the evolution of rudolf steiner’s pharmaceutical impulse evolution... · 2 der merkurstab | von...

2 D e r M e r k u r s ta b | v o n L a u e | R u d o l f S t e i n e r ’ s p h a r m a c e u t i c a l i m p u l s e E n g l i s h I s s u e 2 0 0 8 / 1

The evolution of Rudolf Steiner’s pharmaceutical impulsePreconditions for anthroposophical pharmacokinetics based on insightinto essential human nature

H a n s B r o d e r v o n L a u e

Original title: Die Entwicklungen des pharmazeutischen Impulses bei Rudolf Steiner.Der Merkurstab 1/2008; 61: 4–47. English by A. R. Meuss, FCIL, MTA.

Evolution of Rudolf Steiner’spharmaceutical impulse� AbstractEven in his early lectures (from 1904 onwards) Steinerspoke of “spiritual-scientific medicine” as having anautonomous place alongside homoeopathy andconventional medicine, but his own ideas for “an ex-tension of pharmaceutics” first appeared in contextof the first medical course (Spir. Science and Medicine,1920). The present paper examines previous publica-tions in the light of how Steiner presented his ownstandpoint concerning pharmaceutical issues. Hisefforts to interest physicians orientated towardshomoeopathy in an “extension of medicine” areclearly evident in the medical lectures of 1920–1921.Parallel to this he carefully called into question thetwo supporting pillars of homoeopathy. At the sametime, and without the physicians whose attentionhe sought to gain, he searched for new methods:1) Modification of proteins (in a preparation from

coffee bean, (61,62)).2) Investigation of the specific effects of poisonous

and non-poisonous plant parts on biologicalactivity (115).

3) Modification of the “aggregate process”, i. e. theconfiguration and spatial relationship of the differ-ent constituents should be modified in a hydro-dynamic process. These hydrodynamic processeswere first developed for the pharmaceutical pro-cessing of mistletoe and later applied to manyother medicines. These products were all to bemade from two or more plant extracts.

4) The aim to achieve a spatial configuration of activeingredients in the new synthesis of “medicinalplant processes” using more inorganic con-stituents, which would today be called “colloidal”.

The human being’s internal substance processes arethe model for the homoeopathizing of medicines.A qualitatively fourfold transformation of matter—from the breakdown of foodstuffs to the building upof human substances which are receptive to impulsesfrom the I-organisation—can be discerned. Apart from

“direct” actions which act like poison, efforts are madeto produce medicines that become part of the devel-oping “invisible human being” without being convert-ed “into their opposite”, as is the case with foodstuffs.Later on, concepts such as “vegetabilization” and“dynamization” were used for this pharmaceuticaltask. The fourfold sequence of steps in the metamor-phosis of matter can provide archetypal indicationsfor pharmaceutical methods.Attention is drawn to “evolving” and “existing matter”and to further mental images which Steiner devel-oped as an aid to understanding the effects whichsubstances have on the human being .The idea of “new” pharmaceutical methods is thatmatter be “taken out of earth’s gravity”, i. e. alignedmore closely to growth and development. The practi-cal aim is to prevent the organism’s inherent counter-processes from weakening the therapeutic propertiesof vegetable raw materials. Medicines should beprocessed to make them more effective and longer-acting.In the light of modern pharmaceutical research,Rudolf Steiner’s aspirations for an “extension ofpharmaceutics” are astoundingly modern.� KeywordsExtension of practical medicine andpharmaceutical sciencePotentizationHomoeopathizingDynamizationPharmacokinetics

A remarkablewarning:“… this alone will give us genuinetreatment, a genuine pharmacology ... You see theprospect which opens up before us if we are able tograsp spiritual science in its true form. This spiritualscience will, however, still have to shed some of itsouter trappings, some of the things still attached to ittoday for many who believe that they can also culti-vate it in all kinds of fantasies and in all kinds of am-ateurish ways“ (1).

1 Introduction1.1 Scientific pharmacokinetics and homoeopathy—which is the model for medicinal actions in anthro-posophical medicine?

The impulse for this paper arose from many years ofsearching for the“physiology”of anthroposophicalmedicines. The fruitfulness of the anthroposophi-

cal view of the human being contrasts with the difficul-ty in arriving at a theory as to how a medicine can act onthe higher levels of human existence. The challenge isexemplified in the following quote:

“You have the situation where in a pathological con-dition the I organization intervenes in the kidney or-ganization, and this in the way in which it should on-ly intervene in the heart ... You will only get it out byartificially inducing an activity in the kidney (i.e. witha medicine) which equals this activity of the I organ-ization. You can induce this in the kidney if you suc-ceed in bringing the activity of Equisetum arvense in-to the kidney in the right way.” (2)

This opens up a number of questions.1. How is the heart-type connection between kidney

and I organization evident in the pathophysiology? Canthe pathology be described in qualitative terms only oralso quantitatively—using present-day terms?

2.Behind the words“if you succeed in bringing the ac-tivity, the function,of Equisetum arvense into the kidneyin the right way” are two things we must do:

a) How can the function of Equisetum be better un-derstood both qualitatively and quantitatively?b) How can we find the right method of preparationas a pharmaceutical process? Can this be determinedquantitatively or only grasped intuitively?3. How should we see the connection between the

above-mentioned pathology and the therapeutic inter-vention? How does Equisetum, properly processed andapplied, take effect in the kidney?

The fields of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynam-ics also have to do with issues such as how pathophysi-ology is changed by pharmaceuticals. Pharmacokineticsdescribes the influence of the organism on a physiolog-ically active substance, i. e. absorption, distribution,transformation in the organism, and elimination by theorganism. Pharmacodynamics on the other hand is con-cerned with the actions of medicinal agents on the or-ganism. Investigations concern the nature and quality ofthe action, dose-effect relationship, and ideas concern-ing the nature and mode of action (mechanism of ac-

tion). Both fields developed about 50 years ago; bothcall for defined individual medicinal agents and highlydeveloped analytical methods. At the beginning of thelast century, when Steiner’s lectures initiated the broad-ening of medicine and hence of the pharmacopoeia, thekind of thinking which lies behind these issues had notyet been developed.

Parallel to this scientific issue, the conviction has aris-en in homoeopathic and anthroposophical medicinethat properly done potentization (“produced by specialmethod”) would in itself make vegetable or mineral sub-stances into a medicine. The potentizing process is con-sidered to be independent of a transparent change un-dergone by the substances. The evolution of potentiza-tion from Hahnemann until the last century was de-scribed by Daems:“The essence is the method of prepa-ration; the medium is given a different configuration;po-tentization is a rhythmical process”(3). A further step isthen to correlate a specific number of potentizationstages with the higher levels of human existence.Basold(1963) posed that the mother tincture went as far as the8 x (up to 14 x); then the time body of the substancewould be active (8 x to 14 x), and from there to about the14 x (to 23 x) a soul-like state; after this one had the spir-itual archetype of the substance (5). Other authors setdifferent boundaries, but the idea would be the same.The level of potentization correlated with the levels ofhuman existence. The question as to how an actionarose was barely considered.

Zwiauer (2001) wrote that “pharmacy with an an-throposophical orientation really flourished” after theSecond World War, and this was the time when “somesuggestions made by R. Steiner were brought to realiza-tion, among them the metallic mirror preparations, veg-etabilized metals, RH preparations and mineral compo-sitions”(6).An important paper on the mode of action ofmedicines was also published by G. Husemann (1953)(7). He discussed seven theoretically derived metamor-phoses of the similia which characterized the actions ofa drug in the organism. Papers on the threefold aspectof matter (Cloos 1953)(8) and the development of medic-inal substances in the sphere of life and of dead matter(Krueger 1953)(9) may be said to have been representa-tive. Bott (1976) developed his principle of anthropo-sophical pharmacodynamics also in close connectionwith potentization (10). Scharff (1990) published a com-pendium of homoeopathic research papers (11). Strueh(1991) offered a critical review of the many experimentson potentization (12). Because of his work for Wala hewas much involved in potentization. Yet he wrote: “Mystudy of this research has in the meantime convincedme that it is illusory to think that potentized substancesare active in purely physical experiments, in biochemical,... plant and animal experiments and also in clinical use.It is illusory to look for something that has universal ef-ficacy ...” Meyer-Wegner (2001) sought in vain for physi-cal structural connections between homoeopathic po-tencies and the substances used as media (alcohol, wa-ter or lactose) (13).

v o n L a u e | R u d o l f S t e i n e r ’ s p h a r m a c e u t i c a l i m p u l s e | D e r M e r k u r s ta bE n g l i s h I s s u e 2 0 0 8 / 1 3

The need to develop anthroposophical medicines fur-ther has been stressed by Pedersen (2004) (14). Regret-tably, anthroposophical pharmacy is not defined interms of content in the essay by Kalisch (2000) (15) onthe position of anthroposophical medicine and pharma-cy in the current epistemological dispute.

The reason for writing this paper at the present timeis the highly biased description of anthroposophicalpharmacy by Burkhard (2006) (16). The author referssmugly—with extensive quotations—to the “anthro-posophists”spiritual-scientific,mystic philosophy of life.The paper is clearly designed to make anthroposophicalpharmacy look ridiculous in scientific eyes and margin-alize it politically.

The paper is not intended to be a reply to this.The op-portunity is taken, however, to look for the roots of an-throposophical pharmacy. The aim is to track down ref-erences in Steiner’s life work to the following questions:

1. How did he relate substantial processes to the fourlevels of human existence?

2.Which pharmaceutical methods did he suggest formaking substances into medicines that act on thoselevels of existence?

3. What is the relationship between individual and“typical” medicines?

In the statement quoted above as our motto, Steinerhoped that “a genuine pharmacology”would develop asan essential part of the proposed“medical system of an-throposophy” (17). He spoke of the need to “shed someouter trappings” first and overcome “all kinds of fan-tasies” and “amateurish ways”. Today—a good 80 yearslater—every representative of this medical movementcan ask himself in how far Steiner’s hopes of having“a genuine pharmacology” have been met and whatwork needs to be done when one considers the answer.The paper is in this sense an attempt to trace indicationsfor “broadening pharmaceutics” given by Steiner. Read-ers are invited to sift the accumulated material, put itin a different order and add anything which has beenoverlooked. Open dialogue will help us to overcomebias in collaborationa.

I dedicate this paper to Ibrahim Abouleish,my“broth-er in Egypt” whom I hold in high regard, on the occasionof his 70th birthday (2007). The study of pharmacy andanthroposophy governed his years in Europe,after whichit became his life’s work to develop the Sekeminitiative in Egypt.

1.2 Can we see an evolution of pharmaceutical issuesin Rudolf Steiner’s lectures?

At the turn of the 19th to the 20th century, intense dis-cussion arose between followers of allopathic medicine,which was then the science-based established school,and of homoeopathy. Steiner said in a lecture on themedical faculty and theosophy given in 1905,

“some physicians here and there do work with us.Wedo not wish, however, to get involved in the battle be-tween the parties. That would be a subjective ap-proach.We wish to speak very objectively only of the

thingswhich theosophyhas to saywith regard tomed-ical science” (18).

The physicians in his audience were of homoeopathicand theosophical persuasion and critical of belief in theprogress of a materialistic medicine. We now have thehistorical distance to say that they were only able to freethemselves of their subjective bias within limits.

Steiner concerned himself intensely with the medicalprofession, hoping again and again to find people whowould take up his call for the spiritualization of scientif-ic medicine and pharmacy. His search has been docu-mented from 1905 onwards, and there was also a firstmeeting with homoeopathic physician Emil Schlegel(Tuebingen,Germany),who was treating M.v.Sivers.Thespiritual investigator’s search for physicians who mightbe interested in “broadening” medicine came to a firstculmination in the lectures given in 1909 to 1911. We re-fer to the Budapest lectures (19), theOccult Physiology inPrague (20), and the Hamburg lecture course (21). Stein-er hoped for collaboration with Dr Noll (22), Dr Peipersand other physicians.Close human bonds developed be-tween individual physicians and the spiritual investiga-tor,but none asked for a change in the“medical system”.

Subjects of medical importance next came up insome concentration in around 1916 and 1917. The theoryof the senses was fully developed and following earlierattempts in Fragment (23), the vital processes were pre-sented in The Riddle of Man (24). In 1917, threefoldnesswas published for the first time, after a long period ofwork on the subject (25). In St Gallen, Steiner called out,

“But humanity would be most surprised to see howthingswould be different if onewere to enter into clin-ics and anatomy theatres todaywith spiritual-scientif-ic views and take spiritual-scientific views into all theother sources and media used in medical work” (26).

The lecture on geographical medicine in St Gallen wasalso part of this (27). The mood of all those lectures wassuch that they were really addressed to Dr Wegman,then practising in Zurich.

In the public lecture at Epiphany in Basel the worldwas told,“Spiritual Sciences must open up prospects foran intuitive medicine” (28). For pharmacists Schmiedeland Spiess this appeal led to the question as to thetransformation of medicine. The first medical coursewas then possible (29). Selg has shown these develop-ments in detail (30).

From 1910 onwards, Alexander von Bernus was alsoworking among those around Steiner.He suggested thatSteiner should build his St John’s Building (the laterGoetheanum) on his Stift Neuburg property near Heidel-berg rather than in Munich (1913). Steiner stayed withBernus, helped him to bear the grief over the inexplica-ble death of his son (1912), and baptized his daughter(1913). Steiner praised his literary efforts and encouragedpublication of the journal Das Reich, which became aforum for Steiner’s essays. The “Appeal to the Germannation and the civilized world”(31) appeared in that jour-nal. Bernus attended esoteric lessons and also intended


to attend the first medical course (1920), though not amember of the medical profession.

At the same time Bernus achieved his inner mission,which was the renewal of alchemical medicine (33). Hewrote a number of letters to Steiner about this, hopingthat he would give an opinion on his medicines.Thus hewrote on 23 June 1914: “As to the medicines [which hehad developed himself], they are extraordinarily effec-tive, as I have had occasion to determine on myself andothers ... They are produced exactly according to the de-tails and rules given by Paracelsus ... May I now ask youto write what is necessary for this ... [for me] andwhether the road of alchemy which I have taken is theright one, also in the present day and age; I cannot thinkit to be otherwise, for the arcana do retain their power.Perhaps you will also be so kind as to say which of theremedies you would primarily still wish to be presented.I would be infinitely grateful if you ... were to give youropinion, however briefly, for I would like this under-taking, too, to be under your guidance” b.

As far as is known from quotations taken from theletters to Bernus which have so far been published,Steiner did not respond to this intense request whichwas repeated in further letters. It is surprising to findthat an esoteric student of Steiner’s who wanted tobring a pharmaceutical impulse to realization was nei-ther acknowledged nor encouraged in this. Steiner wasevidently unable to support that proposed revival of al-chemical medicine. On the other hand Rembges (34)considered the relationship between the ideas for med-icines that were suggested by Steiner in around 1920and alchemical formulae and found numerous connec-tions (Kephalodoron®, Renodoron®, Ferrum hydroxyda-tum, Vulnodoron® and Kalium acet. comp.) (35, 36)Schmidt (37) also suggested an alchemical backgroundto Ferrum cum aceto prep. In the same way the first ref-erences to producing metal mirrors (1911) may have beenalchemical in origin (20).

We have three phenomena side by side: Steiner’sstatement that he has individually investigated the ba-sis of alchemical medicine (section 4.1.2), the way he wasclose to old formulae when he started his own pharma-ceutical search, and the fact that he ignored Bernus’alchemical impulse. Judex, thoroughly familiar withBernus’ formulations, also wrote that it was difficult toimagine Steiner accepting such. Indications of elementsof alchemical medicine being taken up are no longerreally apparent in Steiner’s late lectures. The idea ofKephalodoron® (Bidor®) was also given a very differentbasis (section 4.2.1.5)

1.3 Early references to working with medicines—mistletoe pharmaceutics

In a public lecture on health issues in the light of spir-itual science, Steiner said:

“The use of specificmedicines does in away have to dowith the fact that the organism is an independent en-tity and can be repaired inmany respects ifwe are able

to rely on it that following such repair a quite effectivepower exists which drives the human being” (38).

This is a very general reference to medicines.There is nosuggestion as to how a medicine was to be made froma natural substance so that one might thus repair the or-ganism, i. e. as to the pharmaceutical methods required.

The details given for mistletoe as a medicament forcancer show the way in which intuition for a medicineevolves in the spiritual scientist’s mind. In the lecturesgiven from 1904 onwards, mistletoe was often referredto in connection with the Baldur myth and the “oldMoon”. In 1907, the first general point was made thatmistletoe is also a specific medicinal agent, poisons be-ing altogether medicinal” (39). Soon after this (in 1908)Mrs Ritter asked R. Steiner for a medicine to treat cancer.His answer is not known, but she used mistletoe as amedicament after this. Three mistletoe preparations(Viscum Betulae,Viscum Mali,Viscum Pini) were still be-ing produced as“photodynamic medicament”accordingto Mrs Ritter’s intentions in 1928 (40).

Almost ten years were to pass before the spiritual sci-entist had investigated the connection between cancerand mistletoe as a medicine to the point where he couldtalk about it. In his New Year’s Eve lecture he ranged faras he described the substance problems of both thetumour and the mistletoe for the first time as the resultof his spiritual-scientific investigations.

“A carcinoma exactly depends on it that part separatesout and evolves at a faster rate than the rest of the or-ganism.This is a luciferic aspect in life at substance lev-el. [Aboutmistletoe toxin hewent on to say:] The prin-ciplewhichwe consider a toxin today is in a state of re-tardation ... The actual toxins, thus ahrimanic at sub-stance level, from the Moon period, are opposing theregular progress of evolution” (41).

The connection between disease and medicinal plantwas thus shown for the first time. The lecture does not,however, contain any reference to a manufacturingprocess in which mistletoe toxins might be processed tomake them medicinal.

Soon after this,a parenteral product was produced atthe Adler Pharmacy in Zurich in 1917, using the driedplant, glycerin, alcohol and water. The extract was notfermented. A local anaesthetic had to be added. Themethod chosen was not homoeopathic potentizationbut an extract made of the dried plant material accord-ing to the existing state of knowledge. We may assumethat Steiner was not consulted about the method. Themedicament was produced and used as Iscar I (5 mg) andIscar II (10 mg) from 1918.This means that a new medica-ment “based on and standardized for the dried plantmaterial” had been developed, but there was no indica-tion as yet of new methods in pharmaceutics.The next reference to mistletoe pharmaceutics came inthe first medical course:

“The point is that the glue-like, sticky substance inmistletoe is connected in the rightwaywith a triturantand you gradually come to a very high potency of thismistletoe-type substance ... Another important aspect


will be to produce something in the medicines whichis based on the combined action of this glue-like sub-stance with certain metallic substances ... The com-bined action of mistletoe simply from an apple treeand trituration with, let us say, silver salts gives ussomething which could be highly effective against allpelvic cancers” (44).

The reference to trituration may suggest that Steinerthought of processing the dried plant material. The re-quest to go to a “very high potency” relates to homoeo-pathic potentization. The request to triturate with a sil-ver salt does on the other hand go beyond the classic ho-moeopathic method,with an active principle (silver salt)used as the medium instead of lactose.

A page from a notebook referring to mistletoe detailsfor the 1920 course (Fig. 1) includes reference to summerand winter extract,which is not mentioned in the courseitself.The horizontal and vertical lines on that page mayalso be seen as a first reference to the flow process. Anew manufacturing process for mistletoe was also dis-cussed with Dr Noll that summer (or in the autumn of1920). A flow process was to be used to combine the twoextracts, with no reference made to trituration or highpotencies. Further details appear in the manuscript onmistletoe written by W. Spiess. “When I talked for thefirst time with Dr Noll about formula No. 36, he told methat parts of mistletoe plants from two different periodsof vegetation were to be used, with extracts from theflowering and the fruiting plant then to be mixed ... He[R. Steiner] confirmed the instruction concerning thefruiting plant in a talk with Dr Knauer where he suggest-ed“mistletoe that is not quite ripe”. I also had confirma-tion of everything when in December 1923 I showed DrSteiner an extract from the fruiting form of apple-grownmistletoe, saying that the flowering form would be ob-tained at the end of January and beginning of Februaryfor an extract that would then be combined with thefirst. “You will then have a good preparation” ... It wasprobably in connection with the abnormal periods of

vegetation that R. Steiner called the flowering one the“winter form”, and the other the “summer form”. Theseterms were then also used in various notes by Drs Nolland Schmiedel, though details concerning actual har-vesting times different greatly.None of those involved atthe time had probably studied mistletoe physiology asthoroughly as Dr Steiner, otherwise those details wouldnot have differed in that way. I know of this peculiarityof mistletoe ... Initially it was processed in alcohol, butwe soon changed to fermented extracts, mixing thecarefully minced plant parts with water in a 1 : 1 ratio.Thefirst suggestion for this method was to my knowledgegiven to Dr Schmiedel by Dr Steiner, and not only formistletoe ...”(45).

Fermentation of plant extracts was also used in al-chemical medicine (33).

Pharmacist W. Spiess started the work in September1921 (?). On 1 July 1922 he was appointed head of the re-search laboratories at the Institute of Clinical Medicinein Stuttgart. He was thus involved in developing themistletoe preparation from the very beginning.

In the winter of 1920/21,Rudolf Steiner called a meet-ing to discuss the use of flow systems in making themistletoe preparations. Drs Wegman and Noll attended(Minutes, 1936). There is no record of anyone askingabout the pharmaceutical value of using flow.The groupwas not involved any further in the development work.Soon after this meeting, Steiner started to work with C.Unger. They collaborated in the planning, constructionand implementation of the first machine. Details of thishave been given by Leroi and Koehler (46–48).

After the spiritually dense presentation on New Year’sEve 1916, Steiner did not refer to mistletoe as a cancermedicine again until he gave his first medical course.49The concept of the pharmaceutical method was pre-sented to Drs Noll,Wegman and other physicians (at thewinter 1920/21 meeting at the latest). It is evident, how-ever, that those present did not gain a clear idea of thesignificance of this new pharmaceutical impulse. In thelectures that followed, the development of cancer is de-scribed in many ways,but with no reference to mistletoe(49–54). Mistletoe was only rarely mentioned. There isno reference to this medicinal plant even in the lecturegiven on 11 February 1923 (55), where tumour develop-ment and the principle of treatment were considered indetail. In a lecture to physicians we find only the gener-al reference “with a mistletoe preparation, as we useit ...” (56). The next day he complained that opponentswere describing the connection between mistletoe andcancer in a“simple analogy”(57). He said that physicianswere not providing enough information to counter themisconceptions deliberately created by opponents.

In 1921, Dr Wegman wrote to Mr Hauser, her pharma-cist in Zurich: “I have made arrangements with theFuturum corporation ... concerning the commercial dis-tribution of my medicaments, including Iscar” (58). Shestill considered the Viscum preparation to be “her”medicament. She and Noll had attended the meeting inthe winter of 1920/21. It is not known if she knew of


Fig. 1Notebook entry by

Rudolf Steiner

Steiner’s collaboration with Unger. It appears that shehad no questions concerning the new pharmaceuticalprocess Steiner was asking for.

There is no reference to the cancer and mistletoe is-sue in the whole of the second medical course given inApril 1921 (59). The meeting about building a flow ma-chine forViscum had been in the winter of 1920/21,a fewmonths earlier. Some of those who had been at themeeting were now attending the course.The new phar-maceutical process which had been proposed was nottaken up, nor were questions asked about it. The manu-facturing process, the need for flow treatment, was notreferred to in Steiner’s lectures, in spite of the factthat development work and construction were inprogress at the time.

Mistletoe processing also was not included in the dis-cussions on the Vademecum from April 1922 onwards(according to Dr Degenaar’s records).

