Undoubtedly, the good effect produced by a well-chosen remedy is heightened and strengthened by the mental and magnetic influence of the prescriber. The positive faith of the physician in the efficacy of the remedy, his sympathy and his indomitable will to assist the sufferer affect both the physical substance of the remedy and the mind of the patient.
The varying mental and magnetic qualities of prescribers have undoubtedly much to do with the varying degrees of efficaciousness of the same remedy when administered by different physicians.
The true Hahnemannian homeopath, who believes in his remedies as in his God, will concentrate his intellectual and spiritual forces on a certain remedy in order to accomplish certain well-defined results. The bottle is not allowed to become empty. Whenever the graft runs low, it is replenished with distilled water, alcohol, milk sugar, or another "vehicle." Every time he takes the medicine bottle into his hands, these potent thought forms are projected into it: "You are the element sulphur. You produce in the human body a certain set of symptoms. You will produce these symptoms in the body of this patient."
If there is any virtue at all in magnetic, mental and spiritual healing, the homeopathic remedy must be an effective agency for transmitting magnetic, mental and psychic healing forces from prescriber to patient.
Transmission of these higher and finer forces, whether directly, telepathically or by means of some physical agent, such as magnetized water, a charm or simile, etc., is the modus operandi in all the different forms of ancient and modern magic, white or black. It is the active principle in mental healing, Christian Science, sympathy healing, voodooism, witchcraft, etc.
Homeopathy and the Law of Dual Effect
I have formulated the Law of Action and Reaction in its application to the treatment of diseases as follows:
"Every agent affecting the human organism has two effects: a first, apparent, temporary one and a second, lasting one. The second effect is directly opposite to the first."
Allopathy, in giving large, physiological doses, takes into consideration only the first, apparent effect of the drug, and thereby accomplishes in the long run results directly opposite to those which it desires to bring about. It produces the very conditions it tries to cure. As an example, note the permanent effects of laxatives, stimulants and sedatives upon the system. This has been explained more fully in Chapter Six.
On the other hand, the homeopathic physician may use the same remedies as the allopath, provided they produce symptoms similar to those of the disease, but he administers the different drugs in such minute doses that their first effect is noticed only as a slight "homeopathic aggravation," while their second and lasting effect is relied upon to relieve and cure the disease.
In other words, homeopathy produces as the first effect the condition like the disease, and counts on the second and lasting effect of the drug to bring about a permanent change.
If, in accordance with the Law of Dual Effect as applied to drugs, the primary, temporary effect of the homeopathic remedy is equal to the disease, it is self-evident that the secondary, lasting effect of the remedy must be equal to the cure.
This law has been proved by homeopathy for over a hundred years. An experienced homeopathic prescriber would no more doubt it than he would doubt the Law of Gravitation.
Homeopathy and the Law of Crises
Therefore, if the remedy be well chosen in accord with the Law of ~similia similibus curantur,~ the first homeopathic aggravation, which corresponds to the crisis of Nature Cure, will be followed by speedy and perfect readjustment. Nature has her way, the disorder runs its course, and the return to normal conditions will be quicker and more perfect than if the homeopathic remedy had not been employed or if Nature's healing processes had been forcibly interrupted and suppressed by large, poisonous allopathic doses. Homeopathy assists Nature in removing the old encumbrances, whereas allopathy changes the acute, inflammatory healing effort into chronic, destructive disease.
The Economics of Homeopathy
The Law of ~like cures like~ is of great practical importance from another point of view, namely, that of economics.
The best engineer is the one who accomplishes the maximum of results with the minimum of expenditure of force and with the least friction. The same is true of the physician and his remedies.
We have learned that drugs given in the coarse allopathic doses attack and affect the organism as a whole. If, for instance, there is a catarrhal affection of the serous and mucous membranes of the respiratory tract accompanied by fever, the allopath will give quinine in large doses to change this condition. He may accomplish his aim; but if so, he does it by paralyzing the heart, the respiratory centers, the red and white blood corpuscles and the excreting cells of the mucous membranes. The body as a whole and certain parts in particular are saturated with the drug poison and correspondingly weakened. As allopathy itself states it: "Quinine reduces fever by depressing the metabolism" (the vital functions).
Homeopathic materia medica teaches that ~Bryonia~ has a special affinity for the mucous and serous membranes of the respiratory tract and that its symptomatic effects correspond closely to those described in the preceding paragraph.
If, in accordance with the Law of ~similia similibus curantur,~ a homeopathic dose of Bryonia be given to a patient exhibiting these symptoms, the remedy, as has been demonstrated, will assist Nature in her work of cure; and in doing this, it will not attack and affect the entire organism, but only those serous and mucous tissues for which it has a special affinity and which, as in the case of this patient, are the most seriously affected.
To state it in another way: the large, allopathic dose paralyzes the whole organism in order to produce its fictitious cure. The small, homeopathic dose, on the other hand, goes right to the spot where it is needed, and by mild and harmless stimulation of the affected parts, assists and supports the cells in their acute eliminative efforts.
Homeopathic medication, therefore, is not only curative in its effects, but also conservative and in the highest degree economic.
Homeopathy, a Complement of Nature Cure
Having proved the accuracy of Hahnemann's Law of ~similia similibus curantur,~ and having occasion daily to observe its practical results in the treatment of acute and chronic diseases, we should not be justified in omitting homeopathy from our system of treatment. The attenuated homeopathic doses of certain drugs may be of great service in bringing about the acute reactions which we so earnestly desire, especially in the treatment of chronic diseases of long standing.
I am aware of the fact that in severe and obstinate conditions homeopathy is often apparently of no avail. But when the system has been purified and strengthened by our natural methods, by a rational vegetarian diet, hydrotherapy, chiropractic or osteopathy, massage, corrective exercise, air and sun baths, normal suggestion, etc., the homeopathic remedies will work with much greater promptitude and effectiveness.
It is the combination of all the different healing factors which constitutes the perfect system of treatment.
No disease condition, whether apparently hopeless or not, can be called incurable unless all these different healing factors, properly combined and applied, have been given a thorough trial. It is no charlatanic boasting, but the simple truth, when we affirm that the different natural methods of treatment, as we of the Nature Cure school apply them, can and do cure so-called incurable diseases, such as tuberculosis, cancer, locomotor ataxy, epilepsy, eczema, neurasthenia, insanity and the worst forms of chronic dyspepsia and constipation, always providing that the patient possesses sufficient vitality to react to the treatment and that the destruction of vital parts and organs has not advanced too far.
The Diphtheria Antitoxin
In this country the antitoxin treatment for diplitheria is still in high favor, while in Germany, where it originated, many of the best medical authorities are abandoning its use on account of its doubtful curative results and certain destructive after-effects.
