Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

Homoeopathic stock-taking

D . C. R U S S E L L , M.B., CH.B., F.F.HOM.

Homoeopathy is a practical and successful system of therapeutics. I t is success-


ful when the medicines are prescribed in high potency or in low potency; as a
single dose or as multiple doses; as a single remedy or as mixed remedies; as a
single chemical substance or as a complex chemical substance.
The majority of us would agree that the foregoing are facts. A minority would
ask why it is successful in such various forms, and no one could, tell them why.
Experience has led to such aphorisms as:
1 Low for locals
2 One dose and wait
3 The more acute the illness, the higher the potency and the shorter the
interval between doses
4 The higher the potency the more accurate the prescription must be
5 Repeat more often in children
and so o n . . .
Purists condemn the use of mixed or alternating remedies, on the basis that
the remedy which leads to the resultant cure or amelioration of symptoms is
unknown. Academically this is fair criticism. I n practice, it usually means that
the prescriber did not know which drug was the correct one and that, in the
interests of the patient, circumstances did not permit him to find out. This is
sound practice.
I n any case, the homceopathic purist, to date, has been complacent. His
attitude is static, for in the majority of cases he cannot tell which element of his
remedy is the active one, and it is logical that the purist should know this. For
example Calcarea carbonica is not a single chemical substance. I t is an impure
calcium carbonate and in Clarke's Materia Medica it includes the symptoms of
Calcarea acetica and Calcaria ostrearum (which is the trituration of the middle
layer of oyster shells).
Sanicula contains 14 chemical substances originally!
Some drugs are made from parts of a plant, whilst others, like Pulsatilla, are
made from the entire plant when in flower. The uninformed are apt to deride
some of the instructions laid down with regard to the preparation of our
remedies, and they could well be referred to the article by Dr W. P. Kennedy 1
who said: "It is important to determine when an active principle is present, and
in which part of the plant it occurs." I n one investigation he found t h a t the
ascorbic acid content of oranges in a certain area was very high at the beginning
of the season, but that there was no vitamin C at the end of the season, though
the look and taste of each was the same. He pointed out that the vitamin C
content of rose hips in Scotland was higher than those of the South of England.
He avoided a feud between tribes when one suspected the other of poisoning
their camels. He found that during the brief flowering period of a desert plant,

A paper read to the Faculty of Homceopathy on April 2nd 1964


HOM(EOPATHIC STOCK-TAKING 175

it contained significant quantities of a toxic saponin. The homceopath has


appreciated the differences in results when medicines were not prepared con-
stantly in the same way but, very often, not why.
However, these complex chemical substances carry the magic label "proved",
so they are used freely by the purist without qualm.
And so to the question of provings and of provers, those long suffering,
healthy human beings. From the homceopathic standpoint, how do we deter-
mine who is healthy? The pathologist will define a healthy being as one who has
died and whose cause of death is not found at post mortem examination! But
hardly a suitable subject to act as a prover!
For many years our teachers have taken great pains to emphasize the impor-
tance of mental symptoms, if well marked, and that those symptoms should be
matched with the mental symptoms displayed in the provings of the drugs
to be prescribed. Nowadays, however, doubts have arisen as to whether all the
mental symptoms recorded (and indeed physical symptoms) are a result of the
drugs taken or whether, in fact, they are the products of the circumstances of
the provings. For instance, the mere knowledge of taking part in a proving, in
any capacity, has an effect in the mental sphere. The age group, the sex; social
background; the belief or disbelief in homceopathie principles; how well in-
tegrated is the personality--all these have effect. How much more so did these
factors affect the provings of earlier days? 2, 3
In a paper reviewing provings carried out from 1945 till February 1962 no
prescribing gems were revealed. 4
There were no ragged, unkempt, introspective philosophers; no rumbustious,
brandy-swiUing, music-loving, bad tempered business magnates; no blue-eyed,
pale faced, petulant, weepy, cuddlesome blondes; no sallow, tight-lipped,
scolding, want-to-be-away-from-it-all shrews. The paper agreed with the
suggestion that the clinical use of the remedies in Homeeopathy has often little
to do with the original proving and that it is only by using the substance that
one can come to find out how it should be used. "After all", it was stated, "we
start with a drug proving as a foundation on which to build a picture."
This is in keeping with past and present practice of recording symptoms which
have not been in the original drug proving picture, but which have been
removed by the exhibition of the remedy in question. However, I would em-
phasize that only such symptoms may be added. I do not think that it is
homceopathically accurate or, indeed, helpful, to add any physical or mental
condition which was not changed when the drug was exhibited. When a symp-
tom, or symptoms, have been eradicated by a drug, it is wrong, in my opinion,
to add to the picture of that remedy what the clinician in question considered
to be the constitutional picture of the patient treated. I t may well be that such
additions to the original provings gave rise to the very attractive drug "types".
Surely, it is according to homceopathic principle that the prescribing of Sulphur
on constitutional grounds should result in the philosopher being less ragged,
unkempt and introspective, and that if no change takes place in the picture or
the "type", then the value of these particular labels is suspect. The important
factor in prescribing on mental symptoms is that the mental symptom should be
part of the illness as, for instance, in an acute condition, when a normally self-
reliant person may become fearful, when that fearfulness becomes a very
important symptom.
The application of this fallacious technique is being applied to drugs pres-
cribed on past history.
176 THE BRITISH HOMG~OPATHIC JOURNAL

