Buch lesen: «Burnett Rediscovered»

Dion Tabrett

Schriftart:

Dion Tabrett

Burnett Rediscovered

Clinical Strategies of the Great

Homeopath for Modern Practice –

Line of Action of Remedies – Organ

Remedies – Pathological Similimum –

Vaccinosis

Imprint

Dion Tabrett

Burnett Rediscovered

Clinical Strategies of the Great Homeopath for Modern Practice – Line of Action of Remedies – Organ Remedies – Pathological Similimum – Vaccinosis

1^st edition, 2017

ISBN: 978-3-95582-242-2

Editing: Narayana Verlag

Cover image: front: © Shutterstock – Scorpp;

back: © Shutterstock – Kamomeen

Publisher:

Narayana Verlag GmbH, Blumenplatz 2, 79400 Kandern

Tel.: +49 7626 974 970 0, E-Mail: info@narayana-verlag.de www.narayana-verlag.de

All rights reserved. Without the written permission of the publisher, no part of this book may be reproduced, duplicated, photocopied, translated or stored in any form by any mechanical, electronic or photographic process, with the exception of short passages for book reviews.

In so far as registered trademarks, trade names and common names are used, the usual protections apply (even if these are not marked as such).

The recommendations in this book have been compiled and checked to the best knowledge of the author and publisher. There is nevertheless no guarantee provided. Neither the author nor the publisher shall be held liable for possible detriment or damage resulting from the instructions in the book.

Introduction

1. Organopathy

Introduction

1.1 Definition of Organopathy

Organopathic Medicine

Case Study

1.2 Pathological Similimum

1.3 List of Organ Remedies

1.4 Materia Medica of Leading Organ Remedies

Liver Remedies

Spleen Remedies

Uterus Remedies

1.5 Synorganopathy

Varicose Veins

Heart Failure

1.6 Conclusion

Introduction

Welcome to the world of James Compton Burnett. He was a very successful homoeopath and author of many books on homoeopathic medicine. Lots of cured cases of tumours, tuberculosis and vaccinosis. Lots of nosode prescriptions and organ remedies. And an ever-widening, expanding definition of the Law of Similars. What’s not to like about Burnett?

This book is for undergraduate students of homoeopathy as well as for postgraduates. For undergraduates it is best read after one year of study and after the basic principles of homoeopathic philosophy, materia medica, miasm theory and anatomy and physiology have been covered. An understanding of classical homoeopathic methodology is assumed. Postgraduates and practicing homoeopaths can refresh their studies of Burnett, or, if new to Burnett then this book may be used as a navigation tool through his works. Note: This book will be a companion text to students who study the Orion postgraduate course.

Burnett wrote for the prescriber more so than for the student, so have a comprehensive materia medica close to hand and a medical dictionary.

Chitkaras’ work, Best of Burnett, is strongly recommended but, as Chitkaras writes in his introduction, it does not replace Burnett’s original works. Best of Burnett can be considered “The Greatest Hits” compilation double LP. But, as every music aficionado knows, you have to listen to the original albums to get the true understanding. This book has no intention of replacing his original works but hopes to stimulate interest and reading (and indeed re-reading) of Burnett’s work.

Burnett loved philology: the science of language and the love of learning and literature. This is probably why he used interchangeable terms and invented new terms to serve his ideas. His knowledge of French, German, Greek and Latin also contributed to his approach. It can make studying his writings somewhat tricky. Therefore, to help navigate through the original books I have used many of Burnett’s terms (printed in Bold type) and included a glossary, defining each one. The glossary also contains general homoeopathic terminology for students.

Burnett has been my reliable “Clinical Compass” for the last 24 years. In an attempt to understand Burnett’s work in relation to case analysis I have found that he took a broad and deep approach, pulling in different disciplines as needed and creating new ones where none existed. He was a therapeutic trailblazer, who, despite his fantastic clinical work and results, was heavily criticised.

Burnett rarely looked to cover an entire case with one remedy. And the more complex or hybrid the case the more remedies he was likely to use. It is strongly evident throughout his work that he cast his inquiring mind broadly over each case, searching for organ remedies, symptomatic similar remedies and symptom patterns for nosodes, vaccinosis and aetiologies — similar to the astronomer who searches the night sky for familiar stars and constellations. At times we may recognise particular stars and patterns such as Ursa Major but at other times we are lost until we recognise a sequence and are guided to our goal. Therefore, I have introduced a new term, “Constellation of Symptoms”, which I hope will convey the meaning of looking for and recognising distinct and different symptom patterns that are indicative of distinct and different remedies in an individual’s case history. Just like stars in the night sky that form constellations so too symptoms and remedies make up case histories.

