Homoeopathy is regarded, at least by the homoeopathic profession, as a science and an art. In its practice we are more concerned with the latter in our efforts to relieve and, if possible, cure the sick. In the earliest days of homoeopathic practice, in the days of Hahnemann and his followers, with the increasing number of remedies subjected to proving and, consequently, the growth of the homoeopathic materia medica, finding the remedy became increasingly difficult. As a result, indices, designated as repertories, were created by such men as von Boenninghausen and Jahr. A repertory is literally a storehouse, a treasury or a repository.
The repertories which have been constructed by homoeopathic physicians ever since Hahnemanns time are numerous as well as varied. Some of them have been mere compilations of the symptoms taken from other repertories and many, which are of much practical value, relate to special conditions of illness. Among the latter we have such valuable works as The Homoeopathic Therapeutics of Diarrhoea, written by Dr. James B. Bell in 1869 and published by Boericke and Tafel in 1870. A second edition followed after a lapse of twelve years, edited by Dr. Bells successor, Dr. W. T. Laird of Augusta, Maine. William P. Wesselhoeft, Adolph Lippe and E.A. Farrington aided in the work. A third edition was published by Dr. Bell in 1888, with additions of other remedies and observations by such well-known physicians as Samuel A. Kimball, J.G. Allen and William Jefferson Guernsey. The third is the last edition published.
In addition to the above named repertories there have been many others of a special nature and of the general repertories the most valuable of all is undoubtedly that of James Tyler Kent, to which the more able and outstanding Hahnemannians of his day contributed. Both von Boenninghausen and Kent are designed for repertorial analysis and, as a pre-requisite to their use, case- taking is of the highest importance; unless this is done, these repertories have little practical value. It has been said, and with much justification, that a case well taken is a case half cured. Case-taking is in itself an art and one which requires patience, understanding and good judgment on the part of the physician. Its methods are quite different from those of the diagnostician and frequently require the subtleties of a cross- examining lawyer.
Patients differ in their intelligence and in their understanding of homoeopathy and the presence or absence of these qualities must be kept in mind by the prescribing physician. Broadly considered, where symptoms are expressive of pathological states, they are of little value yet, nevertheless, must be considered, more especially with reference to the question of curability or its opposite. Thus, it is readily understood that any repertory must be used with intelligence and understanding.
It is likely that the majority of homoeopathic physicians do not resort to the repertory, largely for the reason that so many are engaged in the numerous specialities and also for lack of time. It takes time to complete a repertorial analysis, even if a card-index repertory such as that of Field or Boger is employed. But these, also, depend upon accurate taking of the case. To some, Boenninghausens repertory gives the best results in the search for the elusive similimum, but comparatively few physicians know how to use it.
No matter which method of arriving at the truly indicated remedy is employed, it makes little difference, just so that we are successful in curing the patient; many a case can be prescribed for without any reference to the repertory and this is especially true when we are dealing with an acute case, in which, as a rule, the symptoms stand out boldly, speaking, as it were, the language of the sick man.
Our provings have done this too, but perhaps unfortunately, have been cut up into anatomical sections which are likely to be confusing. How the individual becomes and grows sick corresponds quite naturally to the sickened prover and both pictures are likely to be similar. If we always knew these pictures, we would be better off. With the acute remedies we are very likely well acquainted, knowing their symptom pictures so well. But with the chronic case the matter is not so simple.
Other methods of finding the remedy have been evolved and are of a mechanical nature, such as the Emanometer of Dr. William E. Boyd of Glasgow, Scotland, whose successful results with the Emanometer have been acknowledged by Lord Horder and other members of the British Medical Association. In our own country are a number of homoeopathic physicians who have used and are using specimens of dried blood with their electronic devices to find the needful remedy in any given case.
The late Dr. Guy Beckley Stearns of New York had his own methods of discovering the similimum and, it is stated, with success. Dr. George R. Henshaw of Montclair, New Jersey, has for a number of years engaged in personal research with his “flocculation test”; his successful results have been very remarkable; however, the test takes considerable time to perform and this is its disadvantage.
What is needed in the homoeopathic school is a mechanical electronic device, a machine which is able to arrive at and definitely point out the most similar remedy required in any given case. No doubt this assertion sounds fantastic, but in the light of the experimentation now engaged in by a number of earnest, scientific physicians of the homoeopathic school it should and must be seriously regarded. In a report by the late Dr. Fred B. Morgan of Clinton. Iowa, Co-Chairman of the Research Committee of The American Institute of Homoeopathy, he makes the following statements:.
The choosing of the homoeopathic remedy by mechanical means still holds a strong hope for the future. As an interpolation may I say that I am not at all sure that “electronic” is the proper word to use in regard to this method, but it is as certain as anything can be that this energy exists. This energy is as positive as gravity and like gravity some laws are known in regard to it, but like gravity we do not know exactly what it is. Possibly if we called it “X-energy” we would be on safer ground than to label it “electronic”. Of this we are certain, it is the same energy as Hahnemanns “dynamis”. And this is enough for our purpose. We have already found the fixed resonance ratings of 680 homoeopathic remedies by means of this “X-energy” and have been able to prescribe successfully by this means.
The method is understandable. The resonance vibrations of the remedy have been found and recorded. When we have a blood specimen that has the same resonance vibrations we know we have the correct remedy because it complies with the law, “similia, similibus curentur”. This promises a great advance in homoeopathy, and opens an extensive field for further investigations. The great problem now is to get an instrument for general use. Those who are working on this phase of the problem seem confident that this will be done. At present, instruments can be produced that are accurate for those operators who have a properly conditioned sense of touch. There are no instruments now that visualize the results of resonance findings. Skilled radionic engineers assure me that some such instrument will be produced.
Work is being done at the present time to accomplish this end. Certainly there are those who say it cannot be done. Of course, they are the ones who are doing nothing. Until the reactions are made objective, the method is not suitable for general use. We already know that the correct homoeopathic remedy can be chosen by means of the recorded resonance ratings and the sense of touch. It is not advisable that any doctor go into the building of one of these instruments. That is the job of a highly trained radionic engineer. A doctor had better stick to the treatment of patients and leave the construction of these instruments to those who know the essentials of the apparatus.
We do not have the money to develop the visualization of these reactions, but we do have hopes of interesting some engineering company in the project. The necessary preliminary work would be expensive. One of these instruments will not only point to the remedy but will indicate the proper potency, and tell when a change of potency or remedy is indicated. I hope homoeopathy will turn the corner that leads the way to the scientific establishment of homoeopathy. All instruments made will have to give exactly similar ratings, and then a real homoeopathic mechanical materia medica can be built that will wonderfully supplement the materia medica now existing.
I have quoted at length from Dr. Morgans remarkable report, deeply impressed, as I am, with its great importance and having known its author so well. Those who knew him were absolutely assured of his sincerity and scientific spirit devoted, as this was, to the development and furtherance of homoeopathic principles and practice. As we all know, putting aside all wishful thinking and realistically facing hard facts, homoeopathy has very definitely been losing ground in the United States. As a School of Medicine, looked upon as a cult or sect. we are not advancing as we ought to and should. We possess a scientific truth, a method of therapy based upon the law of symptom similarity, a law which has proved its success when correctly applied.
American Homeopathy Doctor.
Rabe graduated from the New York Homeopathic Medical College and trained under Timothy Field Allen and William Tod Helmuth.
Rabe was President of the International Hahnemannian Association, editor in chief of the Homeopathic Recorder, and he wrote Medical Therapeutics for daily reference. Rabe was Dean and Professor of Homeopathic Therapeutics at the New York Homeopathic Medical College.