The connection between mistletoe and cancer wasonly taken up again in the“pharmacists’ lectures”in Lon-don, now with the following statement which is impor-tant for the pharmacokinetics:

“If we take the active principle in themistletoe processand introduce it directly into the human organism it[the medicament] changes ... too much. Because ofthis,attempts are nowbeingmade to process the prin-ciple which lives in themistletoe development processwith a highly complex machine [Unger’s machine]which involves centrifugal and radial forces ... The ac-tive principle in the mistletoe process is thus actuallychanged into a wholly different aggregate process,which makes it possible to use the potential in themistletoe-developing power in a more concentratedform”(60).This undertaking was then referred to again and

again, in The Hague (16 Nov. 1923), Arnhem (24 July 1924)and London (29 Aug. 1924). The aim of pharmaceuticalprocessing was to make the changes which the mistle-toe substance undergoes in the organism less rapid.Themistletoe-developing power should stay active longerwith the mistletoe substance in a different aggregateprocess.To solve the problem, it was proposed to changethe substance in a flow process, and a first machine wasconstructed.

A more effective medicament was to be producedsimply by setting up a flow system where two extractswere brought together and taken into a completely dif-ferent process of aggregation. Could it be it was only inconnection with the first medical course that Steinerstarted to give more serious consideration to the ques-tion of how a medicine could be produced that wouldpositively influence vital processes? The first sign of aspecific impulse to develop pharmaceutical methodscomes in a notebook entry on mistletoe pharmaceutics(Fig. 1). Neither “trituration” nor “potentization to a highlevel” came up again in later times. (High potencies aretoday produced in addition to substantial doses in thecase of Iscucin® and Abnoba-Viscum®. The efficacy ofhigh potencies has been demonstrated in single-case

reports.) Were these proposals an intermediate step inhis own researches?

Special reference must be made to two new impuls-es for the production of a mistletoe preparation, bothgoing in the direction of “broadening” pharmaceutics.a) Material to be harvested at two different seasons,b) the flow process to bring about a new state of aggre-

gation in order to achieve a more long-lasting action.In theory, mistletoe was to be“taken out of earth’s grav-ity”, or “influences from the outside world were to beeliminated”.The flow processes should thus change themistletoe extracts so that they would be closer to theliving organism and thus qualitatively “taken out ofearth’s gravity”. In practice, the aim was to improve effi-cacy with the newly created “different process of aggre-gation”, which no doubt means that the substanceswere to be taken to a new state of conformation.

What Steiner meant by a changed “process of aggre-gation” can be more clearly understood if we look at hisrequirements for the preparation to treat foot andmouth disease. He considered this project so importantthat he had E. Kolisko freed from other commitmentsfor a year (1922) so that he might develop and apply apreparation from coffee beans. The pharmaceuticaldetail given is the following.

“The reserve protein in the bean would have to gothrough a specific change in structure” (61).

L. Kolisko gave a similar description: “The work ran par-allel to investigations done to find the structuralchanges in the coffee bean protoplasm which alonemade the preparation medicinal” (62). Could it be thatSteiner was able to express his intentions more clearly toE. Kolisko and veterinary surgeon Werr than to the oth-er physicians? The aim of the pharmaceutical processwas a “structural change in the protoplasm, in the re-serve protein”.This was and is a challenge well ahead ofits time, which probably also holds true for the mistle-toe preparation.

According to the present state of knowledge, thestructural change in the mistletoe material by the or-ganism is effected soon after starting the treatment, asantibodies to various proteins (MLs; cbML, viscotoxin)develop. Only primary exhibition of Viscum in high dos-es makes it currently possible to induce pyrexia (39.5 °C)on repeated occasions. After this, even increasing thedose will only rarely induce it due to direct Viscum ac-tion. (Iscador® infusions, but not the unfermented Is-cador FrF preparation, can also provoke rises in temper-ature later on (pers. communication from Dr Kuehn, Ar-lesheim).) There is probably a causal relation betweenantibody production and loss of the pyretic action ofmistletoe; depending on the dose, this ensues after just1 or 2 weeks of treatment.The disappearance of local in-flammation in injection sites after some weeks is prob-ably also connected with antibody production. Steinermay have been referring to these phenomena when hesaid that the “mistletoe-creating power” is “altered” bythe organism so that efficacy decreases. In my opinion itis important to make it our aim in the further develop-


ment that the primary mistletoe action is achieved notjust two or three but six to ten times.

In science, the problem of medicines being altered bythe body only came up just under 30 years later, whenpharmacokinetics developed (63). There were no theo-ries on the possible key role and potential importance forbiological activity of the conformation of the tertiarystructures of proteins and other macromolecules at thebeginning of the last century. Supersensible investiga-tion pointed the way to technologies which could notyet be described in the scientific terms of that time.Today, some knowledge exists of how the conformationof substances can be changed in flow processes (64).

1.4 Summary and prospectIn 1908, Steiner responded to a request by suggesting

a mistletoe preparation. This was produced by MarieRitter’s “photodynamic method”.When Dr Wegman pro-duced another mistletoe preparation called Iscar inZurich, this still did not involve any new pharmaceuticalimpulse. It was made in the usual “allopathic” way fromthe dried plant material. New pharmaceutical impulsesemerged in the preparation for (page from notebook)and follow-up of (talk in Stuttgart in 1920/21) the first

medical course, though not in the course itself. Thesewere the two different harvesting periods and gainingoptimal efficacy in the flow process. Construction of themachine for this was in collaboration with Carl Unger,notinvolving physicians or pharmacists.Steiner said no moreabout the new pharmaceutical impulse in the medicalcourses which followed. In 1923, when it had beenbrought to realization, he was able to say in London:

“In this cancer medicine which has been developed toa degree of perfection ... but will only be really com-plete ... when this laboratory process using the cen-trifuge—construction is now complete—will havebeen taken fully to its end” (65).

This (or a similar flow process) was also meant tobe used for other typical medicines (Cardiodoron®,Choleodoron®, etc. see Table 5), all having a number ofcomponents from the plant world, to improve the me-dicinal quality. The reference to altering the conforma-tion (process of aggregation) is found under mistletoeand in the suggestion that a “change in the structure ofthe protoplasm in the reserve protein” should beachieved for the foot and mouth disease product. It willcertainly need years of research before the significanceof this can be fully evident. A method to “dynamize”medicines was proposed, with the protein structurechanged in the process to improve the medicinal action.Such a “broadening of pharmaceutics’ would go far be-yond homoeopathy and alchemical medicine on the onehand and pharmacy as it then was on the other.

2 Live substance processes and the human I2.1 Introduction

Before the issue of “broadening pharmaceutics” canbe considered further we need to refer to two subjectareas:a) Current conventional scientific models for drug ac-

tion will be briefly considered.b) Reference will be made to the way in which spiritual

investigation established the connection betweenfood and medicinal substances on the one hand andthe levels of human existence on the other in manydifferent and surprising respects.

Particularly important references to this may be foundabove all in the second medical course (59) and in lec-tures from 1921 onwards. Not all of these can be consid-ered here.

In conventional pharmacology, the question askedconcerning the action/efficacy of a drug is where itspoints of attack in the organism would be. This presup-poses a defined active principle, demonstrable continu-ity for it, and spatial and structural correspondence be-tween it and the site of action.The action itself may de-pend on the mode of application and the absorptionsite.The thinking is that the organism’s response can bedetermined physiologically and/or psychometrically andoccurs at the cell or extracellular matrix level. If cell func-tions are to change, the principle must be actively orpassively made to pass through the cell membrane.Processes in the cell plasma, the organelles or the nucle-


Fig. 2.Blackboard drawing

by Rudolf SteinerLecture of 11 Feb. 1923.

© Rudolf SteinerNachlassverwal-

tung/Dornach 2008

Cosmic matter istaken in throughsenses, skin,respiration.Poisons act likedirect soul andspirit.

Spiritual world ofI organization permitsgrowth and develop-ment

Night soul permitsgrowth and develop-ment of soul functionorgans.

Night-time etherbody builds up thephysical body.

All levels of existenceare active in buildingup the physical body.

Powers of configurationact on live processes through the waking human being

and from the cosmos on the visible and invisible human being

Fig. 2

Foods from the earth world are transformed into the oppositeand serve constructive development.

Vegetabilized medicines act constructively as1) vegetabilized metals

2) mirror productions (met. prep.)3) Two vegetable constituents are reconfigured by flow principles.

4) Plant processes are resynthesized.

Animalized medicines act constructively(Kephalodoron® or Bidor® type)

us can then be either enhanced or inhibited. At the lev-el of molecular biology, receptors and ligands, agonistsand antagonists, etc. are analysed.

Apart from the problem of uptake, one has to estab-lish the distribution of the active principle in the organ-ism and how it reaches the desired site of action. It alsohas to be established how and by what route it is elimi-nated again.This will determine the choice of initial andlong-term dosage.The physiological reactions of the or-ganism can change the action of a substance after atime or even reverse it. This may be cumulative or leadto habituation.The endeavour is to establish the processof a substance in the organism using the terms of con-ventional science and thus learn to analyse the condi-tions for a cure.The actions of some drugs at molecular-biological level may not yet be fully determined, but theclaim is that one gets to know the pathways of the ac-tive principle in the organism’s metabolism exactly. Thesimple need to know whether a medicine is effective isbroadened by asking how its action can be described inits physiological evolution.

There is no real need to consider uptake and process-ing of drugs in the field of homoeopathy, for—at leastfrom a particular potency onwards—different powers ofa substance are considered which were “unnoticeable”,“latent”or“dormant”prior to potentization and only“af-fect the vital principle”directly after“dynamization”(66).

In anthroposophical medicine, absorption and distri-bution of the active principle and its elimination havehardly been discussed so far—not even for non-poten-tized medicines. Steiner was very clear abut this:

“Any substance spreads in a specific way in the organ-ism. Thus certain substances given by mouth do notconcern themselves with the oesophagus but onlywith the heart, for example. Others do not concernthemselves with the heart either ... taken to the kid-neys, only begin to be active there” (67).

As we seek to trace Steiner’s intentions, it will emergethat he hoped for detailed knowledge of medicinal ac-tions—even if in different words and from a different wayof seeing things—also in “broadened pharmaceutics”.

The low value attached to pharmacological and tox-icological aspects in anthroposophical medicine hasmeant that metal preparations once widely employedare no longer available. Degenaar has noted that Anti-monite 3 x (4 x today), Arsenic 3 x (4 x today), Cuprum 2 x(3 x today), Mercury 3 x (6 x today), Phosphorus 1 % (4 xtoday) and Plumbum 4 x (6 x today) were considered tobe the right dosage levels. Today they are no longer per-mitted because of the risk of toxicity. (The records do notshow if those original dosages were established bythe physicians themselves or used on the advice ofR. Steiner.)

In this chapter (2.2–2.5) we will first present impor-tant spiritual-scientific findings relating to the connec-tion between foods and medicinal agents and the activ-ity of the higher levels of existence.This will be necessaryif we are to come closer to understanding the issues inquestion.

2.2 First orientation based on the lecturegiven on 11 February 1923

The lecture on the invisible human being in us andthe pathology which points the way to treatment (55)will give us a first model. Steiner presented the vitalprocesses in us according to the way in which they re-flect our levels of existence.He also made distinction be-tween their evolution and involution. The lecture pro-vides important orientation for gaining an overview ofpathology and medical treatment in the anthroposoph-ical view of the human being (Fig. 2). Studer-Senn haswritten an introduction to the lecture (in German) thatis well worth reading (68).

The first part of the lecture shows how constructiveand configuring processes,both governed by“invisible I”,are initially dominant in all physiological processes asthe human organism develops. From a spiritual (I) im-pulse, a level of existence which has soul quality is tak-en hold of first,and then one which has life;after this thephysical body emerges, most evidently so in condensa-tion into crystalline matter as the teeth develop.Accord-ing to the functional maturity of individual organs, de-structive processes using the organs may run as well,providing the basis for conscious awareness at the dif-ferent levels. Constructive and destructive processes oc-


Upper human being

The cosmic soul and the I organiza-tion guide the ether body in givingform to the organs until functionallymature.Configuration of cellular and extra-cellular parts of organs.Monitoring interaction between so-ma, vessels, connective tissue, neuralelements and extracellular matrix(ECM)Apoptosis

Perception and control of internalprocesses at all levels:NSS: breaking down nerve poten-tials, with tendency to hardening,mineralization, salts formingRhS: Induction of catabolic partsof rhythms, dominance in inhala-tion, acceleration of rhythmicalsequences

M&L: degradations of foreign foodsubstances, combustion

Catabolism in the healing process

Arsenisieren,Creating wedge formHardening, calcification of tissuesMineralizationDifferentiation, controlPower to modelGrow organically self-willedUsing substances ponderably

Lower human being

Cosmic soul and I organization guidethe ether body forGrowth until functionally matureDevelopment of potentials for diffe-rentiation of organs in extracellularmatrix.Development of power of move-ment for interaction of soma, con-nective tissue, nerves and ECM.

Restructuring and construction tomake future functions possible:NSS: Developing nerve potentials,neural metabolism

RhS: Induction of anabolic parts ofrhythms, dominance in exhalation.Rhythmical sequences breakingdown

M&L: Developing own substance asgeneral potential and organ-specificfunction. Dissolving “old” tissues.Anabolism in healing process

AlbuminizationSofteningDissolving body’s own tissuesAtomizationConfounding, creating chaosPower to give formGrow organically selflessCreate new substances ab origine

Table 1: Processes of the ether body

As organs develop

As organs are used

Some other names for specific functions

cur together in the whole visible human being, in allphysiological and pathological functions of the organs,reflecting life. Steiner used the terms “upper and lowerhuman being” collectively for the constructive anddestructive processes in the visible and invisible humanbeing (Tab. 1).

Nutrients are taken in with food and drink.Every foodis foreign to the body initially and needs to be “incorpo-rated” step by step. In the lecture, the process is consid-ered succinctly and in general terms:

“Anything entering into the humanbeing as foodmustimmediately be taken up in inner processes and trans-formed into its opposite.”

The stages of this qualitative change into the oppositehad been considered a few months earlier (see section2.4.3). The foods, initially foreign, must be broken downand then given life; they must then gain soul-sustainingpowers in the human being and finally be open to thehuman I or self. The food is transformed in these fourstages into what qualitatively is “its opposite”.

Unconnected with the transformation of foods,Steiner also spoke of medicines and the pathways oftheir actions in the lecture.

1. Belladonna serves to show that the process quali-ties arising as physiological degradation in the organismunder the direct influence of the soul (or the I) are alsostimulated by the substances in Belladonna. The toxici-ty is presented parallel to modern toxicological informa-tion and the relevant symptoms: central hyperthermia(“dominance of the upper human being”), mental disor-ders with motor restlessness going as far as hallucina-tions (“befogged by mental activity, unconsciousness”),dry mouth and mucosa, inhibition of secretory functionsin the gastrointestinal tract, chronic constipation (“gas-tric phenomena”) and tachycardia (“I activity taking itsorigin in the blood”). The related information on the ac-tion of Belladonna is that it develops specific toxins be-cause it greedily and directly absorbs a particular astral-ity from the cosmos. The genesis of these toxins maythus be directly compared to a particular direct interven-tion of the destructive mental functionality in humanbeings. Substances of that kind have the same effect inhuman beings as the one triggered physiologically by adestructive impulse in the soul. Belladonna increasesthe destruction triggered by certain impulses of think-ing, feeling and will in the organism. These toxins can-not be degraded by the organism (in its present state ofevolution) the way foods are, i.e. overcome and trans-formed into their “opposite”. Given in appropriatedosage, they are helpful medicines as they can inducespecific processes of degradation.

The position of alkaloids in the history of medicaltreatment is given by Meyer.69 In his model,natural sub-stances and impulses in the soul work in the same direc-tion.

2. The second reference is to the possibility of sup-porting constructive powers directly, activating themmedically. Iron was to be given in a suitable form,“to givethe blood the weight it needs by means of the necessary

iron concentration ...”.This directs the constructive pow-ers flowing from the invisible human being right downinto the physical body to strengthen it. Inadequate de-velopment,qualitatively“too lightweight”in itself, leadsto disease and is cured by giving iron. In this theoreticalmodel the organism has been prepared to take in theiron so that iron presented in a suitable form will be im-mediately available for development. For the organismis capable of incorporating iron in proteins in many dif-ferent ways.These provide the medium for iron to arriveat different potency levels in the organism.This develop-ment of the therapeutic action is only touched on in thelecture and probably only applies to specific substances.An indication as to in how far iron,a toxic substance,cangain access to the constructive stream of the “invisiblehuman being” is given in section 3.3 (Fig. 2).

3. In a third theoretical model in the same lecture it isassumed that the disease (development of tumour) aris-es due to destruction being dominant. (This is only partof oncogenesis.) The medicine proposed is to

“support the original healing powers in the organismusing external means ... If we are able, therefore, tomeet the toxic actions of I and astral bodywhich inter-vene in the organism with etheric actions, we supportthe healing processwhichwants to be present throughthe organism’s own healing process. We really onlyneed to know which medicinal agents ...”

The expected reference to mistletoe was not made (sec-tion 1.2). Nor was anything said about how the sub-stances should be processed pharmaceutically so thatthey might prove immediately constructive, i.e. take ef-fect at the level of the nighttime astral or ether body. Intheory this would demand that this group of medicinesare not first changed into their opposite nor that theyact directly as toxins and encourage destructive activi-ties (like Belladonna). One merely needed to know howthe healing, constructive powers of the organism can becalled up directly by a medicament. (One may no doubtalso think of medicaments that need to be partly metab-olized before they become active.)

The lecture thus offers three models for medicinalaction:

1. Poisons (Belladonna model) with direct destructiveaction that need careful dosage. These are only brokendown by the body after they have taken specific effect.

2. Poisons (iron model) where all processes of intake,function and elimination are prepared for in the organ-ism in form of specific proteins, etc. as media for poten-tization within the organism.Their toxicity only takes ef-fect beyond the physiological limits.

3. Medicines intended to provide direct stimulationfor constructive processes. They must be such that theyintegrate their specific activity into the fourfold con-structive stream of the “invisible human being”. Thequestion arises here as to how substances can be pre-pared pharmaceutically so that in spite of being foreignby nature they can serve the vital processes of “mainte-nance”,“growth” and “reproduction”. Later on in the lec-ture we read:


“Wemust,however,have a clear idea as to the changeswhich something located in the root of a plant goesthrough when taken in ... via the mouth and thenprocessed so that it will move [constructively] out-wards to the extreme periphery of the head organiza-tion.”

Steiner asked that we have a clear idea of the changeswhich something goes through (55).This can be done byconducting a spiritual-scientific and natural-scientificinvestigation of the pharmacodynamics and pharmaco-kinetics of the medicaments.A help towards doing so ef-fectivey will be to consider some theoretical modelswhere Steiner described the relationship of the humanI to the substances in the world.

2.3 Theoretical models for the relationships betweenI and substances

2.3.1 Primary model body and secondaryindividual body

In the second medial course (70) the subject of me-dicinal actions comes up right at the beginning:

“The last time I had to limit myself to the outer revela-tion of the inner human being. This time, I’ll try andshowhow thedifferent levels of humanexistenceare in-fluenced by substances as they are in the world outsidethehumanbeing,what substances canbeput tomedic-inal use, and what can be medicinal by influencing thehuman organism at a level other than the purelymate-rial.”

The action/efficacy of substances on an organism whichis alive, ensouled and spiritual was to be described in thewhole lecture course. Steiner developed special theoret-ical models for this which have a bearing on our subject.We will review them here, although it is necessary tohave detailed knowledge of those lectures. In the firstlecture, a number of polar opposite theoretical imagesare developed on the subject. Firstly,distinction was to bemade between a primary body and an individualized sec-ondary body as sites for the physiological processes. Inother lectures the primary body was also called the mod-el body (71). This is partly overcome with childhood dis-eases but continues to be active for a long time,especial-ly in metabolism. It is only completely transformed atdeath. The primary and secondary body elements havedifferent affinity to foods and medicines.The importanceof making this distinction when it comes to the connec-tion between substances and pathological processes hasbeen given little consideration so far but should be men-tioned in the present context.

2.3.2 “Substance in existence” and “substance develop-ment” in the human being

In the same lecture, individual substances were thenconsidered from two different points of view.The currentstatus of a substance is studied on the one hand, whilsta second way of looking at it is called “process”.

“We have to start not with substances but withprocesses, not something finished but a process.”

Steiner was considering the qualitative changes. Forevery single substance moves from an earlier to a laterstate. The focus is not on the isolated, momentary statebut on evolution and involution in time. This is theprocess considered in the anthroposophical study of thehuman being and not the constancy of molecules.

Processes can only be described in our earthly think-ing once we have accurately determined a number ofmomentary states. Thinking trained in the observationof supersensible aspects will, on the other hand, per-ceive the actual transformation,being scarcely confinedto fixing the analysable starting, intermediate or endstates.

The development and transformation process in thehuman being was considered, taking silicon for an exam-ple. In the lower human being, substance developmentpredominates; here lies the centre for silica production,the process which gives rise to silica. The upper humanbeing, on the other hand, needs silica in a state of rela-tive persistence; here the ponderable silica provides abasis for processes in the psyche. Steiner then extendedthe established order to other substances. Calcium,magnesium and fluorine (and hence all substances) in amore finished state,available for the I’s destructive func-tions in this form. In the lower human being, develop-ment, the substance-generating process,dominates.Theconstructive I reveals itself at a deeply unconscious lev-el (Table 2, 4th column). The destructive I, on the otherhand, needs the resistance of substance developed inthe body which has been taken to a relative end-stage inthe generative process.

In the 2nd lecture, the development and the finishedstate of a substance are seen in a wider context:

“When we see arsenic in physical form, it really repre-sents the end of a process in the outside world.We seethe beginning of this process in the inner human be-ing.We therefore do not really know the reality of anyformofmatter observed in the outsideworld unlesswealso know:What is this doing in the inner human or-ganism?”

With arsenic as the example, we are therefore told thatin the outside world we find different forms of matterwhich have more or less come to an end of their processof development. Only “imprints” of generative process-es are perceptible in the substances we find in the world.Here the “finished state” predominates. Today, the evo-lution of any substance found on analysis can only bestudied in the human physiology.The beginning, the ori-gin, can still be discerned in the inner human being to-day. This alone is where the source and origin of the“generation of matter” lies.

Modern minds are not geared to make distinctionbetween“developing and finished substance”.One mustevolve the idea before it is possible to look at the physi-ological reality. The fruitfulness of this distinction—in-cluding all intermediate forms—has to prove its value inthe way we develop medicines. We may anticipate that“developing substances”have greater affinity to the“in-visible human being” in his constructive processes than


to “finished” matter. With this theoretical model, too,the pharmacists’ task is to take the “finished” quality ofplant extracts or minerals back into a developmentalprocess again.

In the 5th lecture, the same differentiation is consid-ered with phosphorus as the example, now in a newcontext. Phosphorus is present throughout the organ-ism as the vehicle for the I in its dual function in the low-er and upper human being. In the latter, phosphorustends to be chemically released as phosphate, so thatprocesses go the way they also would in the outsideworld. It goes so far towards the finished state that itmight prove toxic. In the lower human being, phospho-rus is bound “to other substances” and therefore still ina nascent,developing state.Treatment with phosphoruscan either stimulate the developmental potential ofbound phosphorus, or it can present a risk of poisoning.(For further details on phosphorus physiology see ref.80and section 2.6.)

The term “development” or “genesis” of a substanceinitially sounds absolute, as if something new were toarise from nothing. It would probably be more correct totake the words “silica-generating process” literally. Weare considering a physiological process where silica (orcalcium,or any other substance) in a hidden,bound stateexists only in the potential for a specific substance ac-tion.This potential can be released at any time in the or-ganism; it “evolves” and then develops the substance-specific activity.