According to the enthusiastic advocates of this treatment among the "regular" physicians in this country, the antitoxin is a "certain cure" for diphtheria; but how is this claim borne out by actual facts?
The Health Bulletins sent regularly to every physician in the City of Chicago by the City Health Department show an average of from fifteen to twenty deaths every week from diphtheria treated with antitoxin.
I do not deny that the antitoxin treatment may have reduced somewhat the mortality percentage of this disease, allowing even for the great uncertainty of medical statistics. But we of the Nature Cure school claim and can prove that the hydropathic treatment of diphtheria shows a much lower percentage of mortality than the antitoxin treatment.
The crucial point to be considered in this connection is: What are the after-effects of the different methods of treatment?
This is a very important matter. I make the following claims: that the antitoxin, being itself a most powerful poison, may be and often is the direct cause of paralysis, or of death due to heart-failure. That diphtheria treated with antitoxin may be and often is followed by paralysis, heart-failure, or lifelong invalidism of some kind after the patient has apparently recovered from the disease. That these undesirable after-effects of diphtheria do not occur when the disease is treated by natural methods, but that they are the result of the antitoxin treatment and of its suppressive effect upon. the disease.
To prove my claims, I submit the following facts: I have in my possession clippings from newspapers from different parts of the country stating that death had followed the administration of the diphtheria antitoxin for prevention or "immunization," that is, where the individual had been in good health at the time the antitoxin was given.
Several cases of this kind created quite a sensation in Germany about fifteen years ago. Dr. Robert Langerhans, superintendent of the Moabit Hospital in Berlin, a strong advocate of the antitoxin treatment and also of vaccination, had been one of a committee of three appointed by the municipal government of the German metropolis to investigate the efficiency of the diphtheria antitoxin. As a result of his findings, he had recommended its free distribution to the poor of the City of Berlin.
Not long thereafter the doctor's cook was suddenly taken ill with severe pains in the throat and sent to the hospital. It was thought to be a case of diphtheria, and the doctor, to protect his little son, one and one-half years old, against possible infection, administered an injection of antitoxin. Shortly afterward the child developed symptoms of blood-poisoning and died of heart-failure within twenty-four hours.
It is customary in Germany to insert a death-notice in one of the local newspapers and to invite the friends of the family to the funeral. In his announcement in the columns of the "Lokalanzeiger," Dr. Langerhans stated explicitly that his little son had died after an injection of diphtheria antitoxin for immunization.
Another similar case is that of Dr. Pistor, a prominent Berlin physician, whose little daughter contracted a slight inflammation of the throat. The child was given an injection of antitoxin, and this was followed by a severe and protracted illness.
Very significant, in this connection, are certain utterances of Dr.William Osler in his "Practice of Medicine." He says, on page 150:
" Of the sequelae of diphtheria, paralysis is by far the most important. This can be experimentally produced in animals by the inoculation of the toxic material produced by the bacilli. [This is the active principle in the antitoxin. Author's note] The paralysis occurs in a variable proportion of the cases, ranging from 10 to 15 and even to 20 per cent. It is strictly a sequel of the disease [of the disease treated with antitoxin?—Author's note], coming on usually in the second or third week of convalescence. . . . It may follow very mild cases; indeed, the local lesion may be so trifling that the onset of the paralysis alone calls attention to the true nature of the disease. . . .
"The disease is a toxic neuritis, due to the absorption of the poison. . . .
"Of the local paralysis the most common is that which affects the palate. . . . Of other local forms perhaps the most common are paralysis of the eye muscles. . . . Heart symptoms are not uncommon. . . . Heart-failure and fatal syncope (death) may occur at the height of the disease or during convalescence, even as late as the sixth or seventh week after apparent recovery."
It appears to me that the mystery of these "sequelae" can easily be explained. It is certain that a mere "sore throat," not serious enough to be diagnosed as diphtheria, cannot produce paralysis or heart-failure; but we know positively that the antitoxin can do it and does do it. The cases that Dr. Osler refers to undoubtedly received the antitoxin treatment, because it is administered on the slightest suspicion of diphtheria, nay, even to perfectly healthy persons "for purposes of immunization."
Then is it not most likely that these "mysterious after-effects" are caused rather by the highly poisonous antitoxin than by the "sore throat?"
In my own practice, I am frequently consulted by chronic patients whose troubles date back to diphtheria "cured" by antitoxin. Among these I have met with several cases of idiocy and insanity, with many cases of partial paralysis, infantile paralysis, and nervous disorders of a most serious nature, also with various other forms of chronic destructive diseases.
In the iris of the eye, the effect of the antitoxin on the system shows as a darkening of the color. In many instances, the formerly blue or light-brown iris assumes an ashy-gray or brownish-gray hue.
My secretary who is taking this dictation and who has brown eyes, tells me that her mother informed her that up to her tenth year her eyes had been of a clear blue. About that time she had several attacks of diphtheria and a severe "second" attack of scarlet fever, which were treated and "cured" under the care of an allopathic physician. She does not remember whether she was given antitoxin, but recalls that her throat was painted and her body rubbed with oil, and that she had to take a great deal of medicine. Since that time her eyes have turned brown. They show plainly the rust-brown spots of iodine in the areas of the brain, the throat, and other parts of the body.
The effect upon the iris of the eye would be very much the same whether the attacks of diphtheria had been suppressed by antitoxin or by the old-time drug treatment. A significant fact in this connection is that, since Mrs. C. is with us, following natural methods of living and under the effects of the treatments which she has been taking regularly for several months, her eyes have become much lighter and in places the original blue is visible under the brown. The nerve rings in the region of the brain, which were very marked when she came to us, have become less defined. There is a corresponding improvement in her general health, and especially in the condition of her nerves.
In regard to my claim that undesirable after-effects do not occur under treatment by natural methods, I wish again to call attention to the fact that for fifty years the Nature Cure physicians in Germany have proved that hydropathic treatment of diphtheria is not followed by paralysis, heart-failure, or the different forms of chronic, destructive diseases.
This has been confirmed by my own experience in the treatment of diphtheria and other serious acute ailments.
A Reply to My Critics
My discussions of the germ-theory of disease and of the vaccine, serum, and antitoxin treatment in a series of articles entitled: "Harmonies of the Physical" and published in "Life and Action" called forth a great deal of adverse criticism from physicians of the regular school of medicine. The following paragraphs are extracts from a letter sent by one of these critics to the editor of the above-named magazine:
" . . . I am convinced that some statements have been published in this particular issue [October-Decemher, 1912] which have no proper place in this magazine, the earnest champion of the cause of Truth and the official organ of expression of the U. S. headquarters of the movement which you evidently have at heart."
