Harris Coulter Interview: History, Vaccinations, and "Mongrel
Prescribing"
Author: Berno, William

This interview took place on the "Homeopathy at Sea" cruise in
October, 1995. Dr. Coulter had presented several lectures and we had
the opportunity to ask some specific questions at a private meeting.

W. Berno: How did you initially become interested in Homeopathy?

H. Coulter: I was in the middle of graduate school. I was a specialist
in Russian studies and was studying political science. Time came to
write my dissertation and I got married to Catherine. She had terrible
allergies. We went to Paris for a vacation and she became worse with
the change of climate and the food exacerbated her allergies. Someone
said, 'Go see a homeopath.' We had never been to a homeopath and the
other doctors hadn't done her much good. So we went to a French
homeopath.

It was a very funny experience. It was not like any medical office
you'd ever seen. It was very dirty and small fellow about 60 years old
looked over a large pile of books covered with dust. Every time he'd
consult a book a puff of dust would go up in the air. Then he said,
"I've consulted James Tyler Kent on your case." I thought, "Fine, that
must be one of his colleague here in Paris." He gave my wife a remedy
and it worked like magic. I remember she couldn't eat fish. She was
very allergic to it. She hadn't eaten fish in 10 years and the fish is
very good in Paris. After the first dose she was able to eat it. We
were both astonished. Prior to that she would have wheals on her face
from eating fish. Many of her allergies cleared in several days and
the rest took at least 10 years.

W. Berno: What remedy did he give her?

H. Coulter: I don't know. After that I became very interested in
homeopathy. I went back to Columbia University and I decided to write
my doctoral dissertation on the history of homeopathy. That turned out
to be Vol. 3 of Divided Legacy. I wrote Vol. 3 before 1, 2, and 4. The
University wouldn't approve it because I was in a different
department. I was a Russian specialist, and I was going to write about
a political group in America, so I said, "Good bye, I don't care about
the Ph.D.." I went off and wrote the book on my own. This was in 1961.
In 1968 I had finished it and I was talking to one of my professors
and he asked what had happened. I told him I wrote a book and the
University wouldn't approve it. This is the time the students were
rampaging around, beating up professors and setting fire to buildings
and he said, "That's ridiculous, at least you're doing research, I
don't think we should be so fussy that you don't have an approved
topic." He was the dean of the University. He called up and got me a
hearing and I was awarded my Ph.D..

W. Berno: With the renaissance of homeopathy, how do you see its
future?

H. Coulter: From my understanding of medical history, it's a cyclical
thing. When the rationalists (allopaths) get strong, the empiricists
(homeopaths) gets weak. It's like the yin and yang in Chinese
philosophy. It usually last about 60 or 70 years. In 1830 when
homeopathy was introduced in the USA, it lasted till 1910. Of the
15,000 physicians about 15% called themselves homeopaths. From 1910 it
declined until 1970 when it started to switch and rise again. The
homeopaths should be strong until 2020, and then rationalists will
then reassert themselves.

Homeopathy and the empirical tradition is very open to new medicines,
such as isopathic medication. Allopaths are not interested in new
medications. They would rather burn old ladies at the stake rather
than find new medications to offer for people. The role of homeopathy
is to make new therapeutic information available to the physician. So
as homeopathy developed in the 19th century allopaths were stealing
dozens and dozens of remedies from the homeopaths. I wrote a book on
it called, The Influence of Homeopathic Medicine on Allopathy in the
19th Century. I found references for about 50 medicines that passed
from homeopathy into allopathy and that's why the allopathic tradition
doesn't disappear altogether. When the empirical tradition flourishes
the allopaths steal medicines without acknowledging it. That's going
to happen in the next several decades. The allopaths are having
difficulty now. People are rejecting their medicines because they know
it's not healthy to take all these antibiotics and corticosteroids in
such large quantities. The allopaths are going to have to scratch
around and look for other medicines and they will inevitably come over
and steal things from the homeopaths. Allopathic surgeons are now
starting to use Arnica and other things. This tends to balance the
scales between Homeopathy and allopathy. Allopathy is really
reinforced by homeopathy.

