CLINICAL CASES: RHUS IN ERYSIPELAS

2102 RHUS IN ERYSIPELAS: January 14th, 1873, Captain—six and a half years ago kissed a child suffering from scarlatina, and felt it burn his lips. In a few weeks had boils on back; after this he became costive; once he fainted, fell and bruised his forehead, during the faint had an involuntary stool; soon erysipelas appeared on the bruised part of the forehead, and spread thence all over the face; it also appeared on the scrotum and adjoining surface of the pains, which suppurated. He has had four or five bad attacks of erysipelas since, and three or four slight ones. Since these attacks have come on, his sight for near object has become impaired; formerly it was excellent, both for near and distant objects. The present attack came on January 12th, possibly excited by being in a new damp house. About noon, he felt a shoot in left external orbital integuments;
red, erysipelatous swelling began there and extended all over face, lids, forehead, chin and neck; also on scrotum. He never had it on neck and chin before. Vesicles form and exude fluid which leaves yellow stains on the handkerchief. The affected parts burn and itch; when lying down, at each pulsation of the heart there is throbbing centrifugally in the inflamed integuments of the face and forehead. Any moisture of the skin brings out the erysipelas there, as it always has in these attacks. He must scratch the parts, which causes an “agonising pleasure.” The scratching of the scrotum causes sexual pleasure, and an escape of semen which weakens him. Photophobia, very restless at last night, no sleep, walking about, stamping, shaking arms, and striking about.
Today (January 14th), swelling increased; large yellow crusts from the discharge on chin; scrotum worse; lids closed from the swelling; the throbbing continues; the itching and burning are worse; the hands and feet are cold; pulse 50, intermitting in volume and rhythm; the burning and itching are worse from warmth. He has had the best allopathic treatment in former
attacks, both in England and in India. but the physicians always made him worse by applying moisture and keeping him on low diet. All his allopathic physicians said it was an extraordinary case;one said he had examined all his books in reference to the case, but could do nothing for him. He informed me that once, when london, he consulted Dr. Joseph Kidd,· the professed
homoeopath, for chronic dysentery. Dr. Kidd told him that he could cure him in ten days. Captain—remained under his care for ten weeks without benefit, and afterwards cured himself by eating the pods of the Egyptian bean. He had consequently lost faith in all doctors, but his wife sent for me (in “an agonv of despair,” as Dr. Kiddwould say).
This case, however puzzling to an allopath, was not so to a follower of Hahnemann. Rhus was unmistakably indicated, and I gave him Rhus tox. 2000 in water, a spoonful every hour in water until better; the first dose at 2.30 p.m. To take nourishing diet and wine and water (I should not now give wine, unless there was a great craving for it). At 8 p.m. I saw him again; he had had four doses; improved after first dose; itching burning, and discharge
much less; throbbing almost gone; pulse 60, more regular; Iess swelling; extremnes still cold. To stop medicine.
January 15th, 3 p.m. Slept well last night; much less swelling only slight intching and burning; scrotum better; can bear the light; extremities still cold; pulse 72, regular; no other symptoms. He says he has been relieved in one-third of the time usually occupied by such an attack.
Jan. 22. Steadily improved, and yesterday went out of doors for the first time, which he enjoyed but fett very weak. It was a cold day. He felt better on coming into a very warm room. Afterwards went to bed in a very cold room. Soon the face felt hot; then followed itching and burning, and soreness at outer corner of left orbital integuments, which extended all over face, just as before but less severely. Pulse 72, feeble. Scarcely any sleep last night but could lie in bed. Scrotum as before, but not so bad. To test the accuracy of Carroll Dunham’S statement that the action ofRhus tox, and radicans were the same, I gave Rhus rad. 200′ in water every two hours until better. (This I now see not to have been a true test, as the potencies and the periods of repetition differed in the two trials. Rhus tox. and rad. are now proved to be
identical; and it will be seen that the 2000 acted better than the 200).
Jan. 23. After 4 doses, decided relief, and stopped the medicine for a time. but took another dose at noon. Had itching on face and head last night. which disturbed sleep. Today not much burning but some itching. Semen escaped as before. Can bear light. Pulse 72. rather feeble. Itching and burning are worse after food. Itching all over body more or less. In three or four days recovered completely. and had remained so when I saw him on
January 16th, 1874. He now has perfect confidence in Hahemannian homoeopathy. After this I did not see him, as he went to Suez. I have had several letters from him, the last dated July 28th. 1879. He reports that since the summer of 1876 he has had several slight attacks of erysipelas, but always subdued them quickly with Rhus. On 4 or 5 occasions he applied Holman’s liver pad for indigestion, and on each occasion it excited the erysipelas. He probably will require some well-indicated antipsoric 10 eradicate the disease, but I have not had the opportunity of prescribing it for him. On May 31st, 1879, this gentleman, who had been driven away from homoeopathy by Dr. Kidd’s want of success, wrote to me as follows: “I wish I could come and have a few weeks’ instruction from you. I believe I have converted nearly half of Suez to homoeopathy. I have had any amount.of patients, of course, free, gratis, for nothing. My best cases of cure were an
Arab from paralysis of face, with partial loss of sight; the other, English, an old-standing spleen case; and each of them with only one medicine.”
There ought to be an opening at Suez for a Hahnemannian physician, but no other need apply, the patients being too well instructed.
*I am aware that it is contrary to etiquette to publicly mention another physician’s name in connection with his blunders; but as Dr. Kidd did the same in his Laws of Therapeutics, he has no right to complain if his shortcomings are exposed. “With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Author: Dr. E.W. Berridge, M.D .
Courtesy: Homoeo Physician, 1882.
Source: The Homoeopathic Heritage, 1988.