1909 - A perspective on how the "dominant school" of medicine was changing around the turn of the 20th Century
Today’s Article from the Archives provides an interesting insight into how the medical establishment was evolving in the early 1900s. This was an address made by A. P. Stauffer M.D., President of the Homeopathic Medical Society of Maryland, on May 19, 1909, from page 387 of The Homoeopathic Recorder. You can read it in full here or I have transcribed it below for easier reading, and for my own future reference.
Homoeopathy the Older School
Highlights are mine. It includes my comments.
Address As President of the Homoeopathic Medical Society of Maryland, May 19, 1909. By A. P. Stauffer, M. D.
What Is Homoeopathy?
"Homoeopathy is the simple art of healing, unvarying in its principles, and in its methods of applying them. The principles upon which it is based, if thoroughly understood, will be found to be perfect and unassailable," says Hahnemann. Homoeopathy is the science of therapeutics. It is not an uncertain and variable rule of practice, dependent upon clinical experience. Homoeopathy is the system that cures more swiftly, pleasantly and with better results than any system known. It is a science resting on the law of nature. It is a method of procedure which is invariable, certain and positively correct. It works in harmony with nature. It is the guide post that leads unerringly to the cure of disease, that which one can trust and depend upon in the moments of need. It is an empiric law — known as the law of similars — likes cured by likes.
The contention as to whether it is a law or rule of practice matters but little, for its working is not changed by the theories of men.
There is a law, no doubt, of healing. That law is the law of similars, but it gives no theory of drug action, but simply notices that what a drug will produce in the healthy, it will also cure in disease if the symptoms are similar. It does not differ, therefore, from other laws. No one can explain why the object falls to the ground due to the law of gravitation; neither can one explain the force of electricity — chemical affinity, or why the magnetic needle points to the pole.
How is it known that Homoeopathy is a scientific system — a law of nature? In the same way that all scientists know their working rule. The rule or law of Homoeopathy is that likes are cured by likes, and this has been demonstrated clinically since Hahnemann's time.
While clinical demonstration is proving the law of similars, the bacteriologist is also demonstrating the law of similars. Dr. Wright by the opsonins has established the law by biological methods. He observes that in using bacteria of a diseased organ, especially tuberculosis, and after diluting by injection into a number of animals in succession to dilute it, and using this serum in a small quantity by injection into the patient cures the lesion. He observed that the serum, if given in too large a quantity produced aggravation or symptoms similar to the disease. He also observed that the minimum dose, 7th or 8th dilution of Homoeopathy, not too often repeated, once or twice a week, produced the best results. His observations, therefore, reveal the law of similars, the single remedy, the minimum dose and the aggravation of a drug.
Before reading this article I wasn’t aware of Sir Dr Almroth Wright, his work and I had never heard of “opsonins”, so I had to do a little research. If you are interested, you can read a little about Dr Wright’s opsonin theory here, a 1910 discussions on Vaccine Therapy (using a “vaccine” to treat the already infected or sick - therapeutic immunisation) here, along with Wright’s 1920 “Introduction to Vaccine Therapy” here.
No longer was the word “vaccine” reserved for prophylactic use, Wright turned it into a therapeutic - which really isn’t that what we do today with Tetanus (booster) vaccines when a puncture-wounded patient ends up at the doctors? Though today there is no such thing as a stand-alone tetanus vaccine, they are always mixed with another disease antigen such a diphtheria (dT) and sometimes, depending on the circumstances or age of the patient could include pertussis (dTpa, DTaP), polio (dTpa-IPV), and Haemophilus influenzae type b and/or hepatitis B (DT5aP-hepB-IPV-Hib(PRP-OMP)). But they generally don’t inform you of this when they ask if you are up to date with your tetanus shot - as I personally witnessed in 2023. You can respectfully decline!
If you are interested scroll down to September 2014 for a great overview on tetanus by Dr Suzanne Humphries. She noted that a 1937 BMJ paper revealed that the medical system was often the source of tetanus infection that led to the toxic event!
Back to the article… talking about this “dominant school” bacteriologist using the dilution principle of homeopathy to cure disease.
The minimum dose is the distinctive feature of Homoeopathy. Hahnemann says: "The true physician will prescribe his well selected homoeopathic medicine in a dose so small as to be just sufficient to overcome and extinguish the disease," and this dose must be so small as not to produce any ill effects to the patient. "For this reason," says Hahnemann, "too large a dose of medicine, though homoeopathic to the case, will be injurious." The remedy, or dose, must, therefore, not be repeated, says Hahnemann, "until the remedy ceases to produce improvement."
