By W. H. Freeman, M. D.


      Every Homeopathic physician is constantly receiving requests for information as to the differences between homoeopathy and all other forms of medical treatment. The impossibility of giving a satisfactory and comprehensive reply to everyone so inquiring must be apparent.

     This little pamphlet is designed to meet and answers the most frequent and important question that naturally occur to the layman. It is with the hope that the information herein contained may prove valuable and enlightening to many seekers for improved health that these pages have been prepared by the writer.



      Homeopathy is a system of treatment based on the law of nature that “Like cures like,” as expressed by the Homeopathic motto,”Similia simibibus curantur.”

      Careful and extensive experiments have proved that this is the quickest, surest, safest, and only scientific method for the use of drugs in the treatment of disease.

      By this method each patient receives his individual, specific, curative medicine, selected upon the basis of an exact similarity between the symptoms of the patient and the symptoms which the medicine will cause when given to a healthy person in large doses.

      The reason for this, contrary to what is generally believed, is that drugs are curative only for symptoms and diseased conditions like those which they can cause.  Medicines used in this way not only give quick relief, but the relief is curative and lasting; and, owing to the special way in which such medicines are prepared, poisonous drug action never occurs.


Among the principal advantages of homoeopathic treatment are:-

1. Better control of disease, and consequently less pain and discomfort.

2. Greater freedom from complications and bad after- effects.

3. Large saving in doctor’s, nurse’s and druggist’s bills, as well as great saving of time otherwise lost from work.

4. Impossibility of the formation of drug habits.

5. Comparatively certain cure in nearly all forms of disease and improbability of the development of cancer, tuberculosis. Bright’s disease, diabetes, or other serious forms of disease later in life.

6. Better subsequent health of patients who are treated homoeopathically, and enjoyment of a longer life than would otherwise be possible.

*            *             *            *           *         *

To unfold these advantages more in detail:-

       In acute illnesses correct homoeopathic treatment either stops the course of the disease within a few hours, or cause it to run a much milder and shorter course than is ever possible when not treated at all, or when treated by other methods.

      In the more severe forms of disease pain and discomfort are markedly less; recovery is quicker; convalescence is more thorough; and the chance of escaping an untimely death are, at least, three times better with homeopathy than with other  methods.

       As a result of the quicker control of sickness, the earlier recovery, and freedom from complications, the expense due to sickness are always markedly less with homeopathy than with other forms of treatment.

      Cancer, tuberculosis, insanity, chronic kidney trouble, and other fatal forms of chronic disease, seldom or never develop in persons who have previously had the benefit of homeopathic treatment. The reason is that the tendencies towards such disease are previously driven out of the body by correct treatment applied to the lesser ailments.

      On the contrary,by the customary forms of medical treatment, the various illnesses of childhood and adult life are seldom, if ever, really cured; and nearly always, the seeds of chronic disease are driven back into the body, where they germinate and finally develop into some one of the serious aliments under discussion.

      The foregoing applies especially to the local suppressive treatment of disease of the skin and mucous membranes, by which eruptions and discharges are dried up or suppressed with strong ointments, injections, douches, etc. Such conditions are nature’s attempt to get rid of internal disease by forcing it out of the body to the surface, where it will be least harmful.

     Naturally, patients dislike such symptoms, and usually prefer local treatment, which will dry up the eruption or discharge and drive it back into the body again. Getting rid of an eruption or discharge in this way, however, is, in its ultimate results, analogous to closing a city’s sewer outlets.

      Everyone knows the serious results which follows the suppression or driving inward of the eruption of scarlet fever or measles; and yet seemingly but few have the foresight to perceive that the penalty exacted by nature is just as certain in all other forms of disease. The only difference in results is in the time of their appearance, which is governed by the rhythm of the disease. In the quick, actively progressive disease, like scarlet fever, the bad results of suppression appear quickly. In a chronic, slowly progressive disease, like eczema, the bad results may not be noticeable for weeks or months. Otherwise there is no difference; the ultimate results are just as bad and just as certain in one instance as in the other.