By all means let us prescribe Nitrous oxide where illness apparently followed
inhalation of the substance, but do not, for one reason or another, t r y to build
it into a constitutional " t y p e " until it becomes as protean in its symptomato-
logy as Sulphur. One of the most important spheres in homceopathic prescrib-
ing is t h a t of prescribing on past history and m a n y examples are to be found in
our literature. 5
I t is common practice to prescribe a nosode where there is a marked family
tendency to a disease, for example, tuberculosis or carcinoma. Again, one must
be careful not to assign to such nosodes the various apparent constitutional
symptoms which disappeared on its exhibition, thus removing the use of
nosodes from the sphere of family history, into that of constitution. These
s y m p t o m s which disappear are secondary to the familial tendency and are the
reaction of the patient to t h a t tendency. I t is only when those pseudo-con-
stitutional symptoms disappear t h a t the true constitutional picture can be
seen. However, it is well worth remembering how the suckling b a b y m a y
require the constitutional remedy of the mother.
Some physicians admit, but privately, to giving a succession of such nosodes
in a chronic case, as they consider that somewhere in the family there is a good
.chance of there having been one or other of the related diseases. I seem to
r e m e m b e r a lady member of the Faculty saying t h a t she automatically gave
Medorrhinum--or was it Lueticum?--to any descendant of a sailor! How far
s h o u l d we go, when we consider the state of civilization of a country can be
judged by the prevalent disease--first leprosy, then yaws, syphilis, tuberculosis,
and now cancer? Nevertheless, prescribing on past and family histories is a facet
o f Homceopathy, the indications for which are basically simple and factual, and
is of particular value when introducing a student to homceopathic prescribing.
So it would appear that we start off with a simple proving which (accurately,
we hope) has other indications tagged on, resulting, in m a n y instances, in com-
]alex pictures. And then what happens? T h e fame of m a n y homceopathic
:physicians lingers on, in m a n y instances on their summaries of ddrug pictures;
their thumbnail sketches; their simplification of ddrug pictures, and I personally
honour them, for I am convinced t h a t in our present state of knowledge of
Homceopathy this (other than reproving the classic remedies) is about the only
field of work available to the clinician in which he can a t t e m p t to simplify
:Homceopathy. Indeed, with reference to even the very limited pictures pre-
sented in the review of provings from 1945-1962 the author did this, when he
said t h a t "part of the object in giving this very brief sketchy outline is to t r y to
give in one word, or in one sentence, a phrase one could remember about each
o f these substances, and therefore know how to use it".
I am, very obviously, convinced that the basic principle is correct. Like does
cure like. However, some of us are still elaborating Homceopathy when,
constantly, we should be simplifying it.
The most successful method of simplification, so far, was the introduction of
repertories. Boerecke's Materia Medica gives 1,414 drug pictures in greater or
lesser detail. Kent's Repertory deals with 529 drugs less than h a l l I f 1,414
drugs are necessary for the most successful practice of Homceopathy, then this
Repertory falls short of necessity. Over the years one studies the prescribing
methods of one's teachers and colleagues and one doubts very much ff any
homceopathie doctor uses more than 250 drugs in his lifetime. Many physicians
s a y t h a t when they repertorize, they are always led to one of some two dozen
well-kn~wn remedies. I f their case-taking is not painstaking and their assess-
HOM(E OPATHIC STOCK-TAKING 177

ment of what is important or not (prescription-wise) is not accurate, this result


