Manfred Mueller, MA, DHM, RSHom(NA), CCH is principal lecturer and founder of The Homeopathic College (1989).Beginning in 1990, he developed Reverse Chronological Tautopathy (RCT), a comprehensive approach to homeopathic treatment for adverse effects of infections, vaccinations, x-rays, radiation, drugs, and toxic exposures. He is a regular guest lecturer with the Program on Integrative Medicine, UNC School of Medicine where he has presented cases since 1995. He has been president of the North American Society of Homeopaths since 2005.
AS: In 1990 you developed Reverse Chronological Tautopathy (RCT). Can you define and describe that method briefly?
MM: “RCT was developed in response to a growing need to remove the effects of drugs, vaccines, diagnostic and therapeutic X-ray/radiation and environmental and occupational exposures. I’d seen that children who’d been given multiple vaccines had lingering symptoms that were not part of their constitutional picture. This included a recollection of people’s childhood and upbringing as compared to how they are now. I saw something similar present in many chronic disorders, where the client had a history of conventional medical treatment. When you take a thorough case and recognize that the basic characteristics a person was born with dramatically changed after suppressive medication, it is logical that these syndromes must be removed for a real constitutional picture to emerge.
I always felt it was necessary, especially when it comes to chronic disease, to have a thorough history of the evolution of the disease. I saw that symptoms often developed after medications and/or medical treatments were used. I found that these symptoms were listed among the chronic effects of those medications and treatments! For example, one child who was given prednisone for a year had Cushing’s syndrome. I tried Prednisone 30c and within a few weeks, the Cushing’s syndrome was gone! In a mental patient who’d been treated with antipsychotic medication, antidoting the drug with “Stelazine” in potency rapidly cured his tardive dyskinesia.
I was taught that homeopathy addressed the whole patient, rather than the disorder, but I found that many classical era homeopaths did not share this view. I discovered that even Hahnemann didn’t treat the constitution, but simply matched remedies to the totality of the disease picture. In the Organon (6th) he even refers to several diseases co-existing in the same patient simultaneously. Hahnemann also realized that the most recent conditions needed to be removed, before older ones could be addressed. I came to the conclusion that many modern patients with complex chronic disorders, present with multiple artificially induced disorders. These disorders can often be traced back to a cause, when you take a careful chronological history. So I don’t just use RCT, I use reverse chronological treatment, period.
AS: Can you explain more about using reverse chronological treatment, rather than just removing the cause?
MM: Unfortunately simply removing the causes often does not remove all of the long-term effects. So for example, many patients suffering from side effects of Vioxx or Cipro continue to have symptoms long after the drugs themselves have been discontinued. People exposed to harmful radiation can develop cancer even decades later. Psychotherapist offices are full of patients who have suffered from traumatic experiences years earlier.
Reverse Chronological treatment operates on the premise that complex chronic disorders are the result of multiple causes over time. The causes are long gone, but the effects persist. According to Hahnemann, acute disease is the body’s response to pathogens. This includes natural causes such as infectious agents, animal/plant poisons, emotional/physical trauma, etc. Among the causes of chronic disorders, Hahnemann includes iatrogenic causes: the long-term result of harmful drugs and medical procedures. It is important to remove any sustaining cause – like taking the knife out of your back before the wound can heal and infection can be cured – or in case of a chronic disease, discontinuing a harmful drug or removing an amalgam filling containing mercury, before treatment for the effects can begin.
Instead of trying to find a remedy for ALL the symptoms produced by ALL the multiple causes, RCT removes each effect by administering a remedy made from the causative agent, beginning with the most recent one. It is often impossible to find a single remedy that covers all the symptoms from multiple problems in complex chronic diseases. To complicate matters further, in modern medical treatment, drugs successfully suppress the symptoms of existing conditions, INCLUDING those induced by past drugs. Absence of symptoms as a result of suppression actually constitutes a symptom, too!
AS: Why do you feel mentals are not as important and why don’t you emphasize them? How is your case taking method different?
MM: Mental symptoms are no more important than physical ones for remedy selection, unless you are looking for a single silver bullet that fits the person – an ideal that is elusive and unnecessary. When mental symptoms are present, they are of course part of the equation. We take a case beginning with the present signs and symptoms, with special consideration of their chronological and causative evolution. This is to identify the several disorders that coexist in one individual. When one group of symptoms is brought on by one cause and several years later another from another cause, they are to be considered distinct disorders, in the Hahnemannian sense. They should be treated simultaneously by alternating the suitable remedies.