Dr. E. then refers to certain passages in my article in the October-December, 1912, number of "Life and Action," and comments upon them by quoting Drs. Osler and Andrews in favor of the antitoxin treatment in diphtheria and by giving his own opinion on the subject. He concludes his arguments as follows:
"I am a subscriber to this magazine and have also had my sister's name put on the mailing list. She has a little boy about two years old. Now, suppose she should read that article of Dr. Lindlahr's, and as a result, refuse to permit the use of antitoxin, and if the boy should get diphtheria, with a fatal issue as a result, I could hardly feel gratified over the fact that I had placed that reading-matter at her disposal. I fully appreciate the fact that such an unhappy result might easily ensue in some one or more of the families who read 'Life and Action' and look upon its columns as a source of the truly higher light."
Perhaps Dr. E. has not read one of Dr. Osler's latest and strongest utterances, his unqualified endorsement of natural methods of healing in the Encyclopedia Americana, quoted on page 154 of this volume.
Nature Cure in Germany
That it is possible to cure all kinds of serious acute diseases by drugless methods of healing, has been proved by the Nature Cure practitioners in Germany, nearly all of whom were laymen who had never visited a medical school. For over half a century, many thousands of them have been practicing the art of healing in all parts of Germany. With hydrotherapy and the other natural methods they have treated successfully typhoid fever. diphtheria, smallpox, appendicitis, cerebro-spinal meningitis and all other acute diseases.
It is a significant fact that, in spite of the most strenuous opposition and appeal to the law-making powers on the part of the regular school of medicine, the lay doctors could not be prevented from practicing the natural methods of treatment in law-and police-ridden Germany.
On the contrary, during the last few generations there have been practicing in Germany at all times an ever increasing number of Nature Cure physicians, most of them laymen.
This freedom of Nature Cure practice in Germany is entirely due to the success of its methods.
And this success has been demonstrated in spite of all kinds of opposition and attempted restriction. While the Nature Cure practitioner is permitted to treat those who come to him for relief, he does not have the right to cover his mistakes with six feet of earth. If one of his patients dies, a doctor of the regular school of medicine has to be called in to testify to the fact and issue the death-certificate.
Thus the "lay doctors," the "Nature Cure physicians," were and are at present constantly exposed to the strictest critical supervision by the "regulars," and if the latter can prove that a patient has died because the natural methods were inefficient or harmful, the lay practitioner can be prosecuted for and convicted of malpractice or man-slaughter.
But in point of fact, while a number of these lay physicians were brought before the courts, in no instance could the actual harmfulness of the methods employed by them be proven. The natural methods of treatment became so popular that, as a matter of self-preservation, the younger generation of physicians in Germany had to fall in line with the Nature Cure idea in their practice.
Since Dr. E. so strongly questions the efficacy of our methods, I may be permitted to say something about my own professional experience.
Nature Cure in America
During the last ten years, I have treated and cured all kinds of serious acute diseases without resorting to allopathic drugs. In a very extensive practice, I have not in all these years lost a single case of appendicitis (and not one of them was operated upon), of typhoid fever, diphtheria, smallpox, scarlet fever, etc., and only one case of cerebro-spinal meningitis and of lobar pneumonia. These facts may be verified from the records of the Health Department of the City of Chicago.
After the foregoing statements, I leave it to my readers to judge whether the Nature Cure philosophy is inspired by blind fanaticism and based upon ignorance and inexperience, or whether it is justified in the light of scientific facts advanced by the Regular School of Medicine itself and demonstrated by the wonderful success of the Nature Cure movement in Germany, which in its different forms has attained world-wide recognition and adoption.
There is a popular saying: "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." The following letter will explain itself:
January 20, 1913.
Dear Dr. Lindlahr:—
You may remember that last winter, Mrs. White and I attended your Sunday afternoon lectures in the Schiller Building. Those lectures were an education—I might better say a revelation and an inspiration.
On the 11th of November last, our boy, aged thirteen years, was taken ill with diphtheria. I called at your office and asked your advice. You replied: "You know what to do—wet packs, no food except fruit juices, osteopathic treatment and no antitoxin."
We called an osteopathic physician, who at once sent a specimen from the boy's throat to the city laboratory, where it was pronounced diphtheria. A physician from the Board of Health came and quarantined us and inquired if we had used the antitoxin treatment. When Mrs. White replied "No," he said: "I suppose you know that the percentage of deaths of those who do not have it is very high." She said: "Yes, I know, but we do not intend to use it."
The boy had all the acute symptoms, was drowsy, with headache, and on the second day his temperature went to 105 degrees. We applied the wet body pack and by night had reduced his temperature to 100 degrees. With the aid of the osteopathic treatment, which he had each night, the boy slept well all through big illness. On the fifth day, the membrane spread from his throat to his nose, and his temperature rose again; but the wet body packs again reduced it so that it was never again over 100 degrees.
The boy was bright, his mind was clear, he was able to read, and after the first week was able to play chess with his mother. The only unfavorable symptom he had at all was an irregular pulse. He took no medicine and no food except fruit juices. We used occasionally the warm water enema. On the tenth day he took a little lamb broth, but refused it the next day, and again asked for fruit juices. It was not until two weeks had passed that his appetite returned and he began to eat. He lost flesh, but did not lose strength in the same degree—he was able to go to the bathroom each day unaided.
On the 21st day, the osteopathic physician sent a specimen to the city laboratory which they pronounced "positive," and the city physician found it necessary to take as many as four or five additional specimens before he pronounced him free from the diphtheria germ. The boy was not released from quarantine until five weeks had passed.
During all this time his only attendant was his mother and the osteopathic physician who came daily. The boy has fully recovered and has suffered no bad results that often follow such diseases.
In contrast to this experience of ours, I would like to cite the case of a neighbor of ours whose little girl died of the disease under the antitoxin treatment. She recovered from the diphtheria, but her heart failed and she died suddenly. They had a regular M. D. and a trained nurse. Her mother took ill, but recovered. The father told me that their drug bill alone amounted to $75.
We want to express to you our gratitude for the knowledge and confidence that you have so freely given to us, and you are at liberty to make whatever use of this letter that you desire.
Sincerely yours,
1443 Cuyler Ave., Chicago, Ill.
This letter proves that my claims and assertions regarding the curability of diphtheria by natural methods are not extravagant or untrue. In this case, as in many others, I gave directions for treatment verbally and over the telephone without having seen the patient personally.
