Homeopathy excels at treating 1 condition. That condition is dehydration. If you have the names of any papers that are in a generally accepted peer reviewed journal, I would be THRILLED to see it.
@wowsdrawkcab "Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Clinical Study" Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124:879-885 (AMA journal)
Now let me ask you a Q or 2. If you think the truth is still on YOUR side, then why not ask if there're any tests that show the biochemical invitro action for high dilutes? Isn't that what the real question is?
&if you're the prop&prof of science,reason&logic, then why request in jest&contempt? $?
@wowsdrawkcab "Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Clinical Study" Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124:879-885 (AMA journal)
Now let me ask you a Q or 2. If you think the truth is still on YOUR side, then why not ask if there're any tests that show the biochemical invitro action for high dilutes? Isn't that what the real question is?
&if you're the prop&prof of science,reason&logic, then why request in jest&contempt? $?
@DrSpooglemon IT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED, repeatedly, ad nauseam, BIOCHEMICALLY, producing the same specific or similar effects in millions of people 4 over 2 centuries! You accuse us of being illogical, then you go off the rails telling lies & making assumptions, accusations that are prima facie illogical. How do you know what YOU know? There's not 1 study, test or trial that shows what opponents of h-pathy claim. Show me! The argument against it always ends up destroying itself.
This seems like stuff only a handful of people in the world can even begin to understand. It seems to have not have been tested yet to the extent that it should. It seems groundbreaking, while it has been used for ceturies. Above everything else, at this point and time in history it seems unbeliaveble. Procure studies that can build consensus among a community of experts before you publicise something ridiculously unbelievable to common people.
@CapoeiraPiper You make some good, if not rare observations, a reprieve from the relentless name calling this subject invokes. Fact is that what you are calling for has been done. Run "homeopathy" on PUBMED & you'll find 100's of studies, experiments, 2Xblind tests & trials on the subject, a long history of 1st testing electrochemicals on volunteers to see what their reaction to them is. The prob. now is for those who have been vituperative 2 put down the guns & take a 2nd look.
Cool pseudoscientific babble, bro. I guess Richard Dawkins was right, you do have to rewrite the laws of physics for homeopathy to work (invoking white holes, really?) The truth is, regardless of the big words you try and use, homeopathy performs no better than a placebo under controlled conditions.
@hjf3022 4 a moment then lets apply YOUR rigor to YOUR assertions. Which meta analysis states "homeopathy performs no better than a placebo under controlled conditions" ? Shang? Shang blows up in the face of anyone who touches it; but at least Shang put his name on his stupidity, which you'll never do. And notice too your statement has the qualifier of "controlled conditions." What controls & by whom are you spewing about? James the hi skool dropout w/$1M to lose Randi? Is that your "science?"
@Shawnruss "Every empirical test?" What are you babbling about now? I can quote numerous phys., biochem. & biological tests, trials & studies that show the action of homeopathic remedies. The basophil degranulation test has been replicated now over 2 dozen times! There has yet to be a major metanalysis that has conclusively stated it is a placebo, not even Shang, so if this is not a desperate attempt to save face, why is placebo the putative belief among your imaginary scientists?
I can sit in front of anyone....and create images ...talk to you with just my mind as if its a mental social network.. I have good affidavits as well.. i just need someone in the right position to help..=/..the people at school can't .=[
sir... I can literall st in front of you and perform instantanous results without fail .. I'm currently talking with ign 50,000 challeng and so far I have pure positive results.. I wanna prve james randi wrong but it seems as if hes been ducking my challenege papers so i set up with his sub division who are gonn help me get in touch with the right people..=/...i would love to show you. i promise its worth your time.
James randi along with the other skeptic challenges...please I beg you to give me a chance to prove that this is something I can do instantanous without any trickery I am well known through my campus and neighborhood as the one who harnesses the GOD PARTICLE...please message me at zenster979@yahoo.com also I added you on facebook lol
Hey how are you sir. I've been trying forever to get in contact with you regarding my ability of telepathy and being able to disrupt the energy of molecules and why I can help you and you I as I need a mentor considering I'm able to do this technique at will no matter the cicumstance. I attend the university of maryland but after finals I took a break so that I could setup to take your challenge and
its crazy how human cant just admit there wrong....even with all th study that show no result that all....some goes to the extend of creating explanation (under the name of the science) to justify their years long of stuberness on a subject that is close!!!why would we even bother taking a pill that contain only water..
@lapmarty Aren't you basing your conclusions on what you've been told to think? There have been no comprehensive meta-analyses that have concluded homeopathics are "placebos." Countless studies, tests, trials & experiments show the action of hpathics biochemically, on plants, animals& humans.You can test it yourself by germinating seeds in cotton soaked in hpthically charged water (Staphysagria). What's happening is you've become guilty of the very thing you're accusing hpathy of . .
@Bandershot remember that madeleine ennis result were never reproduce...and it has been try again at less 7 time by major scientific organisation....to this day....if you dont understand that madeleine ennis needed to be out of this experiment then you dont understand what a neutral trial his...imagine her result was a result of a manipulation error.....then she would have done it again...so they did use a other neutral lab tech...chosse by all party...
@lapmarty Ennis' work was merely one part of a multi centered trial of the basophil degranulation test. No other in vitro for homeopathy has been rep'd as many times as the basophil. Look at the work of Belon and Sainte Laudy, abstracts on PUBMED. Also, if you can find it, look at the work of Boyd et al on enzymes. Perfectly done. The BBC test was a joke. I know, because they had to get my permsission to do it, due to my prior claim on Randi's $1M. They purposely staged it to fail. Understand?
@Bandershot the study you send me...are fine but they dont use human cell....they use complete human...wich in this case dont proove the memory of water...
@Bandershot the study you send me...are fine but they dont use human cell....they use complete human...wich in this case dont proove the memory of water...
see to proof homeopathy you need human cell....like the bbc study...cause its the mecanism of action that skeptic attack...do you understand?
@lapmarty Google The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies- a systematic review of the literature by Claudia WItt et al. The is a report that covers 67 in vitro biological experiements.Themost popular and most replciated was the basophil derantulation test,the one attempted by the BBC camera crew. It is the only test you refer to and yet it was not published. Go to the literature and look at some real sceince instead of TV game shows run by fakers like Randi.
@lapmarty all double blinded study have been unconclusive......look at the horizon bbc test and it has been proved that even the one who claim this effect cant tell what is homeopathic water from regular water....it come to a point where the burden of proof is on the behalf of the claimer....sorry i never build a plane too....and i go on plane all the time....it work too..
The Horizon/BBC test was a joke. Watch it again. They interview Prof. Madeleine Ennis of Queens College, who conducted a successful proving of the basophil test. So why didn't they have her do the test for Randi, instead of their own inexp. techs?
Research published in 2005 on hydrogen bond network dynamics in water showed that "liquid water essentially loses the memory of persistent correlations in its structure" within fifty millionths of a nanosecond.[6]
@lapmarty Then how do they explain clathrates? If you read the report from the material sciences from 2007, they speak extensively about liquid aqueous assembly (Google Roy, Structure of Liquid Water) And how do you explain water surface tension, or bubbles, all examples of "persistently correllating" hydrogen bonding. Logically dipole-dipole H2Os must connect & structure, and are held within a colloidal matrix (Tiller). See van der Waals, cage & incllusion molecules, solvation shell.
@1baldchimp Google Bonamin, "Animal models for studying homeopathy and high dilutions: conceptual critical review." 31 papers describing 33 experiments; "the effects of high dilutions seem to stimulate restoration of a 'stable state'. For theory Google Roy, "Structure of Liquid Water, Novel insights from the material sciences and relevance to homeopathy (Penn State, Stanford, UofArizona) Benneth, The Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy (audio lecture, Cavendish Labs, Cambridge)
Furthermore, these nano-particles. I have searched quite a lot and can find no scholarly evidence to back such a claim. Please point me in the right direction.
What I would like to know is where they come from. The point being that, for homeopathy to be effective, it must be the particle that is introduced that forms these particles or they occur as a result of the secussion of the container the water is in. I cannot see how that could occur. If it doesn't, the homeopathic remedy itself is false
@BaggyWalker "Nano-crystaloids" is my description of clathrate hydrates. The action of homeopathic remedies does not come from the guest particle in solution, but from a restructuring of the aqueous host, patterned after the guest. Google "supramolecular chemistry," look here below in the comments for specific NMR & FTIR studies showing the presence of liquid aqueous structuring (LAS) & its EM indices. Since they can no longer deny LAS w/o looking stupid, they now have to say it's irrelevant
When you bring up clathrate hydrates as an explanation for homeopathy (other than the real cause, placebo + ignorance) then you know you're mentally ill. Let's all say it togther: 'HOMEOPAHTY HAS NOT PASSED A SINGLE INDEPENDENT DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL - ALL HAVE FAILED, WITHOUT EXCEPTION. OVER 120 SUCH TESTS, AND OVER 200 YEARS OF THIS 'MEDICINE', AND NOT A SINGLE SUCH RESULT. THEREFORE IT IS NOT MEDICINE, IT IS FAITH-HEALING, MAGIC AND SHAMANISM.
@maureenOWW Google Witt 2007 "The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies--a systematic review of the literature." It says: "Even experiments with a high methodological standard could demonstrate an effect of high potencies." What I'd like to know, is where you're getting your information? Witt is citing dozens of biochemical studies. What are you citing? Real scientists use real references, they don't just hurl insults &spout what they think their "friends" want to hear.
@Bandershot I notice you didn't even attempt to refute my statement. PLEASE SHOW ME AN INDEPENDENT (i.e. not carried out by a homeopath) DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL INVOLVING A HOMEOPATHIC REMEDY THAT PROVED EFFECIACY OUTSIDE OF THAT EXPECTED BY THE PLACEBO EFFECT. Surely, if it WORKS then there must be THOUSANDS of such studies. To save you the embarassment I will type the answer myself: NO SUCH RESULT EXISTS. Every single trial has found no evidence above placebo. Prove me wrong. Lie some more.
@maureenOWWGoogle "Inhibition of basophil activation by histamine: a sensitive and reproducible model for the study of the biological activity of high dilutions."
Sainte-Laudy J.
There are indeed thousands of case studies by medical doctors reporting on the action of high dilutes (now supramolecular chemicals) on humans; there are also numerous biochemical and biolgoical studies on plants, animals, basophiles, enzymes, etc.. The dispute over their validity comes from the patent drug industry.
Why must a Vitalistic Medicine conform to the methodology of official science? Even our conception of health and sickness differ completely. I have explained it before, very clearly, from the standpoint of mre than 30 years of medical practice with homeopathy: we cure asthma in children (I have almost 100 % success) If it is just a placebo, and it works, why to intoxicate children with Salbutamol,theophyllin and corticosteroids? If Homeopathy is a placebo then official medicine is a crime
@maureenOWW The Homeopathic Research institute or the faculty will supply any number of such research evidence. The latest one is published in today's Daily Mail. Babies, children and animals do not know about placibo and make spectacular recoveries with homeopathy. Interesting that.
@Bandershot the studies he's mentioning do not actually back up his claims when you put them together. Clathrates ARE exactly what he said they are. That is not a disputed scientific fact: on the contrary they are accepted by the scientific community. there is no research to support the effect he is claiming they would have on our bodies. and they are found under the sea floor, not in homeopathic remedies. yes, i did research.
