Re: beyondhom Short forms

On Mar 14, 2013, at 5:23 AM, Ellen Madono wrote:

> 
> Irene,
> Is there a constitutional remedy that is not inate? I am referring to the conversation about ICT. 
> Best, 
> Ellen


HI Ellen,

Please bear with me, it needs explanation:

I devised the term Innate Constitutional Type to denote the one type associated with an individual that is clearly there from birth to death, which cannot be changed or removed or altered, it is innate, like part of the  unchangeable major gene DNA.  It's always fascinating to me how it is so clearly a part of the individual even at birth.
(......I add a personal extra here: and if we are reincarnated in any way ever, I would expect the individual to always be that ICT even if in some other form, as it is the essential type of the individual, it is like their essence, I doubt it can be changed over time. I may be right or wrong in this, but I can not figure a theory y which such a critically unique essence of an individual could change.)

I do not use the term "constitutional remedy" at all. I feel it has no clear meaning as it is unclear whether it refers to an innate constitutional type which cannot be changed, or whether it refers to a remedy matched to the disease issues to be restored to health.

I consider that we need to always use a simillimum for an illness situation. And I always use the term simillimum not "constitutional remedy" - as the word "constitution" implies more than matching the illness and one cannot match the illness AND the ICT - we'd be working at cross purposes, it's one or the other, as one starts with the patient symptoms, not the patient's ICT which can include all sorts of tongs NOT part of the illness, and thus NOT to be included in simillimum selection.
      With modern diseases, frequently involving immune system compromise, it is not so often that the ICT is also the remedy needed to restore health, though that certainly can happen. I would never use it for illness instead of seeking a matched simillimum. So for ANY illness situation, I use a simillimum. It is matched to the entire illness picture.

ICT may or may not result from that careful remedy selection. But the simillimum is always the right choice for the situation, arrived at via the *symptoms* (not ICT features) of the individual.
     One can follow later with the ICT, if it looks appropriate to build robustness and resistance, or to balance characteristics of the ICT.

That's how I see it.

So now let me turn the tables. What do YOU refer to when you call a remedy "constitutional"?

Namaste,
     Irene

REPLY TO: <[email protected]> only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."