This book is divided into three main parts:

Organopathic Medicine

Symptom Similarity (Hahnemann’s Homoeopathy)

Medical Doctrines (Miasms/Nosodes, Vaccinosis, Aetiologies)

We start with the discipline of organ remedies and then progress to the increasingly more complex ideas of The Law of Similars and finally to the Medical Doctrines. At the end of the book there is an A to Z Therapeutic List based upon Burnett’s clinical work.

There are two people whom I must thank in the writing of this book. Both are fine homoeopaths (and both also fine chess players). Firstly, Lynn Forte who introduced me to homoeopathy quite a few years ago. A great prescriber with a profound knowledge of materia medica. Lynn is a reliable friend that I frequently talk to regarding ideas and thoughts about homeopathic medicine.

Secondly, Mike Bridger, to whom I remain in debt for the generous sharing of his ideas on remedy relationships, triads, case mapping and constellations of remedies. Mike is the only other homoeopath I know who prescribes and teaches in a truly Burnettian style with the addition of a strong understanding of Kent’s clinical cases and materia medica.

In 1994, I gave my first lecture to students at The London College of Homoeopathy at Regents Park College. That lecture was “James Compton Burnett” where I described his approach to practice. Now, 20 years have raced by and I still give a similar, but much updated version of that lecture.

It has been very enjoyable researching and preparing this book and each time I re-read one of Burnett’s books I learn something new. But I must make it very clear that to attempt to take all his books and distil them and concentrate the best parts into this book cannot be done. I cannot take a large quantity and pour it into a small vessel, be it beer glass or a book about Burnett.

Dion Tabrett

1 Organopathie
Introduction

The first part of this book covers Organopathic medicine and includes a definition of organopathy and an introduction to Pathological Similimum. There is a comprehensive list of organ remedies and a materia medica section. To deepen our understanding of organopathy, Burnett’s term Synorganopathy is fully explored. It is an approach that is seldom taught alongside the teaching of organ remedies but it makes perfect sense, combined with an understanding of anatomy and physiology.

1.1 Definition of Organopathy
Organopathic Medicine

Organopathic medicine is the treatment of Organ Diseases with Organ Remedies.

Organ diseases may be conditions, diagnosed by a medical practitioner, such as jaundice or gallstones in the liver and gallbladder, respectively, or fibroids or polyps in the uterus. Inflammations, hyper-function and hypo-function as well as any pathology can be classified as an organ disease.

Organ remedies are medicines that have an elective affinity for specific locations in the body. Classic examples of organ remedies found in the Materia Medica are:

Ceanothus (Cean) for the spleen

Chelidonium (Chel) for the liver

Thlaspi bursa pastoris (Thlas) for the uterus

Organ remedies are predominantly but not exclusively of plant origin. For example, Chelidonium is Celandine, Thlaspi bursa pastoris is Shepherd’s Purse. Some organ remedies are of mineral and also of animal origin. (See full list in section 2.3.)

Well known Polycrest remedies such as Arsenicum album, Lycopodium and Nux vomica, also organ remedies, are used to treat liver disturbances as well as having multiple uses within their spectrum. When a patient’s symptoms indicate a polycrest remedy, which fully covers the organ disease, then smaller organ remedies are rarely needed.

Chelidonium is well known for having a strong elective affinity for the liver. Burnett called this affinity for a particular organ its Specificity of Seat. The pathological state of the organ he termed as the Primary Seat. He wrote that the quickest way to cure is to identify the primary seat of disease and then prescribe a remedy, or remedies, which has an affinity for location and pathology. In other words, the pathological state of an organ (Primary Seat) is referenced to medicines that can produce/cure a similar pathology (Specificity of Seat), and a prescription is given.

Organ remedy pathological affinity reflects patient’s organ pathology.

Specificity of seat matches primary seat.

The approach of using the characteristic mental/emotional, physical-general and physical-particular (Totality of Symptoms) need not necessarily be used when analysing a case using Burnett’s system. However, a confirmation of remedy selection requires a pathological diagnosis e.g. gallstones or jaundice.

