Minutus

I agree but remember that it is simpler to test single components, THEN test
synergistic action of 2, 3, 4 and more components to understand the reality.

One example: Digoxin is one alkaloid from Digitalis Purpurea; its
pharmacological action is very close to its toxicity level, hence the
difficulty of prescription.
But when testing the different alkaloids, it appeared that one of them,
Gitoxin if my memory is correct, has no cardiac action but is a powerful
emetic.
Therefore you can explain WHY a tincture of Digitalis Purpurea is safer than
the pure alkaloid, because as soon as you get to a certain level of Gitoxin,
you start vomiting.....and you get to that threshold before becoming toxic
for the heart while still having the desired activity.

I personally love those explanations, although I agree they might look
useless to others.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".

Simon I'm just tired of hearing that Homeopathy is boloney and
cant possibly work and seeing it splashed all ove the media,
thats all. Its also slightly frustrating to me that it hasn't yet been
possible to satisfactorily prove that dilutions smaller than an
Avocado are measurable. That thing with Randi a couple of
years ago was done with the participation of homeopaths and it
failed. The excuses started after the result was known and that
seems to be what we do. It also happened with the
homeopaths who worked on trials with Ernst when results were
no good. They participated willingly and then started
complaining about how they were treated, protocol etc when
things didnt turn out well for us. It would be nice to be able to
breathe a sigh of relief one day and say, "there, told you so, now
eff off and leave us alone." My feeling is that the time probably
isnt right yet. The ramifications would be too much for the
establishment to bear. A bit like a UFO landing in Parliament
Square or allowing itself to be filmed making a crop circle. One
day maybe.......

Hi Dr. Roz,
To have your ability to use information on the difference between the chemical and the whole herb, more knowledge is required than what I have. But an open mind is also more likely to soak in the necessary information. So again, I'll open my little peep hole a bit wider. Is there some book or article where these kinds of perceptions are discussed? I bet you wouldn't know. You could write the book.
Thank-you,
Ellen

I studied homeopathy and herbalism (and other stuff), then when reviewing a
remedy I look at it from all the angles: the homeopathic, the herbal, the
Flower Remedy if it is one, the nutritional one if it is a food, and how
different cultures have used it........the closest you could find is the
book by Vermeulen, Prisma, expensive but WOW the info, including the legends
.....
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, MD, PhD, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".

Ok I have to get wider in how I look at each remedy. For me, the key is to find some thread in all that data. I love Prisma.
Thank-you,
Ellen

Hi Ellen,
as I said I am not against getting scientific proof
What I bemoan is the paucity of marketing of homeopathy
Simon
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please reply to
this email and then delete it. Please note that any views or opinions
presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of any other party or organisation

The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. The author accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

To reiterate, I am not against scientific proof.
I bemoan the lack of marketing for homeopathy.
Time, energy, attention.


Simon
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please reply to
this email and then delete it. Please note that any views or opinions
presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of any other party or organisation

The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. The author accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

Dear Robin and Colleagues

The experiment that was shown on BBC2 HORIZON programme a couple of years
back was interesting in the way that there was some kind of a flaw in the
experiment design which allowed someone to randomly label the specimens.

Pls see http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/20 ... athy.shtml

One of Jacques Benveniste's experiments was to tested the action of diluted
histamines on basophil.
Some 20+ years Professor Madeleine Ennis (Belfast University) attended a
conference in which a French researcher claimed to be able to show that
water had a memory. Ennis was unimpressed - so the researcher challenged her
to try the experiment for herself. When she did so, she was astonished to
find that her results agreed.

The Horizon programme attempted to replicate the experiment (but I believe
without the involvement of Prof Ennis).

The experiment was to show the effect of diluted histamines on Basophiles.

When it came to the analysis of the results, if you remember almost HALF of
the samples which were supposed to be diluted and potentised histamines and
almost Half of the supposed WATER samples showed activity against the
basophiles.

I immediately wrote to the programme and also mentioned it on Minutus that
either something was gravely wrong with the experiment's design and
procedures or that indeed the team had found some unexpected property for
'diluted' and 'potentised' water. I suspect the former.

Of course there was NO response from the programme.

I am not sure homoeopaths were involved with the design of the experiment.

Although this time Randi was not shown to touch the samples, I think a game
of switchero was played once again. I believe Randi switched Jacques
Benveniste's original samples in the Nature investigation. And do not forget
that he is a stage magician and his powers of slight of hand are much
greater than the average scientist's powers of observation.

I like to have him prove a remedy and show him personally how a 200C potency
has the power of getting him to beg for mercy!

(Oooops I have just revealed my deep desires!) )

Rgds
Soroush

Sorry Simon, I missed you point.
:- Ellen

It's OK , so did the other posters by the look of it.

Obviously it wasn't clear from my post, and there was me thinking it
was crystal clear!
Ah well back to the drawing board....

Mind you my private thought was that homeopaths are so locked into the
scientific proof thing they can't lift their gaze above the dashboard
and see where the road is actually heading. ie. still dancing to
allopathy's tune without even realising it.
Simon
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please reply to
this email and then delete it. Please note that any views or opinions
presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of any other party or organisation

The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. The author accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this email.