I am convinced, furthermore, that this patient would have made just as good a recovery without the osteopathic treatment. I recommended the attendance of an osteopathic physician in order to ease the burden of responsibility on the part of the parents. If the child had died, they would have been blamed by friends and relatives for their seeming foolhardiness.
The experience of Mr. White's neighbor is another proof of the fatal effect of the antitoxin treatment. The antitoxin "cured" the diphtheria, but-the child died!
Once more I repeat: The hydropathic treatment will give equally good results in appendicitis, meningitis, scarlet fever, and all other forms of acute diseases. If this be a fact, why should not my colleagues of the Regular School of Medicine give the hydropathic method a fair trial, the more so since in Germany, even among the physicians of the Regular School, hydropathy as a remedy is fast superseding antitoxin! Is it not worth while when the "mysterious sequelae" referred to by Dr. Osler, and the many cases of chronic invalidism which he does not connect with the disease or its treatment, might thus be avoided?
Vaccination
The pernicious aftereffects of vaccination upon the system are similar to those of the various serum and antitoxin treatments.
Jenner, an English barber and chiropodist, is usually credited with the discovery of vaccination. The doubtful honor, however, belongs in reality to an old Circassian woman who, according to the historian Le Duc, in the year 1672 startled Constantinople with the announcement that the Virgin Mary had revealed to her an unfailing preventive against the smallpox.
Her specific was inoculation with the genuine smallpox virus. But even with her the idea was not an original one, because the principle of isopathy (curing a disease with its own disease products) was explicitly taught a hundred years before that by Paracelsus, the great genius of the Renaissance of learning of the Middle Ages. But even he was only voicing the secret teachings of ancient folklore, sympathy healing and magic dating back to the Druids and Seers of ancient Britain and Germany.
The Circassian seeress cut a cross in the flesh of people and inoculated this wound with the smallpox virus. Together with this she prescribed prayer, abstinence from meat and fasting for forty days.
As at that time smallpox was a terrible and widespread scourge, the practice of inoculation was carried all over Europe. At first the operation was performed by women and laymen; but when vaccination became popular and people were willing to pay for it, the doctors began to incorporate it into their regular practice.
Popular superstitions run a very similar course to epidemics. They have a period of inception, of virulence and of abatement. As germs and bacteria become inactive and die a natural death in their own poisonous excreta, so popular superstitions die as a natural result of their own falsities and exaggerations.
It soon became evident that inoculation with the virus did not prevent smallpox, but, on the contrary, frequently caused it; and therefore the practice gradually fell into disuse, only to be revived by Jenner about one hundred years later in a modified form. He substituted cowpox virus for smallpox virus.
Modern allopathy, in applying the isopathic principle, gives large and poisonous doses of virus, lymph, serums and antitoxins, while homeopathy, as did ancient mysticism, applies the isopathic remedies in highly diluted and triturated doses only.
From England vaccination gradually spread over the civilized world and during the nineteenth century the smallpox disease (variola) constantly diminished in virulence and frequency until today it has become of comparatively rare occurrence.
"Therefore vaccination has exterminated smallpox," say the disciples of Jenner.
Is that really so? Is vaccination actually a preventive of smallpox? This seems very doubtful when the advocates of vaccination themselves do not believe it. "What," I hear them say, "we do not believe in our own theory?" Evidently you do not, my friends. If you believe that vaccination protects you against smallpox, why are you afraid of catching it from those who are not vaccinated? If you are thoroughly protected, as you claim to be, how can you catch the disease from those who are not protected? Why do you not allow the other fellow to have his fill of smallpox and then enjoy a good laugh on him? The fact of the matter is you know full well that you are not safe, that you can catch the disease just as readily as the unprotected.
German statistics are more reliable than those of any other country. In the years of 1870-71 smallpox was rampant in the Fatherland. Over 1,000,000 persons had the disease, and 120,000 died. Ninety-six percent of these had been vaccinated and only four percent had not been protected. Most of the victims were vaccinated, once at least, shortly before they took the disease.
In 1888 Bismarck sent an address to the governments of all the German states in which it was admitted that numerous eczematous diseases, even those of an epidemic nature, were directly attributable to vaccination and that the origin and cure of smallpox were still unsolved problems.
In this message to the various legislatures the great statesman said: "The hopes placed in the efficacy of the cowpox virus as a preventive of smallpox have proved entirely deceptive."
Realizing this to be a fact, most of the German governments have modified or entirely relinquished their compulsory vaccination laws.
"But," our opponents insist, "you cannot deny that smallpox has greatly diminished since the almost universal adoption of vaccination."
Certainly the disease has diminished. But so have diminished and, in fact, nearly disappeared the plague, the Black Death, cholera, the bubonic plague, yellow fever and numerous other epidemic pests which only recently decimated entire nations.
Not one of these epidemics was treated by vaccination. Why, then, did they abate and practically disappear?
Not vaccination, but the more universal adoption of soap, bathtubs, all kinds of sanitary measures, such as plumbing, drainage, ventilation and more hygienic modes of living generally have subdued smallpox as well as all other plagues.
Many of us remember how the yellow fever raged in Havanna during the Spanish occupancy. Within two months after the energetic Yankees took possession and gave the filthy city a good scouring, yellow fever had entirely disappeared—without any yellow fever vaccination.
The question is now in order why, of all the dreaded plagues of the past, smallpox alone survives to this day.
The answer is: on account of vaccination. If scrofulous and syphilitic poisons were not artificially kept alive in human blood by vaccination, smallpox would by this time be as rare as cholera and yellow fever.
Thanks to the oft-repeated compulsory vaccination of every citizen, young and old, we as a nation have become saturated with the smallpox virus. Is it any wonder that every once in a while this latent taint breaks out in acute epidemics?
Undoubtedly, the almost universal systematic contamination and degeneration of vital fluids and tissues, not alone with vaccine virus, but also with many other filthy serums, antitoxins and drug poisons, account in a large measure for the steady increase of tuberculosis, cancer, insanity and a multitude of other chronic destructive diseases unknown among primitive people that have not come in contact with the blessings (?) of vaccination.
By weakening the system's reactionary powers against one disease, its reactionary powers against all diseases are weakened. In other words, creating in the body a form of chronic smallpox by means of vaccination favors the development of all kinds of chronic diseases.
Quit sowing the seed, gentlemen, and you will cease reaping the harvest. By the mercurial suppression of syphilis and by means of vaccination you are perpetuating smallpox.
What has syphilis to do with smallpox? They are very closely related, and similar in appearance, symtomatology and in their effects upon the organism.
