Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy- Volume I
(UP TO JULY 31, 2012))
————————————————————————
If a physician belonging to modern medicine is convinced of the effectiveness of homeopathy and its supremacy over allopathy, and comes forward to practice homeopathy, what should be the approach of homeopathic community to such converts? I think it is a debatable topic.
Right or wrong, I feel pride for homeopathy whenever I meet an allopath converted himself to homeopathy by realizing is merits, where as ashamed when meeting a homeopath practicing allopathy after failing and losing confidence in homeopathy.
AN ALLOPATH CONVERTING TO HOMEOPATHY INDICATES STRENGTH OF ‘HOMEOPATHY’, WHERE AS A HOMEOPATH PRACTICING ALLOPATHY INDICATES ‘HIS’ FAILURE.
—————————————————————————
Simila Similibus Curentur and Potentization, TWO essential principles of homeopathy, are based on true, objective, natural laws involved in the phenomena of disease and cure, which the great genius of Hahnemann observed perfectly and very minutely. But due to severe historical limitations of knowledge environment available to him, he was forced to explain those natural phenomena using totally unscientific and spiritualistic concepts of dynamism and vitalism while building the therapeutic system of homeopathy. To make homeopathy a scientific medical system, we have to preserve and advance the objective essence of homeopathy, while remorselessly discarding all the unscientific speculations and ‘theories’ in which this ‘essence’ was wrapped by the master. IN MY OPINION, MORE THAN 90% OF TEXTS IN ORGANON AND CHRONIC DISEASES CONSIST OF THIS UNSCIENTIFIC ‘THEORETICAL’ SPECULATIONS, WORTH ONLY TO BE THROWN AWAY AS MERE HISTORICAL GARBAGE!!
———————————————————
Rats are terminated by offering them ‘free’ courses of feeds mixed with rat poisons. HOMEOPATHY could be terminated by offering ‘free courses’ of allopathy pharmacology to homeopaths. BRILLIANT IDEA, INDEED!
PERMITTING HOMEOPATHS TO PRACTICE ALLOPATHY IS NOTHING LESS THAN LEGALIZED PROSTITUTION!!! THIS IS LEGALIZED QUACKERY.
While demanding permission for homeopaths to practice allopathy, please DO NO’T FORGET THE DISASTROUS EXPERIENCES OF AMERICAN HOMEOPATHY!!
Did any allopath demand for permission to practice homeopathy? Did they demand a ‘course’ in homeopathic pharmacology? Never. Think why?
Whether Legalized or not, a homeopath practicing allopathy will have to be called ‘MEDICAL PROSTITUTE’. The term ‘MONGREL’ is not enough .
Homeopaths demanding permission to practice allopathy should be aware of the damage they are doing to homeopathy, by making us defenseless
Homeopaths demanding permission to practice allopathy is a blatant, shameless admission of skeptic criticism that homeopathy is ineffective
—————————————————————————-
Mind is the product of complex chemical interactions happening in brain and central nervous system. Mind does not exist separated from body.
By the term ‘living organism’, we indicate a material system with a specific quantity, quality, structure and functions of its own, which is capable of self-controlled growth and reproduction of its progeny, by accepting matter and energy from its environment. The phenomenon of life exists through a continuous chain of highly complex biochemical interactions which control each other, depend up on each other and are determined by each other.
’Does homeopathy work?’ is an irrelevant question- IT DOES. The real question now is ‘how it works?’. Let us try to answer this question.
————————————————————–
Jay Thompson @boffchops: @similimum “Water is a polar covalent bond, not a polymer! Most common synthetic polymers are hydrophobic (water-fearing). Educate yourself.”
My answer: @boffchops “Not polymer. But water molecules can form hydrogen bonded polymolecular nanostructures and host-guest complexes like clathrates.”
POTENTIZATION is a process by which host-guest complexes are prepared by dissolving drug molecules in water, and then producing empty ‘nanostructures’ of water molecules by removing the ‘guest’ molecules by serial dilution and powerful shaking.These empty ‘nanostructures’ are ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules, which form the active principle of potentized drugs. Molecular imprints can act as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules having configurations similar to original drug molecules.
