This book addresses an approach to the prevention of some psychotic disorders and is based upon a relatively straightforward hypothesis; namely, that vulnerability to the major psychoses is related substantially to genetic factors that may be set into motion by the use of drugs, both illicit and prescribed. My own research has focused largely upon psychotic reactions associated with illicit psychotogenic drug use while my clinical work, particularly in recent years, has convinced me of the psychotogenic potential of prescribed medication as well.

It is important to be understood here. I am not attempting to make a blanket argument against the use of recreational drugs (although I personally believe such a choice is the wisest) and certainly not indicting antidepressant or stimulant drug treatment. I want to call attention to the fact that some persons are more vulnerable than others to the psychotogenic potential of these agents and urge caution in their use, especially in those with a family history of major psychotic or manic illness. I believe that psychiatry as a field has not emphasized this point sufficiently. I further believe that some cases of acute psychosis and mania could be prevented by more attention to these risk factors. This book will outline an argument for increased awareness of the potential for triggering major mental illness through the use of pharmacological substances.

No Description Available.

The Merger: M.D.s and D.O.s in California

If you are interested in the recent history of the medical professions, this book is for you. If personal narratives of historical events speak to you as a second layer of documentation, this book is for you. If you are aware that in America there exist two separate yet equal, fully licensed physicians, M.D.s and D.O.s, you might be interested in learning about their unique relationship in California. If you know little about D.O.s, this book will give you a picture of their approach to patient care and to their M.D. colleagues.

The osteopathic profession in California has a unique history, as it differs dramatically from the profession’s history in the rest of the nation. More than 100 years ago, a small pioneering group of osteopathic physicians established in Southern California the Pacific School of Osteopathy to graduate physicians and surgeons with the ability to acquire an unlimited license. Since then, the educational, research, and regulatory arenas of osteopathy have seen in California low points of near elimination and high points of recognition.

Cultures are based on firm beliefs in the truth of their understanding of the world. Often they collide with those who respect different truths. Similarly, the medical culture in California went through collisions between osteopathic and allopathic medicine, often in response to competition and antagonism. Which values and beliefs about each other’s profession were held so fervently in California that prompted the unique event of absorbing the osteopathic profession into allopathic mainstream medicine?

This project explores the events, unique to California but with repercussions nation-wide, of a merger between osteopathic and allopathic medicine. In 1962, the relatively small medical organization of fully licensed osteopathic physicians (the California Osteopathic Organization) merged with the much larger mainstream medical profession (the California Medical Association). What were the incentives for a fully licensed parallel healthcare profession to forfeit its identity and philosophy? What key players and leaders emerged? How did the individual practicing physician think and feel about the merger?

While about two thousand osteopathic physicians changed to the M.D. degree, about two hundred California D.O.s did not merge but persevered in their battle to restore the licensing power of their profession in California. What social and personal motivational sources sustained this group for over a decade? How has osteopathy’s unique history affected medical education and professional relations, nation-wide and internationally?

Answers to these questions have emerged in historical narratives by key persons figuring in the events. Most of them have not written about their lives and their social and political surroundings at the time of the merger and its repercussions. Many never learned the long-term outcomes of their endeavors. Our multidisciplinary research team transcribed in-depth interviews to capture the thoughts and feelings among individuals who played significant roles from the 1940s to the ‘70s. With the approval of the Institutional Review Board of the University of California, Irvine for the protection of the participants’ rights, we asked a diverse group, 35 in all, of physicians, administrators, lawyers and lobbyists, to provide their historical narratives and their suggestions for future directions.

Our objective has been to give an unbiased account, listening equally to representatives of allopathy, osteopathy, and politics. Inspired by Dr. Gevitz’ cogent academic analysis of osteopathic medicine in America, this book presents personal perceptions of events, integrated with documented descriptions, stored in archives, to facilitate the reader’s understanding and analysis. The work has been based on the assumption that it is necessary to get inside historical events by capturing the thoughts and feelings of key persons in the context of their time and situation.

Many allopathic and osteopathic physicians contributed to California’s pursuit of a constructive relationship between M.D.s and D.O.s. Yet, their contributions have hardly been acknowledged, nor can this book do justice to their work. We tried to convey what we have learned.

