Back in the days when homeopathy was not helping my husband (a PhD chemist/physics type), he used to bug me about all the impurities in the water (including distilled water). He would carp, "How could I prove that xx remedy that had no material existence in current scientific thought had a greater influence than all of the impurities in all water?" After all, he said, "the nature of water is to absorb everything around it including silica from the glass."
I had no smart answer to give him in those days and I still don't. I feel very stupid with no answer, but also I feel that it is not worth petty arguing about the physical principles behind the phenomenon of homeopathy when it actually works and also when the political and technical world are opposed to such explorations. Like the artisan, my job is just to get good at the art of homeopathy. When the political system sees the need for such good work, it will find the resources to fund the scientific research necessary to understand why.
As a student, I just wish for more scientific understandings to make the learning easier. For example, I am looking for chemical, physiological understandings to organize the rubrics.
Blessings,
Ellen Madono
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
remedy purity
Re: remedy purity
Ellen Madono wrote:
Dear Ellen,
On a tour of the (then new) B&T plant in Santa Rosa in 1990 it was revealed to me that they were putting UNFILTERED WELL WATER right through their Skinner fluxion high potency maker. Well water is heavily mineralized and contains soil acids and other impurities, of course. Now this was strange and surprised me although I can understand why they did it--they would go through a lot of carbon block filters or wear out any other filtering equipment because of the extreme water requirements of the fluxion potentizer, thus driving up their costs. Bottom line, the remedies still
seemed to work. Why?
Compared to the level of impurities in the solvent used, the concentration of the solute (the original substance quantity used to make the first dilution) is very HIGH.
The concentrations of each impurity would be on the order of up to a few hundred parts per million (ppm) (maximum) from a typical well for human consumption, and usually not more than 5-100 ppm for these various impurities. I would doubt that B&T's well contained total impurity load over 100 ppm.
For x potencies, the solute (remedy substance) to solvent (water) ratio at the beginning it is 1/9, or over 111 thousand parts per million; for centisimals and LM's (which --correct me if I am wrong--can start with a 3C as first step and I think always do so) the ratio in the intitial solution is 1 to 99, or over 10 thousand ppm of original solute. So the effect on the water molecules of the solute of the original solution is very dramatically higher than all the impurities combined. So, while the impurities in the original solution get potentized at each step right along with
the solute, the solute that was originally of far higher concentration has a far greater influence in structuring the carrier. The ratio of the remedy to the impurities in solution before potentization starts is probably the main reason why the impurities become negligible in influence.
But what about the diluting water, which is the same contaminated stuff being reintroduced every step of the potentization process? This is where the impurity signal could start to catch up to the remedy signal as the potentization process continued. The water with impurities both gets imprinted at each step, and adds material impurities to the portion reserved for the next step in the process in the cases where the method used is Hahnemannian (new bottle each step), or Korsakovian (same bottle refilled).
But my guess is that the pattern of the original high concentration dilutant becomes thoroughly established in the water matrix in the first approximately10 iterations that it takes for the solute material concentration to drop almost to negligible levels. Once established, the remedy signal becomes EXTREMELY STABLE. Remember, this signal (as we observe in remedies almost miraculously carried on dried sugar pellets) is impervious to thermal disturbances probably up to a few hundreds of degrees, to freezing (although solutions may not be) and reintroduces itself when put in
"blank" water again, as if it was reproducing itself (!) So the dominant solute in the original solution becomes hegemonous, and its stability allows it to remain relatively impervious even to the rising concentration of unpotentized and lower potency contaminants. What is being reintroduced is of no potency, totally material. My guess is that the (probably nonelectromagnetic) factor which creates this clumping phenomenon
(see Brian Connellys paper for more on stable aggregates http://www.hpathy.com/RESEARCH/how_does ... y_work.asp )
becomes so pervasive that it clumps impurities (that have not influenced the energetic organization of the water matrix) in the same pattern as it has clumped the water molecules that get passed on and "infect" the next iteration. The clumping force imparted by dilution/succussion gave the "upper hand" to the DOMINANT SOLUTE early in the potentization process, and that dominant solute (the original substance of the intended remedy) becomes what is the dominant signal carried by the water of the remedy to the water in the body of the person taking the remedy. We know that sugar
pellets and paper will carry a potentized pattern. Even a dried-out glass vial of remedy solution will carry the remedy signal even in the glass (!) allowing the vial to be refilled and the practitioner once again made happy. So the "organizing principle" that got the head start in the beginning probably takes over that water and it carries that signal despite impurities. Even though contaminated dilutant is being added each iteration and succussed along with that stable pattern, the pattern probably becomes resistant to unpotentized elements at some point, although those same
elements are indeed part of the signal in the remedy, albeit in the category of "noise". Put in terms of electric audio signals, it is probably that the signal to noise ratio is high in the beginning of the process, and the signal takes over the carrier vehicle such that the noise remains neglible even though it is being reintroduced, because the signal has had the "headstart" in structuring the water.
