Geschichten
aus der Homöopathie
http://www.widesky.de/Widesky-Ecke/Gute-Nacht-Geschichten.html
Natalie Robins: the gruesome practice of medicine in Europe and
“The knives that
were once used by doctors to drain blood from the bodies of men, women, and
children were folding triple-bladed instruments with bone handles and highly
polished sheaths…Always nearby was a shallow bowl—plain
or ornate with
delicate flowers or birds—to catch the cascading blood as it flowed
from the diseased
bodies. The pain of multiple incisions in the scalp, neck,
wrists, ankles,
back, penis, vagina, and forty other sites was invariably
excruciating. Just
as often, the bites of leeches were used as an alternative to
knives. Those
whosurvived their bloodletting sometimes got better…
“And if the removal
of enough blood to cause the patient to lose consciousness—
sometimes as much
as 70% of the person’s blood—didn’t bring about a cure,there
was also mercury,
arsenic, or lead, which purged the body of its excessesif they
didn’t first poison
the patient, or blistering, pulling teeth, sweating, ice,starvation,
darkness, and
silence. Illness was always dreaded; the populartreatments for it
were hell on earth.
Even babies were bled“.
Remedies could be
nearly as bizarre as they were brutal. Lethargy often was treated
with massive doses
of whiskey, wine, opium, or roast beef. The words of the 17th century
playwright Moliere
were almost as true in the 18th and 19th centuries. “Nearly all men die
of their remedies
and not of their illnesses“.
In 1792, Austrian
Emperor Leopold II was bled to death by his doctors, who sliced
open his veins four
times in 24 hours. Hahnemann was withering in his contempt for
Leopold’s doctors.
“Science pales before this!” he wrote in an article published in
George Washington
met a similar fate seven years later. After developing a severe
sore throat and
cold, he was bled four times. One young doctor recommended a new
procedure, a
tracheotomy, which had been successfully used in
would have saved
conventional
treatment, reportedly with
By this time,
Hahnemann had given up medicine in disgust. He believed that a good
diet, good hygiene,
and good living conditions were essential for good health. He
believed patients
often recovered on their own. His beliefs were ignored and ridiculed.
So he made a living
as a translator and chemist.
Then came
Hahnemann’s first “
written by William
Cullen, a medical professor at the
Hahnemann read
about the use of Peruvian bark, also called cinchona or china, for the
treatment of
malaria. Quinine, which became the wonder drug of the 19th century, was
derived from
cinchona.
1
Experimenting on
himself, Hahnemann took a dose of cinchona. And he quickly
began to develop
malaria symptoms. So cinchona could cure people who were sick with
malaria. And it
could produce malaria symptoms in healthy people.
Aha! Well,
actually, I’m not sure most people, even those as brilliant as
Hahnemann, could
invent an entire new school of medicine from such a small discovery.
But he did. It was
based on the Law of Similars: “A substance that causes, in a healthy
person, symptoms
similar to those of a disease state, can cure a sick person of that
disease. Or—“Let
Likes Be Cured By Likes“.
In some respects,
Hahnemann wasn’t reinventing the wheel. Hippocrates
hypothesized that
cures could result from the actions of either similars or opposites. A
smallpox vaccine
had been invented in England in 1776. Vaccines, which used a small
amount of the virus
to produce immunity to the full-fledged disease caused by the virus,
fit snugly within
the parameters of “Like Cures Like“. So do modern treatments for
allergies, which
utilize small doses of the allergens to build up a person’s immunity to
them.
But Hahnemann took
his theory to the extreme. You might even say he ran right off
a cliff with it.
Hahnemann’s sole
focus was on the patient’s symptoms. He couldn’t care less about
the cause of an
illness. Causation was simply irrelevant to the theory of “Like Cures
Like“. The cure
would always be found by matching the symptoms induced by a
particular remedy
in a healthy person with the symptoms displayed by the patient.
Hahnemann
approached a patient like a jailor carrying a massive key chain. One key—
and only one
key—would turn the lock and free the patient from the jail cell of his
illness. And
whenever he encountered a patient with different symptoms, he needed to
find a different
key in order to unlock the door.
Ingesting small
amounts of diluted herbs, plants, minerals, and animals, Hahnemann
and some volunteers
continued to experiment on themselves, monitoring the symptoms
produced by each
substance. The results of about 120 of these “provings,” as
Hahnemann called
his experiments, were collected in a book, the Materia Medica.
Hahnemann also
included information from written accounts of accidental poisonings. It
was particularly
appropriate to do so, since many of the provings involved poisonous
substances such as
arsenic and belladonna. But Hahnemann believed nothing was toxic if
taken in small
doses.
This belief led
Hahnemann to another “Eureka!” moment. Poisons had to be diluted
in order to take
them safely. Hahnemann began to dilute all of his remedies. Then he
began to “succuss”
them, shaking the diluted substance vigorously. Hahnemann believed
that homeopathic
remedies work by triggering the Vital Spark or Vital Force in the
patient, which
heals by restoring balance to the body. The shaking of the remedies was
aimed at awaking
the “slumbering hidden dynamic powers” contained in the remedy.
Weird? You ain’t
heard nothing yet. Hahnemann believed that remedies become
more potent with
successive dilutions. Under his theory of “potentization,” the “weaker”
the remedy, the
more powerful it becomes. Remedies often were diluted to the extent
that not even a
single molecule of the substance remained in the dilution.
1
As Natalie Robins
writes in Copeland’s Cure, “Homeopaths believed that the very
shadows—or
memory—of the original substance was enough to effect
healing…potenization
enabled remedies to touch and effect the energetic realm of the
Vital Force—the
place where disease arises and cure must take place“. In addition,
Hahnemann
speculated that long-term diseases were caused by a “psora,” which he
defined as an itch
produced by a negative spirit.
At this point,
critics of homeopathy, not to mention proponents of logic, pull the
cord and get off
the bus. Invisible remedies? Diluted water that “remembers” what was
in it? Who could
possibly believe such nonsense?