is possible in the chronic case. I t would be nonsense to say t h a t it would be
possible in repertorizing acute cases.
The emanometer is used in an a t t e m p t to make the prescribing of remedies
more accurate and it m a y well be so. A selection of possible remedies is made in
the normal way, when use of the emanometer m a y indicate the most likely of
these remedies or another remedy in the same emanometer group. The skill
required to operate an emanometer is specialized and it is obviously more
time-consuming. Dr McCrae 6 gave a very detailed report on this aspect of
prescribing and at one point he said: "The cumbersome technique which is now
available, and which has just been described, is really out of the question for
our solution." But here again an a t t e m p t is made to simplify prescribing, b y
placing 357 remedies in different groups according to the emanometer evalua-
tions of them.
Clinical experience suggests that the vast number of drugs which have been
proved are unnecessary, and if this is so, then the proving of new substances a t
random does absolutely nothing towards simplifying the practice of Homceo-
pathy.
I t is the commonly frequent experience of beginners and experts alike t h a t
the choice of a remedy is anything but clear, and that a group of remedies con-
tains all the symptoms which have to be "matched"; or again, that when two
similarly experienced homceopaths are presented with the same s y m p t o m
complex, very often each is prepared to prescribe a different remedy.
One way of simplifying the present practice of Homceopathy would be to
subject all the known drug pictures to statistical analysis, so planned that only
the symptoms indigenous to each drug were finally recorded. This would be a
m a m m o t h task for no known machine can read the typed word without
elaborate "programming".
The last time I had the honour of being asked to address the Faculty, I under-
took just such a task, but on a very small scale. I n that paper, I showed that the
mental symptomatologies of the compound drugs of Calcium were practically
valueless, as they were also present in the separate radicle drugs. ~
For those who still believe that repertorizing and past provings are of value
in the prescribing of homceopathic remedies, a further simplification in the use
of the repertory is possible, although a great deal of work would be entailed in
the first instance. Accepting the limitation that not all the symptoms in the
repertory can be found in the appropriate drug in materia medicas and vice
versa, the logical simplification to take place, with regard to speeding up the
choice of one remedy or a small group of remedies, is some form of mechanical
selection, based on the patient's symptomatology as elicited and assessed by the
physician.
This would entail numbering every rubric and subdivision in Kent's Reper-
tory and possibly Robert's "Sensations as if " and these numbers, with the
appropriate drugs, entered in a system of punch cards.
We would then have Kent's Repertory installed in a modern machine which,
when all the relevant numbers were selected, would indicate only those drugs
containing the patient's symptom complex.
This might well simplify the most difficult task in repertorizing, viz. the choice
of the first rubric. A s time would not be so domineering, a more general rubric
could be taken first. For example, one could start with the rubric Headaches in
general; Anxiety in general, etc., before considering the more detailed modalities.
178 THE BRITISH HOM(EOPATHIC JOURNAL

Such a method would be more widely selective but quicker, and would in no
way eliminate the considered judgement of the physician. I t would also be, I
fear, expensive, but, if a sufficiently great number of physicians still believe
implicitly t h a t past and present provings and the Repertory cannot be improved
on, worth while.
Most of us have heard it said that there is no need to explain Homceopathy,
as its results speak for themselves. This is usually proclaimed with reference to
proving its t r u t h to other physicians, but there are very few young homceopaths
who are satisfied with the present methods and the uncertainties involved.
Over the years we have listened with interest to the Place of Homoeopathy
in (the then) Modern Medicine. But the modern medicine of today is ancient
tomorrow. We have been content to bask in the knowledge that Homceopathy
was, and is, ahead of its time.
I t is of vital importance t h a t we, and our successors, should know how to
prescribe more accurately than b y our present methods. When we do, our
results will certainly speak for themselves.
Would t h a t I could agree with Plato (in his Critias) when he says t h a t the
explanation of these things is not difficult of which we can have experience!!
The only worth-while research carried out by a homceopath for Homoeopathy
was t h a t of the late Dr W. E. Boyd. I t was the endcavour of a working lifetime
to prove scientifically t h a t a homoeopathic potency (involving succussion) had
a form of activity. This he did and published in great detail, s
He showed t h a t Mercuric chloride up to the 32nd centesimal potency
accelerated the hydrolysis of starch with diastase, and that Strophanthus
sarmentosis in the same potencies altered the heart rate of frogs.
H a h n e m a n n put the principle Like cures Like into medical practice.
We know from clinical experience and from the laboratory verification of
Boyd that the homceopathic potency is an active agent.
Who will tell us what this activity is?
Galileo said (The Two Sciences): "for human nature is such that men do not
look with favour upon discoveries--either of truth or fallacy--in their own
field, when made by others than themselves." Most homceopaths have been
content to practise as they had been taught to practise by their more ex-
perienced colleagues, and I feel t h a t we must instigate a search for our answer,
outwith the very limited confines of our faculty.
The first objective in our search must be a greater understanding of succus-
sion. Dr Clive Nicholson 9 referred to physicians in the past who believed that
finally the physicist would tell us. I n considerable detail he spoke of some
aspects of molecular physics which he felt might influence our thinking on
succussion. W h a t in fact does it do? A simple example of succussion is demon-
strated in most school classrooms. A partly filled, closed cylinder of water is
upended in rapid succession when the column of water falls to the bottom of the
cylinder each time and finally a measurable increase in the temperature of the
water takes place. That is, energy is transformed into heat.
I t is known that an atom consists basically of a nucleus which is positively
charged electrically and t h a t the size of this positive charge determines the
number of electrons which constantly orbit round the nucleus. (These electrons
are negatively charged.) Work is required to move electrons farther away from
the nucleus, which work is then stored as increased potential energy of the
whole atom. Given a sufficient amount of energy, an electron can leave its
particular atomic field permanently and so become a free electron. (The rest of
HOMG~ O P A T H I C STOCK-TAKING 179