In the case of Fluxion (continuous irrigation) no succussion is going on except that exerted by the flowing water and any machine pressure effects depending on the machine being used. Water is flowing through, so no water aliquots (portions) are compartmentalized to any great degree. The concept of remedy gets a little hazy with this type of potentization, and one would think that the remedy signal gets smoothed out (which is what is observed in practice with fluxion potencies, which are mellower in effect for a given "potency" (in parentheses for fluxion because of the lack
of discrete iterations)). And with high impurity water, this would probably happen to a relatively high level. So the original signal may still hold sway, but much less so than in the potentization methods which retain some of the previous step.
=====
This being said, it seems reasonable to assume that super pure water will yield a sharper remedy image contained by the water carrier. And that, if the concentration of impurities in the water of the original solution water and diluting water was getting to be a big fraction of that in the original solute, then the remedy signal would start to get muted. In the latter case, every remedy made with that water would have a lot in common with all the other remedies made with that system. As Ellen's husband suggested, a really highly contaminated water used would in a real sense
become part of the remedy. Even though the original desired remedy signal may make it through enough to resonate with someone susceptible to whom the rx was correctly chosen, the rx image will not be "sharp" because the signal to noise ratio will be LOW.
A complicated explanation, but I hope it is close to accurate and helps. The key issue here for those skeptical is firstly that we know and can easily demonstrate that there is a powerful and reproducible phenomenon in operation. In order to explain its operation, we have to go beyond conventional valency and concentration and get into the idea that there are other forces at work right under our noses which both maintain and create patterns in the macrostructure of matter. These superimposed patterns affect life forms for good or ill. These patterns can be conveniently
imprinted and captured on media.
Logic can be used to create a match between the recorded and archived database of influences of one of these patterns on a test population of biological organisms; and the pattern of symptoms which develop in someone with a disordered biological organism that needs help. In such a case the matching pattern acts as a facsimile of the pattern which the biological organism cannot disgorge from itself automatically. The pattern can thus be a medicine to act on the organism, an organism susceptible to disorder because it has been compromised by inherited patterns which held sway
during its formative time and continue to hold sway. Thus these captured patterns can be the basis for a system of medicine which captures the signal of any substance and harnesses it to be a perfect medicinal agent --curative when properly chosen and almost harmless when not.
Best,
Andy
Dear Ellen,
On a tour of the (then new) B&T plant in Santa Rosa in 1990 it was revealed to me that they were putting UNFILTERED WELL WATER right through their Skinner fluxion high potency maker. Well water is heavily mineralized and contains soil acids and other impurities, of course. Now this was strange and surprised me although I can understand why they did it--they would go through a lot of carbon block filters or wear out any other filtering equipment because of the extreme water requirements of the fluxion potentizer, thus driving up their costs. Bottom line, the remedies still
seemed to work. Why?
Compared to the level of impurities in the solvent used, the concentration of the solute (the original substance quantity used to make the first dilution) is very HIGH.
The concentrations of each impurity would be on the order of up to a few hundred parts per million (ppm) (maximum) from a typical well for human consumption, and usually not more than 5-100 ppm for these various impurities. I would doubt that B&T's well contained total impurity load over 100 ppm.
For x potencies, the solute (remedy substance) to solvent (water) ratio at the beginning it is 1/9, or over 111 thousand parts per million; for centisimals and LM's (which --correct me if I am wrong--can start with a 3C as first step and I think always do so) the ratio in the intitial solution is 1 to 99, or over 10 thousand ppm of original solute. So the effect on the water molecules of the solute of the original solution is very dramatically higher than all the impurities combined. So, while the impurities in the original solution get potentized at each step right along with
the solute, the solute that was originally of far higher concentration has a far greater influence in structuring the carrier. The ratio of the remedy to the impurities in solution before potentization starts is probably the main reason why the impurities become negligible in influence.
