Editorial February 2006

We are happy to have the second edition of Interhomeopathy. Many people were delighted with the first one, which gives us inspiration to go on. Already many homeopaths have sent in articles and all homeopaths are welcome to do the same.

Website
The website has been updated and bugs have been removed and becoming a member is functioning well now.

Constitution
In this issue we have the theme of constitutional treatment. This is one of the confusing topics in homeopathy. The word constitution means the inborn physical make up of a person. So "constitutional treatment" means prescribing on that physical make-up.
In time though other meanings became attached to "constitutional” prescribing.

The one remedy?
The first idea was that every person has one and only one constitutional remedy, which remains the same for his whole life and can cure all his problems.
In practice this is not working out very well, as is shown in the articles of Ai-Ling Makewell. In many cases more than one remedy is needed. Many times the objection is made that there will be a better remedy that covers the ones that were given, but that's quite hypothetical.

Constitutional remedies?
A second idea that developed in homeopathy is that some remedies are constitutional and others are more superficial oracute. This idea is very often entangled with the idea of the "polycrest", some 50 remedies that are very often prescribed and are the best represented in the repertories. The polycrests were considered the "constitutional remedies" and the other remedies were seen as acutes.
This idea is also in contradiction with reality. Many so called "small" or "acute" remedies have given very deep, "constitutional" cures. The polycrest on the other hand are often prescribed as superficial or acute remedies.
One can better talk of constitutional prescriptions instead of constitutional remedies. Remedies in themselves are not constitutional. The situation in which these remedies are prescribed can be constitutional or more superficial. It is the way in which they are curative for the individual that makes them constitutional remedies or not.
Having a better understanding of “constitutional treatment VS constitutional remedies” allows us to be more open minded to possibilities. When we do not look at remedies or courses of treatment dogmatically we can then achieve better success.