@jessicamshannon Congratualtions for being oneof the few if only commenters to recognize the reality of clathrate hydrates. However, your assumption that they don't have biological effects is challenged by Nobel laureates Linus Pauling and Luc Montagnier; recent studies at U of Cincinatti/Moscow State U. show that they do. So what you say about me is actually proven to be true for yourself. Before making your assumptions public Jessica, do a little more research.
@Bandershot He does site valid research on the existence of clathrate hydrates and their physical properties, but none of that research actually supports his claims. Its like saying "carbon exists. Its proven. It has an atomic mass of 12.0107 amu. (site hypothetical source). This atomic mass is actually the leading cause for cancer". See the problem?You follow a bunch of facts by a wild claim, when in reality the false claim has nothing to do with the facts and is not supported by them.
@Bandershot Fair point. Do you know of the Cochrane Collaboration? In case not, they are a group that take all papers deemed well constructed enough (double-blinded, placebo controlled, randomised, non-exclusive of drop outs etc) and compile the statistical data from them all in order to make a larger test group which will give more reliable information. Look it up. "how homeopathy works" is meaningless as there has never been a well constructed study that demonstrated any efficacy over placebo
@BaggyWalker Note the escape hatch of "well constructed," without naming the criteria of what "well constructed" means. I often wonder what would happen if we turned your same vituperative "standards" on the testing of patent pharmacetuicals? LOL!
great video. however while the mainstream world continues to argue over if homeopathy works or why it works a man by the name of stephen lewis has took homeopathy to the next step and delivers energetic balancing frequencies to you without a solution vehicle. energeticmatrix(dot)com
1.Paper by Montagnier has no peer review, also it states only about DNA sequences, not everything in world
2. Have you worked out and showed that homeo remedies actually emit that kind of radiation?
3. Youtube is just a place to post video's, if you find anything scientific about homeopathy why cant you just do some research, put a paper, get a peer review and publish in a good journal?
4. No research has so far shown that radiation has specificity regarding its actions, how can you claim that?
@rammbbs7 Of course it has peer review. Montagnier won a Nobel prize for Science&Med. & just recently presented his findings at a conference for Nobel laureates. He replicated of Benveniste's work, using B's patented equipment. He's presenting a replicable test. If you're so hot about this, you do it. Put it to the test yourself. You won't believe anything we tell you, you haven't accepted peer review of hapthics, why would you now?
And anyone can see EM has specificity. Turn on the radio.
@Bandershot You haven't answered what i have asked you. The paper says about dna sequences, how can you apply it to everything? The paper doesn't have a peer review as far as i know, but i am happy that you found it to have the PR. But you left the major part of the question.
2. You are proposing the entire thing, why do you think i should work out? I asked if you have demonstrated any effects about which you are speaking. Instead of asking me to work out, why cant you just say--continued--
@rammbbs7 Yes, of course I've demonstrated the effects, run my own experiments, on plants. But so have others, and I don['t see you trumpteing those reports, so why should mine be of any greater value to you? The best trial you can give it is to put it to the test yourself, preferably with somebody who understands it & can help you select the correct remedy. If you can't do this, let it go. Many people are using it because it works for them. Accept this& be at peace with yourself.
@Bandershot Most of my reply dint make to the comment section, i have no problem with that. But i am happy to hear that you conducted experiments on "plants". This should definitely work on humans if only we have more than infinitesimal homology (in dna sequence) to plants.
@Bandershot : --continued--yes or no to that question?
3. Youtube is not a place to post a "mechanism", are you trying to publish this in a scientific journal so that we can read it there instead of listening here, it would be better if you could answer the question straight forward instead of deflecting it to me.
4. Em has been shown unequivocally to cause lot of effects on dna like cross-linking, mostly inducing apoptosis if applied in sufficient doses. I haven't read anywhere--continued--
@rammbbs7 It's funny you mention publication , because what I have found miserably lacking in my detractors is an ignorance of the literature relevant to this topic. My job has been to simply present it, and for that I'm called a fraud? Where's the references for that argument? LOL! Read Roy's "Structure of Liquid Water" and Anagnostatos' Clathrate Model, both online, along with many other studies. Why that should induce so much hatred is a study in itself.
@rammbbs7 If you lay out in the sun naked for a few hours you'll see & feel the effects of raiation on cells. Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier's recent study "Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences" is a rep of Benveniste's controversial work that shows hydrates emit EM radiation. Conte's "Theory of High Dilutions" also shows hpathics emit beta radiation. These claims are reproducible.
@Bandershot Yes, but that study has nothing to do with homeopathy. What matters for medicine is randomized double blind studies of specific medicines, with a control group, and statistical analysis of the outcomes.
Aside from your explanations not panning out, homeopathic remedies do not work. Google "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy" at the PubMed site - real research by real scientists. (If I don't reply here again to any reply, it's because I have been blocked)
@technoway Montagnier recently addressed a panel of fellow laureatesto say that it IS about homeopathy. Anyone who knows the subject doesn't need to be told that. He's even using Benveniste's equipment!
The Ersnt "systematic review" is a joke. It excludes biochemical and biological reports like Montagnier's;1/3 of the ref's are his own. He excludes major meta analyses, none of which say hpathy is placebo. Like you, he's a flaming hypocrite.
Technoway is just another astroturfer 4SAS/Pfizer.
5. Are you claiming that homeopathic remedies are actually radioactive? By the way beta scintillator can detect electrons or positrons as far as i know, they cant be for electromagnetic radiation.
@rammbbs7 Yes, radioactive, tritium respone (Conte) I don't think you're clear about what EM radiation is. Maybe you're being too exclusive with your terms. Do you think EM is not a form of radiation?
I have degrees in physics and electrical engineering. Nano bubbles acting as receivers and re-emitters from the background EM field. Gotta call BS on that one.
Your answer to him below is bunk. The papers you cite in all your topics are either total bunk, or they don't support what you claim.
I also noted you block people who disagree with you, and many of these people, such as myself, have advanced degrees. You do not know more than us. Your comments prove that.
@technoway You disagree & so far you haven't ref'd anything but yourself & brag about your phony degrees. When you're losing the argument, call bunk&foul. Typical skeptard. The background EM claim comes from Montagnier study: hydrates show "a resonance phenomenon triggered by the ambient electromagnetic background of very low frequency waves." Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences. If you know so much, how come you didn't know that?
@csmcmillion Come on, I may be crazy but I'm not THAT stupid. There's a million assholes out there who are laying in wait for me to tell you or some other knucklehead to kick his insulin habit so they can accuse me of murder when you overdose on donuts & die of a heart attack. For a guy who says he has advanced degrees you sure are stupid. Give me one good reason why I would make a suggestion like that in a place like this? Go talk to your witch doctor, he's got the lic. to kill you, not me.
@ralathr And patent medicine does? Any claim for a product that "cures" is attacked. And just what do you mean be "diabetes?" What are the symptoms? What are the causes? Vaccination damage is suspected & so is diet. How you treat that? I have one hpathic rem. indicated for "hereditary diabetes mellitus," 2 for pancreatic, 5 for insipidus, & 68 dif. rem's for mellitus; ea. rem includes it own symptomatic index. Restrict the diet, address the vaccinosis, then totality of symptoms, 1 rem at a time
I have degrees in physics and electrical engineering. Nano bubbles acting as receivers and re-emitters from the background EM field. Gotta call BS on that one.
@csmcmillion Read Montagnier's "Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences."
"We have discovered a novel property of DNA, that is the capacity of some sequences to emit electromagnetic waves in resonance after excitation by the ambient electromagnetic background." Montagnier's a Nobel laureate.
Read "On the Structure of High Dilutions According to the Clathrate Model"
G.S. Anagnostatos. Anagnostatos is a nuclear physicist.
@100jurman Our conscious minds have sublimated the idea that the only way to treat disease is to overcome it by mass action & purging of infected cells as breeding ground for further disease. The homeopathic clathrate presents the immune system with the electronic signature of a pathogen that creates similar symptoms. This diverts attention away from the internal "pogrom" to reduce the EFFECTS of the disease, rather than eliminating the disease by cytocide, where the body attacks itself. cont
@100jurman The 2nd method is that the signal of the remedy acts directly on the pathogen by causing its autotitration, or in the case of malaria, confusing the plasmodium with the signal of another similar species. It would be the same as if Mankind thought it was tricked by misinformation into thinking it was overpopulated or competing with a superior species, the cities crumbling, survivors retreating into the forests. Cells have no eyes, they can only sense things intercellularly by EM/RF
@Bandershot - nice attempt at a distraction from my point by bringing in the concept of conspiracy by the Pharma industry, but what i'm saying 100% accurate. the number of meta-analysis results out there on alternative medicine showing nothing higher than placebo effect is staggering.
I can start with the UK House of Commons enquiry data and go on for months after that.
Or do you also choose to 'cherry-pick' the in favour results on alt.med and laud those as scientifically accurate? shame...
@cwsaja You keep making these vague criticisms about homeoapthy, but when we check out the specifics, it turns out you're wrong. There has been no good review that concluded placebo for h. Google Am J Pharm Educ. 2007 February 15; 71(1): 07 2007: "Where Does Homeopathy Fit in Pharmacy Practice?"
Teela Johnson, HonBSc and Heather Boon, BScPhm, PhD
University of Toronto, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy
Read what it says about the Shang review, the ONLY purported meta that concluded placebo.
@cwsaja So my question to you, what's with the hypocrisy of you people who call yourself skeptics? You routinely say there's no science to support what you criticze; then when its presented, as above, you pick it apart, keep arguing, wander off. In other words, people who take a skeptical attitude seem to incapable of self correction. You can't seem to admit you've made an error in jdugment. You're incapable of apology or reconciliation witht evidence of the people presenting it. Itsadisconnect
@tebman The pseudoscience charge has so far not been supported by specifics. This video outlines the basic element for chemical analysis of homeopathy, the clathrate. The clathrate is a gas hydrate. This is a known fact in supramoelcular chemistry. Google it. It's nothing new. If you knew what real science was and weren't astroturfing this subject, the only question you could surmise would be if clathrates are the determing factor. Don't prevaricate, go investigate.
So if all of this is true, why are the meta-analysis results all overwhelmingly negative? and why has no correctly run, full rigour study ever conclusively shown any benefit above placebo level?
why is it that only the research sponsored by the alternative medicine industry show any benefits and why are those studies all quickly debunked as using flawed science and bad rigour?
@cwsaja What you say isn't true. No true meta analysis of homeopathy has ever concluded that the action of homeopathic remedies is solely due to the placebo effect, and physical, chemical, biochemical, biological and clinical evidence shows their action beynd the shadow of a doubt. You've been led to the placebo hypothesis by astroturf. Homeopathy challenges the medical monopoly held by the patent drug industry because its pharmacy is in widespread generic use and eludes capitalization.
@Bandershot - nice attempt at a distraction from my point by bringing in the concept of conspiracy by the Pharma industry, but what i'm saying 100% accurate. the number of meta-analysis results out there on alternative medicine showing nothing higher than placebo effect is staggering.
I can start with the UK House of Commons enquiry data and go on for months after that.
Or do you also choose to 'cherry-pick' the in favour results on alt.med and laud those as scientifically accurate? shame...
@cwsaja "the number of meta-analysis results out there on alternative medicine showing nothing higher than placebo effect is staggering" LOL! I actually fell for that one too until i checked it out, found that JUST THE OPPOSITE is true. None of the major meta analyses have ever concluded that homeopathy is a placebo. They may have been critical of methodological standards in testing, but not one has ever ever concluded that its just a placebo. (Shang was discredited; no sources listed)
There will always be naysayers. Homoeopathy just sounds too weird to those of a certain life denying belief system. However, the fact that homoeopathy has grown to become the second most widespread medical system in the world through little more than word of mouth speaks for itself.