2.3.3 The “stable and unstable protein organization”in human beings

The 6th lecture (59) adds a further element to the re-lationship between levels of human existence and mat-ter in evolution and existence.The powers of thinking inimages must be strengthened to allow differentiatedinsight concerning treatment. The simple image of thelower human being is now broadened out into the“low-er, anterior human being”. It has functions referred to byspeaking of a sequence of organs: uterus, heart and lar-ynx. The function they share is called the unstable pro-tein organization in human beings.

A new description is also given of the polar opposite,the “upper, posterior human being”, the functions ofwhich predominate in the great protein organs—brain,lung and liver,and probably also the kidneys.These func-tions represent the stable protein organization.The twosystems are opposites. The unstable protein organiza-tion allows for night-time regeneration in all organs. Atthe same it attacks the stable protein organization. Ittakes the changed natural substances to the great pro-tein organs in anabolism, requiring those organs to po-tentize the substances (section 2.4).

2.3.4 Conditions for substances in “spirit-releasing”and “spirit-binding”organs

In a next step, these physiological functions of theunstable and stable protein organizations are consid-ered in relation to the human organism’s soul capacity(72). Spirit-releasing processes providing a basis for soul

life are only possible in the“upper, posterior organs”, i. e.in the brain, lungs, liver and kidneys. In these organs,sub-stances have a configuration and availability whichmake them suitable spirit-developers and serve process-es in mind and spirit. Here, physiological processes canbe configured to provide a potential basis, an abutment,for our thinking, feeling and doing.

At the opposite pole are the lower, anterior organswith their function of depositing matter,“functional de-veloper of systems of forces that go towards combus-tion”. Examples given are uterus/sexual tract, digestiveorgans, vascular systems including the heart, and thelarynx (some in other lectures in the same course). Thisgroup consists altogether of hollow organs in whichsomething can be configured for the future. In theuterus, a new physical organism is created; in intestineand blood circulation, foreign matter is transformed in-to non-foreign matter and later condensed to organ sub-stances. In the larynx, air is configured into speech. Theunstable protein organization of the hollow organsmakes it possible for mental and spiritual processes tobe embodied, brought to realization, in earthly exis-tence—as creation of living matter, transformation ofmatter and ultimately substance for development opento the I and as speech. Compared to the spirit-releasingprocess to which we referred above, this may be called aspirit-developing process. It is dominant in and integralto growth and development in the organism, whichmeans that it cannot play a role in releasing the spirit sothat processes from the sphere of life may be trans-formed into soul processes.

These two opposites, spirit-binding and spirit-releas-ing organs, were not referred to again by Steiner on anyother occasion.They provided the basis on which he thendeveloped examples of finding and producing the med-icine in the 7th lecture. Decoctions of roots (Gentiana,Geum and Iris) act primarily on the lower,anterior humanbeing. The action is due to constituents (though onlygeneral reference is made to these) taken by mouth. In-fusions of leaves (Majorana) and flowers (Sambucus) anddecoctions of seeds (caraway) affect the upper, posteriororgans if taken by mouth. For the upper parts of a planthave already been “dynamized” as the plant developedand are thus able to reach the upper,posterior human be-ing. With all examples, reference is made to the plantconstituents which are to be transformed into medicinalagents. For establishing the order, the site of production(root, leaf, etc.) is important and the method of simplepreparation (decoction, infusion, etc.).

Up to this point, reference had been made only to sim-ple, familiar methods of preparation. It was only at thevery end of this “pharmaceutical” lecture that mentionwas made of a new pharmaceutical impulse, the veg-etabilization of metals. All heavy metals endanger the or-ganism as they cause destruction which is acute or onchronic exposure toxic. The vital processes of the plantsconcerned were to change the quality of the metals tosuch effect that they would directly activate the construc-tive,“invisible”human being.The details of the new meth-


ods were more fully considered in a discussion with phar-macists (7 & 8 Feb. 1923) (section 4.1.4). A pharmaceuticalmethod would have to be developed where the new qual-ity gained by the metals would be taken into a “develop-mental” process and made available medicinally.

2.3.5 I-incarnation in the metabolism and the offprintproblem

Another aspect of the connection between the levelsof human existence and the world of substances relatesto the incarnation process. Long before conception, thesupersensible I is preparing to be active in a living body.It first comes to realization in the membranes aroundthe embryoblast, wholly constructive in its actions asthe“invisible human being”.This“peripheral I”continuesto act “from above” in the early years of life.

“The actual I, which in the wholly exoteric world is ...only being born ... around the 20th year ... this I is alsoborn in an inward direction” in about the 9th year oflife.“But in the period ... between the 9th and 10th yearsthe I which acts from the lower human being, the low-er [central] I, must meet with the upper [peripheral] I.In a child, it is always the I acting from the upper [cen-tral] human being which processes the substances ... Iam, of course, referring to the instruments of the I.”

The following is important on the subject of substance:“Only the I has the power to extend its feelers all theway down into the powers in external substances ...The I ... enters directly into the food substance ...”

(Please give careful consideration to the meaning, forthe words are contradictory here: In this passage, the“upper I” refers entirely to the I which before birth iswholly working from the spiritual realm to develop andconfigure. Elsewhere the term “upper I” is used to referto the daytime I of the adult person.)

Chemical degradation of foods with enzymes and im-munological breakdown into their basic parts is in adultseffected by the upper human being in the metabolism.Breaking down foreign matter correspondingly permitsbuild-up of the organism’s own substance by the lowerhuman being. The important statement at this point isthat this function, the breaking-down of foods by directaction of the upper I, really only begins after the 9th yearof life.Before that, the peripheral I is still involved,actingfrom above and outside.Physiologically,different instru-ments must be used to break up and recombine foodelements before and after the 9th year.

The function of the peripheral upper I and the “birthof the I in an inward direction” into the metabolism inabout the 9th year as precondition for exoteric birth in anoutward direction at 21 has so far been considered to bethe responsibility of educators (132) and hardly at all anissue in developmental physiology. Little considered sofar, this aspect of the transformation of matter beforeand after the 9th year will play an important role in themedical treatment of children.Brief reference to this dis-tinction is found in a suggestion made by Steiner: Hesi-tant incarnation of the higher levels of existence can betreated with arsenic baths—i. e. via the senses—in chil-

dren, and in adults by giving arsenic by mouth, to act viathe metabolic system.

2.4 Substance interiorization—food substancebecoming human substance

The process in which food substances coming fromoutside are transformed into body substance was notdiscussed in detail until the autumn of 1922 (73, 74).Foods are broken down into their basic elements in thehuman metabolism, losing their natural relationship tothe vegetable and animal worlds in the process.They be-come “mineral and fluid”. These foreign elements, still“physical”, must be “homoeopathized” in the organismso that human protein may be produced. This “ascent”occurs in the blood. The first step comes in the field oftension of heart and lung. Here the substances are giv-en life. “The system of heart and lungs exists so thatsomething which is physical system may be caught upinto the etheric organization.”The next step is achievedin the combined activity of brain and kidney. The sub-stance is here taken to a level where it sustains soul.Theair organization and nitrogen play a role in this. In afinal step with this potentization in the inner humanbeing, protein—Steiner primarily refers to this—is tak-en to a quality that is open to the I in the warmth organ-ization which lies in the field of tension between senseorgans and liver (Table 2, 2nd column).

The whole lecture is the archetype of potentization orhomoeopathization. The substances must go step bystep through the four quality levels in the human organ-ism. The structures of physical substances are qualita-tively changed,which frees them from non-human func-tions and makes them serve the human I. They are tak-en from whatever status they have into potential for de-velopment.

In the 4th lecture, the process of creating the body’sown substance which takes place entirely in the unsta-ble protein organization, is summed up:

“If we refer to the route which human food takesthrough the organism as “vitalization’, an ascendingcurve, as it were, which rises from being initially inor-ganic to being vitalized, living, from there to some-thing which can sustain sentience, and finally fromthis to somethingwhich can sustain the I organization... we must speak of progressive vitalization of mattertaken in with the food” (75).

The same thought is developed and given a differentemphasis in the 5th chapter of Extending Practical Medi-cine (76).

Corresponding to the food,the body substance is devel-oped in stages and refined until it has developmental qual-ity open to the I. It means that it exists in an unformed,non-specialized state which holds the potential for anyspecific organ substance but has not yet come to realiza-tion as any such.This prime matter is referred to elsewhereas“germinating life”,“organic development which has notreached completion”(77),or also“chaos”.The nascent,om-nipotential state needs to be condensed in a secondaryprocess before it can be actual organ substance.


2.5 Process of matter condensing to organ substanceReference to the way in which unformed prime matter

open to the I develops into specific organ substancescomes in the first course (78) and later in chapter 12 in Ex-tending Practical Medicine. The nascent substance at thequality level of the invisible I, which can only be deter-mined in thought, is“darkened down”,“cooled down”as itreturns to being specific organ substance.Human proteinas unformed, omnipotent substance must secondarily

“come under the influence of gaseous matter uptake.This takes the transformation products of the carbohy-drates into the protein.The resulting substances can bethe basis for the individual organs which develop.What we have here are not the finished organ sub-stances, such as liver or bone substance, but a moregeneral substance from which all the individual or-gans in the body can be developed. The I organizationis involved in developing the finished organ forms[with the relevant organ substances] (76).

Distinction is made between four levels of organ-sub-stance creation. Substances first arise from the nascentsubstance and these give up their openness to the I butalso change specialization to the point where they canserve soul life. Substances are transformed further untilqualitatively they relate only to the life organization. Fi-nally substances also appear which belong predominant-ly to the physical organization.The extreme case of such“condensation” or “cooling” are the apatite crystals inteeth and bones. Nerve or cartilage substances are lesscondensed. This specialization of substance from being

open to the I and as yet unformed into individual typesof tissue may in summary be called “condensation”.

An attempt to show the qualitative transformationof matter is made in Table 2. Homoeopathization fromthe mineral state of degraded food to I-open substanceable to develop into any form of body substance isshown in the second column,condensation of this“mag-ma” into substances only related to life and ultimatelyinto mineral, crystalline (bone) substance in column 3.The same transformation of “warm” nascent matteropen to the I in a sequence of cooling stages has beendescribed in the 7th lecture of Occult Physiology (79) andlater, in connection with the polarity of blood and nerve,in the 6th chapter of Extending Practical Medicine (76)(Table 3).The information given is not congruent,and theunderlying physiological substance states need furtherinvestigation. The spiritual investigator found that theend point in the condensation process, i.e. mineralizedbone, could be most clearly described.

2.6 Can the physiology of phosphorus and calciumprovide more insight?

The idea of qualitative transformation (homoeo-pathization) of foreign food matter is considered to pro-ceed in four stages according to the anthroposophicalview of the human being. Foods are broken down in theintestine into a largely fluid and mineral form. They arethen taken from this state in the organism to one thatsustains life, then a stage related to soul, and finally astage where they are open to the I.The process is the ar-chetype of homoeopathization in the organism. Phar-macists can take their orientation from this.


Table 2. Qualitative transformation of substances in the organism

Neurosensorysystem

Respiratorysystem

Circulatorysystem

Metabolicsystem

References

Levels of creating bodysubstance in the un-stable protein organsof the lower, anteriorhuman being

The substance qualitywhich arises is impon-derable, open to the Iand unformed; sheerwarmth (senses, liver).

Substance qualitywhich arises is open tothe soul and unformed(brain, kidney).

Substance qualitywhich arises isprimarily at level of life(heart, lung).

Foreign physicalsubstance begins tochange into theopposite in theintestine.

22 Oct. 1922 (133)

Levels of creating bodysubstance in the stableprotein organs of theupper, posterior humanbeing

Heat withdrawn fromthe heart; warmth etherreleased; I-open seed-like substance (stemcells and embryonicECM) arise.

Light ether released inthe kidney, condensa-tion of substance tosoul-sustaining quality.

Chemical ether releasedin the liver. Condensa-tion of substance tolife-sustaining quality.

Life ether is released inthe lung, condensationof substance to mineralquality (bone).

31 Mar. 1920 (78)Ext. Pract. Med. ch. 12

Quality levels of bodysubstance in the visiblehuman being

Ponderable substances(silicon) are used by thedaytime I.

Imponderable substan-ces are newly createdin night-time I.“Silicon-creationprocess”

11 Apr. 1921 (70)

Calcium for daytime Iandphosphorus fornight-time I

Ca++ ionogenicallyinducing configuration,phosphorus releasedPhosphorus from ATPbound to receptors

Ca++ ionogen asmessenger

Phosphorus inmembranes and glia

Ca++ ionogen iin blood

Phosphorus in buffer

Calcium crystallinePhosphorus bound inphosphate of bone

31 Mar. 1920 (78)

1 2

1 2to potentize, homoeopathize to condense

To see if these four qualitative stages can be identi-fied and characterized for individual, physically wellknown substances in the organism,a study was made ofcalcium and phosphorus (80, 81).The results can only bebriefly outlined here.

Calcium and phosphate exist as mineralized apatitecrystals in bone and even more so in the dental enamel.The organism here demonstrates its ability to integratelarge quantities of matter (c. 1.0 kg of Ca++ and 0.7 kg ofphosphate) into the level of life in spite of their outside-world quality. The specific tendencies of the two sub-stances are evident physiologically in the crystallinestructure of bone, and pathologically in the develop-ment of calculi. This tendency to form concretions iswhat Steiner meant by “cohesion of substances” whichneeds to be overcome by homoeopathization.

1)The first step in homoeopathization happens in thefluid circulations of the organism. With calcium, a newbalance is established in the blood between ionogenic,directly effective form and the cloaked, albumin-boundCa++. The albumin may be seen as the “surroundingmedium”enveloping the ionic, salt-like form. Calcium inthis cloaked form is prevented from uncontrolled use ofits tendency towards Ca++-specific processes that lead tocrystallization. This makes it a vehicle for life.

With phosphorus, dynamization to a life-sustaininglevel takes a different course. Buffers in body fluids, andespecially in the blood, prevent individual constituentsof a substance from taking effect. The phosphate losesits affinity to Ca++, and its potential to form apatite is re-duced. Special inhibitors (e. g. proteins and pyrophos-phate) even effect homoeopathization in the urine, ac-tively preventing precipitation of Ca++ and phosphate toform phosphate calculi.

It is thus possible to maintain the acid-base balance(in so far as it depends on Ca++ and phosphate) as a func-tion in the living organism. Bound in their new media,both albumin-Ca++ and phosphate have moved fromoutside-world states to a function that sustains life.

2) The second step in homoeopathization, whichleads to soul-sustaining substance (astralization), in-volves even more intensive enveloping of Ca++. Albuminon its own no longer suffices. Phospholipid membranesare used to envelop the Ca++ completely and keep it sep-arate from the receptors. The membranes are the new“medium” in which the Ca++ is placed to inhibit its ten-dency to crystallize or unphysiological Ca++ activity. Theionogenic Ca++ can be released in the short term to serveas messenger in case of need. It will then trigger physi-ological processes at all levels of the organism to providea basis for soul life. The quantitative amount of Ca++ isgetting less important in the process, and the rhythm ofthe Ca++ impulses, the “Ca++ song”, more and more im-portant. Once an impulse has been triggered, the Ca++ isimmediately bound into the medium again, losing its ef-fectiveness.

Phosphorus—among other things in the form ofphospholipids—makes the second step in the ho-moeopathization of Ca++ possible. Vesicular structuresand cloaking surfaces are developed in form of phospho-lipids to prevent cohesion, crystallization of calciumphosphate to (apatite) or carbonate (calcite) and limitthe messenger function.

3) The third step in homoeopathization in the organ-ism establishes the connection with the I’s substance-creative powers (81). The Ca++ serves as a tool in any mi-tosis and the induction of apoptosis. It is thus possibleto bring order into all growth and dying processes inorganogenesis and regeneration. Ca++ enables the I tocome to bodily realization at molecular-biological levelin this function, so that the I may create its own organs.The sparks and flashes of Ca++ that develop, and thecharacter given by the different “Ca++ songs”which maybe “heard” on the live cells are indications of this calci-um quality which can be observed using our senses.Here, too, the effective ionogenic form of Ca++ is imme-diately taken back again and cloaked. The active, un-cloaked form may be called “Ca++ in existence”, thecloaked form “Ca++ development” (section 2.3.2).


Table 3: Hierarchy of substance qualities in field of tension of upper and lower human being (135)

Upper human beingin the nervous system

I organization

Astralorganization

Ethericorganization

Physicalorganization

Cerebralnerves

Spinal nerves

Autonomousnerves

Nervestem cell

Hierarchy of substancequalities arising in the fieldbetween upper and lowerhuman being

Substance movingtowards being mineral inosteogenesis

Live substance, organs ofinternal mobility, muscles,cartilage

Substance with soulcapacity, organs of internalvitality

Seed-like substance capa-ble of being configures,open to the I (prime matter)

Mineral parts of blood,erythrocytes and bloodsalts/albumin

Coagulative system,non-specific inflammatorycomplement system

Immunoglobulin andlymphocytes

Blood stem cell

Physical organizationin the blood

Etheric/astral organizationiin the blood

I organizationin the blood

?

Lower human beingin the blood system

Phosphate is taken to a higher level in a qualitativelydifferent way in the organism.Phosphorylation with ATPputs phosphates into the surface structure of enzymesand receptors. The process changes the conformation,i. e. brings about a spatial change in the enzyme or re-ceptor.These molecules can only be activated once theyhave been “opened up” in this way. The process may becompared to the opening of a flower which will onlythen be ready to receive pollen, to be pollinated. Phos-phorylation takes the enzyme or receptor to the pointwhere it can react to the triggering signal. The configu-rative impulses brought to realization in mitosis andapoptosis are thus made possible for the I organizationwith the help of Ca++ and phosphate as refined tools(Table 2).

2.7 Summary of calcium and phosphate physiologyQuantitative determination of Ca++ or phosphate will

give the same result at all levels. It is only when we re-late this uniform statement to the relevant function inthe organism that a qualitative difference is seen for thefour functional levels which may be considered to reflectthe different levels of human existence.

1) The physical product aspect is evident in the crys-talline apatite in bone. Here the quantity of both sub-stances matters, and the external law of the constantsolubility product of the two partners, Ca++ and phos-phate, can come into effect in crystallization. The “cohe-sion” of matter (29) can to a large extent take effect.

2) The etheric process aspect shows itself in the flowbalances established between albumin-bound and freeCa++ in the blood on the one hand and the phosphatebuffers on the other.This dual polarity in all extra and in-tra cellular flow systems in the fluid organism betweenCa++ status and Ca++ development on the one hand andfree and bound phosphorus on the other provides abasis for life in all extra and intra cellular flow systemsin the fluid organism.

3) The soul aspect shows itself on the one hand in themessenger function of the Ca++ spark and the boundarysurface-creative ability of phospholipids on the other.The latter assume a function which in classic potentiza-tion of medicines is ascribed to the medium.They createthe protective element which makes it possible to trig-ger action potentials, induce secretory functions andmovement impulses at the right time. These processesare the bodily precondition for all soul processes.

4) The combined actions of Ca++ and phosphate arefurther enhanced as potential builds up and growth istriggered (mitosis) and with death impulses (apoptosis).Once again the phosphate attaches itself to the Ca++ insuch a way that the latter will only take effect where theI’s configuring function demands this. Here the I’s levelof existence meets with that of physical matter.

2.8 Future research issuesQuestions concerning the manufacture of medicines

in the field of anthroposophical medicine arise as weconsider the human organism and its relationships withthe world of substances. Having four levels of quality it

is exemplary for the process of homoeopathization.Theorganism changes foreign earthly matter into a processquality open to the I and from this prime matter then de-velops the specialized substances for individual organs.The process of homoeopathization and re-condensationneeds to be grasped at idea level and elucidated experi-mentally. The characteristic aspects of this transforma-tion, which we can see in the Ca++ and phosphate mod-el can provide first access to the physiologically describ-able reality. This will also help us to understand the fol-lowing better:

“Sentient substance and substance capable of support-ing the self-aware mind and spirit are lifted out of thetotal organism [which means that for a short time,Ca++ is liberated and phosphate freed from its bonds]and put at the service of the astral body and I organi-zation”(82).

The quality of anthroposophical medicines will need tobe measured using the standards of the ether body,i. e. perceptible changes in human physiological vitalprocesses.

Further investigation is needed of the physiologicalprocesses to establish phenomena for the followingquestions:

1. How can we describe the evolution of matter in thelower human being?

2. How can we differentiate the I-function in the pro-cessing of foods and of medicines before and after the9th year of life?

3. How does the I-function in the model body differfrom that in the individualized body, i. e. which are thephysiological differences indicative of this transforma-tion which is part of the biography?

4. What value should attach to the action of sub-stances in spirit-releasing and spirit-binding organs?

These and other questions must be followed up if ac-cess is to be gained in anthroposophical pharmaceuticsto both pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Phe-nomena can then be described on which light will becast by the general statement:

“When a medicine is to influence a pathological con-dition developing in the inner organization ... it is firstof all important to see in how far the astral organiza-tion is acting to the effect that protein decompositionoccurs somewhere in the organism in such a way thatit is initiated in the normalway by the nerve organiza-tion” (83).

The goal in pharmacy, referring to the level of soul-sus-taining substance in the above quotation,can be formu-lated as follows. How do we produce a medicine in sucha way that protein decomposition can be transformedinto corresponding composition effected by the invisiblehuman being? Protein decomposition presupposesknowledge of the possibility of synthesizing protein. Atthis point we may recall the requirement for producingthe coffee preparation to treat foot and mouth disease(section 1.3): Knowledge of the protein structure was re-quired for producing the medicament.


At this point we need not go into in how far the term“homoeopathizing” as used by Steiner is synonymouswith the closely defined term “potentization” and howthese differ from the terms “dynamization” and “veg-etabilization” which he came to use later.

3 Relationship of substances to thehuman organism3.1 Conversion of food into“its opposite”

“An adequate diet must provide sufficient energy, atleast the minimum of protein and carbohydrates, min-erals and trace elements, essential amino acids and fat-ty acids as well as vitamins”(84). In this textbook pas-sage it is taken for granted that there is continuity be-tween substance elements and energy reserves outsideand within the human being.

The same situation is presented the other way roundin the anthroposophical view of the human being.

“The great obstacle to an objective view of the actionswhich substances,and above allmedicinal substances,have in the human organism is ... the law of conserva-tion of matter. These laws, which have been estab-lished as a general law of nature, absolutely and com-pletely contradict the process of human development... The whole process of nutrition and digestion is real-ly seen from the materialistic point of view as if thesubstances were outside us, ... so that we have withinus, even if in small particles, something given to us bythe outside world ... Yet this is not the case. For the po-tential truly exists in the human being first to destroythe external carbon completely through the lower hu-man being, removing it from physical space and thensimply producing it again anew in the countermove tothis.” ... [In modern science] nothing is known of thegenesis of substances and their death, nor of how sub-stances go through death and revitalization” (78).

This statement—carbon merely serves as an example—holds true for all substances and chemical elements.

Using the energies of the upper human being, theforeign matter, substances from the outside world, isdestroyed in metabolism (Table 1).This“death of matter”stimulates a development process in the lower humanbeing in which human substances are newly created orgiven life again.The sequence of the degradation of mat-ter and the four stages of matter coming back into exis-tence has been referred to in sections 2.4 and 2.5. Thecontradiction between the two statements is not easilyresolved. On the one hand we have continuity of chem-ical elements (which can be labelled) from the point ofview of analytical natural science, and on the other thediscontinuity of substances serving the I organizationwhich makes it necessary to forget and come alive again.In a later lecture we read:

“Ifwe thus take somemineral or other existing outsidethe human organism and imagine that this mineral ...is part of its bone,of the teeth ... this is sheer nonsense.No, the substancewhich appears there again in the hu-man configuration must first have changed into thewholly volatile warmth-etheric form and then have

been transformed back into the substance which thenappears in living configuration in the human organ-ism” (85).