      The forcible lowering of high fever with ice baths or strong drugs, and the braking up of colds with large doses of quinine, are also suppressive in character and always harmful. Recovery following such measures is only an evidence of the strong recuperative power of the patient, and health is often seriously and permanently damaged by such treatment. The “scattering” of inflammations and swelling with local applications of iodine, camphorated oil,and other strong drug is also harmful,and just as foolish as would be the scattering over an entire farm of the weeds in one corner of a field.

       With correct Homeopathic treatment, such eruptions and localised ailments are not suppressed or driven inward by local measures; but disappear as a result of internal medication. and because the internal disease which caused them has been cured.

      When comparing the quickness of action of method, if a fair comparison is to be made, the character of the various disease, the time of their existence, and the previous health of the patient should be taken into account. It is also essential to consider whether it is the true curative action of remedies, or only the temporary stoppage of certain disagreeable symptoms which should be compared. In a chronic aliment of several years duration it would be foolish to expect, for instance, in an acute condition like a cold in the head. If only temporary relief of pain in chronic neuralgia is wished for a strong dose of morphine or acetanilide will stupefy the nerves, so that no pain will be felt for the time. It would be futile, however, to compare the temporary, poisonous non – curative action of such drugs with the action of homeopathic remedies which induce a lasting cure, without either poisoning the patient or risking the formation of a drug haibt.


       1. For weakness and loss of appetite – The homeopathic physician obtains, by careful questioning, all the other symptoms, including those of an individualizing nature and prescribes ‘a medicine which would cause similar symptoms. A medicine selected in this way, when properly administered in small doses, will overcome the weakness and loss of appetite, and cure the other symptoms as well. A medicine so selected also removes constitutional tendencies, to disease; and for this reason patients so treated are always much healthier afterward than before.

       For conditions involving weakness and loss of appetite most physician prescribe tonics containing strong doses of such poisonous drugs as nux vomica, strychnine, arsenic, quinine,or iron, any apparent benefit from which is purely temporary, artificial,and harmful in the long run. Patients so treated are never in as  good health afterward.

2. For constipation or diarrhoea – The homeopath gives small doses of medicine, which are capable of causing, when given in strong doses, constipation or diarrhoea of exactly similar nature. When accurately selected, such drugs, in small doses, are positively curative.

      For constipation, most physician give cathartics or laxatives which relieve only temporarily, and always make the patients more constipated and more in need of laxatives than ever before. For diarrhoea, the average physician usually gives a prescription containing opium; which, while it is consepating for the time, is never really curative for diarrhoea, and is always more or less harmful.

      3. Homoeopathy in children’s disease – Not only is there little trouble in getting children to take homoeopathic medicines; but, when these are used, recovery from dangerous illnesses is almost certain, remarkably quick and free from complications.

      One of the principal advantages, also,is that children who are brought up under the supervision of homeopathic physician enjoy much better health later in life; tendencies to discase, which exist in every child, being eradicated by homeopathic remedies given during and following the various ailments of childhood.

      4. Homeopathy in women’s disease – In no other way is homoeopathy more brilliantly successful than in the treatment of disease peculiar to women; most of the expense, discomfort and embarrassment connected with the usual forms of treatment, as well as most of the surgical operations, being rendered unnecessary.

      Neither surgery nor local treatment ever removes the constitutional disease which usually precedes and makes possible thevarious troubles in the organs of women. On the other handhomoeopathy will nearly always cure both the constitutional disease and the local trouble without an operation. Even when an operation is imperative, such an operation does not remove the original cause of the disease. In this instance, homoeopathy will generally bring about a cure of the original cause of the trouble and the patient is thereby enabled to enjoy good health afterwards, which is usually impossible with surgery alone.

      5. Homeopathy in obstetrical work – The expectant mother when treated by a competenthomoeopath before and during pregnancy, can always be sure of a more comfortable period; an easier confinement; a quicker and a more perfect recovery, with less danger of complications; and astronger and healthier baby vomating, indigestion, miscarriage, dropsy, kidney disease, conditions and other troubles of pregnancy can always be controlled and usually prevented by homoeopathic treatment.