Most participants were involved in creating the history that now provides the foundation for our current and future practice of medicine in California. Our narrators belonged to the responsible parties of California’s recent medical history; without them, the world would be different, and medical relationships in California would be different. They were the movers and shakers of their time. They seized opportunities in a particular place at a particular time, and the world moved through them and because of them, like a vortex of time. They made their imprint on the nature of the two professions in this state. They are not the only ones, but they are those that have been pointed out by others as having made a difference.

Every discussion about politics and medicine at nationwide professional meetings on manual medicine seems to turn to the “merger” in California. People use it for every argument, be it as a warning sign for losing one’s professional allegiance and identity, or be it as a sign of respect and acceptance of each other’s medical tradition.

Often, inaccurate accounts are given, though, that might hinder constructive relations between the professions. A detailed personal description is missing of the social and political climate in California in the 1900s that can facilitate a broader understanding of the complexity of the D.O. – M.D. relationship. How could the merger be shrouded in mystery only 40 years later?

Motives to merge differed among the various forces. Maybe there were disappointments about unexpected outcomes or unfulfilled promises. Maybe time moved on with little opportunity to learn from the professions’ cultural heritage. But people still live who witnessed the merger era and often played key roles in the events. Their medical practice has been shaped by the events, whether they integrated themselves with mainstream medicine or whether they persevered as osteopathic physician and surgeon. They have insights to share that contribute to a fuller understanding of these historical events and their consequences.

We embedded the historical narratives in the documentation of archival texts, including the unpublished “History of Osteopathy in California” by Dain Tasker, D.O. and files maintained by Forest J. Grunigen, M.D. and Louis Chandler, D.O., as well as documents collected by many other key players. The richness of the interviews allows us to liven up these archival historical documents and point toward promising venues for mutual understanding and respect among D.O.s and M.D.s. The narratives provide suggestions for collaboration in education and research. The interview transcripts can be found online at http://www.lib.uci.edu/themerger.

For nearly forty years, the 41st Medical Trust at the University of California, Irvine has aimed to support research on osteopathic manipulation which had been one of the incentives for merging the medical professions. Members of the 41st Medical Trust committee presently include Victor Passy, M.D. as Chair, Jen Yu, M.D., Ph.D., Stanley van den Noort, M.D., Dolores Grunigen, Richard Kammerman, M.D., Robert Steedman, M.D., and Leonard Kitzes, M.D. A grant by the 41st Medical Trust has made possible this documentation of osteopathic and allopathic medicine in California.

Sibylle Reinsch, Ph.D.
Michael Seffinger, D.O.
Jerome Tobis, M.D.

Irvine and Pomona, California, January 2009

The Merger: M.D.s and D.O.s in California

If you are interested in the recent history of the medical professions, this book is for you. If personal narratives of historical events speak to you as a second layer of documentation, this book is for you. If you are aware that in America there exist two separate yet equal, fully licensed physicians, M.D.s and D.O.s, you might be interested in learning about their unique relationship in California. If you know little about D.O.s, this book will give you a picture of their approach to patient care and to their M.D. colleagues.

The osteopathic profession in California has a unique history, as it differs dramatically from the profession’s history in the rest of the nation. More than 100 years ago, a small pioneering group of osteopathic physicians established in Southern California the Pacific School of Osteopathy to graduate physicians and surgeons with the ability to acquire an unlimited license. Since then, the educational, research, and regulatory arenas of osteopathy have seen in California low points of near elimination and high points of recognition.

Cultures are based on firm beliefs in the truth of their understanding of the world. Often they collide with those who respect different truths. Similarly, the medical culture in California went through collisions between osteopathic and allopathic medicine, often in response to competition and antagonism. Which values and beliefs about each other’s profession were held so fervently in California that prompted the unique event of absorbing the osteopathic profession into allopathic mainstream medicine?

This project explores the events, unique to California but with repercussions nation-wide, of a merger between osteopathic and allopathic medicine. In 1962, the relatively small medical organization of fully licensed osteopathic physicians (the California Osteopathic Organization) merged with the much larger mainstream medical profession (the California Medical Association). What were the incentives for a fully licensed parallel healthcare profession to forfeit its identity and philosophy? What key players and leaders emerged? How did the individual practicing physician think and feel about the merger?