But what about the diluting water, which is the same contaminated stuff being reintroduced every step of the potentization process? This is where the impurity signal could start to catch up to the remedy signal as the potentization process continued. The water with impurities both gets imprinted at each step, and adds material impurities to the portion reserved for the next step in the process in the cases where the method used is Hahnemannian (new bottle each step), or Korsakovian (same bottle refilled).
But my guess is that the pattern of the original high concentration dilutant becomes thoroughly established in the water matrix in the first approximately10 iterations that it takes for the solute material concentration to drop almost to negligible levels. Once established, the remedy signal becomes EXTREMELY STABLE. Remember, this signal (as we observe in remedies almost miraculously carried on dried sugar pellets) is impervious to thermal disturbances probably up to a few hundreds of degrees, to freezing (although solutions may not be) and reintroduces itself when put in
"blank" water again, as if it was reproducing itself (!) So the dominant solute in the original solution becomes hegemonous, and its stability allows it to remain relatively impervious even to the rising concentration of unpotentized and lower potency contaminants. What is being reintroduced is of no potency, totally material. My guess is that the (probably nonelectromagnetic) factor which creates this clumping phenomenon
(see Brian Connellys paper for more on stable aggregates http://www.hpathy.com/RESEARCH/how_does ... y_work.asp )
becomes so pervasive that it clumps impurities (that have not influenced the energetic organization of the water matrix) in the same pattern as it has clumped the water molecules that get passed on and "infect" the next iteration. The clumping force imparted by dilution/succussion gave the "upper hand" to the DOMINANT SOLUTE early in the potentization process, and that dominant solute (the original substance of the intended remedy) becomes what is the dominant signal carried by the water of the remedy to the water in the body of the person taking the remedy. We know that sugar
pellets and paper will carry a potentized pattern. Even a dried-out glass vial of remedy solution will carry the remedy signal even in the glass (!) allowing the vial to be refilled and the practitioner once again made happy. So the "organizing principle" that got the head start in the beginning probably takes over that water and it carries that signal despite impurities. Even though contaminated dilutant is being added each iteration and succussed along with that stable pattern, the pattern probably becomes resistant to unpotentized elements at some point, although those same
elements are indeed part of the signal in the remedy, albeit in the category of "noise". Put in terms of electric audio signals, it is probably that the signal to noise ratio is high in the beginning of the process, and the signal takes over the carrier vehicle such that the noise remains neglible even though it is being reintroduced, because the signal has had the "headstart" in structuring the water.
In the case of Fluxion (continuous irrigation) no succussion is going on except that exerted by the flowing water and any machine pressure effects depending on the machine being used. Water is flowing through, so no water aliquots (portions) are compartmentalized to any great degree. The concept of remedy gets a little hazy with this type of potentization, and one would think that the remedy signal gets smoothed out (which is what is observed in practice with fluxion potencies, which are mellower in effect for a given "potency" (in parentheses for fluxion because of the lack
of discrete iterations)). And with high impurity water, this would probably happen to a relatively high level. So the original signal may still hold sway, but much less so than in the potentization methods which retain some of the previous step.
=====
This being said, it seems reasonable to assume that super pure water will yield a sharper remedy image contained by the water carrier. And that, if the concentration of impurities in the water of the original solution water and diluting water was getting to be a big fraction of that in the original solute, then the remedy signal would start to get muted. In the latter case, every remedy made with that water would have a lot in common with all the other remedies made with that system. As Ellen's husband suggested, a really highly contaminated water used would in a real sense
become part of the remedy. Even though the original desired remedy signal may make it through enough to resonate with someone susceptible to whom the rx was correctly chosen, the rx image will not be "sharp" because the signal to noise ratio will be LOW.
A complicated explanation, but I hope it is close to accurate and helps. The key issue here for those skeptical is firstly that we know and can easily demonstrate that there is a powerful and reproducible phenomenon in operation. In order to explain its operation, we have to go beyond conventional valency and concentration and get into the idea that there are other forces at work right under our noses which both maintain and create patterns in the macrostructure of matter. These superimposed patterns affect life forms for good or ill. These patterns can be conveniently
imprinted and captured on media.