      There are certain tendencies to various forms of constitutional disease in every one; but, to a large extent, these can be removed from the mother and from the unborn child by homoeopathic treatment of the mother before and during pregnancy.

      6. Homeopathy in surgical conditions – Patients who are fortunate enough to have homeopathic treatment seldom need operation. At least, ninty per cent. of present day operations could be rendered unnecessary by the intelligent choice of a physician.

     In conditions which have progressed so far as to render an operation imperative, not only is complete recovery almost certain, but the after effects are, at least, twice as good when a homoeopathic physician and surgeon are working in harmony. The very best surgeon obtainable is seldom competent to treat a case medically; because his interest, his education, and his training have been almost exclusively surgical rather than medical.

      It may be that a person is certain to die unless operated upon; and, also, that he is very liable to die in spite of an operation, owing to the shock following all operations, especially in those who are severallyweakened by disease. Under such circumstances, homoeopathic remedies overcome weakness; control shock; and relive all forms of dangerous and disagreeable symptoms, without, in any way, interfering with the work of the surgeon. It is, therefore, important that a homoeopathic physician should be consulted in all surgical cause before an operation is decided upon.

      7. Homeopathy in chronic disease – It is possible for nearly all chronic sufferers to be cured by a systematic course of homoeopathic treatment by physician who have specialized in this kind of healing.

     Even in the last stage of organic disease, when the vitality is exhausted and death is unavoidable, homoeopathic treatment prolongs life, prevents suffering, and renders death painless without stupefying the patient with morphine. It is most important for those who are nearing the end to continue in full possession of their faculties, for the settlement of estate, the drawing of will, and for religious reasons.

      8. Homeopathy in the disease of men – The working of nature’s laws makes no distinction for age, sex, or the morality of individuals. Ailments which result from the sowing of wild oats can be radically cured by a course of individuals specifics. The usual method of treating such diseases with strong doses of poisonous drugs continued over long periods are seldom curative. This is proved by the poor health of such men subsequently, as well as by the ill health of the wives and children who come later.

      9. Homeopathy in disease of the mind – The following quotations are taken from the book, “Mental Diseases” by Dr. W. M. Butler, Professor of Psychiatry. New York Homeopathic Medical College:

      “The brilliant results achieved demonstrate that homeopathy is as successful in mental disease as in the other ill of humanity.” “The homeopath needs no assistance from opiates, hypnotics, and anodynes” (habit forming drugs). “Desperate and apparently hopeless cause are often restored to perfect health of body and mind.” “When the cure is fully accomplished, it remains permanent.”

      Every homeopathic physician is able to verify theses statements from personal experience. The superiority of homeopathic treatment has been publicly demonstrated in those state hospitals for the insane now under the control of homeopathic physician.


Even the thoughtless boy knows better than to thaw his frostbitten fingers before a fire. He knows that a gradual thawing in ice-water or melting snow is preferable: and he also knows something of the banefulresults of heat at such a time, either from hearsay or from never- to- be- forgotten experience.

        Also, those people whose work cause them to be frequently subject to burns know that the pain and inflammation following suchaccidents are markedly relieved by holding the burnt part close to the fire; and while the pain may be temporarily relieved by cold water, that it becomes much worse afterwards.

         Now, why is ice-water best for frost-bite, and why is heat best for recent burns? Is it possible for such to be anything else than examples of the “Law of similars” by which physician should be governed in the treatment of all forms of disease?

      The recently-advocated treatment of bacterial diseases, such as blood-poisoning, rheumatism, tuberculosis, etc., with vaccines (which are solutions of dead bacteria or their toxins) is nothing more than a modified form of Hcmceopathy, which originated -with, and has been in use among, homceopaths for the last fifty years, although no credit is given to the originators by the re-cent discoverers. Homampaths have the advantage over other physicians in knowing how, when, and where to use these agents, as a result of many years of experience; since vaccines are use-less in the majority of ailments, and are frequently harmful in the strong doses usually advocated.

