The ABC Homeopathy Forum
The theory of suppression Page 5 of 5
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
I find this old post from Astra interesting and fitting into this discussion.
*********
Re: Organon-The original. From Astra2012 on 2004-10-22
meanwhile, looking for something else, I found this on supression
Hope you'll find it interesting.
SOME THOUGHTS ON SUPPRESSION
by Peter Morrell
The best I can do is to list a summary of the main points followed by some discussion. This is then followed by some quotes from Close, Kent and Hahnemann about this topic.
The main points about suppression are as follows:
1. in general terms it can be defined as the apparent amelioration of a group of (usually localised) symptoms in a case, either by a non-homeopathic drug or technique, or by a homeopathic drug that is not the simillimum for the case, and which only covers some of the symptoms;
2. suppression is any unaccountable change in a case; it is usually a medicinal effect --ie. the effect of a medicinal substance upon health; not all substances are medicinal, but those which are can either be used toxically or therapeutically;
3. it produces an effect nearer to the 'toxic' end of the toxotherapeutic spectrum;
4. it is not an effect produced by the simillimum;
5. it is not a healing effect, but is detrimental to health in the short or longer term;
6. it is often seen when a medicinal substance is applied to the skin for conditions like eczema, psoriasis or warts; another good example is haemorrhoids; the healing of wounds is not included and nor can the killing of bacteria with antiseptics (including natural ones) realistically be viewed as suppression; antiperspirants suppress a natural bodily function and thus can be included, as can creams, sprays and ointments for fungal infections like Athlete's foot; or those which relieve muscular pains; and zinc oxide creams for baby's nappyrash;
7. there may be a short or long gap in time between the use of a suppressive substance and the appearance of its suppressive effects;
8. it often results from the abuse of material doses of drugs;
9. it can also stem from too frequent repetition of homeopathic drugs, which are ill-suited to the case; and especially if this has been done over a long period and in high potency;
10. the suppressive remedy is often a minor remedy;
11. the suppressive remedy often covers only a small compass of the patient's symptoms;
12. not being the simillimum, it is not acting as a form of similars; the suppressive remedy is related to the case, but one which matches it only imperfectly;
13. the suppressive remedy can be a remedy the patient is particularly sensitive to, but one which is incapable of generating a healing response;
14. most of surgery, herbalism and allopathy are regarded by most homeopaths as forms of suppression; there is at best only conflicting evidence in support of this view;
15. suppression is especially beloved by the dogmatic Kentian school, and therefore finds special emphasis by American homeopaths in general; they seem to accept the whole concept as an act of blind faith and thus become very angry against those who question at a more fundamental level the value, nature or even existence of suppression;
16. suppression sits hand-in-glove with Hering's Law; yet Hering's so-called Law was never a law, but merely a set of obseravtions which can sometimes be made; that it has become a fixed dogma so easily again testifies to homeopaths' apparent desire for mythologies within their belief system; I would question how many people actually observe Hering's Law or suppression to be occurring unless they are 'out hunting' for it anyway; should we genuinely rely upon the biased testimony of someone wanting to see something happen as evidence for its actual existence?
17. any change within a case must flow either from an action of the Vital Force, or from the action of a remedy; if we can ascertain that it is neither, then it must be regarded as the result of a suppression from a medicinal substance;
18. all changes in cases can be viewed as either events of healing or events of disease --this good rule-of-thumb allows us to analyse more clearly what is happening;
19. cases progress under their own steam; the patient gets better or worse under the influence of treatment; there is a problem relating to how long we decide to view an aggravation as 'temporary' before we choose to review the case or intervene to alleviate the patient; patients must only be allowed to suffer for so long; badly managed cases and those with a long history of allopathic abuse necessarily require stoic use of sac lac and the courgae to keep going even when unpleasant symptoms are still emerging from old suppressions;
20. we must always strive to be good neutral observers; we watch how the case changes under the influence of a remedy; we try our best to interpret those changes; it is often very hard to decide which changes are due to the healing action of a remedy, which to the Vital Force and miasms, and which to a suppressive agent; entertaining fixed dogmas greatly hamper this process of neutral observation as they bring to the case a pile of preconceptions about what is actually happening and 'crowd-out' our direct perception; we must strive to view the case neutrally and assess what is happening as either healing and therefore GOOD, or suppressive and therefore BAD.
Discussion
While most of the above points are, I hope, self-evident truths, there is a need to expand upon some of them in greater detail.
In point 8 and 9 it is clear that suppression involves a material dose or very frequent or long-continued abuse of a potentised drug. In both cases the organism is brought under excessive influence of the drug and not only suffers directly for that, but also starts to actually become a proving of that substance.