During potentization water-drug host-guest complexes are formed, and then molecular imprints are produced by removing the ‘guest’ molecules
Any idiot can pose himself as a skeptic and make nasty comments on homeopathy. To be a homeopath, one should have some substance in his nut
——————————————————————-
Homeopathy contains a most rational and futuristic system of medicine, but explained in a most unscientific and irrational way
‘Molecular Imprinting’ Is The Key-word in scientific understanding of homeopathy. If You Fail To Get It, You Cannot Follow My Concepts.
———————————————————————-
Actually, homeopaths who say ‘science is wrong’, as well as skeptics who say ‘homeopathy is wrong’ are two sides of same coin- ignorance
To combat skeptic attacks effectively, we should make homeopathy scientific. For that, homeopaths should develop a scientific outlook first
First you stop talking unscientific theories, and make homeopaths aware of scientific homeopathy- Only then you can combat skeptic attacks
FIRST OF ALL, we have to rescue homeopathy from the malignant influence of people promoting unscientific theories and occult practices
Talking nonsense, irrational theories, our unscientific homeopaths do more harm to homeopathy than anti-homeopathic skeptics and scientists.
If we had a scientifically viable and rational theory about homeopathy, no skeptics could have attacked us- deficiencies make us vulnerable
————————————————————————–
Study supra-molecular properties of water, water clusters and molecular imprinting to understand science behind homeopathic potentization.
——————————————————————————-
Jay Thompson @boffchops, a Skeptic said: “200C dilution of duck liver (Oscillococcinum) would require 10^320 more universes to simply have 1 molecule in final substance.”
My answer: “YOU GOT IT WRONG! Potentiztion is a process to prepare ‘molecular imprints’ devoid of any molecules, to be used as therapeutic agent. Once you learn molecular imprinting, you can realize how homeopathy medicine works even without a single drug molecule in it.”
—————————————————————————
Let A be the biological target molecules such as an enzyme or receptor, and B be its natural ligand. If C is a drug molecule having functional groups similar to that of B, C can bind to A by mimicking as B, cause inhibition and produce symptoms. This is the process involved in drug proving .
A pathologic molecule D binds to A and creates a molecular inhibition that amounts to pathology. If drug molecule C and pathological molecule D have similar functional groups, they can produce similar inhibitions and similar symptoms. In that case, C is said to be similimum to D. Let E be molecular imprints of C, produced by its potentization. E can bind to D due to complementary affinity, and thereby relieve A from the inhibition caused by the pathological molecule D. That amounts to a homeopathic cure.
—————————————————————————
I hope, scientific meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’ is well explained by me, and scientifically viable answers provided for the THREE fundamental questions of homeopathy- what happens during potentization, what are the active principles of potentized drugs, and what is the exact molecular mechanism by which potentized drugs produce a therapeutic effect. Answers to all other secondary questions could be easily evolved once you comprehend these fundamental answers.
Diseases, other than those originating from genuine nutritional deficiencies and genetic abnormalities, are caused by diverse types of exogenous or endogenous pathological molecules, which inhibit the normal actions of essential biological molecules by binding to them. Exactly, it is the ‘functional groups’ of pathological molecules that bind to biological molecules and produce pathological inhibitions, which are expressed through subjective and objective symptoms we call as ‘diseases’.
Constituent chemical molecules of a drug substance interact with our body by binding their diverse types of ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ with specific biological target molecules in our organism and modifying their actions. This interaction is determined by configurational as well as charge affinities between those functional groups and biological target molecules. It is the number of types of biologically active ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ available in a drug substance that decides whether it is a ‘single’ drug or ‘multiple’ drug.
Different types of ‘functional groups’ of individual molecules contained in a drug substance bind to different biological target molecules, and produce different types of modifications. It is this ‘modifying’ or ‘inhibitory’ actions that produce molecular states of pathologies during drug proving, which are expressed through diverse types of subjective and objective symptoms.
Similar functional groups being part of different drug molecules of even different drug substances can bind to same target molecules and produce similar bio-molecular modifications and similar symptoms.
When a drug molecule has functional groups or moieties similar to those of a pathological molecule, they can attack same biological targets, and symptoms they produce would be similar. In such a situation, the drug molecule is said to be ‘similimum’ to that pathological molecule. Obviously, according to scientific perspective, we should understand the concept of ‘similimum’ in terms of similarity of ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ of pathological molecules and drug molecules.
Potentization is exactly a process of controlled ‘host-guest’ interactions, by which the three-dimensional configuration of ‘functional groups’ of individual constituent molecules of drug substances (host) are imprinted into a hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular matrix of water-ethyl alcohol molecules (guest) as ‘nanocavities’.
