I discovered that Homeopathy is Homeopathic Pharmacology, by revelation. I can't say when it happened, on what date. I am inclined to believe that it happened gradually, reminding me that, during my life, I opened, successively, several doors of the mysteries of nature. Each of them unfolded in front of me the always searching spirit of the new, other paths, which led me to the next doors. These doors and paths are indicated on the first page of the book.
The first edition of this book, published in March 2007, was the first book in the world in that field. It can be considered as representing the foundations and construction of a new science, that of the relations of the homeopathic medicine with the organism, on the foundation laid by Hahnemann for classical Homeopathy.
Being an international premiere and given the particularities of the subject that refers to a topic little known and / or currently controversial, out of ignorance ("Those who praise homeopathy do not always have a more precise knowledge than those who denigrate it" - Pierre Vannier ), I found it useful to include more than the specific content of the new science. That is why I designed an unconventional book and introduced a first part, with introductory chapters, containing statements, arguments, justifications, which would prepare an apperceptive field, conducive to understanding the problems and which would provide many indispensable data of a formative, informative and philosophical nature. The idea proved to be inspired, which is why the introductory part is maintained in the third edition, with some additions.
* * *
After the publication of the first edition of the book, the launch and analysis of the book naturally followed. These have been done on several occasions. With each presentation but also in the meantime, I meditated for a long time on the content of the book and many new ideas appeared, which I noted in order to be introduced in the third edition, which is revised and added, with substantial improvements compared to the first edition.
At the same time, convinced by the obvious analogy between homeopathic and allopathic medicine, I considered it useful to make a closer analysis of their evolution in the last 200 years, since the discovery of homeopathy. I prepared an essay entitled "Medicine in the 21st Century", which I published in Memomed 2009 and republished, revised and added in Memomed 2010 and 2011. The essay is also published in the third edition of General Homeopathic Pharmacology, in the Annex.
I would not have worked hard and persevered to design, develop and publish these texts, if I had not had a firm belief in the truths about the two types of drugs, in their impeccable logic of presentation, in their invaluable value for human health care, their most precious asset, along with life.
At the same time, I never expected my new ideas and concepts to be accepted quickly by many confreres. But I didn't even think that almost four years would pass and my efforts would be practically unnoticed.
All the more so as, in the mentioned materials, it was not a question of discovering a new medicine, which could bring relief to several hundred thousand or millions of patients. And no other news of similar size.
It is about changing the course of the history of medicine throughout the world, and therefore of the health of humanity. It is impossible to estimate the multitude of causes and the weight of the various factors that contribute to maintaining the current situation, in fact, keeping homeopathy out of medicine. Unfortunately, the causes and factors are found in all categories that could have detrimental influences: homeopathic doctors, allopathic doctors, health authorities or other fields, people outside the medical profession. Equally, all these factors are responsible to humanity and history for the immense harm caused to humans.
Homeopathic doctors are guilty of persevering in modernizing homeopathy and entering the medical sciences, preferring to practice a 200-year-old therapeutic method that should have been permanently renewed over time, following the model of allopathy.
From my entire book it is clear that homeopathy must survive, but not anyway, in any case in its current form. Homeopathy must become what it really is, Homeopathic Pharmacology, medical science, analogous to Allopathy and Allopathic Pharmacology. Homeopathy must be rebuilt, but the only way to do this is homeopathic pharmacology. A typical example: all pathogenesis must be restored according to the rules of modern proving (see annex 2) Only in this way will it be possible to eliminate all unreliable data from current pathogenesis, which represents 6–55% of the content contained in current Medical Books.
Allopathic physicians are guilty of immobility in understanding the healing virtues of homeopathic medicines and their remarkable usefulness. Doctors teachers from medical universities and pharmacy in all countries, are guilty of not accepting that homeopathy be taught as a compulsory subject to all students. This would result in the ability of all physicians to prescribe, alike, allopathic and homeopathic medicines, both in the outpatient and in hospitals, guided exclusively by the optimal therapeutic indications for each patient.
People outside the medical profession can afford to judge homeopathy in various ways and in various ways, competing to address all sorts of invectives, obviously without valid justifications.
Often, when I think about the situation of homeopathy in the world, I have the feeling that I am living in reality, what I could call the "War of 200 years". Probably one of the longest in human history, which is still in full swing and which will probably never end if the two sides do not understand and accept that both are the expression of the laws of nature and that their destiny is to complement each other. and to bring together the health services of the population.
In this field, the uncontrolled passions of some people condemned them to never be victorious or defeated, but to fight incessantly, without reaching a real victory.