While about two thousand osteopathic physicians changed to the M.D. degree, about two hundred California D.O.s did not merge but persevered in their battle to restore the licensing power of their profession in California. What social and personal motivational sources sustained this group for over a decade? How has osteopathy’s unique history affected medical education and professional relations, nation-wide and internationally?

Answers to these questions have emerged in historical narratives by key persons figuring in the events. Most of them have not written about their lives and their social and political surroundings at the time of the merger and its repercussions. Many never learned the long-term outcomes of their endeavors. Our multidisciplinary research team transcribed in-depth interviews to capture the thoughts and feelings among individuals who played significant roles from the 1940s to the ‘70s. With the approval of the Institutional Review Board of the University of California, Irvine for the protection of the participants’ rights, we asked a diverse group, 35 in all, of physicians, administrators, lawyers and lobbyists, to provide their historical narratives and their suggestions for future directions.

Our objective has been to give an unbiased account, listening equally to representatives of allopathy, osteopathy, and politics. Inspired by Dr. Gevitz’ cogent academic analysis of osteopathic medicine in America, this book presents personal perceptions of events, integrated with documented descriptions, stored in archives, to facilitate the reader’s understanding and analysis. The work has been based on the assumption that it is necessary to get inside historical events by capturing the thoughts and feelings of key persons in the context of their time and situation.

Many allopathic and osteopathic physicians contributed to California’s pursuit of a constructive relationship between M.D.s and D.O.s. Yet, their contributions have hardly been acknowledged, nor can this book do justice to their work. We tried to convey what we have learned.

Most participants were involved in creating the history that now provides the foundation for our current and future practice of medicine in California. Our narrators belonged to the responsible parties of California’s recent medical history; without them, the world would be different, and medical relationships in California would be different. They were the movers and shakers of their time. They seized opportunities in a particular place at a particular time, and the world moved through them and because of them, like a vortex of time. They made their imprint on the nature of the two professions in this state. They are not the only ones, but they are those that have been pointed out by others as having made a difference.

Every discussion about politics and medicine at nationwide professional meetings on manual medicine seems to turn to the “merger” in California. People use it for every argument, be it as a warning sign for losing one’s professional allegiance and identity, or be it as a sign of respect and acceptance of each other’s medical tradition.

Often, inaccurate accounts are given, though, that might hinder constructive relations between the professions. A detailed personal description is missing of the social and political climate in California in the 1900s that can facilitate a broader understanding of the complexity of the D.O. – M.D. relationship. How could the merger be shrouded in mystery only 40 years later?

Motives to merge differed among the various forces. Maybe there were disappointments about unexpected outcomes or unfulfilled promises. Maybe time moved on with little opportunity to learn from the professions’ cultural heritage. But people still live who witnessed the merger era and often played key roles in the events. Their medical practice has been shaped by the events, whether they integrated themselves with mainstream medicine or whether they persevered as osteopathic physician and surgeon. They have insights to share that contribute to a fuller understanding of these historical events and their consequences.

We embedded the historical narratives in the documentation of archival texts, including the unpublished “History of Osteopathy in California” by Dain Tasker, D.O. and files maintained by Forest J. Grunigen, M.D. and Louis Chandler, D.O., as well as documents collected by many other key players. The richness of the interviews allows us to liven up these archival historical documents and point toward promising venues for mutual understanding and respect among D.O.s and M.D.s. The narratives provide suggestions for collaboration in education and research. The interview transcripts can be found online at http://www.lib.uci.edu/themerger.

For nearly forty years, the 41st Medical Trust at the University of California, Irvine has aimed to support research on osteopathic manipulation which had been one of the incentives for merging the medical professions. Members of the 41st Medical Trust committee presently include Victor Passy, M.D. as Chair, Jen Yu, M.D., Ph.D., Stanley van den Noort, M.D., Dolores Grunigen, Richard Kammerman, M.D., Robert Steedman, M.D., and Leonard Kitzes, M.D. A grant by the 41st Medical Trust has made possible this documentation of osteopathic and allopathic medicine in California.

Sibylle Reinsch, Ph.D.
Michael Seffinger, D.O.
Jerome Tobis, M.D.

Irvine and Pomona, California, January 2009

Knowledge about sleep apnea has increased dramatically. Sleep apnea is now known to be associated with a growing list of medical conditions. Thus, it is no longer the exclusive domain of a single specialty. Healthcare providers in different fields are likely to encounter sleep apnea in some form or another.This book contains relevant and practical information about sleep apnea, presented in a compact, easy-to-read question and answer format for the busy clinician.