the atom is left with a positive charge and is called an ion.) These free electrons
and remaining ions move in opposite directions and collide with non ionized
atoms in two ways:
1 I n an "elastic" collision when the target atom takes up extra energy in
kinetic form, i.e. its velocity is increased but its internal structure remains
the same.
or
2 I n an "inelastic" collision when the target atom stores energy in potential
form when one of its electrons jumps to a position farther away from the
nucleus (when the atom becomes "excited" as it is called), and when this
electron requires less energy applied to it to throw it clear from its atomic
nucleus and become "free".
One can visualize such a free electron of a nucleus--of an atom---originally
from a molecule--of a substance to be used as a homceopathic remedy, affecting
the atomic field of a molecule of the solution in which the substance is being
prepared. One begins to realize how the energy imparted b y an outside source
(succussion) is stored in the homceopathic potency as a potential energy of
constant level.
The chemical composition (i.e. the molecular and atomic structure) of the
solute (or "medicine") will determine the degree to which the solvent is affected
b y succussion and therefore different levels of energy are produced by the
differing solutes ("medicines"). I n the same way, one begins to realize how
differing homceopathic potencies can have differing energy levels.
B U T - - i s it possible for the degree of succussion used in the preparation of
homceopathic medicine to set up such a reaction? For instance, when Hofstader
and his collaborators were investigating the nucleus of an atom, they bombarded
atomic nuclei with high-energy electrons, which were accelerated in electric
fields of several hundred million volts, in an instrument weighing some 250 tons.
Even if it is theoretically possible, does any means exist today to measure these
different energy levels? "These experiences which are used to prove a scientific
truth, are, for the most part, artificial experiences of the laboratory, gained
after the truth itself has been conjectured" (William James).
I f any such physical change takes place in homceopathic succussion and it
can be measured, one of the greatest difficulties in homceopathic practice will be
overcome, and that is making a final choice from a group of equally well indi-
cated drugs. And the reason will be t h a t m a n y of our chemically Complicated
remedies will act physically in precisely the same way as each other and produce
the same energy level. (At present, it is believed that each electron is the same
as any other.)
Here then will take place the greatest simplification of Homoeopathy so far,
namely, that m a n y of our well and less well proved drugs will be found to have
the same energy level and that their respective potencies will have the same
energy levels.
At this stage we will have groups of remedies which we will know to possess
the same energy level and their composite maCeria medica will equate with a
measurable energy level. Then a new materia medica would be useful, but it
would probably be shortlived for this, so far, obviously deals with the more
accurate knowledge of the activity of the drugs without reference to the patient.
I t has been obvious for m a n y years that certain illnesses produce a measurable
rise in body temperature and t h a t certain inflammatory states have caused an
increase in local temperature, e.g. furuncles, cellulitis, etc. We know t h a t steps
180 THE BRITISH HOM(EOPATHIC JOURNAL