A German physician, Dr. Cruwell, who studied the subject thoroughly, says: "Every vaccination with so-called cowpox virus means syphilitic infection. Cowpox is not a disease peculiar to cattle; it is always due to syphilitic or smallpox infection from the diseased hands of human beings. Cowpox pustules have been found only on the udders of milk cows which came in contact with human hands. Cattle roaming in pasture and prairie have never been affected by cowpox, nor have domesticated steers and oxen. If this disease were a disorder peculiar to cattle, both sexes would be equally affected. Jenner's cowpox was caused by the diseased hands of the syphilitic milkmaid, Sarah Nehnes."
Vaccination of healthy children and adults is often followed by a multitude of symptoms which cannot be distinguished from syphilis, viz., characteristic ulcers and eczematous eruptions, swellings of the axillary and other lymphatic glands, atrophy of the mammary glands in the breasts of women and of girls above the age of puberty, etc.
This explains the constantly growing demand for "bust foods" and "bust developers." A perfectly developed bust has become so rare that many hundreds of beauty doctors and of business concerns that make a specialty of developing the flat-bosomed realize thousands of dollars annually. One firm in this city, and a small concern at that, has made from $2,500 to $5,000 a year and has over ten thousand names on its constantly increasing list of patrons.
It is reasonable to assume that almost without exception these ten thousand women had been vaccinated from one to three times before the age of puberty. When this is realized, and the fact that vaccination dries up the mammary glands is taken into account, is it not time to pause and consider?
The figures of this one small concern represent the report of only one out of several hundred such firms doing business in all parts of the country.
Some years ago, a disease similar to smallpox broke out among the sheep in certain parts of Scotland. As a preventive, the sheep were vaccinated. In the course of a few years it was noticed that a great many ewes were unable to nourish their lambs. With the discontinuance of vaccination this phenomenon disappeared.
Does this help to explain why nowadays over fifty percent of human mothers are incapable of nursing their babies?
Looking Forward
At present the trend of allopathic medical science is undoubtedly toward the serum, antitoxin and vaccine treatment. Practically all medical research tends that way. Every few days we see in the daily papers reports of new serums and antitoxins which are claimed to cure or create immunity to certain diseases.
Suppose the research and practice of medical science continue along these lines and are generally accepted or, as the medical associations would have it, forced upon the public by law. What would be the result? Before a child reached the years of adolescence, it would have had injected into its blood the vaccines, serums, and antitoxins of smallpox, hydrophobia, tetanus (lockjaw), cerebro-spinal meningitis, typhoid fever, diphtheria, pneumonia, scarlet fever, etc.
If allopathy were to have its way, the blood of the adult would be a mixture of dozens of filthy bacterial extracts, disease taints and destructive drug poisons. The tonsils and adenoids, the appendix vermiformis and probably a few other parts of the human anatomy would be extirpated in early youth under compulsion of the health departments.
What is more rational and sensible: the endeavor to produce immunity to disease by making the human body the breeding ground for all sorts of antibacteria and antipoisons, or to create natural immunity by building up the blood on a normal basis, purifying the body of morbid matter and poisons, correcting mechanical lesions and by cultivating the right mental attitude? Which one of these methods is more likely to be disease-building, which health-building?
Just imagine what human blood will be like in coming generations if this artificial contamination with all sorts of disease taints and drug poisons is to be forced upon the people!
Surgery
The discoverers of anesthetics are classed among the greatest benefactors of humanity, because it is believed that ether, chloroform, cocaine and similar nerve-paralyzing agents have greatly lessened the sum of human suffering. I doubt, however, that this is true.
Anesthetics have made surgery technically easy and have done away with the pain caused directly by the incisions; but on the other hand, these marvelous effects of pain-killing drugs have encouraged indiscriminate and unnecessary operations to such an extent that at least nine-tenths of all the surgical operations performed today are uncalled for. In most instances these ill-advised mutilations are followed by lifelong weakness and suffering, which far outweigh the temporary pains formerly endured when unavoidable operations were performed without the use of anesthesia.
We do not wish to be understood as condemning unqualifiedly any and all surgical interventions in the treatment of human ailments. An operation may occasionally be absolutely necessary as a means of saving life. Surgery is also indicated in cases of injury, such as wounds or fractured bones, in certain obstetrical complications and in other affections of a purely mechanical nature.
In all such cases anesthetics prevent much suffering which cannot be avoided in any other way. But anyone who has had an opportunity to watch the prolonged misery of the victims of un-called-for operations will not doubt that anesthesia has been a two-edged sword which has inflicted many more wounds than it has healed.
Many physicians have recognized more or less distinctly the uselessness and harmfulness of "Old School" medical treatment. Dissatisfied and disgusted with old-fashioned drugging, they turn to surgery, convinced that in it they possess an exact scientific method of curing ailments. They seem to think that the surest way to cure a diseased organ is to remove it with the knife—fine reasoning for school boys, but not worthy of men of science.
I, for my part, cannot understand how an organ can be cured after it has been extirpated and, preserved in alcohol, adorns the specimen cabinet of the surgeon.
Destruction or Cure—Which Is Better?
"But," the surgeon says, "we do not remove organs from the body unless they have become useless."
However, this claim is not borne out by actual facts. During the past ten years thousands of patients have come under our treatment, both in the sanitarium and in the downtown offices, whose family physicians had declared that in order to save their lives they must submit to the knife without delay. With very few exceptions these people were cured by us without using a poisonous drug, an antiseptic or a knife.
Several women who, years ago, were confronted with removal of the ovaries, are today the joyful mothers of children. Many of our former patients, who were treated by "Old School" physicians for acute or chronic appendicitis and were strongly urged to have the offending organ removed, are today alive and well and still in possession of their vermiform appendices. Other patients were threatened with operations for kidney, gall and bladder stones; fibroid and other tumors; floating kidneys; stomach troubles; intestinal and uterine disorders, not to mention the multitude of children whose tonsils and adenoids were to have been removed. All of these onetime surgical cases have escaped the knife and are doing very well indeed with their bodies intact and in possession of the full quota of organs given them by Nature.
Is it not better to cure a diseased organ than to remove it? Nature Cure proves every day that the better way is at the same time the easiest way.
Thousands of men and women operated upon for some local ailment which could have been cured easily by natural methods of treatment are condemned by these inexcusable mutilations to lifelong suffering. Many, if not actually suffering pain, have been unnecessarily unsexed and in other ways incapacitated for the normal functions and natural enjoyments of life.
Cases of this kind are the most pitiable of all that come under our observation. When we learn that a major operation has been performed upon a consultant, our barometer of hope drops considerably. We know from much experience that the mutilation of the human organism has a tendency to lessen the chances of recovery; such patients are nearly always lacking in recuperative power.
A body deprived of important parts or organs is forever unbalanced. It is like a watch with a spring or a wheel taken out; it may run, but never quite right; it is hypersensitive and easily thrown out of balance by any adverse influence.