Homoeopathy will continue to grow because people get better from homoeopathic treatment. It is not the only effective medicine in the world but it is also inexpensive. That explains many of its detractors.
@lilacpilgrim13 Astroturfing. The reac tion to most of my videos is overwhelming negative (argumentum ad populum). The opposition to homeopathy is pathological, not scientific., as is evidenced by the inability to apply the standards you demand for my assertions to your own (argumentum ad hominem). And I don't care what you think of my videos, I'm simply presenting information anyone can verify for themselves online (argumentum ad rem).
@alfproperjohn Clathrates, gas hydrates are not technobabble. These are real things in supramolecular chemistry. Their relationship to homeopathy is inreasingly being observed and reported on in the literature. Google this from the Journal of Molecular Liquids: "NMR water proton relaxation in unheated and heated ultrahigh aqueous dilutions of histamine: Evidence for an air-dependent supramolecular organization of water" Jean-Louis Demangeat
@lordstanley4 In homeopathy we observe the law of similars, like cures like, so perhaps what happened is you had a reaction to something that was actually too intelligent for you and ithat's how it made you stupid. I suggest you watch a Will Ferrel movie to antidote the influence of this video on your suffering mind.
I listened to John Benneth with much interest. That homeopathy works is a given. There are just too many people throughout the world for 200 years who have benefitted for this to be in doubt. This video seeks to point a way to explain homeopathy's observable success.
Of greater significance to me are the comments trying to trash what is said. These critics are so certain about what is quite clearly uncertain! They demonstrate closed minds when science demands open minds.
My wife and I found this interesting and hard to believe. She works in medicine and has considered this field. Some other people have said that this is, "bullshit".
Please bare in mind that my wife recognizes and agrees with almost all he said, based on a college education in medicine that is general. Not a specialist of any kind, not a homeopathic doctor, just regular 4th year studies.
I find it hard to believe, but I want to give props to the things stated which are fact.
Homeopathy does NOT work. There is no physical mechanism by which this could possibly work. There is NO active ingredient in any of these homeopathic preparations. People advocating homeopathy are no more than criminals deceiving the public for monetary gain.
alright help me out here. in the case of homeopathy, why is less more? why are homeopathic remedies so expensive if they consist of SOOOO little? why are people afraid of it?
most of all, why should i choose homeopathy instead of other natural remedies?
not trying to start a debate here i just want some answers
PS i tried posting this before but i had a strange comment pending approval message so im trying again
alright help me out here. in the case of homeopathy, why is less more? why are homeopathic remedies so expensive if they consist of SOOOO little? why are people afraid of it?
most of all, why should i choose homeopathy instead of other natural remedies?
not trying to start a debate here i just want some answers
Is homeopathy a treatment which relies a lot on human survival psychology.
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" (Hamlet)
Do homeopaths -at best - seek to exploit the human mind's ability to fight off infection/discomfort through some sort of trickery, but a trick that might (in some cases) work.
I do not mean this comment as an insult, I do respect people who are able to discuss ideas openly and intelligently.
@bobjay25 Given that we have found homeopathics to have measurable, radiant qualities, it could be that they are, at an energetic level, doing as you suggest, tricking the immune system, or causing it to be redirected or inreased it's intensity. I think of it as being like medical akido.
@bobjay25 i'm almost with you but some Homeopath's seem to generally belive in what they do, there has also been anecdotes of homopathic medicine being given to horses and just today I was talking to somone who gave Medicine (herbal mind you) to her disabled husband which confuses the placebo claim somwhat.
@dantheman1507 My video the Homeoapthic Molecule has numerous pictures of clathrates in it, but it doesn't seem to be getting many views. Evidence for homeopathy is highly embarrassing to the critics. It makes them look stupid. And since the mainstream supports the mainstream, there are only a few scientists who are good enough to be immune to popular opinion and support homeopathy, like Josephson, Montagnier, Conte, Roy and Tiller.
I also believe scientists are afraid to touch homeopathy right now because of what happened to that French guy... Tried to talk about a homeopathic experiment with my biochemistry teacher the other day, he was all like "I'm staying out of this one"...Then it hit me...
Anyway, I'm sure this thing will be proven any time soon, when people get the courage to experiment again.
Until then I hope my teacher can get that culture machine back... we want to stress S. pombe with a cell phone
@dantheman1507 It doesn't stop everyone. Benveniste's was a replication of an experiment that's been done over two dozen times now.
There's no question that it works. The real question has been how it works, and I've answered that. The reason they're so upset is not because there's no evidence that it works, its because there's so much evidence that it does, and it embarrasses the hell out of them that they haven';t been able to explain it.
@Bandershot You're right, There isn't any question about homeopathy working because it doesn't. Benveniste's results were shown to likely be the result of the experimenter effect. Its no coincidence that the only replications which yielded positive results were the unblinded ones. The results of blinded tests were nearly always random.
@ArcanaKnight You're lying to save face.. The dif between me and you is that I cite real experiments by real scientists anyone can read. Benv's basophil degranulation test was a REPLICATION done many times under peer review. Google Poitevin, Ruff, Belon, Sainte Laudy, Davenas, Brown, Ennis et al. Anyone can fact check what I say online and in the lit. Baso.degran. now is only one of six different types of biochemical tests for homeopathy.
He's so slick! He can put together half-information into a fluent presentation. But since it's not "nothing but the truth", it's not the truth. One either understands, or not. But I MUST give credit where due: he's as good as the docs the drug companies solicit. You can get a PhD to say just about anything, no?
@brian442442 Why would you quesiton my sanity for reporting what some of the world's top material scientists report on a controversial subject? Why can't you see them for what they are without insulting someone's intelligence? Do you think it makes you look stupid? If not, then what's big effen deal? Do you really know who they are and what they're saying, or are you gonna keep repeating the same embarassed denials of those who took an early position on this?
Being as polite as I possibly can in the face of such overwhelming nonsense, I will only ask you this question: Why do you not contact the James Randi Educational Foundation? He offers a million dollars to anyone who can prove that homeopathy works!!! It would be an astounding boost to your website as well since ALL double blind peer reviewed studies have shown that homeopathy is not effective in treating any disease or condition.
@tenkins Obviously you know less about it as you do homeopathy. The offer is a hoax. Watch my video on it. Randi'sbeen running from me for ten years now, ever since he accepted my application for a test. Why don't you contact JREF? Ask if they've heard about the Conte beta scintillation test, or Roy's spectrography, or Bells gas disharge test. Line it up and if we win I'll give you 10%. See what they say. I'm still up for it.
@Bandershot That was a great suggestion!!! I e-mailed Randi personally and he had this to say and I quote, "We're very familiar with Benneth -- a total nut case... Sigh...Randi" LOL
@tenkins Thanks, well done! makes my point! Randi's not testing anomalies, he's just defaming those who do. He didn 't say anything about physical, biochem&biological tests done at universities: All those profs are nut cases too? i.e. the work of Prof.Roy et al at Penn State, Stanford & U. of Ariz. Roy's told me to use it for the MDC. Ask about that!
@Bandershot First of all, Roy's spectrography is entirely bogus. Also, the JREF hasn't so much been running from you as ignoring someone who consistantly tried to change agreed upon conditions and protocals, and then became borderline abusive, even alienating even those trying to negotiate on your behalf. The majority of the actual negotiation is still available online to anyone who wants to check your facts, but we have seen time and again how well homeopath's claims hold up to fact checking.
@ArcanaKnight - Award winning Evan Pugh Prof. of the Solid State Rustum Roy is the world renowned DEAN of the American material sciences. He holds THREE professor emeritus positions at Penn State, he's the author of over 1,000 scientific papers. He was knighted by the Emperor of Japan for his work. WHO THE F R U? -cont.-
@ArcanaKnight-cont- So who am I supposed to believe? Statements of denial and defamation made as commentary on a Youtube video by some anonymous troll quoting a magician with an axe to grind, or the pub'd peer reviewed reports of respected scientists who are replicating one another's work? You want everyone to think that because homeopathics aren't chemical compounds they can't have any biological action. THEY'RE CHEMICAL COMPLEXES!!! Google it! Do some REAL research . .
What you said in this video made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
I consider myself to be a well educated person with an informed interest in the sciences. The words spoken in this video would not sound out of context if they had been muttered by a filthy, homeless schizophrenic pushing a shopping cart down the sidewalk.
Perhaps if you made a video discussing each individual concept you mentioned. Citations would be also be nice. Thank you.
@halberthawkins I wouldn't feel compelled to censor comments if more people didn't just have insults to share. Please look at the text field for the citations, & watch my other video on the subject, "The Homeoapthic Molecule," where I explain the host guest process. And may I make a suggestion to you and others? Homeopathy isn't going away because you don't understand it. We know it works because we've expereinced it. So all you're doing by aruging is building a wall . . .
You are fundamentaly wrong, sorry to have to tell you.
Clathrates trapp the other molecule "INSIDE" them selfs. Therfor they need to be circular or hollow. Water is neither. Water molecules frequently trapps molecules "BETWEEN" them, but that is totaly different effect. Infact, many ions and componds are written with the number of waters that they bind, or viewed from waters perspective, how many water molecules need to trap it.
Since you premis is flawed, the rest is irrelevant.
@N3CR1S If you look at my follow up video, "The Homeopathic Molecule" I show many pcitgures of clathrate models and describe their action in the homeopathic process. And you are right in saying that clathrates trap the guest molecule inside of them (but the action is created by the guest). Read the citations in the description field. Click on the chevron between the text field and the view count and it will expand.
A public mass overdose of homeopathic remedies has forced the New Zealand Council of Homeopaths to admit openly that their products do not contain any "material substances". Council spokeswoman Mary Glaisyer admitted publicly that "there´s not one molecule of the original substance remaining" in the diluted remedies that form the basis of this multi-million-dollar industry.
@angelo212 Homeopaths have always been thefirst to acknowledge that none of the original molecules remain in the homeopathic solution past 10^23. The homeopathic mechanism is not a molecular compound, it's a molecular complex formed out of weak hydrogen bonds, like ice (see van der Waal bonds) The homeopathic remdy is aliquid crystalandits raidation has been recorded on beta scintillatin film (Lasgne). Watch my video "The Homeopathic Molecule" and stop being so bigoted.
@Bandershot Why are you the "only one in history" that defined the mechanism of homeopathy. As long as it's been around your the only one that can explain it?
@angelo212 Davies & Farraday reported first seeing hydrates in 1810. The French studied them through the 19th cent. Van der Waals won the Nobel prize for his descript. of hydrogen bonding in hydrates. Powell named them clathrates. Bernard ref'd to them in NMR tests of hpathy, Anagnostatos described the host guest process model for hapthics in the 1990's; Roy et al re: to hpathic structuring as analagous to clathrates. But I'm the only one pushing it at the moment.
@Szakalot Thank you very much for asking the most intelligent question here so far, the answer to which is yes, although a ligand is bound to it's guest, whereas a clathrate is not. These are complexes, not compounds. Please watch my video "The Homeopathic Molecule" for an explanation of how clathrates are formed & read Agnagnostatos; Roy et al for struture and Montagnier for radiant action, links in the desc. field.
How is the selectivity of this mechanism maintained? It would seem easy to conclude that a lot of other random salts could form clathrates, that are later pharmacologically active, even though no salt is present anymore.
