Argument
There are two important principles of homeopathy. First, “like cures like”, which means if the symptoms of disease can be reproduced in the healthy body by a drug, then that drug is effective in that disease.
Similar symptoms in the remedy remove similar symptoms of the disease. The eternal, universal law of Nature, that every disease is destroyed and cured through the similar artificial disease which the appropriate remedy has the tendency to excite, rests on the following proposition: that only one disease can exist in the body at any one time. (Bennett & Brown, 2008, p. 16)
Second important principle of homeopathy is, “Dilution potentiates the action of drugs. Homeopathy outlines the therapy for various ailments with drugs in very high dilutions” (Satoskar et al., 2015, p. 1). “Lower concentration of a remedy (properly diluted and shaken vigorously {succussed}), the greater the effectiveness” (Marderosian et al., 2000, p. 1770). According to Hahnemann, the effect of drugs is potentiated by dilution even to the extent that an effective dose may not contain a single molecule of drug. Regarding dilution, “Thirtieth potency (1 in 1030), recommended by Hahnemann, provided a solution in which there would be one molecule of drug in a volume of a sphere of literally astronomical circumference” (Bennett & Brown, 2008, p. 16).
Both of these principles of homeopathy were analyzed and found that the conclusion drawn by Hahnemann was wrong. “Hahnemann’s first principle was a generalization based on the fact that a large dose of cinchona bark induced in him a malarial paroxysm. The reason for this occurrence being that he had previously suffered from malaria and the gastric irritation excited the paroxysm” (Modell et al., 1976, p. 9).
Hahnemann could not understand the fact that his suffering with malaria and gastric irritation by cinchona bark was responsible for his recurrence of paroxysm. The cinchona bark contains quinine alkaloid. This alkaloid has antimalarial action. “In malarial fever, quinine has a direct action on the organism causing the disease and suppresses the elevated body temperature. Quinine may exercise a true antipyretic action. The effect of quinine on normal body temperature is negligible” (Krantz & Carr, 1965, p. 158). “Quinine has analgesic and antipyretic action and a definite lowering of body temperature occurs in fever from any cause. For this reason quinine has been used in many symptomatic remedies” (Dipalma, 1965, p. 1388).
Rigors or chills are common at the onset of various febrile disorders and may occur at regular or irregular intervals. The cardinal feature of rigor is shivering. Chills and rigors may be produced and perpetuated by intermittent administration of an effective antipyretic agent. This may cause a sharp depression of a raised temperature in a febrile state which precipitates involuntary muscular contraction. (Hart, 1985b, p. 737)
“Initially rigors also occur in acute gastrointestinal disorder” (French, 1945, p. 744).
There is always a possibility of relapse of malaria. Relapses of malaria occur when malarial parasites persisting in the liver, reenter the bloodstream, and patients should be followed for one month to detect the infection (Plorde, 1983, pp. 1190–1192). The form of malarial parasite that persists in the liver is not destroyed by quinine present in cinchona bark. It was observed, “Malaria may remain latent for many years. Reappearance is brought about by cold, general depression of health or through some intercurrent malady” (Hart, 1985a, p. 285).
The main constituent of cinchona bark is quinine. “Oral administration of quinine often results in nausea, vomiting and epigastric pain” (Satoskar & Bhandarkar, 1988, p. 655).
By these observations we can conclude the following:
- Quinine is the main component of cinchona bark, which is effective against malarial fever. Effect of quinine on normal body temperature is negligible.
- Hahnemann had suffered from malaria. Just after this, he took cinchona bark and got malarial paroxysm. The cause of this incidence can be explained as: (a) within one month of malarial attack, the chance of malaria relapse is very high. Relapse may occur by acute gastrointestinal problem or any intercurrent malady. Hahnemann had taken cinchona after symptomatic cure of malaria. Gastrointestinal problems created by cinchona could be responsible for recurrence of malarial paroxysm. Normal body temperature is not altered and malarial paroxysm does not occur in a normal healthy person after taking cinchona. (b) Second explanation can also be given for recurrence of malarial paroxysm. At the time of Hahnemann, the actual cause of malaria was not known. Ronald Ross discovered the transmission of malaria by anopheline mosquitoes in 1897 and also discovered malarial parasites, and diagnosis of malaria depends on identification of the parasite in the blood (Park, 1997, pp. 188–193). The paroxysm of fever with chill, which Hahnemann suffered after taking cinchona, might not be malaria, because at that time the cause of malaria was not known. So confirmation of malaria was not possible by demonstration of malarial parasites in blood. There are so many causes of fever with chills. It might be possible that Hahnemann had suffered from other diseases having symptoms of fever with chill. It was just coincidence that at that time he took cinchona and he wrongly concluded that this paroxysm was of malaria and due to cinchona.
If the principle of homeopathy is true, then quinine should produce rigor in a healthy body. But studies say that quinine does not produce rigor. If Hahnemann is true, then quinine should produce rigors in the healthy body because quinine is effective in malaria, which is characterized by rigors with fever. I will write again that in medical science, conclusions cannot be drawn by single observation or observation in a few persons. Those doctors who believe in single observation or observation in a few persons and draw conclusions on this basis only don’t know anything regarding medical science. During single observation or observation in single or few persons, there are various factors which may influence the observation and thus give wrong conclusions.
Hahnemann and his followers made this mistake. In therapeutics, controlled study and experiments on many patients, decided with the rules of statistics, should be done to draw the right conclusion.