Knowledge about sleep apnea has increased dramatically. Sleep apnea is now known to be associated with a growing list of medical conditions. Thus, it is no longer the exclusive domain of a single specialty. Healthcare providers in different fields are likely to encounter sleep apnea in some form or another.This book contains relevant and practical information about sleep apnea, presented in a compact, easy-to-read question and answer format for the busy clinician.

Knowledge about sleep apnea has increased dramatically. Sleep apnea is now known to be associated with a growing list of medical conditions. Thus, it is no longer the exclusive domain of a single specialty. Healthcare providers in different fields are likely to encounter sleep apnea in some form or another.This book contains relevant and practical information about sleep apnea, presented in a compact, easy-to-read question and answer format for the busy clinician.

Dr. Harry Haller’s friend, Martin Lewis, has disappeared. Harry suspects that the beautiful teacher, Lilpah Bennet, with whom Lewis was taking an evening course, knows Lewis’s fate. So he arranges to study with her, too. She teaches Harry about ancient medicine, magic, Cabbala, astrology and mysticism. They are soon having an affair. He starts having fascinating dreams about ancient doctors and historical characters, but has difficulty awaking from those dreams. Other doctor-students of Lilpah’s die mysteriously. Is Lilpah a murderer? Where’s Martin Lewis? Why are doctors dying? Will Harry die, too? He approaches the mystery with humor.

Dr. Harry Haller’s friend, Martin Lewis, has disappeared. Harry suspects that the beautiful teacher, Lilpah Bennet, with whom Lewis was taking an evening course, knows Lewis’s fate. So he arranges to study with her, too. She teaches Harry about ancient medicine, magic, Cabbala, astrology and mysticism. They are soon having an affair. He starts having fascinating dreams about ancient doctors and historical characters, but has difficulty awaking from those dreams. Other doctor-students of Lilpah’s die mysteriously. Is Lilpah a murderer? Where’s Martin Lewis? Why are doctors dying? Will Harry die, too? He approaches the mystery with humor.

The Roots of Modern Hypnosis is a compendium of three classic volumes on hypnosis, written by some of its most important practitioners. Read in sequence, these books provide a fascinating explication of the history of hypnosis, from the “animal magnetism,” “mesmerism,” and “universal fluid” of Franz Anton Mesmer as utilized by Dr. James Esdaile in his surgical facilities in India, to the First Modern (1961) International Congress on Hypnosis in New York City.

The three texts contained in The Roots of Modern Hypnosis are:

Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery (originally entitled Mesmerism in India), by James Esdaile, M.D. The book contains an introduction and “Supplemental Reports on Hypnoanesthesia” by William S. Kroger, M.D. The original text was published in 1850; a revised edition, containing Dr. Kroger’s introduction and notes, was published in 1957 by The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society and The Julian Press, Inc.

The Fundamental Principles of Hypnosis (originally entitled The Law of Suggestion) by Stanley L. Krebs, Ph.D., published in 1906. The work was revised by Henry Guze, Ph.D., and republished in 1957, with a new introduction by Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., by The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society and The Julian Press, Inc.

The Nature of Hypnosis: Transactions of the 1961 [First Modern] International Congress on Hypnosis, edited and with an introduction by Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., Director of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, and a Foreword by Lewis Wolberg, M.D., of The Postgraduate Center for Psychotherapy. The book was jointly published by the Institute and the Center.

Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., Director of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, and of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society, conceived the idea of publishing the current edition of each of these texts under a single title, The Roots of Modern Hypnosis. Dr. Kline has been widely acknowledged as one of the foremost experts on medical, psychological, clinical, therapeutic and experimental hypnotherapy and hypnoanalysis, with more than 50 years of experience in using, teaching and conducting research in hypnosis. His recognition and honors have been worldwide.

Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery
by James Esdaile, M.D.

James Esdaile, M.D., was a young surgeon who was put in charge of a hospital for paupers and criminals in Hooghly, India, and then in charge of a medical facility in Calcutta, in the 1840’s. While in India, he made some of the most significant contributions to the history and evolution of hypnosis as a technique for pain control since it was discovered by Franz Anton Mesmer, circa 1775. In addition, despite the conditions under which he worked (heat, lack of proper sanitation, etc.), Dr. Esdaile proved conclusively that hypnosis was a reliable and relatively risk-free method for inducing deep anesthesia under which surgical operations could take place.