With the small dose, goes the single remedy as another corollary of Homoeopathy. It is reasonable that since each drug is proven singly, it must be used singly to cure. Alternation of remedies is not compatible with homoeopathic dosage. "Combination tablets" have no place in the materia medica of Homoeopathy. They are unproven, an unscientific commodity, and, therefore, worthless as a homoeopathic prescription. They discredit the school.
The doctrine of individualization is another important tenet of Homoeopathy and distinguishes it from all other systems of practice. This, with the totality of symptoms, is the link that forms the complete chain and is the foundation upon which all prescriptions are based.
It is no wonder the allopath clashed (and still does clash) with the homeopath.
Hahnemann says : "The totality of the symptoms must be regarded by the physician as the principal and only condition to be recognized and removed by his art in each case of disease, that it may be cured and converted into health.''
What is Homoeopathy? Homoeopathy is not the practice of the careless or indifferent man. It is inconsistent with the clinical plan. Its followers believe in its philosophy, but are not dogmatic enough to believe there may be no other methods of cure. "Many lights thou hast kindled; by any of them may we find the path." Perhaps there are other laws of cure, but the homoeopathist believes it is the only true and correct method of curing disease by drugs.
Homoeopathy is the law of nature recognizing the dynamic action of drugs. It is the mild and gentle, though elaborate and difficult system of treating diseased humanity. Homoeopathy is the subtle force based upon the law of similia ; its successful application depends upon the single remedy, the minimum dose, the totality of symptoms.
Homoeopathy has no relation to pseudo science. It is the system that remains steadfast and unchangeable, not guided by the uncertain experiments on animal organism.
It is the system that believes in the power of the ion, the infinitesimal, or " the dynamic derangement of life." It does not sanction the fallacy that disease is an entity, a something to exterminate from the body with ponderable doses. It believes that disease is the manifestation of an inward process, a disturbance of the vital force. In curing disease it is the conservator of nature's powers and holds no communion with the method that depletes the system and interferes with the harmonious process of nature. It is that system of medicine that does not take the life before the kindly hand of nature bids the time.
What Has Homoeopathy Done for Mankind?
To fully understand the beneficial influence of Homoeopathy upon mankind, the medical condition prevailing at the time of its announcement is the best answer. Inhuman and heroic treatment served the day. Nature was never aided, the system was never fortified, but abused, tortured and robbed. Before the two last decades every patient was the victim of depletion ; heartless cruel and irrational treatment served the day. Such was the condition when Homoeopathy appeared. It grew and broke down the opposition to it and undermined the impregnable school, and traditional medicine was compelled to recognize its power and influence. It stands, therefore, the champion of scientific medicine in the medical world and triumphs over the changed therapeutics of the dominant school. "It left its impression on the medical thought and raised the standard of medical practice in all schools today." "It gave impetus to other lines of investigation to benefit mankind." Science in all fields of knowledge recognizes the beneficial influence of Homoeopathy and readily ascribes the meed of praise. It has greatly mitigated the suffering of mankind, softened the bed of sickness quickly, agreeably and pleasantly ; shortened the convalescence, lessened the death rate, and for countless thousands made life worth while.
Homeopathy was notably popular during the mid to late 1800s, and I feel if more people took the time to understand the modality it would regain it’s popularity today in western cultures. Little is known about the power and influence of the anti-homeopathy lobby groups like “Friends of Science in Medicine” i.e. enemies of anything alternative to Big Pharma, who are connected with discrediting the actual science.123
Homoeopathy has taught the older school the worthlessness of its methods. It compelled them to relinquish human depletion and to forsake the cup, the leech and the blister. It compelled them to relinquish the large and poisonous doses in treating disease and to save the strength of the organism so that its function would be unimpaired in its performance. It compelled them to simplify their practice and to discard the heroic doses and get nearer nature in treating the sick. This fact alone, even if Homoeopathy becomes a tradition in medicine, will immortalize Hahnemann.
Homoeopathy instituted new methods of obtaining knowledge of drugs and in this Hahnemann was the pioneer and was the first, therefore, to require exactness and completeness in the minutest detail, antedating the exactness of laboratory methods many years. The system Hahnemann established requires the knowledge of the action of drugs on the healthy. No such knowledge existed at this time and he therefore undertook the stupendous task of proving drugs upon himself. This was a new therapeutic field and, without a chart or compass to guide, he led the way alone, giving himself a sacrifice for the cure and suffering of mankind, and though, notwithstanding the criticism his drug provings received, it was so well done that his followers have found but little to improve, save what chemistry and the microscope adds to the symptoms of drug provings.
