As an appendix, we can now take a brief look at the most prevalent misrepresentations of homeopathy at present.
The most common misconceptions about homeopathy
If only this were the famous dispute described in *Gulliver’s Travels*, between the bastards who crack a soft-boiled egg at the narrow end and the other bastards who crack it at the wide end!
No, the harsh reality on the ground always sets the record straight: recovery or no recovery? Patients are best placed to judge this, and homeopathy provides us with many sophisticated methods for assessing changes in health status, enabling us to determine whether we are dealing with a cure or merely a masking of symptoms.
Objectivity compels us to acknowledge that mothers are achieving results with a basic knowledge of homeopathy, and this is a very good thing provided that these treatments are properly supervised. Similarly, I do not deny that certain effects can be observed following the use of homeopathic remedies that have been misapplied, as we shall discuss. But are these few, rare results – which are always partial – really due to the method used to select the remedy, given that in the vast majority of cases it is a bitter failure that leads to constantly changing remedies?
In short, a single successful case is of no value in itself. What matters is achieving a consistent rate of 75 to 85 per cent successful outcomes; this is the only proof that a phenomenon is truly understood and mastered.
Sankaran and sensation
‘I prefer an exhilarating lie to a dull, trite truth.’ This statement by Pushkin[1], Sankaran, an Indian practitioner, understood this perfectly. Although not a doctor, but rather the heir to a line of homeopaths – as is often the case there – he has devised a system that fascinates the less educated masses who, sadly, currently make up the bulk of homeopathy’s following. This is the ‘sensation’ method. Of course, all self-respecting homeopaths know that a particular sensation is of paramount importance in diagnosing the remedy, but the extreme here lies in basing the entire approach on sensation, supposedly to uncover what lies deepest within the patient. Adherents prescribe numerous plants and other substances derived, for example, from fish or birds, without the slightest experimental study, but applied in accordance with the theory.
It is clearly not enough for them to violate the first paragraph; they also feel the need to imitate allopathic doctors by prescribing on the basis of theories. Yet Hahnemann had already warned:
‘Let all conjecture, unfounded assertions or fiction be strictly excluded from this materia medica. It should contain nothing but the pure language of nature, examined with care and in good faith.’ (§ 144.)
It will be obvious to everyone that this method discourages a deeper understanding, as it simply involves getting the patient to talk in order to elicit their feelings. It’s a brilliant way to attract uneducated crowds in search of quick-fix cures and hysterical patients who will happily ramble on for hours about whatever you want them to! One doctor had concluded, after many long hours of ‘studying’ the case, that his patient needed a ‘wild’ tree. ’ ‘If you were a tree,’ he asked his patient, ‘which one would you choose?’ The patient replied, ‘An oak!’ and the prescription: acorns…
Sankaran’s idea is based on a thought magical[2] according to which belonging to a particular plant family determines the properties of a medicine. It is as if the label stuck to a bottle conferred the properties of the name printed on it. Here we are disregarding phylogeny, which proves the porosity of the boundaries between species, and ignoring Hahnemann’s position, who had already emphasised that this sort of comparison is pointless because the properties of a single plant vary according to the soil, climate and exposure. How, moreover, can one compare the effects of medicines from the same family (assuming one could even know their limits), given that to prepare one, roots are used; for others, the whole plant; sometimes their fruits; some are macerated, some dried, and some even roasted…
The aim, therefore, is to identify the sensation that best suits the species, and each plant within that species is assigned a position according to the ‘variation’ of that sensation. One soon realises that this is a trick, because searching the repertory for rubrics containing at least n Including family members only produces a biased result. One could easily find a correlation between all medicines whose names begin with the letter Z and also identify common sensations.
Worse still, in order to situate a remedy within his system, the author is forced to resort to ‘miasms’ – most of which he invents entirely from scratch – and which bear no relation to what Hahnemann described as a practising clinician. The true meaning of the term refers to the concept of energetic contamination by an infectious agent. This may be chronic – such as syphilis, sycosis or tuberculosis – or acute – for example, measles, influenza, etc. We retain this archaic term to emphasise that we are referring to contamination on a dynamic, rather than a material, level.