The Human Body Is a Unit
We are realizing more and more that the human body is a homogeneous and harmonious whole, and that we cannot injure one part of it without damaging other parts and often the entire organism. Cutting in the vital organs means cutting in the brain. It affects the functions of the nervous system most profoundly.
A physician in Vienna has written a very interesting book in which he shows that the inner membranes of the nose are in close relationship and sympathy with distant parts and organs of the body. He located in the nose one small area which corresponds to the lungs. By irritating this area with an electric needle he could provoke asthmatic attacks in patients subject to this disease. By anesthetizing the same area he could stop immediately severe attacks of asthma and of coughing. Another area in the nasal cavity corresponds to the genital organs. The doctor proved that by electric irritation applied to this area abortions could be produced, and that by anesthesia of the same area in the nose, uterine hemorrhages could be stopped.
These and many other facts of experience throw a wonderful light upon the unity of the human organism. The body resembles a watch. You cannot injure one part of it without affecting its entire mechanism.
The evil aftereffects of surgical operations do not always manifest at once. On the contrary, the surgical treatment is frequently followed by a period of seeming improvement. The troublesome local symptoms have been removed, and aftereffects of the mutilation have not had time to assert themselves. But sooner or later the old symptoms return in aggravated form, or a new set of complications arises. The patient is made to believe that the first operation was a perfect success and that this latest crop of difficulties has nothing to do with the former, but is something entirely new. At other times he is assured that the first operation did not go deep enough, that it failed to reach the seat of the trouble and must be done over again.
And so the work of mutilation goes merrily on. The disease poisons in the body set up one center of inflammation after another. These centers the surgeon promptly removes; but the real disease, the venereal, psoriatic or scrofulous taint, the uric or oxalic acid, the poisonous alkaloids and ptomaines affecting every cell and every drop of blood in the body, these elude the surgeon's knife and create new ulcers, abscesses, inflammations, stones, cancers, etc., as fast as the old ones are extirpated.
Those who have studied the previous chapters carefully will readily comprehend these facts. They will know that acute and subacute conditions represent Nature's cleansing and healing efforts, and that local suppression by drug or knife only serves to turn Nature's corrective and purifying activities into chronic disease.
The highest art of the true physician is to preserve and to restore, not to mutilate or destroy.
Chronic Diseases
The "Old School" of medical science defines acute diseases as those which run a brief and more or less violent course and chronic diseases as those which run a protracted course and have a tendency to recur.
Nature Cure attaches a broader and more significant meaning to these terms. This will have become apparent from our discussion of the causes, the progressive development and the purpose of acute diseases in the preceding pages.
From the Nature Cure viewpoint, the chronic condition is the latent, constitutional disease encumbrance, whereas acute disease represents Nature's efforts to rectify abnormal conditions, to overcome and eliminate hereditary or acquired morbid taints and systemic poisons and to reestablish normal structure and functions.
To use an illustration: In a case of permanent or recurrent itchy psoriasis, the "Old School" physician would look upon the itchy skin eruption as the chronic disease, while we should see in the external eczema an attempt of the healing forces of Nature to remove from the system the inner, latent hereditary or acquired psora, which constitutes the real chronic disease.
It stands to reason that the exterior eruptions should not be suppressed by any means whatever, but that the only true and really effective method of treatment consists in eliminating from the organism the inner, latent psoric taint. After this is accomplished, the external "skin disease" will disappear of its own accord.
As another illustration of the radical difference in our respective points of view, let us take hemorrhoids (piles). The regular physician considers the local hemorrhoidal enlargements in themselves the chronic disease, while the Nature Cure practitioner looks upon hemorrhoids as Nature's effort to rid the system of certain morbid encumbrances and poisons which have accumulated as a result of sluggish circulation, chronic constipation, defective elimination through kidneys, lungs, and skin and from many other causes.
These constitutional abnormalities, which are the real chronic disease, have to be treated and corrected. After this has been done, the hemorrhoidal enlargements and discharges will take care of themselves.
It is, therefore, absolutely irrational, and frequently followed by the most serious consequences, to surgically remove the piles or to suppress the hemorrhoidal discharges and thereby to drive these concentrated poison extracts back into the system.
In a number of cases we have traced paralysis, insanity, tuberculosis, cancer and other forms of chronic destructive diseases to the forcible suppression of hemorrhoids.
Chronic disease, from the viewpoint of Nature Cure philosophy, means that the organism has become permeated with morbid matter and poisons to such an extent that it is no longer able to throw off these encumbrances by a vigorous, acute eliminative effort. The chronic condition, therefore, represents the slow, cold type of disease, characterized by feeble, ineffectual efforts to eliminate the latent morbid taints and impediments from the system. These efforts may take the form of open sores, skin eruptions, catarrhal discharges, chronic diarrhea, etc.
If acute diseases are treated in harmony with Nature's laws, they will leave the body in a purer, healthier condition. But if the treatment is wrong, if under the "Old School" methods fever and inflammation (Nature's methods of elimination) are checked and suppressed with poisonous drugs, serums and antitoxins or if, instead of purifying and invigorating cells and tissues, the affected parts and organs are removed with the surgeon's knife, Nature is not allowed to get rid of the disease matter, and the poisonous taints and morbid encumbrances remain in the organism.
In this way originate the worst forms of chronic diseases which now afflict civilized races.
The truth of this assertion is proved by the fact that chronic diseases we know are rare among the primitive peoples of the earth, such as the early indiginous people of Africa and Australia or the Eskimos of the arctic regions. They are not found among people who do not use drugs. All the different forms of venereal disease, chronic rheumatism, chronic indigestion, etc., are unknown in those countries whose inhabitants live in harmony with Nature. The reason is that these people have not learned to suppress Nature's acute purifying and healing efforts by poisonous drugs and surgical operations.
The Cell
Let us now study the actual condition of the cells, tissues and organs of the body in chronic disease.
We know that the human body is made up of billions of minute cells of living protoplasm. Though these cells are so small that they have to be magnified under the microscope several hundred times before we can see them, they are independent living beings which are born, grow, eat, drink, throw off waste matter, multiply, decline and die just like the large conglomerate cell which we call Man.
Each one of these little cells has its own business to attend to, whether it be assimilation, elimination, nervous activities and functions, etc.
If these little beings are well individually, the man is well. If they are starved or ailing, the entire man is similarly affected. The whole depends upon the parts. In the human body as well as in a nation or a city, the welfare of the entire community depends upon the well-being of its individual members.
