained unknown, and even if they were known, it would never be possible to divine the apt remedy with such generalizing views.

Hahnemann then makes a second reference in the Introduction to the allopathic attempts indirectly to cure disease by imitating nature (he means here that they tried to imitate the sustentive power of the Living Power) and instead created "heterogenic irritations" (e.g. an ulcer in another part to "divert the malady"). In this context, he repeats the need to treat directly (that is, working on the generative side of the Living Power) to create an artificial homogenic irritation with potentised medicines. He places a footnote after the term "indirectly".

61.a] 1.
"Instead of extinguishing the malady rapidly, without digression, without loss of vitality, with homogenic, dynamic, medicinal Potences leveled directly at the diseased points in the organism itself as Homeopathy does."

So it becomes obvious that homogenic treatment, a variant of the overarching law of similar resonance, is valid, but only if used with potentised doses of medicines having a homogenic relationship to a disease irritation. If we look elsewhere in Hahnemann's writings, we find many examples of homogenic relationships as well as a further discussion of the principle involved.

In his "Examination of the Sources of the Common Materia Medica", Hahnemann gives us the principle involved in different words, but it is clear from the context (various examples - see below) that this is the homogenic relationship: "...Only for a want of a constant character can we suppose a supply of a constant character."

Let's now take a look at the numerous examples Hahnemann gives in his writings of homogenic relationships (that is, relationships based on a similar resonance between the remedy and the disease irritation, not the symptomology of the patient):

1. "Usually such a stomach vitiation is of dynamic origin, engendered by emotional disturbances (grief, fright, chagrin), a chill or mental or bodily overexertion just after eating - often after even a moderate meal. If however the sufferer, ...sniffs only a single time at highly diluted PULSATILLA juice (on a large mustard seed sized moistened globule), whereby the mistunement of his condition in general (and of his stomach contents in particular) is certainly abrogated so that in two hours he is recovered...This is true causal treatment..." (Introduction to the Organon, fn. 8)
2. "Even the corrosive gastric acid, ...recedes of itself if its dynamic origin is curatively abrogated by a very small dose of highly diluted SULPHURIC ACID or, if often manifested, is better abrogated by the use of an antipsoric means in subtlest doses also more compatible in similarity to the remaining symptoms." (Introduction to Organon, fn. 8)
3. So it spills blood, often to the brink of death, if the inflammatory fever does not subside, in order to take away this buffy coat or supposed plethora, without suspecting, that the inflammed blood, a product only of the acute fever, only of the morbid immaterial (dynamic) inflammatory-irritation, the latter being the only cause of this great storm in the vascular system, is to be abrogated by the smallest dose of a homogenic (homeopathic) medicine, eg., by a dose of a fine globule moistened with a decillion-fold diluted ACONITE juice, while avoiding vegetable acids, so that the most violent pleuritic fever, with all its threatening occurrents, without blood decrease and without coolants, is turned into health and cured in a few hours (at most 24). (Introduction to the Organon, footnote 11)
4. By an infinite number of trials of all imaginable simple substances used in domestic practice, in a well-defined disease, which shall constantly present the same characters, a true, certainly efficacious, specific remedy for the greater number of individuals and their friends suffering from the same disease might certainly be discovered, though only casu fortuito. But who knows how many centuries the inhabitants of deep valleys were forced to suffer from their goitres before [it was discovered] that ROASTED SPONGE was the best thing for it...
5. It is well known that for many years after its first invasion, the venereal disease was treated in a most unsuccessful manner by the physicians of the schools..., until at last, ... MERCURY was hit upon, and proved itself specific in this dreadful scourge...
6. The intermittent fever endemic in the marshy regions of South America,which has a great resemblance to our own marsh ague, had long been treated by the Peruvians, probably after innumerable trials of other drugs, with CINCHONA BARK, which they found to be the most efficacious remedy, and which was first made known by them as a febrifuge to Europeans in the year 1638.
7. The bad consequences resulting from blows, falls, bruises and strains were long endured, ere chance revealed to the labouring classes who principally suffered from such accidents, the specific virtues of ARNICA in such cases...Thus, after thousands upon thousands of blind trials with innumerable substances upon, perhaps, millions of individuals, the suitable, the specific remedy is at last discovered by accident....which never afterwards belied its specific power
8. ...The constant specific remedies in these few diseases were capable of being discovered by means of trying every imaginable medicinal substance, only because the thing to be cured, the disease, was of a constant character;- they are diseases which always remain the same; some are produced by a miasm which continues the same through all generations, such as the venereal disease; others have the same exciting causes, as the ague of marshy districts, the goitre of the inhabitants of deep valleys and their outlets, and the bruises caused by falls and blows. ...Only for a want of a constant character can we suppose a supply of a constant character. (Examples #4-8 from Examination of the Sources of the Common Materia Medica from Lesser Writings).
9. If one discounts the cases where the empiricism of the common man furnished the ordinary doctors (rather than their inventive art,) with the specific means for a static disease, whereby they could thus directly cure, e.g., venereal chancre disease with mercury, contusion disease with Arnica, intermittent swamp fever with China bark, freshly arisen scabies with sulfur powder, etc. (Introduction to the Organon, para. 161)
10. Among the mishaps which disturb the treatment only in a temporary way, I enumerate: overloading the stomach (this may be remedied by hunger, i.e., by only taking a little thin soup instead of the meal and a little COFFEE);
11. disorder of the stomach from fat meat, especially from eating pork (to be cured by fasting and PULSATILLA),
12. a disorder of the stomach which causes rising from the stomach after eating and especially nausea and inclination to vomit (by highly POTENTIZED ANTIMONIUM CRUDUM);
13. taking cold in the stomach by eating fruit (by smelling of arsenicum); troubles from spirituous liquors (NUX VOMICA);
14. disorder of the stomach with gastric fever, chilliness and cold (BRYONIA ALBA);
15. fright (when the medicine can be given at once, and especially when the fright causes timidity, by poppy-juice (OPIUM);
16. but if aid can only be rendered later, or when vexation is joined with the fright, by ACONITE;
17. but if sadness is caused by the fright, IGNATIA seeds);
18. vexation which causes anger, violence, heat, irritation, by CHAMOMILLA,
19. (but if beside the vexation there is chilliness and coldness of the body, by BRYONIA);
20. vexation with indignation, deep internal mortification (attended with throwing away what was held in the hand, by STAPHISAGRIA);
21. indignation with silent internal mortification (by COLOCYNTHIS);
22. unsuccessful love with quiet grief (by IGNATIA);
23. unhappy love with jealousy (by HYOSCYAMUS);
24. a severe cold (next to keeping the house or the bed) by NUX VOMICA;
25. when diarrhea resulted, by DULCAMARA,
26. or if followed by pains, COFFEA CRUDA,
27. or if followed by fever and heat, by ACONITE;
28. a cold which is followed by suffocative fits, (by IPECACUANHA);
29. colds followed by pains and an inclination to weep, (by COFFEA CRUDA);
30. cold with consequent coryza and loss of the sense of smell and of taste,(by PULSATILLA);
31. overlifting or strains (sometimes by ARNICA, but most certainly by RHUS TOXICODENDRON);
32. contusions and wounds inflicted by blunt instruments (by ARNICA);
33. burning of the skin (by compresses of water mixed with a dilution of highly potentized ARSENICUM, or uninterruped application for hours of alcohol heated by means of very hot water.
34. weakness from loss of fluids and blood, (by CHINA),
35. homesickness with redness of the cheeks, (by CAPSICUM). (Examples #10-35 from Chronic Disease.