In points 10 11 and 12 it is clear that the suppressive drug is not the simillimum and covers only a portion of the case. It therefore follows that proper use of the repertory and taking of the full case should never lead to suppressions of any kind.
The problem with point 16 is that this view of suppression derives from Swedenborgian dogmas about the nature of the organism and all those Kentian hierarchies with mind and nervous system at the top and skin at the base. One is at liberty to accept those dogmas or reject them. There is only conflicting evidence at best, that the organism actually works in that way and it is better in my view to just keep your own counsel and watch how the organism operates for yourself.
In the Kentian viewpoint suppression and Hering's laws are gleefully grasped as important dogmas which confirm each other and the rest of the hierarchy ideas. They use one dogma to confirm belief in another and like dogs chasing their tails, they call that science. Its a weird form of science that never bases its assertions upon direct observation of living things, but upon preconceived dogmas. It is a rigid and inflexible belief-system, which most self-styled classicalists seem keen to push at the rest of homeopathy.
Hahnemann, Kent and Close on SuppressionIn relation to the idea of what a 'medicinal substance' is, Hahnemann in the Organon gives some ideas about that. The following quotes relate also to the primary and secondary effects:
'...primary action is to supress every irritation;..Cantharides to stimulate the urinary passages...large doses of purgative drugs...which excite the bowels to frequent evacuation;...stimulates only in its primary action...stimulating in their primary action only...' (p58) Aph 59
'...electricity and galvanism, with in their primary action greatly stimulate muscular action... this action is only a primary action, and that the organism, after it has passed, most certainly falls back, in the secondary (antagonistic) action, into still greater stupor and immobility...' (p59) Aph 59
'Every agent that acts upon the vitality...deranges more or less the vital force...this is termed the primary action...' (p61) Aph 63
'...after the primary action of a medicine that produces in large doses a great change in the health of a healthy person....' (p62) Aph 65
'...in experiments with moderate doses of medicine on healthy bodies, we observe only their primary action...' (p83) Aph 114
All quotes come from the combined 5th/6th edition of Boericke and Dudgeon.
Close:
'Suppression or palliation of disease is the removal of the external symptoms of disease by external, mechanical, chemical or topical treatment; or by means of powerful drugs, given internally in massive doses, which have a direct physiological or toxic effect but no true therapeutic or curative action.' [pp.75- 76]
Kent:
'Do not apply externally the indicated remedy. If it does no good there is no use in using it. If it cures it does so by healing up the external disease before the internal one is cured and thereby leaving no opportunity for the internal disease to come out.
The healthier the patient becomes the more likelikood there is for an eruption upon the skin. The vital energies must be sufficient for this. A cure progresses from within outward.'
'It would seem that the most natural thing to do is to remove external obstructions, but I warn you, anything that comes from within must be treated from within.' [from his Lesser Writings]
Hahnemann frequently discusses suppression The following is merely a guide to some of the more important references to it in the Organon.
In aph 46 he says that a case of blindness was brought on 'for two years after the suppression of a scalp eruption.'
In Aph 59 he talks of suppressing coughs with Opium '..in its primary action it suppresses all irritation...if the physician continues to suppress it with increasingly strong doses of this palliative, fever and night sweats are added to the disturbance.'
In Aph 69 he states that 'the palliative remedy makes the vital force insensible to the natural disease...'
In Aph 185-206 he discusses at length with many examples the horrors of treating 'local diseases' using internal and external drugs in various doses as a great folly and entirely unhomeopathic.
In Aph 235 he discusses the pernicious effects of the suppressive treatment of fevers.
In Aph 276 he discusses again the ill-effects of high doses in 'local diseases'.
In Aph 285 he discusses the ill-effects of suppressing skin eruptions with local applications.
Likewise in Aph 289 he returns to the discussion of various forms of suppressive events and practices.
The above quotes are from the Kunzli/Naude translation.
Sources:
Close, Stuart, 1924, The Genius of Homeopathy, Jain reprint
Hahnemann, Samuel, 1981, The Organon, Kunzli, Naude translation
Hahnemann, Samuel, c1930, The Organon, combined 5th/6th edition, Dudgeon & Boericke
Kent, James Tyler, c1900, Lesser Writings, Aphorisms & Precepts, Jain
**********
Murthy
*********
Re: Organon-The original. From Astra2012 on 2004-10-22
meanwhile, looking for something else, I found this on supression
Hope you'll find it interesting.
