ON HAHNEMANN’S COFFEE THEORY – Peter Morrell

Main

‘…Hahnemann himself alludes to the essay he wrote upon the action
of coffee in 1803, where he had ascribed the production of a multitude of chronic diseases
to the action of that all but universal beverage, and he confesses that he thinks he had
ascribed an exaggerated importance and gravity to its use; since his discovery of psora as
the cause of many chronic diseases, he is inclined to attribute to that agent the
production of most of those affections he had imputed to coffee.’ (Dudgeon, 1853, Lectures
on the Theory & Practice of Homeopathy, p259)

I will not quote in full length his essay, but in the course of it
Hahnemann ascribes the following chronic disorders to the use of coffee:

‘constipation, impotence, dental caries, abscesses in children,
pulmonary mucus, blue rings around the eyes, leucorrhea, ulcers, general megrim, nervous
affections, chronic diseases, insomnia, stammering of speech, lack of appetite for food,
ophthalmias, rattling in the chest, etc.’ (On coffee, 1803, Lesser Writings, pp401-9)

This list very closely resembles many of the entries in his list of
conditions for Psora (given both in Chronic Diseases and in other essays from the 1820’s and
30’s) and it is perfectly clear to me – as Dudgeon states – that Hahnemann was tempted in
1803 to ascribe to Coffee a grand theory of chronic disease remarkably similar to that which
he later, in 1827, ascribed to the Itch animal of Scabies.

In the Chronic Diseases Hahnemann says this:

‘That the drinking of warm coffee and Chinese tea…has further
augmented the tendency of this period to a multitude of chronic diseases and thus aided
psora, I least of all can doubt, as I have made prominent, perhaps too prominent, the part
which coffee takes with respect to the bodily and mental sufferings of humanity, in my
little work on the ‘Effects of Coffee’ (Leipzig, 1803). This perhaps undue prominence
given was owing to the fact that I had not then as yet discovered the chief source of
chronic disease in Psora.’ (Chronic Diseases, Jain Edition, 1978, (Tafel translation of
1896), Vol 1, pp13-14)

It therefore follows that he was, through strong mental impulse, trying to
develop a theory of chronic disease with a pathological basis in the lives of people – which
is fine, I do not object to that per se – it shows great mental powers. He even goes as far
as to say (in his essay of 1803) that children and babies accumulate the ill-effects of
coffee from their parents and from being in the same rooms as coffee drinkers. Being
convinced in his mind of the certainty of the theory apparently impelled him to then find
‘evidence’ for it, no matter how ridiculous. That was my main point. Further, one might say,
he showed a peculiar and recurrent tendency to create ‘grand theories’ upon what is arguably
scant evidence.

It is also of interest to note that he recommends Coffee as the chief
antidote (along with Nux vomica) for the excessive action of Psorinum. I can testify
personally from clinical experience both to the wide usefulness of Psorinum as a profoundly
acting remedy and to Coffee as its chief antidote. I actually believe the Psora theory, but
not the one about Coffee. I am not a coffee drinker.

I do not mean to imply that Hahnemann was wrong to look for evidence for
grand theories. Quite the reverse, it shows he believed that we live in a meaning-saturated
universe, and that through careful observation we can discern patterns and then reveal the
meanings that account for those patterns. But the inevitable tendency of such a superior
mental tendency is also the occasional and forgiveable (?) lapse of ‘jumping to conclusions
on scant evidence’. I think the Coffee theory is a good example both of Hahnemann’s superior
mental powers and of his occasional tendency to make up a grand theory from scant evidence.

I think it is clear from the quote from Dudgeon above, that he was in
pursuit of a grand theory and did for a short time hold coffee as such a theory.

Firstly, we have the observation that the deeper-acting psoric remedies
help the vital force to bring to the surface and expel the problems of suppressed psora and
push them towards outward manifestations. Secondly, we can say that coffee appears to
suppress them inwards even further. So here we can see in this a simple dipole action of
push in or push out. Maybe it is this which lies at the heart of Hahnemann’s observations
and the link he made between coffee and Psora, which we have been discussing? Maybe this is
also why coffee is the natural antidote for Psorinum?

In other words, the link between coffee and psora is not coincidental and
there is a meaningful basis to it. Yet such a suppressive substance can be helpful, for
example when the action of Psorinum is excessive and it is throwing too much material to the
surface than the patient can cope with. In such a situation coffee can be safely used to
dampen and neutralise the activity of the psoric miasm in a positive way. It is also
interesting as it illustrates the positive and negative actions of remedies and relates to
their primary and secondary effects.

But in general terms, according to Hering’s law those things that bring
material to the surface and increase expulsion are generally good for the long-term good of
the patient, while those things that ‘push in’ are harmful to the long-term good of the
patient. So here we can see that coffee has an opposite (suppressive) effect to what is good
for the patient. It suppresses by pushing inwards. This is in the opposite direction to the
path of cure.

In nature cure we find a similar situation: that which encourages
excretion and expulsion of toxins (eg fruit diet, exercise, fasting, steam baths, etc) is
good for the patient, while that which pushes inwards or increases toxins is bad (eg
antiperspirants, medicaments applied to the skin and alkaloids like coffee and nicotine). So
here we see a direct parallel between nature cure and homeopathy – based entirely upon
separate healing traditions with minimal cross- dialogue – in terms of the effects of a
regime of treatment and its value or worth to the longer term benefit of the patient. I
suspect this can be duplicated for many other types of natural medicine. Another example: in
the case of psychotherapy, in most cases progress is made not through hiding material from
the past but through bringing it out and reviewing it.

So I would summarise this by saying that Coffee is very probably a natural
suppressant of symptoms and miasms, that pushes inwards the psoric miasm and aspects of it.
This is also in accord with Hahnemann’s original observations about Psora being both ‘hydra-
headed’ and based upon ‘evil suppressions of outer conditions’. And his claim that coffee is
a purely medicinal substance. The psoric remedies (and especially Sulphur and Psorinum) and
the aims of constitutional homeopathic treatment, act very largely to bring to the surface
and expel that which lies buried. The two work antagonistically and thus coffee in the last
analysis – imho – has to be regarded as harmful to the overall and long-term health of the
patient (whether it neutralises the action of their remedies or not), while psoric remedies
and homeopathy in general are good for the patient.

The underlying pattern is also that homeopathy (esp constitutional and
miasmic treatment) tends to bring to the surface undigested and unresolved material which
needs to be reviewed, resolved and re- experienced (re-integrated) – mental and physical,
miasmic or genetic. As Kent said, ‘That is the path to cure and there is none other.’

Main