If governing bodies would realize and apply these truths, and pay more attention to providing wholesome surroundings and proper conditions of living for their subjects, to an adequate supply of pure food and a normal combination of work and rest, instead of concentrating their best efforts upon restrictive and punitive measures (allopathic treatment), there would be no social problems to solve.
It is our duty to provide the most favorable conditions of living for the little cells that make up the individual human organism. If we do that, there will be no occasion for disease. Natural immunity will be the result.
Herein lies the vital difference between the attitude of Nature Cure and that of the allopathic school toward disease. The latter spends all its efforts in fighting the disease symptoms, while the former confines itself to creating health conditions in the habits and surroundings of the patient, from the standpoint that the disease symptoms will then take care of themselves, that they will disappear on account of nonsupport. It is the application of the injunction "Resist not Evil" to the treatment of physical disease.
Under the influence of wrong habits of living and the suppressive treatment of diseases, all forms of waste and morbid matter (the feces of the cells), together with food, drink and drug poisons accumulate in the system, affect the cells and obstruct the tiny spaces (interstices) between them. These morbid encumbrances impinge upon and clog the blood vessels, the nerve channels and the other tissues of the body. This is bound to interfere with the normal functions of the organism, and in time lead to deterioration and organic destruction.
In this connection we wish to call attention to a difference in viewpoint between the school of osteopathy and the Nature Cure school. Osteopaths and chiropractors attribute disease almost entirely to "impingement" (abnormal pressure) upon nerves and blood vessels due to dislocations and subluxations of the vertebrae of the spine and of other bony structures. They do not take into consideration the impingement upon and obstruction of nerve channels and blood vessels all through the system caused by local or general encumbrances of the organism with waste matter, morbid products, and poisons that have accumulated in cells and tissues.
The Life of the Cell
Every individual cell must be supplied with food and with oxygen. These it receives from the red arterial blood. The cells must also be provided with an outlet for their waste products. This is furnished by the venous circulation, which represents the drainage system of the body. If this drainage is defective, the effect upon the organism is similar to the effect produced upon a house when the excretions and discharges of its inhabitants are allowed to remain in it.
Furthermore, every cell must be in unobstructed communication with the nerve currents of the organism. Most important of all, it must be in touch with the sympathetic nervous system through which it receives the Life Force which vivifies and controls all involuntary functions of the cells and organs in the human body.
Each individual cell must be supplied with nerve fibers which convey its sensations and needs to headquarters, the nerve centers in brain and spinal cord. Also, each cell must be connected with other nerve filaments which carry impulses from the cranial, spinal and sympathetic centers to the cell, governing and directing its activities.
For instance, if the cell be hungry, thirsty, cold or in pain, it telegraphs these sensations to headquarters in the brain or spinal cord and from there directions necessary to comply with the needs of the cell are sent forth in the form of nerve impulses to the centers controlling the circulation, the food and heat supply, the means of protection, etc.
This circuit of communication from the cell over the afferent nerves to the nerve centers in the brain or spinal cord, and from these centers over the efferent nerves back to the cell or to other cells is called the reflex arc.
Let us use an illustration: Suppose the fingers come in close contact with a hot iron. The cells in the finger tips experience a sensation of burning pain. At once this sensation is telegraphed over the afferent nerves to the nerve centers in the brain or spinal cord. In response to this call of distress the command comes back over the efferent nerve filaments: "Withdraw the fingers!" At the same time the impulse to withdraw the fingers is sent over the motor nerves to the muscles and ligaments which control the movements of the hand.
If the means of communication between the different parts of the organism are obstructed or cut off entirely, the individual cell is bound to deteriorate and to die, just like a person lost in a barren wilderness and cut off from his fellowmen must perish.
In warfare it is a well-known fact that if one of the contending armies succeeds in cutting off the telegraphic communication of the other army with its headquarters, the activities of that other army are seriously handicapped. So the waste materials in the system, the disease taints, narcotic and alcoholic poisons, etc., obstruct the nerve passages, and thus interfere with the functions of the cell by cutting off its means of communication.
What has been said will serve to elucidate and emphasize the necessity of perfect cleanliness, inside as well as outside of the body. It justifies the dictum of Kuhne, the apostle of Nature Cure: "Cleanliness is Health." Anything that in any way interferes with or obstructs the circulation of vital fluids and nerve currents in the system is bound to create the abnormal conditions and functions which constitute disease.
When the morbid encumbrances and obstructions in the organism have reached the point where they seriously interfere with the nourishment, drainage and nerve supply of the cells, the latter cannot perform their activities properly, nor can they rid themselves of the impediment. They may be compared to people who are forced to live in bad, unwholesome surroundings and who cannot do their best work under these unfavorable conditions from which they cannot escape.
In this way originates chronic disease, which means that the cells have become incapable of arousing themselves to acute eliminative effort in the form of inflammatory febrile reactions.
In my lectures I sometimes liken the cell thus encumbered with morbid matter and poisons to a man buried in a mine under the debris of a cave in such a manner that it is impossible for him to free himself of the earth and timbers which are pinning him down. In such a predicament the man is unable to help himself. His fellow workers or his friends must come to his aid and remove the obstructing masses until he can assist them and free himself.
This is a good illustration of the condition of the cells of the body in chronic disease. They also have become unable to help themselves and need assistance until they can once more arouse themselves to self-help by means of an acute eliminative effort.
What can we do to help them? We must endeavor in the first place to furnish the cells with the right nourishment. We must abstain from everything that may be injurious to the body in food and drink, so as to relieve the cells of all unnecessary work.
Whatever one may think of vegetarianism as a continuous mode of living, a little consideration will make it plain that a rational vegetarian diet is the ~sine qua non~ in the cure of chronic diseases. It builds up the blood on a normal basis, excludes all food and drink poisons and thereby gives the organism an opportunity to throw off the old accumulations of waste and morbid materials.
In chronic disease, every drop of blood and every cell of the organism is affected. In order to produce a cure, the old tissues must be broken down and removed and new tissues built up. The more thorough the change in diet, the greater and more rapid will be the changes for the better in cells and tissues, especially if only pure and eliminating foods are used.
For these reasons it is advisable to omit most red-blooded meat while under the natural treatment. All animal flesh contains the morbid secretions and other waste products of the animal organism, and this means additional work for the cells already overburdened with systemic poisons.
Then we must work for elimination. Cold water applied to the surface of the body is the most powerful stimulant to the circulation. It actually pumps and pushes the blood through the system. One feels the blood rushing through the arteries and veins with greater force.
The cold-water treatment makes the skin more alive and active, stirs up and accelerates the circulation throughout the system and thus promotes the elimination of systemic poisons through the skin.
