Homeopathy II: Answering My Critics

 

In my January 9, 2023 post I wrote about the errors of homeopathy. I received quite a pushback from those who swear by the practice. (See introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2023/01/bad-medicine-for-body-and-soul-errors.html). The purpose of this post is to answer those critics' objections. I'm sure they are good and well-intentioned people. This is not to be an attack on any person's character who uses homeopathy. I believe homeopathic remedies to be bad for both body and soul. Many of the contentions brought forth by my objectors were "speaking past" what I wrote and not really addressing the problems. I will let this post be my last word on the topic--at least for a long time. You, my dear readers, must decide for yourselves what to do, but I feel I that I have a duty to make the information clearly known. 

Just as in my 1/9/23 post, I want to state that in addition to the sources listed below, I have drawn heavily upon many other papers and books on homeopathy, most notably Samuel Hahnemann, Organon of Medicine, 6th edition, reprint [1978]; and Martin Gumpert, Hahnemann: The Adventurous Career of a Medical Rebel [1945]. My post is my compilation and condensation of the pertinent sources with my commentary. All credit for the facts herein I give to the appropriate authors, and I take credit only for putting their works into a concise and thorough post.---Introibo

Homeopathy is Based on Occult Principles

An indisputable fact is that the founder of homeopathy, Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, was a Freemason and occultist. The objection was raised, "Thomas Edison was a Freemason, does that mean we can't use a lightbulb, or that they are somehow evil?" The objection totally misses the point. Freemasons can do good things, just as anyone else. Freemasonic clerics are also presumed by the Church to confer valid Sacraments, which is why the "Masonic Objection" to Archbishop Lefebvre's ordination by Cardinal Leinart (who was considered to be a high ranking Freemason) holds no water. 

Homeopathy is not bad because it was founded by a Mason/occultist, rather it is bad because it is founded on occult principles. To illustrate: If Satanist Aleister Crowley wrote a book on e.g., marine biology, the book is not thereby Satanic, nor is the subject matter. His Book of the Law, [1909] is evil because the subject matter is Satanic. Hence, there is a difference between a book written by a Satanist and a Satanic book.  Likewise, homeopathy is not simply made by an occultist, but is based on occult principles.

Proof:

As I wrote in my last homeopathy post, some homeopathy "medicines" are diluted to the point where they no longer exist. You're basically drinking ordinary water.  How can a substance that, in some cases, is literally no longer present be stronger than when it's present? How can a dilute substance be stronger than the same substance less diluted? Hahnemann reasoned we must be dealing with energy, not matter. If one can really produce dramatic healings with virtually no physical medicine, then we must be dealing in the realm of a vital force, or some spiritual power that resides within matter itself.

(See Hahnemann, Organon, pgs. 112-113; See also Yogi Ramacharaka, The Science of Psychic Healing, reprint [1937], p. 104). 

He concluded that homeopathy must produce spiritual medicines, not physical ones.

If so, how could spiritual medicines affect and cure physical diseases? Apparently, they could not; the only way a spiritual medicine could work on a physical illness was if a physical disease was only a symptom of a much deeper spiritual disease. Hahnemann thus concluded that disease was not ultimately physical in nature but “spiritual.” Therefore, because disease represents an improper function or imbalance of vital force or energy, it must be cured by a like healing or realignment of energy. This, he believed, was accomplished by medicines prepared homeopathically.

Therefore, homeopathic medicines are spiritual, energetic medicines, not physical medicines, and the homeopath works ultimately with energies, not physical disease. In his Organon of Medicine, Hahnemann declares the following:

The diseases of man are not caused by any [material] substance,… any disease-matter, but… they are solely spirit-like (dynamic) derangements of the spirit-like power (the vital principle) that animates the human body. Homeopathy knows that a cure can only take place by the reaction of the vital force against the rightly chosen remedy that has been ingested. (See Hahnemann, Organon, p. 18). 

He continues, ...the true healing art is… to effect an alteration in… energetic automatic vital force… whereby the vital force is liberated and enabled to return to the normal standard of health and to its proper function…. Homeopathy teaches us how to effect this. (Ibid., p. 67). 

Once Hahnemann believed he had discovered that the true cause of illness and disease was based in energy, not matter, his hostility toward the medical profession re-doubled.