These words clearly point to a sequence of four majorsteps, each with a number of intermediate steps.

1. Food substances are broken down into their individ-ual parts in the gastrointestinal tract, divesting them oftheir foreign nature.

2. The individual parts are still ponderable to beginwith; they are taken up into the“unstable protein organ-ization” and qualitatively taken to a level where theysustain life and powers of soul. Finally they reach a levelof unformed potential matter open to the I. The processtakes them qualitatively from “existence” to “develop-ment” (section 2.4).

3. I-open potential matter enters into a relationshipwith the“stable protein organization”where specialized,analysable organ substances arise. These are open toquantitative analysis.The specific characteristics in bothsubstance and configuration for nerves, glands, bone,etc. develop. The “neogenesis” of substances in the or-ganism which Steiner would refer to again and againrefers mainly to this final stage. From a potential formatter open to the I—also referred to as pure warmthether—organ substance would arise at the physical lev-el which could be quantitatively defined.

4.The resulting organs—all of them now“upper pos-terior organs”—can be taken hold of in a direct“spirit-re-leasing”process by the upper levels of existence to sucheffect that the soul functions of thinking (brain), feeling(lung) and acting out of the will (liver) appear when theyare broken down. The organs are made “spiritual” againin the process.

3.2 “Feeding through the senses”Steiner would often stress that the physical matter

making up the body must be considered to come fromtwo sources.

“Ordinary metabolism only provides ... the buildingstones for the nervous system as far as matter is con-cerned.The neurosensory system is then active, togeth-er with respiration, in taking in substances in an ex-traordinarily finely divided state, integrating them inthe organism, to replace at substance level everythingwhich leaves the body ...The humanbody is never builtup through food intake. The food merely contains theactivity which has to be there to organize the nervoussystem. The [metabolic organs] are ... in terms of sub-stance built up not from ingested foods ... but reallyfrom the cosmos” (86).An important point made in the lecture of 2 July 1921

(87) (Table 4) concerning the qualitative changes “sub-stances from the cosmic surroundings” have to gothrough until condensed to human organ substance.Steiner did,however, speak only of developments in soullife and not the live physiological processes needed atthe same time:“Feeding through the senses”is connect-ed with subconscious or conscious perception. This isfollowed by physiological and if necessary mental pro-


cessing and further condensation to adaptive habitua-tion or learning memory.The organs needed for this areassumed to be the sense organs for sensory perception,brain and nerves for the thinking. The organ relating todeveloping memory (probably long-term memory)comes as a surprise:

“Our perceptions and also everything we process inour thoughts ismirrored on the surface of all our inter-nal organs. This mirroring signifies our memories, re-membrance, in life.The things reflected on the surfaceof our heart, our lung, our spleen, etc. once we haveperceived and processed themmake up our memory.”

He always made distinction between memory imageson the surface of internal organs and memories comingto mind in the brain.

A fourth step for the condensation process of the“finely divided substances” taken in through the sensesand respiration follows. Part of the subtle stream ofthoughts that first arises in the sense organs and is mir-rored on the surfaces of our organs will enter into the or-gans and give the impulse for

“secretions ...The powers evolved in these thoughts are... stored in the inner lung ... Metabolism [in the lung]changes these powers to the effect that between birthand death we have a reservoir of powers, as it were, inthe lung ... Andwhenwe enter into a new incarnation,it is above all these powers ... which externally imprinton us the physiognomy of the head.”

Thought substances are hidden within the internal or-gans—apart from the lung, reference is also made to liv-er, kidney and heart—as “potential for future develop-ment”. They are seeds for potential powers which willcome into their own in creating the configuration of thehead, the structure of the brain, etc. in the next incarna-tion. Today’s perceptions and thoughts thus determinethe bodily configuration for the next incarnation.

The physiological phenomena which correlate withthis spiritual-scientific view have been even less workedout than the organ-relationships of the food-substancestream. The structures are remarkably similar: the foodstream is spiritualized in four stages and with the “up-per posterior organs”(section 2.3.3) provides the basis fortoday’s inner life in thinking, feeling and acting out ofthe will. The thought-substance stream is spiritual-ized—again in four stages—to be the seed for powersof configuring the future body.

It is not said that these “finely distributed sub-stances” taken in through the senses and respirationmust also be broken down first, like ordinary food, andrefashioned into their opposite. These condensed sub-stances seem to be taken in and processed as they are.(One must, of course, assume transitional situations be-tween these two ways.)This way of taking substances inis therapeutically activated with all external applica-tions. The pleasant scent of volatile oils and the sooth-ing perception of being touched by hands are part of theprocess, as are pharmaceutical products taken in via theskin. It is still an open question as to how these can beoptimized pharmaceutically. In conclusion, mentionmust be made of the fact that all forms of art therapyalso touch on this through-substance stream.

3.3 Medicines in relation to the upper andlower human being

In the passage quoted above (78), reference is madeto the discontinuity of food substances and also thebreaking down and reconstruction of medicines.Changed into “the opposite”? How should we think the“genesis and death of substances”? Unfortunately nofurther explanation was given at that point and there isno indication as to whether this concept of death andgeneration applies to all medicines and all formulations.

In section 2.2, we considered the way in which weshould think of the action of Belladonna (lecture of 11February 1923). Alkaloids, a natural substance, enforcephysiological processes in the human being. They arenot changed into “the opposite”, like foods, but act di-rectly. The uptake and mechanism of action of alkaloidsare well known in pharmacokinetics. Physiologicaldegradation only begins after they have developed theirspecific action.

The same theoretical model is used for the action ofarsenic as a mineral poison. The “action of arsenic if di-luted but not too much so” (81, 88) was recommendedwhere the I organization does not intervene sufficientlyto cause degradation during the day and the individualis too sleepy.Again the“action of an external substance”was directly shown to be parallel to the destructive psy-chic processes within the human being.89

If toxic medicines are used in suitable dilution,we canuse the model for the direct action of soul and spiritfrom the above lecture to explain the connection. Themedicine has a direct action,strengthening degradationin a specific way. The toxicological phenomena point tobodily relations, where and how the poison in question


Table 4.The four levels of organ use and developments of powerswith nutrition through the senses (95)

Sensory perception

Ideation

Creating memoryon the surfaces ofinternal organs

Potential for afuture head con-figuration createdin the internalorgans today

Organs used

Sense organs

Nerves, brain

Lung: Abstract memories, preserves ideasbecause open to outsid

Liver: Emotive memoriesKidney: Emotive memories, habit-formingHeart: Conscience

Lung: Giving form to head, creating skullLiver: Inner disposition (= structure of brain)

for astute thinkingKidney: Emotional aspect of head organs, basis for

temperament “in so far as determined fromthe head”

Heart: Warmth structure takes in karma, moral nuanceof metabolism is stored. Hunger for necessarykarmic encounters and its satisfaction.

has its origin in the soul world. The essential differencebetween direct action of the I and action of the soul canbe worked out with poisons.

As mentioned earlier,apart from the“direct”action ofBelladonna alkaloids, reference was also made to twoother treatment principles in the lecture. Iron was to begiven in suitable form “to give the blood the weight itneeds by the necessary iron concentration ...” The con-structive stream coming from the invisible human beingis here directed down into the physical body, correctingconstructive activity where it is qualitatively insufficientand “too light”. Many processes of iron absorption andprocessing in the organism are known in modern phys-iology.The organism takes the iron step by step from theintestine to the haemoglobin of erythrocytes on the onehand and into the matrix metalloproteins (MMP) of ex-tracellular substance on the other, going through thesteps of creating the body’s own substance and organsubstance (sections 2.4 and 2.5). It calls for appropriategalenics if a medicinal iron preparation is to intervene inthese physiological processes. It is doubtless too gener-al to say that haem Fe2+ is most easily absorbed, Fe2+ lesswell, and that Fe3+ must first be reduced to Fe2+ in themucosal membrane (with a ferri reductase and ascor-bate).On the other hand the clinical experience that Fer-rum hydroxydatum is efficacious will need substantia-tion.

The third way in which medicines can take effect inthe organism is only referred to briefly in the lecture:

“... original healing powers existing in the organism[can be] supported using external agents ...”

Overweening degradation due to the direct influence ofpowers of soul and spirit is said to initiate tumour devel-opment. At this point the informed reader would expectreference to mistletoe as the agent of choice. Instead wehave just a general statement that a medicine shouldhave the powers of the invisible levels of existence in itand thus encourage constructive development. Thehealing powers of the substance must not be metabo-lized (“changed into their opposite”),nor should they act“directly”, like poisons. In homoeopathy, the experienceis that this can be achieved with appropriate potentiza-tion. According to many suggestions made by Steiner,this should lead to the development and verification ofnew pharmaceutical methods (section 5.3 and Table 4).Extending our knowledge of substances in and outsidethe human being can lead to anthroposophical pharma-ceutics.

Elsewhere, Steiner spoke of ways of supporting theactivity of the“invisible human being”.Destructive pow-ers coming in too strongly need to be reduced. Themethod is therefore not to intensify constructive pow-ers as such but merely to improve the balance. The “ex-hibition of very small amounts of phosphorus and alsosulphur” is recommended for this (90). Later,he spoke ofsomething further which is important from the pharma-cological point of view:

“It is now a matter of introducing substances into thehuman organism that are able to relieve the astral

and I organization of activities that have not been al-lotted to them ... Substances that contain phosphoruscan also do it. All we have to do is take care to add oth-er substances to the phosphorus so that its action de-velops in the intestine and not inmetabolism that liesoutside the intestine.”

Phosphorus—even when used medicinally in smallquantities—must be prepared so that it acts only in theintestine and is not absorbed.

From the details given in the lecture of 11 February1923 we can derive very general rules concerning the re-lationship between the human being in body, soul andspirit and medicinal agents:

1. Substances of a poisonous nature have the same di-rect destructive actions as astral body and I if given insuitable dosage.They are metabolized and overcome af-ter they have taken their specific effect.

2. Substances with constructive actions as in the“iron” model need a wisely prepared route of transfor-mation so that they are not broken down and maystrengthen the healing powers of the “invisible humanbeing” and not act as poisons.

3.To strengthen constructive processes, the intentionfor which comes from the“invisible human being”,Stein-er suggested new pharmaceutical methods—the flowmethod, the vegetabilization of metals, producing met-al mirrors, and new synthesis of medicinal plant pro-cesses. The medicines should activate or support theprocesses of the “invisible human being” (nutrition,growth, reproduction) directly.The modifications of pro-tein-type substances suggested by Steiner were consid-ered in section 1.3: mistletoe substances need to begiven a new order in their aggregate process (conforma-tion); coffee bean protein needs to be processed for amedicine against foot and mouth disease. The complexclinically relevant constituents of mistletoe provide im-pressive confirmation of this requirement for anthropo-sophical pharmaceutics made at an early date.

Steiner recommended medicines produced by theusual dilution/potentization mainly when asked abouttreatment for a particular patient. This need for imme-diate help can be seen as distinct from the impulse forindependent development of medicines based on thescience of the spirit.

3.3.1 Action and mode of exhibition of medicinesIn conventional medicine,questions as to the method

of exhibiting a medicine are given less attention thanare absorption, tolerance,practicability,etc. In anthropo-sophical medicine, the method of exhibition was givena set of new rules in the lecture of 11 February 1923, andon many other occasions Steiner made it clear that oralexhibition acts on metabolism, and external applica-tions influence the neurosensory system via the sensesin the skin. Injections always act on the rhythmical hu-man being via the blood (92, 93 etc.). At first sight, suchcorrelation appears to take no account of the quality ofsubstances, their absorption, distribution, etc. It has tobe said that to my knowledge,no investigation has so far


been done to establish if the same dose given by mouthor by injection (e.g.Stibium or Arnica) really acts more onmetabolism or the rhythmical system. The action of apoison (e.g. arsenic) differs only in degree and not inprinciple with different forms of exhibition, though theabove rule might suggest this. The situation with ar-senic is that independent of the method of exhibition,the action is the same if given orally or applied external-ly.The indication for both is the same: to get I and astralbody to intervene more effectively in the body duringthe day. Arsenic was recommended in Levico baths forchildren and by mouth for adults. In either case it actsas a poison “from above outside”, independent of themode of exhibition.

3.3.2 Connection between plant organ and medicinalaction

A further rule was given in a lecture given on 17 April1921 and on a number of other occasions. The organ ofthe plant from which the medicine is obtained has an in-fluence on the pharmaceutical process and also deter-mines the region of the human organism where the me-dicinal action takes place. Preparations from the rootneed to be boiled and act on metabolism (exampleGen-tiana lutea,Geumurb. and Iris germ.).This general state-ment was immediately made more specific, however.The specifically therapeutic actions arise through differ-ent constituents in the three medicinal plants. They doall affect the “lower and anterior human being”, but invery different processes which in turn were shown tohave polarities within them.

An infusion was to be made of marjoram leaves—atypical medicine for this plant organ—to strengthen therespiratory organs. It was emphasized that boiling theleaves would destroy certain constituents.The flowers ofSambucus nig.were also to be used in a tea for changinginternal respiration, now, however, from the“upper pos-terior”and not the“lower anterior”human being. Againa general characterization was given of the constituents.A decoction of caraway seeds also acts on the“posteriorupper human being”, due to volatile oils, waxes, resins,gum sugars, etc., affecting metabolic and sensory func-tions.

This thought was taken much further on another oc-casion, with the substance process itself and not theplant organ determining the site of action. The processmay be more “earthy”, more “liquid”, “gaseous” or“warmth-like”:

“If you consider themore earthy qualities of the plant,you must look there for the medicinal action on any-thing ... connected with diseases that have their originin the lung. If you take the principlewhich circulates inthe plant, ... youmust look there for anything connect-ed with the life organization. Study of the interrela-tionships between the organs and the environmentthus really also provides the basis for rational medicaltreatment. Currently this is a hotchpotch of empiricalnotes.Wewill only have a truly rationalmedicine if we... study the interrelationships between theworld of or-

gans within the human being and the outside world.It does, however, mean that we have to overcome our... yen for subjective mysticism” (95).

Reference to the lung in connection with the earthyprocess and of the liver with the fluid sphere relates tothe condensing organ sequence mentioned in section2.5. The words “hotchpotch of empirical notes” and “yenfor subjective mysticism”can still be taken for a warningtoday.3.4 Summary

The medicines used in anthroposophical medicineare also subject to the laws of absorption, distribution,to changes undergone in the organism and elimination.This fact has been referred to in the above and willemerge even more clearly as we go on.At the same time,Steiner established general rules independent of thespecific knowledge required.We may perhaps put it likethis: The less was known about the constituents andtoxicity of medicinal agents, the more helpful were thegeneral rules concerning both exhibition and prepara-tion. Note must also be taken that it was not until hislate lectures that Steiner was emphatic about the needto have knowledge of the pathways and transformationof foods and medicines in the body in order to bring amore broadly based medicine to realization (section 4.2).

“Exact insight is gained into the relationships betweensubstances: the functioning of these substances with-in the human organism, and outside of it both in thenaturalworld and of course also in the processeswhichmay be used in the laboratory” (96).

The “basis for rational medical treatment” is knowledgeof the connection between substance processes in thenatural world and in the human organism.This will pro-vide the basis for the further development of anthropo-sophical medicines.

4 Pharmaceutical processes4.1 Relationship to homoeopathy and alchemy4.1.1 Early indications

The physicians who were interested in theosophyand asked R.Steiner’s help were,as far as we know,main-ly involved in homoeopathy. They were certain that thehealing powers of potentized natural substances couldbe made directly available to patients.Steiner was askedto suggest medicines and meditations for individual pa-tients even before he gave his medical courses. There isno evidence of any intention to produce medicines one-self at this time. Luescher (136) refers to the two impuls-es to be discerned prior to the medical courses. On theone hand, the focus can be on the individual with his dis-ease, as in theManifestations of Karma lectures given inHamburg (21). This suggestion was taken up by thephysicians and brought to realization in individual prac-tices. In the Prague lectures on An Occult Physiology (20)Steiner developed “the general, generic, human aspectof health and sickness, insight into which can be madeto bear fruit in a future art of medicine” (136). This gen-eral task was less definitely taken up by the physicians.As far as we know, they did not ask about to the method


of producing medicines, the “rationale” for the relation-ship between human being and medicine, nor explore itthemselves.

From July 1912 onwards, Mr Schmiedel, the pharma-cist, was working with herbal material to produce veg-etable paints, hair oil, etc. in the newly establishedTheosophical Chemical Laboratory (later called “DrSchmiedel’s Chemical Laboratory”).Rudolf Steiner madesuggestions (137).The laboratory moved to a shed in Dor-nach in March 1914 where the vegetable paints for theFirst Goetheanum were produced. Schmiedel also gavethe impetus for the first medical course when he hadheard Steiner say to the world in a public lecture thatthere was need to develop an “intuitive medicine” (28).He had said that it

“would be the ideal of the spiritual scientist to reallyspeak fully to people who were experts in the field. Ifthey were to come and let their expertise speak with-out prejudice, they would see howmuch their very ex-pertisewould bemade fruitful out of the science of thespirit ... science of the spirit seeks to drawondeeper sci-entific sources than our ordinary science today.”

Prior to the medical course, the physicians and the phar-macist had not had any questions concerning the deep-er scientific sources, a methodology for medicine andpharmacy.The first medical course followed a few weekslater, in March and April 1920 (29).

4.1.2 The first medical course, IntroducingAnthroposophical Medicine (29)

All those who attended the first medical course wereseekers hoping to find a way out of traditional medicine.Steiner spoke of the“outward manifestation of the innerhuman being” in the course (70) which is the activity ofthe supersensible levels of existence in the sensible.Physiology,pathophysiology and treatment were broad-ened from this point of view. Steiner addressed the pre-vious training in homoeopathy of his audience,he hopedto be asked about the “deeper scientific sources” whichspiritual science can provide. His own approach tohomoeopathic medicine is evident from his words. Hereferred to potentization on several occasions, and onecan see a gradual broadening of the concept. We willlook at the key aspects of this.

In the first lecture,Hahnemann was given due appre-ciation as the founder of homoeopathy. He was the firstphysician of our time who sought to overcome medievalmedicine on the basis of a scientific concern.

“How the attempts that point to the future enteredinto this decline of humoral pathology—like the at-tempt made by Hahnemann, for example—will beconsidered in the days to follow.” He spoke of “at-tempts” or “attempts” made by Hahnemann.

The nature of homoeopathic pharmaceutics was consid-ered in the second lecture (22 March 1920), referring tosubstance metamorphosis between the “lower and up-per processes” in the human being as a model for thepharmaceutical processes (section 4.2).The“coherence”of matter”is cancelled in that transformation within the

human being. The potentization of medicines wouldneed a transformation of similar quality. The image giv-en for the right method of homoeopathization was theway in which light spreads. In the 4th lecture (24 March1920) the meaning of the term was expanded. Whenminerals are processed, “something occurs which insome form or other points to some homoeopathic prin-ciple or other ...”The familiar rhythmical dilution, i.e. theclassic method of potentization, even if handled differ-ently in different places,was said to be not the principle,but “some homoeopathic principle or other in someform or other”. Examples from nature given were medic-inal springs as places where homoeopathization takesplace.

At the same time, the other source for a medicineopen to the spirit is integrated into the subject matteras well: the tria principia of alchemical medicine. In thesixth lecture Steiner defined his own position regardingthis approach to medicine in more detail.

In the 5th lecture (25 March 1920), reference is madeto the dispute between homoeopaths and allopaths,and once more to the archetype in the human organism.Cancellation of “the cohesion of individual parts of themedicine” happened in the human organism, he said,when substances were made into the body’s own.Pharmacists could relieve the organism of having to car-ry this process. Pharmaceutical action overcame the op-position between the two medical disciplines if guidedfrom spiritual-scientific insight.

In the 6th lecture (26 March 1920), the alchemical Sal,Mercury and Phosphorus processes were first of all relat-ed to the plant. On the basis of this, the planets withtheir metals and their relationships were developed in-to the original wisdom of the tria principia. It is interest-ing that Steiner described his own investigations intoalchemy:

“What I am saying here has not been taken from ear-lier medical writings but based wholly on current in-vestigations in spiritual science ... It would be quite er-roneous to think that anything said here has been tak-en from earlier writings.”

The old insights in alchemy had petered out, but pres-ent-day spiritual-scientific research could take up thethread of the old nomenclature and the old processes(section 1.2).

Towards the end of the 6th lecture, tribute was paidto the new beginning that came with the“Hahnemann-ian approach”. The aim of that approach had been tomake the cosmic origin of substances available throughpotentization:

“The method is that one seeks to take what exists andpotentizes it so that the powers inherent in the exist-ing substances can be made available.”

Once again, emphasis is on the attempt, and it is madeclear that we must not forget the connection with thecosmos.

Potentization was referred to in the lectures, whilstthe process of rhythmical dilution was not mentionedbut assumed.Nor is there any reference to the difference


in action if a substance is merely diluted or genuinely po-tentized. Rather than giving an appreciation of the clas-sic potentization process, Steiner gave images, e.g. thatof spreading light. Here, he said, one had the models forhow the “qualitative and quantitative spread” of a sub-stance and its transformation happen in nature.The me-dicinal springs managed to“cancel out the aggregation,the coherence of matter”in a different way.The transfor-mation of substances in the human being was the typi-cal process. Foods were “potentized” in metabolism “allthe way to the upper human being”. Up to the 6th lec-ture, reference to potentization related to the first pillarof homoeopathy.

In the 7th lecture (27 March 1920) the “simile”—thesecond pillar—was also broadened, changed: Homoeo-pathic medicine was based on the constitution andsymptoms which the patient displayed in the here andnow.With chronic diseases, earlier symptoms were alsoincluded in establishing the drug picture and integratedin the “simile” of the medicine. New symptoms develop-ing during treatment meant that pharmacognosy mustbe repeated.Steiner said in this lecture that the simile inthe disease picture (the simile as picture of poisoning)might lie in phenomena which do not primarily have todo with the current disease but developed years earlier.The patient’s current symptoms were not necessarilythe key to finding the simile. Hahnemann had alsoknown that the proper simile lay far back in the past,butthis was hardly taken into account in current practice.The physician was called upon to know the origin of thedisease in earlier diseases and symptoms. (Surprisingexamples of this are given in Extending Practical Medici-ne (138) and also in the lectures.)

Correction of the simile continued in the 9th lecture(29 March 1920). Dr Scheidegger, leading homoeopathicphysician from Basel in whom Steiner set great hopes,was gently corrected:

“We shall see that one has to master all these things[developed in the preceding lectures] if we are to arriveat a proper evaluation of the law of similars which DrScheidegger spoke of so clearly yesterday. This law ofsimilars involves something of extraordinary impor-tance. But it will be necessary to base the law on allelements ... as we establish them now.”

Steiner was most cautious in making the correction,say-ing that the law of similars needed to be newly based onthe spiritual-scientific elements. This made it necessaryto master all the things which he had by then developedfrom spiritual-scientific knowledge.

In the 11th lecture (31 March 1920), emphasis was onthe need to build a bridge between the physiology andchemistry of that time. Reference was made to the ho-moeopath’s fear and danger of“turning mystical”. Stein-er spoke of the importance of the processes used in pro-ducing a medicine. The “ponderable state” of a sub-stance needed to be changed into the“opposite”and the“surrounding medium [thus] given a new configura-tion.” It is not certain if this referred to the media usedfor existing medicines, i.e. alcohol, water and lactose, or

the methods intended by the speaker. It must be takeninto account, however, that to date it has not provedpossible to demonstrate the changed“configuration”ofthe“surrounding medium” in a medicine potentized us-ing the classic media (139).