      Since all physicians acknowledge the harmfulness of contrary. methods in frost-bite and burns, as well as the value of similarly acting vaccines in bacterial diseases,—why do so many of them still continue to use drugs and other remedial measures according to contrary methods which are just as harmful, unscientific and useless as would be the application of heat for frost-bite or cold for burns? Is it because of prejudice, ignorance, indifference, or laziness that they refuse to study and apply the logical ex-tension of the “Law of cure” in the general treatment of disease?


      The rank and file of old school physicians know nothing of IlomTopathy because it is not taught in their colleges and seldom mentioned in their medical journals except in a derogatory manner, or in a spirit of ridicule. Also, its discussion is pro-hibited in the meetings of their societies, and they arc taught to look upon it as opposed to their interests, and as something which should be ignored or’ exterminated, rather than as something to be investigated and used for the benefit of humanity. Only a small percentage of physicians ever come to know anything definite about it, therefore, and the majority are so prejudiced against it that they are unable to judge impartially when its beneficent results occasionally come to their notice. Those physician; who do investigate and adopt Homoeopathy are forced to resign from their college and hospital positions and medical so-cieties, and are ostracized by their former associates, a penalty That few men have the hardihood to incur. Like every other revolutionary improvement, Homappathy is  detrimental to many powerful established interests. It is detrimental to drug manufacturers who have millions of dollars invested in their business, and tO’rnost of the medical journals who depend largely upon drug advertisements for their income, be-cause the sale of drugs is decreasing, and when Homoeopathy is universally adopted will be but a fraction of what it now is. It is detrimental to all tines of business associated with medicine, because it eliminates at least two-thirds of otherwise unavoidable sickness. It is detrimental to many physicians of prominence who must be supplanted by physicians specially trained to-practice Homeopathy, and such training is obtainable only after years of special study.

      It is only a question of time until Honwropathy will be generally accepted and used by all physicians; but no radical change in political, legal or medical conditions ever occurs suddenly; the change is always gradual, for the reason that the leading men MI every profession, and those holding positions of authority, are always violently opposed to changes which are harmful to their own interests, and such men do the thinking for the majority of their brethren.

      History bristles with examples showing the difficulty of establishing reforms, and the persecution of reformers. Harvey, who discovered the circulation of the blood, was ridiculed and perse-cuted after giving proofs of his discovery Dr. Semmelweis, Professor of Obstetrics at Vienna, was degraded and driven insane by persecution after proving to his brother physicians that the awful mortality among women, following child-birth, could’ be prevented by cleanliness. Dr. Morton, who made painless• surgery possible through his discovery of ether anesthesia, was Oersecuted as an enemy to the human race. And Dr. Hahne-mann, the founder of Homceopathy, previously acknowledged’ to be one of the leading medical scientists of Europe, was ostra-cized and persecuted for the rest of his life merely for demonstrating to his medical brethren the homeopathic method for the radical cure of disease.


      By the usual methods of giving drugs, which are so devoid oP everything scientific or methodical as hardly to justify the use of the word “method,” drugs are given which have an opposite, contrary or different action to that seen in the disease for which they are prescribed. Drugs so used are never really curative, be-cause they act in a way which is contrary to nature’s law of cure as expressed by the formula “Similars cure similars.”

       Since the diseases and the drugs so used are contrary to each other in action, and, alto, since drugs so used have no specific relationship to the individual patient, strong doses are necessary in order to produce results ; and, what is more important, it is the poisonous action of such drugs, rather than their curative action. by which such results are obtained.

      While the use of drug’s in large doses may seem necessary to the average patient, both science and experience have proved large doses to be not only unnecessary, but usually productive of more harm than good. All drugs are poisonous in strong doses. Otherwise they would be useless for medicinal purposes, since it is their power to produce symptoms (poisonous action) that makes them of medicinal value. When given in strong doses, they invariably cause chronic drug diseases which closely resemble natural diseases, and are usually mistaken for them by patients and by the majority of physicians.