are being taken to measure the local rise in temperature caused in the body in
some conditions not considered in this way before. Infra-red thermography is
the term used to describe the method employed, for recording an image repro-
duction of the infra-red radiation emitted b y the body surface, as a function of
the skin temperature. Again, this has only become possible because of the recent
developments in electronic components giving sufficiently good resolution with
infra-red wavelengths of limited power. The present camera is the Pyroscan
Mark I I developed by S. Smith & Sons and is sensitive to a radiation wavelength
extending to about 5.5 microns, a micron being a wavelength of 10 -4 cm.
Having in mind the possibility of temperature changes in the production of a
homceopathic potency, the immensity of the problem of measuring this energy
in a simple, practical form, to me, as a layman in the field of physics, is appalling.
You will remember that beyond the range of infra-red waves come successively
light waves, ultra violet waves, x-rays and t h a t the energy of x-rays is equiva-
lent to 40,000 electron volts. One electron volt is the energy required to move
one electron through a potential difference of one volt; which is very small!
I n scientific history there are innumerable instances of hypotheses having to
await the advance of practical scientific method to prove them. This can be
understood, but there are times when observed f a c t s also must so await. For
example in 1898 Camillo Golgi saw tenuous networks of substance when he
examined microscopically the stained brain cells of a barn owl. Over the next
50 years some 2,000 scientific papers argued about it. I n 1945 most leading
scientists pronounced the network a delusion and the flow of papers stopped.
Within two years, the electron microscope demonstrated the reality of the
Golgi network.
The speed with which new discoveries are being made in physics is almost
unbelievable and I will give you one example. Between 1930 and 1960, twenty-
five elementary particles were discovered. I n the single year ~1961, thirty-four
more were discovered. (One of these--the neutrine--is believed to serve only as
an energy carrier in various kinds of transformations.) Many of these particles
travel with the speed of l i g h t - - t h i r t y thousand million centimetres per second
- - a n d since their diameters are about point-twelve noughts-three of a ccnti-
metre, the time they stay in contact in the case of a simple collision and bounc-
ing back would be point-twenty-two noughts-one of a second (George Gamow).
This gives us some idea of the smallness of measurements which are now
possible.
As m o r e sensitive means of measurement are devised, the energy level of the
body and of parts of it will be charted, in health and disease, and be as common-
place as the electrocardiogram and the electroencephalogram. Such a hypothesis
would, ][ think, be acceptable to those of us who believe that the human body
has forces which are similar in nature to those forces contained in the potentized
remedy.
We will then prescribe preparations of drugs of known energy level, on the
symptomatology presenting (noting the local and general energy levels of the
body). Afterwards, the changes of body energy level will be noted and charted,
in relation to the energy level of the drug prescribed successfully. We will have
been able to build up a materia medica which will be a chart of the disturbances
of energy level of the body and the energy level of the homceopathie potency
required, to bring the energy level of the disease back to t h a t of health.
We might well take to heart the words of H a r v e y (Animal Generation) when
he referred to "The age we live in, when men, inclined to idleness, prefer going
HOM(EOPATHIC STOCK-TAKING 181

wrong with many, to becoming wise with the few, through dint of toil and
Outlay of money".
The "outlay of money" is pertinent.

REFERENCES
1 Kennedy, W. P., The Practitioner, January 1963, p. 10.
Brieger, J. E. G., "Does pleasure benefit?", Brit. Horn. J., 50, 57, January 1961.
s Nicholson, B. Clive, "Placebo reactors", Br/t. Horn. J., 52, 143, July 1963.
4 Raesido, J. R., "A review of recent provings", Brit. Horn. J., 51, 188, July 1962.
5 Foubister, D. M., "The significance of past history in homceopathic prescribing", Bri~.
Horn. J., 52, 81, April 1963.
s McCrae, W. R., "A summ~ry of forty years' study of potency energy", Brit. Horn. J., 50,
143, July 1961.
7 Russell, D. C., "The mental symptomatology of Calcium compounds", Brit. Horn. J., 40,
July 1950.
8 Boyd, W. E., "Biochemical and biological evidence of the activity of high potencies",
Brit. Horn. J., 44, 7, January 1954.
Nicholson, B. Clive, "The nature of potency energy", Bri~. Ham. J., 50, 165, July 1961.