In the 11th lecture, we are finally given an abstractmathematical model for the qualitative potency stages.Three process directions at right angles to each other,with zero points in between. A further comparison wasadded to avoid any confusion with familiar views. Theaction of fluorescent light related to direct light like amore imponderable, homoeopathized quality to onethat was more ponderable.The ideal way of condensingsubstances via the organ sequence (heart) – kidney –liver – lung was then shown (see section 2.5).

The 15th lecture (4 April 1920) contains references to anumber of medicinal plants, their processes and their ac-tions on the human organism. Important developmen-tal gestures of the plants (Betula, Capsella, Cochlearia)were considered and related to constituents. Theprocesses in which of plant substances developed wasgiven weight, processes to which little importance at-taches in the homoeopathic method.

In the 17th lecture (6 April 1920) we read:“Among the things of not inconsiderable merit whichhave come up specifically in the homoeopathic tradi-tion of the 19th century is the fact that acceptance ofthe spirituality of external material substances waskept alive.”

This is important. Acceptance of spirituality is empha-sized. This should have led to the investigation of spiri-tuality in external material substances in homoeopathy.

Later, speaking of hypochondria, it was said that“wemust treat the hypochondriac by applying power-ful treatment to the lower human being, with medic-inal actions atmaterial level, i.e. in low potencies. If wefind that someone is of a livelymind or sanguinewhennot suffering from the disease, it will be necessary totake recourse to higher potencies from the beginning.”

With this last statement,a physician with homoeopath-ic orientation would be bound to feel solid ground underhis feet again – or did it refer to the quality stages of sub-stances with potentization within the human being?

In the 20th lecture (9 April 1920), the archetype of po-tentization is mentioned once more. Iron medicationmust be such that the iron

“gains a true relationshipwith the homoeopathizationwhich happens on each occasion in the [through the]upper human being ... For everything connected withour “lower human being” is connected with the earth-ly processes.”

The whole of the task is then gently hinted at in the fi-nal paragraphs:

“You can’t say that onewill therefore simply always besatisfied—please forgiveme for saying so—when tak-ing a critical look at homoeopathic medicine.”

With due caution he considered the equivocal nature ofhomoeopathic medicines, recommending that “the re-gion of a medicine” be narrowed down.


“This can only be done, however, by not only studyingwhat results when a medicine is given to a healthy orsick person,but also gradually endeavouring to consid-er the universe as a single whole.”

Steiner only touched lightly on the realization of his ownspiritual-scientific and esoteric impulse in this medicalcourse. In the 12th lecture he spoke of the need for a“meditative medical life” and “realistic self knowledge”.This was taken further in the 14th lecture, on EasterSaturday.Taking neoplasia as his example,he referred tothe need to think “repeated lives on earth” and making“clairvoyance part of one’s powers of judgement” inpreparation for developing “actual clairvoyance” (140).This would have been expanded further in the Easter lec-ture, speaking of the way in which supersensible in-sights may be gained.However,a delegation went to seeSteiner and complain about the“most difficult lectures”and so the approach previously developed was not tak-en further.There was just a careful reference to the mat-ter in the 15th lecture:

“I do think that one can go very far if one acquires apersonal trainingwhere processes in the naturalworldoutside and processes inside the humanbeing are seentogether.”

The inner training involves“personal training”and a wayof genuinely seeing man and world together. The needfor inner training was only referred to again 2V yearslater when he spoke to the physicians in the autumn of1922 (108).These esoteric preconditions for an anthropo-sophical medicine were then given a practical basis withthe sequence of 7 mantras in the course for young doc-tors (117) and the underlying ideas presented in Steiner’slast book (76) and in the “Van Leer paper” (149).

4.1.3 Physiology and Therapeutics (50)The title given to these lectures was chosen by L. Noll

who was meant to give them himself. He was unableto cope with the subject matter, however (141). Steinerspoke of the impulse to produce one’s own medicines,ashe had done in the 15th lecture of the first medical course(v.s.). In birch, salt is produced and deposited in the bark,whilst the leaves swell with the powers of protein. A“ra-tional view of therapeutic pathology and pathologicaltherapy” is demanded. This is possible “if one has thisway of taking [the organ functions]wholly into the func-tional aspect, and external knowledge [of plant sub-stances] which also moves in the direction of the func-tional.” He said that this functional aspect of plant sub-stances could be seen in the symptoms of poisoning,andone-sidedness of physiological processes in diseases.Later on he referred to “small” and “the smallest” dosesof phosphorus and sulphur as medicines.

Towards the end of the four lectures we find a state-ment of principle:

“You can see from this that the medical approach isgradually becoming rational, so that illustrative ex-amples are given how one truly sees the process in theinner human being and the process in the naturalworld outside ...”

The connection must be found between disease processin the inner human being and the medicine from thenatural world outside.

These lectures were probably quite specifically ad-dressed to Dr Noll. They do not support his homoeo-pathic habits but demand that we enter “into the realnature of the human being,constructive and destructiveprocesses in him,”that is, into the physiology.The patho-physiology in the organism must match the vitalprocesses of the medicinal plants.

The speaker’s hope that people would ask questionsas to the broadening of pharmaceutics is clearly evident.What needed to be done so that the functional processin birch truly could intervene in the functional process inthe human being?

4.1.4 IntroducingAnthroposophicalMedicine or Anthro-posophical Spiritual Science and Medical Therapy (29)

These lectures are concerned with“how the differentlevels of human existence are influenced by substancescoming from outside the human being ...which can thenbe put to medicinal use” (11 April 1921). It would be nec-essary to gain knowledge of essential human nature.How are “substances coming from outside the humanbeing” transformed into medicines, and how can wegain insight into the ways in which they act in the organ-ism? Almost all the themes considered in section 2.3 ofthis paper are considered in detail in these lectures.Theymust be given due consideration if we are to understandthe way natural substances relate to the spiritual natureof the human being. Let me recapitulate briefly.• Natural substances have a different effect in the pri-

mary, model body than in the individualized body, forin the latter the I-organization is able to penetratethe substances.

• The lower human being, with the ability to generatematter, must be distinguished from the upper hu-man being where matter is extant.

• The substances are taken up into the unstable pro-tein organization and only act on the stable proteinorgans in us through this.

• Conditional requirements for substances must bestudied separately for spirit-releasing and spirit-bind-ing organs.Basic physiological conditions for normal and patho-

logical functions were considered in connection withthe levels of human existence and substances (silicon,fluorine, calcium) in the lectures, as were the therapeu-tic functions of sulphur, phosphorus, arsenic, antimonyand “magnesium in any kind of preparation”. The sub-stances were to be used in “small amounts”, in suitable“dilution”. Mercury was to be given “in small doses, i.e.going in the direction of the homoeopathic”.

Aspects were mentioned that bring order into diag-nosis, for the homoeopathic

“symptom complexes involvemany,many details, andit calls for some skill to bring the individual symptomstogether, keep them together ... Thus is it necessary, ifwe want to judge a pathological situation rightly, to


keep together the symptomswhich occur in the upperhuman being. If you add just one symptom which, al-though in terms of location it does occur in the upperhuman being has in fact ... merely pushed its way upfrommetabolism,wewill be ...mistaken.”(13 April 1921)

In homoeopathy, there is to provision for this distinctionbetween an upper human being in spatial terms andone which is functional (etheric). Later on, reference ismade to various iron compounds: “the carbonate, Fer-rum muriaticum, [iron with] vegetable acids and the na-tive metal. It is indicated that these different iron saltsare qualitatively at different levels of homoeopathiza-tion (and definitely not due to being different decimal orcentesimal potencies) and thus relate to the levels of hu-man existence. We then read:

“Basically the human organism does not allow itselfto be dealt with allopathically but homoeopathizesthemetals itself,breaking themdownas itmoves fromdigestive system to head organism” (15 April 1921).

Both the law of similars and classic potentization werethus carefully corrected. Just the day before he said:

“Forwemust gain an idea of the real heart of the prob-lem.Themore deep-seated the deficit [functionally], ...the lower the potentization ...Themore you are able tosay that it is close to the head organization, it will be amatter of using higher potentization” (14 April 1921).

Four potency levels resulting as substances change in-side the human being are the premise throughout thelecture (section 2.4).

“For the sequence of stages in the humanbeing,whichis so important when considering treatment ...” (16April 1921)

is the basis for a functional diagnosis and the approachto treatment based on this.

The general rule concerning dosage also relates tothese four levels:

“The system of metabolism and limbs is most like thenatural world outside. If something is amiss there ...one must use the low potentizations. As soon aswe come to the middle human being, we must usemediumdosages.But as soon aswewant the action tocome from the head ... wemust work with the highestpotencies ... the highest potentizations.”

This, he said, was “a guide for potentization” (16 April1921). (Anticipating, let me way that a rule which soundsthe opposite was given in a later lecture (96))

A summing-up came in the 8th lecture, following re-peated efforts to exemplify the lower and upper func-tional human being.

“Substances which in large quantities are destructivein the upper human being, prove constructive actions,coming from the lower human being, in small quanti-ties, diluted ... Substances which in large quantitiesprove pathogenic in the lower human being will insmall quantities restore health, and vice versa.This re-vision of the homoeopathic rulewill alonemake it pos-sible to settle the dispute [between homoeopathy andallopathy]” (18 April 1921).

Nothing was said about the theoretical or practical stepsto be taken to achieve this revision and settle the disputebetween the empirical, critical approach on the onehand and homoeopathic thinking in images.

It was only in the 7th lecture of the second medicalcourse (142) that Steiner addressed pharmaceuticalmethods and medicinal preparations. Initially referenceis limited to the familiar methods of decoction or infu-sion. Then came the first mention in lectures of a newpharmaceutical impulse. Metals were to be taken to thelevel of life to improve the medicinal action. The medic-inal plant was to be fed metal solutions and a specialcompost was then to be made of the harvested vegeta-tion. The medicinal plant grown in this could be used tomake the medicine. This, Steiner said, enhanced its effi-cacy. Homoeopathization of the medicine was to beachieved by means of vegetabilization in the plant itself.The qualitative step into the sphere of life which in theorganism comes between heart and lung (section 2.4) ishere taken in the medicinal plant.The metal process wasto be taken into life to activate the constructive streamof the “invisible human being” directly.

The suggestion to vegetabilize metals was the sec-ond practical proposal for new pharmaceutical process-es. The first had been the flow machine. Notes from apharmacists”meeting with Steiner in Stuttgart on 8 Feb-ruary 1923 (passed on by Degenaar, though he did not in-clude this in his Case Records), show that the method offeeding medicinal plants with metals was discussed indetail with the physicians and pharmacists. Plantsnamed in this talk wereUrtica for iron,Equisetum for sil-icon, Bryophyllum for mercury, and cacti, stonecrop andlemon balm for copper.

The 8th lecture concluded with question-and-answersession. None of the questions referred to pharmaceu-tics. The listeners were not open to this aspect of “ex-tended medicine”.

The 9th lecture, in which the second medical courseand the eurythmy therapy course (57) running parallelto it were summed up did not touch on the issue of med-icines.

The theory of signatures from the past—and hencealchemical and esoteric medicine were mentioned inconnection with cinnabar (15 April 1921).The approach tothe theory of signatures was more distanced than it hadbeen in the first course. A correction made was the fol-lowing:

“But external appearancewill only explain anything ifone takes an inner view of it.”

All in all, Steiner’s views on homoeopathy and alchemywere clearly more reserved than in the first course.

4.1.5 The Anthroposophical Approach to MedicineThe lecture course, in another translation called Fun-

damentals of Anthroposophical Medicine (56) had to begiven from necessity.The lectures should have been giv-en by L. Noll and perhaps also F. Husemann. “It was notreally my intention to speak at this medical meeting ...”The speaker repeatedly addressed an audience used to


thinking as scientists. He considered the axioms of nat-ural science and asked for many different series of exper-iments. At the same time—and for the first time withinhis medical lectures—he referred to the need for innertraining, developing imagination, inspiration and intu-ition as the basis for a renewal of medical and pharma-ceutical) thinking and work.

Up to the 4th lecture, reference is only made to famil-iar medicinal plants and simple substances (sulphur,phosphorus) and metals. At the very end he spoke of anew pharmaceutical goal which was that the processesof medicinal plants were to be recreated in a syntheticmethod to make the medicines more effective. It shouldbe possible to synthesize new, more effective prepara-tions if one knew the physiology of plants. The sugges-tion that one should imitate the order of substances ina known medicinal plant and thus improve efficacy wasonly presented in full detail in the London lectures (sec-tion 6.1) almost a year later (section 4.2).

This was the third step towards a renewal of pharma-ceutics. The flow process for Viscum at around the firstcourse and the vegetabilization of metals in the secondcourse were now followed by the new synthesis of veg-etable processes to produce medicines that were moreeffective than the original vegetable process itself.Noth-ing is known of physicians or pharmacists asking ques-tions concerning these new methods.

4.1.6 Cautious assessment—Old pharmaceuticalprocesses (alchemy and homoeopathy) and seedsfor a broadening of pharmaceutics

In principle, Steiner considered a future spiritual-sci-entific medicine independent of established homoeopa-thy and conventional medicine from as early as 1905. Inthe medical courses he gave from 1920 to 1922 he pro-gressively changed the concepts inherent in ho-moeopathization for physicians who were thinking andworking homoeopathically.The way in which he took upthe subject, avoiding the term “potentization”, showsthat his audience were meant to move from their habit-ual ideas to understanding the archetype of potentiza-tion.

The first tenet in homoeopathy is that a substancewhich has produced the symptoms of poisoning inhealthy subjects becomes medicinal if diluted and suc-cussed in stages (potentization).The resulting medicineis said to have greater powers than a natural substancethat is merely diluted.Hahnemann’s own attitude to theissue has been aptly summed up by Meyer 2006.

The second tenet in homoeopathy is similia similibuscurentur. It refers to the connection between patientand natural substance. The toxic symptoms of the sub-stance in a healthy subject and the signs and symptomsof the patient (perceptible symptom, modality and con-stitution) are related.

These two pillars of homoeopathy were cautiouslychanged and extended in the lectures given from 1920to 1922. Looking at this from the distance we have today,it was probably F. Husemann, 33 at the time, who was

asked to bring together “scientific accuracy and artisticimagination”(109).Were the many references to“neces-sary doctorate theses” and scientific elaboration reallyaddressed only to the participating students? Who, ifnot he, could be asked to promote and follow these in-vestigations with an ability to see the whole and withexpert knowledge? Noll was expected to write a “vade-mecum”. Degenaar (110) has passed on records of somediscussions on the vademecum in Stuttgart—the notescame from F. Husemann. (As far as I know there are nonotes on the vademecum issue by L. Noll.) The spiritualteacher’s hope for collaboration in taking a new, pro-gressive step beyond conventional medicine and ho-moeopathy and towards an“intuitive medicine”were di-rected mainly towards F. Husemann and L. Noll. Thiswould also have included issues relating to a broaderpharmacology.

Within the teaching of homoeopathy, the issue ofthe material constituents of a medicament is not ofprime importance. The pharmaceutical process is de-signed to overcome this material aspect. Similarly thequestion as to a suitable medium for potentizationwhich would make reconfiguring into higher quality lev-els possible through the stages of its own transforma-tion has hardly ever been asked. Alcohol and lactose arestill used as the medium for most preparations. The Rhpreparations made by Weleda and Wala methods avoidalcohol, using fermentation processes that are made totake different specific courses. These were originallysuggested by Steiner (see section 1.3), and the actualmethod was used in alchemical medicine in the past(33). Fermentation of a plant extract achieves a degreeof stabilization for individual substances in the extract.At the same time substances are transformed, precipi-tated or released in gaseous form. (The problem of par-tial lectin degradation on fermentation of mistletoeextracts can only be mentioned in passing here.)

In the literature on potentization, the authors large-ly base themselves on the first medical course (111–114).Their evaluation does not take so much account of thefurther development of the pharmaceutical task, whichSteiner explored step by step in the courses that fol-lowed, making no mention of his proposals to analysethe functional aspect of the plant substances or to im-prove efficacy by means of flow processes. A talk whichSteiner had with Dr Maier, the physicist, on 20 April 1920shows the expectations Steiner had of the pharmacistsand physicians. Maier ran the Stuttgart research labora-tory for a time. The talk came less than two weeks afterthe first medical course. Steiner handed him a hand-written page of proposals for research which he consid-ered of prime importance. Evidently none of the physi-cians attending the course had said anything about hav-ing plans for research. In part the proposals relate clear-ly to the first medical course. One was:

“Investigate plant poisons and non-toxic plant sub-stances and compare their powers, especially theirpowers of configuration.”


Following that talk with Steiner, Dr Maier noted the fol-lowing:“Details of the method of investigation:To plantpoisons and non-toxic plant substances, and above allmixtures of the two, add solutions (in weak doses) andlet crystals crystallize out from these. The plant sub-stances, or mixtures of them, will cause certain modifi-cations in the crystals.Here the transition from the pow-er to configure mineral crystals to the power to config-ure plants” (155). Analysis of the plant constituents wasrequired, both of poisons and of non-toxic secondaryconstituents. Plant extracts and/or individual sub-stances were also to be investigated for their biologicalactions with regard to their powers of configuration.

Neither F. Husemann, who was more inclined to thinkscientifically,nor L.Noll,who was tending towards theos-ophy and homoeopathy in his thinking, asked how natu-ral substances could be processed into medicinal agents.

Pelikan (111) suggested that the action of a potentizedmedicine depended on the number of potentizationsteps and not the concentration of original substance.His exact and detailed investigations, using growth ex-periments, resulted in correlating graphs. There is stillneed,however much we appreciate those pioneering in-vestigations, to establish how these biological actionscan be applied to medicinal actions.

It is not our remit here to establish the efficacy of po-tentized medicine. We are only concerned with how wemay follow the physiological actions of a medicine in theorganism in our thoughts.The separate investigation ofplant poison and non-toxic plant substances is mademore difficult today because of the vast number of sec-ondary constituents. Pedersen (116) suggests an “ele-ment cross” to bring order into this multiplicity.

The important issue in anthroposophical pharmacyis:“How can a medicine reach the constructive stream ofthe“invisible human being’at the level of the etheric,as-tral or I organization?” In the lectures given from 1920 to1922, Steiner’s presentation of the homoeopathic princi-ples grew increasingly more distant and his relationshipto natural-scientific issues more distinct. He no longerreferred to his own investigations relating to alchemicaltheories. Instead,he postulated that the live processes inthe plant and those in the human organism must be ap-propriately seen together. This is an matter for pharma-ceutical science.

In brief, the preconditions for more broadly-basedpharmaceutics might be summed up as follows:1 The stages of transformation between lower andupper human being as the archetype of ho-moeopathization (potentization).2 Substances within the human being show commonaspects between “active principle” on the one handand an“active medium”in which this is embedded onthe other.Here we have the archetype for the connec-tion between the actions of individual substances inthe organism and in their given medium.

3The close similibus of homoeopathy must be broad-ened to give the relationship, open to the spirit, be-tween nature and human being. A relationship be-tween macrocosm and microcosm seen in real termspresupposes knowledge of the pharmacology of amedicine and of human physiological processes inhealth and sickness.4 Proposed new pharmaceutical methods were:a) A flow process for Viscum, Cardiodoron®, Choleo-doron® and Myodoron® (no longer in use).The old ex-pression “push through mixture with special struc-ture” traditional for the manufacture of Hepatodor-on®, may also be seen as a flow problem.b) Vegetabilization of metals using suitable medici-nal plants.c) Neosynthesis of a medicinal-plant process usingsuitable substances.d) Producing mirrors. The method was first men-tioned in 1911 (20). It was taken up again in 1923 (sec-tion 4.2.1.2). The method has been considered in de-tail by Simon (131).5No distinction made between dilution in stages andthe classic method of potentization.6 As far as one can see, Steiner made no distinctionbetween “potentization”, “homoeopathization”, “dy-namizing”,“vegetabilization”–“animalization”,on theone hand and“smallest entities”,“high potentization”,“high dilution”,“smallest doses”, etc. on the other.

4.2 Developments towards a“broadening ofpharmaceutics”4.2.1 London lectures on 2 and 3 September 1923

Anyone familiar with Rudolf Steiner’s lectures will re-alize that those given in Holland and England between1922 and 1924, and especially the medical lectures givenin 1923 and 1924, have a style of their own. They are fullof hope and clearly looking ahead—they have an air ofcourage and purpose. It is evident that there the teacherwas less hampered by the personal or social concerns ofhis audience. In the two London lectures of 1923, theseed was sown for the Medical Section (58), at the sametime outlining the methodology for developing a phar-maceutics and medicine broadened out of the resourcesof anthroposophy.

Below, those lectures are presented, with brief com-ments.

4.2.1.1 Introduction in the lecture of 2 September 1923The speaker emphasized from the beginning that he

did“not exactly enjoy talking about this part of our spir-itual-scientific movement”. What mattered to him wasto “produce medicines which will be truly effective ...The major guidelines are indeed gained from spiritual vi-sion”, to be able to formulate natural substances andprocesses exactly. This, he said, could bridge the gap be-tween pathology and treatment: “Pathology is some-thing today which take be taken up and taken some dis-tance further in every one of its points.”He asked that inmedical science


“one accurately understands the connections that ex-ist between substances—between the way they func-tion within the human organism and outside both innature and indeed also in the processes which can beused in the laboratory.”

Reference was made to the establishment of the scien-tific institutions and L. Kolisko’s publications on splenicfunction on the one hand and the activity of smallest en-tities on the other:

“So far there has essentially been no exact research inthis field, only homoeopathic belief.”The work on splenic function has never gained ac-

ceptance. L. Kolisko has described the way it developedand the conflict with the Stuttgart physicians which fol-lowed (62). She had found“elements”unknown to her inthe blood of cows examined in connection with foot andmouth disease.Steiner called them“splenic hormone”or“regulators”. To my knowledge no one else has ever de-scribed them. The surprisingly positive value whichSteiner attached to the results of animal experiments(“innocent vivisection”) cannot be recognized today.Apart from anything else, they could not now be repeat-ed for ethical reasons.The paper on the efficacy of small-est entities is, on the other hand, generally accepted to-day to have marked the beginning of the investigationof such entities. It will depend on the nature of the en-quiry if her details concerning optimum succussiontimes stand up to critical evaluation (99). In this passage,Steiner noticeably avoids using the term“potentization”with the claims made for this on the basis of homoeopa-thy. He spoke of “dilution of substances”,“smallest enti-ties” or “smallest quantities”. Extremely small amountsof substances—perhaps in form of ultra trace ele-ments—are effective in biological systems. Referencewas made to the powerful action of tiny traces of Ca++

in the process of configuring the organism (section 2.6).

4.2.1.2 Example of antimony in lecture of2 September 1923

Clear distinction must be made between the “upperprocesses” of the neurosensory system and the “lowerprocesses” in metabolism in the human organism, for

“one sphere [in the human organism] ... needs to betreated with larger quantities, but the other sphere ...with minimal quantities.”

A bit later, the subject was taken up again:“More detailed insight into the human organismshows ... that,whenwe are dealingwith the neurosen-sory organization, we are essentially dealing with theaction of different substances in substantial amountsin the human organism ...Whenwe are dealingwith ametabolic process ... a movement process, we have toconsider not the substantial level of somethingwe findin the surroundings but the changes happening in it,the processes it goes through.”

“Antimony in substantial dosage” is needed to achievean effect in the neurosensory system. For the“motor”ormetabolic system “it will be a matter of subjecting theantimony to processes—combustion,oxidation—where

the antimony turns to smoke and the smoke precipi-tates to form a mirror ... We must consider the process-es—which we either bring about by ourselves or whichnature brings about—as the healing principle for theprocesses in metabolism and movement.”