As homeopathy develops, the homeopaths starting fighting with each
other. They have never been able to maintain any type of
organizational unity. This is a natural phenomenon because you have
two wings: one group that wants to become part of the allopathic
profession such as the British Faculty and the other group that wants
to stay as far away from the allopaths as possible. As homeopathy
starts to develop and get more recruits they are not going to be very
well trained. They will be allopathic physicians who are going to have
to practice homeopathy to get and keep patients but they will be
thinking allopathically. They will think that homeopathic medicines
are just a bunch of new medicines to prescribe instead of the ones
they are using. 'Don't use the red ones, use the yellow ones or if
they don't work use the green ones.' That will exacerbate the inherent
conflict within homeopathy. The new recruits will come and maybe form
the majority. This happened in 1860's, 70's and 80's. Constantine
Herring said he couldn't continue to go to the meetings of the
American Institute of Homeopathy anymore because they didn't talk
about homeopathy. He refused to go to them after the civil war. I
think history will probably repeat itself along those lines. So it's a
good thing to know history so it won't repeat itself too precisely and
you can make it go in a different direction.

W. Berno: How can we prevent this from happening?

H. Coulter: The only way is to know your history. (Laughing) Everyone
should buy Divided Legacy and memorize it and maybe that will help
prevent those things from happening.

W. Berno: We study classical homeopathy. What do you feel about the
work that is being done in Europe with the mixing of remedies?

H. Coulter: Actually in the US and Europe there are both types of
homeopathy being practiced. In the US we are more under the influence
of Kent since he was an American. We tend to be more classical here.
In Europe they go back to a tradition that is somewhat degenerate -
pre-Kentian where they mixed remedies. The anti-Kentian thinking is
still strong in France. There will always be a conflict. The real
reason behind it is because the poly-pharmiceutical homeopaths are
sympathetic to allopathy. They would like to see homeopathy become of
the allopathic profession. This is the case of the British Faculty of
homeopathy which is quite hostile to Kent and wants to go back to
Richard Hughes which is a ridiculous idea. No one has ever heard of
Richard Hughes who doesn't live in the British Faculty. The British
Faculty considers itself as part of the medical profession. They feel
that Kent is standing in their way of a total rapprochement
(togetherness) with the allopathic community. They claim Kent was a
spiritualist and influenced too much by Swedenborg. All these
arguments are beside the point. We follow Kent because through his
system patients are healed. The allopaths will never accept Kentian
philosophy. The allopathic thought applies also on the continent,
especially in France, where they secretly want to be part of the
allopathic profession.

W. Berno: Many people use disciplines such as acupuncture and
chiropractic with homeopathy. How do you feel about that?

H. Coulter: Added to those disciplines could be naturopathy,
nutritional treatment and classical osteopathy. They view the body as
a reacting, vital entity and treatment should stimulate a reaction.
There are different ways to stimulate this reaction. They are all
compatible with one another. The underlying philosophy is the same.
This is not true for allopathy. Allopathic medicine views the body as
mechanistic. It must be interfered with by a contrary medicine.
Homeopathy is not compatible with allopathy.

W. Berno: What is your goal in research?

H. Coulter: My major goal was to discover the ancient history of
homeopathy. After my dissertation I came to realize that homeopathy is
not something that Hahnemann invented out of whole cloth...which we
all thought. It's not the brain child of Samuel Hahnemann. His
greatest contribution was the proving of remedies - the source of
knowledge about the curative action of remedies.

All the ideas, like the law of similars were there for 2000 years. The
idea of the microdose had been suggested by Paracelsus. The knowledge
that symptoms are positive phenomenon and should not be suppressed
predated Hahnemann. All these ideas can be found in the Hippocratic
corpus. I can say that I made the discovery that homeopathy forms the
part of the empirical tradition of medicine and no one knew that
before I found the reference in the homeopathic writings of 1830's and
40's. This is important for the homeopaths sense of self confidence
and self esteem. It's better to know that homeopathy is part of an
ancient tradition on an equal basis with the allopaths and that it is
not the brainchild of one man. Everyone would rather be a follower of
a long tradition than a follower of one man.

To make homeopathy flourish was my second goal. In 1961 homeopathy was
practically extinct. There was only 15 or 20 homeopathic doctors in
the US and they were very old. In 1970 it all turned around. Now there
is a great resurgence.

W. Berno: What, if any, is a weakness in homeopathy?

H. Coulter: I really don't see any. I would say that the
computerization of homeopathy is a enormous reinforcement. The
computer takes all the dog work out of it and makes it much easier to
find the right remedy. It's an important contribution to homeopathy.
It's also a good teaching tool.

W. Berno: How do you keep up with homeopathy and all the changes going
on?

H. Coulter: In fact I don't keep up with the homeopathic activities
now. There are so many others who are more qualified and know the
Materia Medica better than I. I don't feel a responsibility to carry
this on myself. I'm working in cancer now. I've bought a license to a
remedy for cancer from a doctor in Moscow which involves using an
extract from human placentas. They inject the extract into the
patient. It undermines the immune system of the tumor. As you know the
tumor and the host each have their own immune system. They conflict
with one another. The immune system of the tumor protects itself from
the action of host. This doctor found a way to undermine the immune
system of the tumor so it becomes vulnerable to the immune system of
the host. After the injection the tumor so it becomes vulnerable to
the immune system of the host. After the injection the tumor becomes
quite soft and starts dissolving and going away.

