At the recent Neural Therapy conference in Vienna, Austria, three case reports were presented. All three were complex and required many months of pain-staking and careful neural therapy for success. Potential interference fields were searched for all over the body and treated in the classical way, with dilute procaine injections. The patients' responses guided the process. Positive responses proved that the potential interference fields were significant. No response generally indicated that the potential interference field was a "red herring" (lead to nowhere).
I was impressed by the patience and skill shown by the presenting physicians, but also by the trust exhibited by the patients who were willing to endure so many injections. In countries where neural therapy is less well known, persuading patients to accept numerous injections (many fruitless) is more of a task.
This slow, systematic approach is in contrast to that producing the "lightning reaction" for which neural therapy is famous. Much has been made of the many lightning reactions obtained by the neural therapy pioneers of 60 or 70 years ago. There seem to be less now. The European neural therapists that I spoke to about this phenomenon blame poor regulation in the "ground system", i.e. a sluggish response to stimuli because of pervasive toxicity, hormonal disruption and malnutrition in the extracellular space of our patients.
American osteopathic physicians have told me the same thing. Osteopathic manipulation was more consistently effective in previous (healthier) generations.
The slow patient application of neural therapy is particularly important in treating certain chronic infections. I have already written about treatment of periodontal infections (Vol.4, No.10, Oct.2009), which generally take a number of treatments. However almost all settle down within two or three weeks of twice-weekly neural therapy treatments (whether by injection of procaine with a homeopathic or by Tenscam (+homeopathic) treatment.
Here is another case of chronic infection seen recently in my office, this time of a woman with an infected pilonidal sinus:
A 33 year old woman presented with an episode of acute low back pain that had begun suddenly 2 days before when getting up from her bed. There was a great deal of muscle spasm and her upper trunk was translated noticeably to one side.
This was a recurring problem for her ‐ each time precipitated by a minor unguarded movement and then lasting for several days. Spinal manipulation was helpful at times but did not seem to prevent further recurrences.
On this occasion the patient mentioned that she was having one of her recurring "flares" of an infected pilonidal sinus. Typically, a painful swelling would develop and then rupture, discharging pus before settling down, until the next time, ‐ sometimes only days later. Surgery had been offered to her, but (searching the internet) she realized that recurrence after surgery was common.
Autonomic response testing (ART) indicated that the pilonidal sinus was an interference field and that it might respond to an isopathic nosode (Sanum remedy ‐ Notakehl). The interference field was treated using the Tenscam device with a vial of nosode placed over the infected sinus.
Drawing upon my experience with dental infections I suggested that the patient return twice a week for assessment and treatment. Within a week the back pain had settled, but more interestingly the patient reported that the pilonidal sinus region was feeling different ‐ "tighter". After 3 weeks, the "flares" were becoming less frequent and the interval between visits was increased. On most visits ART indicated an interference field needing treatment but as time went by, the pilonidal sinus appeared on certain visits to be quiescent.
At three months, flares were still occurring, but much less frequently, with less pain and the pus had become thicker and changed colour. At four months (the most recent visit), there had been no flares in several weeks.
The Dosch textbook warns that the response to neural therapy of infection may take longer than for an uncomplicated pain problem. Presumably, treatment alters the electrical and biochemical milieu of the interference field but time is needed for these changes to deal with the infection and the inflammatory process. This is consistent with Speransky's finding that the disease process is a chain reaction of biochemical processes, one feeding into the next.
Whatever the explanation, neural therapy of chronic infection can be effective, but it requires persistence and patience on the part of both physician and patient ‐ no dramatic interruption of body-wide cybernetic loops ‐ simply gradual alteration of the biochemical environment supporting the chronic infection.
Robert F. Kidd, MD, CM