While in India, Dr. Esdaile performed approximately 300 major operations, as well as many more minor procedures, on patients under the “Mesmeric trance.” Among the cases which he treated were the removal of tumors from even the most sensitive parts of the body; the amputation of legs, arms and breasts; the extraction of teeth; the repair of bent limbs; and the cure of headaches, colic, eye inflammations, convulsions and nerve pain. In some cases, Dr. Esdaile was able to hypnotize his patients so deeply that their pupils failed to contract even when exposed to bright sunlight.

As Dr. Kroger points out in his introduction to the revised edition of Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery, one of the most important aspects of Dr. Esdaile’s work involves the induction of an extraordinarily deep state of hypnosis in virtually all of his patients. Many of those on whom Dr. Esdaile operated lost little blood, manifested few or no signs of shock, and healed exceptionally rapidly, even by present-day standards. Says Dr. Esdaile, “I beg to state, for the satisfaction of those who have not yet a practical knowledge of the subject, that I have seen no bad consequences whatever arise from persons being operated on when in the mesmeric trance. Cases have occurred in which no pain has been felt subsequent to the operation even; the wounds healing in a few days by the first intention; and in the rest, I have seen no indications of any injury being done to the constitution. On the contrary, it appears to me to have been saved, and that less constitutional disturbance has followed than under ordinary circumstances. There has not been a death among the cases operated on.”

Adds Dr. Kroger, “All the refinements in surgical techniques, asepsis, blood plasma, hormones, and antibiotics have failed to match Esdaile’s record. Even...our present results using chemoanesthesia are not as efficacious in preventing surgical shock.”

Dr. Esdaile attributed the success of hypnosis in treating pain and inducing anesthesia to “thought transference,” or “clairvoyance.” He believed that thoughts were placed in the mind of the patient by the doctor, using a special consciousness awakened by mesmerism. Nevertheless, the anesthetic principles under which he operated are still scientifically valid today. In fact, as observed by Dr. Kroger, Dr. Esdaile’s belief in a “special consciousness” was actually a precursor to modern dynamic psychiatry, “in which the unconscious, with its emotional and volitional forces, exerts a powerful influence on human behavior.”

Another of the most significant principles advocated by Dr. Esdaile was the idea of a “rapport” which must exist between doctor and patient for hypnosis, and therefore surgery, to be most likely to succeed. As explained by Dr. Kroger, “James Esdaile was first and always a physician. What operated to his great...advantage was the one true supposition unknowingly advanced by Mesmer, namely, that a special ‘rapport’ must be established between doctor and patient. Esdaile intuitively understood...that his patient’s confidence in him and his own self-confidence, patience, skill and courage all contributed to his excellent results. The patient’s motivation, his ability uncritically to accept an idea, and his need to rely on the prestige of the doctor are of inestimable value in any form of healing....If the patient can feel this strong link with his physician, he can usually transcend his normal voluntary capacity so as to alter sensory and motor functions and thus initiate appropriate behavior.” In this seemingly simple explanation of “rapport” lie the seeds of hypnotic induction, transference, age regression and many of the other precepts on which modern clinical hypnotherapy and hypnoanalysis are based.

In addition to the valuable information presented therein, Hypnosis in Surgery and Medicine is a highly-entertaining work, providing, as it does, a charming illustration of the style of scientific writing prevalent during the period. Consider, for example, this somewhat flowery endorsement of hypnosis by Dr. Esdaile: “Mesmerism often comes to the aid of my patients, when all the resources of medicine are exhausted, and all the drugs of Arabia useless; and therefore, I consider it to be my duty to benefit them by it, and to assist in making it known for the advantage of mankind.”

The Fundamental Principles of Hypnosis
by Stanley L. Krebs, Ph.D.

Dr. Krebs stated, in the introduction to his book, that he had a threefold purpose in writing it:

“1. To give a bird’s eye view of the whole field, for busy people -- all about Suggestion, but not, of course, all of it.
“2. To tear from the subject that veil of mystery, or ‘occultism,’ with which so many initiates delight to surround it bef

The Roots of Modern Hypnosis is a compendium of three classic volumes on hypnosis, written by some of its most important practitioners. Read in sequence, these books provide a fascinating explication of the history of hypnosis, from the “animal magnetism,” “mesmerism,” and “universal fluid” of Franz Anton Mesmer as utilized by Dr. James Esdaile in his surgical facilities in India, to the First Modern (1961) International Congress on Hypnosis in New York City.