Logic can be used to create a match between the recorded and archived database of influences of one of these patterns on a test population of biological organisms; and the pattern of symptoms which develop in someone with a disordered biological organism that needs help. In such a case the matching pattern acts as a facsimile of the pattern which the biological organism cannot disgorge from itself automatically. The pattern can thus be a medicine to act on the organism, an organism susceptible to disorder because it has been compromised by inherited patterns which held sway
during its formative time and continue to hold sway. Thus these captured patterns can be the basis for a system of medicine which captures the signal of any substance and harnesses it to be a perfect medicinal agent --curative when properly chosen and almost harmless when not.
Best,
Andy
-
Ellen Madono
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:00 pm
Re: remedy purity
Dear Andy,
That was a head full. I will have to read it again (the internet article too). You are discussing everything that has been bothering me. It is really important because there is so much that can happen and be changed between remedy choice and taking the remedy. Thank-you Ellen Madono
That was a head full. I will have to read it again (the internet article too). You are discussing everything that has been bothering me. It is really important because there is so much that can happen and be changed between remedy choice and taking the remedy. Thank-you Ellen Madono
-
Julian Winston
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: remedy purity
At 7:23 AM -0800 3/9/04, andyh@mcn.org wrote:
Because the mistake is made in thinking that all the stuff IN the
water is getting potentized, and I don't think it is. The Skinner
potencies made on that machine (which was removed from service in
1992 or so) were all begun with a hand made (in alcohol) 30c.
Exactly.
Yes. This is the problem I have with rely only on "memory of water"
as an explanation-- because the end result is usually *alcohol* that
has peen placed on sucrose granules, and then has evaporated off.
You said it!
I have some higher potency Fincke remedies that were made by Fluxion,
and then placed on pellets. The remedies are all 10-50M and seem to
be still active-- i.e., given to patient with expected result.
[snip]
Boy! You said a mouthful!
JW
Because the mistake is made in thinking that all the stuff IN the
water is getting potentized, and I don't think it is. The Skinner
potencies made on that machine (which was removed from service in
1992 or so) were all begun with a hand made (in alcohol) 30c.
Exactly.
Yes. This is the problem I have with rely only on "memory of water"
as an explanation-- because the end result is usually *alcohol* that
has peen placed on sucrose granules, and then has evaporated off.
You said it!
I have some higher potency Fincke remedies that were made by Fluxion,
and then placed on pellets. The remedies are all 10-50M and seem to
be still active-- i.e., given to patient with expected result.
[snip]
Boy! You said a mouthful!
JW
-
Julian Winston
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: remedy purity
At 11:45 PM -0500 3/9/04, Ellen Madono wrote:
you bet.
When you study the history of potentization and go through the
processes developed by folks like Jenichen, Fincke, Skinner, etc. You
realize how much has been tried, and how it all seems to work. If you
try to think "Why" and "How" about this stuff you will get NO
answers, and get endlessly confused.
The way out is to NOT get involved in thinking about it, and just get
on with using it-- learn the materia medica and learn the principles
of the practice.
Once you find it works, the "how" becomes not that important. My opinion.
For the life of me, I can't understand why. What you want to organize
is not the rubrics but the remedies. Learn *them*. Learn which has
which symptom and then which remedies are close or very different.
Learn "This remedy is like that, but this is hot and that is cold."
Learn that "these five remedies are all aggravated at that time."
That's the kind of information that becomes useful to you because you
are learning to compare remedies *by symptoms* and not by some
artificial construct. If you try to "understand" why Lycopodium (a
plant) has a sore throat that moves from right to left, and that
Lachesis (a snake) has a sore throat the moves from left to right,
then you'll get really baffled trying to understand why Lac caninum
(dog's milk) has a sore throat which alternates sides.
Learn the remedies. Then learn to apply them to sick people. THAT is
what homeopathy is about.
JW
you bet.
When you study the history of potentization and go through the
processes developed by folks like Jenichen, Fincke, Skinner, etc. You
realize how much has been tried, and how it all seems to work. If you
try to think "Why" and "How" about this stuff you will get NO
answers, and get endlessly confused.
The way out is to NOT get involved in thinking about it, and just get
on with using it-- learn the materia medica and learn the principles
of the practice.
Once you find it works, the "how" becomes not that important. My opinion.
