I answer, unequivocally, not one! They are all wrong. This so-called “Law of Cure” is a purely imaginary affair; one of the many misconceptions peculiar to the medical schools, originating in a false conception of the true nature of disease. There is no such thing as a law of cure! There is a condition of cure, and that is, obedience. Nature has provided penalties for disobedience, and is inexorable in exacting payment; but she does not provide remedies. If there is one thing absolutely certain in nature, it is the unfaltering sequence of cause and effect. Nature never stultifies herself. It is impossible to imagine nature providing penalties for violation of her laws, and then furnishing remedies to make those penalties negatory. It is a lamentable fact that the medical profession, as a body, entertain a totally erroneous conception of the true nature of disease, and its legitimate function in the economy of nature. Instead of recognizing it as a beneficent remedial process, which, if properly aided, will work out the salvation of the patient, they antagonize it at every turn, and endeavor to suppress the symptoms, which are its legitimate expressions. The whole thing is a huge misconception, the failure to understand the true relation between living and dead substances. According to the United States Dispensatory, medicines are those substances that make sanative impressions on the body. A false definition of a word leads to a false system of remedial practice, based upon that definition. What is an impression? Is it the action of a dead substance, which _cannot act_ upon a living substance _that can_? Assuredly not! Is it not rather the recognition by the living substance of the lifeless one? The whole theory of drug action is easily explainable on this hypothesis. Drugs--inert substances--do not _act_ upon the living organism, but are _acted upon_, with a view to their expulsion from the living domain. If it were not so, if drugs _really acted upon_ the various organs, then their action should be equally as effective _after_ death as before. But no, nature resents the introduction of foreign substances into the human economy, and exerts all her powers to cast out the intruders. Now, as all substances incapable of physiological use are foreign, such as particles of worn out tissue, the waste products of digestion, etc., and their presence in the animal economy inimical to the general welfare, the depurating organs are called into active play to expel the offending substances; and the increased physiological activity, and (in the case of actual lesion) the increased flow of blood to the parts, for the purpose of repair, cause a rise in temperature, commonly known as fever, which is one of the most frequent symptoms of what is generally recognized as disease; thus establishing the fact, indisputably, that disease is purely and simply a remedial process, either for purposes of repair or purification.