For making a prescription that would offer a ‘Total Cure’ of the individual, we have to get his ‘Totality of Symptoms’ which constitute the his ‘constitutional totality’ as well as various ‘’particular totalities’. Presence of underlying miasms, or ‘chronic disease dispositions arising from off-target effects of antibodies generated against exogenous proteins such as infectious agents’ should also be considered and appropriate ‘anti-miasmatic’ drugs included in the ‘total cure’ prescriptions.
A patients Mental symptoms and Physical generals constitute the ‘constitutional totality’.
Particular disease symptoms consisting of their Causations, Appearance, Locations, Sensations, Modalities and Concomitants constitute ‘particular totality’ .
There may me more than one ‘particular totality’ existing an individual simultaneously, arising from different types of molecular inhibitions. He may be having headache with a ‘particular totality’, with some skin eruptions with yet another ‘particular totality’ , and a gastric complaint with yet another ‘particular totality’, all existing simultaneously.
Case taking and repertorizing using mental symptoms and physical generals according to classical KENTIAN METHOD would be ideal to find out ‘constitutional totality’ and a ‘similimums’ for that totality.
Case taking and repertorization using causations, locations, sensations, modalities and concomitants according to BOENNINGHAUSSEN’S METHOD would be ideal to find out’particular totalities’ , and appropriate ‘similimums’ for each ‘particular totality’ .
If we get a ‘single’ drug as similimum’ for ‘constitutional totality’ and ‘particular totality’ , and symptoms arising from probable miasms also were covered by that drug, we can prescribe a ‘single drug’.
IF different ‘similimums’ comes out for ‘constitutional totality’ and different ‘particular totalities’, we will have to make a ‘multiple drug’ prescription. In most chronic cases, nosodes will be required to tackle miasms.
Concept of ‘constitutional totality’ evolves from KENTIAN METHOD of case taking and repertorization, whereas the concept of ‘particular totality’ is based on BOENNINGHAUSSENS method. In my opinion, KENT and BOENNINGHAUSSEN has their own limitations, and hence a synthesis of both approach is necessary for finding a similimum that cover the ‘Complete Totality’ of the patient.
In brief, this is the practical way to make individualized ‘Total Cure Prescritptions’ for our patients.