Minutus

Glad you make this point Chris
It needs making at regular intervals
Simon
If you want to do what you love it will be easy - Courtney Pine

I should add to my previous post, that I was not referring to layers based
on actual functional-pathological stages of disease, but rather the
inference that WE should determine the deepest/true remedy based on OUR
presumptions of what is the patient's actual condition.
Thanks,
Chris.

Hi Chris and all,

These ideas (whether the rx treats a "layer", and whether it reached
the "deepest level of the pt", and therefore whether its cured sxs can
all be taken as "belonging to" the remedy) I think become important in
evaluating the results of provings and cured cases. I think it's
important, actually (thinking out loud, here).

Chris, I agree with you that we should not presume we know what's
"deepest" in the patient, and we should not keep prior assumptions
about what the range and action of a remedy will be--sometimes we are
surprised! Sometimes a "superficial" prescription turns out to be all
that was needed, and cures deeply. But in *retrospect* we can see when
the action handled a "layer" rather than deeper issues. I've had the
experience a number of times, where a nicely suited "layer" remedy for
a time made *all* the complaints go away, including ones that, so far
as I could tell, were not directly connected with the remedy; and those
in time came back, and were handled by the next remedy (or the
next...).

When Massimo Mangialavore presents cases "of" a remedy, he uses *only*
those people for whom no other remedy was needed, at any point. (Nice
"gold standard", huh!), because only in that way is he sure that their
picture will be *only* about the remedy in question, not mixing in
their other "layers"...

Shannon