Had Hahnemann done nothing more for humanity than this, it alone is sufficient to give him a place as the greatest medical genius and benefactor in the world.
Homoeopathy has been foremost in dietetic and hygienic regulations in health and disease. Hahnemann lays great stress on these important adjuncts, who was the first in the therapeutic field to inaugurate them, and his followers have trodden in his footsteps. In these later days the dominant school regard these measures as their strongest aid in dealing with diseased humanity.
Homoeopathy also gave to the world a long list of useful remedies that have stood the test of time and are curing conditions today that the same remedies cured 100 years ago. Therapeutically. Homoeopathy occupies the highest position in medicine, and because of this fact its remedies are gradually being incorporated into the medical practice of all schools without due acknowledgment.
Dr. Dyce Brown, in an address before the British Homoeopathic Society, in 1902 says "That he found 71 remedies in the therapeutics of the dominant school that are used on the principle of similars."
If Homoeopathy, therefore, is not a truth — a law of medicine — how could it be such a mighty force and tremendous power in medicine and benefit to mankind and be able to resist the tremendous forces that were used to destroy it? The persecution of Hahnemann and his followers is scarcely paralleled in history, and though, notwithstanding this persecution, they stood by their principles and time demonstrates their truth and great worth to mankind.
"In the beginning everything was against it : the college and pharmacy united to destroy it : "and yet today it is stronger than ever. There are more homoeopathic physicians prescribing the single remedy than ever before : there are more patrons of Homoeopathy than ever before, and a more determined effort to propagate its principles than ever before. It cannot be destroyed. "Measured by what it has resisted." says Sutherland, "it stands among the mighty. It is a truth that stands tested, unshakable in public and private esteem in honorable recognition.''
More than a 100 years on, and homeopathy still exists today. Also, if you are not aware in 2019 His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, now King of England, was the Royal Patron of The Faculty of Homeopathy in England4.
What is the Therapeutics of the Dominant School Today?
The therapeutics of the dominant school is in the most unsatisfactory and chaotic state. It has been so before and since Hahnemann's time and nothing was done to "elevate it to a science or to even dignify it as an art." The advent of Hahnemann, who announced new principles and methods, should have modified more quickly the whole field of therapeutics, but it did not. It is still the empiric school without a law to guide it. The dominant school has not found the road, therefore, has made very little progress during its 2,500 years of existence. They are still blind leaders of the blind. Dr. Osler, who but voices the authorities of his school, says : "He has faith in but four drugs," and these he'll not mention, for he is not absolutely sure of them.
Dr William Osler is the “father of modern medicine”5, is a founding professor of the Johns Hopkins Hospital and author of The Principles and Practice of Medicine first published in 1892. Osler’s book was the inspiration for the creation of the Rockefeller Institute thanks to JD Rockefeller Sn. advisor Mr Frederick T. Gates.
What is the Status of the Dominant School ?
It is best answered by uncertainty and disbelief. In the great field of medicine, it has not kept pace with science along all other lines, and while they have accomplished much in the way of sanitation and hygiene, and make places unfit for habitation the abode of luxury and refinement and added greatly to methods of diagnosis and dietetics, etc., yet in the therapeutic field they have accomplished very little and have not met the expectations or requirement of the people, and this has caused, therefore, a growing distrust in drugs, a diminished confidence in the ability of physicians to cure diseases.
This distrust in drugs by the laity has developed in the country "a state of erethism which leads it to adopt any new therapeutic movement, no matter how illogical."
That accounts, therefore, for the growth of Christian science, the growth of the hygienist, the growth of physical culture, the growth of Emanuelism, and the growth of osteopathy. This growth is an expression of revolt against drugs, against the dominant school ; and this revolt is growing notwithstanding the claim of scientific medicine.
I guess the homeopath had little regard for the osteopath. Nor does Wikipedia today (note the padlock). I recall Annie Riley Hale's in her 1926 book, had a chapter dedicated to Osteopathy which you may find of interest.
There is growing, too, among the medical men a therapeutic agnosticism; a disbelief and rejection of drugs.
This agnostic spirit is manifest in every book of practice in the older school, and every page is marked with discouragement, uncertainty and doubt. This disbelief in drugs, therefore, comes as a natural sequence.
Is it not a fact apparent to all observers that, with all the elaborate methods of scientific medicine (so-called) in the laboratory and clinical field, that the death rate in some diseases is on the increase, and that cancer, consumption and Bright's disease, the dreaded diseases, are more prevalent than ever? These facts are given in the last census reported by the Government.