      The bone pains, catarrh and sensitiveness to cold caused by Mercury; the chilliness, .liver disease and incurable deafness caused by Quinine; the puffy face, paleness, weakness, chilliness and restlessness caused by Arsenic; the irritability, nervousness, indigestion and constipation caused by Nux vomica or Strych-nine: the skin eruptions, sleeplessness, and even insanity caused by Potassium bromide; the sallow, lead-colored complexion, pale bluish lips, and weak heart following the use of headache powders are only a very few of the chronic symptoms which result from the abuse of drugs.

      With the exception of a very incomplete knowledge of the acute poisonous action of a few drugs, derived from experiments on animals, and the examination of those who have died from poi-son, the members of the medical profession, except the homoeopaths, know but little of the chronic results producible by the drugs used in their everyday work. The reason for this is that, with the exception of the homoeopaths, the profession has never undertaken a systematic study of the action of drugs on healthy human beings, which is the only way in which such knowledge can be obtained.

      On the contrary, thousands of such experiments have been made by homeopathic physicians who have taken such drugs themselves for long periods of time. By keeping careful daily records of the symptoms which resulted, and by comparing them with the records of other experimenters, homeopathic physicians have been able to learn accurately the disease-producing powers of every important drug in its entirety.

      It is the symptom records of thousands of homoeopathic physicians, compiled in book form and known as the Homccofrathic Materia Medica, which enables homeopathic physicians to recognize drug symptoms and to prescribe the proper antidotes. It is the knowledge of drugs contained in the Homoeopathic Materia Modica, and nowhere else, which enables the homoeopathic physi-cian to select with accuracy the similar curative drug for every individual case of disease.

      For pain and sleeplessness the average physician is usually forced to rely upon such drugs as morphine, acetanilid, chloral, bromides, etc., which must be given in strong doses in order to produce results. Such drugs give temporary relief by stupefying the brain and the nerves of sensation. They are never curative; and, unless the illness is only a temporary one, drugs of this character must be frequently repeated in still larger doses. in order to continue the effect. It is in just this way that health is often ruined, drug habits formed, and many useful lives irretrievably wrecked.

      On the contrary, real homoeopathic drugs are never poisonous in effect, and never cause drug habits because of the special way in which they are prepared. For excessive pain, with restlessness and sleeplessness. the homoeopath would give small doses of some ant- drug, the action of which accurately simulated the peculiar symptoms of the indi-vidual patient. A drug used in this way. while it is specifically curative, does not stupefy the patient, nor does it ever result in the formation of a drug habit, nor in the formation of a drug disease.

      The homoeopath endeavors to give each patient his individual. specific, curative drug. He aims to fit the remedy to the patient as accurately as a well-fitted suit of clothes.

      A dozen homoeopaths, in one, case of pneumonia, for example, would be unanimous in the selection of the same drug. In another case of pneumonia they would probably all agree to give an entirely different drug, because the individual symptoms of the two patients would be different, and would, therefore, call for different drugs. The reason for the careful selection of remedies, based on the individuality of patients, is that experi-ence has proved that by such means only can positive curative results be obtained.

      On the other hand, when other physicians consult together, there is seldom any attempt at real individualization, or any uniformity of opinion. Without a law of cure to guide them. each physician is a law unto himself ; each has his own routine treatment for each disease, which he gives with but slight variation to every patient suffering from such a disease, and his method often differs markedly from the routine treatment of each of his fellows.

      Routine methods of treatment based on the diagnosis of disease are generally ineffective and unscientific, because that which 15 curative for ore patient is useless for the next. A medicine can be curative only when its disease-producing powers are specifically and exactly similar to the peculiar symptoms of the individual patient.


      Since the symptoms of the patient and the symptoms which the drug is capable of causing are of a similar nature, the patient is certain to be very sensitive to the action of a homoeopathic drug. If, therefore, such a drug is given in strong doses, the symptoms will be increased, and the patient will feel worse instead of better.

      When, however, the homeopathic drug is given in very small doses, its action is at once curative. In other words, very small closes have an opposite action to that of large doses; or small doses are curative for symptoms like those caused by large doses.

