How medicine could have developed differently : a Tory historiographical analysis of the conflict between allopathic and homoeopathic medicine in America and Britain from 1870 to 1920
After its formulation by Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) at the end of the 18th century, homoeopathy spread to Britain and America in the 1820àžŁ. Based upon the principle or law of ~similia similibus curentur~- let like be cured by like-homoeopathy presented a serious challenge to allopathic medicine. By the 1870s homoeopaths were part of science, performing the first single blind clinical trial, establishing the action of drugs upon the body by experimentation and investigating the nature of matter. Institutionally established, especially in the U.S., they regularly published statistics demonstrating the superiority of homoeopathic treatment in both general practice and in hospitals. Allopaths responded by ~nihilating~ homoeopathic theory and practice on several levels. Through the language of bacteriology they absorbed key homoeopathic tenets into their own symbolic universe. During the Progressive Era allopaths' ideological resonance with the corporations enabled them to finally vanquish homoeopaths and define medical science along new lines. Homoeopathy's decline in the 1920s was precipitated by its inability to handle experimental error effectively. Yet homoeopaths had raised important epistemological questions
Brierley-Jones, Lynda Karen
How medicine could have developed differently : a Tory historiographical analysis of the conflict between allopathic and homoeopathic medicine in America and Britain from 1870 to 1920. After its formulation by Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) at the end of the 18th century, homoeopathy spread to Britain and America in the 1820àžŁ. Based upon the principle or law of ~similia similibus curentur~- let like be cured by like-homoeopathy presented a serious challenge to allopathic medicine. By the 1870s homoeopaths were part of science, performing the first single blind clinical trial, establishing the action of drugs upon the body by experimentation and investigating the nature of matter. Institutionally established, especially in the U.S., they regularly published statistics demonstrating the superiority of homoeopathic treatment in both general practice and in hospitals. Allopaths responded by ~nihilating~ homoeopathic theory and practice on several levels. Through the language of bacteriology they absorbed key homoeopathic tenets into their own symbolic universe. During the Progressive Era allopaths' ideological resonance with the corporations enabled them to finally vanquish homoeopaths and define medical science along new lines. Homoeopathy's decline in the 1920s was precipitated by its inability to handle experimental error effectively. Yet homoeopaths had raised important epistemological questions
medicine could_develop differently tory historiographical analysis conflict medicine america britain formulation end spread britain america based upon principle law let like cure like present serious_challenge medicine part science perform first single blind clinical trial establish action drug upon body experimentation investigate_nature matter institutionally establish especially regularly publish statistic demonstrate superiority treatment general practice hospital respond theory_practice several level language absorb key tenet symbolic universe progressive era ideological resonance corporation enable finally define medical science along new_line decline inability handle experimental error effectively yet raise_important epistemological question