AS: When you decide to administer a remedy from the causative agent, does the person have to be exhibiting specific symptoms of that agent? Or can you just infer that this agent is a block to cure, based on a timeline?
MM: Good question. There is evidence that every agent that has an effect on the body, even temporarily, changes the body permanently. We can infer from this that we don’t need symptoms to try to counteract any such agents known to have biological action. Often symptoms take decades to develop. The relative risk of failing to antidote the morbid effects is always greater than any theoretical “harm” from unnecessary homeopathic treatment!
AS: Is there a special range of potencies you find most effective in RCT? How often is the dose repeated? Do you have a particular protocol for dosing?
MM: Typically, we use a 30C potency since we have found they are the most readily available at the pharmacies. We begin the process by mixing a pellet in liquid (I use 1/2 oz, amber glass bottles with glass droppers; 10% alcohol to water mixture) and dose 3 times a day, for 3 days, for each “clearing” remedy, one at a time, in the reverse order of exposure (with my clients, I refer to them as “clearing remedies”).
I have found the 30C’s work just deep enough to stimulate the body to begin to undo the negative influence. However, I’ve noticed in some cases where the exposure was sustained for a long duration of time (such as being on a medication for several years or repeated X-rays) that it is more appropriate to use a Q (LM) potency and take a daily dose for 10 days. In my experience, Q potencies work on a much deeper level, and of course, are much more gentle than the centesimal scale.
Often, we will repeat certain clearing remedies or use it for more than 9 or 10 doses at a time. There are tutorials where I go into greater detail on this systematic method of removing the long-term effects of drugs and other exposures.
AS: Are toxins identified by the client’s story alone, or are other means used, such as hair analysis, blood tests etc.? Does the detox process require any supportive means, such as herbs or drainage remedies?
MM: Toxins and drug harm should be identified by symptoms, clients’ recollection of exposure, medical or other records of exposure, and by additional appropriate tests. The detox process is conducted with any safe means, but there are some particularly effective ones.
But first, it’s important to understand the difference between the primary and secondary action of drugs and toxins. The primary action of a poison is a chemical reaction of the poison in the biological system. It exists so long as crude amounts of a biologically active substance remain in the organism (i.e. when the drug is still in your “system”). The secondary action is the organism’s response to these substances, usually an opposite reaction to the primary one.
The strength of conventional medicine lies in its primary effect achieved through giving material doses of appropriate substances. The strength of the homeopathy, and especially the tautopathic method, is the ability to identify and remove the secondary dynamic effects of previous exposures.
Detoxification involves primarily materials that can buffer, absorb, chelate or stimulate excretion. This includes benign substances like activated charcoal, baking soda, flour, sugar, egg white, spirulina, chlorella, cilantro, DMSA, EDTA, and many other measures. In addition, some homeopathic remedies like low X potencies of Hepar Sulphuris to antidote mercury and other metals. We find some gems in homeopathic manuals, such as Hering’s Domestic Physician and Lillienthal’s Homeotherapeutics. For drug overdoses or toxic exposure, standard poisoning guidelines, chemical buffers and homeopathic antidotes apply, or more recently discovered methods such as those found on our website (www.thehomeopathiccollege.org).
While we can also employ standard homeopathic treatment during the primary action, it is often useless or may even aggravate. To avoid such aggravations, we need to employ the proper rules of antidoting. You can get an overview on the subject either by viewing this webinar I did called “Homeopathic Antidote Protocol”
or by listening to this “Interview on Reverse Chronological Tautopathy:”
The secondary effects can linger indefinitely, either latent or symptomatic, long after the drug or poison has been removed. “Clearing” (RCT) these dynamic effects only applies to these remaining secondary disorders, so the clearing process is different, technically speaking, from detoxification. No other system of medicine can accomplish this so easily, quickly and effectively as homeopathy can.
AS: I see, so this explains why a lab test may be negative for some toxin, but the patient still suffers the effects of it. Once you detox and also clear the maintaining factors, do you begin treatment with the simillimum? Do you ever find ailments disappearing just from the clearing and detox?
MM: Yes, in fact we often find ailments disappear permanently simply by clearing the secondary effects of past suppressive and toxic agents. Sometimes no further treatment is needed. In addition to that, we sometimes see ailments disappear by removing current sustaining causes such as by discontinuing medications (although further treatment is usually needed). The other day, I started a new case of a 15 year old girl who had chronic daily headaches. I questioned when the symptoms started. She said exactly 2 years ago. She also revealed that a little over 2 years ago she got her first cellphone. I asked her to try going without the phone for one week. At the end of that week, she had not had a single headache! A few doses of the potency of Mobile Phone (30C in water) will remove any latent effects and complete the cure.