@Szakalot Distilled water will have contaminants that will replicate, but the diluent is overwhelmingly constituted by hydrates from the mother tincture replicating by way of the host/guest process during dilution & succussion. Did you read the articles by Anagnostatos? That should explain it.
@dantheman1507 This is an excellent question, one that homeopaths know little about, and one that I have admittedly shyed away from. It is a sine curve I have seen mirrored in physical and biological studies. For instance, plant studies at anthroposophic medical schools and Italian universities show that wheat seedlings were stunted at one level of potency and stimulated at another. Time and place also affect the reaction . . Why this is I can barely speculate.
@dantheman1507 The way Iook at it is like music. The remedy is transmitting a dischordant, harmonious or out of range frequency, like singing a song while a different one is played. But this is only speculation and it could be true for only one or a few aspects of energy treament. Homeopathy is more of an influence than an intervention.
I could not agree more wholeheartedly with acorntechnique. Having used homeopathy myself for many years and having found it to be far superior to most of what the pharmaceutical industry claims to offer, I now use it exclusively. On top of that it's safe and inexpensive.
It's been great for serious diseases like neuropathy and equally great for acute illnesses like bronchitis. Wonderful for treating the pain and swelling of dental problems/work and injuries. Great for animals too.
The powers at be have a vested interest in seeing the failure, the demise of homeopathy, because it works, it's cheap to produce, and most importantly, cannot be patented by the pharmaceutical fraternity.
The sad fact is, because it works, the pharmaceutical industry need to try and squash it, because they cant make any real money out of it.
So now we're agreed that opinion on any matter must be based on some experience or research, and not simply on the basis of junk-food thought processes, Google 'Homeopathic research' - to find truckloads of leading edge research that's going on.
Not only is homeopathy a valid form of medicine, but it's light years ahead of anything the pharmaceutical industry can come up with.
And therein lays the problem.
The pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest in seeing the downfall of homeopathy.
There's so much I would like to write here that I just don't know where to start.
Sure, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but what so many people from the ant-homeopathic camp fail to consider, is that an opinion based in idle, spontaneous and spurious conjecture, does not constitute an opinion.
Any opinion about anything must be based on the result of some informed and considered process, else. it's totally meaningless.
Widgetas- "Structure of Water" was authored by a collaboration of 4 prof's at Stanford, U of Ariz and Penn State, three physicists and one psychiatrist who've done physical studies of homeopathics. All is available online. I don't know who funded it. Just look it up for yourself. Perhaps a more relevant question would be, if these substances are placebos, why do they have action on non human subjects & why are detractors who say there's no scientific support not mentioning those studies?
Yeah, and a sketpic is a man without references. Hydrates were noted by Humphry and Farraday in 1810. Powell named them "clathrates" in the '40s. They form at normal temps. Google SMALL WATER CLUSTERS (CLATHRATES) IN THE PREPARATION PROCESS OF HOMEOPATHY G.S. Anagnostatos
and
On the Structure of High Dilutions According to the Clathrate Model
G.S. Anagnostatos, Institute of Nuclear Physics, National Center for Scientific Research, Attiki, Greece
Well thanks for the reasoned argument. Anagnostatos doe s not make a case for homeopathy. His chlathrate-like model for a framework is an empty hole - it only mimics the outer form of another molecule, not the content. What about Cowan et al who show water retains any form at molecular level for only 10 quadrillionths of a second ? Nature 434, 199-202 (10 March . 2005. FDA only want proof substances do no harm. Sugar and water do no harm.
Stop posing and start really investigating this. The core clathrate is what's inside the second mantle after the original orthomolecule is knocked out during the succussion process; the 1st mantle collapses down to become the new core. Cowan is describing the action of strong aqueous covalent bonds, not van der Waal forces, which describe how clathrates are held together out of pure H2O molecules. Read Roy's Structure of Water. & if these are inert substances, explain the action on plants.
You bought the big lie. There's a huge amount of experimental data that it works, you idiot.. Use your brain, why shouldn't there be exp. data for FDA reg'd susbtances it to get this far? Do you want me to start posting the links? And then what are you going to say? "I didn't know that" ? No, not you. You're too full of shit to admit that.
The question is, how stupid do you want to look? Any kid can use the online data to prove what a fool you are.
And one more thing. If their not radioactive, then how is that the signature can be recorded on beta scintillation film? (Lasgne/Conte, Theory of High Dilutions and Experimental Aspects) Conte's an applied phsyicist. Anagnostatos, author of the clathrate model, is a nuclear physicist. What are you? A "skeptic"? An idiot? See if you can answer that one without using the word "not."
Who am I supposed to believe? You? You got to be kidding.
No, Abus, most of the uneducated people are the ones who call it techno-babble, like you. Let me show you what I mean. If homeopathy is such bullshit, then why does it work on plants and animals, why is the action seen in biochemicil studies? If you're too stupid to lookumup yourself, I can post the links for you.
They're in the video description field, you idiot. But since I'm such a nice guy I'll add some more crap for you to cuss at. How's that? Then you can come back and show us all your puhblished lies.
This may interest you by the way. I used to work in the pharmacology department of University College London, where a group headed by medic John Foreman tried to reproduce experiments done in Paris by Benveniste to measure pharmacological activity in super-diluted solutions. Foreman's group turned up a negative, in contrast to Benveniste. This probably coloured my outlook.
Witt's systematic review of the literature for intro tests of homeopathy shows 28 published reports of attempts to replicate the basophil degranulation test, intro'd in 1985 by Murrieta and made famous by Benveniste; 23 were successful in showing biochemical action, four were unsuccessful; Hirst was equivocal. Foreman isn't listed among the trials with pub'd negative results. By your account in other correspondence, Foreman did not use properly succussed dilutes prepared by a qualified chemist.
Why is it do you think that people like yourself are so demanding of things that are right infront of them? As I said in the video, links to the articles to which I am referring are in the vid desc field. Also, I am referringto Roy's work pretedly other comments.
Do you think thiis could be the reason why there';s such a hard line against homeopathy? Could it be that people aren't really reading anything?? Why don't you do a little investigation before you get rude about this, okay?
Thank you! It means a hell of a lot to me. It's so rare for me to actually get an apology here it that when I do it comes as a huge surprise. Once people have thrown something you have offered to them back in your face, there's little hope of them ever apolgizing, much less admitting that they were ignorant of the amount of study that has gone into it by countless intelligent people. The arrogance is stunning. And when it comes to stueies demonstrating the placebo hypothesis, there's nothing.
Absolute bollocks! Throw in a few pseudo-scientific terms and anyone without a scientific background with be inclined to believe you. Where do these 'nano-crystalloids come from then, if the solution is diluted well beyond extinction point? Crystals of what? Drug? Water/ Or (and this where I put my money) utter bullshit?
Hydrates have been seen for 200 years. Powell named them clathrates in the '40's. Van der Waal described the forces that create long term hydrogen bonds. Guest host & supramolecular chemsitry have become fields of study. Read Roy's "Structure" article & Anagnostatos' Clathrate Model. This isn't technobabble, these are material scientists studying replicated effects biologically, biochemically & physically. I don't have to make anything up, it's all online. What can you show to prove otherwise?
Homeopathy excels at treating 1 condition. That condition is dehydration. If you have the names of any papers that are in a generally accepted peer reviewed journal, I would be THRILLED to see it.
No shady journals or authors please.
wowsdrawkcab 4 months ago
@wowsdrawkcab "Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Clinical Study" Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124:879-885 (AMA journal)
Now let me ask you a Q or 2. If you think the truth is still on YOUR side, then why not ask if there're any tests that show the biochemical invitro action for high dilutes? Isn't that what the real question is?
&if you're the prop&prof of science,reason&logic, then why request in jest&contempt? $?
Be nice or begone.
Bandershot 4 months ago
@wowsdrawkcab "Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Clinical Study" Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124:879-885 (AMA journal)
Now let me ask you a Q or 2. If you think the truth is still on YOUR side, then why not ask if there're any tests that show the biochemical invitro action for high dilutes? Isn't that what the real question is?
&if you're the prop&prof of science,reason&logic, then why request in jest&contempt? $?
Be nice or begone.
Bandershot 4 months ago
What is the point of positing a mechanism for a phenomenon that has not been demonstrated?
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon IT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED, repeatedly, ad nauseam, BIOCHEMICALLY, producing the same specific or similar effects in millions of people 4 over 2 centuries! You accuse us of being illogical, then you go off the rails telling lies & making assumptions, accusations that are prima facie illogical. How do you know what YOU know? There's not 1 study, test or trial that shows what opponents of h-pathy claim. Show me! The argument against it always ends up destroying itself.
Bandershot 7 months ago
This seems like stuff only a handful of people in the world can even begin to understand. It seems to have not have been tested yet to the extent that it should. It seems groundbreaking, while it has been used for ceturies. Above everything else, at this point and time in history it seems unbeliaveble. Procure studies that can build consensus among a community of experts before you publicise something ridiculously unbelievable to common people.
CapoeiraPiper 8 months ago
@CapoeiraPiper You make some good, if not rare observations, a reprieve from the relentless name calling this subject invokes. Fact is that what you are calling for has been done. Run "homeopathy" on PUBMED & you'll find 100's of studies, experiments, 2Xblind tests & trials on the subject, a long history of 1st testing electrochemicals on volunteers to see what their reaction to them is. The prob. now is for those who have been vituperative 2 put down the guns & take a 2nd look.
Bandershot 7 months ago
Cool pseudoscientific babble, bro. I guess Richard Dawkins was right, you do have to rewrite the laws of physics for homeopathy to work (invoking white holes, really?) The truth is, regardless of the big words you try and use, homeopathy performs no better than a placebo under controlled conditions.
hjf3022 10 months ago
@hjf3022 4 a moment then lets apply YOUR rigor to YOUR assertions. Which meta analysis states "homeopathy performs no better than a placebo under controlled conditions" ? Shang? Shang blows up in the face of anyone who touches it; but at least Shang put his name on his stupidity, which you'll never do. And notice too your statement has the qualifier of "controlled conditions." What controls & by whom are you spewing about? James the hi skool dropout w/$1M to lose Randi? Is that your "science?"
Bandershot 7 months ago
Why does homeopathy fail under EVERY empirical test?
Why does EVERY conclusion by every scientific body of many nations say it does no better than placebo?
Shawnruss 11 months ago
@Shawnruss "Every empirical test?" What are you babbling about now? I can quote numerous phys., biochem. & biological tests, trials & studies that show the action of homeopathic remedies. The basophil degranulation test has been replicated now over 2 dozen times! There has yet to be a major metanalysis that has conclusively stated it is a placebo, not even Shang, so if this is not a desperate attempt to save face, why is placebo the putative belief among your imaginary scientists?
Bandershot 7 months ago
I haven't laughed so hard since the Retroencabulator. Absolute comedic genius!
anothercrappypianist 1 year ago
I can sit in front of anyone....and create images ...talk to you with just my mind as if its a mental social network.. I have good affidavits as well.. i just need someone in the right position to help..=/..the people at school can't .=[
Kariei100 1 year ago
@Kariei100 Do it over Skype.
Bandershot 1 year ago
sir... I can literall st in front of you and perform instantanous results without fail .. I'm currently talking with ign 50,000 challeng and so far I have pure positive results.. I wanna prve james randi wrong but it seems as if hes been ducking my challenege papers so i set up with his sub division who are gonn help me get in touch with the right people..=/...i would love to show you. i promise its worth your time.
