Re: Migraine
Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 4:18 pm
Hi Venkat,
I like your definition! Even with that, we can do what I would call a
constitutional prescription, in that "disease totality" is taken to be not
e.g. "my headache" (tho of course that *might* be the most appropriate
totality for a given circumstance), but instead "my life, beliefs,
sensitivities, loves, hates, fears, (etc.) -- part of which includes these
headaches with all their particulars". Same process, different boundaries.
I was taught to be open to needing either approach, depending upon where the
richness of symptoms lies -- "Follow the case" -- and that sometimes you'll
need a "constitutional" remedy (that's the term we used, with a distinctly
different meaning from the one Eizayaga gives the term), i.e. an "overall"
remedy; or you might need a remedy "for the headache (or etc.)", and might
need to follow up later with the "constitutional".
How does that sit with you?
Shannon
on 3/21/04 7:52 AM, J.Venkatasubramanian at apexpreci@eth.net wrote:
I like your definition! Even with that, we can do what I would call a
constitutional prescription, in that "disease totality" is taken to be not
e.g. "my headache" (tho of course that *might* be the most appropriate
totality for a given circumstance), but instead "my life, beliefs,
sensitivities, loves, hates, fears, (etc.) -- part of which includes these
headaches with all their particulars". Same process, different boundaries.
I was taught to be open to needing either approach, depending upon where the
richness of symptoms lies -- "Follow the case" -- and that sometimes you'll
need a "constitutional" remedy (that's the term we used, with a distinctly
different meaning from the one Eizayaga gives the term), i.e. an "overall"
remedy; or you might need a remedy "for the headache (or etc.)", and might
need to follow up later with the "constitutional".
How does that sit with you?
Shannon
on 3/21/04 7:52 AM, J.Venkatasubramanian at apexpreci@eth.net wrote: