Posted: Jun 21, 2010 5:46 pm
by Dr. Nancy Malik
OHSU wrote:
Is the value of a substance as a curative agent not tied to its chemical and physical properties? How is it, then, that substances that are made into homeopathic preparations become chemically and physically indistinguishable from water in every single way, yet still retain the ability to cure illness? Doesn't it seem just a little bit odd that for hundreds or thousands of completely unrelated substances, the property related to treating disease is precisely the quality (and the ONLY quality) that happens to be retained when diluted in water, and that for each of the hundreds or thousands of substances in question, that special property that makes the substance curative is not otherwise detectable via any means? That seems like quite a coincidence to me.

If water retained some but not all the physical or chemical properties of diluted substances, doesn't it seem likely that different substances would behave differently? For example, doesn't it seem that certain substances would totally lose whatever property it is that makes them useful for treating disease, but they'd retain their color, while for other substances it might be smell, and others their flammability? It just seems really strange and not a little suspicious to me that all substances should lose all their properties, and become completely indistinguishable from pure water except for whatever property they have that makes them curative.

Can someone knowledgeable in homeopathy explain the chemical or physical mechanism of that to me?


Many experiments have been conducted in the more remote past as well as re-cently, to at least prove the existence of something in our potencies, of which I will give some examples here.

1. In 1948, Wormser and Loch tested several substances from 24X to 30X. They used a photoelectric cell, to measure the intensity and wavelength of these potencies and found measurable changes, of both intensity and wave-length in these substances.

2. In the years 1951-3, Gay and Boiron tested both distilled water and Natrum muriaticum in the 27C potency for their dielectric constant. They were able to show that the potency of Natrum mur. could be easily selec-ted from among 99 control bottles.

3. In 1963, Boericke and Smith tested a 12X potency of Sulphur, with and without succussion. They tested the solvent structure by nuclear magnetic resonance spectrum. They found that there were structural changes in the solvent, as the potency was increased by succussion, while no such change was detected in the controls. They repeated the experiment in 1974, with diverse potencies of Sulphur, up to the 30C.

4. In 1966, Stephenson and Brucato tested both distilled water and Mercu-rius corrosivus, from the 1X to the 33X. They found that the dielectric constant for the controls varied from 5.6 to 6.05. For the homoeopathic potencies it varied from 2.8 to 4.4.

5. In 1975, Young tested Sulphur from 5X to 30X, with controls. He also tested the solvent structure by nuclear magnetic resonance spectrum. He found that there were measurable changes in the spectra at each dilution and succussion. No such changes were observed for the solution without succussion or without Sulphur.

6. In 1976, Boiron and Vinh used Raman Laser Spectroscopy, showing that for the 1C potency of Kali bichromicum the spectrum of alcohol disap-pears completely, while that for potassium bichromate appears. In Kali bich 1C the ratio of the number of potassium bichromate molecules is 1 to 500. In such a case the light meets 500 more alcohol molecules as those of bichromate, yet the alcohol spectrum does not appear.

7. In 1982, Resch, Gutman and Schauer found that dilute sodium chloride solutions revealed an increase in electrical conductivity, by rocking them prior to measurement.

8. Four French researchers developed a method of detection through nu-clear magnetic resonance, conducted in the late 80's, which shows spe-cific sinus waves for each potency, as well as a specific sinus wave for the substance used. These latter remain the same throughout all poten-cies of that substance, while the sinus wave expressing the potencies, are specific to those potencies. Thus a clear and recognisable scientifi-cally provable frame of reference exists, for each remedy and potency.

9. More recent NMR studies have reached similar conclusions (Demangeat et al., 1992; Weingärtner, 1992).

10. Recent experiments with Raman Laser Spectrography have shown that a 1M potency (1 divided by 100 to the –1000th power) of Kali bichromicum reveal the spectrum of Kali bichromicum and not that of water. It must be realized that there are supposedly no molecules of Kali bichromicum present in this dilution rate, since it is way beyond Avogadro’s limit, which lies at 1024 or 10012.

11. Another Raman Laser Spectrography test with Natrum muriaticum 10M showed the spectrum of Chloride of sodium, instead that of water. It must be noted that here the dilution rate is a 1000 times smaller still than that of the previous example.

12. Ultra-high dilutions of lithium chloride and sodium chloride (10-30 g/cm-3) have been irradiated by X-rays at 77 K, then progressively rewarmed to room temperature. During that phase, their thermo luminescence has been studied and it was found that, despite their dilution beyond the Avo-gadro number, the emitted light was specific of the original salts dissolved initially.

Reference
http://chestjournal.chestpubs.org/conte ... 3/936.full