It is the war between allopathy and homeopathy, started immediately after the discovery of homeopathy. Like all wars, it is absurd, because it is caused by misunderstandings between people based on subjective opinions. In reality, both allopathy and homeopathy exist because they express objective laws of nature, which are immutable and perennial, independent of people's subjective opinions. Without the ability to distinguish unique reality, as is clear from the laws of nature, some people have "their reality," which is irreconcilable with "the reality of others."
* * *
In the four years that have passed since the publication of my first book on Homeopathic Pharmacology, I am constantly experiencing a feeling of helplessness. This is natural because I do not receive the slightest sign of encouragement, but I have to face more and more opposition, some even from those I would not have expected in any way.
In 2008, I participated in the Congress of the International League of Homeopathic Physicians in Ostend, Belgium. A section of the Congress was entitled Pharmacology. I was surprised to learn that most pharmacologists are against homeopathy and that I have not yet met a pharmacologist who will accept and practice homeopathy, as I do.
I was convinced that it was the ideal situation to present my ideas about homeopathic pharmacology. I also had a tangible argument. The English version of my book "General Homeopathic Pharmacology" had just been printed. I sent the book in advance to the president of the congress organizing committee and a book presentation flyer and asked him to schedule me a conference in a plenary session of the congress. It was a unique opportunity for homeopaths from all over the world to learn about innovative ideas and discuss them, as each would consider. What else could be the purpose of an international congress more than the one I requested? To my surprise, I was included in the congress program, in the afternoon of the penultimate day, when at least two thirds of the participants had left for a secondary hall. But the mess didn't stop here. The day before the scheduled date, when I went to hand over the slide stick, I was told that I had been rescheduled to support my work, on the last day, in the smallest room. Obviously, most of the participants had left, so I had an insignificant audience. Even in these conditions I was not spared. The moderator ordered me to respect the time reserved for me, 20 minutes. After me followed a presentation from the host country, which, instead of 20 minutes, was allowed to speak for an hour and a half, a completely minor topic compared to mine.
* * *
I met the same indifference in my country. After the publication of my book, "the first in the world", so an event that does not appear every week or month, I wanted to launch the book in a joint meeting of the Romanian Academy and the Academy of Medical Sciences, I being a member of both understanding to make my personal contribution to asserting their role as high scientific forums. After more than a year of interventions, I managed to have the necessary approvals and to schedule the joint meeting. I personally sent the invitations to all the heads of the departments at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Bucharest and to other institutions that might have been interested. On the day of the launch, I was honored only by some of the invited teachers. Even if they were busy, I would have expected them to send one of their subordinates, which did not happen.
Thus, homeopathic pharmacology remained unknown to doctors and teachers.
* * *
I could not help but relate these reprehensible facts, which dishonor ideas and institutions, which should be models of probity and dignity, at the forefront of progress. I made the report to point out that, unfortunately, in the course of the years of human history, most people are so limited and comfortable that they learn nothing from life's experiences. The phenomenon is general in all compartments of society. He met in countless ways, with all the sciences. It has also been found in the science of medicine. Here is the proof. Until the middle of the 19th century, knowledge of known "medicinal substances" (mostly plants and natural substances) was described in books on "Medical Matter" and taught to students by clinicians.
A young graduate of the University of Leipzig, Rudolf Buchheim (1820–1879) had the idea to found a science of medicine, Pharmacology. He tried at several universities in Germany, but was refused, being told that the drugs should be taught to students by clinicians, who also use them in treatments. In 1849, Buchheim, aged 29, managed to set up the first Department of Pharmacology at the University of Dorpat (located in present-day Estonia). Later, despite all the opposition of the medical schools, Buchheim returned to Germany. The best of his students, Oswald Schmiedeberg (1838–1921) was appointed Professor of Pharmacology at the University of Strasbourg in 1872, where he had one of the most valuable schools of Pharmacology in the world.
History repeats itself at the beginning of the 21st century with Homeopathic Pharmacology. When my book "General Homeopathic Pharmacology" appeared in 2007, I sent a letter to the rectors of Romanian universities of medicine and pharmacy, asking them to examine the possibility of introducing the new science, at least as an optional subject. I did not receive any answer, favorable or not, although I was not a 29-year-old, like Buchheim, but a university professor established in the more than 60 years of a fruitful university career. One might remember here the banal and obsolete idea of the teachings of history which has the gift of arousing indifference.
Any comment is useless. It remains for the future to show us what will happen with homeopathic pharmacology.
Univ. PhD in Pharmacology and Homeopathy,
Corresponding member of the Romanian Academy,
Full member of the Academy of Medical Sciences