These nanocavities or ‘molecular imprints’ can bind to and deactivate any functional group having configuration similar to that of original ‘host’ molecule imprinted into it. As such, a potentized drug can act as biological antidote towards any pathological molecule, if the drug and disease were capable of producing ‘similar’ symptoms, which actually mean, they contain similar ‘functional groups’.
————————————————————————–
Only way I can be truly ‘positive’ to homeopathy is by being myself ‘negative’ to ‘negative’ things in homeopathy. Lot of ‘negatives’ there.
A prominent lady homeopath messaged me today: “I read your articles when ever i get time from my practice and agree to most of the points but i feel if a positive approach is posted that will motivate many young drs to associate with you and you can be a very good guide to them if you have any strategies to involve them in research.Thanks”.
Being negative to negatives, and positive to positives- that is the essence of dialectical scientific approach. If you take a positive approach to negative things in homeopathy, you actually become negative to true positive homeopathy.
—————————————————————————
Hahnemann could not provide a scientific explanations for the phenomena involved in homeopathy, due to the historical limitations of knowledge environment available to him. That is understandable and acceptable. But, what were the ‘faithful disciples’ of hahnemann doing for explaining homeopathy scientifically all these 200 hundred years after hahnemann? Only making it appear more and more absurd by talking all sorts of ‘anti-scientific’ and ‘ultra-scientific’ nonsense ‘energy medicine’ theories that contradicts all existing scientific knowledge system. By talking about ‘miracles’ ‘magics’, and doing occult practices in the name of homeopathy that no rational minded human beings can agree with. Nobody so far bothered to evolve even a scientifically viable working hypothesis about homeopathy that could be presented as a candidate for verification according to scientific methods. All those ‘newtons’, ‘ensteins’ and ‘gurus’ of homeopathy were only busy with amassing money by conducting seminars, propagating and marketing their branded ‘methods and principles’. Our ‘research institutions’ were only interested in preparing bills and vouchers for the huge money they were allotted from public exchequers. How can we blame scientific community for saying homeopathy is unscientific.
————————————————————————–
Had he happened to live 200 years later, Hahnemann would have presented a therapeutic system totally different from our present Homeopathy.
————————————————————————–
The sad thing we should never forget is that we have not yet evolved even a scientifically viable working hypothesis regarding homeopathy.
—————————————————————————
Homeopathy should be learned and applied as subject of science, not as religion or metaphysics. Homeopaths should learn how to talk science
————————————————————————-
In present knowledge environment, no hope for homeopathy to exist and advance, unless we provide a scientifically viable explanation for it.
————————————————————————–
Homeopathy is so far not proved by scientific methods, and as such, scientific community has every right to say homeopathy is not scientific
————————————————————————–
Learning homeopathy for long 40+ years, there remains a lot for me yet to learn. Learning process never ends for a dedicated homeopath.
————————————————————————–
True, most homeopaths talk a lot of bogus things about homeopathy. But I assure you, there is science in in homeopathy, which even those homeopaths fail to understand. I would not blame anybody for saying homeopathy is nonsense. It is Homeopaths themselves who misguided the scientific community by talking that much nonsense theories no rational mind can tolerate. Homeopathy is not nonsense, but there are a lot of nonsense homeopaths who make homeopathy appear nonsense before the scientific community.
————————————————————————
Dear Skeptic, you say: “Homeopaths only have to learn the art of flannel, remedies are identical!”. Means either you got it wrong, or you are prejudiced against homeopathy. Doing homeopathy 40+ years, I have a lot to learn yet!
—————————————————————————
Being a skeptic is much easier than becoming a good homeopath. Homeopath has to learn science and art of curing. Skeptic needs only negating
——————————————————————————-
Skepticism is the real pseudoscience. Being a skeptic, one can pretend to be a big scientist, without knowing science or scientific methods
————————————————————————–
Skeptic approach basically differs from genuine scientific approach. Science is concerned with truth. Skeptics negate truth unknown to them!
———————————————————————-
Every ‘science’ has an ‘art’. Every ‘art’ has a ‘science’. ‘Art of Science’ and ‘Science of ‘art’. ‘Science’ represents ‘theory’ and ‘art’ represents’ ‘practice’. Practice without theory is blind, theory without practice is impotent. Theory evolves from practice. Practice is guided by theory. Theory and Practice- Science and Art- forms a ‘dialectical unity’, where one cannot exist without the other.