The three texts contained in The Roots of Modern Hypnosis are:

Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery (originally entitled Mesmerism in India), by James Esdaile, M.D. The book contains an introduction and “Supplemental Reports on Hypnoanesthesia” by William S. Kroger, M.D. The original text was published in 1850; a revised edition, containing Dr. Kroger’s introduction and notes, was published in 1957 by The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society and The Julian Press, Inc.

The Fundamental Principles of Hypnosis (originally entitled The Law of Suggestion) by Stanley L. Krebs, Ph.D., published in 1906. The work was revised by Henry Guze, Ph.D., and republished in 1957, with a new introduction by Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., by The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society and The Julian Press, Inc.

The Nature of Hypnosis: Transactions of the 1961 [First Modern] International Congress on Hypnosis, edited and with an introduction by Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., Director of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, and a Foreword by Lewis Wolberg, M.D., of The Postgraduate Center for Psychotherapy. The book was jointly published by the Institute and the Center.

Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., Director of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, and of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society, conceived the idea of publishing the current edition of each of these texts under a single title, The Roots of Modern Hypnosis. Dr. Kline has been widely acknowledged as one of the foremost experts on medical, psychological, clinical, therapeutic and experimental hypnotherapy and hypnoanalysis, with more than 50 years of experience in using, teaching and conducting research in hypnosis. His recognition and honors have been worldwide.

Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery
by James Esdaile, M.D.

James Esdaile, M.D., was a young surgeon who was put in charge of a hospital for paupers and criminals in Hooghly, India, and then in charge of a medical facility in Calcutta, in the 1840’s. While in India, he made some of the most significant contributions to the history and evolution of hypnosis as a technique for pain control since it was discovered by Franz Anton Mesmer, circa 1775. In addition, despite the conditions under which he worked (heat, lack of proper sanitation, etc.), Dr. Esdaile proved conclusively that hypnosis was a reliable and relatively risk-free method for inducing deep anesthesia under which surgical operations could take place.

While in India, Dr. Esdaile performed approximately 300 major operations, as well as many more minor procedures, on patients under the “Mesmeric trance.” Among the cases which he treated were the removal of tumors from even the most sensitive parts of the body; the amputation of legs, arms and breasts; the extraction of teeth; the repair of bent limbs; and the cure of headaches, colic, eye inflammations, convulsions and nerve pain. In some cases, Dr. Esdaile was able to hypnotize his patients so deeply that their pupils failed to contract even when exposed to bright sunlight.

As Dr. Kroger points out in his introduction to the revised edition of Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery, one of the most important aspects of Dr. Esdaile’s work involves the induction of an extraordinarily deep state of hypnosis in virtually all of his patients. Many of those on whom Dr. Esdaile operated lost little blood, manifested few or no signs of shock, and healed exceptionally rapidly, even by present-day standards. Says Dr. Esdaile, “I beg to state, for the satisfaction of those who have not yet a practical knowledge of the subject, that I have seen no bad consequences whatever arise from persons being operated on when in the mesmeric trance. Cases have occurred in which no pain has been felt subsequent to the operation even; the wounds healing in a few days by the first intention; and in the rest, I have seen no indications of any injury being done to the constitution. On the contrary, it appears to me to have been saved, and that less constitutional disturbance has followed than under ordinary circumstances. There has not been a death among the cases operated on.”

Adds Dr. Kroger, “All the refinements in surgical techniques, asepsis, blood plasma, hormones, and antibiotics have failed to match Esdaile’s record. Even...our present results using chemoanesthesia are not as efficacious in preventing surgical shock.”

Dr. Esdaile attributed the success of hypnosis in treating pain and inducing anesthesia to “thought transference,” or “clairvoyance.” He believed that thoughts were placed in the mind of the patient by the doctor, using a special consciousness awakened by mesmerism. Nevertheless, the anesthetic principles under which he operated are still scientifically valid today. In fact, as observed by Dr. Kroger, Dr. Esdaile’s belief in a “special consciousness” was actually a precursor to modern dynamic psychiatry, “in which the unconscious, with its emotional and volitional forces, exerts a powerful influence on human behavior.”