I looked up the US Census, which the last one from this article would have been conducted in 19006 but there was no mention of disease incidence, only population statistics. So I’m suspecting this comment is in reference to CDC’s vital statistics which, in 19087 it was the governments Bureau of The Census that recorded mortality statistics by disease. Deaths from old age had been going down, but cancer was going up.
What is the Hope in the Therapeutics of the Dominant School?
There is no hope for the people in the therapeutics of the dominant school. The endless experimentation with drugs all the years of its existence is practically useless. Their time and talent has been given to experimentation on the animal organism and while the results seem favorable and satisfactory from a scientific standpoint, when the same procedure is applied to the human organism the results are disappointing and most unsatisfactory. And as long as the dominant school ignores the human organism the mental and the moral forces in the study of drugs and depends upon pharmacist to elaborate a semi-proprietary therapeutics instead of using the large clinical field open to them, the death rate will increase and chronic invalidism multiply. There is scarcely anything in their system that has stood the test of time and what benefit the world reaps from their therapeutics is in accordance with the principles of Homoeopathy. The mercurial treatment, which is greatly praised for specific diseases, is strikingly on homoeopathic line. The same can be said of the anti-toxic, anti-tetanic and anti-rabic serums. There is a tendency, however, to forsake the failures of the past and to turn from 2,500 years of medical darkness.
When a homeopath refers to mercury as a remedy, please be aware this is a very specific preparation that is given in infinitesimal doses, where as the allopath used various formulations with toxic doses of mercury, commonly known as Calomel, which was used to treat almost everything.
What is the Trend of the Dominant School Today in Medicine?
Simpler medication is gradually changing the whole field of their therapeutics. The prescription of a dozen or more remedies is a relic of the past, and traditional medicine will soon be but a memory.
The trend of the old school is more and more toward Homoeopathy, and little by little, slowly and surely, here and there, are absorbing the practice and principles of Homoeopathy, and are advocating the doctrines that Hahnemann announced in the Organon of the Healing Art.
Century after century, the disease with which the patient suffered had to be known to be treated scientifically (so-called), but now that is less potent, and much more attention is paid to the patient. The uncertain knowledge of drug action which was obtained on the lower animals, by accidental poisoning of the human and by observation on the sick is gradually giving way to experimentation with drugs on the healthy human organism.
The Philadelphia Medical Journal says : "Many modern physicians have fallen into the habit of giving a single remedy and depending upon it."
Prof. Schultz, of the University of Griefswald, in speaking of the use of a single drug, says : "Before a drug can be used at the bedside at the fullest advantage, it is absolutely necessary to interpose the experimental use of it on the healthy individual."
Dr. Howard Fussell, at the last session of the A. M. A. in 1908, says : "That physicians should study their cases and not prescribe for the name of the disease."
Dr. Huchard, of Paris, says : "The organism profits and derives much benefit from the infinitesimal dose, our cells are more sensitive to the small dose."
Thus many quotations could be produced bearing evidence of the turn of the therapeutic tide toward Homoeopathy, but this is enough.
We observe that the thinkers and the scholars of the dominant school advance the single drug, the proving of drugs on the healthy, the individualization of cases, and the minimum dose. Thus the spirit and influence of Hahnemann is shaping the thought of the medical world, and is cleansing and purifying and enlightening the path and pointing to the road that is leading to therapeutic light and success.
The tremendous forces back of the changes in the so-called rational school, a complete reversal of former position, is but the forerunner of a complete evolution of the therapeutics of the old school. This force is the intellect of the school, students of Hahnemann, on the road to Homoeopathy.
Dr. Cabot, of the Harvard Medical School, and Dr. Trudeau, of Saranac Lake; Von Behring, Koch, Roux, Huchard, Pasteur, Robin, Trousseau, all of Europe, recognize Homoeopathy and some of them announce it to the world.
If homoeopathists are not careful and hold fast to their mooring, many of them will be sitting at the feet of the dominant school learning lessons in the doctrines of Homoeopathy.
The very next year Abraham Flexner released his Report - and qushed the emerging trend!
The serums, anti-toxins and vaccines, of the older school, are similar to the nosodes of Homoeopathy. They are isopathic in their action and are engaging the attention of the dominant school more and more, clinically. They are, therefore, working for the first time on a law of cure. The immunity treatment, of which we are familiar, is almost a complete appropriation of Homoeopathy. It is so intertwined with its principles that their action cannot be explained on any other basis.
Dr Isaac Golden from Australia has been conducting research with nosodes for several decades now, including during epidemics. If you are interested you will find summaries of his work on this page.
What of the Serums?
The serum treatment of the dominant school, the product of a disease to cure a disease, is of vital concern to us. They are similar to the nosodes of Homoeopathy, which antedates the serum treatment a number of years.
