Minutus

I am undertaking research from a homeopathic point of view on Charles de
Coti Marsh and producing a paper. His work is not homeopathic as such but I
know there may be people from different backgrounds subscribing the Minutus
who may care to comment on his work from a homeopathic slant.

He was a chemist, osteopath, nutritionist, psychologist who did ground
breaking work on arthritis in the 1930s to 1960s. He founded the Arthritic
Association and his work still continues in many forms today. He took
homeopathic ideas, although from archive material he was definitely not
trained!, He was not working as a homeopath.

Summarizing: CdCM states that there are two basic types arthritic diseases
arising from Bacillus Coli and Sodium Chloride. (He mentions Boericke
Materia Medida here and appears to be talking about Natrum Muriaticum).
These two things chemically disrupt the potassium in the blood stream and
makes blood gummy. Earliest symptoms would be catarrh, digestive and bowel
disorders. Potassium is responsible for the fluid condition of the blood.
Salt saturates the muscular tissues, degenerates the adrenal glands and
causes rapid arthritic development. It is a lack of potassium in the system
that causes arthritis.
Potassium 'K' deficiency, he states, is attributable to many diseases of
mental, glandular, circulatory, nervous, digestion, muscular and articular
type. He discusses potassium as the balancer of the elements in Group One
of the Periodic Table and believes that Potassium should be above hydrogen
in this table.
He states that by reconstructing the atomic picture and restoring the atomic
integrity of the atom 'K' the potassium substances in the bloodsteam are
again restored to the condition enjoyed before disruption took place.
He developed 'K' compound which he states matches the electro chemical
content of the nature substances in the K atom. He does make a passing
reference to the work of Dr Scheusler.
This is now: Charcoal BPC34 300mg; Kali Mur 6X, Kali Bich6X, Kali Sulph 6X,
Kali Carb 10X, Kali Brom 8X, Kali Chlor 8X. This is suspended in carbo veg.

He used a limited number of homeopathic remedies alongside which, he says,
are a transformation of the old homeopathic remedies which he 'stabilized'.
His method, he states, was the first known means to calibrate homeopathic
quantities used in dispensing remedies to a known and accepted valency in
standard physics; by this means converting particles of 'K' atom to a form
of measurement by which they could be dispensed.
He says he carried out the first scientific investigation into Arnica and
invented a method of stabilisation of the remedy so each tablet would be
fresh for years (Comments appreciated very much here).
His Rhus Tox was the outcome of ten years bio-chemical research in Europe
and Canada and is now standardized.
He also used Oil of Garlic tablets, Nux Vomica,Hammelis (recommended in
place of aspirin), Thuja, Colchicum These were used daily over a number of
months.
Bacillus Coli 30c one powder night and morning was given.

He discusses the reasons why one person gets a disease and not another. The
origin of the disease is in the bloodstream. No mention of miasms here.

This is necessarily a very brief outline of his work. It would be really
appreciated for your comments from a homeopathic point of view. He makes no
mention of miasms which are many of the reasons as to why one person gets a
disease and not another; how did he 'stabilize' Arnica in a different
fashion from that applied by Hahnemann and followers; he only used a very
limited amount of homeopathic remedies, probably using the work of
Scheussler on tissue salts, not working to rubrics and the individual
constitution of his patients. It seems a scatter gun approach that is
definitely not balanced. However, he had tremendous results with, roughly
90% of success. He went against medical opinion of the day and worked on
homeopathic principles initiating natural process of restoration. He gained
much respect during his life which continues to this day.

I apologise in advance to those who might think that this is not what
Minutus should be discussing. I would just like to get some learned
comments.