Millions of people,
as it turned out, who were sickened, literally and figuratively, by
the conventional
medicine of the time. By the early 1800’s, Hahnemann was practicing
homeopathy and
railing against “old school medicine“. In 1810, he published the
Organon Of The
Medical Art, a textbook on homeopathy. The medical establishment
called him a
“daring revolutionist” and an “eccentric troublemaker”.
The typhoid fever
epidemic of 1813 cemented Hahnemann’s reputation as a guru of
alternative
medicine. As thousands perished around the city of Leipzig, Hahnemann
treated 180
patients with homeopathic remedies and lost just two of them.
A star was born.
The medical establishment fought back. Doctors and druggists
harassed Hahnemann.
He was charged with selling illegal remedies in 1820 and cast out
of the big city.
Hahnemann fled to a small town in eastern Germany. But his fame grew
and doctors,
students, and patients from around Europe flocked to see him.
Hahnemann was the
equivalent of a rock star, an anti-establishment bad boy. In the
evening, as Amy
Lansky writes in Impossible Cure, a circle of disciples would gather at
Hahnemann’s feet.
Dressed in a gaudy dressing gown, yellow stockings, and a black
velvet cap,
Hahnemann would puff on a long Turkish pipe and dispense pearls of wisdom
to his devotees.
His
made-for-the-movies life featured a particularly happy ending. In
1830, when
Hahnemann was 75,
his wife died. Four years later, a beautiful, wealthy, socially
prominent artist
and poet, Melanie d’Hervilly, journeyed from Paris for treatment from
Hahnemann after
reading the Organon Of The Medical Art. She then became his student
and much more. The
34-year-old artist and the 79-year-old doctor fell head over heels in
love. Hahnemann and
d’Hervilly married, moved to Paris, and established a thriving
homeopathic clinic,
treating luminaries such as Paginini and Balzac.
Hahnemann died in
1843, but his reputation was just beginning to blow up in the
United States. In
1844, the American Institute of Homeopathy was founded. Partly in
response to the
growing popularity of homeopathy, the American Medical Association
was established in
1847.
And the battle was
joined. In the long, nasty war between conventional and
alternative
medicine, homeopathy often has been on the front lines.
The AMA wasted
little time in going after the upstart. It branded homeopathy as
“alien” and as a
“delusion,” a form of medicine practiced by imposters who believed in
miracles. It also
mounted campaigns against other forms of alternative medicine,
including
naturopaths, chiropractors, and osteopaths.
1
But the AMA’s
campaign didn’t stop millions of Americans from flocking to
homeopathic
practitioners. Clergymen recommended homeopathy from their pulpits.
Women and children
loved the “sugar doctor“. (Homeopathic remedies were usually
absorbed into sugar
water and taken in the form of sugar pellets.) And why wouldn’t
they? It was a
no-brainer. Do I want a doctor to slice open my child’s veins and splash
his blood into a
basin? Or do I want to give little Susie or Timmy a sugar pellet?
Homeopathy became
known as the “people’s medicine“. It was readily available
and it was
inexpensive. As Robins describes it, homeopathy was “the first worldwide,
systematic option
to bloodletting. Because of its painlessness, lack of side effects, and
relative
simplicity, homeopathy caught on like wildfire in America“.
By 1900, there were
22 homeopathic colleges and 14,000 homeopathic doctors in
America. The war
between the medical establishment and the rebels waxed and waned in
intensity, but
never ceased. Prominent Americans took sides. Oliver Wendell Holmes
denounced provings
as random experiments devoid of scientific validity. But Mark
Twain wrote,
“Homeopathy forced the old school doctor to stir around and learn
something of a
rational nature about his business…” Twain was “grateful that
homeopathy survived
the attempts of allopaths [conventional doctors] to destroy it“.
President William
McKinley, who used homeopathic doctors, was instrumental in the
erection of a
statue of Hahnemann within viewing distance of the White House.
One of the most
influential advocates of homeopathy was Royal Copeland (1868-
1938), the hero of
Copeland’s Cure. An eye surgeon who became fascinated by
homeopathy after
traveling to Europe, Copeland became the Health Commissioner of
New York City. He
cemented his reputation as a healer during the flu epidemic of 1918,
which ravaged other
cities far more severely than New York. He achieved nationwide
celebrity status by
penning a syndicated newspaper column called “Your Health,” which
attracted 11
million readers. In 1922, he was elected to the U.S. Senate.
Copeland was a
subtle proponent of homeopathy, a skilled politician who walked a
tightrope between
those who extolled and those who excoriated the practice. He
described
homeopathy as “one of many methods of treating sickness“. Copeland
attempted to
position it as a medical specialty rather than a distinct and separate practice
of healing that had
little in common with conventional medicine.
And he was a harsh
critic of some practitioners of alternative medicine, branding
chiropractors as a
“public menace and peril” to both patients and the community at large
after some
chiropractors “treated” typhoid fever and tuberculosis victims with
chiropractic
methods, thus exhibiting little or no understanding that such communicable
diseases were
spread by germs.
Copeland’s crowning
political achievement was his sponsorship of the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic
Act of 1938. The bill was sparked by the death of 100 people who
had taken a strep
throat medication containing diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in
antifreeze. Copeland
persuaded his Senate colleagues to pass the first bill requiring drug
companies to
disclose active ingredients and post warning labels on their products.
Homeopathic
remedies were treated as the equivalent of drugs under the Act, which gave
homeopathy a certain
stamp of legitimacy. The Act, a forerunner of the modern FDA,
remains Copeland’s
enduring legacy. He died just four days after its passage.
1
But the heyday of
homeopathy was drawing to a close. Conventional medicine was
advancing with
giant strides. Homeopathic and other of alternative medicine
practitioners
continued to be besieged by the AMA and other establishment figures,
branded as “pseudo
scientists,” “freaks,” “unconscionable quacks,” and “fakers“.
The conduct of
snake oil salesman within the ranks of alternative medicine also
undercut its
credibility. Some naturopaths claimed that they could cure cancer “by
natural processes
without medicine or surgery“. Some homeopaths in New York
recommended
“autotherapy”—the use of remedies made from bodily fluids ranging from
diluted blood to
pus to spit to tears, to ear gook.
Homeopaths
splintered into competing camps. Unicists, an orthodox sect, preached
the original gospel
of Hahnemann, who insisted on using only one remedy at a time.
Kentians, a reform
group, recommended one high potency remedy for mental and
emotional symptoms
and one low potency remedy for physical symptoms. Pluralists
prescribed taking
several remedies in a precise order. Complexists prescribed taking
several remedies at
the same time.
By the middle of
the 20th century, homeopathy had almost disappeared in America,
although it
continued to attract practitioners and patients in other parts of the world.
(England has always
been a homeopathic bastion, in large part because the Royal Family
has employed a
homeopathic physician for generations.)
While the 60’s
brought a renewed interest in alternative medicine, for better and for
worse—Robins writes
that “offbeat, unconventional care became increasingly faddish”—
homeopathy lingered
in the shadows.
A watershed moment
for homeopathy occurred in 1985, creating reverberations that
continue to this
day. French research scientist Jacques Benveniste claimed to have proof
that highly diluted
homeopathic remedies—so high that not a single detectable molecule
of the substance
remained—left a “memory” in the diluted water that measurably
changed the
molecular composition of the water. His findings were written up in the
respected journal
Nature, and they created a furor. When investigators from Nature tried
and failed to
replicate the results claimed by Benveniste, it left homeopathy with a black
eye that remains
visible.
And it separated
the True Believers in homeopathy and the Contemptuous Critics of
homeopathy into
fiercely antagonistic camps. Call it an ugly fight between the
Counterculture and
the Establishment. Or, if you’ll indulge me in a bit of hyperbole, a
bitter feud between
the Hippies and the Squares.
Dr. Murray
Gell-Mann, winner of the Nobel Prize in 1969 for his discovery of
quarks, says it is
“garbage physics” to claim there is a “memory” left in water that no
longer contains a
single molecule of a homeopathic remedy. True Believes such as Amy
Lanksy, author of
Impossible Cure, cites Benveniste’s experiments as proof of the
scientific validity
of homeopathy. But the True Believers of homeopathy continued to
lose ground. By
2001, insurers were covering chiropractic care in 50 states, acupuncture
in seven, and
naturopathic treatments in two. Homeopathy wasn’t covered by insurers in
a single state. It
still isn’t.
1
Despite the
grudging acceptance of some types of alternative treatments,
conventional
medicine is still spooked by and suspicious of alternative medicine in
general. In 2002,
Jonathan Quick, director of drug and medicine policy at the World
Health
Organization, which was described by the New York Times as the “global
watchdog over
unconventional medicine,” pleaded for a truce between “uninformed
skeptics who don’t
believe in anything, and uncritical enthusiasts who don’t care about
the data. We want
to convince the skeptics that some things work, and make the
enthusiasts more
cautious because it can kill them“.
Makes sense. Yet in
many cases the Hippies and Squares continue to view each
other with fear and
loathing.
Consider the flap
over the appointment of Dr. James Gordon in 2000 to lead Bill
Clinton’s White
House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine. The
purpose of the commission,
the first of its kind, was to evaluate “the great potential and
possible perils
associated with the use of CAM“.
Gordon is a
psychiatrist who founded the Center for Mind/Body Medicine in
Washington D.C.
He’s a faculty member at Georgetown Medical School and the author
of 10 books about
alternative medicine. But his appointment to head the White House
commission sent the
Squares into a hissy fit. Steven Barrett’s quackwatch.com blasted
Gordon for
volunteering at the Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic in the 60’s—“helping ease
young seekers
through their experimentation with drugs“. If cavorting with actual
hippies wasn’t bad
enough, Gordon was also criticized for his interest in dynamic
meditation, a form
of dance involving whirling and spinning, and his fascination with
U.F.O.s.
An exasperated
Gordon fired back at the Squares, accusing CAM opponents of
possessing “a
McCarthyite mindset—the inquisitioner’s mind, not the scientific mind.
There’s a lack of
thoughtfulness in that approach—knee-jerk is the right word“.
Gordon may be right
regarding the reaction of the Squares to alternative medicine in
general. But the
old school docs have sound reasons to question the validity of
homeopathy, with
its weird theories and oddball practitioners. Hahnemann completed
the 6th edition of
the Organon Of The Medical Art way back in 1842. It is, writes Amy
Lansky, “still the
most comprehensive text on the principles of homeopathy to this day“.
Is that something
to brag about? Imagine if an M.D. pulled out a 160-year-old text
to diagnose and
treat a patient who complained of stomach pains or a lump in his armpit.
He’d be laughed out
of the profession.
“Hey doc, haven’t
you learned anything in the last century or two? Sure, give me
some of those
leeches you’ve got in that jar. And slice open a vein or two while you’re at
it“.
Lansky claims that
Hahnemann was a “scientist in the truest sense of the word“.
Maybe in his own
time. But today his teachings appear to be the work of a mad scientist.
Homeopathy seems
mired in the past, lost in a bygone era, suffused with ignorance,
superstition and
mysticism.
And yet. Fifteen
million Americans use homeopathic remedies. The global
popularity of
homeopathy is steadily rising, particularly in Europe and Asia. Why? For a
1
very practical
reason--many remedies work. Clinical trials in Europe in the 1980’s
indicated that
homeopathy was at least mildly effective for conditions ranging from
arthritis to flu to
hay fever to gall bladder problems, to fibromyalgia.
You can buy
homeopathic remedies at health food stores, of course, but also at
Safeway and
Walgreens. Asked to recommend some useful homeopathic remedies for
everyday injuries
and illnesses, Todd Rowe reels off 14.
Geschichte
der Potenzabstufungen Posologie
Apis: This article appeared in 1866 in The Elements of a New
Materia Medica and Therapeutics.