Another of the most significant principles advocated by Dr. Esdaile was the idea of a “rapport” which must exist between doctor and patient for hypnosis, and therefore surgery, to be most likely to succeed. As explained by Dr. Kroger, “James Esdaile was first and always a physician. What operated to his great...advantage was the one true supposition unknowingly advanced by Mesmer, namely, that a special ‘rapport’ must be established between doctor and patient. Esdaile intuitively understood...that his patient’s confidence in him and his own self-confidence, patience, skill and courage all contributed to his excellent results. The patient’s motivation, his ability uncritically to accept an idea, and his need to rely on the prestige of the doctor are of inestimable value in any form of healing....If the patient can feel this strong link with his physician, he can usually transcend his normal voluntary capacity so as to alter sensory and motor functions and thus initiate appropriate behavior.” In this seemingly simple explanation of “rapport” lie the seeds of hypnotic induction, transference, age regression and many of the other precepts on which modern clinical hypnotherapy and hypnoanalysis are based.

In addition to the valuable information presented therein, Hypnosis in Surgery and Medicine is a highly-entertaining work, providing, as it does, a charming illustration of the style of scientific writing prevalent during the period. Consider, for example, this somewhat flowery endorsement of hypnosis by Dr. Esdaile: “Mesmerism often comes to the aid of my patients, when all the resources of medicine are exhausted, and all the drugs of Arabia useless; and therefore, I consider it to be my duty to benefit them by it, and to assist in making it known for the advantage of mankind.”

The Fundamental Principles of Hypnosis
by Stanley L. Krebs, Ph.D.

Dr. Krebs stated, in the introduction to his book, that he had a threefold purpose in writing it:

“1. To give a bird’s eye view of the whole field, for busy people -- all about Suggestion, but not, of course, all of it.
“2. To tear from the subject that veil of mystery, or ‘occultism,’ with which so many initiates delight to surround it bef

The Roots of Modern Hypnosis is a compendium of three classic volumes on hypnosis, written by some of its most important practitioners. Read in sequence, these books provide a fascinating explication of the history of hypnosis, from the “animal magnetism,” “mesmerism,” and “universal fluid” of Franz Anton Mesmer as utilized by Dr. James Esdaile in his surgical facilities in India, to the First Modern (1961) International Congress on Hypnosis in New York City.

The three texts contained in The Roots of Modern Hypnosis are:

Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery (originally entitled Mesmerism in India), by James Esdaile, M.D. The book contains an introduction and “Supplemental Reports on Hypnoanesthesia” by William S. Kroger, M.D. The original text was published in 1850; a revised edition, containing Dr. Kroger’s introduction and notes, was published in 1957 by The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society and The Julian Press, Inc.

The Fundamental Principles of Hypnosis (originally entitled The Law of Suggestion) by Stanley L. Krebs, Ph.D., published in 1906. The work was revised by Henry Guze, Ph.D., and republished in 1957, with a new introduction by Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., by The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society and The Julian Press, Inc.

The Nature of Hypnosis: Transactions of the 1961 [First Modern] International Congress on Hypnosis, edited and with an introduction by Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., Director of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, and a Foreword by Lewis Wolberg, M.D., of The Postgraduate Center for Psychotherapy. The book was jointly published by the Institute and the Center.

Milton V. Kline, Ph.D., Director of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, and of The Institute for Research in Hypnosis Publication Society, conceived the idea of publishing the current edition of each of these texts under a single title, The Roots of Modern Hypnosis. Dr. Kline has been widely acknowledged as one of the foremost experts on medical, psychological, clinical, therapeutic and experimental hypnotherapy and hypnoanalysis, with more than 50 years of experience in using, teaching and conducting research in hypnosis. His recognition and honors have been worldwide.

Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery
by James Esdaile, M.D.

James Esdaile, M.D., was a young surgeon who was put in charge of a hospital for paupers and criminals in Hooghly, India, and then in charge of a medical facility in Calcutta, in the 1840’s. While in India, he made some of the most significant contributions to the history and evolution of hypnosis as a technique for pain control since it was discovered by Franz Anton Mesmer, circa 1775. In addition, despite the conditions under which he worked (heat, lack of proper sanitation, etc.), Dr. Esdaile proved conclusively that hypnosis was a reliable and relatively risk-free method for inducing deep anesthesia under which surgical operations could take place.