Note: Mr. Little objects that I have taken the previous shorter references in Chronic Diseases out of context. He argues that the references (detailed above) are to acute "intercurrent" remedies. And he goes on at some length on this point.

Hahnemann is speaking here of remedies for things that disturb the patient in a temporary way, but which can, nonetheless be treated by medicine. This requires a particular store of medicines. Right after he talks of "the other non-antipsoric store of medicines in cases where epidemic diseases or intermediate diseases" attack chronic patients. Intercurrent they may be, although this term is fairly broad and vague. What is important is that Hahnemann sees a distinct class of diseases and remedies which relate to disease irritations (homogenic).

The argument that 'these are just our old friends the intercurrent remedies' can only be an attempt to confuse (look, there's nothing new here, so we can relax) because it explains nothing. It still does not tell us what is the PRINCIPLE behind the choice of such remedies. If it works, it must have a principle. To say that it is "intercurrent" prescribing explains nothing, it only confuses. Certainly the principle is not the "signs and symptoms of the mistuned body/soul constitution" used by Mr. Little in a "one-size fits all" approach.

The argument about "intercurent remedies" is both incorrect and a red herring, coming from the false dichotomy that Mr. Little seeks to impose on the debate. He cannot let the facts speak for themselves. It is too damaging to his central thesis and uniformitarian worldview.

The truth is that Hahnemann discovered dimensions of disease which had a principles and those principles are the basis for the choice of remedy.

Dimension: Specific Disease Irritation
Relationship: Homogenic
Law: Similia similibus
Principle: Homogenicity - "specific... medicines ... homogenic in their action to the disease irritation" remedies are prescribed to remove the disease on the basis of their similar resonance to the disease irritation, such as Arnica for bruises.
Remedies Action Determined By: Folk experience, provings and clinical evidence.

[ Back to Articles ] [ Top of page ]