Many thanks for your attention

Glenda

Hi, Glenda --
I can't offer learned comments on any of this, but some things are clear to the homoeopathically trained even from your quick summary of his work, and perhaps it would help if I pointed them out.
(1) The "first known means to calibrate homoeopathic quantities" was undertaken at the end of the eighteenth century by Samuel Hahnemann, who for exactly that purpose used precise serial dilution -- which, of course, resulted in his discovery that a medicine's dynamic properties in a diluent vehicle may be as evident after as before its substance has been diluted.
(2) Pathogenetic trials of Arnica were performed long before CdCM, to use your abbreviation of his name, studied it. Why CdCM would regard those studies as unscientific escapes me, but I'd be interested to know.
(3) CdCM's ideas on the origins of at least certain forms of arthritis and the balancing role of K against Na may be spot on, but "reconstructing the atomic picture and restoring the atomic integrity of the atom 'K'" seems to be a meaningless description, suggesting that his knowledge of chemistry was limited. Still, perhaps it's just the terminology, and he really means something else.
(4) Stabilisation of Arnica or of any other plant with any chemical other than ethanol is likely to alter its medicinal properties, necessitating fresh pathogenetic trials -- due to which CdCM might validly claim the first scientific study of that preparation of Arnica. And, though another preservative substance, such as methanol, might equally be used instead of ethanol, unless it is used consistently as a diluent in potentising the preparation (as alcohol is), it risks becoming a second medicinally active substance and destabilising the pathogenesis. Many such alternative preservatives (including, of course, methanol) are far more serious risks to health than ethanol is, so their use here would seem to be problematic.
(5) The meaning of "results" and their "success" in assessing them as being tremendous is relevant if comparing them with the results of homoeopathy, whose ends are rather unusually all-encompassing.
(6) How you gauge that CdCM worked on homoeopathic principles is not clear, but your sentence saying so suggests that you gauge it by his attempt (perhaps successful) to initiate a natural process of restoration. If this amounts to a curative process, it's a good standard, but does not mean that his methods or even his results are homoeopathic. (Acupuncture, for instance, is well capable of the same thing, but cannot by any stretch be called homoeopathic.)
What is clear by your description is that CdCM did not attempt to choose a substance capable of mimicking the totality of a patient's symptoms. In fact, merely his use of more than one medicinal substance at the one time shows that he had some other aim in mind than a symptom match. So I think it's safe to say that he did not, in prescribing these mixtures, work on homoeopathic principles. The elements that some call principles of homoeopathy that go to make up its one essential principle are: a single substance used as a medicine (in potency or crude); a knowledge of its effects on the healthy (its pathogenesis); a knowledge of the totality of the symptoms to be cured; and a comparison of the latter with the former (and with other medicines' pathogeneses).
This last point is not to denigrate CdCM's achievements in any way, incidentally, as he may be the largely unrecognised discoverer of a novel and easily applicable approach to cure; it's merely to correct the record of his having implemented a homoeopathic method in his use of "homoeopathic" potencies.
I hope that that's of some little help, anyway.
Cheers!
John
2009/7/29 GLENDA FRASER >

Hi John
Many thanks for your very welcome and useful comments. From reading CdCm's
work it has become very obvious that he was never trained in homeopathy. He
claims though that this is what he was doing. It is my remit to find out
just what principles he was using, if any, and make comments and point out
the philosophies and totality of symptoms used when working with homeopathy.

There are reams of appreciative letters from his patients so cannot reject
his work. A lot of success was based on the work he did in nutrition,
natropathy, osteopathy. As you rightly say though, his work is not
homeopathic.

It appears that he was in Switzerland in 1921 studying biochemistry and, I
am assuming but do not know for certain, became aware of the work of Dr
Scheussler. Mention is made only once of Boericke, who wrote a book with
Dewey on the Twelve Tissue Salt Remedies. This I am assuming again is what
started his interest in homeopathy and the use of tissue salt Kali in his
"K" Compound.

My knowledge on how you can 'stabilize' homeopathic remedies into a tablet
is non existent.

I very much appreciate your time in replying. It has been extremely
helpful.

All the best

Glenda

Hi, Glenda --

Yes, very interesting; thanks. And you're very welcome.

Kindest regards --

John
2009/8/4 GLENDA FRASER >