New Publication
Homeopathy in Intensive Care
and Emergency Medicine
Homeopathy First Magazine
Best Vitamin C Drink 
Learn More With Caralyn 


Homeopathy World Community

Creating Waves of Awareness

Aurum Met - Aurum Foliatum - Aurum Hahnemanni ?

posted to minutus online email list:
Please look at this movie -- and especially at the last third of it:
and select AURUM METALLICUM movie there.
So, I watched it. Did a little research. Here's what I came up with:
Hi Rafy,

In the Aurum 'movie' ..
I see someone claiming that their pharmacy is using "pure gold leaf" -and claiming that "other" pharmacies
are using gold which is affected by chemical extraction.

In Hahnemann's proving of Aurum, he states that he used "the finest gold-leaf (its fineness is 23 carats, 6 grains)"
He further states emphatically:
(Materia Medica Pura)
"In this place I will speak only of gold, and not of this metal altered by the ordinary chemical processes, consequently not of it dissolved by the action of acids nor percipitated from its solution (fulminating gold), both of which have been declared to be, if not useless, then absolutely noxious, apparently because they cannot be taken without dangerous consequences when given in what is called a justa dosis, or, in other words, in excessive quantity.
No! I speak of pure gold not altered by chemical manipulations."

So, this must mean 23.2 carat pure "nugget" gold .. gold found pure; not needing to be purified. Fulmination was the common means of purifying gold in Hahnemann's time (using Mercury.) He mentions use of acids, which is a method not commonly used in his time, which HOWEVER .. is how the 1883 "American Homeoapthic Pharmacopia" indicates that the gold is purified prior to trituration:

In 1887, J.C. Burnett engaged in a self-proving of "aurum foliatum" ("Gold as a Remedy in Diseases")
-and details a great deal of study of, and employment of the Rx
-all seemingly consistent with Hahnemann's proving.

I think we must assume that the purification process in common use at that time would have been what Burnett used, as he made no comment otherwise than noting that Hahnemann's "own idea would seem to be that the pure metal is to be preferred on account of its noble simplicity and superior merits" which is offered as a comment contrasting Hahnemann's listing symptoms of Aurum Muriaticum and Arum Fulminans .. which is in itself a bit odd, since he clearly studied Hahnemann's work in intimate detail, occasionally qouting a phrase in German.

Somehow, Hahnemann's objection to use of acid in purification of Aurum Met / Aurum Fol has fallen out of literature soon after Hahnemann himself fell out of this world.

It seems safe to presume, based on Burnett's yeoman work with Aurum including his self-proving .. that the Aurum which Burnett used produced the same range of symptoms as Hahnemann's.

I wonder if the pharmacy Remedia has some evidence otherwise?

I think it is probably well intentioned, but ends up being more of a marketing thing than a 100% accuracy thing..
Because: if the "pure gold leaf" that Hahnemann used was in fact (as he stated) NOT "pure" but instead 23.2 carat,
there is a large-ish (.8 carat; 3.45%) UN-known impurity.

Unless I am missing some secret Masonic alchemical knowledge, 24 carat @ .9999 "fine" (99.99% pure) gold, processed in a way which Hahnemann would not have been fully aware, though it does indeed use acids, which he strongly objected to..

-is nevertheless
1) of greater purity than Hahnemann's originally proven gold
2) proven again by Burnett, and found consistent with Hahnemann's proving
3) clinically consistent from then until now
4) consistently available vs. Hahnemann's defintely unique sample with 3.45% unknown impurities.

my $.02

warm wishes,
david 510.776.5914 fax: 510.336.6671
I.T. support:
web developer:

Views: 725


You need to be a member of Homeopathy World Community to add comments!

Join Homeopathy World Community

Comment by david hartley on May 13, 2009 at 11:57pm
It was an interesting point which Remedia brought up; so interesting that I felt it worth researching; having done so, my conclusion is that Hahnemann's originally proved Aurum Fol. is not reproducible.. his figures indicate it is 96.5% "pure" gold -- no way of knowing what the balance of the sample is. We could advance a theory that "naturally occurring" ... "mostly pure" gold .. would be similar from one geographic locale to another; with copper and silver being the most common impurities.
-but this seems like we'd need to reinvent the wheel; to prove the Remedia Aurum Fol., and see what we have as compared to Hahnemann's writing; and as compared to J.C. Burnett and others to-date.
That project may appeal to some, but it seems to me that 99.99% pure gold.. whose provings and cured cases are consistent with Hahnemann's provings and cases.. is "status quo" .. and that there is no compelling reason to suggest a need for an antiquarian Aurum Fol. (including non-specific impurities) vs. the easily reproducible current Aurum Met. of 99.99% purity.
I suppose I should write to Remedia, and get their point of view, and their ideas on what I've presented here.
Comment by Debby Bruck on May 13, 2009 at 9:57pm
Fascinating Aurum Hahnamanni movie.

HWC Partners


© 2019   Created by Debby Bruck.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...