At first sight this goes against the familiar potencyrule given in the first and second medical courses. Herewe’ll limit ourselves to the polar opposite statement,not going into the different points of view.

Treatment with“antimony in substantial dosage”willhave to take account of the toxicity of the metal. For usein the“lower”human being, a (fourth) new pharmaceu-tical process was introduced to give the substanceprocess quality. The antimony was to precipitate on asurface. Different approaches are used as to whetherthis mirror production should be by means of smoke orvapour.

Naturally occurring processes were to be copied“cor-rectly”,and the process should then be active in the med-icine.We can expect“the medicine to be successful,withthe processes correctly done”. The process was to takethe medicine closer to the human ether body, with thesubstances taken to a“state closer to life”. No indicationwas given as to dilution or to potentization in the clas-sic sense.

The pharmaceutical process of metal mirrors was de-scribed by Pelikan in Zu den Urangaben fuer die Metall-spiegelpraeparate (447; 27 May 1967). Daems (101), Titze(102, 103) and Zwiauer (104) wrote of the problems in de-veloping the method and the antimony action.The 3rd in-stalment of Heilmittel fuer typische Krankheiten (120)was also devoted to this medicine. All were more con-cerned with the idea and not with investigations to de-termine the action. So far it has not been taken into ac-count that the amorphous modifications of Stibium inthe thin mirror surface may well be processed different-ly in the organism than the relatively thicker layers of thecrystalline substance.

4.2.1.3 Example of Gencydo® in lecture of2 September 1923

If insight is gained into the polar opposite process or-ders of the upper and lower human being, the organismwill be understood “in terms of both substance andfunction” and it will be possible to relate pathology totherapy.

The second step possible in principle in pharmaceu-tics was then the manufacture of Gencydo®.We will hereconcentrate on the pharmaceutical aspect. A ripeningprocess for fruit that was directed inward was to be theraw material, using lemon juice on the one hand andsubstances from leathery skin (quince) on the other.

“If [using these substances] one creates the processwhich is the opposite of fructification in the laborato-ry, one is making it medicinal.” The process was char-acterized further:“We use not only elements which inlaboratory terms must be seen as chemical ... but thedynamics of the process.We seek to imitate these dy-


namics in our methods, and with this draw forth themedicinal factors from nature.”

No questions were asked as to the form which thesemethods was to take. Steiner did say to the workmenbuilding the Goetheanum:“It really is terribly simple,ourmedicine [for hayfever]” (105). As evident from the sen-tence which followed, this did, however, refer to the ac-tion in the organism rather than the method of prepa-ration. The 20th chapter of Extending Practical Medicine,entitled “Typical Medicines”—a chapter written by DrWegman—includes no reference to the required phar-maceutical process of “imitating these dynamics in ourmethods.”

Steiner was here probably also referring to a flowprocess similar to the one he spoke of the next day (3Sept. 1923) with regard to mistletoe.The task Steiner sethimself was to configure a medicine of two components,using technological means to achieve a dynamic (en-livened) state which could serve the processes of life inthe organism directly.

The descriptions of Gencydo® given in the followingpublications contain no reference to a dynamizationtechnology: Korrespondenzblaetter fuer Aerzte No. 21,January 1955,special issue of the same in 1996,andWele-da’sArzneimittelbrief Gencydo® of 1995.Pedersen wrote:“It would be pseudoscientific to try and explain the effi-cacy of Gencydo® on the basis of the pharmacologicalactions of the constituents” (106). This may apply to thepresent-day product. Yet if I apply my experiences withthe Viscum problems to the details given for Gencydo®I have more confidence in Rudolf Steiner’s suggestions.The substantial processes of the two plants, the patho-physiology of the disease and the technical methodswhich bring the dynamics into the preparation must bereconsidered and tested.This could lead to a more effec-tive medicine, with scientifically demonstrable efficacy.

4.2.1.4 Example of Cichorium in lecture of2 September 1923

The third proposal for new pharmaceutical methodstakes the process originally mentioned on 28 Oct. 1922up again.

“It is nevertheless a good thing, even if one is able tomanufacture a preparation synthetically ... to knowhow this is put together synthetically by nature herself,in a way, in a particular plant. One can then also learna great deal about synthesis in manufacture ...” (107)

This absolutely new concept of neosynthesis, taking amedicinal plant for the model, did not elicit questionsfrom the physicians and pharmacists in 1922. More thana year later it was presented in detail to an open-mind-ed London audience, taking Cichorium as the example.

“There are lay practitioners who use straight Cichori-um intybus for digestive disorders. This can certainlyprove effective,but ... successwill only rarely be lasting,for the process in Cichorium intybus is bound to theplant’s instability. Introduced into the human organ-ism it is subject to change and does not stay itself.”

The suggestion was made to synthesize a medicine fromsilica and alkaline salts,

“in such a way that there is a loose connection ... notreally chemical but merely by reduction to a powderand provision of resinous binding agents ... a subtle,natural adhesion.”

Silica and alkaline salts are not to be chemically bound,yet synthesized to make a new whole.

“It is a matter, in what we do in the laboratory, to imi-tate all the time what the plant is doing .... It is simplyamatter of not being able to get ... the right result withmere herbalism, for the process in the plant is in turndestroyedwhen introduced into the organism in someway or other.”

The“lay practitioners”and“mere herbalism”were clear-ly held in low regard here. Anthroposophical medicinewas to stay away from this.The plant was characterizedin its material processes.The terms “silica” and “alkalinesalts” are merely representative here and in all relevantpassages, reflecting the knowledge of the constituentsat that time.An important point made was that the sub-stances in the plant themselves were too unstable afterharvest, they did not stay the same. They were takenhold of by the processes which are designed to destroyfoods, so that there can be no long-term effect.The spir-itual investigator refers to the need to face the tasks offuture pharmacokinetics.The dynamics in the plant ma-terial, which analysis will reveal, must be resynthesizedin the pharmaceutical laboratory to achieve an ade-quately consistent and lasting effect.

This was to be done by taking the individual sub-stance into a state of cohesion which we would call col-loidal today. Steiner described this without using theterm, which was created by Graham in 1861 (117). Theprocess in which a medicinal agent is taken close to thevital processes in human beings (“dynamized”) is expen-sive and demanding. The statement made with refer-ence to Cichorium that there were lay practitioners whoused straight Cichorium intybusno doubt also applies tomany other medicinal plants.Cichorium is merely a typ-ical example of the need to broaden pharmaceutics inthe field of anthroposophical pharmacy.

W. Cloos and G. Grohmann devoted themselves ex-tensively to developing a resynthesis of medicinal plantcompositions. Cloos spoke of the need to work with“de-veloping and not developed nature” (118). He had devel-oped five preparations at the time (Alkali comp. for Ci-chorium, Solutio ferri comp. forUrtica leaves,Solutio sac-chari comp. for chamomile root, Solution silicea comp.for Equisetum shoots, and Calcium silicicum comp. forArnica root).Kaufmann referred to this. In addition to theabove,Kalium chloratum comp.was developed for anise,and Kalium sulfuricum comp. for Anagallis. He ended bysaying “that the future will call for many more develop-mental steps” (119).

We also still have the theoretical and experimentalpreconditions before us.The model of a medicinal plantwas to be developed in such a way in neosynthesis thatthe produce was “dynamized” in the synthesis and tak-


en to the level of life, giving improved efficacy. The “de-velopmental impulse” of individual secondary con-stituents of a plant can be described in detail today. Inthe plant, synthesis proceeds from protein-type precur-sors to substances which can be more and more clearlyidentified.The chemical substances Steiner spoke of (sil-ica, alkaline salts and the binding agent) are end pointsin a developmental process that started from protein-type macromolecules. These pathways for synthesiswere still completely unknown in 1923.

4.2.1.5 Example of Kephalodoron® in lecture of2 September 1923

Before we come to the next example of a pharmaceu-tical process, let us remember that Steiner saw the ar-chetype of homoeopathization in the human organism.Foods coming from the outside world have to be trans-formed in stages (section 2.4). In the first stage of ho-moeopathization the material is taken close to the hu-man ether body. It is therefore approximated to en-livened matter and so made available. At the secondstage the material is further refined and comes close toastral body function. It becomes a vehicle for and akin tosoul qualities. The third stage achieves openness to Ifunctions.Steiner used the terms dynamizing,vegetabi-lizing, vitalizing for this and no longer the term ho-moeopathizing used earlier.The term potentization as atarget in pharmacy is not mentioned at all.

In the London lecture, the idea of Kephalodoron®(Bidor®) was developed in the next example. Equisetumwas the model; its processes were to be studied. Againsilica, sulphates and a binding agent were to be used tosynthesize the model. Up to this point the manufactur-ing process was in principle the same as for Cichorium,probably aiming to achieve a colloidal state in both cas-es.Then a further step was proposed for Kephalodoron®.The process sequence was to be enhanced, for the aimwas to address not only processes that sustained life inthe human being.The substance was now to be“animal-ized”.

“But with this, Equisetum does not yet help one totreatmigraine.For ... it becomes evident that certain vi-tal processes in the human organism are similar tovegetable processes,yet also differ radically from them.It is therefore a matter of not just taking up the Equi-setum process directly ... but to animalize it first ... Oneuses silica ..., sulphur. Binding is achieved not onlywiththe other binding agents, which play a subordinaterole, ... but by bringing in the iron process. The wholeEquisetum arv. process will then have been animal-ized.”

Again we may assume that with silica, sulphur and thebinding agents, Steiner was referring to the end point ina process and not the raw materials for a medicament.

As far as I know, the suggestion to “animalize” amedicament does not appear anywhere else in Steiner’sworks or lectures. No reference was made here to thespirits of wine and the honey which are used in the man-ufacture. Does the mention of “other binding agents,

which play a subordinate role” refer to these two sub-stances?

The problem as to what “animalization”might meanis not considered in the 20th chapter of Extending Practi-cal Medicine, written by Wegman (76), nor did Pelikanrefer to it in the first instalment of Heilmittel fuer typi-sche Krankheiten (120).Wolff (121, 122) and Titze (123, 124)also made no mention of this. Engel (125) did say thatiron was intended to serve the astral body,but did not gointo the matter.The obvious interpretation, to my mind,is that“animalization”referred to a pharmaceutical goal,is that the medicament would act constructively at thelevel of the astral body. This does not, of course, tell uswhat form the manufacturing process might take. Howcan medicines be processed so that they are not only dy-namized but also animalized and enter into the con-structive processes of the “invisible human being”?

Kephalodoron was proposed in close connection withalchemical processes in 1920.This passage from 1923 nolonger has anything of that early idea.The Equisetumde-velopment process was to be neosynthesized and alsotaken to the level of night-time astral-body activity withthe help of iron.

4.2.1.6 Summary of first London lecture (2 Sept. 1923)Steiner used terms like “vitalize, dynamize”, etc.

rather than “potentize” with its homoeopathic back-ground. In the first transformation stage, the substancesare taken into a state where they come close to the liv-ing human organism. They are to be similar to life.

1st example: antimony.Through the smoke (or evapo-ration) the single substance is condensed into a mirror,possibly changing the conformation to take it close tothe vital processes.

2nd example: Gencydo®. Two vegetable substancesare taken to a new order (aggregation process) in flowprocesses, resulting in greater efficacy. The intentionprobably was to change the relationship of medium toactive principles or their conformation by adding a sec-ond group of substances and so make the therapeuticprocess more effective and lasting. Substances whichwere end products were to be taken closer to the processstage by means of flow processes.

3rd example: Cichorium. Insight into the inherent dy-namics of a medicinal plant makes it possible to resyn-thesize the active processes. This was to achieve betterand more lasting efficacy than with simple plant ex-tracts.Reference to use of a binding agent indicates thatthe aim was to achieve a colloidal state for the medici-nal composition. The trend is discernible: Innovativepharmaceutical research to define protein-type“bindingagents” and the route of synthesis for the primary andsecondary plant substances, using these to produce amedicine which acted constructively in the ether body.

4th example: Kephalodoron®. Neosynthesis of theEquisetum process was the aim, also involving the ani-malization process. The latter to be achieved by appro-priate treatment of the iron during the neosynthesis.


Again, Steiner spoke of the need for a binding agent, re-ferring to a colloidal state for the future Kephalodoron®.

The aim was always to produce medicines which theliving organism could take up and process and whichhad a long-term action that would be better and longer-lasting than could be achieved with a purely herbal med-icine. This calls for knowledge of the processes in whichthe constituents of the medicinal plants develop and ofhow to make them into medicines.

The London lectures in 1923 gave the first systematicdescription of the pharmaceutical processes which wereto be part of a more broadly based medicine and phar-

maceutics. The clear progression of stages can be seenin the four examples, with the vegetabilization of met-als the only method not discussed.

4.2.1.7 Second London lectureThe pharmaceutical processes were no longer to the

fore in the lecture which followed (65). Remarkable cer-tainty was shown in describing the first results thenavailable. Unger’s machine was working, dynamizationof the two separately harvested and processed mistletoeextracts brought to a first realization. This was the firsttime that a new pharmaceutical process was made anessential part of the relationship between medicamentand disease. It was now possible to speak of results andnot only theories. The connection between mistletoe,which had to be subjected to the newly developed flowprocess, and cancer could thus be demonstrated for thefirst time again since 1920.

“If we take the principle active in themistletoe processand give it directly, it will change toomuch,as I showedyesterday with reference to other things. Because ofthis,we now seek to process the principlewhich lives inmistletoe development, using a highly sophisticatedmachinewhich develops a centrifugal and radial force,... Construction was far from easy. So one is actuallyreconfiguring the principle active in the mistletoeprocess into a totally different aggregate process. Thismakes it possible to use the tendencies inmistletoe de-velopment in a more concentrated form than themistletoe process itself shows today, when it hasgrown decadent.”

He added that the laboratory process with the cen-trifuge was almost complete (see section 1.3).

The two vegetable substances (extracted from sum-mer and winter harvests) were to be brought together insuch a way in a new industrial process that the medici-nal principles would be more effective. A new processwas hinted at which would change the substances andtake them closer to a live state. In relation to the me-thodical progression of stages in the first lecture, thetreatment of Viscum here corresponds to the proposalfor Gencydo.Two different extracts were to be processedindustrially to give greater efficacy. The subject ofchanged aggregate processes or structural change wasthus touched on again (section 1.3).

4.2.2 Lectures in Penmaenmawr, The Hague, Arnhem4.2.2.1 The two Penmaenmawr lectures

In the first of the two lectures given in Penmaen-mawr (93) antimony served as an example again to

“find the relationship of the medicine taken from na-ture and its powers to the powers of gaining healthor causing disease in the inner human being.”

Steiner again developed the polarity between “upperand lower human being”—here called antimonizing andalbuminizing powers. As late as 1921 (54) he would referto the polarity between developing and developed statewithout characterizing the developing state in a sub-stance. Now a protein—albumin—was introduced asprocess quality polar to antimony,a developed state.The


Table 5:The four levels of ‘typical medicines’ (section 5.3)

1. Plant-based typical medicines,w. ref. to pharmaceutical methods

“Typicalmedicine”

Gencydo®

Hepatodoron®

Cardiodoron®

Choleodoron®

Myodoron®

Viscum alb.

Dermatodoron®

Digestodoron®

Menodoron®

Plants used

CitrusCydonia (?)

Vine leavesStrawberry leaves

Primula,Hyoscamus Onopordon

Chelidonium, pumpkin,Curcuma

Plantago, PrimulaHyoscyamus

Winter and summer extracts

Solanum dulcamaraLysimachia nummularia

Dryopteris filix-masPolypodium vulg.Salix alba purpureaPhyllitis scolopendrium

Origanum maj. fruct.& herb.Quercus, Cortex siccaCapsella bursa-past.Achillea millefoliaUrtica dioica

R. Steiner’s suggestionsfor pharmaceutical andtechnical methods

“Dynamize usingtechnical means”

“Push through” mixture withspecial structure

Flow processes

Flow processes withdrops and trickling

Flow processes

Flow processes with dropsand trickling

?

?

?

2. Typical mineral medicines and the recommended ‘binding agents’

“Typicalmedicine”

Kephalodoron

Alkali comp.

Kalium chlor.comp.

Scleron

Renodoron

Plants used

Equisetum,animal.w. iron

Cichorium int.

Pimpinellaanisum

Suggestions

Silica, sulphurIron

SilicaAlkal. salts

Iron & salts

Lead, honeySugar

Silica (flint)Crab stone

Binding agents

Honey & wine

Resinousbinding agent

Vegetablemucilage

Honey ?

Suitable pharm.processes.Wine vinegar

3. Vegetabilized metals

4.Metal mirror production (met. prep.)

development of a substance was thus connected withthe protein problem. Silica was then mentioned as amedicine. Silica is effective

“if one exhibits this medicinal agent in the right way.Depending on the nature of the secondary symptoms,onemust add other substances,but in themainweareconcerned with the principle inherent in the processwhich produces silica” (see section 2.3.2).

Phosphorus was then described in a similar way. Again asecond principle would be needed (calcium,copper, iron)to address different forms of the disease. Steiner spokeof the need for research, saying

“We do not work in an amateurish way, and do not re-ject today’s science.We merely take it further.”

The subject was taken further in the second Penmaen-mawr lecture (143) Steiner spoke of Mrs Kolisko’s poten-cy experiments:

“One is able to see how lower potencies, dilutions,make seedlings grow differently and how the highestdilutionsmake the seedling grow fastest, i.e. stimulatevitality most. It has therefore been possible to split upthe purely material aspect, making the actual spiritu-ality in mere matter show itself. For if you do not splitmatter into atoms,which is what atomists do, but letsits functions, its powers take effect, you demonstratethe good will to fill matter itself with spirit ... In futureone will, of course, have to know where substanceshave to be applied directly in an allopathic way, andwhere theymust be used in dilution, so that they influ-ence the humanbeing,and especially the humanetherbody, in the right way ... In future it will be possible toestablish the boundaries accurately—here youhave touse the allopathic approach, here the homoeopathicapproach ...”

The physician should always decide afresh when to usethe more or less toxic substance in its finished state andwhen to use medicines which thanks to the pharmaceu-tical process serve the evolving process state in the hu-man being.

The inherent scientific nature of spiritual-scientificresearch findings leads to the further development of“today’s science”. Pure substances (antimony, phospho-rus) were to be altered by binding them to different part-ners; other substances were to be added in to differen-tiate the action of the pure substance so that actions canbe achieved at the different levels of existence. This willbe possible when process qualities that are polar oppo-sites—here called “albuminizing” and “antimonizing”,have been integrated into the manufacturing process.Again Steiner was considering the possibility of triturat-ing quartz so finely that its functions and powers couldtake effect. It was not a matter of splitting the atoms,but to split the material aspect by trituration.The quartzwas to have a direct influence on the ether body in theorganism (section 4.3.1).

4.2.2.2 The two lectures given in The HagueThe two lectures given in The Hague (126) started

with a sentence outlining a programme: “It is certainly

possible to take what anthroposophy has to offer andcase a light on pharmaceutical preparations ...” The de-velopment of medicines must be seen in close connec-tion with clinical practice and research using accuratemethods. Examples given were the work of Dr L. Kolisko(127, 128) on splenic function and potency experiments.He went on to say:

“You will not expect me to defend the widely disputedfield of homoeopathy in its relationship to allopathy;this is not what I have in mind. For I know how muchof the usual homoeopathic views are amateurish andof a lay nature. It cannot be denied,however, that sub-stances in high dilution can have the most far-reach-ing actions, even in the external physical field.”

Steiner then referred to the inhalation of substancesand the action of baths, saying that here, too, very smallquantities were undeniably having an effect.“And it tru-ly is not the case that the usual effect of material dosesdevelops, but the function which lives in the substancesenters into the medium.” Substances in high dilutionare also effective medicines if in the right medium. Hisview of homoeopathy emerged even more clearly: “Andwith this [the potency experiments], the small part, thesection of the practice which is misused in homoeopa-thy has been elevated to the rank of a field of exact re-search.” The dilution experiments showed a distinct bi-ological action.As to which parts of homoeopathic prac-tice were referred to as being misused, this is open to allkinds of interpretation.

The medicinal plant serving once again as an exam-ple was Equisetum. The silica and sulphates it containsplay an important role. Steiner then said:

“Ifwith our spiritually developed insightwe are now ina position to perceive the specific nature of the com-pound ...we find that there is a functional relationship…But it is better nownot to use Equisetumas such,andthis is what is special about our method of manufac-turingmedicines, for the actions are there in the plant,evidently so, but not very lasting. If we endeavour tostudy the function relationship between silica and sul-phur and then seek to imitate it in the medicament,this makes it possible for us … to develop more power-ful effects on the human organism for what essential-ly is an inorganic preparation … than if one were touse the plant as it is. This is really the essence of ourmedicines.”

The“essence of our medicines” thus lies in neosynthesisof the active plant processes.Medicines for hayfever andthe plants Cichorium and Anise were then considered ina similar way. “We could relieve the blood of these dis-ease processes by using a preparation which recreatesthe connection between particular mucilage and iron inanise.” Insight into the pathological function sequencesin the organism and knowledge of the vital processes ina medicinal plant can allow a prognosis to be made forthe medicinal action. The relationship between the me-dicinal substances then needs to be neosynthesized tointensify the action.To develop a medicine, we must actfrom real insight into the disease process.“We must first


have a rational pathology, must know the diseaseprocess.”

In the next lecture, more weight was given to themetals (lead, silver, iron, antimony). The rationale forScleron®,composed of lead,honey and sugar,developed.Silver, if “introducing using the necessary bindingagents, the necessary additives in subtle dosage”,can ac-tion on the eliminatory processes.

4.2.2.3 The three lectures given in ArnhemThe Arnhem lectures (129) followed the style of The

invisible man within us (130). One comes to see“that life is made up of two streams … Just as we haveheaving, sprouting, shooting life in us, evolving life, sowe also have devolving life in us.”As an example for the method of treatment, Equise-

tum (silica and sulphates) was recommended when di-agnosis shows constructive processes in the kidney to beweak.“If we make a preparation from Equisetum arv.andin circulatory process, in nutrition, take the preparationin the right way to the proper site where it can take ef-fect, we strengthen the weakened constructive powersin the kidney with the medicine.”Manufacture should besuch that the preparation gets “in the right way to theproper site”. Unfortunately there is nothing to say howthis may be achieved. Equisetum should serve tostrengthen the constructive stream coming from the Iorganization of the invisible human being in the sphereof metabolism and circulation.

For the opposite tendency—when constructive prin-ciples are excessively dominant in the kidney—poisonsfrom ferns should stimulate degradation. Inflammationand cancer were again shown to be polar opposites.With regard to the issue we are concerned with here—the pharmaceutical processes—there was only the sug-gestion to process mistletoe “appropriately” to have acancer treatment “which will gradually make the usual… surgical procedures unnecessary.

4.3 Late Dornach impulses4.3.1 References to pharmaceutics in the youngdoctors’ course

In the young doctors’ course (131) encouragement forthose present to undertake inner development workwas much to the fore. This was the background toSteiner’s representation of the relationship between hu-man being and cosmos and to our being subject toheredity and the law of karma. None of the questions inthe 7th (8 Jan. 1924) lecture or 1st (21 Apr. 1924) lecture ofthe Easter course concerned medical treatment or apharmaceutical problem. Potentization was merelycalled a natural process with reference to ants. Instead,Steiner developed the connection between the geolog-ical environment and the medicinal agent growing in it,with rhododendron and laburnum serving as examples.Pharmaceutical challenges were not mentioned for ei-ther plant (113).

In the course, orientation was given for carbohydratemetabolism and important references were made totoxic metals. References to pathophysiological process-

es show no evident connection with homoeopathicrules;with“potentization”not used even where the sub-ject matter would make one expect this.