A lad, aged about
12 years, had been afflicted for several months with ascites [accumulation of
fluid in the abdominal cavity] and hydrothorax [accumulation of fluid in the
lung cavity].
He had been treated
for some three months by allopathic physicians first for dysentery, followed by
ascites, and afterwards for several months by a homeopathic physician. No
permanent benefit resulted from either mode of medication, and the symptoms
finally became so urgent that I was called in consultation, and tapping was at
once resorted to in order to save the patient from imminent danger. Appropriate
homeopathic remedies were again prescribed, but without arresting the onward
course of the malady. The patient commenced to fill up again with great
rapidity.
The secretion of
urine was nearly suspended, the skin was dry and hot, pulse rapid and weak,
respiration short and difficult, great tenderness of the abdomen, dryness of
the mouth and throat, thirst, excessive restlessness and anxiety, short,
irritating cough, and an almost entire inability to sleep.
At this stage of
the case a wandering Indian woman - one of the few survivors of the Narragansett
tribe - suggested to the family the use of a honey-bee every night and morning.
She enclosed the
bees in a covered tin pail, and placed them in a heated oven until they were
killed, and then after powdering them, administered one in syrup every night
and morning.
After the lapse of
about twenty-four hours the skin became softer and less hot, the respiration
less difficult and more free, the pulse slower and more developed, and there
was a decided
increase in the
quantity of urine. From this time the symptoms continued steadily to improve,
the dropsical effusion diminished day by day, until at the expiration of a few
weeks, the patient was entirely cured.
This is the first
cure of dropsy by Apis which was ever reported … From this empirical fact -
this usu in morbus - I perceived that the profession was as yet unacquainted
with a powerful remedial agent, and accordingly commenced a series of provings
and of clinical trials with it …
Blatt-o: Ein an Asthma leidende
Mann (Indien) trank Wasser, worin eine Kakerlake gefallen war. Danach besserte
sich sein Asthma.
http://www.remedia.at/homoeopathie/Causticum/causticumgrimm.html
Caust is most challenging. I [John Morgan] have made this remedy 5x in
the last 11 yrs with 3 successes and 2 complete failures. It is by far the most
complicated and involved process of all Hahnemann’s special remedies, involving
hazardous chemical reactions and distillation apparatus which needs constant
care and attention. It is also the one remedy for which the final chemical
composition has been the subject of debate and it is still not known what
Causticum actually is. Even before Hahnemann’s death it was controversial. In
1835 a chemist called Griesselich followed Hahnemann’s instructions to the
letter but failed to reproduce the remedy concluding that there was no such
thing as Causticum. He offered a prize of 12 ducats to anyone who could clarify
its chemical nature - an offer which was not taken up by anyone. The recorded
attempts of other chemists, during Hahnemann’s lifetime, and the analysis of
different preparations from different manufacturers, more recently, has
revealed variable and inconclusive results. Also chemically there are good
reasons why it should be nothing other than distilled water which was what
Griesselich’s experiments mostly produced.
To
try and unravel this mystery we must look at the preparation in detail, in the
Causticum monograph in Chronic Diseases. I will go through it step by step to
explain the chemical changes.
Lime, in the state of marble, owes its insolubility
in water and its mildness to an acid of the lowest order which is combined with
it; when heated to red heat the marble allows this acid to escape as a gas. Hahnemann is describing the liberation
of carbon dioxide (CO2) from marble when it is heated and its transformation
from a hard insoluble form into a soft and water soluble substance which is
calcium oxide (CaO). His use of the word 'lime' to describe marble relates to
limestone, from which marble is derived and not to the modern chemical
definition of 'lime' or 'quicklime' which is calcium oxide. Carbon dioxide is
an acidic gas and will make carbonic acid (H2CO3) when dissolved in water.
During this process the marble, as burned lime, has
received (besides the latent heat) another substance into its composition,
which substance, unknown to chemistry, gives to it its caustic property as well
as its solubility in the water, whereby we obtain lime-water.
From
this statement is seems that Hahnemann did not know the chemical composition of
calcium oxide which is formed after heating marble or any other calcium
carbonate such as egg or oyster
shells.
Calcium oxide is caustic, can create burns on the skin and reacts quite
violently with water giving off much heat creating lime water, a solution of
calcium hydroxide Ca(OH)2, which has
alkaline
properties.
This substance, though not itself an acid, gives to
it its caustic virtue, and by adding a fluid acid (which will endure fire)
which then combines with the lime by its closer affinity, the watery caustic
(Hydras caustici) is separated by distillation.
This
passage describes the reaction of the alkaline quicklime with a heated acid to
create the
watery Causticum which is recovered by distillation.
Two
pounds of white marble has to be heated to red heat to effect the necessary
chemical change
by
driving off the carbon dioxide as follows:
CaCO3
+ fire (heat) = CaO + CO2
dip this piece into a vessel of distilled water for
about one minute, then lay it in a dry dish, in which it will
soon turn into powder with the development of much
heat and its peculiar odour called lime vapour.
When
the burnt marble, now quicklime CaO, is put into water it fizzes quite
dramatically giving
off
heat and hydrating to form calcium hydroxide some of which, in solution, steams
to create the
vapour
Hahnemann mentions.
The
formula is as follows: CaO + H2O = Ca(OH) 2 + heat
Of this fine powder take two ounces and mix with it
in a warmed porcelain triturating bowl a solution of
two ounces of bisulphate of potash, (potassium
bisulphate KHSO4) which has been heated to red heat,
melted, cooled again and then pulverised and
dissolved in two ounces of boiling hot water.
Potassium
bisulphate is an acid salt with some water in its crystals. Just why Hahnemann
melts it to red heat and cools it again is unclear. Perhaps in his day it was
only available in hard
lump
form instead of the modern fine crystals and needed this treatment to make it a
quickly dissolving powder. It melts easily at red heat, is dried by this
heating and easily dissolves
in
hot water. Another possible reason for heating is to bake the crystals so
ensuring that no more than two ounces of water and two ounces of the two solids
are present in the final mixture so
that
all of it can react completely as per the following formula: Ca(OH)2+ KHSO4 +
H2O = KOH + CaSO4 + 2H2O
The
thick, white paste formed by this mixture of components is just fluid enough to
be pourable though needs a spatula to put it all in the retort. The hydrated
calcium sulphate so formed is
commonly
known as Plaster of Paris hence its insoluble pasty quality and the potassium
hydroxide formed is in the solution which binds the mass.