However, Sankaran produces miasms that are supposedly chronic ad hoc such as typhoid, malaria, ringworm and many others, bringing the total to 12. None of these diseases has ever passed on any characteristics to offspring, and it is therefore entirely inappropriate to speak here of chronic miasms. In this system, each remedy within the same family is plotted with the sensation on the y-axis and the ‘miasms’ on the x-axis.
Just one example among thousands: the Asteraceae or Compositae family comprises numerous dicotyledonous plants; it includes nearly 13,000 species divided into 1,500 genera. Honestly, doesn’t the author feel a bit ridiculous with his 12 miasms? What about all the other plants in the same family?
Sequential therapy
‘But noble souls are universal souls, open-minded and ready for anything; if not already educated, then at least capable of being educated. ’ One must have reflected deeply on this maxim by Michel de Montaigne to appreciate what separates us from those narrow-minded people who peddle their harmful fads to an under-educated public.
In Switzerland in particular, TS has attracted many followers. The method, which promises a thorough ‘clean-up’, taps into a powerful subconscious need for cleanliness and order amongst our Swiss friends.***
Only someone with a proper grounding in homeopathy can refute the biased arguments put forward by this approach. We shall briefly comment on what is written on Dr Jean Elmiger’s page.[3] As is customary in such systems, one begins with truisms, followed by a conflation, and finally a diversion.
A truism : “SEQUENTIAL THERAPY is the name given in 1975 by Dr Jean ELMIGER, of Lausanne, to a therapeutic technique inspired by the concept of energy common to all traditional forms of medicine.”
It is worth noting that TS is described by its author as a ‘technique’, which already places it on a par with the many alternative therapies. The paradox is that homeopathy is not just one technique amongst thousands of others; it is the only way to heal using therapeutic agents. It therefore holds absolute value in comparison with all other concepts*** of limited scope, because it is based on a universal law of healing. However, it is only applicable by adhering to a set of aphorisms, each of which has a relative scope.
A truism : “Like classical homeopathy, from which it derives, sequential therapy (also known as sequential homeopathy) recognises an imbalance in vital energy as the cause of both acute and chronic illnesses.”
At least everyone here will agree that we are witnessing a distortion, but who on earth claims to do better than homeopathy, for goodness’ sake! The author has therefore read some of Hahnemann’s work and agrees with him that the root cause of illness lies in an energetic imbalance.
Confusion, misrepresentation and manipulation : But unlike homeopathy, it takes the reasoning a step further than simply noting an imbalance. It asks the key question: Why is the vital energy out of balance? The answer is obvious: because it has been thrown out of balance. By what? By what Dr Elmiger defines as a ‘sequence of events’.
Hahnemann certainly did not wait for Dr Elmiger’s birth to ponder the nature of chronic diseases and, contrary to what is claimed here, the Founder did resolve the problem. As Dr Elmiger has evidently studied homeopathy only very superficially, he conflates here concepts that are elaborated at length in the Organon: he confuses the concepts of chronic diseases with those of interactions between miasms. It is in aphorisms 35 to 40 that Hahnemann examines the interactions of various dissimilar dynamic aggressions, according to their intensity and the length of time they have been established in the organism. To put it simply, it sometimes happens that an aggressive agent, which is dissimilar to the chronic condition existing at the time of its action on the body, is capable of disrupting the existing energetic balance.
If the new agent is extremely potent, it will, in this case, wholly or partially supplant the initial energy pattern, which was characterised by a set of symptoms. A new pattern emerges, and the previous symptoms are partially or wholly supplant.
What is important to understand is that, in response to a triggering factor, the whole body restores its balance, and all the symptoms change. This is what happens, for example, following an emotional shock, a haemorrhage, a trauma or a vaccination.
Elmiger then simplistically misinterprets Hahnemann’s findings by prescribing the supposed causative agent in homeopathic form. One would have to prescribe ‘north wind’ if one had been exposed to the cold, ‘sadness’ or ‘grief’ following a bereavement, ‘a stick’ if one had been beaten, ‘E. coli’ if one had cystitis, the ‘measles virus’ for measles, and so on.
It is so tempting to prepare a homeopathic ‘vaccine’, have people take it, and claim to have ‘cleansed’ the body. These myths are repeated to thousands of gullible patients who are uninformed about what homeopathy really is.