They only fancied that they could discover the cause of disease; they did not discover it, however, as it is not perceptible and not discoverable. For as far the greatest number of diseases are of dynamic (spiritual) origin and dynamic (spiritual) nature, their cause is therefore not perceptible to the senses; so they [doctors] exerted themselves to imagine one… (See Ibid., p. 32)

Unfortunately, once Hahnemann entered the realm of “spirit,” all bets were off; he could never really know the true cause of disease. He could never again practice medicine based on the physical body in the way the average physician does. He even confessed,

It is the morbidly affected vital energy alone that produces diseases. … How the vital force causes the organism to display morbid phenomena [symptoms], that is, how it produces disease, it would be of no practical utility to the physician to know, and will forever remain concealed from him…. (See Ibid., pgs. 99, 102).

Thus, for Hahnemann, There was nothing he would ignore except the immaterial, meta­physical sources of illness for nothing could be ever known about how disease originates. (See Martin Gumpert, Hahnemann: The Adventurous Career of a Medical Rebel [1945], pg. 137).

Here is the fundamental problem between classical homeopathy and modern medicine: physicians are trained to painstakingly uncover the root cause of disease, but Hahnemann maintains the entire procedure is worthless. Hahnemann again confessed,

It is unnecessary for the cure to know how the vital force produces the symptoms. To regard those diseases that are not surgical as [physical] … is an absurdity which has rendered allopathy so pernicious….It is only by the spiritual influences… that our spirit-like vital force can become ill; and in like manner, only by the spirit-like… operation of medicines that it can be again restored to health. (See Hahnemann, Organon, pg. 21, cf. pg. 112). 

The spirit-like operation of medicines is how homeopathy claims to cure. Hahnemann taught that:

Homeopathic Dynamizations are processes by which the medicinal properties, which are latent in natural substances while in their crude state, become aroused, and then become enabled to act in an almost spiritual manner on our life;... (See The Chronic Diseases, Their Peculiar Nature and Their Homeopathic Cure—Theoretical Part, trans, Louis H. Tafel,  [1976], pg. 17). 

In speaking of the “healing energy” of his medicines, he freely admitted such energy did not reside in the “corporeal atoms” of the substances themselves:

That smallest dose can therefore contain almost entirely only the pure, freely-developed, conceptual medicinal energy, and bring about only dynamically such great effects as can never be reached by the crude medicinal substance itself taken in large doses. It is not in the corporeal atoms of these highly dynamized medicines,… that the medicinal energy is found. (See Hahnemann, Organon, pg. 101). 

Finally, he confessed that homeopathy alone could restore the vital force to its proper func­tioning, increase its energetic powers for healing, and that such powers had divine origin;

Only homeopathic medicine can give this superior power to the invalidated vital force….

We gradually cause and compel this instinctive vital force to increase its energies by degrees, and to increase them more and more, and at last to such a degree that it becomes far more powerful than the original disease….The fundamental essence of this spiritual vital principle, imparted to us men by the infinitely merciful Creator, is incredibly great…. (See Hahnemann, Chronic Diseases, pgs. 14-15). 

In essence, Hahnemann taught that diseases are simply too profound and spiritual for any physician to ever locate them by scientific instruments or specific tests; furthermore, classical homeopaths would claim that any modern “scientifically oriented” homeopathic physician who does so is only deceiving himself. Diseases are the result of energy imbalance, and it is the energy imbalance that must be corrected. Moreover, what "fundamental essence of this spiritual vital principle, imparted to us men by the infinitely merciful Creator" is this Mason talking about...the soul?  This is the occult principle of homeopathy. There's no getting around it. 

Three Levels of Occult Homeopathy

Homeopaths can be divided into three categories: (1) the traditional homoeopath who largely follows the unscientific and occultic theories of the founder of homeopathy, Dr. Samuel Hahnemann; (2) the scientifically and/or parapsychological oriented homeopath who attempts to bring homeopathy into the twenty-first century, including, however, the suspect practice of “infinitely” diluting its medications; and (3) the “demythologized” homeopathist who thinks homeopathic medicines may work by unknown principles but questions that homeopathic medicines can be effective in dilutions so high that none of the original medicine remains. They sometimes invoke quantum physics as an explanation. 

