Dr. MAS: If you want to discuss a literal, such term and since I write the Englishman of evil, already I offer him my surrender :razz: humbly but with dignity, it always.
Now then, if you do not get stuck(do not get into a jam) in terms, but in the meaning of my words, I can clarify them:

Certainly that can treat with remedies homeopathycs for a symptom, even following the allopathic criteria, in fact many that are called homeopaths do it, you know it.
Since in many occasions I have said, the LAW OF THE SIMILARITY is fulfilled always, and if the similarity is applied with A SYMPTOM, we treat the symptom, and if the semajanza is applied with the totality, we treat the totality.

When I say to recover, (you put the term that he likes more), I speak of restoring the balance, and from my point of view, the human being is one and indivisible,(complete) in which there can no be imbalance of a part without imbalance of the totality and vice versa, there can no be treatment(healing) of a part without treatment(healing) of a totality, since in this case, treatment(healing) does not exist, but suppression.
Because of it I said, that never the prescription for only a symptom. It, to medicate the isolated symptoms, is in my opinion, to do allopathy with remedies homeopathycs. Also I said later, to except of cases of urgency or the first aids, since the first thing is the life.
I believe in Kent's aphorism that he says that any remedy not simillimum is the suppressing one. And I believe in the ideal one of treatment(healing) that the homeopathy has the potential of offering, a balance of the totality. For less, I believe that is not worth being a homeopath, the allopathy is not so bad to suppress symptoms.

I wait that you have understood the best what I want to say and in any case, am glad much of being able to debate with you.

Regards.