————————————————————————-
According to skeptics, anything they fail to understand is ‘pseudoscience’ and ‘quackery’. They simply don’t understand homeopathy!!!!
—————————————————————————————
Modern medicine should cast aside their ego and imbibe homeopathy into their arsenal for the benefit of humanity.
———————————————————————–
Most homeopaths as well as skeptics say they have been “laughing and arm waving” after reading my articles explaining homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics. When everything you read simply fly over your head, only thing you can do is “laughing and arm-waving”. Pitiable, indeed.
Homeopaths would have been happy if I said “homeopathy is ultimate science”. Skeptics would have been happy if I said “homeopathy is quackery”. Sorry sir, I differ from both of you.
—————————————————————–
Homeopathic potentization is ‘target-specific drug designing’, and ‘similia similibus curentur’ is a way of ‘target-specific drug piloting’
Homeopathy actually involves target-specific drug designing, targeted drug piloting, and a way to avoid off-target actions of drug molecules.
That is why I say, Homeopathy is Molecular Imprints Therapeutics- an advanced branch of Modern Molecular Medicine. For the time being, it will be difficult for both homeopaths and modern scientists to realize this great truth. But I am sure, a day will come when everybody understand and accept what I say.
————————————————————
By potentization and similia principle, homeopathy provides most scientific and practical answers to three important issues of modern molecular medicine- target specific drug designing, targeted drug piloting, and a avoiding side effects arising from off-target actions of drug molecules. Modern medicine should cast aside their ego and imbibe this wonderful therapeutic tool into their arsenl for the benefit of humanity as a whole.
———————————————————————-
Target-specific drug designing and piloting devoid of any chances off-target actions- it is the most cherished dream of Modern Molecular Medicine. Once they comprehend the scientific meaning of potentization as a way of drug designing by molecular imprinting in water, and ‘similia similibus curentur’ as an advanced technology of target-specific drug piloting, scientific community will have to accept the truth that ‘Homeopathy is the right answer’ for their inquiries.
——————————————————————–
If you are not willing to abandon some of the existing beliefs that are based on comparatively ‘less perfect’ old knowledge you call ‘classical homeopathy’, and update yourselves with ‘more perfect’ new scientific knowledge, you cannot comprehend or accept the concepts of advanced scientific homeopathy. You are doomed to belong to that class of intellectual morons who resist all scientific advancements in homeopathy, and declare ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’ and ‘our master is the greatest scientist ever lived’.
————————————————————————
Everything I say about homeopathy will appear to be “too much” for those who are trained in ‘classical’ homeopathic lessons, and those who are not willing or capable of thinking beyond ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’ concepts of homeopathy. For those who are not willing or capable of updating their scientific knowledge. For those who believe homeopathy is the ‘ultimate science’, and ‘our master is the greatest ever scientist’.
——————————————————————————
Existing more than 250 years as an independent therapeutic system totally alienated from mainstream scientific knowledge, I think time is now ripe for homeopathy to converge into modern molecular medicine, as an advanced branch of medical science.
The great divide between ‘allopathy and homeopathy’ could now be effectively bridged through my scientific explanation of potentization and similia similibus curentur.
Once the people belonging to molecular medicine realizes the historical implications of this convergence, I hope they would also utilize ‘molecular imprinting’ as part of their target-specific drug designing technology.
Since ‘modern medicine’ requires a clear understanding of pathological molecular processes to decide an appropriate therapeutic agent, they cannot treat many diseases which are not well understood. For homeopathy, knowing the exact molecular error behind the pathology is not necessary, since homeopathy identifies the molecular errors and their remedial agents by observing subjective and objective ‘symptoms’ that express the molecular errors. As such, homeopathy can cure any disease even without knowing the underlying molecular errors, merely on the basis of ‘symptoms’. This is a great advantage for homeopathy. Whereas modern medicine can hope for an effective treatment only for well understood diseases, that to with possibility of unwanted side effects, homeopathy can treat any disease effectively and safely.
Since ‘modern medicine’ uses highly reactive ‘drug molecules’ as therapeutic agents, they can create dangerous ‘off-target’ molecular errors in the organism. That is the main draw back of ‘modern medicine’. Since homeopathy uses only ‘molecular imprints’, they cannot cause any ‘off-target’ molecular errors. Hence homeopathy is very safe when compared to modern medicine.