The fundamental misunderstanding stems from a failure or refusal to recognise the totality of symptoms corresponding to the new state of equilibrium. This is Hahnemann’s genius: identifying the totality and prescribing the remedy capable of mimicking that totality. This is the only correct way to apply the law of similars; Hahnemann set out a new paradigm, and the many fools looked at his finger.
It would be tedious to comment on the rest of Elmiger’s text, which is riddled with misrepresentations of homeopathy, falsehoods and pseudo-scientific gibberish[4]. To put it simply, he misappropriates – without citing it – Hering’s Law, which states that symptoms progress from top to bottom, from inside to outside, and in the reverse order of their onset.
This common occurrence for any good practitioner – the reappearance of old symptoms – stems from the fact that the correct medicine, suited to the patient’s current energy level as identified by their current prominent symptoms, provides the system with sufficient energy. Consequently, the symptoms present at the time of prescription – which corresponded to a lower energy level – disappear; this is what is known as a cure. However, the body then finds itself at a previous energy level, which causes the return of the old symptoms that corresponded to that level.
Instead of understanding this natural, clinical progression – characterised by changes in the patient’s overall condition as a result of a sequence of homeopathically selected remedies – Dr Elmiger resorts to arbitrary decisions.
“The first consultation takes a great deal of time to carefully establish the chronological sequence. The most recent event is then neutralised first, followed by the subsequent ones, at a pace dictated by the time required for each correction, which depends on its nature and intensity.”
The framework imposed by the system transforms quick and effective homeopathy into a very lengthy consultation, where, instead of focusing on the patient’s overall condition at that moment and defining it on the basis of characteristic symptoms, arbitrary events are laboriously noted down. What follows is nothing more than a long, draining ordeal to which the unfortunate patients are subjected, in the reverse order of the events deemed key by the prescriber.
There you have it – all this waste is heartbreaking. It boils down to laziness, a lack of training and the absence of a philosophical approach. And, above all, it means patients are missing out on the chance to receive proper care.
Scholten and the Periodic Table of the Elements
For those brave souls who have followed me this far, I must admit I’ve reached the point where I’m sick of having to spend so much time and energy debunking all these theories that lead to harmful advice.
We shall therefore say little about Scholten, who claims to have deciphered the periodic table of elements (PT). According to him, each row and column of the table carries a theme which, when combined, yields the essence of a remedy. We have seen above that defining a remedy by its ‘essence’ is nothing more than a dangerous illusion. This does not deter Scholten’s followers, who take two words spoken by the patient, turn them into row or column themes, and thus devise the chemical combination supposedly indicated for the patient.
Not only is the construction completely ad hoc But the author even goes so far as to move the Carbon column and place it right in the middle of the periodic table. This is enough to turn the stomachs of chemists, physicists and anyone who still has any idea of the meaning of the word ‘science’. ’ The so-called explanation of the properties of arsenic, for example, introduces themes that are found nowhere else but in the box for this element. A remedy as common as Kalium carbonicum is never as described by the theory – though the author seems to have run a bit out of ideas here… There are plenty of other examples.
No longer satisfied with the known elements, Scholten set his sights on the lanthanides, drawing with him numerous pseudo-homeopaths who all claim to be able to treat autoimmune diseases with these substances.
It goes without saying that there has been no experimentation with these drugs, which are prescribed on the basis of a theory – and what a theory, given that the lanthanides themselves are classified according to the author’s whim! Indeed, Scholten has no qualms about lining up the lanthanides and actinides in a row from column 3 to column 17… He draws inspiration for this from diagrams such as the one below, which, due to lack of space, are forced to arrange these elements after marking their positions with an asterisk. This is exactly what happens when Corsica is shown on a map of France, at the cost of a geographical cut-off.
In fact, if we really wanted to incorporate these elements into the practical assignment, we would end up with the following:
This has nothing to do with Scholten’s attractive set-ups. The fraud – for there is no other word for it – becomes apparent as soon as one examines the ‘clinical cases’ as they are presented in videos to a gullible public. First of all, there is no clear reason for the consultation; then the lanthanide is prescribed (one wonders how we ever managed before…) and, hey presto, the patient declares themselves cured…
I was left utterly dumbfounded by the sort of treatment recommendations this leads to in practice, and the level of fundamentalism required to reach that point. It was in Paris during an international conference. The author described the case of a woman suffering from depression who had experienced numerous traumas – in short, the sort of case that, without psychotherapeutic support and hospital care, would never recover. In his view, the author believes that the problem stems from childbirth (!) and that, consequently, she needs oxygen (!) – but what sort of oxygen, he asks? Well, it would have to be ozone (O3) for reasons so far-fetched that I’d rather not go into them here.
