Books

Materia Medica Viva Volume 7 – page 1632

that patient may suffer, when the prescription is selected’ (op. cit., ‘Cancer Cures’, p. 522f). It is therefore important to understand the essence and individuality of the pathogenesis of Carcinosin, as far as it is currently known.
The remedy should be definitely thought of in cases where there is a strong tendency to cancer in the family, i.e. even if the parents of the patient have not been affected by the disease but, rather, the grandparents or uncles or aunts. (Bear in mind that, if one person of the family has had cancer at a very late age, this cannot be called a ‘strong tendency’).
There may also be other diseases in the family or individual history of Carcinosin cases, diseases that may have taken part in the development process of the cancerinic miasm, as explained above. These, however, may be taken as important hints towards the remedy, but no more than that. For example, we may see in the family anamnesis diseases such as diabetes, tuberculosis and other chest problems (including asthma), pernicious anaemia, leukaemia, and problems of the alimentary tract (e.g. ulcers of the stomach).
A severe reaction to vaccination (or a vaccination that, seemingly, did not ‘take’) in the family or individual history of the patient may also be found in Carcinosin cases, as well as an unusually early and prolonged occurrence of whooping cough or pneumonia or a delayed occurrence of childhood diseases (after puberty). You should not, however, take these pathologies in the family or individual history of the patient as a reliable substantiation for the prescription of Carcinosin. It is only a family history of cancer that can be considered a guiding symptom to the prescription of Carcinosin.
Boericke says, quoting Clarke: ‘It is claimed the Carcinosin acts favourably and modifies all cases in which either a history of carcinoma can be elicited, or symptoms of the disease itself