Kariei100 1 year ago
James randi along with the other skeptic challenges...please I beg you to give me a chance to prove that this is something I can do instantanous without any trickery I am well known through my campus and neighborhood as the one who harnesses the GOD PARTICLE...please message me at zenster979@yahoo.com also I added you on facebook lol
Kariei100 1 year ago
@Kariei100 How do you plan to demonstrate it?
Bandershot 1 year ago
Hey how are you sir. I've been trying forever to get in contact with you regarding my ability of telepathy and being able to disrupt the energy of molecules and why I can help you and you I as I need a mentor considering I'm able to do this technique at will no matter the cicumstance. I attend the university of maryland but after finals I took a break so that I could setup to take your challenge and
Kariei100 1 year ago
its crazy how human cant just admit there wrong....even with all th study that show no result that all....some goes to the extend of creating explanation (under the name of the science) to justify their years long of stuberness on a subject that is close!!!why would we even bother taking a pill that contain only water..
lapmarty 1 year ago
@lapmarty Aren't you basing your conclusions on what you've been told to think? There have been no comprehensive meta-analyses that have concluded homeopathics are "placebos." Countless studies, tests, trials & experiments show the action of hpathics biochemically, on plants, animals& humans.You can test it yourself by germinating seeds in cotton soaked in hpthically charged water (Staphysagria). What's happening is you've become guilty of the very thing you're accusing hpathy of . .
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot remember that madeleine ennis result were never reproduce...and it has been try again at less 7 time by major scientific organisation....to this day....if you dont understand that madeleine ennis needed to be out of this experiment then you dont understand what a neutral trial his...imagine her result was a result of a manipulation error.....then she would have done it again...so they did use a other neutral lab tech...chosse by all party...
lapmarty 1 year ago
@lapmarty Ennis' work was merely one part of a multi centered trial of the basophil degranulation test. No other in vitro for homeopathy has been rep'd as many times as the basophil. Look at the work of Belon and Sainte Laudy, abstracts on PUBMED. Also, if you can find it, look at the work of Boyd et al on enzymes. Perfectly done. The BBC test was a joke. I know, because they had to get my permsission to do it, due to my prior claim on Randi's $1M. They purposely staged it to fail. Understand?
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot the study you send me...are fine but they dont use human cell....they use complete human...wich in this case dont proove the memory of water...
see to proof homeopathy you need t
lapmarty 1 year ago
@Bandershot the study you send me...are fine but they dont use human cell....they use complete human...wich in this case dont proove the memory of water...
see to proof homeopathy you need human cell....like the bbc study...cause its the mecanism of action that skeptic attack...do you understand?
lapmarty 1 year ago
@lapmarty Google The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies- a systematic review of the literature by Claudia WItt et al. The is a report that covers 67 in vitro biological experiements.Themost popular and most replciated was the basophil derantulation test,the one attempted by the BBC camera crew. It is the only test you refer to and yet it was not published. Go to the literature and look at some real sceince instead of TV game shows run by fakers like Randi.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@lapmarty all double blinded study have been unconclusive......look at the horizon bbc test and it has been proved that even the one who claim this effect cant tell what is homeopathic water from regular water....it come to a point where the burden of proof is on the behalf of the claimer....sorry i never build a plane too....and i go on plane all the time....it work too..
lapmarty 1 year ago
@lapmarty There are many successful 2xblinded RCTs of homeoapthics. Google Nancy Malik's knol, "Scientific Research in Homeopathy
Triple Blind studies, Double-Blind Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trial, Systematic Reviews & Meta Analysis"
The Horizon/BBC test was a joke. Watch it again. They interview Prof. Madeleine Ennis of Queens College, who conducted a successful proving of the basophil test. So why didn't they have her do the test for Randi, instead of their own inexp. techs?
Bandershot 1 year ago
Research published in 2005 on hydrogen bond network dynamics in water showed that "liquid water essentially loses the memory of persistent correlations in its structure" within fifty millionths of a nanosecond.[6]
lapmarty 1 year ago
@lapmarty Then how do they explain clathrates? If you read the report from the material sciences from 2007, they speak extensively about liquid aqueous assembly (Google Roy, Structure of Liquid Water) And how do you explain water surface tension, or bubbles, all examples of "persistently correllating" hydrogen bonding. Logically dipole-dipole H2Os must connect & structure, and are held within a colloidal matrix (Tiller). See van der Waals, cage & incllusion molecules, solvation shell.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@1baldchimp Google Bonamin, "Animal models for studying homeopathy and high dilutions: conceptual critical review." 31 papers describing 33 experiments; "the effects of high dilutions seem to stimulate restoration of a 'stable state'. For theory Google Roy, "Structure of Liquid Water, Novel insights from the material sciences and relevance to homeopathy (Penn State, Stanford, UofArizona) Benneth, The Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy (audio lecture, Cavendish Labs, Cambridge)
Bandershot 1 year ago
Thanks Very interesting!
be408 1 year ago
Furthermore, these nano-particles. I have searched quite a lot and can find no scholarly evidence to back such a claim. Please point me in the right direction.
What I would like to know is where they come from. The point being that, for homeopathy to be effective, it must be the particle that is introduced that forms these particles or they occur as a result of the secussion of the container the water is in. I cannot see how that could occur. If it doesn't, the homeopathic remedy itself is false
BaggyWalker 1 year ago
@BaggyWalker "Nano-crystaloids" is my description of clathrate hydrates. The action of homeopathic remedies does not come from the guest particle in solution, but from a restructuring of the aqueous host, patterned after the guest. Google "supramolecular chemistry," look here below in the comments for specific NMR & FTIR studies showing the presence of liquid aqueous structuring (LAS) & its EM indices. Since they can no longer deny LAS w/o looking stupid, they now have to say it's irrelevant
Bandershot 1 year ago
When you bring up clathrate hydrates as an explanation for homeopathy (other than the real cause, placebo + ignorance) then you know you're mentally ill. Let's all say it togther: 'HOMEOPAHTY HAS NOT PASSED A SINGLE INDEPENDENT DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL - ALL HAVE FAILED, WITHOUT EXCEPTION. OVER 120 SUCH TESTS, AND OVER 200 YEARS OF THIS 'MEDICINE', AND NOT A SINGLE SUCH RESULT. THEREFORE IT IS NOT MEDICINE, IT IS FAITH-HEALING, MAGIC AND SHAMANISM.
maureenOWW 1 year ago
@maureenOWW Google Witt 2007 "The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies--a systematic review of the literature." It says: "Even experiments with a high methodological standard could demonstrate an effect of high potencies." What I'd like to know, is where you're getting your information? Witt is citing dozens of biochemical studies. What are you citing? Real scientists use real references, they don't just hurl insults &spout what they think their "friends" want to hear.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot I notice you didn't even attempt to refute my statement. PLEASE SHOW ME AN INDEPENDENT (i.e. not carried out by a homeopath) DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL INVOLVING A HOMEOPATHIC REMEDY THAT PROVED EFFECIACY OUTSIDE OF THAT EXPECTED BY THE PLACEBO EFFECT. Surely, if it WORKS then there must be THOUSANDS of such studies. To save you the embarassment I will type the answer myself: NO SUCH RESULT EXISTS. Every single trial has found no evidence above placebo. Prove me wrong. Lie some more.
maureenOWW 1 year ago
@maureenOWWGoogle "Inhibition of basophil activation by histamine: a sensitive and reproducible model for the study of the biological activity of high dilutions."
Sainte-Laudy J.
There are indeed thousands of case studies by medical doctors reporting on the action of high dilutes (now supramolecular chemicals) on humans; there are also numerous biochemical and biolgoical studies on plants, animals, basophiles, enzymes, etc.. The dispute over their validity comes from the patent drug industry.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Why must a Vitalistic Medicine conform to the methodology of official science? Even our conception of health and sickness differ completely. I have explained it before, very clearly, from the standpoint of mre than 30 years of medical practice with homeopathy: we cure asthma in children (I have almost 100 % success) If it is just a placebo, and it works, why to intoxicate children with Salbutamol,theophyllin and corticosteroids? If Homeopathy is a placebo then official medicine is a crime
MrManumona 1 year ago
@maureenOWW The Homeopathic Research institute or the faculty will supply any number of such research evidence. The latest one is published in today's Daily Mail. Babies, children and animals do not know about placibo and make spectacular recoveries with homeopathy. Interesting that.
JMOGH1 1 year ago
@Bandershot the studies he's mentioning do not actually back up his claims when you put them together. Clathrates ARE exactly what he said they are. That is not a disputed scientific fact: on the contrary they are accepted by the scientific community. there is no research to support the effect he is claiming they would have on our bodies. and they are found under the sea floor, not in homeopathic remedies. yes, i did research.
jessicamshannon 1 year ago
@jessicamshannon Congratualtions for being oneof the few if only commenters to recognize the reality of clathrate hydrates. However, your assumption that they don't have biological effects is challenged by Nobel laureates Linus Pauling and Luc Montagnier; recent studies at U of Cincinatti/Moscow State U. show that they do. So what you say about me is actually proven to be true for yourself. Before making your assumptions public Jessica, do a little more research.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot He does site valid research on the existence of clathrate hydrates and their physical properties, but none of that research actually supports his claims. Its like saying "carbon exists. Its proven. It has an atomic mass of 12.0107 amu. (site hypothetical source). This atomic mass is actually the leading cause for cancer". See the problem?You follow a bunch of facts by a wild claim, when in reality the false claim has nothing to do with the facts and is not supported by them.
jessicamshannon 1 year ago
@jessicamshannon i have use homepathy for years and i haven't gotten sick once explain that corporate puppet
mynameissooriginal2 1 year ago
@Bandershot Fair point. Do you know of the Cochrane Collaboration? In case not, they are a group that take all papers deemed well constructed enough (double-blinded, placebo controlled, randomised, non-exclusive of drop outs etc) and compile the statistical data from them all in order to make a larger test group which will give more reliable information. Look it up. "how homeopathy works" is meaningless as there has never been a well constructed study that demonstrated any efficacy over placebo
BaggyWalker 1 year ago
@BaggyWalker Note the escape hatch of "well constructed," without naming the criteria of what "well constructed" means. I often wonder what would happen if we turned your same vituperative "standards" on the testing of patent pharmacetuicals? LOL!
Bandershot 7 months ago
great video. however while the mainstream world continues to argue over if homeopathy works or why it works a man by the name of stephen lewis has took homeopathy to the next step and delivers energetic balancing frequencies to you without a solution vehicle. energeticmatrix(dot)com
guidav123 1 year ago
1.Paper by Montagnier has no peer review, also it states only about DNA sequences, not everything in world
2. Have you worked out and showed that homeo remedies actually emit that kind of radiation?
3. Youtube is just a place to post video's, if you find anything scientific about homeopathy why cant you just do some research, put a paper, get a peer review and publish in a good journal?
4. No research has so far shown that radiation has specificity regarding its actions, how can you claim that?
rammbbs7 1 year ago
@rammbbs7 Of course it has peer review. Montagnier won a Nobel prize for Science&Med. & just recently presented his findings at a conference for Nobel laureates. He replicated of Benveniste's work, using B's patented equipment. He's presenting a replicable test. If you're so hot about this, you do it. Put it to the test yourself. You won't believe anything we tell you, you haven't accepted peer review of hapthics, why would you now?
And anyone can see EM has specificity. Turn on the radio.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot You haven't answered what i have asked you. The paper says about dna sequences, how can you apply it to everything? The paper doesn't have a peer review as far as i know, but i am happy that you found it to have the PR. But you left the major part of the question.