W. Berno: Would you have words of encouragement to the young
homeopathic students?

H. Coulter: I'd say a couple of things. One, there will inevitable be
conflict in the homeopathic movement as it develops and grows. Many
different people practicing many different kinds of homeopathy. I view
it as a pyramid. Classical homeopathy at the apex and Mongrel
prescribing at the base. But you must have a base to have an apex so
you can't be too upset that some practice a poor variety of
homeopathy. The best thing to do is to encourage them and above all be
tolerant of them. That's my first piece of advise. My second would be
that the present cycle will go on for 40 years of so they can expect a
good career in homeopathy.

W. Berno: Besides your wife's case, have you seen other dramatic
affects of homeopathy?

H. Coulter: Yes, one of my wife's first cases. Her patient was in her
thirties. She had abdominal bloating. The allopaths couldn't figure
out what was wrong. They did a hysterectomy and that didn't help. The
bloating and pains returned. Catherine gave her three doses. She was
suppose to take one dose and call back in three days. They were 1-M
doses. But she took them one after another in half-hour intervals. She
had an extraordinary reaction. She started intense, unbearable itching
all over her body. Her skin started peeling off. She called in great
distress and wanted to take some ointment for the itching. Catherine
said, "No, get some cold water." She stuck it out for three days of
considerable discomfort. After that the exasperation stopped and she
never had a return of the bloating.

W. Berno: You spoke on vaccinations during the course. You've written
several books on that. You could speak a little on that?

H. Coulter: In 1982 and 1983. Barbara Fisher and I wrote DPT: A Shot
in the Dark, I didn't realize how dangerous the vaccine was. This book
had an interesting affect on public policy. The Congress read it and
they passed a law on compensation to families where there had been
some child suffering from the vaccination and to this day, that
program has paid up to 700 million dollars to families who have
suffered from vaccine damage. Now there are about 3 to 4 billion
dollars in claims in the pipe line. When we finished the book I
realized there was a lot more material left over so I wrote a second
book called, Vaccinations and Social Violence and Criminality,
published in 1990.

That book deals with the long term effects of vaccinations on the
emotional life and psychological stability. I came to the conclusion
that this vaccination is having a very long-term serious effect on the
American population in the sense of being directly responsible for the
epidemic of violent behavior we are witnessing in our society today.
It's not a difficult conclusion. Vaccination does cause encephalitis,
the doctors admit that. Encephalitis does have as one of its many
sequelae, violent behavior. All one has to do is read the literature
and it is evident that vaccinations are causing this epidemic of
violent behavior. I haven't had any luck in persuading the allopathic
physicians of that but I hope to one day before its too late.

W. Berno: The question is always asked why we as homeopaths don't do
controlled studies.

H. Coulter: I wrote that 100 page book a couple of years ago about
controlled clinical trials because I got so tired of hearing the
medical profession talking about the controlled clinical trial as the
gold standard for proving drugs. The idea of the controlled clinical
trial as being the standard is based on a completely false supposition
- that you can assemble homogeneous groups of patients. We in
homeopathy know that this is not possible. In allopathy they'll take a
group of people and arbitrarily designate them as a homogeneous group.
Then they'll give their medicines and placebos and see how many get
well and how many don't get well, etc. The procedure is vicious at its
very root. You can't get a homogeneous group of people no matter how
hard you try and the rest is just window dressing. The ultimate effect
is to favor the large pharmaceutical manufacturers at the expense of
the small pharmaceutical manufacturers. The controlled trials are very
expensive. They cost between the 10s and 100s of millions of dollars
so that no small manufacturer can afford this, so only the big
companies can put the new drugs on the market. What it really does is
support the idea of monopoly in business.

Author : Berno, William
Article Title : Harris Coulter Interview: History, Vaccinations, and
"Mongrel Prescribing"
Publication Name : Prover, The: The Journal of the Chiropractic
Academy of Homeopathy
Volume & Number : V. 7; N. 1
Publication Date : 04-30-96
Page : p. 63-67

Material appearing in The Prover is for informational purposes only
and should not be considered advisory or prescriptive. Always consult
a licensed health care provider about using any such information as
therapy. Copyright © The Global Homeopathic Alliance 2001