Challenge to Dana Ullman's article Dysfunction ...

[John R. Benneth]

Ullman's Huffpo article is a smash hit. It's about time homeopathy's most elegant and comprehensive journalist took Wikipedia's "founder" to task. A job well done exposing their perfidy!
However, for the benefit of the Hahnemannian theory of magnetic imprinting, allow me to try to politely challenge the nanoparticle asymptote hypothesis which Dana highlights. It seems the nanoparticle atomists are being led away from traditional non particulate theory of liquid aqueous structuring (LAS) by Chikramane's asymptote theory, first touted by (of all people) Iris Bell, while Rao, William Tiller and Rick Hoover are apparently mute and Roy is turning in his grave. (Homeopathy. 2007 Jul;96(3):175-82. The defining role of structure (including epitaxy) in the plausibility of homeopathy.Rao ML 1, Roy R , Bell IR , Hoover R . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17678814 )
Myself aside, the only person I can think of now who is positioned to explain the supramolecular physics of the isotopic pharma used in homeopathy, in the context of hydroelectrostriction is Joe Rozencwajg.
Dana . . if you're reading this, let me pose a question to you regarding your theory of nano particulate asymptotes being the operative component of the homeopathic remedy: How does the asymptote theory explain the action of imponderabilia? How do you explain biological effects caused by structural changes in the aqueous host through which no guest particle has passed, when there's been no solute? How is it that Montagnier could pick up the pathogenic signal in a vial of pure water that without contact with the solution in the originating vial, had simply been put next to it, the vial containing the filtrate, if it wasn't radiation? Interdiscip Sci Comput Life Sci (2009) 1: 81–90 MONTAGNIER Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences http://tinyurl.com/montagnier
http://www.homeopathyeurope.org/media/n ... ignals.pdf
How is it that homeopathic effects could be obtained in Endler's frogs without direct contact with the solution if it wasn't from radiation? (Vet Hum Toxicology 1995 Jun. 37(3): 259-60 Non-molecular information transfer from thyroxine to frogs by means of homoeopathic preparation and electronic processing Endler PC, Pongratz W, Smith CW, Schulte J. http://giriweb.com/endler.htm )
John
In a message dated 10/10/2014 7:50:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, minutus@yahoogroups.com writes:
John Benneth, Homoeopath
PG Hom - London (Hons.)
http://johnbenneth.com
SKYPE: John Benneth (Portland, Oregon)
503- 819 - 7777 (USA)

[Fran Sheffield]

Hi John,

In regard to nanoparticles, I think similarly to you. They seem to be there by association and not as the cause of homeopathic effect – at least not the total cause.

I have always thought that if nanoparticles were the be all and end all of homeopathy, then how do remedies work by olfaction, or with sensitives, just holding the bottle for a period of time.

But, you have drawn on far more eloquent scientific examples than me so I will just have to say, I agree.

And that's not to detract from the wonderful information Dana has laid out in his article.

Fran.

[Irene de Villiers]

Do you know the difference between electromagnetic frequency (emf) waves (=ENERGY)
and radoactivity involving subatomic PARTICLES (which move out of, or into, atoms)
I suspect not:-(

Homeopoathy is no more radioactive than you are.
You transmit ideas and information without radioactivity, and so does homeopathy.
EMF ENERGY examples are light, electricity, heat, microwaves, shortwaves as in radio, longwaves, television signals, and the like...... and the emf of crystals and all other substances, including homeopathic remedies.
Everything in the universe has an emf frequency.
All these wave frequencies transmit through various substances that may appear solid to us -
You feel a shock touching a copper wire carrying elctricity?
You feel heat through an electric blanket? You see light after it transmits through glass or glasses?
ALl of these tramsmit information - without involving chemical molecules.

You are ascribing emf waves to nuclear radiation when they are as different as cytoplasm and Fukushima fallout.

