question about antidotes

The most effective way to antidote is to match the new/aggravated symptoms to a remedy. This is will cure the symptoms, leaving you in the same state you were in before you took the remedy.

However, a medicine cannot neutralize symptoms that are already cured. You cannot antidote genuine cure. You can only neutralize symptoms that are actually present.

There are situations where a medicine is palliating the symptoms and has not cured them. In this case, taking an antidote will take away both the troublesome symptoms and the temporary improvement.

It is also possible, if the practitioner takes the time to take the case again (as per Hahnemann's advice) that the 'antidote' will be the correct medicine to improve the person's health overall (adding new and old symptoms together).

If the antidote is dynamic (a homeopathic remedy), it can even undo the good effects of a remedy. e.g. In a case where Sulphur is the similimum, and has cured a person of chronic problems, the patient should not be given Pulsatilla after Sulph as it is likely to undo the good effects of Sulph. This happens because an anti-dote has an action which is in some way similar to the remedy it anti-dotes. The set of symptoms that the correct remedy removed is also the set of symptoms that the person is 'prone' or 'predisposed' to exhibiting. If a homeopath does not respect remedy relationships, he can keep going around in circles where he will keep coming back to square one, because the next remedy anti-doted the previous (albeit well chosen) remedy's curative effects.

Also, if the problems started from a homeopathic remedy, a remedy which is listed in the anti-dotes and is closest to the troublesome symptoms being exhibited is the surest way to bring relief from those symptoms.