2. You are proposing the entire thing, why do you think i should work out? I asked if you have demonstrated any effects about which you are speaking. Instead of asking me to work out, why cant you just say--continued--
rammbbs7 1 year ago
@rammbbs7 Yes, of course I've demonstrated the effects, run my own experiments, on plants. But so have others, and I don['t see you trumpteing those reports, so why should mine be of any greater value to you? The best trial you can give it is to put it to the test yourself, preferably with somebody who understands it & can help you select the correct remedy. If you can't do this, let it go. Many people are using it because it works for them. Accept this& be at peace with yourself.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot Most of my reply dint make to the comment section, i have no problem with that. But i am happy to hear that you conducted experiments on "plants". This should definitely work on humans if only we have more than infinitesimal homology (in dna sequence) to plants.
rammbbs7 1 year ago
@Bandershot : --continued--yes or no to that question?
3. Youtube is not a place to post a "mechanism", are you trying to publish this in a scientific journal so that we can read it there instead of listening here, it would be better if you could answer the question straight forward instead of deflecting it to me.
4. Em has been shown unequivocally to cause lot of effects on dna like cross-linking, mostly inducing apoptosis if applied in sufficient doses. I haven't read anywhere--continued--
rammbbs7 1 year ago
@rammbbs7 It's funny you mention publication , because what I have found miserably lacking in my detractors is an ignorance of the literature relevant to this topic. My job has been to simply present it, and for that I'm called a fraud? Where's the references for that argument? LOL! Read Roy's "Structure of Liquid Water" and Anagnostatos' Clathrate Model, both online, along with many other studies. Why that should induce so much hatred is a study in itself.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Comment removed
rammbbs7 1 year ago
@rammbbs7 If you lay out in the sun naked for a few hours you'll see & feel the effects of raiation on cells. Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier's recent study "Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences" is a rep of Benveniste's controversial work that shows hydrates emit EM radiation. Conte's "Theory of High Dilutions" also shows hpathics emit beta radiation. These claims are reproducible.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot Yes, but that study has nothing to do with homeopathy. What matters for medicine is randomized double blind studies of specific medicines, with a control group, and statistical analysis of the outcomes.
Aside from your explanations not panning out, homeopathic remedies do not work. Google "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy" at the PubMed site - real research by real scientists. (If I don't reply here again to any reply, it's because I have been blocked)
technoway 1 year ago
@technoway Montagnier recently addressed a panel of fellow laureatesto say that it IS about homeopathy. Anyone who knows the subject doesn't need to be told that. He's even using Benveniste's equipment!
The Ersnt "systematic review" is a joke. It excludes biochemical and biological reports like Montagnier's;1/3 of the ref's are his own. He excludes major meta analyses, none of which say hpathy is placebo. Like you, he's a flaming hypocrite.
Technoway is just another astroturfer 4SAS/Pfizer.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot --contined--me to that also.
5. Are you claiming that homeopathic remedies are actually radioactive? By the way beta scintillator can detect electrons or positrons as far as i know, they cant be for electromagnetic radiation.
rammbbs7 1 year ago
@rammbbs7 Yes, radioactive, tritium respone (Conte) I don't think you're clear about what EM radiation is. Maybe you're being too exclusive with your terms. Do you think EM is not a form of radiation?
Bandershot 1 year ago
csmcmillion wrote:
I have degrees in physics and electrical engineering. Nano bubbles acting as receivers and re-emitters from the background EM field. Gotta call BS on that one.
Your answer to him below is bunk. The papers you cite in all your topics are either total bunk, or they don't support what you claim.
I also noted you block people who disagree with you, and many of these people, such as myself, have advanced degrees. You do not know more than us. Your comments prove that.
technoway 1 year ago
@technoway You disagree & so far you haven't ref'd anything but yourself & brag about your phony degrees. When you're losing the argument, call bunk&foul. Typical skeptard. The background EM claim comes from Montagnier study: hydrates show "a resonance phenomenon triggered by the ambient electromagnetic background of very low frequency waves." Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences. If you know so much, how come you didn't know that?
Bandershot 1 year ago
Background radiation into specific electromagnetic signals. LOL!!! That is a laugh. You know nothing of physics!!!
technoway 1 year ago
@technoway And you do? LOL!
Hey technoway, you've become quite a fan. But get this: The statement about the background radation comes from Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier's study:
Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures
Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences
"It appears to be a resonance phenomenon triggered by the ambient electromagnetic background of very low frequency waves."
Google it!
Unlike you, I don't have to make things up.
Bandershot 1 year ago
I am an insulin-dependent diabetic. Do you advocate forgoing insulin injections for a homeopathic treatment?
Would you (or any other homeopathy advocate) willing to undergo your next surgery with a homeopathic anesthetic?
csmcmillion 1 year ago
@csmcmillion Come on, I may be crazy but I'm not THAT stupid. There's a million assholes out there who are laying in wait for me to tell you or some other knucklehead to kick his insulin habit so they can accuse me of murder when you overdose on donuts & die of a heart attack. For a guy who says he has advanced degrees you sure are stupid. Give me one good reason why I would make a suggestion like that in a place like this? Go talk to your witch doctor, he's got the lic. to kill you, not me.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot But if homeopathy works then why wouldn't it cure diabetes?
ralathr 1 year ago
@ralathr And patent medicine does? Any claim for a product that "cures" is attacked. And just what do you mean be "diabetes?" What are the symptoms? What are the causes? Vaccination damage is suspected & so is diet. How you treat that? I have one hpathic rem. indicated for "hereditary diabetes mellitus," 2 for pancreatic, 5 for insipidus, & 68 dif. rem's for mellitus; ea. rem includes it own symptomatic index. Restrict the diet, address the vaccinosis, then totality of symptoms, 1 rem at a time
Bandershot 1 year ago
I have degrees in physics and electrical engineering. Nano bubbles acting as receivers and re-emitters from the background EM field. Gotta call BS on that one.
csmcmillion 1 year ago
@csmcmillion Read Montagnier's "Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences."
"We have discovered a novel property of DNA, that is the capacity of some sequences to emit electromagnetic waves in resonance after excitation by the ambient electromagnetic background." Montagnier's a Nobel laureate.
Read "On the Structure of High Dilutions According to the Clathrate Model"
G.S. Anagnostatos. Anagnostatos is a nuclear physicist.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Wouldn't water absorb the radiation?
gregkahuna1 1 year ago
@Bandershot
You explain that there is radiation (electro-magnetic signal) but you don't say how the radiation helps you overcome a disease. Can you clarify?
100jurman 1 year ago
@100jurman Our conscious minds have sublimated the idea that the only way to treat disease is to overcome it by mass action & purging of infected cells as breeding ground for further disease. The homeopathic clathrate presents the immune system with the electronic signature of a pathogen that creates similar symptoms. This diverts attention away from the internal "pogrom" to reduce the EFFECTS of the disease, rather than eliminating the disease by cytocide, where the body attacks itself. cont
Bandershot 1 year ago
@100jurman The 2nd method is that the signal of the remedy acts directly on the pathogen by causing its autotitration, or in the case of malaria, confusing the plasmodium with the signal of another similar species. It would be the same as if Mankind thought it was tricked by misinformation into thinking it was overpopulated or competing with a superior species, the cities crumbling, survivors retreating into the forests. Cells have no eyes, they can only sense things intercellularly by EM/RF
Bandershot 1 year ago
I can't make up my mind as to whether or not this works.
I guess I'll just sit aside and see what happens.
Hey, I wonder which frequencies of radiation cause which reactions... Could we possibly replicate them artificially and test them that way?
But anyway, if what John Benneth is saying can be proven, we have a Nobel prize or two in order for the discoverers...
amysteriousgal 1 year ago
@Bandershot - nice attempt at a distraction from my point by bringing in the concept of conspiracy by the Pharma industry, but what i'm saying 100% accurate. the number of meta-analysis results out there on alternative medicine showing nothing higher than placebo effect is staggering.
I can start with the UK House of Commons enquiry data and go on for months after that.
Or do you also choose to 'cherry-pick' the in favour results on alt.med and laud those as scientifically accurate? shame...
cwsaja 1 year ago
@cwsaja You keep making these vague criticisms about homeoapthy, but when we check out the specifics, it turns out you're wrong. There has been no good review that concluded placebo for h. Google Am J Pharm Educ. 2007 February 15; 71(1): 07 2007: "Where Does Homeopathy Fit in Pharmacy Practice?"
Teela Johnson, HonBSc and Heather Boon, BScPhm, PhD
University of Toronto, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy
Read what it says about the Shang review, the ONLY purported meta that concluded placebo.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@cwsaja So my question to you, what's with the hypocrisy of you people who call yourself skeptics? You routinely say there's no science to support what you criticze; then when its presented, as above, you pick it apart, keep arguing, wander off. In other words, people who take a skeptical attitude seem to incapable of self correction. You can't seem to admit you've made an error in jdugment. You're incapable of apology or reconciliation witht evidence of the people presenting it. Itsadisconnect
Bandershot 1 year ago
Welcome to classy pseudoscience....
tebman 1 year ago
@tebman The pseudoscience charge has so far not been supported by specifics. This video outlines the basic element for chemical analysis of homeopathy, the clathrate. The clathrate is a gas hydrate. This is a known fact in supramoelcular chemistry. Google it. It's nothing new. If you knew what real science was and weren't astroturfing this subject, the only question you could surmise would be if clathrates are the determing factor. Don't prevaricate, go investigate.
Bandershot 1 year ago
So if all of this is true, why are the meta-analysis results all overwhelmingly negative? and why has no correctly run, full rigour study ever conclusively shown any benefit above placebo level?
why is it that only the research sponsored by the alternative medicine industry show any benefits and why are those studies all quickly debunked as using flawed science and bad rigour?
Why .....?
cwsaja 1 year ago
@cwsaja What you say isn't true. No true meta analysis of homeopathy has ever concluded that the action of homeopathic remedies is solely due to the placebo effect, and physical, chemical, biochemical, biological and clinical evidence shows their action beynd the shadow of a doubt. You've been led to the placebo hypothesis by astroturf. Homeopathy challenges the medical monopoly held by the patent drug industry because its pharmacy is in widespread generic use and eludes capitalization.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot - nice attempt at a distraction from my point by bringing in the concept of conspiracy by the Pharma industry, but what i'm saying 100% accurate. the number of meta-analysis results out there on alternative medicine showing nothing higher than placebo effect is staggering.
I can start with the UK House of Commons enquiry data and go on for months after that.
Or do you also choose to 'cherry-pick' the in favour results on alt.med and laud those as scientifically accurate? shame...
cwsaja 1 year ago
@cwsaja "the number of meta-analysis results out there on alternative medicine showing nothing higher than placebo effect is staggering" LOL! I actually fell for that one too until i checked it out, found that JUST THE OPPOSITE is true. None of the major meta analyses have ever concluded that homeopathy is a placebo. They may have been critical of methodological standards in testing, but not one has ever ever concluded that its just a placebo. (Shang was discredited; no sources listed)
Bandershot 1 year ago
There will always be naysayers. Homoeopathy just sounds too weird to those of a certain life denying belief system. However, the fact that homoeopathy has grown to become the second most widespread medical system in the world through little more than word of mouth speaks for itself.