SOME THOUGHTS ON SUPPRESSION
by Peter Morrell
The best I can do is to list a summary of the main points followed by some discussion. This is then followed by some quotes from Close, Kent and Hahnemann about this topic.
The main points about suppression are as follows:
1. in general terms it can be defined as the apparent amelioration of a group of (usually localised) symptoms in a case, either by a non-homeopathic drug or technique, or by a homeopathic drug that is not the simillimum for the case, and which only covers some of the symptoms;
2. suppression is any unaccountable change in a case; it is usually a medicinal effect --ie. the effect of a medicinal substance upon health; not all substances are medicinal, but those which are can either be used toxically or therapeutically;
3. it produces an effect nearer to the 'toxic' end of the toxotherapeutic spectrum;
4. it is not an effect produced by the simillimum;
5. it is not a healing effect, but is detrimental to health in the short or longer term;
6. it is often seen when a medicinal substance is applied to the skin for conditions like eczema, psoriasis or warts; another good example is haemorrhoids; the healing of wounds is not included and nor can the killing of bacteria with antiseptics (including natural ones) realistically be viewed as suppression; antiperspirants suppress a natural bodily function and thus can be included, as can creams, sprays and ointments for fungal infections like Athlete's foot; or those which relieve muscular pains; and zinc oxide creams for baby's nappyrash;
7. there may be a short or long gap in time between the use of a suppressive substance and the appearance of its suppressive effects;
8. it often results from the abuse of material doses of drugs;
9. it can also stem from too frequent repetition of homeopathic drugs, which are ill-suited to the case; and especially if this has been done over a long period and in high potency;
10. the suppressive remedy is often a minor remedy;
11. the suppressive remedy often covers only a small compass of the patient's symptoms;
12. not being the simillimum, it is not acting as a form of similars; the suppressive remedy is related to the case, but one which matches it only imperfectly;
13. the suppressive remedy can be a remedy the patient is particularly sensitive to, but one which is incapable of generating a healing response;
14. most of surgery, herbalism and allopathy are regarded by most homeopaths as forms of suppression; there is at best only conflicting evidence in support of this view;
15. suppression is especially beloved by the dogmatic Kentian school, and therefore finds special emphasis by American homeopaths in general; they seem to accept the whole concept as an act of blind faith and thus become very angry against those who question at a more fundamental level the value, nature or even existence of suppression;
16. suppression sits hand-in-glove with Hering's Law; yet Hering's so-called Law was never a law, but merely a set of obseravtions which can sometimes be made; that it has become a fixed dogma so easily again testifies to homeopaths' apparent desire for mythologies within their belief system; I would question how many people actually observe Hering's Law or suppression to be occurring unless they are 'out hunting' for it anyway; should we genuinely rely upon the biased testimony of someone wanting to see something happen as evidence for its actual existence?
17. any change within a case must flow either from an action of the Vital Force, or from the action of a remedy; if we can ascertain that it is neither, then it must be regarded as the result of a suppression from a medicinal substance;
18. all changes in cases can be viewed as either events of healing or events of disease --this good rule-of-thumb allows us to analyse more clearly what is happening;
19. cases progress under their own steam; the patient gets better or worse under the influence of treatment; there is a problem relating to how long we decide to view an aggravation as 'temporary' before we choose to review the case or intervene to alleviate the patient; patients must only be allowed to suffer for so long; badly managed cases and those with a long history of allopathic abuse necessarily require stoic use of sac lac and the courgae to keep going even when unpleasant symptoms are still emerging from old suppressions;
20. we must always strive to be good neutral observers; we watch how the case changes under the influence of a remedy; we try our best to interpret those changes; it is often very hard to decide which changes are due to the healing action of a remedy, which to the Vital Force and miasms, and which to a suppressive agent; entertaining fixed dogmas greatly hamper this process of neutral observation as they bring to the case a pile of preconceptions about what is actually happening and 'crowd-out' our direct perception; we must strive to view the case neutrally and assess what is happening as either healing and therefore GOOD, or suppressive and therefore BAD.
Discussion
While most of the above points are, I hope, self-evident truths, there is a need to expand upon some of them in greater detail.
In point 8 and 9 it is clear that suppression involves a material dose or very frequent or long-continued abuse of a potentised drug. In both cases the organism is brought under excessive influence of the drug and not only suffers directly for that, but also starts to actually become a proving of that substance.
In points 10 11 and 12 it is clear that the suppressive drug is not the simillimum and covers only a portion of the case. It therefore follows that proper use of the repertory and taking of the full case should never lead to suppressions of any kind.
