Record Keeping by James Tyler Kent

You should endeavor to have a good knowledge of both the acute and chronic miasms. First of all the image of psora should be studied from all the symptoms that we can gather, and especially from the symptoms that Hahnemann has given, in the Chronic Diseases.

Next we have to make out a similar anamnesis of syphilis, which can be done from books, from clinics, from observation, and all other possible sources, and then an anamnesis has to be made of sycosis. These are things most general, and will bring before the mind, in one, two or three images, a grand picture of all the chronic disease of the human race.

Take psora first for that is the very foundation of human sickness. It would appear that the human race is one enormous leper. Now, add to that the state of syphilis and we have a bad matter made worse; then add the state of sycosis and we will see the extent of human sickness.

We then have to advance and carefully study each of the acute miasms from the books, from observation, and from every source of information, carefully arranging it on paper so that it can appear before the mind as an image. Smallpox has few features and it can be made to appear as an image before the mind, a nd so with all the acute miasms, infectious diseases, cholera, yellow fever, etc., the diseases that have heretobefore appeared in epidemic or endemic form. T

hese have all to appear before the mind as images. It may be said to them that they are all true diseases seen by the examination of the totality of the symptoms. No physician can know too much about the image of a give sickness, studied from the symptomatology, and this is the best information that can be obtained. Now-a-days patients are not permitted to tell their story in the language of nature. The physician says, “I do not want to heat that.” Talk on the part of the patient interferes with his prescription writing. There is no writing down of the case.

Now take, for instance, one of the clinics here. How would you remember from day to day, and from week to week, what had been given to each patient? There is no importance attached to that in the old school. It is simply their object to give the patient a big dose of medicine. It may not have occured to you that there are several reason of importance for keeping records, and of constantly referring to them; even the regular clinicians here may not have seen the full importance of it.

But suppose a patient that I have been considering for three years is partially cured, and she has done remarkably well, has been restored from an invalid to a good wife and mother, but is not yet cured. Now for some reason she goes into the hands of another homoeopath. What can he do with out ascertaining what I have done for her? It is important for the patient when living in the same town to be faithful and true to the physician who has done her the most good. A conscientious physician will not feel like taking another doctor’s practice in that way I am not so conceited that I should feel like taking up the work of another doctor who is able to do good work. Men who think more of getting money than anything else will jump in and prescribe for your patients.

“The physician ought ever after to have this image before the eyes to serve as a basis to the treatment, especially where the disease is chronic. Without records, you are at sea without compass or rudder. With a record, Hahnemann says, “He can then study it in all its parts, and draw from it the characteristic marks,” that is, you have the nature of the disease continuously in mind. When the image of the disease has passed from mind its very nature is gone.

Here a point comes in you must know about. After your first prescription has been made, you may have an aggravation. It is well to know the date of this, and about how long it lasted, and to keep watch of it. If no change has occured the same image may continue to appear before the mind, but if changes have occured and are continuously appearing in the symptoms you will readily see that no medicine can be administered. The symptoms that come and go could not guide anybody as to what to do.

Now a commotion has taken place, you cannot prescribe while this commotion is going on, the symptoms are changing place, they are coming and going, for perhaps one to three weeks after that prescription. You have to watch and wait. Notice when the symptoms begin to roll into order; then another dose of medicine is needed. These things take place only after the administration of a remedy that was pretty high, high enough to take hold, and the case falls into order only when the patient needs another dose.

Suppose a patient has been sick three to four years with a train of symptoms, and on the way to visit you from a long distance; the patient is taken worse, and a homoeopathic physician is called in. The patient gets a dose of medicine and improves wonderfully now what are you going to do? You do not know what it was and you write to the physician, but he has forgotten what it was. What a confusing state that is, is it not? Well, that is just the state you would be in without your records.

There is, I have been led to feel, too great carelessness often among our best men in transferring cased from one town to another, from one physician to another. A habit that has existed between another Hahnemannian and myself has been pleasing to us both. When one of his patients has been transferred from his care to my care he has told me what remedy the patient was on, and I in the same way when sending patients to him have mentioned the remedy the patient was on. It is the duty of the physician to furnish such information when a patient leaves the city to go under the care of another physician. It is the duty of the physician to transfer such a patient to good hands, if there are any good hands to transfer him to.

This subject is preliminary to the observation of s 105, which leads to the second step of practical Homoeopathy.


The old school of Allopathy considered about `sickness’ and `medicine’ in a particular way.

– The sphere of sickness was limited to the physical level. Only tissue changes were seen and considered.

– The source of sickness, process of sickness, the nature of sickness and the concept of real health were not studied.