“If one were to pulverize quartz to the point where inits parts it would no longer have the tendency to actaccording to its own inherent powers, somethingwould grow from the quartz that had living cosmicquality.This happens in seed development.Theremat-ter is pushed out so far that the cosmos can come inwith its ether powers.”

The natural powers of quartz naturally take it towardscrystallization.This tendency was to be overcome by pul-verizing it. The problem has been mentioned in section4.2.2.1. The quartz was not to be split into atoms butchanged in its functions so that it could directly serve theether body.Here the picture was much broadened.Quartzwas to be as open to the life principle from the cosmos asare the seeds of a plant. Quartz was to address the pow-ers of growth and development in the organism directly.This shows that pulverization (trituration) can only havebeen a metaphor. However fine, quartz sand will neverreach a seed-type state. But how can it do so?

One example of how silicon makes the process ofosteogenesis possible was given by E. Carlisle in 1970.She described the brief appearance of silicon immedi-ately prior to calcification in bone. Apart from this, sili-con processes may also be expected to play a role in oth-er forms of organ differentiation. It would be importantto know how and where quartz occurs in a seed-like,nascent state, acting as a tool for organ differentiation.According to the present state of knowledge, this nas-cent state of quartz may be envisaged to be like a pro-tein compound or enzyme. It would also be reasonableto think of silicon processes as a tool in keeping organsin a germinal state (77). This would also throw light onthe connection between silicon organization and cancerdevelopment (93). Unfortunately, few substantiated sci-entific data are available that would permit one to go in-to all these questions concerning the relationship be-tween silicon and human being. (See Ciba FoundationSymposium (132) on the problems of silicon determina-tion.) A similar, allegorical statement is that in spiritualscience, progressive dilution of gold or the like allows usto perceive a “fundamental essence of our material ex-istence on earth” in form of light (27 May 1910 (21)).

The questions which remain are:Which are the phar-maceutical processes that can take quartz close to thesphere of life? What findings, capable of substantiation,must be tracked down which might meet the supersen-sible reference to seed quality arising on pulverizing thedevelopment of light on dilution?

In this course, an example was again given (22 Apr.1924) to show that the cause must be treated and notthe symptom “skin eruption”. The law of similars, it wassaid, did not result in effective treatment; the cause, achildhood trauma, had to be treated. In the 5th lecture,finally, three medicinal plants (Melissa, Belladonna andHyoscyamus)were mentioned,but no reference made topharmaceutical processes.


4.3.2 References to pharmaceutics in the later medicallectures (Dec. 1923/Jan. 1924) and discussions withmedical practitioners (21–23 Apr. 1924)

The lectures (“Three lectures to doctors”, 31 Dec. 1923,1 & 2 Jan. 1924; typescript translation R95) and the dis-cussions at the medical meetings in April 1924 (107) ranparallel to the Course for Young Doctors, in response to arequest from the physicians who were not permitted toattend the course.The suggested medicine was a prepa-ration of Astragalus exscapus, combining an extract ofthe seed with a fluid extract of leaves and flowers. As inthe case of Viscum, reference was made to two harvest-ing times. Again we may assume that the medicinal ac-tion was to be enhanced by use of a combined flowprocess, as with mistletoe.

Steiner was explicit when it came to the treatment ofglaucoma:

“Glaucoma is essentially only treated surgically today,I think, or at most also by the homoeopaths; but ho-moeopathy is not yet rational.”

Arnica injections were recommended in the 15th, 25th,even 30th potency.One would have to observe the actionof the Arnicamontana toxins, and this gentle poisoningcould be cancelled out by alkaline compounds of somekind taken by mouth. Steiner was largely respondingto questions in those talks, and none of these relatedto pharmaceutical problems. He was not developingthoughts in his usual way, and this explains why he wason the one had criticizing homoeopathy and yet sug-gesting treatments which went in that direction. A sim-ilar approach can also be seen in direct suggestions fortreatment (section 5).

The polar opposite nature of upper and lower humanbeing was also developed in the meetings with medicalpractitioners, who were then asked:

“How does one get to know themedicines?We cannotget to know them unless we have first lived in spiritwith what is truly going on in the human being.”

Steiner went on to say that all therapeutic influences(examples being light, lead and stibium) must bethought of in two ways:

“If we take it [antimony] the way it exists in the out-side world as a fibrous metal, stibiumwill be an agentto act on metabolism. If we subject antimony to anearthly process, making it into antimony mirror, weact specifically on the human head.”

Generally speaking,“It is a matter of knowing how the process went, if wehave a rawmaterial or if we have subjected it to someprocess or other. The way in which material has beenstreated—that is essentially what matters.”

Here it strikes one that mirror production was called anearthly process.The changes due to the pharmaceuticalprocess determined the level of the organism where theaction unfolds in the sphere of life. Homoeopathic po-tentization was not even mentioned as a possibility.

Important statements concerning the pharmaceuti-cal process using flow methods for mistletoe were madeon the following two days (section 1.3).

4.3.3 References to pharmaceutics inExtending Practical Medicine

The book, written by Steiner and Wegman in collab-oration,contains descriptions of the qualitative changesof substances in the organism. Reference is made to liv-ing and sentient substance which is ultimately drawninto the sphere of the I organization. In the 5th and 6th

chapters, reference is also made to the transformation ofunformed substance open to the I into organ substance,i.e. the process which is called condensation in section2.5. In qualitative terms it is here referred to as a coolingdown.

The references to medicines in the book will be brieflyrecapitulated, and reference made to new impulses forpharmaceutical processing.

Anagallis is mentioned in the 7th chapter,“The natureof medicinal actions”. The medicinal plant and its min-eral constituents are characterized, and neosynthesis ofthe plant process recommended (see section 4.2.1.4). Inthe 13th chapter, “On the nature of illness and healing”,reference is made to sulphur and phosphorus, with nomention of pharmaceutics or dosage. Knowledge ofpharmacodynamics is called for in the 14th chapter,“Thetherapeutic way of thinking”.“It will merely be a matterof influencing the organic bodily action to such effectthat the silica which is introduced acts specificallyaround the diseased organ and does not have a systemiceffect ...” It remains open which silicon compound orpharmaceutical process might be used to achieve this. Inthe 15th chapter, “The method of treatment”, anotherpharmaceutical reference is:

“Substances that contain phosphorus can also do this.All we have to do is to add other substances to thephosphorus so that its action develops [only] in theintestine and not in metabolism that lies outside theintestine.

Phosphorus was to be treated so that it would not be ab-sorbed but act only in the intestine. Further on we read:Introduce

“to the organism the gum-like substances thatmay beobtained from Levisticum (lovage)—in form of a tea,or even better processed to some degree to obtain amedicinal preparation.”

Such a preparation would act on the blood circulation.Again no reference to a suitable processing method.

In the 16th chapter, “Perceiving medicinal qualities”,antimony and later Conchae were introduced.Antimonycrystallization, liquation, oxidation and electrolysis ofantimony are discussed to show its specific properties.It is not stated how the listed “chemical actions” relateto pharmaceutical processing.

“However, when it comes to actions in the humanbody, the chemical actions of substances have in factas little relevance as the chemical composition of apigment has for the way a painter uses it. Yet it wouldbe a good idea for a painter to know something aboutthe chemical point of origin.”

This lends particular weight to the title of the 17th chap-ter, “Perceiving the nature of substances as a basis of


pharmacognosy”. Knowledge of the connection be-tween medicines and the human organism was notenough at that time, though even then it was good “toknow something about the chemical point of origin”.Up-to-date knowledge of substances was then and stillis the basis for pharmacognosy in anthroposophicalmedicine. At the time, data were only available on thetoxicity of antimony, with the effects at trace and ultra-trace element level not known.

Finally Formica and Oxalis are referred to in generalterms, drawing attention to the difference in action be-tween substances of vegetable and mineral origin. (Thechapter on eurythmy therapy concluded the part of thetext written largely by Steiner himself.)

The last two chapters give examples of treatmentand contain no references to pharmaceutics.

5 Typical medicines,medicines for typicaldiseases, individual prescriptions5.1 Individual prescriptions5.1.1 Introduction

A typical example of the way in which Steiner madebedside recommendations for treatment has been giv-en by Glas (150). “Asked about a new medicine recentlyreferred to by Rudolf Steiner,he [Schmiedel] would listencarefully, getting very thoughtful when Rudolf Steinerhad presented us with yet another riddle. OskarSchmiedel would talk not so much about the medicinebut rather about the way in which one might make itavailable in the best—and quickest—way … There wasone [patient with] severe tuberculosis.Two of our physi-cians went to R. Steiner, who had known the patientfor years,and asked his advice.Without a moment’s hes-itation we were told: “Go to the Weleda [i.e. to O.Schmiedel], for a preparation of tree fungus growing onsoftwood trees; it has to be this really hard fungus, po-tentized to the 10 x. The injections must be given threetimes a week.” Our chemist did not hesitate for long,talked to a botanist and went on a walk of several hoursin the woods. He found what we needed and we soonhad the preparation in ampoules. It was injected—andproved effective; which did not even surprise one—merely make one very glad.”

Glas truly conveyed the mood of a new dawn, full ofhope, and the therapeutic enthusiasm of the youngphysicians in Arlesheim. Steiner posed riddles, one wentinto the woods and found the tree fungus and was noteven surprised. Nor did they ask questions as to the na-ture of the plant extract, the pharmaceutical process orother details. Exhibition by injection was accepted, andso was using the 10 x, injected three times a week. Theintuitive medicine present among them through Stein-er fired their enthusiasm and was immediately effective.

F.Husemann described the consultations in Stuttgartin his preface to Dr Degenaar’s case records.“In the con-sultations with Rudolf Steiner, the history and results ofexaminations were reported to him before the patientwas presented. He would then often ask further ques-tions of the patient, frequently concerning events in

their young days, sometimes eliciting surprising revela-tions.Rudolf Steiner was clearly intensely active inward-ly on these occasions before he presented his findingsbased on spiritual-scientific insights and recommendedtreatment ...”

A. G. Degenaar and H. Walter published the caserecords. Dr Kirchner-Bockholt (1967) wrote about Stein-er’s visits to the clinic in Arlesheim.

5.1.2 Degenaar’s case recordsDr Degenaar (personal communication 1981) spoke of

starting to work at the Institute of Clinical Medicine inStuttgart as a young physician. He said that with O.Palmer he was mainly learning about homoeopathy,andthey did not read the medical lectures. In 1929 he wasgiven the medical discussions recorded by F. Husemannand the latter’s notes on the vademecum, a“chaotic pileof papers”, to sort out.

The typical medicines only came up very occasional-ly in the 165 case records (Hepatodoron®, Kephalodor-on®, Phthysodoron®, Rheumadoron® once each, Der-matodoron® twice,Scleron® four times,Viscum 8 times).The great majority were single medicines, some familiar,others put to medicinal use for the first time. Low poten-cies (up to the 6 x) were mainly listed, metals and occa-sionally other substances in higher potencies. The ap-pendix has minutes by F. Husemann of individual talkson the vademecum which Steiner hoped for. No refer-ence is made to questions concerning the suggestednew pharmaceutical methods and especially the signif-icance of the flow processes for Viscum. Surprisingly,only Viscum was referred to in these case records andnot Iscar®. Which mistletoe preparation did they use inStuttgart?

5.1.3Walter’s case recordsZeylmans van Emmichoven (58) described Steiner’s

collaboration with the physicians in Arlesheim:“Steiner’sdiagnoses, suggestions for treatment and discussionswith the physicians were not regularly minuted and dat-ed but rather given immediate practical application.Thedetails of new medicines,written on scraps of paper andprescription notes, would immediately go to Schmiedelnext door, asking him to produce the medicines in hislaboratory.Wegman would probably ask few questions;her interest focused less on the purely scientific aspectof Steiner’s suggestions than on curing her patients.Shealso had an excellent memory and therefore no reasonto write everything down immediately for later genera-tions. Some of the notebooks and diaries of that timecontain numerous notes on patients—none of themdated—with many quickly jotted-down diagnoses anddetails of medication,many of which undoubtedly camefrom such consultations. The surviving material sug-gests that Hilmar Walter only made formal records of afairly large number of patients’histories at a later date.”

Dr Walter published “Abnormal mental and psychicdevelopments, their signs and symptoms and possibili-ties for treatment. Guide to understanding a collectionof case records with suggestions from Rudolf Steiner” in


manuscript form [in German] in 1955. 117 patients wereseen and treatment plans made. Again we note that theonly typical medicines listed where we know for certainthat they were suggested by Steiner are Scleron® andKephalodoron®. The other typical medicines (Cardio-doron® 3 times, Digestodoron® once, Gencydo® twice,Iscador® twice) were only used in later years. Potencies(above the 6 x) were used little on the whole. Here wehave metals and known poisons. The book on the sevenmain metals and their relations to world, earth andhuman being published in 1966 included further caserecords.

5.1.4 Summary. Do the recommended single medicinesprove a help in gaining insight?

The problem with learning something from individ-ual recommended treatments has been described bySieweke (144).“A physician who studies R. Steiner’s med-ical courses and on the basis of these comes across thetreatments recommended by R. Steiner may be over-whelmed by the feeling that it is simply hopeless to tryand cross the gulf between the two. The content of thecourses seems accessible in the sphere of ideas, usingthe powers of enlivened thinking; the content of the in-dividual prescriptions seems inaccessible to logicalthinking.”

We can imagine the situation in Arlesheim and Dor-nach:Many patients coming for consultations, the physi-cians focused wholly on Steiner’s suggestions concern-ing treatment, and preparations to be made available asquickly as possible. The new pharmaceutical ideas hadonly been touched on lightly in the lectures, and neverinquired into further. Their implementation in Englandand Holland was not known to the physicians who treat-ed the patients,except for DrWegman. It seems that thecourage to heal left scarcely any room in the physician’sminds for the questions that would have had to be askedto understand Steiner’s references to new pharmaceuti-cal processes.

The distinction between individual prescriptions andthe use of typical medicines was also only made in Ex-tending Practical Medicine. The case records thus provean inexhaustible source of individual suggestions fortreatment.This applies especially to the accepted use ofpotentized preparations.There was need to give medicalhelp quickly and the physicians’ courage to heal had tobe encouraged,which made it necessary to act along es-tablished lines.The case records do,however,not help usmuch in our search for Steiner’s impulse to broadenpharmaceutics.

5.2 Typical medicines—medicines for characteristicdiseases

In chapter 19, written by Dr Wegman (76) mention ismade of two levels at which every serious illness may betreated. On the one hand, treatment should let thepathological process“go into reverse”in a controlled wayto regain health;on the other,“typical medicines”shouldbalance out the general weakness. The “typical medi-cines”are in this case defined by the treatment goal and

not their composition. Further on we read:“It thereforeneeds fairly detailed study before one realizes why apreparation has certain constituents.” Dr Wegman al-ready had the ability for this “fairly detailed study”. Thesentence does, at any rate, indicate that the “typicalmedicines” had a number of constituents.

Up to and including the 5th case, the principles werecharacterized which we use “to find the indicated med-icines in the process of diagnosis.To illustrate this clear-ly we chose cases where treatment had to be highly in-dividual. Typical medicines for typical diseases will fol-low.” The typical medicines mentioned are Gencydo®and Scleron®, followed by individual substances—Bella-donna and elder tea, Colchicum, and wormwood oil en-emas, external applications of Urtica, lime blossom andsorrel salt (potassium oxalate), internally first antimonyand later Tormentilla. It is not stated in how far these in-dividual agents were “typical”.

The 20th chapter finally bears the title “Typical medi-cines”.Scleron® is referred to again,saying that it was ef-fective“providing the dosage is high enough. If the doseis too strong, the I organization will hypertrophize.”Bidor® (Kephalodoron®) comes next, followed by anti-mony, cinnabar and pyrites as single substances. Underpyrites, we have the puzzling statement:“Based on thisinsight,we produce a medicament for the above pathol-ogy from pyrites, reconfiguring the mineral in such away that its forces find their way into the affected or-gans when there is an internal indication. It is, of course,necessary to know the route particular substanceprocesses take in the organism.” The pharmaceuticalprocess involved is not stated.Pyrites was manufacturedas a simple trituration. The chapter ends with a secondreference to Gencydo®.

The later literature also does not make clear whatwas meant by “typical medicines”: “The term “typicalmedicines’refers to preparations which represent some-thing central to anthroposophical medicine and as suchderive exclusively from R. Steiner’s work. They includeabove all the metal preparations and the “typical medi-cines” (145). The list does, however, also include Anae-modoron®, although this is “merely a mixture of simpleformulations which Steiner put forward in connectionwith the iron process” (146). O.Wolff listed the followingas medicines for typical diseases: Cardiodoron®,Choleodoron®, Dermatodoron®, Digestodoron®, Gen-cydo®, Hepatodoron®, Iscador®, Kephalodoron®, Meno-doron®, Renodoron® and Scleron® (147). He did not statewhy he did not include preparations which did not endin “-doron” (Alkali comp. , Kalium chlor. comp.; Kaliumacet. comp. etc.) and also meet the criteria for typicalmedicines. Himmelsbach stated that combinationpreparations given by Steiner were called“medicines fortypical diseases”. Typical diseases were those whichcould be defined by a more or less fixed term capable ofclear definition and characterization (148).Unfortunate-ly the clearly definable term is still not clear. The expla-nations for the 2nd edition of the 1923 Medicines List al-so left the terms poorly defined: “The list initially only


included typical medicines which should have the mostfavourable composition for most forms of the diseaseat a medium level.” Before, Steiner had said:

“I consider the “medicines list’ to be the most harmfulthing there can be. What matters is to represent themethod [of anthroposophical medicine]” (136).

Pedersen called the medicines in the Arlesheim list thatbear the comment “Given to Dr Noll by R. Steiner” orsimilar “typical medicines in the narrower sense” (15).preparations are listed,but only 8 of these were also list-ed by Wolff (147) (personal communication). The papersavailable to me do not show how typical and non-typi-cal diseases may be systematically differentiated, nortypical and single medicines, for both kinds of medicinesare mentioned in chapters 19 and 20, and explanationsin the later literature are heterogeneous.

5.3 New pharmaceutical methods and newmedicines with the“broadening of pharmacy”

Four groups of new pharmaceutical methods can besaid to meet Steiner’s intention to broaden pharmacy.With all of them, the raw materials were to be dy-namized, vegetabilized. They were thus meant to act atthe level of the ether body in the“invisible human being”and have a direct constructive action. Further proce-dures can also enable the newly synthesized medicinal-plant compositions to act on the constructive soul levelsection 4.2.1.5 and table 4).

Familiar poisons (e.g. Belladonna) were used in thethen existing preparations and dosages.They act on thevisible human being and need no further processing.The new preparations are based on essentially nontoxicnatural substances,and almost all of them act in the“in-visible human being” where I organization, astral bodyand ether body act constructively. The four groups ofnew medicines are the following.

5.3.1 Typical plant-based medicines where flowprocesses or technological means not described in moredetail would combine two extracts to enhance their ac-tion (Table 5).These pharmaceutical flow processes weremost fully worked out for Viscum,newly developed in anexperimental Choleodoron® preparation,and have beenhistorically confirmed for Cardiodoron®. In spiritual-sci-entific terms, the task is to free the medicinal agent frombeing bound to earthly forces and open it up for the lev-el of vital powers, to “dynamize” it. The demonstrableaim is to enhance the action.

Combining two plant extracts in a flow processmakes it possible to rearrange the relevant active prin-ciples together with their secondary constituents. Im-proved galenics and symbiotic enhancement concentra-tion of primary extracts results in a medicine whichqualitatively has become a life-sustaining substance ca-pable to direct improvement of constructive develop-ment in the human being.Koehler (47) has described thescientifically demonstrable further development of theflow process to improve the colloidal structure of plantextracts.

5.3.2 Typical mineral agents subjected to neosynthe-sis based on an improved plant model. The pharmaceu-tical and clinical aim in this case was best described forAlkali comp. (Cichorium as the model) in the lecture giv-en in London on 2 Sept. 1922 (60).The concept can, how-ever, also apply to many other medicinal plants (Table 5).The action was to be enhanced and made more long-term.The process of the plant’s development was there-fore to be resynthesized using more or less mineral con-stituents; a binding agent was to give a compoundwhich we would call colloidal today.This was to providea direct constructive effect.

The chemical substances listed for synthesis clearlydo not represent a formula but suggestions as to the di-rection which anthroposophical pharmacy might take.Constituents are manipulated in many different ways inmodern phytopharmacy.What the two methods have incommon is that the native vegetable substance is thestarting point in processes to improve efficacy.

5.3.3 Metals are vegetabilized by repeated passagethrough suitable medicinal plants to support the con-structive powers.

5.3.4 Metals are evaporated (or used as smoke) tochange their conformation in mirror production to sucheffect that they, too, can serve constructive processes di-rectly. Further developments of these two methods can-not be considered in the present context. See the paperby Simon (131).

6 The futureSpiritual-scientific medicine gained its own place

quite early, independent of homoeopathy and allopathy.As far as one can see from the lectures,Rudolf Steiner didnot give serious consideration to pharmaceutical issuesprior to the first medical course in March 1920. The his-torical starting point for his search would appear to havebeen the alchemical medicine of Paracelsus. Such rootsare perceptible at least for Kephalodoron® and Reno-doron®,Ferrum hydroxydatum,Vulnodoron® and Kaliumacet. comp. The formulas for these were given toSchmiedel in July 1920. Parallel to this, the first noteson Viscum preparation indicate that he was lookingfor new ways—harvesting at two different seasons anddynamization using a flow process.

The medical courses given in 1920 and 1921 were ad-dressed to an audience with homoeopathic orientation.Steiner struggled to gain their collaboration in develop-ing an intuitive medicine. He used terms such as “ho-moeopathization” to indicate the essential differencefrom classic potentization.No distinction was ever madebetween dilution and potentization; images from na-ture were instead given for homoeopathization.The lawof similars was also touched on, but extended with theinvitation to develop a rational connection between me-dicinal agent and pathological process. This, he said,could only be found through the science of the spirit.The archetype of the new pharmaceutical methods heintended to develop lay in the human ether body. Fin-ished natural substances were to stimulate processes


of development—probably in connection with a protein-like quality that was close to life.

The 20th lecture (9 Apr. 1920) concluded with an eval-uation of “modern allopathic medicine”; The supersen-sible causes of sickness were not seen, and secondaryphenomena were said to be the causes instead.

Homoeopathy was also said to be “the wrong road”,one might “despair at finding medicines listed one af-ter the other, each for a whole legion of diseases. It isnever the case that one can easily arrive at the specif-ic aspect ...”Natural medicine serves the inner instinct “to take

human beings ... into the effects of their own healingpowers”. For the medical system in anthroposophy (17)both medicine and pharmacy had to be broadened.

Substance processes were more and more clearlycharacterized: Live matter was taken to the level of sen-tient and then spiritualized in the human being. “Thehuman being in his configuration is the fruit of his I or-ganization even in the smallest particles of his sub-stance” (82).The transformation going through qualita-tive stages in us are the model for the pharmaceuticalmethods. Beyond natural medicine and homoeopathyon the one hand and a materialistic allopathy on theother, the idea was to develop our own pharmaceutics.This aim is also evident in the “van Leer paper”, writtenin 1924, to provide some orientation concerning thebroadening of medicine, seeing that the “vademecum”had not been brought to realization.Van Leer,a businessman, was to use this paper to open up a market for an-throposophical medicines in the USA. Here there is onlyone“old method in medicine which has developed fromthe natural-scientific views of more recent times”. The“new medical method [added] insight which goes be-yond the physical to physical knowledge. Homoeopathywas still wide-spread in the USA at the time, yet it wasnot even mentioned in the paper, nor were efforts madeto connect the “new medical method” with it.