According to Hahnemann, the idem (tauton) is the simillimum to the disease it causes (Chronic Diseases, last paragraph). That means the potency of the very substance that caused the illness is the simillimum to that illness, since during provings it produces a syndrome with the closest resemblance to the disease it causes. However since etiology is not always reliable during case-taking, we also give the homeopathic remedy (remedies) that match the symptoms. In cases where various components of a complex disorder exist and when a timeline can be established by symptoms, we use daily doses in the Q-potencies (Organon 270) and alternate (Organon 40) several remedies to address these several components simultaneously, using the simillimum for each disorder. Disorders are addressed in reverse chronological order of their appearance. This latter method has the support of some of the best of the classical homeopathic masters.
“The correct method is to prescribe for the present conditions, bearing in mind as especially important the latest symptoms that have arisen; then to follow the case backward step by step, removing the ailments in the reverse order of their first appearance. Finally, the constitutional remedy becomes clearly indicated, and it will complete the cure gently and safely.”
– Erastus E. Case
Some Clinical Experiences of Erastus E Case MD. Sarcoma.
Details a dramatic cure of an infant of sarcoma.
After all acquired disorders have disappeared permanently, we finally also need to remove inherited susceptibilities to prevent recurrence. This is done by addressing the inherited characteristics of the whole person, with so-called constitutional treatment. But when it comes to such constitutional characteristics, today more than one remedy may be needed to cover the complexities of the whole person. Today’s inherited disorders are much more complex than they were in the 19th century. For example, then we might have seen a purely psoric case where one psoric remedy may have sufficed. Today virtually all patients have a complicated composite of inherited disorders, and above all, the cancer diathesis (http://www.thehomeopathiccollege.org/cancer-diathesis/interview-on-the-cancer-diathesis-predisposition/) with components of the three classical miasms plus the tubercular miasm, and all the various mutations from exposure to modern life. More than one simillimum for inherited syndromes may need to be alternated to accomplish a complete cure, all the while carefully watching for new dangers in life-style and environment and antidoting their effects as needed.
AS: Two diseases which seem to be on the rise are Parkinson’s and Hepatitis C. Can you offer any insights into either of these from RCT?
M.M. I’ve covered these two diseases in tutorials available on our website. In a nutshell, Hepatitis C is a fake disease. For more information, please read up on Dr. Peter Duesberg’s work on invented viral diseases (http://www.duesberg.com/). The disorder itself is not a viral disorder at all, but rather drug induced and responds very well to the Mueller Method of homeopathic treatment. I’ve successfully worked with dozens of cases in the past few years.
Parkinson’s is a mercury induced disorder. When low dose chronic mercury enters the nervous system, it induces, in some individuals, the syndrome called Parkinson’s disease. Parkinson’s doesn’t respond very well to the classical method of homeopathic treatment because the obstacle to cure (cause) remains. Mercury must be removed in order to achieve a permanent cure. Parkinson’s does responds well to the Mueller Method of homeopathic treatment, if treatment starts before too much damage to the nervous system is done.
AS: This approach really addresses the problems of the modern age, while still maintaining all the principles of homeopathy. I think your method will give hope to many people for whom the standard approach wasn’t working. Thank you for sharing with us today.
MM:Thank you for giving me the opportunity to get this message out. It’s been a pleasure.
This was really interesting, thank you.
I find that my patients experience aggravations whilst detoxing using homeopathic potencies of the aggravating toxin according to the CEASE methodology (I treat mainly ADHD and autism).Do you have any tips on avoiding aggravations?
I’m not an expert on the CEASE method, however, Dr. Tinus Smits seemed to advocate the use of higher than 30C potencies. My research has found that these higher potencies unnecessarily aggravate many patients. These potencies were introduced by J.T. Kent who erroneously thought you had to increase the potency to dilute the remedy further. They have been used in homeopathy ever since. They account for the majority of homeopathic aggravations.
You might want to experiment with split doses of 30C. This is what we use in RCT. When, in sensitive patients, symptoms of the drug appear from the standard dose of the 30C (1 pellet diluted in 4 oz of water given in 5 drop doses), olfactory doses and/or additional exponential dilutions may be indicated to suit each patient’s sensitivity. For more information, please review my tutorials “Advanced Posology” and “The Sensitive Patient”.
Wonderfully informative interview. Manfred Mueller is solving a problem we all run into. Thank you!