For the life of me, I can't understand why. What you want to organize
is not the rubrics but the remedies. Learn *them*. Learn which has
which symptom and then which remedies are close or very different.
Learn "This remedy is like that, but this is hot and that is cold."
Learn that "these five remedies are all aggravated at that time."
That's the kind of information that becomes useful to you because you
are learning to compare remedies *by symptoms* and not by some
artificial construct. If you try to "understand" why Lycopodium (a
plant) has a sore throat that moves from right to left, and that
Lachesis (a snake) has a sore throat the moves from left to right,
then you'll get really baffled trying to understand why Lac caninum
(dog's milk) has a sore throat which alternates sides.
Learn the remedies. Then learn to apply them to sick people. THAT is
what homeopathy is about.
JW
-
Ellen Madono
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:00 pm
Re: remedy purity
Dear Julian,
Thinking about "how the remedy works" is not only of political significance. The questions are practical. Imprinting the the remedy on none water elements is very curious. My husband was explaining the other day that glass is actually a fluid. That's why stain glass windows become thicker at the bottom, over hundreds of years. Are crystaline structures the commonality between glass, sugar, water and alcohol? No, I never heard of an alcohol crystal. What do I know? Is there water in the sugar or paper? The remedy solution doesn't imprint on the metal spoon that you use for diluting the remedy? If I just wash the glass where I drank the remedy, does it remain imprinted on it? Do I need to boil that glass to get rid of the remedy? Would plastic be less likely to imprint the remedy because it lacks crystaline structure? Why does paper imprint?
I am doing some unorthodox things because I want my homeopathy to be a part of my normal kitchen routine. Also, I am just a student so I don't charge much for working on cases. I am trying to make homeopathy cheap for me and for my patient. To save on buying dropper lid bottles, I am boiling a little jelly jar, covering it with pastic wrap, cooling the water and dropping a remedy pellet in it. I keep that jar in my kitchen cupboard. Every morning, I drop one drop of that water into a glass of water. I have not been carefully boiling my cups after using them. Maybe I am risking mixing remedies through the glasses. My teacher would say just drink from throw away plastic cups. But the less special stuff in my house, the better.
Blessings,
Ellen Madono
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thinking about "how the remedy works" is not only of political significance. The questions are practical. Imprinting the the remedy on none water elements is very curious. My husband was explaining the other day that glass is actually a fluid. That's why stain glass windows become thicker at the bottom, over hundreds of years. Are crystaline structures the commonality between glass, sugar, water and alcohol? No, I never heard of an alcohol crystal. What do I know? Is there water in the sugar or paper? The remedy solution doesn't imprint on the metal spoon that you use for diluting the remedy? If I just wash the glass where I drank the remedy, does it remain imprinted on it? Do I need to boil that glass to get rid of the remedy? Would plastic be less likely to imprint the remedy because it lacks crystaline structure? Why does paper imprint?
I am doing some unorthodox things because I want my homeopathy to be a part of my normal kitchen routine. Also, I am just a student so I don't charge much for working on cases. I am trying to make homeopathy cheap for me and for my patient. To save on buying dropper lid bottles, I am boiling a little jelly jar, covering it with pastic wrap, cooling the water and dropping a remedy pellet in it. I keep that jar in my kitchen cupboard. Every morning, I drop one drop of that water into a glass of water. I have not been carefully boiling my cups after using them. Maybe I am risking mixing remedies through the glasses. My teacher would say just drink from throw away plastic cups. But the less special stuff in my house, the better.
Blessings,
Ellen Madono
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-
Julian Winston
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: remedy purity
At 12:30 PM -0500 3/10/04, Ellen Madono wrote:
Yes. A most unique substance. A liquid which appears as a solid to
us. It *does* run, albeit slowly!
Interesting questions-- all which are being looked at, but the
answers will come when someone puts the money in to really look at
the nature of it and/or we change our ideas about how the world is
really put together.
It is interesting that most of the pharmacies find they can clean the
glassware by using an industrial quality (runs very hot) dishwasher.
The problem is, you can't LOOK at the glass and say, "that's not
clean." The only way you can do it is to use it for another remedy,
and then USE the remedy and see if it obtains the expected results.
Personally, I took a number of old vials, boiled them for a
half-hour, then washed them in bleach, then boiled them again, then
tried them in an oven at about 300F. I've used remedies stored in
theses "cleaned" vials, and they appear to work.