This thickish mixture is put into a small glass
retort, to which the helm is attached with a wet bladder; into
the tube of the helm is inserted a receiver half
submerged in water; the retort is warmed by the gradual
approach of a charcoal fire below and all the fluid
is then distilled over by applying the suitable heat.
The
glass apparatus Hahnemann used was the well known distillation retort known as
the alembic. They are difficult to find these days but are commonly seen in old
chemistry or
alchemical
books. A glass bulb elongates into the conical helm which ends in a small
spout. The absence of modern water cooled glass condensers in the early 1800's
gave rise to the use of a pigs
bladder
full of water to cool and condense the distillate vapour as it rose from the
heated glass bulb. The receiving bottle is attatched to the helm, with a
moistened pig's bladder, to create a
porous
seal and is also cooled to complete the liquefaction of any uncondensed vapour.
Using gradual heat, as the charcoal fire infers, it takes many hours (4-6) to
completely distil all the liquid
and
it is important that it is heated to dryness. My experience up to now has been
with the use of modern distillation equipment, rather than the alembic, which I
feel physically mimics the
properties
of the original adequately although cannot replace the authentic ritual of the
real thing with all its beautiful subtleties. I'm sure that I will have more
experiences of this remedy
preparation
each time getting even closer to the impossible goal of perfectly repeating
Hahnemann's own remedy.
The distilled fluid
will be about an ounce and a half of watery clearness, containing in
concentrated form the substance mentioned above, i.e. Causticum;
It smells like the
lye of caustic potash. On the back part of the tongue the caustic tastes very
astringent, and in the throat burning; it freezes only in a lower degree
of cold than water,
and it hastens the putrefaction of animal substances immersed in it.
When muriate of
Baryta is added, the Causticum shows no sign of sulphuric acid, and on adding
oxalate of ammonia it shows no trace of lime.
A
dictionary definition of 'lye' is ' the technical term for the alkaline liquor
obtained by leaching wood ashes with water commonly used for washing and in
soap making; more generally the
common
name for any strong alkaline solution or solid such as sodium or potassium
hydroxides.'
The
chemical tests mentioned at the end, using barium chloride, shows there is no
presence of sulphate ions and ammonium oxalate shows there are no calcium ions
present in Causticum. The
physical properties mentioned, of freezing point and putrefaction, are
common characteristics of caustic alkalis.
The Preparation
Take a piece of freshly burned lime of about two pounds,
Two pounds of white marble has to be heated to red heat to effect the necessary
chemical change by driving off the carbon dioxide as follows:
CaCO3 + fire (heat) = CaO + CO2
dip this piece into a vessel of distilled water for about one minute, then lay
it in a dry dish, in which it will soon turn into powder with the development
of much heat and its peculiar odour called lime vapour.
When the burnt marble, now quicklime CaO, is put into water it fizzes quite
dramatically giving off heat and hydrating to form calcium hydroxide some of
which, in solution, steams to create the vapour Hahnemann mentions. The formula
is as follows:
CaO + H2O = Ca(OH) 2 + heat
Of this fine powder take two ounces and mix with it in a warmed porcelain
triturating bowl a solution of two ounces of bisulphate of potash, (potassium
bisulphate KHSO4) which has been heated to red heat, melted, cooled again and
then pulverised and dissolved in two ounces of boiling hot water.
Potassium bisulphate is an acid salt with some water in its crystals.
Just why Hahnemann melts it to red heat and cools it again is unclear. Perhaps
in his day it was only available in hard lump form instead of the modern fine
crystals and needed this treatment to make it a quickly dissolving powder. It
melts easily at red heat, is dried by this heating and easily dissolves in hot
water. Another possible reason for heating is to bake the crystals so ensuring
that no more than two ounces of water and two ounces of the two solids are
present in the final mixture so that all of it can react completely as per the
following formula:
Ca(OH)2+ KHSO4 + H2O = KOH + CaSO4 + 2H2O
The thick, white paste formed by this mixture of components is just
fluid enough to be pourable though needs a spatula to put it all in the retort.
The hydrated calcium sulphate so formed is commonly known as Plaster of Paris
hence its insoluble pasty quality and the potassium hydroxide formed is in the
solution which binds the mass.
This thickish mixture is put into a small glass retort, to which the helm is
attached with a wet bladder; into the tube of the helm is inserted a receiver
half submerged in water; the retort is warmed by the gradual approach of a
charcoal fire below and all the fluid is then distilled over by applying the
suitable heat.
The distilled fluid
will be about an ounce and a half of watery clearness, containing in
concentrated form the substance mentioned above, i.e. Causticum;
It smells like the lye of caustic potash. On the back part of the tongue the
caustic tastes very astringent, and in the throat burning; it freezes only in a
lower degree of cold than water, and it hastens the putrefaction of animal
substances immersed in it.
When muriate of Baryta is added, the Causticum shows no sign of sulphuric acid,
and on adding oxalate of ammonia it shows no trace of lime.
A dictionary definition of ‘lye: ‘the technical term
for the alkaline liquor obtained by leaching wood ashes with water commonly
used for washing and in soap making; more generally the common name for any
strong alkaline solution or solid such as sodium or potassium hydroxides.’
The chemical tests
mentioned at the end, using barium chloride, shows there is no presence of
sulphate ions and ammonium oxalate shows there are no calcium ions present in
Causticum. The physical properties mentioned, of freezing point and
putrefaction, are common characteristics of caustic alkalis.
