When Samuel Hahnemann was experimenting with opening most of his cases with Sulphur in the late 1830s, he did not give "everyone" this remedy as claimed in the article on ST. Many misleading things have been said about the Master's manifold experiments by those who wish to say that he did not practice what he preached so they may ignore what he wrote. The exact methods Hahnemann published in The Organon and in The Chronic Diseases are those techniques which he found to be the safest and most effective in his extensive clinical trials. In Boenninghausen's Lesser Writings, there are two cases from Hahnemann's notebook from the 1840s, one of which is dated January 14, 1843, just six months before the old homeopath left for his Heavenly Abode. The Hofrat personally sent these case notes to the Baron less then three months before he passed away. These case histories give us a clear indication of the Master's techniques in the last days of his long and fruitful career.

In these cases, Hahnemann used centesimal potencies in acute disorders and the LM potency for the underlying chronic conditions, both in carefully adjusted doses of a medicinal solution. He did not begin either of these cases with Sulphur, he used only a single remedy at a time until the symptoms changed (not two remedies in alternation), and he carefully adjusted the dosage to avoid the phenomena of aggravation. Each remedy was chosen individually on an complete analysis of aetiology and the totality of the signs and symptoms. In these case histories he used the exact same methodologies he described in the 6th edition of The Organon, which was completed during this period. Therefore, it is safe to say that these final cases, and the instructions in the 6th Organon, reflect the last testament of Samuel Hahnemann.

We have discussed some of the major areas where Classical Homeopathy differs from Sequential Therapy. Although ST tries to use traditional homeopathic sources as a theoretical background, its methodology is based on diametrically opposite principles:

First of all, homeopathy is based on the maxim of likes cure likes which uses the triad of constitutional temperament, aetiology and symptomatology to find a remedy while ST focuses on remedies chosen by a reductionist concept of causation.

Second, homeopathy specializes in the art of individualized constitutional treatment, while ST promotes routinism based on specific remedies in a mechanistic manner.

Third, homeopathy is based on the doctrine of the single remedy while ST embraces a system of polypharmacy which uses high potency mixtures of several remedies for every perceived causation.

Fourth, homeopathy is a conservative science based on the maxim of the minimal dose and minimal intervention, while ST uses radical measures which include a series of remedies or combinations in an extended monthly schedule.

Fifth, homeopathy seeks to avoid the phenomena associated with the homeopathic aggravation through carefully controlled doses, while ST provokes aggravations as confirmation of its theoretical premises.

ST is more mechanistic and reductionist in nature, as it uses a few specific remedies, combinations chosen by causation alone, and standardized treatment plans with the use of all the major nosodes. In this way it shares certain principles in common with orthodox medicine. Sequential Therapy has taken up the importance of aetiology and the time-line, which is all too often over looked by homeopaths, but has elevated them to a position of supremacy where they cannot stand alone. For these reasons Dr. Elmiger's system will have to succeed or fail on its own merits as must all the other treatments which use homeopathic remedies but do not follow homeopathic principles.

Is ST Homeopathy renewed? This seems unlikely because it focuses on only one narrow aspect of the greater field of traditional homeopathy while using many principles that are in direct opposition. As a homeopath who over the last 15 years has followed many cases backward along the time-line using classical methods, I see little advantage in using one-sided aetiological specifics, combination remedies, and treatment plans that produce prolonged aggravations. I would suggest to those who are using ST to refine their techniques by reintroducing the cardinal principles of Homeopathy into their practice so that they may experience a more rapid, gentle and permanent cure.

I am confident that the Homeopathy introduced by Samuel Hahnemann will be Medicina Futura, as it is based on universal principles confirmed by the experience of several generations of homeopaths. It is holographic in its view, contemplative in its observations, and conservative in its practice. Today's homeopaths must integrate their contemporary experiences into clinical practice without losing sight of the principles which form its fundamental basis. As Constantine Hering said, "It is the duty of all of us to go farther in the theory and practice of Homeopathy than Hahnemann has done. We ought to seek the truth which is before us and forsake the errors of the past." Although Hering introduced many grand innovations into our homeopathic practice, he never left behind the cardinal maxims of Hahnemannian Homeopathy.