§ 258 – Sixth Edition
The true practitioner, moreover, will not in his practice with mistrustful weakness neglect the employment of those remedies that he may now and then have employed with bad effects, owing to an erroneous selection (from his own fault, therefore), or avoid them for other (false) reasons, as that they were unhomœopathic for the case of disease before him; he must bear in mind the truth, that of medicinal agents that one alone invariably deserves the preference in every case of disease which correspond most accurately by similarity to the totality of the characteristic symptoms, and that no paltry prejudices should interfere with this serious choice.
Similarly, a real doctor should not develop dislike or hatred towards some drugs. There might have been occasions when some bad results occurred in the beginning on account of his mistake. The drugs that were used on such occasions should not be dishonoured and left unutilized. There are no medicines that are not useful and dangerous. Each drug is greater than all other drugs wherever similarity is accomplished. Thus the doctor should never develop likes and dislikes towards medicines and create obstacles in selecting drugs.
“Phosphorous takes the life. I never use it”, said a doctor. Another doctor said, “Lachesis is the poison of a snake. I do not use such poisonous drugs.” These types of preconceived opinions are undesirable to a doctor.
§ 259 – Sixth Edition
Considering the minuteness of the doses necessary and proper in homœopathic treatment, we can easily understand that during the treatment everything must be removed from the diet and regimen which can have any medicinal action, in order that the small dose may not be overwhelmed and extinguished or disturbed by any foreign medicinal irritant.1
1 The softest tones of a distant flute that in the still midnight hours would inspire a tender heart with exalted feelings and dissolve it in religious ecstasy, are inaudible and powerless amid discordant cries and the noise of day.
In homoeopathy, the more the necessity of a suitable drug to a patient, the minute is the dosage of the drug. If this is remembered during the course of treatment, he would also remember importance of the required food restrictions in order to protect the action of the drugs. Any little mistake in food etc. can disturb, arrest, or cancel the action of the remedy.
The curative part of the potentised drug in a disease is minute. One has to take sufficient care to protect that curative part of the medicine from being nullified or scattered, either during preservation, application or following the required regimen. If neglected, the dose gets antidote. The doctor gets confused as to when the next dose should be used. How and when, the next dose is to be used depends on the manner and the degree of effect of the first dose. Same is the case to increase the patency also i.e. the changing conditions are only leaders for further prescription. In this way, in homoeopathy, the realtions of the first dose with other subsequent prescriptions would be the same as the beads arranged through a thread of a garland. It is difficult to link up the cut-off due to faulty regimen. So the author of the homoeopathic system emphatically repeated the importance of strict regulation of food and other habits.
Some homoepathists regard these regulations as superstition and that they need not be followed. One fellow challenges the Patient, “You come chewing a jarda pan, I will put the medicine over it and prove its action”. In this context we have to humbly understand that the treatment is service to humanity and not challenge. It is sheer ignorance to say that the teachings of Dr. Hahnemann are superstitions, at the same time following his method.