Very Interesting RCT. It does not sound much different from Dr. Jean Elmiger’s work and book Redisdovering Real medicine. It sounds exactly likes Rudi Verspoor work on SEQUENTIAL THERAPY and CEASE therapy by Tinus Smits, or even Dr. Julian and the French homepaths work of using drainage remedies to remove the toxins from the drugs etc. I think there is something to your method as there have been many before you that have shown the way. I am sure that you are helping many people. Thank you for sharing and updating this method to todays time. Best Wishes.
I was not aware of Emiger or Smits work when I developed Reverse Chronological Tautopathy in the early 90’s. I did read Rudi Verspoor’s article in Homeopathy Today where he first presented his method as an offshoot of Elmiger’s method. I was fascinated to see someone else had thought along the same lines. I made a point to meet him at a NCH conference where he again presented his methods ( I believe this was in Baltimore, MD in 1996). We discussed our observations and noted some important differences in our methods. I found Rudi to be well informed on Hahnemann’s Organon and very much appreciated his input.
The differences between our methods are substantial. Please review my tutorials on RCT (see links in interview above) for more details.
I agree. This is one of the best interviews I ever read.
its an interesting interview.DR.MONFRED MUELLER’s method should be established to save the young generation from unwanted chronic disorders.. thank u…
I completely agree that modern environments present a greater challenge, and tautopathy may be an answer.
I have thought of basing a method entirely on environmental substances, even if the are not so obviously toxic (sometimes I feel there is something overly macho about the classical materia, considering that no substance is homeopathically inert!).
I also thought that this seems very similar to the approach of Dr Jean Elmiger
(“Rediscovering Real Medicine”Element Books,1998 ISBN-13: 978-18620419981988)
though Elmiger always uses the classical sequence of basic miasmatic nosodes (for everyone) alongside .
Dr. Mueller has been very lucky with his potentised tautopathic pharma!
I would be very wary that some drugs don’t seem to behave very well when potentised – they tend not to reverse action in the normal way, so continue to be toxic. It seems particularly true of hormone triggers & disruptors, and aromatics. I am thinking of the well-known positive action of synthetic IgE in the Benveniste (later, Ennis & others) experiments (at least when not carried out in the presence of conjurors).
This anomalous tendency not to clearly reverse action might well be the case with prednisolone, for example.
One should remember that even classical remedies like merc & phos can be quite dangerous in a well-matched case; however, a drug like prednisolone tends not to be so immediately toxic, so much as to have long-term disbenefits. This could be different for other more toxic hormomal disruptors.
Also, such pharma remedies have rarely been subject to provings, so one is really in the dark.
I’m just suggesting caution.
Having said that, I’ve often tried, say, low camphor to get past an environment where camphor is used to store clothes (Hahnemann & Kent would say, change the environment!), or coffea where someone is habituated to coffee, or a potentised anti-depressant (etc.), or insecticide. It is frustrating when one suspects tautopathy would be of use, but the relevant drug is forgotten or unavailable, which is when classical method comes into its own.
I suppose this also highlights the threat to innovation in homeopathy, where some legislators would like us to be limited to what is in established materia medica.
I’ve experimented with a proximate method (when I suspect a direct potentisation may detrimental): instead of classical dilution, I’ve succussed water in a /jacket/ of the dissolved substance, or succussed a sealed via of substance (or both, simultaneously), with no actual contact. It’s analogous to the proximity method sometimes used for crystals. I suspect this works well with hormone disruptors, but I really don’t have enough evidence as yet.
I have speculated that in future, when the value of homeopathy is more scientifically accepted, it may be possible to design toxins (pharma drugs) to match a case, just in order to potentise them and bring about a cure. There’s a long way to go to understand modes of action, though.
It is welcome that Dr. Mueller is contributing new materia entries, and case histories.
I enjoyed the article & the talks, thank you.
Dear Alan and Manfred ~ We learn so much by reading these in-depth interviews. Manfred presents a unique way of dealing with the harsh impositions of our toxic environment. All researchers, scientists and physicians admit that drugs, pollution, chemicals and waste in our environment impacts us negatively, some more than others. Finding useful methods, techniques and tools with which to approach these sensitive individuals can release them and their families from much longterm pain. Blessings, Debby
Great Interview Alan 🙂
Glad this has been brought up,so much damage caused by conventional modern medicine in the last few decades.
Scanning over the data presented here-very similar to using the Tinus Smits Protocol of clearing IATROGENICS via his CEASE method. mentioned here- http://www.CEASE-therapy.com
As mentioned in a previous comment, the difference is the use of potency by Manfred.
Thanks for sharing
thanks for this conversation.