Modern Documentation
One of the drawbacks to the industrialisation of remedy preparations by large
homoeopathic manufacturers, over the years, is the imposition of allopathic
methods of quality control and analysis on raw materials in order to licence
remedies as medicines for retail sale. This can impose strict testing of
original remedy materials to prove identity, quality and the validation of
potentisation methods which, of course, is a good thing. When pure sources of
elements and compounds are used there is no problem achieving this, but when
the starting point is already an impure source this can cause difficulties. For
example it is impossible to know the exact analysis of the marble Hahnemann
used for the original remedy/not documented from where the sample was obtained.
Also uncertainty as to the exact composition of the finished Causticum, and the
many trace elements it may contain, would mean very involved analytical
discussions about criteria and tests. Pharmacopoeias over the years have avoided
this issue by substituting 2 pounds of marble with 2 pounds of burned lime,
without indicating a source, to avoid having to introduce such a variable. This
means pure industrially prepared 99.9% calcium oxide is put forward as the
starting point. Caust is not found in either the French or German homoeopathic
pharmacopoeia (GHP) which are both widely used in the
Causticum Raasay Quelle: Helios
My interest in Causticum was rekindled when on a visit to the Burren school in
Galway,
However as the years go by I am more and more convinced that remedies
themselves choose when to be made and the timing must be right to create the
perfect conditions. Esp. true for new proving remedies, a good example being
the coincidental major astrological movements of Pluto at the start of the
Plutonium proving previously unknown by the proving team.
The conditions for a superb Causticum firing came together one night
last June at Jeremy Sherr’s summer school on Raasay island off the
Not found yet is a satisfactory answer to why Hahnemann went to so much
trouble to make this remedy/his intentions. If the goal was to make potassium
hydroxide (KOH) this method is not very efficient and apparently unnecessary.
Chronic diseases describes the smell of Causticum like the 'lye' of caustic
potash (KOH) so it was obviously already available and known to him so why
bother?
Andreas Grimm, who reproduced the original method exactly in 1989,
speculates that Hahnemann was trying to isolate and distil the 'caustic
principle' i.e. the OH-ion which is, unknown to him, a fruitless task using
this crude method. Perhaps we will never know the truth but the combination of
so many alchemical elements seriously leans towards an experiment with another
dimension. The use of the great transforming fire, the meeting of the two
principles masculine (acid) and feminine (base) in equal measure, the
hermetically sealed unit and the final distillation in the alembic are all well
known alchemical
processes. Whatever the true reason the result is undeniably one of the
most important remedies in the materia medica and it is important to be clear
as to its composition and reproducibility.
Chemical Possibilities
According to the formulas the thickish mixture in the flask contains
only three components KOH + CaSO4 + 2H2O. i.e. Potassium hydroxide, calcium
sulphate and water. There are actually no
volatile gases or products which would pass over during distillation
except water. Potassium hydroxide dissolves in water but remains behind as the
water boils off. Calcium sulphate is
insoluble and remains behind as a white hard mass. So how is the final
product alkaline at all. Many years it was thought that the alkalinity was due
to ammonia which is created when
elemental calcium metal reacts with nitrogen 3Ca + N2 = Ca3N2 and the
resulting calcium nitride reacts with water to form ammonia gas. Ca3N2 + 6H2O =
2NH3↑ + 3Ca(OH)2 This gas then forms ammonium hydroxide (amm-caus), when
it contacts water. NH3 + H2O = NH4OH.
Scholten states in his recent book
that Causticum contains ammonia but is different from ammonium causticum.
However reactive elemental calcium metal is not present in our process
and calcium oxide, which is, does not form this liaison with nitrogen and thus
ammonia is not formed. It is possible for
ammonia to be formed if potassium hydroxide comes into contact with the
protein of the pigs bladder but this is very remote. So how is the potassium
hydroxide present in Causticum?
Grimm gives, what I believe, is the most likely explanation. At 350 -
400o C, temperatures, created by the charcoal fire, potassium hydroxide
sublimates without decomposing. Sublimation means that the
solid vaporises into the condenser and is carried over into the receiving
vessel by water vapour thus resulting in a weak solution. Grimm also suggests
that bumping may also occur, which is
common with alkalis, creating a spitting effect up the tube. Thus
Causticum is a weak solution of potassium hydroxide by these effects. If there
are traces of unfired calcium carbonate in the
calcium oxide then the addition of the acid may liberate carbon dioxide
gas which may be present as a trace as in CaCO3 + KHSO4 = CaSO4 + KOH +CO2.
However there is also another subtle
dimension which must also be remembered. The starting point was an
impure marble which could have had trace elements of many different elements.
Ornamental marble gains it colours
from the presence of impurities such as iron creating red, chlorites the
greens and graphites the blues. Quartz (silica) is also often found as an
impurity in marble, so there are still many possible
trace elements which are unknown and may be present.
The Kali Element
Causticum theme: sympathetic/serious/intense/sensitive type who can become
a social activist, working on behalf of others, to overcome injustice can be
seen as being made up of the 3 elements KOH.
Scholten describes the potassium element themes as:
Doing their work and duty without thinking. Steady plodding
conscientiousness to get the job done. Have and need fixed rules and like to
stick to them. Have strong principles and can be
depended upon to fulfil their responsibility. Often work alone and
decide for themselves how to do it. Don’t like interference. Can even turn away
from the family. Fixed attention to principles
and duty leads to an inability to identify with their action. Loose
their sense of self. Brainwashed. Are naive. Over control suppresses free
thinking. Are not open to debate and become closed, dogmatic, moralistic.
Siehe Causticum
Conclusions
At present Causticum holds secrets and speculation and attempts to use
materia medica to decipher constituents is very inexact because of the
differences in numbers of rubrics between
the remedies in the repertories. Perhaps continued chemical analysis of
preparations in the future, ideally by many companies, will give rise to some
definitive answers as to what Causticum is.
Up to now the documented variations have been inconsistent and more
samples, willingness and time is needed to standardise this remedy correctly. I
am sure it is a Kali salt, and should be
thought of as one, but alchemy is a mysterious thing and I'm sure this
wonderful substance will still keep some of its secrets hidden for some time to
come.
