THE NEW YORK JOURNAL OF PHARMACY 



period of glory each "cured" pneumonia 

 in its time and each in turn became obso- 

 lete. Pneumonia is a self-limited dis- 

 ease — a man, who twenty-four hours 

 ago was at death's door, suddenly 

 brightens, his temperature falls, his pulse 

 slows, he is remarkably improved. This 

 is the crisis which occurs anywhere be- 

 tween the third and twenty-first day of 

 the disease. It is perfectly plain how 

 the drug which was given just before the 

 crisis "cured" the disease. The self- 

 same applies to typhoid and many other 

 diseases. The advocates of these cure- 

 alls were in many instances the good 

 clinicians of their time. What was lack- 

 ing was the careful supervision, tabula- 

 tion, methods of recording, improved 

 methods of physical diagnosis, and, 

 moreover, all this information taken 

 from large groups of parallel cases, the 

 opportunity for the study of which is 

 furnished by our large, modern, well- 

 equipped hospitals 



The second reason for the apparent 

 benefit derived from absurd methods of 

 treatment, viz., the role of mental influ- 

 ence, was no less a factor in the produc- 

 tion of the medical sects. Why was it 

 that Father Kneipp had so many follow- 

 ers (including the Pope and the Empress 

 of Austria) ? Why was it that after his 

 death his. methods of treatment became 

 inert? It is granted by all students of 

 psychical medicine that this man alle- 

 viated suffering and stimulated hope by 

 means of his lovable personality. On 

 no other grounds can his success be ex- 

 plained. Similarly why was it that many 

 a poor creature with a degenerative dis- 

 ease of the spinal cord was helped by the 

 famous French neurologist, Prof. Char- 

 cot, and by no one else, in spite of the 

 fact that Dr. Charcot prescribed inert 



powders ? The answer is psycho-therapy, 

 in this instance by the mental influence 

 which Dr. Charcot held over his patients 

 by means of his charming and radiant 

 personal characteristics. There are 

 scores of examples of improvement in 

 disease processes brought about by 

 strong mental influence. However, I 

 wish to make it clear that mental medi- 

 cine influences only the subjective symp- 

 tomatoly of disease, and in no way alters 

 the anatomico-pathological process if 

 such be present. 



With a realization of the foregoing 

 and with the development of scientific 

 methods in medicine, sectarianism has 

 made an unconditional surrender. At 

 the present time there exists but one 

 school of medicine — modern medicine. 

 Modern scientific medicine, as exempli- 

 fied by our great medical institutions — 

 Johns Hopkins, Harvard, Cornell, Co- 

 lumbia, brushes aside all historic dogma. 

 There exists no pet formula such as 

 "similia semilibus curantur" and no a 

 priori explanations, no grandiose precon- 

 ceptions of disease. Modern scientific 

 medicine is built upon exact clinical and 

 experimental evidence, nothing more nor 

 less. Allopathy has long ago surrendered 

 to modern medicine. No allopathic insti- 

 tution exists at the present time. Ho- 

 meopathy is only such in name. The 

 original theories of Hahnemann have 

 been entirely discredited. The so-called 

 homeopathic schools are well grounded 

 in modern pathology and have thrown 

 to the winds the dogmatic preconceived 

 notions of their founder. It simply re- 

 mains for them to discard the irrational 

 term homeopath. This will soon occur. 

 The eclectic school is rapidly going to its 

 grave. It will soon cease to exist, com- 