DISCUSSION

DR W. THOMSON WALKER: Congratulations and thanks for an interesting


and provocative paper. Dr Russell's reflections cover a wide area of the theory
and practice of our art and I shall take up just a few of the very many points
raised.
We all agree that varying potencies are effective and some would agree that
mixtures in the continental manner are also efficacious, but as Dr Russell
rightly pointed out, even in so-called pure potencies, particularly of organic
substances, there are liable to be considerable differences in chemical constitu-
tion from sample to sample according to their source of origin, and therefore in
the resulting potencies and, to some extent, the provings.
I also agree most heartily that simplification of the teaching and practice of
Homceopathy is urgently required and that there are two main points at which
this should be applied:
The materia medica, where only the universally agreed symptoms of provings
should be retained and all the useless dry wood cut out ruthlessly. I t is mostly
"padding", symptoms produced by one prover, and needlessly fogs the issue. As
has been said, we usually get our initial guidance in choice of remedy from the
proving and subsequently use it empirically from our knowledge and experience
of the action of the drug.
The second simplification should be in the repertory. I t is surely indefensible
that there should be examination questions as to "where 'so-and-so' may be
found in the repertory"! The repertory is an index of symptomatology grouped
regionally which should be self-explanatory. I t is a serious defect that this is
not so in the case of the best-known repertories. This makes the study of
Homceopathy needlessly difficult and discouraging. A small alphabetically
arranged index would easily dispose of this particular difficulty. (I think t h a t
Dr Russell could very well do this himself!)
I n m y view repertorizing in the classical Kentian manner is seriously limiting
in the choice of remedy. I have watched the masters of this method at work and
]82 THE BRITISH HOM(EOPATHIC JOURNAL

admired their successes, but noted with interest that invariably their final
prescription was limited to one of twenty well-known remedies. Dr Russell
suggests that few of us in a lifetime ever use more than 250 remedies. I counted
as a matter of interest and find that although I use fewer than I had supposed I
have used well over 300 remedies, though the ones in daily use are far fewer.
I n an a t t e m p t to find an easier and perhaps more accurate way of prescribing
I tried a South American punch card index system. The light shines through the
punch-holes where the remedy has the symptom named on the card in its
proving. I used it for three months and found it completely unsatisfactory.
Polyehrests always turned up, after quite tedious manipulations of the cards.
Dr Russell would like us to simplify further by use of computers. No doubt
this is theoretically feasible and with their ability to be programmed to give
priority to "mentals" and "peculiars" computers would doubtless do better than
select polychrests every time which we could do ourselves without this fan-
tastic expense. But should we emulate the hospitals which are already toying
with "penny-in-the-slot" diagnostic machines of this character?
Dr Russell deprecates proving new drugs "at random". Our provings here
have been carefully planned, are instructive, and although not spectacular
in results are undoubtedly the "life blood" of Homceopathy and do not com-
plicate but widen the usefulness of Homceopathy. I t ' s the repertories that
complicate! I find it difficult to follow Dr Russell's reasoning when he says t h a t
"'exhibition of Sulphur should change a Sulphur type of personality". This is
certainly not m y idea of the function of a deep-acting constitutional remedy.
I have been unable to follow Dr Russell with understanding into the field of
nuclear physics. I understood him to say t h a t several remedies might have the
same or similar energy levels residing in their free unattached electrons,
neutrons or neutrines, and so should be interchangeable yet alike in effect. Is
this correct?
Is the quantity of this energy in a n y way related to the mass of the remedy
or is it a specific quality like a wave rate or a vibration? Or is the energy im-
parted to the inert substance b y succussion? I n this case succussion would
become all important and the remedy of less account?
This emphasis upon "energy" calls to mind the phenomena of radiesthesia,
emanometry, dowsing and the like, which appear to detect energies and locate
them with considerable accuracy. Could this be the same kind of energy?
Personally I think that the answer is more likely to be in the phenomenon of
resonance and tuning in to particular wavelengths.
The fact t h a t people are now thinking in terms of physics instead of chemistry
is in itself a great advance toward the understanding of Homceopathy even
though at present we seem to be still in the realm of speculation and dreams of
the future rather than practical politics, and certainly very far away from
Similia Similibus!
Although he did not say so, I expect that Dr Russell intends t h a t we shall
still after all the simplifications and possibly mechanical computer-like selection
of the remedies give them in little homceolaathic phials and not as radio-
isotopes!
Finally, Dr Russell's stock-taking seems to pinpoint some pitiful inadequacies
in the state of our stock of which m a n y of us are very conscious. Let us hope that
some of us will take up the challenge which this presents.
Thank you again, Dr Russell, for your excellent paper.