– Only the result of sickness was felt with fingers, seen with eyes and observed by sense through instruments.

– The meaning of restoration of health was confined to relief in the ailments of particular organs where they appeared. – Drugs were used in crude forms to remove the ailments.

– The system was based entirely on experience. Decisions were made on opinions of individuals at different times and concensus of opinions or hypothesis.

– Pathological findings formed the basis of the diagnosis.

– The internal of man–his mental and emotional aspects were not considered.

– Symptoms–the language of sickness, at the levels of mind, emotion and body were not studied.

– Every pathological result had its corresponding bacteria.

– Doctrine of Vital Force had no place for them.

– Prime importance was given to the organs of man, and not to the man himself which constituted of body mind and emotions.

Will and understanding of man not studied and considered

Dr. Hahnemann `proved’ the drugs on healthy enlightened human bodies. He found that the drugs affected the mind, the emotions and the body and the effects are expressed through symptoms and modalities. He also found that these drugs in potency are able to remove Similar Sickness appearing in human beings. He discovered an Universal Truth; a truth based on `science’ where opinions do not matter, experiences do not form basis; source of sickness, process of sickness and the nature of sickness is explored and the correct curative agent is found.

Dr. Kent has interpreted and explained the various aspects of Hahnemann’s “Organon of the Healing Art”. His lectures are so vivid that they mirror the fundamental laws of health and healing to the mankind at all levels of understanding. This book was written about 90 years ago-but still, the concepts hold true in the present times. He was an empirical Hahnemannian. He could not compromise with the deviation from principles and philosophy and we find his criticism sometimes sharp and bitter of `Pseudo-homoeopaths’.

– Man is the will and the understating and the house which he lives in is his body.

– The organs are not the man. The man is prior to the organs.

– The order of sickness as well as the order of cure is from man to his organs. The real sick man is prior to the sick sick body.

– A man is sick prior to localization of disease. When we wait for localization, the results of disease have rendered the patient incurable.

– Symptoms are but the language of nature, talking out, as it were, and showing as clearly as the daylight, the internal nature of the sickman or woman.

– Crude drugs cannot heal the sick and that what changes they effect are not real but only apparent.

– Tissue changes are of the body and are the results of the disease, they are not the disease.

– The bacteria are results of the disease. The disease cause is more subtle.

– The remedy, which will produce on healthy man similar symptoms, is the master of the situation, is the necessary antidote, will overcome the sickness, restore the will and understanding to order and cure the patient.

– Man consists in what he thinks and what he loves and there is nothing else in man.

– The physician has to `perceive’ in the disease that which is to be cured, and that is through `totality of symptoms’. He has to perceive the nature of disease and the nature of the remedy.

– Experience has only a confirmatory place. It cannot take the place of science and truth.

– All true diseases of the economy flow from centre to circumference. All miasms are true diseases.

– The active cause is within, and the apparent cause of sickness is without. If a man has no deep miasmatic influence, outer causes will not affect him.

– Homoeopathy has two parts: the science of homoeopathy are the art of homoeopathy. One has to learn the art of homoeopathy to prepare himself for the application of the science of homoeopathy.

– Vital force is constructive and formative, and in its thing in the universe has its aura. Every star and planet has it. The remedy to be homoeopathic must be similar in quality and similar in action to the disease cause.

– As soon as the internal economy is deprived in any manner of its freedom, death is threatening; where freedom is lost, death is sure to follow.

– Potency should suit the varying susceptibility of sickman.

– Any more than just enough to supply the susceptibility is a surplus and is dangerous.

– Human race has been greatly disordered in the economy because of surplus drug taking.

– Primitive cause is not in the bacteria. Bacteria themselves have a cause to appear and survive.

– Over sensitive patients are actually poisoned by the inappropriate administration of potentized medicines.

– Their chronic miasms are complicated with chronic drugging and its effect upon the vital force.

– The physician who can only hold in his memory the symptoms of a disease or a remedy will never succeed as a homoeopath.

– The majority of such as call themselves homoeopaths at the present time, are perfectly incompetent to examine a patient, and therefore incompetent to examine homoeopathy.

– It is impossible to test homoeopathy without learning how to get the disease image so before the eyes that the homoeopathic remedy can be selected.

– At the present day, there is almost no such thing as an unprejudiced mind.

– Do not prescribe until you have found the remedy that is similar to the whole case, even although it is clear in your mind that one remedy may be more similar to one particular group of symptoms and another remedy to another group.

– It is unaccountable, therefore, that some of our homoeopathic practitioners make use of palliatives that are so detrimental to the patients.