      Small doses are, therefore, necessary in homoeopathic practice in order to relieve the patient without first making him worse. In fact, such small doses are very much more powerful for the patient than they are for well people, or for other patients with dissimilar symptoms.

      Since it is the curative, non-poisonous. principle represented in the small doses used, rather than the poisonous chemical effect of large doses, it is easy to understand why an overdose of homoeopathic medicine may often be taken through error, either by the patient or some one else, without poisonous results.

      When it is understood that disease primarily consists of a disorder of certain special groups of body cells, and that these cells are so small that a piece of flesh the size of a pin-head will contain millions of cells, it is easy to see why such cells are best acted upon by homeopathic medicines which are so prepared that their particles, also, are in a finely divided state.


      In spite of the apparently slow progress of the medical profession in adopting better methods for the cure of disease, when we stop to consider that the medical practice of one hundred years ago was crude, barbarous, hared on empty theory, and absolutely unscientific in nearly every respect, and that modern medicine, compared with the medicine of the Dark Ages, is chiefly a development of the last twenty-five years, we should be thankful for the great gains that have already been made in the endeavor to place medicine upon a strictly scientific basis, and should be very optimistic for the future.

      Great advances in the control of preventable disease have recently been obtained, for the first time in the world’s history, through disinfection, quarantine and improved sanitation. Such human scourges as yellow fever, cholera, small-pox and bubonic plague, formerly considered as unavoidable evils, or as examples of Divine wrath, are now things of the past in civilized communities. Malaria, typhoid, diphtheria, scar’et fever, and other forms of preventable disease, in all probability will also soon be things of the past.

      Such results in the control of epidemic disease are due to the efforts of physicians and sanitarians in the employ of the various governments, and are obtainable only through the authority of government officials.

      In contra-distinction to the duties of government sanitarians, it is the duty of the medical practitioner to improve the health of the families in his charge. It is his duty carefully to fit himself by impartial study and investigation for the successful cure of those diseases which are peculiar to families and individuals; the common everyday acute and chronic diseases which are always with us in spite of improved sanitation. And it is also his duty never to allow prejudice or sectarianism to govern his studies and investigations or his methods of practice, but always to be governed by the spirit of the true scientist who tests all things pertaining to his special field of endeavor in order that nothing important shall escape his notice.

      It should be the endeashar of physicians to cure diseases of a constitutional nature, thereby raising the standards of individual and family health, and eliminating most of the ordinary forms of sickness. If all physicians were competent to do this, there would need to be no ‘deaths except those resulting from accident and old age.

      At present there is no method known to science for the elimination and cure of constitutional disease other than the homeopathic method; and since this is founded upon “Nature law of cure” it is doubtful if anything else will ever he discovered to take its place.

      Diet, fresh air, change of climate, hydrotherapy, massage, me-chanical therapy, spinal manipulation, electricity, surgery, organotherapy, and mental therapy, all have their place in the treatment of disease; but for the radical cure of disease, and for the eradication of disease tendencies, none of these can ever take the place or do the work of specific homeopathic medicines. Homeopathy cures when other measures only palliate or relieve temporarily.

      The adoption of real homoeopathic methods by the medical pro-fession, and the universal adoption of homoeopathic treatment by the public at large, will be as successful in the increase of health and happiness as has already been accomplished through the control of such diseases. as cholera, yellow fever, small-pox, typhoid and diphtheria.

      Since the time of Hahnemann, the founder of the homeopathic school, Homoeopathy has spread by leaps and bounds, in spite of the most violent and’bitter opposition, and it is only a question of time until its truths will be universally acknowledged, and its methods of treatment be in general use. In the meantime, these patients who have been benefitted by it, can do much for the general welfare by taking an active part in the spread of its doctrines among their less fortunate friends. In fact, every in-telligent person who is acquainted with its advantages should become an active missionary in its favor, and thus hasten the time of its general adoption, not only for his own good, not only for the good of his friends and relations, but for the good of all mankind.

 263 Arlington Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.