If any of you have any comments or information which can shed more light
on the subject I would be very grateful to receive it.
Acknowledgements
Quelle: Helios pharmacy UK
Hahnemann und die Choleraepidemie:
Die in der amerikanischen Literatur erwähnten Hauptmittel für die Epidemiebehandlung waren Ars., Bry. und Gels., wobei ersteres bei einer Nachrepertorisation der Leitsymptome wie schon
Bei Shepherd im Vordergrund steht.vii Es wurden aber auch Merc-cy., Phos., Lach., Rhus-t. und andere Mittel mit gutem Erfolg eingesetzt. Eine europäische Sonderposition nimmt der
bedeutende Schweizer Homöopath Dr. Antoine Nebel sen. (1870–1954) ein, der Eupat-per. wichtigstes Pandemiemittel bestimmte.
Ein international koordiniertes, einheitliches Konzept fehlte bei dieser Pandemie. Die homöopathische Bewegung war trotz ihrer Qualifikation zu sehr zersplittert und ohne genügend klare wissenschaftliche und organisatorische Führung, was sicher auch einer der Gründe für ihren Krebsgang in den nachfolgenden Jahrzehnten war. Und wie sieht es heute aus, etwa 3 Jahrzehnte
nach einem erneuten Aufschwung der Homöopathie in Europa und USA und bei erneutem Aufflackern einer H1N1-Pandemie? Im Internet waren trotz optimaler Kommunikationsmöglichkeit
zu meinem großen Erstaunen auch einige Wochen nach den ersten beunruhigenden Nachrichten aus Mexiko nur einige Gemeinplätze zur Influenzabehandlung und ein paar esoterische
Spekulationen, aber keinerlei verwertbare homöopathische Daten zur aktuellen Epidemie zu finden.
Wie anders hatte doch der bereits 76-jährige Hahnemann reagiert, als 1831 die ersten Berichte über eine an der Ostgrenze der K.u.k.-Monarchie neu aufgetretene und potenziell sehr
gefährliche Seuche eintrafen! Er ließ sich von der um sich greifenden lähmenden Panik und Ratlosigkeit nicht anstecken, geschweige denn, dass er sich auf anderweitige Autoritäten verlassen
hätte: Er befolgte die altbewährte taktische Regel, dass man einen angreifenden Gegner nicht einfach in Verteidigungsstellung erwarten, sondern wenn immer möglich schon im Aufmarschraum
attackieren sollte, und ließ sich durch einen homöopathischen Kollegen im polnischen Galizien umgehend über sämtliche Krankheitsaspekte der sich schnell zur Pandemie ausweitenden
Cholera informieren. Nach einer in Anbetracht der damaligen Postkutschenkommunikation und langsamen mechanischen Drucktechnik sehr kurzen Zeit konnte Hahnemann nach sorgfältiger Fernrepertorisation schon einen schriftlichen Epidemieplan zirkulieren lassen. Dieser erwies sich schon beim ersten Einsatz in Osteuropa als der damaligen Schulmedizin deutlich überlegen
Und sollte der Homöopathie schließlich auch gesundheitspolitisch mehr Gewinn bringen als vermutlich alle Individualbehandlungen zusammen.
Lac owleum: Im Juli 1996 hatte J. Wichmann mit ein paar Kollegen ein
„amüsantes“ Gespräch bei einem Seminar-Mittagessen in Augsburg, wobei über
besonders skurrile Mittelverordnungen
Witze gemacht wurden. Dabei wurde
die Idee aufgebracht, einen Artikel über ein erfundenes Mittel zu schreiben und
schlug als offensichtlich absurd die „Eulenmilch“ vor (Till Eulenspiegel
lässt grüßen)
Lachesis: C. Hering hatte gehört von der Giftigkeit der Lachesisschlange.
Er nam sich vor sich das Gift zu besorgen. So gesagt, so getan!
Er fuhr mit seiner Frau mit einem
Segelschiff nach Mittelamerika (Surinam). Da brauchte er Träger, die die beiden
zu Fuß in einem Gebiet brachten, wo Lachesisschlangen vorkamen.
Da fanden sie erst mal keinen
Person, der eine Lachesisschlange fangen wollte. VIEL zu giftig und zu
gefährlich.
Nach dem Versprechen immer großere
Belohnungen wurden die Beiden eine Lachesisschlange gebracht. Die Fänger
flüchteten!!
Dr. Hering entnahm die Schlange
persönlich das Gift und fiel in ein Delirium. Seine Frau notierte fein
säuberlich, was ihren Mann während dieses Deliriums sagte, tat und zeigte.
Das war die erste Lachesisprüfung!!!
The Story of Oscillococcinum
[freely adapted from Jan Willem Nienhuys]
Hahnemann’s description of the substance used
indicates that it was not a refined substance but simply crude petroleum taken
from the ground: “This product of the interior of the earth is extremely strong
in smell, taste and medicinal effect. For medicinal use it ought to be very
fluid and of light - yellow colour. If it is very fluid it is not very likely
that it has been adulterated with fat vegetable oils.”
In Hahnemann’s day, oil distillation had not been
developed, the first instance of it being in 1853, 10 years after his death,
and fractional distillation had not been developed as a laboratory or
commercial tool until 1864. In 1853 the first actual distillation of crude
petroleum into kerosene (paraffin oil) was performed and the first modern “rock
oil” mine was created in southern
in the following year. While Hahnemann was alive,
therefore, the practice of refining crude “rock oil” had not been developed and
what he worked with would have been the liquid portion of the unrefined
substance. From his description as above, this would have been a mixture of
some of the lighter liquid elements of the hydrocarbon mix that make up
petroleum.
T. F. Allen’s Encyclopedia (1878 edition) states that
oil from
being sold at the time.
‘Accidental’ oil fields in
from the 1830’s and it was possibly this that
Hahnemann used, as even the commercial development of oil from
and the huge variation in the composition of oil
extracted from different locations, as well as the tendency of the lighter
elements of the petroleum mix to evaporate and the lack of control and
standardisation in the collection methods, what Hahnemann’s Petroleum was could
not even be broadly guessed at with any accuracy.