While in India, Dr. Esdaile performed approximately 300 major operations, as well as many more minor procedures, on patients under the “Mesmeric trance.” Among the cases which he treated were the removal of tumors from even the most sensitive parts of the body; the amputation of legs, arms and breasts; the extraction of teeth; the repair of bent limbs; and the cure of headaches, colic, eye inflammations, convulsions and nerve pain. In some cases, Dr. Esdaile was able to hypnotize his patients so deeply that their pupils failed to contract even when exposed to bright sunlight.

As Dr. Kroger points out in his introduction to the revised edition of Hypnosis in Medicine and Surgery, one of the most important aspects of Dr. Esdaile’s work involves the induction of an extraordinarily deep state of hypnosis in virtually all of his patients. Many of those on whom Dr. Esdaile operated lost little blood, manifested few or no signs of shock, and healed exceptionally rapidly, even by present-day standards. Says Dr. Esdaile, “I beg to state, for the satisfaction of those who have not yet a practical knowledge of the subject, that I have seen no bad consequences whatever arise from persons being operated on when in the mesmeric trance. Cases have occurred in which no pain has been felt subsequent to the operation even; the wounds healing in a few days by the first intention; and in the rest, I have seen no indications of any injury being done to the constitution. On the contrary, it appears to me to have been saved, and that less constitutional disturbance has followed than under ordinary circumstances. There has not been a death among the cases operated on.”

Adds Dr. Kroger, “All the refinements in surgical techniques, asepsis, blood plasma, hormones, and antibiotics have failed to match Esdaile’s record. Even...our present results using chemoanesthesia are not as efficacious in preventing surgical shock.”

Dr. Esdaile attributed the success of hypnosis in treating pain and inducing anesthesia to “thought transference,” or “clairvoyance.” He believed that thoughts were placed in the mind of the patient by the doctor, using a special consciousness awakened by mesmerism. Nevertheless, the anesthetic principles under which he operated are still scientifically valid today. In fact, as observed by Dr. Kroger, Dr. Esdaile’s belief in a “special consciousness” was actually a precursor to modern dynamic psychiatry, “in which the unconscious, with its emotional and volitional forces, exerts a powerful influence on human behavior.”

Another of the most significant principles advocated by Dr. Esdaile was the idea of a “rapport” which must exist between doctor and patient for hypnosis, and therefore surgery, to be most likely to succeed. As explained by Dr. Kroger, “James Esdaile was first and always a physician. What operated to his great...advantage was the one true supposition unknowingly advanced by Mesmer, namely, that a special ‘rapport’ must be established between doctor and patient. Esdaile intuitively understood...that his patient’s confidence in him and his own self-confidence, patience, skill and courage all contributed to his excellent results. The patient’s motivation, his ability uncritically to accept an idea, and his need to rely on the prestige of the doctor are of inestimable value in any form of healing....If the patient can feel this strong link with his physician, he can usually transcend his normal voluntary capacity so as to alter sensory and motor functions and thus initiate appropriate behavior.” In this seemingly simple explanation of “rapport” lie the seeds of hypnotic induction, transference, age regression and many of the other precepts on which modern clinical hypnotherapy and hypnoanalysis are based.

In addition to the valuable information presented therein, Hypnosis in Surgery and Medicine is a highly-entertaining work, providing, as it does, a charming illustration of the style of scientific writing prevalent during the period. Consider, for example, this somewhat flowery endorsement of hypnosis by Dr. Esdaile: “Mesmerism often comes to the aid of my patients, when all the resources of medicine are exhausted, and all the drugs of Arabia useless; and therefore, I consider it to be my duty to benefit them by it, and to assist in making it known for the advantage of mankind.”

The Fundamental Principles of Hypnosis
by Stanley L. Krebs, Ph.D.

Dr. Krebs stated, in the introduction to his book, that he had a threefold purpose in writing it:

“1. To give a bird’s eye view of the whole field, for busy people -- all about Suggestion, but not, of course, all of it.
“2. To tear from the subject that veil of mystery, or ‘occultism,’ with which so many initiates delight to surround it bef

No Description Available.