Just why should all surgeons be compelled to study and practice homœopathy? Study the following exhibits and answer the question yourselves! Do not get me wrongly, I am not unalterably opposed to surgery. I am only opposed to unnecessary surgery! Surgery should only come into play as a dernier resort; a resort to be avoided whenever and wherever possible. The human body, more intricate and more delicate than the most delicately constructed watch, once any of its parts are either removed or changed, can never again operate with the accurate precision it did before that removal. To remove parts without the most just cause to supposedly prevent causes already existent spreading, or to prevent their supposed occurrence, is a method born of crass ignorance, and does not speak well for the intelligence of the operator. No sane man would think of snipping a cog from the wheel of his watch because it did not keep proper time, but the surgeon entertains no compunction in cutting out section or parts of the body simply because they do not directly cripple that body, or would not be there to offend again. Why not cut out the brain to prevent headache? Few of us have any great need of a brain, apparently.
Here let me give you a few examples of my reason for all surgeons studying and practicing homœopathy in their work.
Exhibit I: A government meat inspector caught his finger on a meat hook. Infection set in at once. A surgeon was called. His ignorance of homœopathic therapeutics allowed the infection to spread. Three operations disposed of the finger. The infection spread to the hand. It looked as if the hand would have to be removed. The man was directed to our office. Silica was indicated and the hand was saved. Through the surgeon’s ignorance of homœopathic therapeutics the man was crippled for life. All of which could have been avoided.
Exhibit II: A glass worker developed an abscess in the palm of his hand. He was sent to the company’s surgeon who was a firm believer in free incisions. He cut clear across the palm of the hand, severing all the ligaments. Infection set in and some of the ligaments sloughed out. The man was on the way to losing his hand entirely through the ignorance of the surgeon’s therapeutics. He was turned over to us. Here again Silica was indicated. It healed the wound, but of course could not restore the missing ligaments. So through the surgeon’s ignorance of proper therapeutics the man was crippled for life.
Exhibit III: A structural iron worker was struck in the eye with a splinter from a red hot rivet, the splinter striking right in the center of the cornea. A phagedenic ulcer immediately set in and spread rapidly toward the outer rim, and was within an eighth of an inch from the outer rim when he was referred to us. The company employed the very best of “old school” eye specialists, who completely failed on the job and finally decided the eye must come out to save the other one. The man’s wife refused to have an operation, but suggested he be turned over to us. It was a beautiful case of Mercurius corrosivus, and that remedy saved the eye.
Thus again I prove that every surgeon should be compelled to study and practice homœopathy.
Exhibit IV: An executive of a large department store ruptured himself. He was operated on, but the operation was unsuccessful and he was compelled to wear a truss. Later he developed a beautiful case of Rhus tox rheumatism for which he was recommended to our office for treatment. Being very busy when he came to the office, and Rhus tox being so plainly indicated, I did not take time to make a physical examination, therefore did not know he had a hernia. After he finished his treatment for the rheumatism it was some time before he needed attention again. It was right after Dr. D. T. graduated from Ann Arbor that he called for me to either come or send Dayton, as he was not feeling well. Dr. D. T. went out to see him. Just as Dr. D. T. was about to leave the man called Dr D. T. aside and said, “I want to tell you something your father does not know. Some time ago he treated me very successfully for rheumatism, but was not aware at the time that I was suffering from a very bad rupture, which an operation failed to correct and for which I was compelled to wear a truss. After your father got through with me I was able to throw my truss away and have not worn it since.”
Had the surgeon been acquainted with homœopathy he could have saved that man both suffering and considerable expense.
Exhibit V: A young man developed an osteosarcoma of the right upper jaw. To arrest the progress of the disease surgery, x-ray and radium were in turn employed, but were unable to stem the progress of the disease. As a last resort the parents were induced to try homœopathy. The case presented a beautiful picture of Phosphorus. From a puny youth he has grown up to be a sturdy man.
The dentist came to his rescue and made him an upper plate to filling the gap made by the operation and restore the contour of his face.
To me, at least, the above exhibits present pretty strong evidence why every surgeon should be compelled to study and apply homœopathic therapeutics. What do you think?