——————————————————————
Homeopathic potentization is a process by which dissolved drug molecules are removed from the water, and empty hydration shells preserved
Presence of ethyl alcohol molecules enhances the bond strength, restricts movements of water molecules, and stabilize the hydration shells
———————————————————————-
Without a clear understanding of concepts and methods of ‘molecular pathology’ and ‘proteomics’, one cannot conceive ‘Scientific Homeopathy.
———————————————————————————-
Molecular imprints are ‘stored’ in the supra-molecular matrix of water, just like a fingerprint are ‘stored’ in a waxy surface.
Water always exist as a supramolecular network formed by hydrogen bonding. When any substance is dissolved in water, this H2O network restructuress in such a way that H2O molecules molecules arranges themselves around each individual molecule of the ‘guest’, thereby forming ‘hydration shells’. Normally, these hydration shells disappear once ‘guest’ molecules are removed. But through the process of serial dilution and succussion, the guest molecules are removed without destroying hydration shells. Presence of heavy alcohol molecules also plays a role in stabilizing hydration shells, restricting movements of water molecules. As a result, empty hydration shells remains, which carries the ‘imprints’ of dissolved molecules, which we call ‘molecular imprints’.
—————————————————-
Potentized homeopathic drugs supply molecular imprints which act as artificial binding sites for pathologic molecules of ‘similar’ shape.
‘Similimum’ is a drug that contains molecules having functional groups similar to those of pathogenic molecules, and can bind to same target
Molecular Imprints contained in potentized forms of simimum can deactivate pathogenic molecules by binding to their functional groups.
Molecular Imprints and antibodies act somewhat similar ways- antibodies bind and deactivate antigens, molecular imprints bind to pathogens
Antibodies act as ‘natural binding sites’ for antigens, whereas Molecular imprints act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathogens- that much similar, that much different.
Epitopes of antigens bind to peritopes of antibodies by complementary configurational affinity. Similar way, functional groups of pathogenic molecules bind to molecular imprints in potentized drugs by complementary configurational affinity.
Antibodies are ‘molecular imprinted proteins’. Potentized drugs are ‘molecular imprinted water’.
————————————————————————–
Molecular imprints acting as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules- It is the most fitting scientific explanation of homeopathy
————————————————————–
If you are given two separate samples of ‘rectified spirit’ and ‘Nux Vom 200 in equal quantities, can any body identify them by any means? If not, do you not think it is a most imperative task our researchers should undertake? Have you got any ideas or proposals on this question?
Until somebody answers this question and evolves a reliable solution, homeopathic profession is left to the pity of pharmacists and manufacturers.
————————————————————–
Problem with skeptics in understanding homeopathy is that they blieve that their knowledge level decides the limits of scientific truth
—————————————————————–
Dear skeptics, study ‘molecular imprinting technology’ and supra-molecular properties of water, before declaring homeopathy is impossible.
—————————————————————–
A common factor I could observe in all skeptics is that all of them behave as if they are ‘know-alls’, with a divine right to judge anything and everything that are even beyond their range of comprehension. They believe, nothing exists beyond their limited knowledge levels. They think they have a special right to define what is science and what is not!
—————————————————————
Homeopathy is so far explained very unscientifically, using concepts of dynamism and vital force, which alienated it from scientific community.
————————————————————-
With my 40+ years of hard personal experience with homeopatjy, I am fully convinced ‘IT WORKS’- beyond any doubt. Only question is, ‘HOW’?
—————————————————————
Stop nonsense talks about ‘energy medicine’ and ‘dynamic science’. Explain homeopathy scientifically, and prove it as per scientific methods
—————————————————————-
Homeopathic potentization could be rationally explained only by ‘molecular imprinting’. Unless you understand it, you remain in the dark.
————————————————————–
Dear skeptic, bring me ten persons suffering from different acute or chronic diseases. I will convert you into an admirer of homeopathy.
—————————————————————-
A skeptic who calls homepathic drugs as ‘magic water’ is like the legendary frog, believing there is no world outside the well he lives in.
————————————————————-
Skepticism should not be a convenient mask to cover up ignorance. It does not give you power to judge everything. You do not know what really is homeopathy. That is all.
——————————————————-
Most skeptics use the word ‘science’ to cover up their ignorance, and use it to attack homeopathy, without any idea about what it teally is.