The spiritual investigator was most able to go hisown way in the mistletoe preparation he developed. Aspecial process technology was brought to realization—without recourse to the physicians and pharmacists—inorder to test the idea. Suitable flow processes were totake the substance to new aggregation processes and soenhance the medicinal action. The active principles andexcipients were to be given a conformation where bothdestroyed tumour tissue (“replacing the surgeon’sknife”) and evoked inflammation—connected withpyrexia—out of the intentions of the I organization.

The other new pharmaceutical methods—synthesisof processes in medicinal plants, dynamization of met-als passed through medicinal plants and metal mirrorproduction—are still at an early stage of development,though important steps towards realization were taken50 years ago and other development work was alsodone.Much work is still needed to make them hold theirown in the scientific climate of today. The explanation,still given today, that a medicine based on spiritual-sci-entific ideas needs no rational explanation, even if effi-

cacy can be demonstrated, sounds more like alchemythan a modern science of the spirit.

When it came to practical application and collabora-tion with physicians and pharmacists, Steiner followedthe familiar, established ways. It might be that medica-tion was immediately required,or he would recommendpotentized medicines, partly basing himself on ho-moeopathy. I do not, however, know of any mention ofSteiner doing his own researches in the field of ho-moeopathy. His searches concerning new ways in phar-maceutics were initially close to alchemical medicines.His decision not to work with Bernus (32, 33) did showthat his own search was completely separate from thishistorical phenomenon.The spiritual scientist’s aims areevident in the ideas for the four groups of typical medi-cines. The Arlesheim list (1922). showed only two of thenew medicines he intended to be in potency (Renodor-on® D15 (= 15 x),Scleron® D13 (13 x)).Otherwise there is noindication that medicines produced by the new methodshad to be “potentized” in addition. The new methodswere meant to “dynamize” the substances. In practice,individual medicines were given in homoeopathic po-tencies, or medicinal poisons used in suitable dosages.

I would stress that this paper is not about the effica-cy of present-day anthroposophical or homoeopathicmedicines. Used by experienced physicians they are agreat help, and extensive, fully evaluated empirical dataare available (151).As Zwiauer (6) put it,essential steps indeveloping the typical medicines were taken 50 yearsago. I am grateful for the life’s work of pharmacists andphysicians who worked to broaden medicine and phar-maceutics. Since then impulses for renewal have beenimplemented for individual medicines (Cardiodoron®,Renodoron®, Kephalodoron®, etc.). Different flow de-signs have been developed forViscum,and these need tobe compared for their effect on the substance composi-tion. Many new medicinal compositions have been pro-duced. The further development of anthroposophicalpharmacy and medicine will depend on whether new in-sights and methods are developed on the basis of theoriginal work, to take us closer to the goal of broadeningthem and continue to be in dialogue with the scientificworld. It is a matter not of judging work done in the pastbut of taking a sober look at the future and grow awareof the tasks that lie ahead. Knowledge of the lecturesand published writings should give a real picture of thepharmaceutical impulse in spiritual-scientific medicine.This must inevitably be one-sided. Open and critical di-alogue can lead to further development if we see thetask together.What did the spiritual investigator ask usto do to spiritualize pharmacy as part of a medicinebroadened out of the science of the spirit?

H. B. von Laue,MDForststrasse 19D-75223 [email protected]


References1 Steiner R. The Boundariesof Natural Science. Tr. F. Amrine,K. Oberhuber. Lecture of 2 Oct.1920. New York: AnthroposophicPress 1983.2 Steiner R. Course for YoungDoctors. Tr. rev. G. Karnow. Lec-ture of 2 Jan. 1924. Spring Valley:Mercury Press 1994.17 Steiner R. The ChristmasConference for the Foundationof the General Anthroposophi-cal Society 1923/1924. Tr. J. Collis,M. Wilson. Lecture of 24 Dec.1923. New York: AnthroposophicPress 1990.19 Steiner R. Rosicrucian Eso-tericism. Tr. D. S. Osmond. NewYork: Anthroposophic Press1978.20 Steiner R. An Occult Physiolo-gy. London & New York: H. Colli-son & Anthroposophic Press1932. 3rd edn London: RudolfSteiner Press 1983.21 Steiner R. Manifestations ofKarma. 4th rev. edn London:Rudolf Steiner Press 1995.23 Steiner R. Anthroposophy (AFragment). Tr. C. E. Creeger & D.Hardorp. New York: Anthropo-sophic Press 1996.24 Steiner R. The Riddle of Hu-manity. Tr. J. F. Logan. London:Rudolf Steiner Press 1990.25 Steiner R. The Case for An-throposophy (extracts fromGerman original). Tr. O. Barfield.London: Rudolf Steiner Press1970.26 Steiner R. The Opposition toSpiritual Science. St Gallen, 26Oct. 1916. Anthroposophic NewsSheet 9: 21 – 28.27 Steiner R. Geographic Medi-cine & the Secret of he Double.Tr. A. Wulsin. St Gallen, 16 Nov.1917. Spring Valley: MercuryPress 1986. Also as Secret Broth-erhoods. London, publ. by H.Collison.28 Steiner R. Social issues. Tr. J.Reuter, rev. S. Seiler. Lecture of6 Jan. 1920. Hudson: Anthropo-sophic Press 1991.29 Steiner R. Introducing An-throposophical Medicine. Tr. C. E.Creeger. Hudson: Anthropo-sophic Press 1999. Also as An-throposophical Spiritual Scienceand Medical Therapy. Tr. rev. G. F.Karnow. Spring Valley: MercuryPress 1, 991.38 Steiner R. Spiritual Scienceand Questions of Health. 14 Jan.1909. Typescript Z 438. RudolfSteiner House Library, London.39 Steiner R. Theosophy of theRosicrucian. Tr. M. Cotterell, D. S.Osmond. Lecture of 3 June 1907.London: Rudolf Steiner Publish-ing Co. 1953.41 Steiner R. The Karma of Un-truthfulness. Tr. J. Collis. Lectureof 31 Dec. 1916. London: RudolfSteiner Press 1988.

44 See ref. 29. Lecture of 2 Apr.1920. See ref. 29.50 Steiner R. Physiologisch-Therapeutisches auf der Grund-lage der Geisteswissenschaft. 4of the lectures publ. in Englishas Physiology and Therapeutics.Tr. A. Wulsin, G. Karnow. SpringValley: Mercury Press 1986.52 Steiner R. Cosmic FormativeForces in the Animal Kingdom.Dornach 16 July 1921. Anthropo-sophical Movement 8: suppl. 6.Ref. NSL 93, London: RudolfSteiner House Library.53 Steiner R. From Crystals toCrocodiles. Tr. J. Reuter. Lectureof 9 Sept. 1922. Forest Row:Rudolf Steiner Press rev. 2002.54 1) [Planetary Spheres andTheir Influence on] Man’s Lifeon Earth and in the SpiritualWorlds. Tr. G. & M. Adams. Lec-ture of 16 Nov. 1922. Tr. G. & M.Adams. London: Anthr. Publ.Co. 1952. 2) Spiritual Relationsin the Human Organism. Tr. M.Deussen. Lecture of 22 Oct. 1922.Spring Valley: Mercury Press1978.55 Steiner R. Earthly Knowledgeand Heavenly Wisdom. Tr. S. Seil-er. Lecture of 11 February 1923.New York: Anthroposophic Press1991. Also single lecture The In-visible Man within Us. ThePathology underlying Therapy.Tr. A. Wulsin, G. Karnow. SpringValley: Mercury Press 1987.56 Steiner R. Fundamentals ofAnthroposophical Medicine. Tr.A. Wulsin. Spring Valley: MercuryPress 1986. Earlier translationby C. Davy: AnthroposophicalApproach to Medicine. London:Anthroposophical PublishingCo. 1951. Lecture of 27 Oct. 1922.57 Steiner R. Curative Eurythmy.Tr. K. Krohn, A. Degenaar.Lecture of 28 Oct. 1922. London:Rudolf Steiner Press.59 See ref. 29.60Steiner R. The HealingProcess. Tr. C. E. Creeger. Lecturesof 2 and 3 Sept. 1923. Hudson:Anthroposophic Press 2000.[Also An Outline of Anthropo-sophical Medical Research.London & New York: BritishWeleda & Amnerican ArlesheimLaboratories 1949]65 Steiner R. The HealingProcess. Tr. C. E. Creeger. Lectureof 3 Sept. 1923. Hudson: Anthro-posophic Press 2000.66Hahnemann S. Organon ofMedicine. 6th edn. in German.Various English translations inexistence. Here quoted fromDaems WF. Die Entwicklung desPotenzierugsverfahrens vonHahnemann bis heute. Poten-zierte Heilmittel. Ursprung,Wesen und Wirkungsnachweisvon dynamisierten Substanzen.Stuttgart: Freies Geistesleben1971.

67 Steiner R. Spiritual Relationsin the Human Organism. Tr. M.Deussen. Lecture of 22 Oct. 1922.Spring Valley: Mercury Press1978.70 Steiner R. AnthroposophicalSpiritual Science and MedicalTherapy. Tr. rev. G. F. Karnow. Lec-ture of 11 Apr. 1921. Spring Valley:Mercury Press 1991.71 Steiner R. Pastoral Medicine.Tr. G. Hahn. Lecture of 11 Sept.1924. Hudson: AnthroposophicPress 1987. Other title: BrokenVessels. Tr. G. Hahn rev. GreatBarrington MA: AnthroposophicPress 2003.72 Steiner R. AnthroposophicalSpiritual Science and MedicalTherapy (see ref. 59). Lecture of27 Oct. 1921.73 Steiner R. Spiritual Relationsin the Human Organism. Tr. M.Deussen. Lecture of 22 Oct. 1922.See ref. 67.74 Steiner R. Fundamentals ofAnthroposophical Medicine.Lecture of 27 Oct. 1922. See ref.56.75 Steiner R. Ibid. Lecture of 28Oct. 1922.76 Steiner R, Wegman I. Extend-ing Practical Medicine. Funda-mental Principles based on theScience of the Spirit. Tr. A. R.Meuss. London: Rudolf SteinerPress 1996. Several earlier trans-lations titled Fundamentals ofTherapy.77 Steiner R. Cosmosophy vol.2. Tr. A. R. Meuss. Lecture of30 Oct. 1921. Gympie, Australia:Completion Press.78 See ref. 29. Lecture of31 Mar. 1920.79 See ref. 20. Lecture of23 Nov. 1911.80von Laue HB. Kalzium alsSubstanz und als Prozess.Merkurstab 2004; 57: 78 – 95.English E version available.Von Laue HB. Die vier Wesens-glieder des Menschen und ihreTaetigkeit mit dem Phosphor.Merkurstab 2005; 58: 428 – 447.81 See ref. 29. Lecture of 12 Apr.1921.82 Steiner R, Wegman I. Extend-ing Practical Medicine. Chapter5. See ref. 76.83 Ibid. Chapter 7.85 Steiner R. Man as Symphonyof the Creative Word. Tr. J. Comp-ton-Burnett, rev. K. Kiniger, A.Meuss. Lecture of 10 Nov. 1923.London: Rudolf Steiner Press.86 Steiner R. The HealingProcess. See ref. 60. Lecture of2 Sept. 1923.87 See ref. 52.88 See ref. 29. Lecture of14 Apr. 1921.89 Steiner R. Original Impulsesfor the Science of the Spirit. Tr.A. R. Meuss. Lecture of 22 Oct.1906. Lower Beechmont, Aus-tralia: Completion Press 2001.

90See ref. 29. Lecture of2 Apr. 1921.91 See ref. 76. Chapter 15.92 See ref. 2. Lecture of1 July 1924.93 See ref. 65, lecture of1 July 1923.94 See ref. 29. Lecture of17 Apr. 1921.95 Steiner R. Therapeutic In-sights: Earthly and Cosmic Laws.Tr. M. Laird Brown, A. Wulsin,G. Karnow. Lecture of 2 July 1921.Spring Valley: Mercury Press1984.96Steiner R. The HealingProcess / An Outline of Anthro-posophical Medical Research.Lecture of 2 Sept. 1923.97 See ref. 65. Whole volume.98 See ref. 2. Lecture of 21 April1924.105 Steiner R. From Comets toCocaine. Tr. M. St Goar. Discus-sion of 27 Dec. 1922. London:Rudolf Steiner Press 348.107 See ref. 50.108 Ibid. Lecture of 26 Oct. 1922.126 See ref. 65. Lectures of15 & 16 No. 1923.129 See ref. 65. Lectures of17 – 24 July 1924.133Steiner R. Earthly and CosmicMan. Tr. D. S. Osmond. London:Rudolf Steiner Publ. Co. 1948.134 See ref. 76. Chapter 12.135 Ibid. Chapter 6.140 See ref. 29. Lecture of3 April 1920.142 See ref. 37. Lecture of17 April 1921.143 Steiner R. The Evolution ofConsciousness. Watkin T VE,Davy C. Lecture of 30 August1923. Sussex: Rudolf SteinerPress 1991.


Discussion on Hans Broder von Laue’s paper“The evolution of Rudolf Steiner’s pharma-ceutical impulse” (Der Merkurstab 1/2008)1

I would like to make some comments on the long, in-formative paper by Hans Broder von Laue. It will not be

possible, of course, to deal with every point where ques-tions and problems arise, but I think it is important tomention some fundamental aspects that have come tomind on reading the paper.

These critical remarks are, of course, not intended todiminish the positive suggestions in the paper.The manyquestions, especially on points where research will beneeded,contribute greatly to the further development ofRudolf Steiner’s pharmaceutical impulse.

The question posed was how one can work on theroots of anthroposophical pharmacy (section 1.1), and inthe Editorial we read that“existing resources have for thefirst time been systematically worked up, which tookyears of work’ and it is therefore appropriate to offersome thoughts on this.Considering Hans Krueger’s workof several volume on references to medicines, printed in1969,a systematic collection not only of the most impor-tant medicinal substances but also the pharmaceuticalprocesses, including“potentization’or the“three-dimen-sional dynamic system, or R. Hauschka’s publication in1965—oddly enough not mentioned in the otherwise ex-tensive list of references—it seems to me that the pres-ent paper is at least somewhat one-sided.

A number of important lectures by Rudolf Steinerwhich form part of the roots of anthroposophical phar-macy are not mentioned.This is not by chance, for H. B. v.Laue is more or less deliberately representing a particu-lar approach and looking for substantiation in the worksof Rudolf Steiner, but leaving aside other aspects. Yet inits length and with its given title the paper appears tocover the whole of anthroposophical pharmacy.

Some examples:Rudolf Steiner spoke of the manufac-ture of medicines and of substance processes in connec-tion with the Druidic Mysteries.1 Here the wide field of el-emental spirits and the need to consider this world onprocessing the substance opens up.Conscious collabora-tion with nature spirits is part of the new pharmacy.

The lectures on the Rosicrucians2 include importantdetails concerning the Sal, Mercury and Sulphur process-es and the inner experiences connected with these.Enter-ing into natural processes in meditation leads to innerchange which comes to outward reflection. This is an ap-proach which in different form is important for pharma-cists to this day.The mental state of the manufacturer is anot inconsiderable part of the “history’ of the anthropo-sophical medicine and depends on anthroposophical innerdevelopment work.The laboratory bench must become analtar,3 and the pharmacist must work towards this.

The lectures on the powers of evening and morning4also refer to processes that gain importance in the man-ufacture of medicines. One must learn to be aware ofcosmic influences. The Wala and Rh methods are con-

nected with this and are one of the pillars supportingour pharmacy.

The course on agriculture5 may surely also be said tobe a source of inspiration for pharmacists. Many detailsgiven for the agricultural preparations are no doubt alsoimportant in the manufacture of medicines.The works ofW. Cloos are a telling example.

These are several areas of major importance to phar-macists which H.B.v. Laue is simply leaving aside.The pa-per therefore cannot be said to have been “worked upsystematically’.

One of the basic issues raised is the “rationale’ of re-lationship to the kingdoms of nature, i.e. of the differentminerals,plant and animals to the human organism (e.g.section 3.4). Rudolf Steiner’s extensive work to show thecommon evolution of earth and man—e.g. in his OccultScience6 and the lectures on mystery centres7—providesa secure and clear basis for an answer to the questionposed. A “rationale’ which only anthroposophy can offer.No mention at all is made of the whole of this most fruit-ful and innovative area (especially taken further by W.Cloos), an omission that is almost incomprehensiblewhen anthroposophical pharmacy is in discussion.

Another issue I feel I must mention has to do withmethodology. Essential H. B. von Lauer considers onlymethods not previously used in pharmacy to be anthro-posophical, among them flow processes, vegetabiliza-tion, mirror production, synthesis with medicinal plantsthe model, typical medicines. This creates the someonestrange problem area, difficult to follow, relating to po-tentization, dynamization, etc., where it is said thatRudolf Steiner distanced himself from the classic methodof potentization and did not value it (section 4.1.2). Thisis a very limiting view.We should consider the anthropo-sophical aspects to lie not only in physical proceduressuch as mixing, succussion, reactions, etc. but also in thequalitative relationships that give those procedures spe-cific meaning.This casts new light on procedures that ex-isted also before Steiner’s time, giving them new mean-ing. This gives rise, for example, to new connections be-ing seen for known heating methods to human physio-logical processes. In potentization, the relationships ofmetals to the planets will, for instance, give us a potencycalendar. Anthroposophical pharmacy cannot be imag-ined without this. Steiner’s “pharmaceutical impulse’must primarily be sought not in original physical andchemical combinations, but in extending horizons andbroadening ideas and the consequences of this.

Much knowledge has been gathered in this paper interms of“model ideas’,2, 3 but unfortunately there are al-so major gaps. Steiner’s ideas are seen from this one an-gle, without the qualitative differentiation of points ofview and the level of conscious awareness one wouldconsider desirable. It really behoves us,however, to breakup the “model ideas’ and advance to genuine images(imaginations).We must then learn to“read’ their mean-ing (inspirations) so that we may intuitively do the rightthing at the right moment. One would thus, at least ini-


Notice1) Original title: Diskus-sion um den Beitrag:Die Entwicklung despharmazeutischenImpulses bei RudolfSteiner von HansBroder von Laue.In: Der Merkurstab1/2008. Der Merkurs-tab 4.2008: 387-9. Eng-lish by Anna R. Meuss,FCIL, MTA

tially, seek to reach the levels at which Steiner was ableto make his investigations.

Many details should, of course, also be mentioned,but they would need to be considered individually. Thiswill only be meaningful when we are able to differenti-ate more consciously between the different methodolog-ical approaches, e.g. more substance-related, or cosmo-logical, or also meditative and inward, identifying themmore clearly and thus arriving at a degree of mutualrecognition and then complementation.

These lines are intended to make some contributionin that sense.

Stefano Pederiva

I am grateful to Mr Pederiva for drawing attention to thedifferent methodological approaches one may chose

when dealing with the subject of “The evolution ofRudolf Steiner’s pharmaceutical impulse”. He speaks offour possibilities in his last paragraph:

a substance-relatedb related to essential human naturec cosmologicald meditative and inward.Mr Pederiva is right, I deliberately chose the first two.

On the other hand it is not at all possible to work in thisfield unless one uses a meditative, inward approach.Oth-erwise the overview of different spiritual-scientific re-search findings that has led to this attempt at an“imag-ination in thought”could not have been kept in mind andconsidered. Should I have made a point of referring tothis part of the preparations in my paper? It would nothave changed much of the subject matter. In my view, thebroadening of pharmacy mainly concerns “methods notpreviously used in pharmacy to be anthroposophical,among them flow processes,vegetabilization,mirror pro-duction, synthesis with medicinal plants the model, typ-ical medicines” (Pederiva) and not the study of essentialhuman nature to give earlier approaches to treatment areason to exist.

I am unable to see, however, why it should not be ac-ceptable to select a number of“models in thought”fromthe whole picture in order to formulate research issuesfor the future.

Serious consideration must be given to the statementthat I omitted all cosmological aspects. Mr Pederiva isright, I deliberately chose to do so and will be glad to ex-plain this. Section 4.1.6 in the paper bears the title “Cau-tious assessment—Old pharmaceutical processes (alche-my and homoeopathy) and seeds for a broadening ofpharmaceutics”. Here attention is drawn to the differentchoice of words in lectures Rudolf Steiner gave beforeand after 1922/1923.

In the 3rd lecture given at Torquay8 he also referred tothe new step in development he had to take himself sothat he could consistently separate the cosmologicalform aspect from the more earthly substance aspect:“Ifone continues to have the courage one will say to oneself:One drop of the divine is in you, you cannot sink, you areof a nature that is divine, one has not merely theory butlives in something which will give one courage to stand

up straight and be prepared to move forward.” HereSteiner was referring to the courage which he himselfneeded to take another step forward in spiritual-scientif-ic investigations. He went on to say: “At this point onegets to know something else relating to the minerals.Be-fore, one got to know the crystallized nature [the cosmo-logical aspect] of mineral. Now one gets to know theirmateriality, what fills them inwardly at the material lev-el.Before it was the form,now it is substance nature.”Thegreat theme of that last lecture course was the questionas to what the spiritual nature of the substance is andnot only its cosmic form aspect: “and today we mustagain look for very different insights so that we comeback from the outer to the inner, from the higher to thelower, back from the inner to the outer, back from thelower to the higher in a spiritual way.” Steiner spoke ofthe consequences of this new step in spiritual-scientificinvestigation in the last lecture of this course.The conse-quence in the practice of medicine and pharmaceuticsstill need to be fully established. I have not found refer-ence to this important change in methodology in any-thing published by anthroposophical pharmacists. Yet Ihave found it more and more important to think throughthe consequences of this new step with regard to thework we need to do today.

It may also have been part of the new step that Stein-er only spoke of the three steps to be considered when de-veloping a medicine in the late lectures: Intuition basedon spiritual science, realization in practice in “our labora-tories’, and verification in clinical use, and that this [real-ization] be done with the same full responsibility whichare ordinarily used in clinical work.”The three steps of in-tuition, realization and verification have their own sever-al laws which must not be confused.Mr Pederiva refers tothe important lecture on the powers of evening andmorning.The need to consider these powers applies fullyin work leading to the intuition for a new medicine.Schef-fler raised the question as to whether those powers havethe same importance for the realization of a medicine—i.e. the practical, process of manufacture in accord withGMP—as for developing the intuition.

When it comes to clinical verification as the third step,these powers are needed only to decide on how efficacymay be established in the be possible way,and not to theactual process of verification. Inner and outer require-ments differ when it comes to establishing the threesteps. This can be taken into account in pharmaceuticaland medical practice.

The substance and the human-nature aspect were de-liberately chosen for the paper,so that the focus would beon the substances. What pharmaceutical processes andchanges do the pharmaceutically utilized substances gothrough in the organism. How should this question bedealt with in broadening pharmaceutics? The question isposed anew in the paper but not solved. I am sure that acommon will to work on this, in spite of a controversial be-ginning, will help all of us to move forward.

Hans Broder von Laue,MDForststrasse 19, D-75223 Niefern


References1 Steiner R. Man inthe Past, the Presentand the Future. Lec-ture of 10 Sept. 1923.2 Steiner R. EsotericChristianity. Lectureof 28 Sept. 1911.3 Steiner R. Spiritu-al Guidance of theIndividual/Man.4 Steiner R. Reap-pearance of Christ inthe Etheric/SecretBrotherhoods.5 Steiner R.Warmth Course.6 Steiner R. OccultScience.7 Steiner R. MysteryKnowledge.8 Steiner R. Trueand False Paths.Lecture of 13 August1924.

the evolution of rudolf steiner’s pharmaceutical impulse evolution... · 2 der merkurstab | von...

Documents