- Email: [email protected]
Saving holistic homeopathic medicine from mechanistic scientism—an urgent need
Homeopathy (2003) 92, 161–162 r 2003 The Faculty of Homeopathy doi:10.1016/S1475-4916(03)00039-0, available online at www.sciencedirect.com
DEBATE
Saving holistic homeopathic medicine from mechanistic scientism—an urgent need EK Ledermann* 13 Ardwick Road, London, UK
Introduction The editorial in the January 2003 issue of Homeopathy1 and the report ‘Controversy in homeopathy’2 in America paint a picture of utter confusion in the interpretation of homeopathy in Great Britain and the USA. No matter how often we, as homeopathic doctors, successfully help patients with homeopathic remedies, our academic status will be judged by reports in our official journals. The honest question: ‘Are we looking in the right place?’ posed in the editorial points the way forward. This article presents my diagnosis and treatment of the malaise in present-day homeopathy. The introduction of R Waldo and J-L Torres’ paper in the January issue of Homeopathy 3 forms the basis of my objection: ‘The characterisation of the homeopathic effect through physicochemical concepts and methods is a fundamental requirement in the quest to bring this therapy into the scientific mainstream.’ Without in any way denying the enormous benefits of scientific medicine, it is the wrong place to look for the basis of homeopathic medicine. The right place is indicated in two fundamental works of Hahnemann: ‘the Organon of the Rational Art of Healing’ and ‘Chronic Diseases’. In addition ‘the right place’ which explains the efficacy of the High Potencies can be found in the philosophy of science.
The Organon The message of the Organon is contained in the name of homeopathy which refers to the likeness of the remedy and the patient’s condition, the similimum standing for the greatest likeness of the two factors. It
*Correspondence: Dr EK Ledermann, 13 Ardwick Road, London NW2 2BX, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Received 17 January 2003; accepted 10 March 2003
follows that patients are classified as types of whole people, units of body, mind and spirit. The right homeopathic remedy promotes a healthier state of the integration of these dimensions. A ‘scientific’ remedy does not treat a whole person but acts on a specific organ, say an irregular heartbeat or excessive secretion of gastric acid. This approach is concerned with bodily mechanisms, not with wholeness. Mental diseases are treated with drugs which aim at improving cerebral mechanisms. Adverse drug effects are common in physical and mental illnesses,6 and foreign elements are introduced into the patient’s organism which is not the case with homeopathic remedies. There is no doubt that scientific medicine benefits many patients, but its limitations must be admitted. Millions of patients prefer the holistic approach of homeopathy. The spiritual dimension which characterises the human being in distinction from animals pre-supposes ethical freedom and responsibility. The homeopathic remedy which includes this dimension can help a patient who is suffering from a spiritual illness. Scientific medicine only recognises determinism, not ethical freedom. This is one of the reasons why homeopathy is superior to ‘scientific’ medicine. An illustration of a spiritual illness could be the case of a man who was terrified of making decisions, and making a decision is a supreme manifestation of our ethical freedom. He could not decide whether to sell one of his flats (he was in no way worried about money). When buying his food he could not decide what to buy. Baryta carb is a remedy for irresolution, given in the 200C potency it helped this man. Another man of 36 was convinced that he was so inferior that he could never marry and have children though he earned enough to support a family. He had many sexual affairs with girls. Recently, during a ‘nervous breakdown’ a psychiatrist had helped with psychotropic drugs, but his science could not help this man with his severe spiritual problem. The treatment with a high potency of Anacardium orientale did help this man to trust himself. For a homeopathic doctor, in neither case is the treatment for an impersonal disease called
Debate: homeopathy and scientism EK Ledermann
162
anxiety or depression but for a personal lack of faith in the self.
mental and spiritual dimensions represents the central position in homeopathic treatment.