(See David S. Sobel, ed., Ways of Health: Wholistic Approaches to Ancient and Contemporary Medicine [1979], pgs. 301-305).

The traditional homeopath generally follows the teachings and philosophy of Samuel Hahnemann, offering the least amount of revision, if any, in light of modern scientific knowledge. This group almost blindly accepts all or most of Hahnemann’s ideas and is the most overtly reactionary, anachronistic, and occultic among the three. They readily prescribe ho­meopathic medicines in such high dilutions that not a single molecule of the original substance remains. They believe that the homeopathic practice of repetitive shaking and diluting the sub­stance somehow energizes it to become an effective medicine. They may employ astrology, radionics devices, pendulums, or spiritistic revelations in their work.

The second category is comprised of both scientifically oriented homeopaths and parapsychologically oriented practitioners. The scientific homeopath usually operates in con­junction with scientific medicine and believes that homeopathy works on the basis of physical principles that have not yet been discovered. This group thinks science will one day prove the truth and efficacy of homeopathy, but they have no idea how this will be accomplished. 

Even in the third category of "scientific homeopath," problems remain in the classification of their practices. Many of them still maintain that homeopathy is only effective in such high dilutions that not a single molecule of the homeopathic medicine remains. This raises the issue of "are they really scientific"? The appeal to quantum physics fails since  neither the actions of sub-atomic particles, nor their observed paradoxes, are applicable to the homeopathic claim that infinite dilutions of a substance somehow produce extremely powerful medicines. 

Some critics told me homeopathy is like antivenom for a snakebite. Antivenom is traditionally made by collecting venom from the relevant animal and injecting small amounts of it into a domestic animal. The antibodies that form are then collected from the domestic animal's blood and purified. Versions are available for spider bites, snake bites, fish stings, and scorpion stings. Antivenom is therefore something, not something diluted to the point of nothing. The analogy fails. 

Vaccinations allegedly demonstrate the “like cures like” principle because an individual is immunized against a disease by giving him a small part of that which causes the disease. Allergies allegedly demonstrate that substances which are often in a very weak concentration can produce very powerful and even violent reactions in the human body. Hormones and biocatalysts also demonstrate that minute amounts of a substance can powerfully affect the physical organism.

Homeopaths will cite illustrations. One milligram of acetylcholine dissolved in 500,000 gallons of blood will lower a cat’s blood pressure. Pure penicillin will inhibit the development of some microorganisms even when it is diluted at one part to fifty million; the thyroid hormone is effective at one part per ten trillion of blood plasma, etc.

The problem with these illustrations is that even if they were legitimate applications, they could still not prove homeopathy. They could only suggest it might be true in theory; but, in fact, they are usually not even legitimate applications.

Vaccinations and homeopathic remedies work on entirely different principles and have different effects. Vaccinations deal with physical substances designed to stimulate the production of specific antibodies to act against specific microbes. It is scientifically demonstrated that they are effective in this.

How does this have anything to do with homeopathy? Homeopathic treatments are not intended to stimulate antibodies, do not produce them, and, in fact, often do not contain even a single molecule of the alleged medicine. Vaccinations work on a physical, material level; homeopathic treatments work on an entirely non-physical level, allegedly altering the “vital force” of the body. Or, they claimed to work in a scientifically undemonstrated manner supposedly acting on the immune system in some unknown way. Nevertheless, such supposed action is not much different from occult magick; magick is also scientifically undemonstrated and works in an unknown manner (think: Reiki, etc.). 

In the cases of allergies, hormones, and biocatalysts, we are again dealing with the demon­strated effect of known material substances on the body. They are proven to work as claimed.

Homeopathic medicines or effects do not work as claimed; they are not material, not demonstrated, and probably never can be demonstrated.

In addition, although hormones, biocatalysts, and the entities producing allergies are much smaller than tiny grains of sand, they are gigantic suns in comparison with homeopathic medicines. Homeopathic remedies are infinitely more minute or even non-existent, yet such “medicines” of homeopathy are said to work even when none of the original medicine remains.

Other Objections Answered

• Homeopathy has worked for over 150 years. I've seen [insert names] cured. 

