...Let me go a bit further. Paul described the classical view that the "stronger" medicinal action of the remedy displaces the disease, replaces it then disappears leading to cure; that is what we are told in classes, am I right?
Now, let's go back to burn/scald treated with warm/hot applications: you do not apply anything hotter than what has caused that burn, do you? You apply something similar but different, hence confirming the Law of Similars...it is good enough for most of us as it works, but how does it work?
Applying cold, will numb the nerve endings, leading to relief of pain, but it will eventually aggravate the burn through vasoconstriction; in every thermic injury, there is a centre with maximum destruction, a periphery with reversible changes and a borderline area that can go either way; cold will constrict the vessels in that borderline area, leading to necrosis; warmth will lead to vasodilatation, increased drainage of toxic matter, increased oxygenation and increased nutrition, leading to repair of that area, ending with a more limited damage or even no destroyed tissues...that is the physiology underlying the Law of Similar in the cases of burns and scalds, and it explains also very well why doing that can increase the pain sensation as the nerve endings are also stimulated and send the pain signal to the brain. Every time I have to redo my First Aid Certification, I have a malignant pleasure explaining that to the class and see the inner furore of the instructor...ha ha ha...
This type of mechanism of action of the Law of Similars does exist for each and every situation. Because I have no access to Physics Labs, I cannot test my generalised hypothesis about clathrates, receptors, etc,...so I am stuck right now.
Makes better sense?
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
www.naturamedica.co.nz