Dr. Clark, of London, says : "Homoeopathists are untrue to their trust, if they allow the so-called orthodox party to exploit their principles, make use of them in a violent manner, and carry off the credit of such result as they obtain. The injection of animal solution called serums into patients' blood current is to my mind a violent proceeding, and it is quite unnecessary since the use of homoeopathic infinitesimals is open to all. The curative effects of the nosodes can be obtained without violation of the organism from which they are obtained."
Drs. Burnett and Clark, of London, have demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt the efficacy of the nosodes, especially in tuberculosis and cancer, and if homoeopaths believed less in material and ponderable doses and more in dynamics and infinitesimals, the experience would be similar.
If energetic and ambitious efforts are not exerted by our able men of our hospital staffs all over the country, where clinical material is available to demonstrate the power of the nosode, it will be done by the older school and will, therefore, reap the honor.
Dr. Inman, in the London Lancet, says : That Tuberculin given by the mouth, rectum or subcutaneously, and though the dose is dissimilar, the opsonic curve and temperature charts show that the same effects are produced.
It remains, therefore, for the homoeopathists, to press the internal treatment in these so-called bacterial diseases and thus replace the method that is fraught with so much danger to the organism.
In conclusion, let me ask: Is Homoeopathy true to its principles and tenets? It seems that while the dominant school is getting tired of drugs and leaning our way, homceopathists are beginning to stray out of the field into strange pastures.
What has caused this mistrust and disbelief in Homoeopathy which is as perfect and unassailable as the day it was given to the world? Polypharmacy, the combination tablet, has crept into its therapeutics and has absolutely displaced the Materia Medica of many of its members and made it a sealed book to the man when he needs its truth the most. Polypharmacy has made him an indifferent and unsuccessful prescriber, and he blames it, therefore, on the system when the fault lies in the lack of knowledge and he thus floats and flounders on the waters that lead to failure and despair.
The pressures of this time obviously convinced some homeopaths to stray from their training and mix their practice with allopathic drugs, a 1906 example8 is provided in this article.
The time is here, therefore, for homceopathists to get back to the simple principles, follow the footsteps of the masters and practice pure Homoeopathy. The time is here to strike hard for its principles and practice and to quit apologizing for being a representative of the system. It is time to give up the combination tablet and the semi-proprietary medicine of the pharmacy. It is time to drive from the field the vendors of combination tablets and to crush out these foes who corrupt the young men with false doctrine and damnable hope. It is time to study the Materia Medica, the best — though not perfect — in the world. It is time to study the Organon, the soundest medical doctrines ever announced. It is time to recognize the totality of the symptoms upon which to base a prescription. It is time to assert that a disturbed vital force is the cause of disease. It is time to prove that an infinitesimal will set it right.
If we do this, Homoeopathy will be the leaven of all therapeutics ; will be the light of all medical paths ; the hope of all mankind. Will we be true to our philosophy, true to our traditions, true to our founders?
Then Homoeopathy will reign and the victory and reward will be ours.
Maybe one day.
Support Jack’s Work
If you find the content at Totality of Evidence (The Website) useful for yourself or to help awaken your family and friends, please consider becoming a paid subscriber (Of this Substack) so I can continue to add to this historical record.
From time to time I’ll add a stack here, but most of my work is done on the website, your support here, supports my work there!
Otherwise share the website on social media and subscribe to my substack so you get my next stack in your inbox.
https://www.hri-research.org/resources/homeopathy-the-debate/the-australian-report-on-homeopathy/
This page summarises what happened with the 2015 Australian review of homeopathy, who’s impact was felt across the world.
A Freedom of Information request showed the taxpayer funded review committee rejected the initial 2012 positive review - and hid this from the public.
And read what happened after the Australian Homeopathic Association (AHA) made a formal complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman against the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) in August 2016…aiming “to hold NHMRC accountable for bias, misconduct and ultimately misleading the public in their inaccurate 2015 report on homeopathy.”
https://justonedropfilm.com/
Short documentary on what actually went down with alleged review of homeopathy.
https://www.scienceinmedicine.org.au/2017/01/28/media-release-its-official-homeopathy-is-a-swindle-time-for-government-action/
Note: The Friends of Science in Medicine (FSM) state that they are “an informal association of medical academics and consumers who are concerned about the misleading promotion of non approved medical therapies to Australian consumers.“ In other words they are against their competition, anything that challenges Big Pharma products.
"BE FISH, FLESH, FOWL OR GOOD RED HERRING" 1906
https://archive.org/details/pathicreco21inte/page/258/mode/2up