The position of the high potency Chronic diseases Hahnemann introduced treatment for chronic diseases when he found that the similimum was not able to effect a cure in chronic diseases. Working in the prebacteriological era he was treating ‘miasms’, chronic hereditary conditions. Hahnemann considered psora the most important miasm, maintaining that seven– eights of all chronic diseases were due to it. He identified specific anti-psoric remedies headed by Sulphur and including 46 other remedies. The symptoms of psora include nosebleeds, coughs, pain in various parts of the body, skin eruptions, psychological states such as fears, irritability and changes of mood. Hahnemann considered psora to be an external disease, identical with scabies, as well as an internal disease. As a second miasm, he postulated sycosis or gonorrhoea, to be treated with potencies of Thuja and Nitric acid. The third miasm was syphilis, to be treated with potencies of Mercury. Only in the case of syphilis was Hahnemann correct in assuming a hereditary infection. Certain modern homeopaths identify a miasm as diathesis, others, an allergy or a toxicity. Others have given up the concept of the miasm. Homeopaths have applied the approach of the Chronic Diseases to a number of infectious diseases, prescribing Morbillinum for measles, Scarlatinum for scarlet fever, Influenzinum for influenza, if patients have not recovered from these infections. Drs John Paterson and WE Boyd published a paper in the British Homoeopathic Journal in 1941 in which they claimed that high potencies of diphtherinum and alumen precipitated toxoid convert a positive into a negative Schick test.4 They did not claim that this made immunisation unnecessary. An allergic disease, hay fever, has been successfully treated with a 30C potency of the pollen. This result, confirmed by randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials, represents a very important proof that the highpotency preparations which do not contain any molecules of the named substance have a definite effect and are not purely placebo effects.5 When homeopaths use the disease-specific approach, they do so without joining the ‘scientific mainstream’. The use of high potencies prevents such a link. But it is similimum which provides reference to the bodily,
Homeopathy
Attempts have been made to explain the efficacy of high dilutions in terms of physics. The emphasis is on the diluent which is supposed to be the bearer of the particular remedy. All such efforts have failed and I consider them to be futile. The correct answer lies in understanding the philosophical basis of science. The universe does not consist of atoms, molecules, or other elemental particles which the sciences use for their approach. What the universe consists of, apart from the human mind, is unknowable. Thus, while there no molecules left in these high-potency preparations, it only means that their use dispenses with the scientific framework. If rigorous experiments prove their efficacy, this proof is valid. Sir James Jeans provided a demonstration of the results which occur when scientific concepts are not employed. In his book ‘Physics and Philosophy’ he discusses the electron, an elemental physical concept which has some wave characteristics. He assumes that there are electrons on the planet Sirius, but there are no scientists to observe them. Jeans asks: what happens to the waves in that case? ‘The simple but surprising answer would seem to be that when there is no human knowledge there are no waves. We must always remember that the waves (or molecules) are not part of nature, but of our effort to understand nature’. It seems fitting to me that this definition of the limitations of the use of science forms the conclusion of my attempt to rescue homeopathic theory from an illinformed application of science.
References 1 Fisher P. How does homeopathy work: are we looking in the right place? (Editorial) Homp 2003; 92: 1–2. 2 International press abstracts: Controversy in homeopathy. Homp 2003; 92: 51–52. 3 Waldo R, Torres J-L. Mutual information and the homeopathic effect. Homp 2003; 92: 30–34. 4 Paterson J, Boyd WE. Potency action. A preliminary study of the alternation of the Schick test by a homeopathic potency. Br Hom J 1941; 31: 301–309. 5 Rally DT, Taylor MA, Beattie NGM. Is evidence for homeopathy reproducible? Lancet 1994; 344: 1601–1606. 6 Jeans J. Physics and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1942.
DEBATE
Saving holistic homeopathic medicine from mechanistic scientism—an urgent need EK Ledermann* 13 Ardwick Road, London, UK
Introduction The editorial in the January 2003 issue of Homeopathy1 and the report ‘Controversy in homeopathy’2 in America paint a picture of utter confusion in the interpretation of homeopathy in Great Britain and the USA. No matter how often we, as homeopathic doctors, successfully help patients with homeopathic remedies, our academic status will be judged by reports in our official journals. The honest question: ‘Are we looking in the right place?’ posed in the editorial points the way forward. This article presents my diagnosis and treatment of the malaise in present-day homeopathy. The introduction of R Waldo and J-L Torres’ paper in the January issue of Homeopathy 3 forms the basis of my objection: ‘The characterisation of the homeopathic effect through physicochemical concepts and methods is a fundamental requirement in the quest to bring this therapy into the scientific mainstream.’ Without in any way denying the enormous benefits of scientific medicine, it is the wrong place to look for the basis of homeopathic medicine. The right place is indicated in two fundamental works of Hahnemann: ‘the Organon of the Rational Art of Healing’ and ‘Chronic Diseases’. In addition ‘the right place’ which explains the efficacy of the High Potencies can be found in the philosophy of science.