Homoeopathy will continue to grow because people get better from homoeopathic treatment. It is not the only effective medicine in the world but it is also inexpensive. That explains many of its detractors.
kevinjohnmorris 1 year ago
HAHAHA and the comments are screened. Fantastic.
lilacpilgrim13 1 year ago
@lilacpilgrim13 Looks like another irrelevant statement has made it through.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Hmm, ratings disabled. I wonder why...?
lilacpilgrim13 1 year ago
@lilacpilgrim13 Astroturfing. The reac tion to most of my videos is overwhelming negative (argumentum ad populum). The opposition to homeopathy is pathological, not scientific., as is evidenced by the inability to apply the standards you demand for my assertions to your own (argumentum ad hominem). And I don't care what you think of my videos, I'm simply presenting information anyone can verify for themselves online (argumentum ad rem).
Bandershot 1 year ago
way to go technobabble, you have no idea what you're talking about and this is a smokescreen to intimidate your critics.
alfproperjohn 1 year ago
@alfproperjohn Clathrates, gas hydrates are not technobabble. These are real things in supramolecular chemistry. Their relationship to homeopathy is inreasingly being observed and reported on in the literature. Google this from the Journal of Molecular Liquids: "NMR water proton relaxation in unheated and heated ultrahigh aqueous dilutions of histamine: Evidence for an air-dependent supramolecular organization of water" Jean-Louis Demangeat
Bandershot 1 year ago
What. In. The. Fuck... I am actually stupider having listened to this...
lordstanley4 1 year ago
@lordstanley4 In homeopathy we observe the law of similars, like cures like, so perhaps what happened is you had a reaction to something that was actually too intelligent for you and ithat's how it made you stupid. I suggest you watch a Will Ferrel movie to antidote the influence of this video on your suffering mind.
Bandershot 1 year ago
I listened to John Benneth with much interest. That homeopathy works is a given. There are just too many people throughout the world for 200 years who have benefitted for this to be in doubt. This video seeks to point a way to explain homeopathy's observable success.
Of greater significance to me are the comments trying to trash what is said. These critics are so certain about what is quite clearly uncertain! They demonstrate closed minds when science demands open minds.
Pity
stevescrutton 1 year ago
My wife and I found this interesting and hard to believe. She works in medicine and has considered this field. Some other people have said that this is, "bullshit".
Please bare in mind that my wife recognizes and agrees with almost all he said, based on a college education in medicine that is general. Not a specialist of any kind, not a homeopathic doctor, just regular 4th year studies.
I find it hard to believe, but I want to give props to the things stated which are fact.
downstube 1 year ago
"How Homeopathy Works "
It doesn't.
mecher3k 1 year ago
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
sillerymcgreery 1 year ago
Homeopathy does NOT work. There is no physical mechanism by which this could possibly work. There is NO active ingredient in any of these homeopathic preparations. People advocating homeopathy are no more than criminals deceiving the public for monetary gain.
Mutrino 1 year ago
This guy uses all sorts of buzzwords to sound sciency: clathare, nano-..., dilution, hiper-..., white hole, radiation, radio-active, beta-..., radiants, polymeric, nano-crytaloids, electromagnetic, Nobel pize winning ..., background radiation, liquid crystal.
I call this BULLSHIT!
ZergAteu 1 year ago
@ZergAteu You misspelled clathrates.
Bandershot 1 year ago
What an idiot. If this is not Poe, this guy is an idiot.
ZergAteu 1 year ago
alright help me out here. in the case of homeopathy, why is less more? why are homeopathic remedies so expensive if they consist of SOOOO little? why are people afraid of it?
most of all, why should i choose homeopathy instead of other natural remedies?
not trying to start a debate here i just want some answers
PS i tried posting this before but i had a strange comment pending approval message so im trying again
ratherbill 1 year ago
alright help me out here. in the case of homeopathy, why is less more? why are homeopathic remedies so expensive if they consist of SOOOO little? why are people afraid of it?
most of all, why should i choose homeopathy instead of other natural remedies?
not trying to start a debate here i just want some answers
ratherbill 1 year ago
Is homeopathy a treatment which relies a lot on human survival psychology.
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" (Hamlet)
Do homeopaths -at best - seek to exploit the human mind's ability to fight off infection/discomfort through some sort of trickery, but a trick that might (in some cases) work.
I do not mean this comment as an insult, I do respect people who are able to discuss ideas openly and intelligently.
bobjay25 1 year ago
@bobjay25 Given that we have found homeopathics to have measurable, radiant qualities, it could be that they are, at an energetic level, doing as you suggest, tricking the immune system, or causing it to be redirected or inreased it's intensity. I think of it as being like medical akido.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@bobjay25 i'm almost with you but some Homeopath's seem to generally belive in what they do, there has also been anecdotes of homopathic medicine being given to horses and just today I was talking to somone who gave Medicine (herbal mind you) to her disabled husband which confuses the placebo claim somwhat.
greenelf12 1 year ago
you should draw a picture for these idiots to understand
dantheman1507 1 year ago
@dantheman1507 My video the Homeoapthic Molecule has numerous pictures of clathrates in it, but it doesn't seem to be getting many views. Evidence for homeopathy is highly embarrassing to the critics. It makes them look stupid. And since the mainstream supports the mainstream, there are only a few scientists who are good enough to be immune to popular opinion and support homeopathy, like Josephson, Montagnier, Conte, Roy and Tiller.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot
I also believe scientists are afraid to touch homeopathy right now because of what happened to that French guy... Tried to talk about a homeopathic experiment with my biochemistry teacher the other day, he was all like "I'm staying out of this one"...Then it hit me...
Anyway, I'm sure this thing will be proven any time soon, when people get the courage to experiment again.
Until then I hope my teacher can get that culture machine back... we want to stress S. pombe with a cell phone
dantheman1507 1 year ago
@dantheman1507 It doesn't stop everyone. Benveniste's was a replication of an experiment that's been done over two dozen times now.
There's no question that it works. The real question has been how it works, and I've answered that. The reason they're so upset is not because there's no evidence that it works, its because there's so much evidence that it does, and it embarrasses the hell out of them that they haven';t been able to explain it.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot You're right, There isn't any question about homeopathy working because it doesn't. Benveniste's results were shown to likely be the result of the experimenter effect. Its no coincidence that the only replications which yielded positive results were the unblinded ones. The results of blinded tests were nearly always random.
ArcanaKnight 1 year ago
@ArcanaKnight You're lying to save face.. The dif between me and you is that I cite real experiments by real scientists anyone can read. Benv's basophil degranulation test was a REPLICATION done many times under peer review. Google Poitevin, Ruff, Belon, Sainte Laudy, Davenas, Brown, Ennis et al. Anyone can fact check what I say online and in the lit. Baso.degran. now is only one of six different types of biochemical tests for homeopathy.
Bandershot 1 year ago
He's so slick! He can put together half-information into a fluent presentation. But since it's not "nothing but the truth", it's not the truth. One either understands, or not. But I MUST give credit where due: he's as good as the docs the drug companies solicit. You can get a PhD to say just about anything, no?
laportama 1 year ago
Are you insane?
brian442442 1 year ago
@brian442442 Why would you quesiton my sanity for reporting what some of the world's top material scientists report on a controversial subject? Why can't you see them for what they are without insulting someone's intelligence? Do you think it makes you look stupid? If not, then what's big effen deal? Do you really know who they are and what they're saying, or are you gonna keep repeating the same embarassed denials of those who took an early position on this?
Bandershot 1 year ago
test
exposefraud 1 year ago
Being as polite as I possibly can in the face of such overwhelming nonsense, I will only ask you this question: Why do you not contact the James Randi Educational Foundation? He offers a million dollars to anyone who can prove that homeopathy works!!! It would be an astounding boost to your website as well since ALL double blind peer reviewed studies have shown that homeopathy is not effective in treating any disease or condition.
tenkins 1 year ago
@tenkins Obviously you know less about it as you do homeopathy. The offer is a hoax. Watch my video on it. Randi'sbeen running from me for ten years now, ever since he accepted my application for a test. Why don't you contact JREF? Ask if they've heard about the Conte beta scintillation test, or Roy's spectrography, or Bells gas disharge test. Line it up and if we win I'll give you 10%. See what they say. I'm still up for it.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot That was a great suggestion!!! I e-mailed Randi personally and he had this to say and I quote, "We're very familiar with Benneth -- a total nut case... Sigh...Randi" LOL
tenkins 1 year ago
@tenkins Thanks, well done! makes my point! Randi's not testing anomalies, he's just defaming those who do. He didn 't say anything about physical, biochem&biological tests done at universities: All those profs are nut cases too? i.e. the work of Prof.Roy et al at Penn State, Stanford & U. of Ariz. Roy's told me to use it for the MDC. Ask about that!
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot First of all, Roy's spectrography is entirely bogus. Also, the JREF hasn't so much been running from you as ignoring someone who consistantly tried to change agreed upon conditions and protocals, and then became borderline abusive, even alienating even those trying to negotiate on your behalf. The majority of the actual negotiation is still available online to anyone who wants to check your facts, but we have seen time and again how well homeopath's claims hold up to fact checking.
ArcanaKnight 1 year ago
@ArcanaKnight - Award winning Evan Pugh Prof. of the Solid State Rustum Roy is the world renowned DEAN of the American material sciences. He holds THREE professor emeritus positions at Penn State, he's the author of over 1,000 scientific papers. He was knighted by the Emperor of Japan for his work. WHO THE F R U? -cont.-
Bandershot 1 year ago
@ArcanaKnight-cont- So who am I supposed to believe? Statements of denial and defamation made as commentary on a Youtube video by some anonymous troll quoting a magician with an axe to grind, or the pub'd peer reviewed reports of respected scientists who are replicating one another's work? You want everyone to think that because homeopathics aren't chemical compounds they can't have any biological action. THEY'RE CHEMICAL COMPLEXES!!! Google it! Do some REAL research . .
Bandershot 1 year ago
What you said in this video made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
I consider myself to be a well educated person with an informed interest in the sciences. The words spoken in this video would not sound out of context if they had been muttered by a filthy, homeless schizophrenic pushing a shopping cart down the sidewalk.
Perhaps if you made a video discussing each individual concept you mentioned. Citations would be also be nice. Thank you.
halberthawkins 1 year ago
@halberthawkins I wouldn't feel compelled to censor comments if more people didn't just have insults to share. Please look at the text field for the citations, & watch my other video on the subject, "The Homeoapthic Molecule," where I explain the host guest process. And may I make a suggestion to you and others? Homeopathy isn't going away because you don't understand it. We know it works because we've expereinced it. So all you're doing by aruging is building a wall . . .
Bandershot 1 year ago
You are fundamentaly wrong, sorry to have to tell you.
Clathrates trapp the other molecule "INSIDE" them selfs. Therfor they need to be circular or hollow. Water is neither. Water molecules frequently trapps molecules "BETWEEN" them, but that is totaly different effect. Infact, many ions and componds are written with the number of waters that they bind, or viewed from waters perspective, how many water molecules need to trap it.
Since you premis is flawed, the rest is irrelevant.
