To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something to be not poisonous.
Paracelsus
Everything is poisonous, nothing is poisonous, it is all a matter of dose.
Claude Bernard
THE ORIGINS OF HORMESIS
Between 1421 and 1423 great exploratory fleets sailed from China; hundreds of junks crewed by many thousands of men set out from Nanching. Gavin Menzies, in his book 1421, vividly describes how the captains and their fleets literally explored the world, riding the great ocean currents, making discoveries that have long been attributed to later explorers. They circumnavigated the globe in great voyages that took two years and more to complete. By that time, Chinese culture was scientifically advanced and capable of making silk, brass, gunpowder and porcelain. They were also very knowledgeable about medicine, minerals and metals.
The crews enjoyed a rich and varied diet from the cultivated plants and animals kept on board the huge junks. Menzies records that they killed bugs and insects with arsenic but, remarkably, used the same poison to promote the growth of plants and silkworms. They had discovered that arsenic, while toxic at higher concentrations, also had stimulatory and beneficial effects on growth at lower concentrations. They might have assumed this to be a specific property of arsenic, but we now know that stimulation due to low concentrations of toxic substances is a general phenomenon. This discovery has been made repeatedly over the centuries for many toxic agents and a wide range of animals and plants.
By all accounts, Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843) merits a prominent place in the history of medicine as the only practicing physician ever to have founded an entire system of medical treatment, that of homeopathy. His insights and innovations were manifold. Even had he not invented the homeopathic cure, he was for his era a radical, farsighted thinker: he pioneered public hygiene, promoted a pure diet and healthy lifestyle, trenchantly criticized the harsh medical treatments common to his day, and read illness as a disruption of the mind-body connection and life's vital force. But although Hahnemann established a new medical paradigm, his innovation cannot be contemplated outside related systems of thought current at the time. Proponents of homeopathy, however, tend to present Hahnemann as unique and revolutionary, and they are not alone. Historians of medicine invariably allot him a chapter unto himself, constructing the two-centuries-long narrative of homeopathy with Hahnemann at its start. Unfortunately, the unintended result of this narrative drive to establish clear beginnings is that similarities between Hahnemann and German Romanticism are generally overlooked, in particular Romantic modes of reading. No doubt the chroniclers of homeopathy have been misled by the founder himself: although a learned, skilled translator fluent in seven languages, Hahnemann tended to promote himself as an innovator and denied being influenced by any medical predecessors. He publicly criticized, for instance, the Naturphilosophie of Schelling and his followers, writing that “their dualism, their polarization, and representation … their potentizing and depotentizing … incorporeal and ethereal,… soars aloft beyond our solar system, beyond the bounds of the actual.”
Despite being recognized as a significant literary mode in understanding the advent of the modern self, biographies as a genre have received relatively little attention from South Asian historians. Likewise, histories of science and healing in British India have largely ignored the colonial trajectories of those sectarian, dissenting, supposedly pseudo-sciences and medical heterodoxies that have flourished in Europe since the late eighteenth century. This article addresses these gaps in the historiography to identify biographies as a principal mode through which an incipient, ‘heterodox’ Western science like homoeopathy could consolidate and sustain itself in Bengal. In recovering the cultural history of a category that the state archives render largely invisible, this article argues that biographies are more than a mere repository of individual lives, and in fact are a veritable site of power. In bringing histories of print and publishing, histories of medicine, and histories of life writing practices together, it pursues two broad themes: first, it analyses the sociocultural strategies and networks by which scientific doctrines and concepts are translated across cultural borders. It explores the relation between medical commerce, print capital, and therapeutic knowledge to illustrate that acculturation of medical science necessarily drew upon and reinforced local constellations of class, kinship, and religion. Second, it simultaneously reflects upon the expanding genre of homoeopathic biographies published since the mid-nineteenth century: on their features, relevance, and functions, examining in particular the contemporary status of biography vis-à-vis ‘history’ in writing objective pasts.
The present discussion of sociobiological approaches to ethnic nepotism takes Pierre van den Berghe's theory as a starting point. Two points, which have not been addressed in former analyses, are considered to be of particular importance. It is argued that the behavioral mechanism of ethnic nepotism—as understood by van den Berghe—cannot explain ethnic boundaries and attitudes. In addition, I show that van den Berghe's central premise concerning ethnic nepotism is in contradiction to Hamilton's formula, the essential principle of kin selection theory. It is further discussed how other approaches that make reference to ethnic nepotism are related to van den Berghe's account and its problems. I conclude with remarks on the evolutionary explanation of ethnic phenomena.