If any emf energy was radioactive, reading glasses would be somehow radioactive to cause the light to bend to a more convenient angle. Light is not sending molecules through but it sends information and energy.
Your TV receives emf wave information wtih no molecules involved, as does your cellphone.
Radioactivity is only relevant in nuclear reactions! (= REACTIONS WITHIN THE NUCLEUS OF AN ATOM, which change the physicl structure of the nucleus of the atom) There are none of those in homeopathy or any other emf energy system.

Energy transmission by emf waves is everyday stuff, no nucleus changes (which change an element into a new element) are involved.
Radioactivity by contrast is always to do with nuclear reactions - physical changes in the actual central nucleus of an atom (="nuclear" reactions) they are only found within an atom's nucleus - completely separate from everyday emf waves which never involve the nucleus of any atom.
Nuclear reactions are not chemical reactions or energy travel.
They are particles from the inner nucleus of an atom, which change the very nature of the element of the atom (such as to a different isotope). If homeopajthy has any radioactivity it would cause cancer not help the body recover health so as to overcome it.

SO think emf waves for homeopathy. Hahnemann himself compared it to magnetic energy.
Which also is emf energy and also can be seen to act without touching anything, with no molecules being transmitted.

PLease drop the radioactivity dea. It is very misleading to those who have not yet understood the non-homeopathy forms of emf, such as magnetism, light, heat, electricity, cellphone emf, computer screen emf, radio waves, microwaves, the frequency of healing crystals, and the rest of the emf options. THAT is where homepathic emergy frequencies belong, and the emf frequencies of machine made remedies to a specific emf frequency. No molecules are involved in any of it. It is just energy that moves in waves.
It is just energy transmitted in a wave at a specific emf frequency per remedy. Nothing mysterious about it.
There is no radioactivity possible thankfully, because there are no nuclear reactions:-)

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[Dana Ullman, MPH]

Dear John, Fran, and others,
The “nanoparticle” theory behind homeopathy is NOT an explanation for all of the homeopathic phenomena (obviously), but it is an viable explanation for some of its phenomena. People who think that there is only one answer to a complex question are not understanding the complexity of nature…
Dana Ullman, MPH, CCH

Homeopathic Educational Services

812 Camelia St.

Berkeley, CA. 94710

510-649-0294

email@homeopathic.com

dullman@igc.org (personal)

www.homeopathic.com (website)

www.Huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman (blog)

[John R. Benneth]

. . and Chikramne's "asymptote froth theory" (AFT) is simply grasping at the straws of the solute's "nanoparticles." There is no such thing at higher dilutions. Ionization begins well before the molecular limit of dilution and should ionize them before 10^23. AFT only serves to confuse just about everyone and lead us away from a consistent, classical theory of supramolecular structuring via the hydrogen, sigma, and van der Waal bonds, or attracdtions. It's still consistent with the mechanism for hydroelectrostriction . . the piezo electric effect in water . . in collaboration with other media, such as silica and lactose.
Chikramane's TEM was reading the signal of the original solute, not the solute itself, tranducted out of the background radiant field (Montagnier) through aqueous structuring, in collaboration with silica. There is no asymptote nanoparticulate needed from the original starting material to make water isotopic.
If nanoparticulate has any notable effect it would be seen in solutions made in borosilicate glass . . but it's not noted in NMR studies because borosilicate doesn't contain the "water of crystallization" like soda glass does.
It's all in how you read the results. The TEM results actually support Hahnemannian classic "magnetic imprint" theory and Benveniste's "memory of water" in concordance with Roy's Structure of Liquid Water, if you see what is mistaken for solute particulate in post 10^23 solutions as silica or other contaminates. Why Bell got off the bus to atomistically pursue the never ending asymptote is still a mystery to me . .
best regards,
John
In a message dated 10/13/2014 10:51:43 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, minutus@yahoogroups.com writes:
John Benneth, Homoeopath
PG Hom - London (Hons.)
http://johnbenneth.com
SKYPE: John Benneth (Portland, Oregon)
503- 819 - 7777 (USA)