This stimulating effect of cold water upon the organism has been proved by counting the number of red blood corpuscles in a drop of blood before and after the application of the cold "blitzguss." They were found to have doubled in number. That does not mean that in an instant again as many red blood corpuscles had come into existence, but it does mean that before the cold "guss" one-half of them were dozing lazily in the corners. The cold water stirred them up, forced them into the circulation, made them travel and attend to business.
Another powerful means to promote elimination is thorough, systematic massage. The kneading, rolling, twisting and clapping actually squeezes the stagnant morbid matter and the waste products out of the tissues into the circulation, to be carried off through the venous drainage and allows the red blood with its nourishment and fresh supply of oxygen to flood the cells and organs.
Massage is also very effective as a means of regulating the blood supply in the system. In every chronic disease there is obstruction or congestion in some part of the organism, causing high blood pressure in the interior of the body and insufficient blood supply to the external parts, especially the extremities. Massage distributes the blood quickly and evenly.
Of great importance is osteopathy. All dislocations, luxations and subluxations of bones and ligaments should be corrected by expert manipulation. As a matter of fact, hardly a person can be found today whose spine is not abnormal in one way or another, just as there is hardly a single normal human eye [as far as iridology markings are concerned].
Manipulative treatment adjusts the lesions of the spine and other bony structures, thus removing abnormal pressure upon the nerves and blood vessels and establishing a free and abundant flow of nerve and blood currents.
Air and light baths, by stimulating the skin in a natural manner to increased activity, also contribute to the attainment of the various good results just described.
Next comes physical exercise. Corrective and curative movements combined with deep breathing promote the combustion (oxidation) of morbid materials and in this way facilitate their elimination from the system.
Life itself is dependent upon breathing. The Life Force enters the body with every breath we draw. Show me a man with well-developed, full-breathing lungs, and I will show you a man with good vitality.
Last but not least among the natural methods of treating the cell in chronic disease we mention the right mental and emotional attitude. Fear, anxiety and all kindred emotions congeal the nerve matter and thereby shut off the supply of nerve force. The cells and tissues starve and freeze. On the other hand, the emotions of hope, confidence and cheerfulness relax and open blood vessels and nerve channels and allow the free and unobstructed inflow and circulation of vital energy.
The different methods of natural treatment and their practical application in chronic diseases will be discussed in detail in subsequent chapters.
When through natural methods of living and of treatment the morbid encumbrances have been removed sufficiently to provide and maintain normal blood supply, better venous drainage and the unobstructed flow of the nerve currents, when lesions of the bony structures have been corrected by skilful adjustment, and when, through right mental attitude, a free and abundant inflow of Life Force has been established, then the cells and tissues of the body become once again able to arouse themselves to an acute eliminative effort, and the organism is ready for a healing crisis.
Crises
Crisis in the ordinary sense of the word means change, either for better or for worse. In its relation to medicine, the term "crisis" has been defined as "a decisive change in the disease, resulting either in recovery or in death."
We of the Nature Cure school distinguish between healing crises and disease crises, according to the character and the tendency of the acute reaction. If an acute disease is brought about through the accumulation of morbid matter or the invasion of disease germs to such an extent that the health or the life of the organism is endangered, in other words, if the disease conditions are forcing the crises, we speak of disease crises.
But if acute reactions take place in the system because conditions have become more normal, because the healing forces have gained the ascendancy and forced the acute inflammatory processes, we call them healing crises.
Healing crises are simply different forms of elimination by means of which Nature endeavors to remove the latent, chronic disease encumbrance from the system. The most common forms of these acute purifications are colds, catarrhal and hemorrhoidal discharges, boils, ulcers, abscesses, open sores, skin eruptions, diarrheas, etc.
Healing crises and disease crises may seem very much alike. Patients often tell me: "I have had this before. I call it an ordinary boil (or cold, or fever)."
That may be true. The former disease crisis and the present healing crisis may be similar in their outward manifestations. But they are taking place under entirely different conditions.
When the organism is loaded to the danger point with morbid matter, it may arouse itself in self-defense to an acute eliminative effort in the shape of cold, catarrh, fever, inflammation, skin eruption, etc. In these instances, the disease conditions bring about the crisis and the organism is on the defensive. These are disease crises.
Such unequal struggles between the healing forces and disease conditions sometimes end favorably and sometimes unfavorably.
On the other hand, healing crises develop because the healing forces are in the ascendancy and take the offensive. They are brought about through the natural methods of living and of treatment and always result in improved conditions.
A simple allegory may assist me in explaining the difference between a healing crisis and a disease crisis:
For years a prizefighter holds the championship because he keeps himself in perfect physical condition and before every contest spends many weeks in careful training. When he faces his opponent in the ring, he has eliminated from his organism as much waste matter and superfluous flesh and fat as possible by a strictly regulated diet and a great deal of hard exercise. As a consequence, he comes off victorious in every contest and easily maintains his superiority.
These victories in his career, like healing crises in the organism, are the result of training and preparation.
The prizefighter in the one case and Vital Force in the other are on the offensive from the beginning of the struggle and have the best of the fight from start to finish.
Rendered overconfident by long-continued success, our champion gradually permits himself to drift into a weakened physical condition. He omits his regular training and indulges in all kinds of dissipation.
One day, full of self-conceit and underestimating the strength of his challenger, he enters the ring without preparation and is ingloriously defeated by a man who, under different circumstances, would not be a match for him.
So, in the case of a patient in a disease crisis, fatal termination may be due to the excessive accumulation of waste and morbid matter in the system, to lowered vitality and to lack of preparation. Victory or defeat in acute reactions as well as in the ring depends on right living and preparatory training.
In the healing crisis, vitality is the stronger and gains the victory in the struggle; in the disease crisis, disease conditions have gained the ascendancy and may bring about the defeat of the healing forces.
Under conditions favorable to human life, a body of normal structure, healthy blood and tissues and good vitality cannot be affected by acute disease. Such an organism is practically immune to all forms of inflammatory febrile reactions. These always indicate that there is something wrong in the system which Nature is trying to correct or get rid of.
Healing Crises
In Chapter Two "Catechism of Nature Cure," we defined healing crises as follows: "A healing crisis is an acute reaction, resulting from the ascendancy of Nature's healing forces over disease conditions. Its tendency is toward recovery, and it is, therefore, in conformity with Nature's constructive principle." The possibility of producing healing crises and thereby curing chronic ailments depends upon the following conditions:
The patient must possess sufficient vital energy and powers of reaction to respond to the natural treatment and to a change of habits. The destruction and disorganization of vital fluids and organs must not have advanced too far.
Some patients become frightened at the idea of crises. They exclaim:"I came here to get well, not to grow worse."