Hahnemann suggested heating vials to red-hot. The mortar was cleaned
by careful washing and then sloshing some alcohol in it and burning
it off.
Just curious. Where are you studying and at what level? I know that
at the Wellington College our students are prohibited from taking any
cases on their own (outside of their immediate family) until the 3rd
year-- and then it must be done in consult with a supervisor. They
are not allowed to practice until they have completed (and been rated
"competent") the 4th year Clinical module.
I use small paper cups.
Best!
JW
Yes. A most unique substance. A liquid which appears as a solid to
us. It *does* run, albeit slowly!
Interesting questions-- all which are being looked at, but the
answers will come when someone puts the money in to really look at
the nature of it and/or we change our ideas about how the world is
really put together.
It is interesting that most of the pharmacies find they can clean the
glassware by using an industrial quality (runs very hot) dishwasher.
The problem is, you can't LOOK at the glass and say, "that's not
clean." The only way you can do it is to use it for another remedy,
and then USE the remedy and see if it obtains the expected results.
Personally, I took a number of old vials, boiled them for a
half-hour, then washed them in bleach, then boiled them again, then
tried them in an oven at about 300F. I've used remedies stored in
theses "cleaned" vials, and they appear to work.
Hahnemann suggested heating vials to red-hot. The mortar was cleaned
by careful washing and then sloshing some alcohol in it and burning
it off.
Just curious. Where are you studying and at what level? I know that
at the Wellington College our students are prohibited from taking any
cases on their own (outside of their immediate family) until the 3rd
year-- and then it must be done in consult with a supervisor. They
are not allowed to practice until they have completed (and been rated
"competent") the 4th year Clinical module.
I use small paper cups.
Best!
JW
-
Julian Winston
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: remedy purity
At 9:19 AM +0000 3/11/04, Julian Winston wrote:
[snip]
[snip]
An analogy.
You are faced with a circular surface. You hit it with a hammer. The
hammer bounces off it.
Someone says: "That's really a 10 bladed propeller, spinning at 1,000,000 RPM."
You say, "Nuts. I can hit it with a hammer."
The proof will come when someone gets the right tool (a strobe at a
millon cycles a second), and shines it on the disk. The propeller
with then appear.
So there are two piece here-- the conception that it is something
other than it appears, and the need to develop a tool for seeing it
as such.
A small wrinkle is that it might, when examined, be a 12 bladed
propeller-- was the original person wrong?
With homeopathy we are looking at a phenomenon that we can not yet
measure. Much of the research is looking to establish activity of
ultra-dilute substances on biological processes, but no one is even
looking at the most most basic question-- how does the law of
similars work?
I have seen a Eupatorium flu respond to a 200c. I have seen a similar
flu respond to two drops of mother tincture.
We just do not have the understanding of how the body works. With all
the knowledge of the process of digestion, and how the stomach breaks
down the food into usable components, the answer to "How does the
body turn the BigMac into the components to break it down (i.e., the
enzymes and acids)?
And as Deepak Chopra suggested, the answer will always be in that
place just beyond our understanding.
JW
[snip]
[snip]
An analogy.
You are faced with a circular surface. You hit it with a hammer. The
hammer bounces off it.
Someone says: "That's really a 10 bladed propeller, spinning at 1,000,000 RPM."
You say, "Nuts. I can hit it with a hammer."
The proof will come when someone gets the right tool (a strobe at a
millon cycles a second), and shines it on the disk. The propeller
with then appear.
So there are two piece here-- the conception that it is something
other than it appears, and the need to develop a tool for seeing it
as such.
A small wrinkle is that it might, when examined, be a 12 bladed
propeller-- was the original person wrong?
With homeopathy we are looking at a phenomenon that we can not yet
measure. Much of the research is looking to establish activity of
ultra-dilute substances on biological processes, but no one is even
looking at the most most basic question-- how does the law of
similars work?
I have seen a Eupatorium flu respond to a 200c. I have seen a similar
flu respond to two drops of mother tincture.
We just do not have the understanding of how the body works. With all
the knowledge of the process of digestion, and how the stomach breaks
down the food into usable components, the answer to "How does the
body turn the BigMac into the components to break it down (i.e., the
enzymes and acids)?
And as Deepak Chopra suggested, the answer will always be in that
place just beyond our understanding.
JW