The Organon The message of the Organon is contained in the name of homeopathy which refers to the likeness of the remedy and the patient’s condition, the similimum standing for the greatest likeness of the two factors. It
*Correspondence: Dr EK Ledermann, 13 Ardwick Road, London NW2 2BX, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Received 17 January 2003; accepted 10 March 2003
follows that patients are classified as types of whole people, units of body, mind and spirit. The right homeopathic remedy promotes a healthier state of the integration of these dimensions. A ‘scientific’ remedy does not treat a whole person but acts on a specific organ, say an irregular heartbeat or excessive secretion of gastric acid. This approach is concerned with bodily mechanisms, not with wholeness. Mental diseases are treated with drugs which aim at improving cerebral mechanisms. Adverse drug effects are common in physical and mental illnesses,6 and foreign elements are introduced into the patient’s organism which is not the case with homeopathic remedies. There is no doubt that scientific medicine benefits many patients, but its limitations must be admitted. Millions of patients prefer the holistic approach of homeopathy. The spiritual dimension which characterises the human being in distinction from animals pre-supposes ethical freedom and responsibility. The homeopathic remedy which includes this dimension can help a patient who is suffering from a spiritual illness. Scientific medicine only recognises determinism, not ethical freedom. This is one of the reasons why homeopathy is superior to ‘scientific’ medicine. An illustration of a spiritual illness could be the case of a man who was terrified of making decisions, and making a decision is a supreme manifestation of our ethical freedom. He could not decide whether to sell one of his flats (he was in no way worried about money). When buying his food he could not decide what to buy. Baryta carb is a remedy for irresolution, given in the 200C potency it helped this man. Another man of 36 was convinced that he was so inferior that he could never marry and have children though he earned enough to support a family. He had many sexual affairs with girls. Recently, during a ‘nervous breakdown’ a psychiatrist had helped with psychotropic drugs, but his science could not help this man with his severe spiritual problem. The treatment with a high potency of Anacardium orientale did help this man to trust himself. For a homeopathic doctor, in neither case is the treatment for an impersonal disease called
Debate: homeopathy and scientism EK Ledermann
162
anxiety or depression but for a personal lack of faith in the self.
mental and spiritual dimensions represents the central position in homeopathic treatment.
The position of the high potency Chronic diseases Hahnemann introduced treatment for chronic diseases when he found that the similimum was not able to effect a cure in chronic diseases. Working in the prebacteriological era he was treating ‘miasms’, chronic hereditary conditions. Hahnemann considered psora the most important miasm, maintaining that seven– eights of all chronic diseases were due to it. He identified specific anti-psoric remedies headed by Sulphur and including 46 other remedies. The symptoms of psora include nosebleeds, coughs, pain in various parts of the body, skin eruptions, psychological states such as fears, irritability and changes of mood. Hahnemann considered psora to be an external disease, identical with scabies, as well as an internal disease. As a second miasm, he postulated sycosis or gonorrhoea, to be treated with potencies of Thuja and Nitric acid. The third miasm was syphilis, to be treated with potencies of Mercury. Only in the case of syphilis was Hahnemann correct in assuming a hereditary infection. Certain modern homeopaths identify a miasm as diathesis, others, an allergy or a toxicity. Others have given up the concept of the miasm. Homeopaths have applied the approach of the Chronic Diseases to a number of infectious diseases, prescribing Morbillinum for measles, Scarlatinum for scarlet fever, Influenzinum for influenza, if patients have not recovered from these infections. Drs John Paterson and WE Boyd published a paper in the British Homoeopathic Journal in 1941 in which they claimed that high potencies of diphtherinum and alumen precipitated toxoid convert a positive into a negative Schick test.4 They did not claim that this made immunisation unnecessary. An allergic disease, hay fever, has been successfully treated with a 30C potency of the pollen. This result, confirmed by randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials, represents a very important proof that the highpotency preparations which do not contain any molecules of the named substance have a definite effect and are not purely placebo effects.5 When homeopaths use the disease-specific approach, they do so without joining the ‘scientific mainstream’. The use of high potencies prevents such a link. But it is similimum which provides reference to the bodily,
Homeopathy
Attempts have been made to explain the efficacy of high dilutions in terms of physics. The emphasis is on the diluent which is supposed to be the bearer of the particular remedy. All such efforts have failed and I consider them to be futile. The correct answer lies in understanding the philosophical basis of science. The universe does not consist of atoms, molecules, or other elemental particles which the sciences use for their approach. What the universe consists of, apart from the human mind, is unknowable. Thus, while there no molecules left in these high-potency preparations, it only means that their use dispenses with the scientific framework. If rigorous experiments prove their efficacy, this proof is valid. Sir James Jeans provided a demonstration of the results which occur when scientific concepts are not employed. In his book ‘Physics and Philosophy’ he discusses the electron, an elemental physical concept which has some wave characteristics. He assumes that there are electrons on the planet Sirius, but there are no scientists to observe them. Jeans asks: what happens to the waves in that case? ‘The simple but surprising answer would seem to be that when there is no human knowledge there are no waves. We must always remember that the waves (or molecules) are not part of nature, but of our effort to understand nature’. It seems fitting to me that this definition of the limitations of the use of science forms the conclusion of my attempt to rescue homeopathic theory from an illinformed application of science.
References 1 Fisher P. How does homeopathy work: are we looking in the right place? (Editorial) Homp 2003; 92: 1–2. 2 International press abstracts: Controversy in homeopathy. Homp 2003; 92: 51–52. 3 Waldo R, Torres J-L. Mutual information and the homeopathic effect. Homp 2003; 92: 30–34. 4 Paterson J, Boyd WE. Potency action. A preliminary study of the alternation of the Schick test by a homeopathic potency. Br Hom J 1941; 31: 301–309. 5 Rally DT, Taylor MA, Beattie NGM. Is evidence for homeopathy reproducible? Lancet 1994; 344: 1601–1606. 6 Jeans J. Physics and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1942.