New York Medical College - Fleuroscope Yearbook (Valhalla, NY)

Page 201 text:

AN EMB12 vos VIEW or HOMEOPATHY THE physician, who, after many years. of experience, has become well ac- quainted with the use of the similar principle in therapeutics, could hardly be expected to be materially influenced one way or the other, by the critical chirpings of one who is just emerging from the shell of the medical educational egg. Nevertheless, we of this new brood, have spent years in development, and naturally, have formed a few ideas relative to the past, present and future of that method of medical treatment that has been added to our knowledge . . . the similia. So you sages of homeopathic therapeutics, take these candid remarks, from an embryo, for what they are worth. The similia principle of drug action, from Hippocratic roots, through Hahne- manian budding to its present blossoming, has retained life because it con- tains and makes use of the basic action of all drugs. Anyone who takes advantage of his scientific knowledge and sincerely investigates the principle, could hardly fail to recognize the fundamental truths included therein. - Hippocrates noted two distinct modes of .drug action, and indelibly im- pressed those observations in medical thought. One was contrara, the other the similia. This was no vague dream of Hippocratesp it was evolved from an observant and thinking mind-a mind that was not afforded the advantages of modern science in investigating such complex and diametrically opposed effects. We are obliged to seriously consider and investigate the statements uttered by such a profound observer. Samuel Hahnemann was the next one to flare up the smouldering fire of similia .... many centuries later. Great changes had taken place in the interim. Scientific knowledge had developed markedly. The basic sciences were rapidly developing toward perfection. Proof of scientific discoveries were more easily obtainable. With these advantageous circumstances at hand, Samuel Hahnemann put forth his tenets. The reaction elicited from the medical minds of the day, was explosive and far-reaching. A revolution in science had begun: sides were taken. Hippocrates turned over in his grave. All great discoveries are startling, and homeopathy was no exception. At first, the natural results were profound. Physicians by the thousands promptly dropped their then used methods of treatment and became radical converts. Volumes were written on the subject. The most intense and laborious investi- gations were instituted, and homeopathy soared to heights of great repute. The enthusiasm displayed by some, was truly remarkable . . . One might say over-enthusiasm. I remember my father telling me of one noble convert who became very rabid on the subject of contaminated dilutions, and posi- tively forbade any drug salesman to enter his office for fear that the mere presence of one so tainted with numerous compounds, would ruin the doctor's pure drug armamentarium. All dealings of such nature were held in the hall outside the office. To this day, there are some hyper-enthusiasts who are just about one jump away from this ridiculousness. Some still hold the opinion that the action of homeopathic medicaments, is wholly spiritual! lt isn't chemical-it isn't psychical, and it isn't physical, stated one lecturer. These are the false thoughts we, as modern scientists, must wipe out in order to clear the path to systematic investigation and to facilitate the securing of irrefutable proof as to the true value of the method. We cannot argue our- selves right by a variety of logical contortions and sophisticationsu as one critic has written. The burden of obtaining scientific proof is at present weigh- ing heavily on the shoulders of a few men. Such ardent and caeable investi- gators as Boyd and McGavack are examples of this group. They deserve Two hundred two

Page 200 text:

to 2 to l the odds increase to about 22 to 1, and with a ratio of 3 to 1 the odds are about 400 to 1, etc. Thus by computing our observed difference with its standard deviation we can calculate the probability that it is real and not accidental, i. e. that it is statistically significant. As an approach to homo- geneity and heterogeneity of statistical groups one finds a good approach in the Chisquare test of homogeneity as employed by Eisenhart 131. An attempt has been made to expose some of the fundamental and glar- ing inaccuracies of research work, and the remedies necessary to effect a cure. There remains, yet, one conspicuous factor that, more than anything else, has been not only a hindrance-but an actual menace to the advance of Medicine. The greater part of American physicians were graduated from medical schools with a burning ambition to really practise the Art of Medicine, with the under- lying implication that they devoutly hoped to keep in touch with the modern theories in Medicine. Two outstanding methods of maintaining knowledge of new facts and new theories are the attendance at lectures, and the reading of medical literature. Unfortunately physicians in small towns do not have the opportunity of deriving first hand information from prominent lecturers, and many of the doctors in the larger cities fail to take advantage of their facilities. What remains? Medical journals become the only methods that the physician has to prevent inevitable decay. Were journals filled with the thoughtful research work of competent observers all would be well. But such is not the case. In the hundreds of journals published there is startlingly little of real scientific worth, remarkably little worth remembering or even consid- ering. Fortunate indeed is the author whose article is remembered after sev- eral years. Amidst all the gibberish and nonesenical articles written, the physician loses all confidence in learning, concludes that reading journals is a waste of time, and ends up by being just another physician. And who can blame him? His good intentions were blasted by bad literature. So, we are forced to conclude that not only must there be more accurate scientific articles, but there must also be a concomitant increase of articles of real scientific merit, and an abolition of much of the mess which now passes for modern developments of Medicine. Until medical journals have adopted such a program, of restricting articles, there must be eternal vigilance on the part of the doctor to protect himself against inaccurate conclusions drawn from faulty data, and there must also be a concerted campaign to force journals to publish only really scientific material so that Medicine will progress under the stimulus of real Physicians. References: ill Galton, 1889: Natural Inheritance CLondon and New Yorkl. 121 Fisher, 1934: Statistical Methods of Research Workers fLondonl. C31 Eisenhart, 1935: I. Sedimentery Petrology, 5:l37. Two hundred one

Page 202 text:

BY IOI-IN H. CRUMP high commendation and the unflinching support of all physicians concerned. We are living in a modern world. Great changes occur over night and most are for the betterment of living. The primitive dump-heap of vitalism and spiritualism, where all unexplained natural occurrences were disposed of, has all but been relegated to antiquity. We are administering material sub- stances to material living bodies. Let us work to our end with this thought in mind. lt is very apparent that at the present time there is a definite metamor- phosis taking place in Allopathy and Homeopathy. There seems to be a sort of transition of the two dominating types of thought into one all inclusive meth- od. It is a blending of the two into'a single and more rational system of therapy-a compromise, so to speak. Our most modern texts prove this point. The discovery of the fact that hyperthermia, within limits, is a defense mech- anism of the body in certain diseases, and that the use of physiologic Unfipy- retics is contra-indicated and harmful in these cases, is an example. The re- cent discovery that the sting of the bee is useful in certain types of arthritis is another example. There are many more instances that could be described relating to the so-called new discoveries suddenly found by the allopathic group in the past few years. The newness of these findings, gives the fol- lowers of Samuel Hahnemann an uncontrollable desire to smile in a manner of understanding and satisfaction. The only regret the homeopaths have is that these therapeutic principles disclosed and held by them, are not being recognized by the other school of thought, with due credit given where it is deserved. Absorption of our methods, covered by silence and new discoveries, seems to be the modern technique of the allopathic group in this so-called absorptive compromise. However, l cannot see a great deal of harm in this subtle mode of gaining a unification of the two methods. The ultimate aim of all physicians, is to re- store health and prevent illness. If we can accomplish a fraction of this end in our generation, it will be well worth the change at hand. But what roads shall we take to prove the truth of our system? What methods can we use to avail ourselves of the recognition We deserve? On the surface, this problem appears complex, but in reality it is not such a hard nut to crack. Keenly directed research: revision of old texts into modern style: running series of cases on the great multitude of patients available to us in our hospitals: investigation of the great mass of literature relating to industrial poisoning fobtainable in Washington, D. CJ .... and the ousting of those who triturate moonbeams. As stated before, a few progressive men are at present following this plan. But we cannot reach our goal by only the aid of this few. We need all of the new men and the aid of the older men who have revised their opinions to fit the new era. For one hundred and fifty years, homeopathy has held forth and influenced the medical mind. Herbert Spencer in his First Principles stated that noth- ing can be so wrong that there is no truth in it. Everything that occurs is based on some truth . . . some minute seed of fact. So does homeopathy con- tain truth . . . and abundant truth. The longevity of the similia bears out this statement. lt therefore becomes obvious that we must search the truths upon which this great method of treatment is based. We must glean from it, the definite values it affords us in the rational treatment of disease. Let us not lie down by the side of the road, and allow this precious man- ner of treatment to quietly pass into innocuous desuetude. Two hundred three