Hahnemann’s expressed concern was whether the product
was exclusively rock oil or had been adulterated with vegetable oils, chiefly
suspecting oil of turpentine. He proposed tests, one using sulphuric acid and a
simpler one of evaporation on writing paper, to determine if such oils were
present. He then advised a means of removing any such oils, if found, using
alcohol and filtration. (Chronic Diseases)
So we are forced to accept that Hahnemann’s Petroleum
is from the liquid portion of crude petroleum of unknown composition and from
an undefined source.
At some point later in the development of homoeopathic
literature, we find homeopathic Petroleum identified with kerosene (paraffin
oil). For instance Clarke’s Materia Medica (1900) states: “Commercial
‘Petroleum’ and commercial ‘paraffin oil’ are one and the same. The Petrol. of homoeopathy is this substance
purified and rectified.”
The most recent Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the
The adoption of kerosene/paraffin oil as a more
defined homoeopathic “Petroleum” has its justification in that it closely matches
Hahnemann’s description and that, as a specified fractional distillate of crude
oil, it can now be standardised - which is essential to the reliance on a
remedy that is being prescribed in accordance to a proving. According to the 26th
edition of the Martindale Extra Pharmacopoeia, kerosene is “a mixture of
hydrocarbons, chiefly of the methane series, distilled from petroleum. It is a
colourless or pale yellow mobile oily liquid with a characteristic odour. B.P.
150 to 300. Wt. per ml about 0.8g . . . Insoluble in water; soluble 1 in 2.5 of
alcohol.”
Uranylacetat/Thoriumnitrat/Uranylnitrat
Robert Müntz:
Ausgangspunkt und Motor für die Herstellung neuer radioaktiver Arzneien war Jan
Scholten radioaktive Salze der Actinoidenreihe zu potenzieren.
Die Herstellung
radioaktiver homöopathischer Arzneien bringt neben der herkömmlichen Arbeit der
Potenzierung (Lösungsvorschrift o. Trituration) zusätzliche rechtliche Fragen
des Strahlungsschutzes mit sich, die vor Beginn der Arbeit geklärt sein müssen.
Nach Gesprächen mit den Verantwortlichen des Austria Research Centers (ARC) in
Seibersdorf und des Gesundheitsministeriums wurde kein Einwand gegen die
Anfertigung entsprechender Centesimalpotenzen gegeben. Das ARC zeigte sich
höchst verständnisvoll für mein Anliegen, radioaktive Stoffe im
Forschungszentrum zu potenzieren/unterstützte mich großartig bei der
praktischen Durchführung.
Zu erwähnen ist, dass mit dieser Potenzierung Thorium als drittes natürlich
vorkommendes Element der Actinoiden erstmals der Homöopathie zugänglich gemacht
wurde. Potenzierung steht aus von Protactinium und Neptunium als letzten
Vertreter der 5 natürlich vorkommenden Actinoiden.
Durchgeführt
wurde die Arbeit im Sicherheitstrakt des ARC in Seibersdorf unter
entsprechenden Vorsichtsmassnahmen:
Schutzkleidung/Schutzhandschuhe/Chemieabzug/Zählrohr zur Messung der Strahlung
vor und nach dem Potenzieren.
Die Potenzierung erfolgte aus pragmatischen Gründen gemäß HV 5a, der
Lösungsvorschrift des HAB 2003. Die Trituration wäre zwar aus der Sicht der
Arzneiwirksamkeit vorteilhafter gewesen, ließ sich aber auch aus Zeitgründen
nicht durchführen, zumal sie mehrere Stunden dauert und der Zeitaufwand
gegenüber der Leitung des Forschungszentrums nicht vertretbar gewesen wäre.
Außerdem wäre die Kontamination mit radioaktivem Staub, der bei der Trituration
entsteht, nicht auszuschließen gewesen.
Die Lösung der Stoffe erfolgte im Verhältnis 1:100 mit Ethanol 43 % und war
unproblematisch, lediglich Uranylacetat brauchte zur Lösung etwa 15 Minuten.
Danach wurde nach der Hahnemannschen Mehrglasmethode gemäß HAB 2002 10x kräftig
auf eine elastische Unterlage geschlagen und in das nächste Fläschchen im
Centesimalverhältnis verdünnt.
Wesentlich für die Genehmigung der Herstellung durch die Behörden war, dass die
Verdünnungsschritte deutlich über die Avogadrosche Konstante hinaus zu erfolgen
hatten. Es wurde daher die Potenzierung bis zur C15 in der Mehrglasmethode
durchgeführt, eine Verdünnung, die eine Million mal höher ist als jene
Konzentration, bei der statistisch gerade noch ein Molekül des Ausgangsstoffes
anzutreffen ist. Die Mehrglasmethode, also die Verwendung eines neuen
Fläschchens bei jedem Potenzierungsschritt, ließ auch Adsorptionsphänomene mit
Sicherheit ausschließen. Als reine Vorsichtsmassnahme wurde nach Beendigung der
Potenzierreihe mit einem Geigerzähler nochmals überprüft, ob die C15 Lösung
auch tatsächlich strahlungsfrei war. Danach wurde sämtliches Arzneimaterial und
sämtliche Hilfsmittel wie Flaschenladen, Faserschreiber etc. zur Vernichtung im
ARC zurückgelassen, lediglich die C15 Lösungen von Thoriumnitrat, Uranylacetat
und Uranylnitrat wurde zur weiteren Verarbeitung in unser Labor nach Eisenstadt
gebracht. Die Vernichtung des strahlenden Abfalles erfolgt durch Einbringen in
flüssigen Beton, der in 100 l Endlagerungsfässer gegossen und nach Aushärtung
in ein Endlager gebracht wird.
Vergleich: Siehe: Hahnemann
Vorwort/Suchen Zeichen/Abkürzungen Impressum