Burnett considered organopathic medicine to be “Elementary Homoeopathy,” or “Homoeopathy of the First Degree” (Diseases of the Spleen p.vii) and wrote that organ remedies are “the foundations of our homoeopathic house”. (Organ Diseases of Women p.60) His reasoning is a simple one: an organ disease is matched to an organ remedy. A prescription based solely upon the totality of symptoms is termed the Similimum; whereas the use of organ treatment (organopathy) alone was termed by Burnett as the Simile.

It is important to emphasise that when an indicated homoeopathic remedy, the Similimum, covers the pathological organ state, fully, then organ remedies are not needed. Often, a polycrest will cover both symptoms and pathology, but at least equally as often, it will not, and an organ remedy is useful. The degree of similarity in organopathic treatment is less when compared to general homoeopathic treatment. For this reason, Burnett gave Tincture (Ø), low Decimal (x) or low Centesimal (c) doses. Tincture doses ranged from 5 to 20 drops given twice or three times a day. Decimal dose was generally 1x to 3x given two to three times a day. Centesimal was 1c to 5c given two to three times a day. Each prescription was continued for two to four weeks and then reviewed. The duration of organopathic treatment is typically one to six months. The results can be very effective, even though low potencies are employed.

If homoeopathy is the mighty oak then organopathy may be described as the acorn.

Burnett traced the origin of organopathic medicine back to Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus Von Hohenheim (1493–1541), who is better known as Paracelsus. He was the first to formulate organopathic medicine in so far as he thought organs had counterparts in nature that could be curative to diseased states.

Johann Gottfried Rademacher (1772–1850) later resuscitated and extended Paracelsus’s theory. However, the practice of organopathic medicine largely passed away again after Rademacher. If Rademacher resuscitated Hohenheim’s organopathy then Burnett attached the electrodes, delivered a therapeutic dose of electrical energy causing defibrillation, jump starting the heart of organ medicines and extending it further still. Burnett was the leader of this approach of homoeopathic treatment in Britain and this was in no small part aided by his studies of anatomy. Burnett studied medicine initially at Vienna University and qualified in 1869. He was so interested in the science of anatomy that he devoted two extra years of study to this subject. Then he came back to Britain and enrolled at Glasgow University to study medicine, qualifying in 1872. His final anatomy exam lasted one and a half hours and the professor conducting the exam shook Burnett’s hand afterwards and stated that he had never encountered such a brilliant pupil with such a deep and thorough knowledge of anatomy. In 1875 he submitted his thesis of “Specific Therapeutics” for the MD degree. Due to its homoeopathic leanings, however, the examiners turned it down. Burnett waited a year, re-submitted a second, more acceptable thesis and passed in 1876.

With his thorough anatomical knowledge Burnett examined patients using techniques such as palpation, percussion and auscultation to ascertain the condition of the internal organs and to diagnose the primary seat of the disease. For instance, inflammation of the liver in different locations could help to differentiate between certain hepatic remedies as Carduus marianus, Chelidonium, or Chelone glabra. (See Organ Remedies Materia Medica, line of action diagram.) From such examination he would form a diagnosis and then initiate the appropriate treatment. However, historically, organopaths would frequently use Organ Testing. This is a use of the Law of Similar’s where the level of similarity is simply organ disease matched to organ remedy affinity. A case of liver pathology would be treated with either Chelidonium or Carduus marianus or any other prime liver remedy. If amelioration occurred then the test was positive and justified more treatment along the same lines. (If there is no amelioration then the test is considered negative and other avenues of treatment, such as Symptom Similarity/Totality of Symptoms, Vaccinosis, Miasmatic, can be considered.) Frequently, a month’s course of one liver organ remedy was followed by another month of a different organ remedy for the liver. For example, Chelidonium followed by Carduus marianus. This may be followed by another remedy or a return to Chelidonium. Burnett’s rationale was to either continue the search for the most effective remedy or, in some cases, each remedy cured a certain percentage of the case and once its action was complete, then another similar-acting remedy cured another percentage, and so on until the goal of cure is reached.

This Rotation of Remedies — the selection of similar-acting remedies prescribed sequentially — was used by Burnett not only for organ remedy prescriptions but also for homoeopathic therapeutic prescriptions and also nosodes. (See Symptom Similarity and Medical Doctrines chapters.)

To fully understand, it is necessary to define some of the terms that Burnett used in relation to organopathic medicine. This will also be useful when considering symptom similarity treatments.

Burnett’s terminology (modified to current definitions):

Primary Seat = pathology or even just inflammation in a particular organ. E.g. gallstones in the gallbladder.

