ABSTRACT
Incivilities1838, New York physician James McNaughton, a regular and president of the Medical Society of the State of New York, addressed his society by placing Samuel Hahnemann within the mainstream of medical thinking, suggesting that the profession should more closely examine the system which had already spread from Germany to nearly every part of Europe and America. He acknowledged that Hahnemann made no claim of originating the principle of similars; in fact, he had identified numerous predecessors who had investigated the effects of medicines upon themselves and others. However, he added, no one could deny Hahnemann’s perseverance in his investigations, the diligence of his followers, their reasoned arguments for smaller doses, or the avoidance of mixtures and combinations.1 McNaughton felt that the good sense and propriety of Hahnemann’s injunctions, including the assertion that his New School remedies did no harm, could not be denied, although physicians might disagree with his having transformed the principle of similars into a “grand axiom.” The influence of friction in imparting energy to medicines certainly seemed improbable to McNaughton; on the other hand, “it may nevertheless be true.” Given the known effects of electricity, galvanism, and electromagnetism, he urged the medical profession to ascertain the veracity of Hahnemann’s claim, and determine as well the efficacy of belladonna to prevent scarlet fever; dorsera as a specific in whooping cough; the odor of gold to cure melancholy; and aconite to treat inflammatory fevers.2