The problem with point 16 is that this view of suppression derives from Swedenborgian dogmas about the nature of the organism and all those Kentian hierarchies with mind and nervous system at the top and skin at the base. One is at liberty to accept those dogmas or reject them. There is only conflicting evidence at best, that the organism actually works in that way and it is better in my view to just keep your own counsel and watch how the organism operates for yourself.
In the Kentian viewpoint suppression and Hering's laws are gleefully grasped as important dogmas which confirm each other and the rest of the hierarchy ideas. They use one dogma to confirm belief in another and like dogs chasing their tails, they call that science. Its a weird form of science that never bases its assertions upon direct observation of living things, but upon preconceived dogmas. It is a rigid and inflexible belief-system, which most self-styled classicalists seem keen to push at the rest of homeopathy.
Hahnemann, Kent and Close on SuppressionIn relation to the idea of what a 'medicinal substance' is, Hahnemann in the Organon gives some ideas about that. The following quotes relate also to the primary and secondary effects:
'...primary action is to supress every irritation;..Cantharides to stimulate the urinary passages...large doses of purgative drugs...which excite the bowels to frequent evacuation;...stimulates only in its primary action...stimulating in their primary action only...' (p58) Aph 59
'...electricity and galvanism, with in their primary action greatly stimulate muscular action... this action is only a primary action, and that the organism, after it has passed, most certainly falls back, in the secondary (antagonistic) action, into still greater stupor and immobility...' (p59) Aph 59
'Every agent that acts upon the vitality...deranges more or less the vital force...this is termed the primary action...' (p61) Aph 63
'...after the primary action of a medicine that produces in large doses a great change in the health of a healthy person....' (p62) Aph 65
'...in experiments with moderate doses of medicine on healthy bodies, we observe only their primary action...' (p83) Aph 114
All quotes come from the combined 5th/6th edition of Boericke and Dudgeon.
Close:
'Suppression or palliation of disease is the removal of the external symptoms of disease by external, mechanical, chemical or topical treatment; or by means of powerful drugs, given internally in massive doses, which have a direct physiological or toxic effect but no true therapeutic or curative action.' [pp.75- 76]
Kent:
'Do not apply externally the indicated remedy. If it does no good there is no use in using it. If it cures it does so by healing up the external disease before the internal one is cured and thereby leaving no opportunity for the internal disease to come out.
The healthier the patient becomes the more likelikood there is for an eruption upon the skin. The vital energies must be sufficient for this. A cure progresses from within outward.'
'It would seem that the most natural thing to do is to remove external obstructions, but I warn you, anything that comes from within must be treated from within.' [from his Lesser Writings]
Hahnemann frequently discusses suppression The following is merely a guide to some of the more important references to it in the Organon.
In aph 46 he says that a case of blindness was brought on 'for two years after the suppression of a scalp eruption.'
In Aph 59 he talks of suppressing coughs with Opium '..in its primary action it suppresses all irritation...if the physician continues to suppress it with increasingly strong doses of this palliative, fever and night sweats are added to the disturbance.'
In Aph 69 he states that 'the palliative remedy makes the vital force insensible to the natural disease...'
In Aph 185-206 he discusses at length with many examples the horrors of treating 'local diseases' using internal and external drugs in various doses as a great folly and entirely unhomeopathic.
In Aph 235 he discusses the pernicious effects of the suppressive treatment of fevers.
In Aph 276 he discusses again the ill-effects of high doses in 'local diseases'.
In Aph 285 he discusses the ill-effects of suppressing skin eruptions with local applications.
Likewise in Aph 289 he returns to the discussion of various forms of suppressive events and practices.
The above quotes are from the Kunzli/Naude translation.
Sources:
Close, Stuart, 1924, The Genius of Homeopathy, Jain reprint
Hahnemann, Samuel, 1981, The Organon, Kunzli, Naude translation
Hahnemann, Samuel, c1930, The Organon, combined 5th/6th edition, Dudgeon & Boericke
Kent, James Tyler, c1900, Lesser Writings, Aphorisms & Precepts, Jain
**********
Murthy
♡ gavinimurthy last decade
To post a reply, you must first LOG ON or Register
Important
Information given in this forum is given by way of exchange of views only, and those views are not necessarily those of ABC Homeopathy. It is not to be treated as a medical diagnosis or prescription, and should not be used as a substitute for a consultation with a qualified homeopath or physician. It is possible that advice given here may be dangerous, and you should make your own checks that it is safe. If symptoms persist, seek professional medical attention. Bear in mind that even minor symptoms can be a sign of a more serious underlying condition, and a timely diagnosis by your doctor could save your life.