The list of physicians here has just three names: Hippocrates, Hahnemann, and Kent. This is by no means to suggest that I can think of no other worthies, either in general medicine or even in homoeopathy proper, but, as always, my choice here has been spontaneous and, one can say, quite subjective.
Hippocrates: The Spirit Of Medicine.
Unlike the Greek god of medicine and healing, Asclepius, considered by the Greeks to be the first physician and guardian-god of all human physicians, Hippocrates of Kos was a real person who lived between 460BC and 370BC. However, being so far removed from us and from modern history, his memory is barnacled by so many legends, that it is often hard to distinguish which parts of his biography are true and which are not. He is obviously not unique in this respect.
The most curious part of the Hippocratic legacy is that although he is often referred to as father of Western medicine, his philosophy of medicine is much closer to the homoeopathic philosophy of the last two centuries than to the allopathic philosophy and medical practice which claims to have descended from him. The father of homoeopathy Samuel Hahnemann actually traced his revolutionary approach to medicine to none other than Hippocrates, and credited him as the direct source of his own inspiration.
Medicine surely existed before Hippocrates and could be divided into two categories. One associated health with religion and attributed diseases to the wrath of gods. Treatment in such cases was reduced to placating the gods with sacrifices. The other one, almost like modern allopathic medicine, judged each disease by its most severe visible symptom and attacked that symptom, rather than treat the patient’s totality of symptoms in the context of his overall constitution.
Such an approach often led to lethal results, as, for instance, a patient with a severe case of diarrhea would be treated with diarrhea-suppressant remedies, and in numerous cases where diarrhea was not the real problem, but, in fact, the only relief for an underlying condition, the patient was sure to suffer most terribly, and eventually die, having lost his body’s sole means of fighting the actual disease. Thus, the medical treatment by the allopathic so-called “law of contraries” (as opposed to the homoeopathic “law of similars”) habitually turned out far worse than the disease itself, and as a result those who did not get any medical help fared better than those who did.
It was Hippocrates who advocated preventive medicine and general patient care, seeing the symptoms only as superficial manifestations of an underlying condition. His approach was indeed more consistent with the homoeopathic approach than with that of the allopaths. With this in mind, my present decision to include in this Physicians series two homoeopathic greats alongside Hippocrates should make more sense than merely looking at it as a random choice.
And finally, the famous Hippocratic Oath. Here it is, given for reference in the classic English translation:
“I swear by Apollo the Physician, and Asclepius, and Hygieia, and Panaceia, and all the gods, and goddesses, making them my witnesses that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and covenant:
“To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art, if they desire to learn it, without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and taken the oath according to medical law, but to no one else.
“I will apply dietic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I’ll keep them from harm and injustice.
“I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
“I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
“Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief, and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, free or slaves.
“What I may see or hear in the course of treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep myself holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
“If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite be my lot.”
This oath has an undeniable solemnity and flavor of the ages. I understand, of course, the unwillingness of a devout Christian or any other later physician to refer to Apollo and to other gods and goddesses even for the sake of a purely symbolic nod to the greatness of Hippocrates and to such godly attributes as hygiene and panacea. But changing those poor Greek gods and goddesses to God, or even letting God out of it altogether was not enough. “Modernized” alternative versions of the Oath have appeared, undermining the uniformity of the medical initiation rite. Such deviations from the classic Oath have allowed many medical schools to forego the oath altogether. No wonder: if the original Oath is no longer sacred, then nothing is sacred… Too bad!
In the next two entries, as promised, I shall talk about two great followers of Hippocrates: Hahnemann and Kent.
No comments:
Post a Comment