N3CR1S 1 year ago
@N3CR1S If you look at my follow up video, "The Homeopathic Molecule" I show many pcitgures of clathrate models and describe their action in the homeopathic process. And you are right in saying that clathrates trap the guest molecule inside of them (but the action is created by the guest). Read the citations in the description field. Click on the chevron between the text field and the view count and it will expand.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Homeopaths Admit Expensive Concoctions Just Water
A public mass overdose of homeopathic remedies has forced the New Zealand Council of Homeopaths to admit openly that their products do not contain any "material substances". Council spokeswoman Mary Glaisyer admitted publicly that "there´s not one molecule of the original substance remaining" in the diluted remedies that form the basis of this multi-million-dollar industry.
angelo212 1 year ago
@angelo212 Homeopaths have always been thefirst to acknowledge that none of the original molecules remain in the homeopathic solution past 10^23. The homeopathic mechanism is not a molecular compound, it's a molecular complex formed out of weak hydrogen bonds, like ice (see van der Waal bonds) The homeopathic remdy is aliquid crystalandits raidation has been recorded on beta scintillatin film (Lasgne). Watch my video "The Homeopathic Molecule" and stop being so bigoted.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot Why are you the "only one in history" that defined the mechanism of homeopathy. As long as it's been around your the only one that can explain it?
angelo212 1 year ago
@angelo212 Davies & Farraday reported first seeing hydrates in 1810. The French studied them through the 19th cent. Van der Waals won the Nobel prize for his descript. of hydrogen bonding in hydrates. Powell named them clathrates. Bernard ref'd to them in NMR tests of hpathy, Anagnostatos described the host guest process model for hapthics in the 1990's; Roy et al re: to hpathic structuring as analagous to clathrates. But I'm the only one pushing it at the moment.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot
how exactly are molecules of water, regardless of their shape supposed to act as pharmacologically active molecules of scientific treatment?
Are you suggesting that water can as a ligand in biological transduction pathways?
Szakalot 1 year ago
@Szakalot Thank you very much for asking the most intelligent question here so far, the answer to which is yes, although a ligand is bound to it's guest, whereas a clathrate is not. These are complexes, not compounds. Please watch my video "The Homeopathic Molecule" for an explanation of how clathrates are formed & read Agnagnostatos; Roy et al for struture and Montagnier for radiant action, links in the desc. field.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot
Very well, lets assume this is correct.
How is the selectivity of this mechanism maintained? It would seem easy to conclude that a lot of other random salts could form clathrates, that are later pharmacologically active, even though no salt is present anymore.
Szakalot 1 year ago
@Szakalot Distilled water will have contaminants that will replicate, but the diluent is overwhelmingly constituted by hydrates from the mother tincture replicating by way of the host/guest process during dilution & succussion. Did you read the articles by Anagnostatos? That should explain it.
Bandershot 1 year ago
how do you explain the phenomenon when a substance in a certain concentration has one effect, and in another concentration the opposite effect?
(examples: vitamin K, heparin, antioxidants )
dantheman1507 1 year ago
@dantheman1507 This is an excellent question, one that homeopaths know little about, and one that I have admittedly shyed away from. It is a sine curve I have seen mirrored in physical and biological studies. For instance, plant studies at anthroposophic medical schools and Italian universities show that wheat seedlings were stunted at one level of potency and stimulated at another. Time and place also affect the reaction . . Why this is I can barely speculate.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@Bandershot
it's interesting that this happens only in vivo experiments (from what I know)
dantheman1507 1 year ago
@dantheman1507 The way Iook at it is like music. The remedy is transmitting a dischordant, harmonious or out of range frequency, like singing a song while a different one is played. But this is only speculation and it could be true for only one or a few aspects of energy treament. Homeopathy is more of an influence than an intervention.
Bandershot 1 year ago
@dantheman1507
I'm not sure what you are asking but are you suggesting that Heparin and Vitamin k are the same substance?
mochuck 1 year ago
I could not agree more wholeheartedly with acorntechnique. Having used homeopathy myself for many years and having found it to be far superior to most of what the pharmaceutical industry claims to offer, I now use it exclusively. On top of that it's safe and inexpensive.
It's been great for serious diseases like neuropathy and equally great for acute illnesses like bronchitis. Wonderful for treating the pain and swelling of dental problems/work and injuries. Great for animals too.
den151redbank 1 year ago
The powers at be have a vested interest in seeing the failure, the demise of homeopathy, because it works, it's cheap to produce, and most importantly, cannot be patented by the pharmaceutical fraternity.
The sad fact is, because it works, the pharmaceutical industry need to try and squash it, because they cant make any real money out of it.
acorntechnique 1 year ago
So now we're agreed that opinion on any matter must be based on some experience or research, and not simply on the basis of junk-food thought processes, Google 'Homeopathic research' - to find truckloads of leading edge research that's going on.
Not only is homeopathy a valid form of medicine, but it's light years ahead of anything the pharmaceutical industry can come up with.
And therein lays the problem.
The pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest in seeing the downfall of homeopathy.
acorntechnique 1 year ago
There's so much I would like to write here that I just don't know where to start.
Sure, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but what so many people from the ant-homeopathic camp fail to consider, is that an opinion based in idle, spontaneous and spurious conjecture, does not constitute an opinion.
Any opinion about anything must be based on the result of some informed and considered process, else. it's totally meaningless.
And therefore valueless.
acorntechnique 1 year ago
wow...they couldn't help but verify the validity of homeopathy
Jahrass7 1 year ago
--"Is it genetic engineering?"
--"Oh no, that's science fiction mumbo jumbo. In fact, his electronium hat harnesses the power of sunspots to create cognitive radiation."
---Futurama
AspiringPotato 1 year ago
Quick question, before I go in to this in depth:
The papers etc you reference - They were not funded/ the experiment not undertaken to give weight to the homoeopathic case?
Your reasoning that they support homoeopathy has come about externally to the original motivation behind the studies?
Widgetas 1 year ago
Widgetas- "Structure of Water" was authored by a collaboration of 4 prof's at Stanford, U of Ariz and Penn State, three physicists and one psychiatrist who've done physical studies of homeopathics. All is available online. I don't know who funded it. Just look it up for yourself. Perhaps a more relevant question would be, if these substances are placebos, why do they have action on non human subjects & why are detractors who say there's no scientific support not mentioning those studies?
Bandershot 1 year ago
Homeopathic preparations are not radioactive. Chlathrates exist only at zero or lower temperatures. How does this help ?
The presentation sounds like the evidence for homeopathy is the fact that it relies on crystal therapy. Still no experimental data that it works.
skulptor 1 year ago
Yeah, and a sketpic is a man without references. Hydrates were noted by Humphry and Farraday in 1810. Powell named them "clathrates" in the '40s. They form at normal temps. Google SMALL WATER CLUSTERS (CLATHRATES) IN THE PREPARATION PROCESS OF HOMEOPATHY G.S. Anagnostatos
and
On the Structure of High Dilutions According to the Clathrate Model
G.S. Anagnostatos, Institute of Nuclear Physics, National Center for Scientific Research, Attiki, Greece
Bandershot 1 year ago
Well thanks for the reasoned argument. Anagnostatos doe s not make a case for homeopathy. His chlathrate-like model for a framework is an empty hole - it only mimics the outer form of another molecule, not the content. What about Cowan et al who show water retains any form at molecular level for only 10 quadrillionths of a second ? Nature 434, 199-202 (10 March . 2005. FDA only want proof substances do no harm. Sugar and water do no harm.
skulptor 1 year ago
Stop posing and start really investigating this. The core clathrate is what's inside the second mantle after the original orthomolecule is knocked out during the succussion process; the 1st mantle collapses down to become the new core. Cowan is describing the action of strong aqueous covalent bonds, not van der Waal forces, which describe how clathrates are held together out of pure H2O molecules. Read Roy's Structure of Water. & if these are inert substances, explain the action on plants.
Bandershot 1 year ago
You bought the big lie. There's a huge amount of experimental data that it works, you idiot.. Use your brain, why shouldn't there be exp. data for FDA reg'd susbtances it to get this far? Do you want me to start posting the links? And then what are you going to say? "I didn't know that" ? No, not you. You're too full of shit to admit that.
The question is, how stupid do you want to look? Any kid can use the online data to prove what a fool you are.
Bandershot 1 year ago
And one more thing. If their not radioactive, then how is that the signature can be recorded on beta scintillation film? (Lasgne/Conte, Theory of High Dilutions and Experimental Aspects) Conte's an applied phsyicist. Anagnostatos, author of the clathrate model, is a nuclear physicist. What are you? A "skeptic"? An idiot? See if you can answer that one without using the word "not."
Who am I supposed to believe? You? You got to be kidding.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Hey bro, that's not how biology/physics/the universe works.
Nice techno- babble though, I bet plenty of less educated people eat this crap up.
Absu2012 1 year ago
No, Abus, most of the uneducated people are the ones who call it techno-babble, like you. Let me show you what I mean. If homeopathy is such bullshit, then why does it work on plants and animals, why is the action seen in biochemicil studies? If you're too stupid to lookumup yourself, I can post the links for you.
Bandershot 1 year ago
Smells like bullshit. Link to the actual studies involved.
Orayn 1 year ago
They're in the video description field, you idiot. But since I'm such a nice guy I'll add some more crap for you to cuss at. How's that? Then you can come back and show us all your puhblished lies.
Bandershot 1 year ago
This may interest you by the way. I used to work in the pharmacology department of University College London, where a group headed by medic John Foreman tried to reproduce experiments done in Paris by Benveniste to measure pharmacological activity in super-diluted solutions. Foreman's group turned up a negative, in contrast to Benveniste. This probably coloured my outlook.
ilkinond 2 years ago
Witt's systematic review of the literature for intro tests of homeopathy shows 28 published reports of attempts to replicate the basophil degranulation test, intro'd in 1985 by Murrieta and made famous by Benveniste; 23 were successful in showing biochemical action, four were unsuccessful; Hirst was equivocal. Foreman isn't listed among the trials with pub'd negative results. By your account in other correspondence, Foreman did not use properly succussed dilutes prepared by a qualified chemist.
Bandershot 2 years ago
The issue of improper succussing was indeed Benveniste's response to Foreman'a findings.
ilkinond 2 years ago
Comment removed
ilkinond 2 years ago
Comment removed
ilkinond 2 years ago
Why is it do you think that people like yourself are so demanding of things that are right infront of them? As I said in the video, links to the articles to which I am referring are in the vid desc field. Also, I am referringto Roy's work pretedly other comments.
Do you think thiis could be the reason why there';s such a hard line against homeopathy? Could it be that people aren't really reading anything?? Why don't you do a little investigation before you get rude about this, okay?
Bandershot 2 years ago
I apologize for my earlier rudeness, by the way, if that is worth anything.
ilkinond 2 years ago
Thank you! It means a hell of a lot to me. It's so rare for me to actually get an apology here it that when I do it comes as a huge surprise. Once people have thrown something you have offered to them back in your face, there's little hope of them ever apolgizing, much less admitting that they were ignorant of the amount of study that has gone into it by countless intelligent people. The arrogance is stunning. And when it comes to stueies demonstrating the placebo hypothesis, there's nothing.
Bandershot 2 years ago
Absolute bollocks! Throw in a few pseudo-scientific terms and anyone without a scientific background with be inclined to believe you. Where do these 'nano-crystalloids come from then, if the solution is diluted well beyond extinction point? Crystals of what? Drug? Water/ Or (and this where I put my money) utter bullshit?
ilkinond 2 years ago
Hydrates have been seen for 200 years. Powell named them clathrates in the '40's. Van der Waal described the forces that create long term hydrogen bonds. Guest host & supramolecular chemsitry have become fields of study. Read Roy's "Structure" article & Anagnostatos' Clathrate Model. This isn't technobabble, these are material scientists studying replicated effects biologically, biochemically & physically. I don't have to make anything up, it's all online. What can you show to prove otherwise?
Bandershot 2 years ago