Would appreciate comments about the following:

1. I keep hearing about constitutional prescribing, I thought there was only one type of prescribing in homeopathy and that was based on the totality of the symptoms. So are these two the same. How many types of prescribing are there in homeopathy.

2. During provings, a remedy doesn't produce all of its symptoms in all the provers, so would it be fair to assume that the CHARACTERISTIC symptom (which is UNUSUAL, PECULIAR not something general e.g. restlessness or lack of sleep)is the one which is shown in ALL of the provers. The reason for this logic is that, since during proving, the remedy didn't show all its symptoms in one prover, so there is every bit a chance that the patient in question and the prover (who didn't show, say, one particular symptom of the remedy) are alike and hence the patient in question won't benefit from that remedy. Whereas if a particular symptom of the remedy is shown in all the provers, then its the CHARACTERISTIC symptom and if its present as the chief complaint of a patient, its guaranteed that he will be cured. (I am forgetting the aphorism # which deals with this as it says that it doesn't matter if a particular symptom was shown in lesser number of provers, it still will work on the patient in question based on the totality.)

[ 11. August 2003, 06:30: Message edited by: fitness first ]

__________________
Don't take life too seriously, it aint permanent.