Editorial

by Richard Pitt and Premananda Childs

This issue is dedicated to the study of miasmatic theory and practice in homeopathy.  The role of miasms has always been controversial.  Since Hahnemann first postulated the concept of miasms and which led him to elucidate his ideas in The Chronic Miasms, the homeopathic community has often been divided in its validity as a theory and its significance in homeopathic prescribing.  The fact that there has been such a division and debate within the profession forces us to re-evalue the foundations of miasmatic theory.  Why did Hahnemann, toward the end of his career, reveal such a radical idea regarding the origin of disease?  How valid was his conclusions and how much has changed since then?  Do his original ideas have much significance in terms of homeopathic prescribing?  Was Hahnemann correct about the origins of Psora and how much did he really consider the heriditary significance of sycosis and syphilis?  How many more miasms are there since Hahnemann outlined this three miasms?  All these questions are important today, as they were 180 years ago.  Various homeopaths and authors have given their own opinions on this subject and so this issue of the California Homeopath is dedicated to exploring the history and relevance of miasmatic theory and its application in homeopathic prescribing.

It is hoped this journal can be a resource of study for both students and practitioners exploring this subject.  Some of the articles may be rather long and although we understand that this is not always easy to read, we felt that the subject deserved as thorough an investigation as possible and we hope that it will be of use to homeopaths and students of homeopathy as they grapple with the theory of miasms in homeopathic prescribing and history.

We hope you enjoy this issue and please contact us if you have any comments of questions.  We welcome your letters and input.

Richard Pitt CCH

Premananda Childs.

Editors, The California Homeopath.