John Michel Warner
In the field of therapeutics, Homoeopathy, now-a-days, is considered to be the most competitive one. Despite its innumerous examples of success, it has failed to make a place in the mainstream medical sectors because it still lacks a scientifically proved theoretical basis and laboratory-evidences. As a result, it is regretfully considered as ‘alternative treatment method’. But if Samuel Hahnemann’s therapeutic philosophy were properly understood, it would have occupy the highest seats of the medical schools. Or, at least it would have been taught in the mainstream medical universities. However, researchers, around the world, are endeavoring heart and soul to discover laboratory evidences in support of homoeopathic therapeutic concepts. In this paper, I have attempted to contribute a little bit to their effort by explaining the mechanism-of-action of Silicea, one of the very useful medicines of homoeopathy from an immunological perspective.
Moreover, I have tried to interpret mathematically the actions of Silicea on human body and how those actions cure our ailments. Obviously, all these interpretations are purely theoretical and further researches are necessary to discover the specific effects of this medicine. Such mathematical interpretation of the effects of Silicea on organisms like human body necessarily can answer many questions which have remained unanswered so far. For example, we now know why oral and olfactory administration of homoeopathic medicines is more effective than the intravenous injection. We further can argue if some medicines need to reach the stomach in order to be effective. Also, the mathematical interpretation of the homoeopathic medicines, presented in this paper, can help us to explain why several molecules of some toxic crude medicines can set the patients free off some functional diseases so rapidly and, at the same time, to explain homoeopathic treatment takes so much time to cure. Let us proceed.
Hahnemann’s Postulation and Warner’s Momentum
The counter immune response which any poisonous substance induces in human body has been manipulated by a number of different therapeutic methods such as isopathy, immunotherapy, vaccination, etc differently. The techniques and strategies of manipulating the counter immune responses make all those differences among those therapeutic methods. So, if the law of “similia similibus curantur” is taken into consideration in its literal sense, isopathy and vaccination can be broadly aligned with the mainstream homoeopathic philosophy. Whereas for vaccination, dead or attenuated germs of the same disease are used to induce adaptive immunity as prophylaxis of the same disease before the infection, dead or attenuated germs of a disease are used to induce immune response against any disease after the infection.
In homoeopathy, there are no rigorous criteria that the immune-response inducer must be of the same disease; rather traditionally it is believed that the medicines are selected according to the similarity of symptoms, though the ‘selection of medicine according to the similarity of symptoms’ is not always true. For example, check the rubrics from any homoeopathy repertory and the suggested medicines for them. You will find that almost of thirty percent of the symptoms are missing in the suggested medicines in the Materia Medica. I am doubtful whether some of those symptoms were produced during the proving of the related medicine. For example, open the “stomach” chapter of the Synthesis by Dr. Frederick Shroyens and search for the rubrics, “nausea>coition, during: Sil, Sabad”, “nausea > bread after: Ant C, Zinc”, “Nausea> amorous caresses, from: Ant C, Sabad”, etc. I checked for the related medicines in several Materia Medicas. Unfortunately I found those symptoms missing in those material medicas. So, I am almost sure that selection of homoeopathic medicines is not determined by the ‘law of similarity’ alone. Rather evidences of successful clinical experiences have helped those medicines to make a place in the repertory.
Conclusion
I hope this immunological and mathematical interpretation of the mechanism-of-action of homoeopathic medicines like Silicea will help therapeutic researchers to embrace Hahnemann’s therapeutic philosophy and reexamine the efficacy of homoeopathic medicines in curing ailments. It will further help researchers to use the discoveries of modern immunology to explain the medicinal properties of smaller dose of toxic substances. Indeed, this mathematical model of the mechanism-of-action will help the doctors to understand why painkillers should not be prescribed, when the antibiotics will fail and how homoeopathic medicines invalidate the use of antibiotics. Physicians can utilize the mathematical model of Hahnemann’s vital force to assess the stage of the patient’s immune deficiency and to select the relevant medicines. Last but not the least, this model will help the physicians to guess why their prescribed medicines are supposed to fail the desired results.
Email : jmwarnerx@gmail.com
Be the first to comment