The historiography of medicine in South Asia often assumes the presence of preordained, homogenous, coherent and clearly-bound medical systems. They also tend to take the existence of a medical ‘mainstream’ for granted. This article argues that the idea of an ‘orthodox’, ‘mainstream’ named allopathy and one of its ‘alternatives’ homoeopathy were co-produced in Bengal. It emphasises the role of the supposed ‘fringe’, ie. homoeopathy, in identifying and organising the ‘orthodoxy’ of the time. The shared market for medicine and print provided a crucial platform where such binary identities such as ‘homoeopaths’ and ‘allopaths’ were constituted and reinforced. This article focuses on a range of polemical writings by physicians in the Bengali print market since the 1860s. Published mostly in late nineteenth-century popular medical journals, these concerned the nature, definition and scope of ‘scientific’ medicine. The article highlights these published disputes and critical correspondence among physicians as instrumental in simultaneously shaping the categories ‘allopathy’ and ‘homoeopathy’ in Bengali print. It unravels how contemporary understandings of race, culture and nationalism informed these medical discussions. It further explores the status of these medical contestations, often self-consciously termed ‘debates’, as an essential contemporary trope in discussing ‘science’ in the vernacular.
The present study traces concepts and experiences regarding the integration of different medical models, in particular complementary medical traditions, in a national public health system in the case of a multi-ethnic country, Malaysia. A major aspect is the religious framing of such integration processes. Malay medical cultures – including long-standing traditions, as well as those developed over several centuries under the influence of popular and scriptural Islam – coexist with traditional Chinese medicine and Indian (e.g. Ayurveda) practice. The focus of the present study is on the encounter of a particular alternative medical system, homeopathy, with Malaysian Islam in a crucial historical period: the end of the colonial era in South East Asia in the aftermath of WWII, the de-colonisation processes and the formation of the independent state, the Federation of Malaya (1957), and the subsequent Federation of Malaysia (1963). One of the prominent actors in these political developments, Dr. Burhanuddin Al-Helmy (1911–1969), combined leadership in the political Islamic movement and the inaugural initiative of establishing homeopathy practices in Singapore and Malaysia. In the further course of development of political Islam in Malaysia several of his disciples in homeopathy practice claimed an intrinsic affinity of homeopathy with the principles of Islam as a religion. The present study analyses this issue on the basis of textual and ethno-medical sources taking into account the specific historical frame. The encounter of homeopathy and Islam in the Malaysian context can be portrayed as an example of appropriation of an alternative medical concept of European provenance and Indian mediation through local discourses. The specific focus lies on showing how these discourses were developed while negotiating medical practice and political balances on an opportune basis of religious claims.
This paper focuses on homeopaths’ strategies to popularise homeopathy from 1850 to 1870. I argue that homeopaths created a space for homeopathy in Mexico City in the mid-nineteenth century by facilitating patients’ access to medical knowledge, consultation and practice. In this period, when national and international armed conflicts limited the diffusion and regulation of academic medicine, homeopaths popularised homeopathy by framing it as a life-enhancing therapy with tools that responded to patients’ needs. Patients’ preference for homeopathy evolved into commercial endeavours that promoted the practice of homeopathy through the use of domestic manuals. Using rare publications and archival records, I analyse the popularisation of homeopathy in Ramón Comellas’s homeopathic manual, the commercialisation of Julián González’s family guides, and patients’ and doctors’ reception of homeopathy. I show that narratives of conversion to homeopathy relied on the different experiences of patients and trained doctors, and that patients’ positive experience with homeopathy weighed more than the doctors’ efforts to explain to the public how academic medicine worked. The fact that homeopaths and patients used a shared language to describe disease experiences framed the possibility of a horizontal transmission of medical knowledge, opening up the possibility for patients to become practitioners. By relying on the long tradition of domestic medicine in Mexico, the popularisation of homeopathy disrupted the professional boundaries that academic physicians had begun to build, making homeopaths the largest group that challenged the emergent medical academic culture and its diffusion in Mexico in the nineteenth century.
The maxim of proponents of pseudoscience is to spread ignorance through false perceptions of its scientific status. One of its most attractive — and simultaneously harmful — manifestations is complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Despite the scientific evidence against them, CAM has taken hold in today’s society as a therapeutic model for a growing segment of the population. We analysed 379 articles on homeopathy, acupuncture, reiki and Bach flower remedies published in mainstream Spanish newspapers (El País, El Mundo, La Vanguardia, El Periódico and ABC) for the period 2011-2016, finding that disinformation is participated in actively by the Spanish press. CAM content was detected in these newspapers, together with a lack of an editorial perspective. In most of the cases, the uncritical articles were found in the interpretive genre and the society section. We also characterized the pseudoscientific discourse aimed at the public, finding that it is irrational and fraudulent in sowing fear and distrust regarding science. On the basis of theories invalidated by the scientific method and on appeals to the emotions, pseudoscience not only threatens scientific knowledge, but directly undermines public health by encouraging the abandonment of conventional medicine. In order to remedy this situation, better scientific training, informative screening and editorial commitment is urgently needed in the Spanish press.