—————————————————————-
The scientific concept of ‘Molecular Imprinting’ in water should not be confused with the pseudoscientific ‘water memory’ theory.
The term ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘molecular imprints’ originally comes from polymer chemistry, where these terms are used to describe a technique of creating template-shaped cavities in polymer matrices with memory of the template molecules, to be used as artificial molecular recognition sites.
This technique is based on the system used by enzymes for substrate recognition, which is called the “lock and key” model. The active binding site of an enzyme has a unique geometric structure that is particularly suitable for a substrate. A substrate that has a corresponding shape to the site is recognized by selectively binding to the enzyme, while an incorrectly shaped molecule that does not fit the binding site is not recognized.
In a similar way, molecular imprinted materials are prepared using a template molecule and functional monomers that assemble around the template and subsequently get cross-linked to each other. The functional monomers, which are self-assembled around the template molecule by interaction between functional groups on both the template and monomers, are polymerized to form an imprinted matrix. They are known in the scientific community as a molecular imprinted polymer (MIP). Then the template molecule is removed from the matrix under certain conditions, leaving behind a cavity compl ementary in size and shape to the template. The obtained cavity can work as a selective binding site for a specific template molecule.
I have been using the concepts of ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘molecular imprints’ to explain homeopathic potentization in this scientific perspective. My contention is that water has polymer-like properties at supra-molecular level, and as such, water can be used as molecular imprinting medium exactly similar to other polymer substances. During potentization, three dimensional configuration of drug molecules are imprinted as nanocavities into the hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular networks of ethyl alcohol-water matrix. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for the drug molecules used for imprinting, as well as to pathogenic molecules having similar configurations. Active principles of potentized drugs are these ‘molecular imprints’.
This is the scientific understanding of ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘molecular imprints’.
Now, the proponents of ‘energy medicine’ theories are trying to hijack this scientific concept to promote their pseudo-scientific theories of ‘water memory’. They talk about ‘molecular imprints’ of ‘drug energy’ and even ‘spiritual energy’. They talk about ‘molecular imprinting’ of ‘thoughts’ into water. According to them, ‘molecular imprints’ act by ‘emitting’ ‘radiations’, ‘waves’, ‘resonance’ and such things. They mix up ‘molecular imprinting’ with ‘water memory’ theories of people like Emotto, Chaplin and Rustum Roy. Their theories have nothing in common with the scientific concepts of ‘molecular imprinting’.
Anyhow, these people create a lot of confusions during our discussions about scientific homeopathy.
Modern biochemistry explains molecular mechanisms of disease and cure in terms of ‘key-lock’ relationship between ligands and their target molecules. This ‘key-lock’ concept has been proved right by the preparation and use of target specific designer drugs. Any scientific explanation we provide for molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ should be fitting to this ‘key-lock’ concept of molecular interactions. My explanation of of homeopathy on the basis of ‘molecular imprints’ acting as ‘artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules’ perfectly meets this fundamental condition.
—————————————————————-
Scientific homeopathy can advance only by waging consistent and relentless struggle against pseudo-scientific ‘energy medicine’ homeopathic theoreticians on one side, and negative-mined ‘anti-homeopathic’ skeptic community on other side.
You cannot defeat skeptics simply by scolding them as ‘ignorant fools’, same time talking nonsense unscientific ‘dynamic’ theories about homeopathy.
Merely ‘showing’ “efficacy of homeopathic medicines”, or establishing some “research centers” will not be enough to ‘prove’ homeopathy as a ‘medical science’. For that, somebody should explain homeopathy in a way fitting to existing scientific knowledge system, using scientific paradigms, and prove such explanations through scientific methods.
Not only those ‘anti-homeopathic’ skeptics, but many “qualified and competent homeopathic physicians ” also talk a lot of nonsense foolish theories of “dynamic science” about homeopathy. Actually, it is those ‘foolish theories’ of such people that provide ammunition to skeptics for attacking homeopathy. You should know, even the propagator of ‘hair transmission homeopathy is a ‘great qualified and competent homeopathic physician’, having big ‘credentials’ and ‘authority’. In my opinion, such people do more harm to homeopathy than even skeptics.
————————————————————-
During our foetus as well as neonatal stages, we get a lot of diverse types of antibodies from mother through maternal blood and breast milk.
Then, all through our life, ever new antibodies are produced in our body whenever any proteins alien to our genetic blue print enters our body, such as infectious agents, allergens, insect bites and the like. Cancer cells also produce proteins alien to our genetic blue print, and our body produce antibodies against them.