Reply: Claims to healing are cheap; proof is another matter. So then how do we really know it was homeopathy that cured any practitioner’s patients when there is no proof? Often the anecdotal evidence is the weakest of all because it is wholly uncontrolled and subject to the errors of observation or logic of both patient and practitioner. Astrologic medicine has made similar claims for much longer than one hundred and fifty years. Astrologers also think their practices have served as the basis for successful astrological treatment of disease. But, like homeopaths, they are wrong and have been proven wrong.

• There are scientific studies that prove homeopathy effective.

Reply: No, there isn't. The same old disproven studies are trotted out. All extensive reviews and meta-studies conclude that homeopathy is a mere placebo effect at best. It is pseudo-science. (See smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/1800-studies-later-scientists-conclude-homeopathy-doesnt-work-180954534). 

• It can't be a placebo effect, because homeopathy works on infants and dogs which don't have use of reason. 

Reply: If such an effect had really been proven, I think everyone would know it. It would have spurred a multi-billion-dollar research program, and homeopathy would have been accepted long ago. For Americans, the discovery of a dramatic new healing power for their infants and pets would hardly go unnoticed. Furthermore, corporate interests (Big Pharma) would have been secured by the promise of vast profits in the neo-natal industry and veterinarian care. Such a discovery would have caused a public sensation from the implications alone. Interestingly, homeopaths often appeal to the "Big Pharma Is Against Us" conspiracy theory, yet in this case they dismiss obvious and huge profits that could be gained by Big Pharma. 

• Modern medicine (often called by the archaic "allopathic" medicine) gave us the COVID vaccines and other scams.

Reply: That modern medicine has produced bad things; CONCEDED. That everything modern medicine has produced is bad; DENIED. Let's face facts: (1) modern food with all its chemicals and processing is the worst food in history; (2) the pollution of the air, (especially around major cities) is the worst ever; (3) the stresses of modern life are the worst ever--and YET people are living longer on average--than ever! We can attribute this to (a) homeopathy, (b) modern medical screenings, surgeries and medicines; (c) Divine intervention; or (d) something else. Since most people don't use homeopathy, choice (a) can be dismissed. If someone wants to assert Divine intervention, I'd like to see their proof. If something else, what is it and what facts support it? In the absence of such evidence I must conclude the answer is (b). 

• The FDA regulates homeopathy. It's OK.

Here's what the FDA has to say:

On December 6, 2022, FDA issued a final guidance, Homeopathic Drug Products, that describes the agency’s approach to prioritizing regulatory actions for homeopathic products posing the greatest risk to patients. The FDA is prioritizing specific categories of drugs, such as those intended for populations at greater risk for adverse reactions. There are currently no FDA-approved products labeled as homeopathic, and the agency cannot ensure these drugs meet standards for safety, effectiveness, and quality. Previously, the FDA warned the public about homeopathic products, including those containing a toxic substance and ones recalled due to contamination.  

(See fda.gov/drugs/information-drug-class/homeopathic-products: Emphasis mine). Doesn't sound too reassuring, does it? 

• Even if occult, you can take homeopathic medicine as long as you bless it with holy water or touch it to some other sacramental.

This is tempting God. To knowingly involve yourself with something based on occult principles and expect God to protect you in spite of your knowledge and consent is ludicrous. Do you think it OK to read the Satanic Bible as long as you sprinkle the pages with holy water? How about reading it through sunglasses blessed by a priest? It's as bad as someone who thinks wearing a Brown Scapular is a license to sin. Wear the Scapular and live like a heathen--then expect to be given the grace of Final Perseverance. It doesn't work like that. 

Conclusion

Homeopathy is just plain bad. Think of people who may neglect real medical treatment for this sham and find out (God forbid) too late that what could have been cured can no longer be. Waiting for a diluted nothing to cure something resulted in real harm. I'll repeat what I wrote in the conclusion of my last homeopathy post: Do not seek the services of some homeopath and warn anyone who does go of the inherent peril. None of the claimed evidences offered in support of homeopathy, theoretical or practical, proves that homeopathy is an effective medical procedure. Not only does homeopathy fail to operate under the principles of scientific medicine, it may cause bodily harm and involve one, unwittingly, in the occult that can lead to demonic possession.