Page 1 of 1

Vaccination circa 1799

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 5:15 am
by homeopathus
The following is from a pamphlet published in Gotha, Germany by Dr.
Hahnemann in 1801. Its interesting that by this point he had not
started to dilute the substances but he was moving in that direction.
You can see that Hahnemann certainly did practice homeopathic prophylaxis:

Protection against scarlet-fever
Prophylaxis

But even under the most appropriate and certain medical treatment of
developed scarlatina of a bad type there is always risk of death, of
the most miserable death, and the amount of the countless sufferings
of the patients is not unfrequently so great that a philanthropist
must wish that a means could be discovered by which those in health
might be protected from this murderous children's pestilence, and be
rendered secure from it, more especially as the virus is so extremely
communicable that it inevitably penetrates to the most carefully
guarded children of the great ones of the earth. Who can deny that the
perfect prevention of infection from this devastating scourge, and the
discovery of a means whereby this divine aim may be surely attained,
would offer infinite advantages over any mode of treatment, be it of
the most incomparable kind soever?

The remedy capable of maintaining the healthy uninfectable by the
miasm of scarlatina, I was so fortunate as to discover. I found also
that the same remedy given at the period when the symptoms indicative
of the invasion of the disease occurs, stifles the fever in its very
birth; and, moreover, is more efficacious than other known medicaments
in removing the greater part of the after-sufferings following
scarlatina that has run its natural course, which are often worse than
the disease itself.

I shall now relate the mode in which I made the discovery of this
specific preservative remedy.

The mother of a large family, at the commencement of July, 1799, when
the scarlet-fever was most prevalent and fatal, had got a new
counterpane made up by a semptress, who (without the knowledge of the
former) had in her small chamber a boy just recovering of
scarlet-fever. The first mentioned woman on receiving it, examined it
and smelt it in order to ascertain whether it might not have a bad
smell that would render it necessary to hang it in the open air, but
as she could detect nothing of the sort, she laid it beside her on the
pillow of the sofa, on which some hours later she lay down for her
afternoon's nap.-She had unconsciously, in this way only (for the
family had no other near or remote connexion with scarlatina
patients), imbibed this miasm.-A week subsequently she suddenly fell
ill of a bad quinsy, with the characteristic shooting pains in the
throat, which could only be subdued after four days of threatening
symptoms.
Several days thereafter, her daughter, ten years of age, infected
most probably by the morbific exhalations of the mother or by the
emanations from the counterpane, was attacked in the evening by severe
pressive pain in the abdomen, with biting itching on the body and
head, and rigour over the head and arms, and with paralytic stiffness
of the joints. She slept very restlessly during the night, with
frightful dreams and perspiration all over the body, excepting the
head. I found her in the morning with pressive headache, dimness of
vision, slimy tongue, some ptyalism, the submaxillary glands hard,
swollen, painful to the touch, shooting pains in the throat on
swallowing and at other times. She had not the slightest thirst, her
pulse was quick and small, breathing hurried and anxious; though she
was very pale, she felt hot to the touch, yet complained of
horripilation over the face and hairy scalp; she sat leaning somewhat
forwards in order to avoid the shooting in the abdomen which she felt
most acutely when stretching or bending back the body; she complained
of a paralytic stiffness of the limbs with an air of the most dejected
pusillanimity, and shunned all conversation; "she felt," she said, "as
if she could only speak in a whisper." Her look was dull and yet
staring, the eyelids inordinately wide open, the face pale, features
sunk.

Now I knew only too well that the ordinary favourite remedies, as in
many other cases, so also in scarlatina, in the most favourable cases
leave everything unchanged, and therefore I resolved in this case of
scarlet-fever just in the act of breaking out, not to act as usual in
reference to individual symptoms, but if possible (in accordance with
my new synthetical principle) to obtain a remedy whose peculiar mode
of action was calculated to produce in the healthy body most of the
morbid symptoms which I observed combined in this disease. My memory
and my written collection of the peculiar effects of some medicines,
furnished me with no remedy so capable of producing a counterpart of
the symptoms here present, as belladonna.
It alone could fulfil most of the indications of this disease, seeing
that in its primary action it has, according to my observations, a
tendency to excite even in healthy persons great dejected
pusillanimity, dull staring (stupid) look, with inordinately opened
eyelids, obscuration of vision, coldness and paleness of the face,
want of thirst, excessively small, rapid pulse, paralytic immobility
of the limbs, obstructed swallowing, with shooting pains in the
parotid gland, pressive headache, constrictive pains in the abdomen,
which become intolerable in any other posture of the body besides
bending forwards, rigour and heat of certain parts to the exclusion of
others, e. g., of the head alone, of the arms alone, andc. If, thought
I, this was a case of approaching scarlet-fever, as I considered was
most probable, the subsequent effects peculiar to this plant-its power
to produce synochus, with erysipelatous spots on the skin, sopor,
swollen, hot face, andc.-could not fail to be extremely appropriate to
the symptoms of fully developed scarlatina.

I therefore gave this girl of ten years of age, who was already
affected by the first symptoms of scarlet-fever, a dose of this
medicine, (1\432,000th part of a grain of the extract, which,
according to my subsequent experience, is rather too large a dose.) 1
She remained quietly seated all day, without lying down; the heat of
her body became but little observable; she drank but little; none of
her other symptoms increased that day and no new ones occurred. She
slept pretty quietly during the night, and the following morning,
twenty hours after taking the medicine, most of the symptoms had
disappeared without any crisis, the sore throat alone persisted, but
with diminished severity, until evening, when it too went off. The
following day she was lively, ate and played again, and complained of
nothing. I now gave her another dose, and she remained well, perfectly
well-whilst two other children of the family fell ill of bad
scarlet-fever without my knowledge, whom I could only treat according
to my general plan detailed above; I gave my convalescent a smaller
dose of belladonna every three or four days, and she remained in
perfect health.

Re: Vaccination circa 1799

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 5:20 am
by Irene de Villiers
Homeopathus,
Thanks so much for posting this! I am a great believer in homeopathic
prophylaxis and had not seen quite such firm evidence before that
Hahnemann used it.
homeopathus wrote:
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Re: Vaccination circa 1799

Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:22 am
by homeopathus canheal
I think that the only danger in prophylaxis is
in repeating a potentized remedy too frequently
which could cause a proving and ultimately
engrafting of symptoms.
Prophylaxis should be done with low potencies, infrequently
in my opinion. Here Hahnemann gave material doses every 3
days. Therefore a potentized should probably be given much
less often.

Roger