The miasms doctrine has also become unfortunately and

perhaps unnecessarily tangled up

both with
Hering's Law and with Kentian metaphysics.

Both of which are suspect on a number of grounds relating directly to actual

practice.

Hering's Law claims that symptoms get better under treatment in the reverse order
of their appearance, from top downwards and from centre to circumference.

Is this true?
Under the influence of deep constitutional
ie miasmatic remedies the law should be confirmed in this way.
What l ie miasmatic remedies the law should be confirmed in this way.
What if it isn't?

Does that mean that the case is not cured or that the law is inaccurate?

If the cure does not proceed in this way is it a true cure or merely a suppression?

Is the remedy the true simillimum?

Questions of this kind can lead straight into a wilderness of thorns and brambles
where everything seems uncertain and painful!

Finally, on Kentian grounds the miasms and their remedies are regarded as 'high
homoeopathy', the ultimate and only true homoeopathy, acting in that hallowed and
rarefied realm of disease causation.

This somewhat snooty view of homoeopathy has been questioned before.

Is it a real claimant of the high ground or a pretender?

Again, many years of observant practice are required to answer this question for
yourself.