Homeopathy Papers

History of Homeopathy Part IV

Written by Iman Navab

The author provides anecdotes about the struggle of good ideas.

The Struggle of Good Ideas

In 300 B.C., Hippocrates was attacked by his colleagues and called a dung-eater, because he so carefully took note of the character of fecal and waste material.
In 162 A.D., Galen, who guided the ideas of medical knowledge, was so persecuted by the doctors of his time that he was forced to leave Rome. In 1600, William Harvey faced the most violent opposition, when he made known his discovery of the circulation of the blood. He was declared to be insane. In 1831, Hahnemann was called a charlatan, and it was a crime to admit articles favourable to homeopathy. A human will never change his mind, who has no mind to change!

Hippocrates             Claude Galen          William Harvey

Perhaps mental inertia is one of the biggest reasons why all physicians are not adopting homeopathy, and therefore homeopathy has the least chance of being understood by the very people who are supposed to be devoted to pure science.

There are many stories in history that demonstrate the side effects of ignorance, fear and jealousy. Here I wish to share some of them with you.

In the 1800’s, at a meeting of the French Academy of Medicine, Dr. Tessier, in charge of the Marguerite Hospital, offered a clinical report on his remarkably successful treatment of Pneumonia with Homeopathy. Many doctors shouted at once, “Homeopath!” “Traitor!” “Charlatan!” and demanded his immediate removal from the hospital. In the midst of the storm, Dr. Chomel, the oldest and wisest member of the academy rose to his feet and said, “Gentlemen, Dr. Tessier is an educated, respectable physician; he has exercised his undoubted right of experimentation. The only scientific way of treating this matter is for you to report Dr. Tessier’s experiments in similar cases and make your reports.”… which they did and accepted it.

In New York, 1852, an allopathic doctor denounced a young homeopath in his neighbourhood as a “quack”. The allopath was brought before a court of justice on the charge of insult and abuse. The case turned upon the definition of quack, and the applicability of that definition. A quack is an ignorant pretender to knowledge. The young homeopath provided his certificates and diplomas, proving that he had received a good classical medical education. The quack is a vender of secret medicines. The young homeopath kept no secrets and deceived no one. The definition was exhausted and did not fit the case, so the allopath was guilty of insult and abuse. The judge imposed a heavy fine upon him and administered a severe and well merited rebuke.

In 1873, two young physicians were best friends, classmates, and alumni of the same college. One of them became a homeopath. Ten years after their graduation, they became residents of the same city and renewed their acquaintance. The homeopath, called upon his old friend, stating the results of his own experiments, and proposing that his friend should investigate them with him. His friend replied: “James, personally, I highly esteem you, but you know I am a member of the American Medical Association, and its laws forbid my consulting with a homeopath. I must therefore deny myself the pleasure of conversing with you on professional topics. You can see how challenging it has been for homeopathy to survive the abuse.

At a science congress in 1878 it was stated that the most important works of medicine and therapeutics were not advanced by cellular pathology. Biology, too, through the cellular doctrine, has had very little effect. What long lists of medicines are recommended in all diseases without any precise differentiation of them! The endless recommendations of remedies dance before the investigator; they appear and disappear, come into fashion and then go out of fashion!
All these different therapeutic systems and schools have waged war with homeopathy, but homeopathy stands firm, secure through its therapeutic results. Fashion does not prevail in homeopathy as in the opposite camp. The same remedies which Hahnemann used are still employed according to the same indications. The medicines of homeopathy are not subject to the caprices of fashion!

In 1792 Dr. J. Hennicke said: “I have for more than twenty years printed the coarsest criticism against homeopathy and its founder, … then I have been for more than forty years on the most friendly terms with Hahnemann, and respect him as one of the greatest benefactors of the human race, on account of his far-reaching scientific culture, his piercing intelligence, his profound and clear spirit of observation, and his great medical services, which, for the past fifty years, have been thankfully acknowledged by all competent judges of medical science!”

Thus it is our great responsibility to keep raising public awareness about homeopathy in one unified voice, and let the truth prevail.

About the author

Iman Navab

Iman Navab is a certified classical Homeopath and doctor of alternative medicine from Canada. He is the President of the Applied Research in Homeopathy Foundation of Canada (www.ARHFC.ca). He is the author of 'Miasma of Cancer', and is a historian of Homeopathy. Iman teaches History and Philosophy of Homeopathy at the Canadian College of Holistic Health. Navab gives lectures and seminars to raise awareness about the rich history of Homeopathy.


  • Dear Dr.Iman Navab

    Thank you so much for your nice presentation on the bitter historic

    facts and stories especially those about homeopathic characters. Surely

    divine Classical Homeopathy has been presented and kept by arduous work

    of great homeopaths like Hahnemann, Herring, Kent, Vithoulkas, Sankaran.

    We should follow them by presenting good homeopathic work to our

    patients to keep homeopathy alive and dynamic, for ever.

    I suggest you to mention sweet and positive historic points which are

    much more encouraging and energetic.

    Best Wishes, S.Sadeghi M.D.& Homeopath

    • Dear Dr. Sadeghi,

      Thank you very much for your input.

      Certainly we Homeopaths had a rich history and with our own positive efforts we will have a rich future too!

      Best regards,

      Iman Navab

  • Dear Dr. I Navab;
    I do appreciate and endorse your efforts. your endeavour at highlighting history of Homoeopathy and popularising it; receives clapps from my side. I share the same feeling and passion; may God make us meet in person some day in our life. God bless you ; keep up good work and fill you with energy that never exhaust.

    • Dear Dr. Chitaliya,

      Likewise and thank you very much, I highly appreciate your kind comment.

      Certainly we Homeopaths had a rich history and with our own positive efforts we will have a rich future too!

      Best regards,

      Iman Navab

  • Love it. We need historians like you, with such a clear eyed and funny perspective. We may not sway those who are stuck in their own mud with such well-delivered presentations, but I certainly appreciate adding writing like this to my own files.

    • Dear Dr. Chitaliya,

      Thank you very much, I highly appreciate your kind comment.

      Certainly we Homeopaths have a rich history and with our own positive efforts we will have a rich future too!

      Best regards,

      Iman Navab

      • Dear Genevieve Ahearne,

        Wow, thank you very much, I highly appreciate your kind comment.

        Certainly we Homeopaths have a rich history and with our own positive efforts we will have a rich future too!

        Best regards,

        Iman Navab

Leave a Comment