As is always the case with this sort of presentation, it’s like magic: the patient is ‘transformed’ overnight, without the slightest adverse reaction.[5] Alas, as we might have expected, the condition relapses, and the author tells us that only a lanthanide can save this unfortunate woman. And as she still needs oxygen, the next step will be lanthanum oxide.
To sink to this level, we can only describe it as quackery. We have reached the stage where prescribers imagine they are playing with the TP as if on a piano keyboard, adding a sprinkling of this and a pinch of that in order to obtain the chemical composition they are after.
CONCLUSION
We might speak of an ocean of negligence, the shores and the rivers that feed into it which we have attempted to describe. For decades I have been observing those who wish to study our subject. Alongside all the ‘genuine’ ones – those driven by philanthropy and who possess sufficient methodological grounding – stands the mass of ‘fakes’, the pretenders. Often these people make a sensational entrance into the school, proclaim their ‘passion’ loud and clear, and mostly seek to charm the head of department. And then, once the dust has settled, there is little or nothing left. All they are interested in is being able to claim that they have ‘studied with Dr Broussalian’, to lend themselves a certain legitimacy and to prescribe a few homeopathic remedies without having to make any effort to learn the subject.
These people then split into two groups. Those who remain close to conventional medicine – which they have never really left – schmooze with people in positions of influence, reinforcing the latter’s view of homeopathy as a placebo. We meet up at the same conferences; we’re all good mates because, at the end of the day, what matters is social recognition and money.
The other group is what I would describe as the ‘enlightened’ or the ‘rootless’. Understanding the mysteries of the universe seems well within their grasp, all the more so as their minds are filled with fragmented notions and syncretism. This gibberish gives an idea of the kaleidoscope that serves as their thought process; they will spend their lives wandering from one system to the next, from one method to another, remaining as superficial and futile as ever.
We must denounce these practices and focus entirely on high-quality teaching by reclaiming Hahnemann’s legacy. Planète Homéo is bringing a breath of fresh air through the rediscovery of the *Organon*, which has been completely neglected for generations. Philosophy thus shows us that medicine is a science, but above all an art. A solid foundation of knowledge is essential, and only the efforts made to acquire it will pay off. It is not enough simply to seek; one must persevere and be prepared to endure hardship.
Gradually, the interplay between science and philosophy is giving rise to a new level of knowledge; prescribing is becoming an art that allows every prescriber the freedom to flourish in their own style, whilst always adhering to the laws that set us free.
The key personal lesson I have learnt comes from the success of many students who are not medical graduates. Indeed, since it seems that medical schools no longer recruit those with a true calling for the profession, these new recruits bring a real breath of fresh air, just as Boenninghausen did in his day. Often brilliant in their own fields (engineers, researchers, physicists, teachers), they acquire the rigour of the Organon and achieve some truly remarkable cures.
Now it is the turn of our dear Jedaïs to step into the arena, to make their mark through their achievements and to promote the medicine of the future!
[1] The Tales of the Late Ivan Petrovich Belkin (1831)
[2] This is the exact opposite of the Hahnemannian approach, which aims to finally free medicine from Paracelsus’s magical thinking and base it on an experimental and scientific foundation.
[3] http://www.jelmiger.com/la-therapie-sequentielle-fr440.html.
[4] "The revitalisation, the cornerstone of homeopathy, combines succussion with successive dilutions and provides access to another space-time, unknown to conventional medicine. It unleashes a great deal of energy and also makes it possible to travel back in time ’ or ‘Dr Elmiger proposes a corrective intervention into the alterations in space-time that precede birth, that is to say, into the genetic code (ancestral energy in Chinese medicine, or the concept of the ‘constitution’ so dear to homeopaths)’
[5] Anyone who has studied the Organon knows that when the correct remedy is prescribed, similar symptoms are bound to appear, especially in a case like this, where the prescriber, having no idea whatsoever of the degree of potentisation, makes the patient swallow a whole tube!
