Letter to the editor

Dear Harry,

For the past few years, I have had to debate within myself whether or not to renew my subscription to Links. This year the debate was unusually long and arduous.

Massimo Mangialavori, in his interview in The American Homeopath, relates:

‘I think I learned the most important things about remedies from my own cases. What I like most, is to have a living picture of a remedy. […] I have been to many seminars where people had in fact very strange ideas about certain remedies. They were able to speak in an amazing, brilliant and fantastic way about these ideas, but mostly they were not attached to the reality of cured patients. So now I insist that, more important than to have brilliant ideas, is to have good cures…’

In recent years, Links has chosen to publish fewer case reports and more philosophical discussions of all types. I have seen this trend in many other homeopathic journals as well. Perhaps it is inevitable, a symptom of our collective disease. Perhaps there are fewer case submissions now than formerly, and so you must fill out the issues with philosophy.

Of course, one cannot make blanket statements. I did read one philosophical discussion some years ago that I liked. It was called “The Shadow of Homeopathy - An Analysis of the Current Situation in Homeopathy from a Jungian Perspective.” Perhaps I liked it because it was not another theory about how homeopathy works or how it should be practiced.

But, speaking from my heart, I wish you could rededicate Links to cured cases. If an author wishes to add some philosophical insights at the end of a well documented case, I would not object.

Sincerely,

Diderik Finne