Specificity of Seat = remedies that have an affinity for particular pathological states in organs, e.g. Chelidonium and the gallbladder and gallstones.

Symptomatic Similimum = a remedy that covers the totality of symptoms. The symptomatic similimum may, or may not, cover the organ pathology.

Pathological Similimum = a remedy that covers the pathology of the case fully. The pathological similimum may, or may not, cover the totality of symptoms of the case.

Seems confusing, but a case example will clarify and explain each term. Burnett’s approach was to look for constellations of symptoms within the totality of symptoms. Some of these constellations could be attributed to organ pathology needing treatment.

Case Study

Early in 1993, a gentleman of 77 came into the clinic with a diagnosis of weak heart and the advice to start taking allopathic medication. On questioning his doctor on the duration of treatment he was informed that it might well be for the rest of his days. He was unhappy with this prognosis so was investigating alternative advice and treatments. He had been a very keen gardener and rambler in the recent past. Now he presented with weak heart and low spirits. He had also been offered medication for depression but at this point declined. I took his case and being a recent graduate followed the advice of many, and analysed the case from a Totality of Symptoms’ approach. Placing the mental/emotional symptom of depression as uppermost and using various generals and the particulars of his heart symptoms, I was able to confidently prescribe Aurum LM1.

His follow-up one month later showed no amelioration whatsoever. I re-prescribed Aurum but in a Hahnemannian centesimal dose of 12c, twice daily. Another month passed and still no improvement. Now I was floundering. This time I gave Crataegus tincture 30 ml bottle 5 drops twice daily in water while contemplating what to do next. The third follow-up showed great improvement, physical symptoms of heart weakness much improved, in fact, almost absent. Patient returned to gardening and began walking/rambling again the next month with great vigour. He continued on Crataegus for two more months and then onto constitutional treatment.

What had happened in this case was that I had over-analysed and complicated things. The patient was depressed because he could not garden or walk due to his heart not being as strong as normal. Crataegus helped tone up his heart, and then he returned to the activities he enjoyed. He was no longer in low spirits. To use Burnett’s terms, the primary seat of the case was the heart muscle, the remedies selected and prescribed both had specificity of seat for heart muscle. Aurum was initially given as it covered the symptoms of the case such as depression as well as heart weakness. But Aurum was not the similimum and did not accurately reflect the heart weakness. Crataegus was the pathological similimum. It fully covered and thus fully cured the heart muscle weakness. The depressive state was produced by the limitations of heart weakness. Granted this was a lucky outcome but one that has taught me to consider organ treatment as equally important as the Totality of Symptoms’ approach when appropriate.

Burnett wrote that the organ affects the whole organism, which the case above exemplifies. Once the ailing organ has been correctly treated then the person’s entire state of health improves, or as he termed it:

“When a patient gets the right organ-remedy it is often really astonishing how their feeling of bien-être is augmented: they not only become well, they are, as it were aggressively well.” (Diseases of the Liver p.105)

In this case, there was a definite chain of events:

Weak heart => lifestyle limitations => depression

Organopathic treatment increased the strength of the heart enabling our patient to return to gardening and walking. Thus, the limitations to lifestyle are removed and subsequently the depression symptoms no longer have a causative factor to maintain. To treat the end product of the symptoms of depression in this case would only be palliative (making the symptoms less severe but not removing the cause of the disease). The causation of weak heart would still exist. The phenomenon of amelioration of mental/emotional symptoms due to organopathic treatment is not unusual. Women with heavy menstrual flow can easily succumb to anaemia and fatigue, leading to irritability and moodiness. Treating the emotional state does not cure. Remedying the excessive flow, however, helps and ameliorates and cures the irritated emotional symptoms by removing the cause, the exhausting metrorrhagia.

If a remedy had covered, perfectly, the weak heart, as in the earlier case, and also the depression, then this would be an ideal prescription of the homoeopathic similimum.

When the similimum covers the underlying pathology then organopathy is not needed.

Much more common is to find a remedy that is indicated for the affected organ. Then, all the limitations can be modified and the depression is ameliorated. According to Burnett, the weak heart in this case is the “primary seat” of the disease. He would further say that we need remedies with an affinity to the location of the disease and also that act in a similar way to the natural disease, i.e. remedies that have “specificity of seat”.

The remedy that covers the primary seat of the disease in the full range of pathology is termed the Pathological Similimum.