Though these antibodies are generated in our body to fight the attacks of alien proteins, those antibodies remain in our system life long. They can bind to off-target biological molecules and produce divers types of diseases, which we call ‘miasmatic diseases’, ‘auto immune diseases’ or ‘immunological diseases’. Most of the chronic diseases are now known to be caused by these ‘off-target’ actions of antibodies.
Hahnemann studied about chronic diseases caused by antibodies formed against itch, syphilis and human papiloma viruses. We cannot limit miasms to those three. I think miasms are innumerable, and trying to name them is unnecessary.
We have to understand, all these diverse types of antibodies could act as chronic miasms, which should be treated by drugs selected as similimum as well as appropriate nosodes or ‘molecular imprints of antibodies’.
Actually, antibodies are ‘globulin’ proteins in our body, subjected to ‘molecular imprinting’ by alien proteins. Exactly, the ‘epitopes’ of antigens are imprinted into ‘paratopes’ of antibodies.That is why each antibody showing specific affinity towards specific antigens.
Molecular imprints or potentized forms of antigens (epitopes) as well as molecular imprints of antibodies (peritopes) can act as anti-miasmatic remedies. That is why nosodes prepared from infectious agents as well as disease products are effective
——————————————————————
Due to deficiency of basic scientific knowledge in biochemistry, molecular biology, supra-molecular chemistry and such other essential subjects, some homeopaths utterly fail to comprehend my explanations of homeopathy in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘bio-molecular inhibitions. Some of them are pathetically below even high school level in their science lessons. For them, ‘organon’ and ‘chronic diseases’ are the ultimate scientific texts, hahnemann is the greatest ever scientist, and homeopathy is the ultimate science. They prefer to live in their 250 year old knowledge environment, and hesitate to update themselves. They simply fight tooth-and-nail to safe guard ‘true homeopathy’ from the ‘malignant’ influence of my ‘un-homeopathic theories’. It is difficult to communicate with them.
——————————————————————
Some homeopaths seem to be very much obsessed with ‘single/multiple’ drug issue. For them it is an issue of ‘fundamental’ or ‘cardinal’ principles in homeopathy, that decides whether one is a ‘true’ homeopath or not.
Actually, it is a non-issue, once you perceive drugs in terms of constituent molecules and their functional groups. Obsessive discussing of ‘single-poly’ drug issue indicates deficiency of fundamental scientific knowledge.
From scientific point of view, all ‘multi-molecular’ drugs are ‘polymedicine’, even though you imagine and use it as ‘single’ drug.
—————————————————————-
Identifying the molecular level pathology underlying diseases by observing subjective and objective symptoms of patients, identifying the exact molecular targets of drug substances by observing the symptoms they could produce in healthy individuals, determining medicines for particular patients by comparing their ‘symptoms’ with ‘symptoms’ of diseases, curing diseases by removing pathological molecular inhibitions in the organism using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules having ‘functional groups’ similar to those of pathological molecules- this is the scientific meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’.
Once the scientific community recognize this real ‘science’ behind homeopathy, they will realize that homeopathy is an advanced branch of ‘molecular medicine’, capable of showing the way for future advancement of medical science as a whole. THEY CANNOT IGNORE THIS GREAT TRUTH FOR EVER!
————————————————————–
In the process of homeopathy evolving into a full-fledged medical system of modern times, we will have to discard many things from what we have so far learned and believed to be ‘indispensable’, if they do not agree with scientific knowledge system.
To accept the idea of a solar system with earth and other planets revolving around sun, even though after a long period of stubborn resistance, humanity had to abandon the age-old concept that sun revolves around earth. The concept of ‘flat earth’ was abandoned once it was proved that earth is a ‘globe’. Any learning involves unlearning also. That is the way human knowledge advances.
If you are not ready to abandon certain things you studied and believed as integral part of homeopathy earlier, you cannot understand or accept the scientific explanations I am proposing. Without such an unlearning, you cannot perceive potentization as molecular imprinting. You cannot perceive disease in terms of molecular inhibitions. You cannot perceive curative process in terms of removal of molecular inhibitions. You cannot perceive drugs in terms of constituent molecules and functional groups.
Without unlearning old lessons, you will go on resisting new ideas tooth-and-nail, to safe guard your cherished beliefs such as ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’, ‘our master is the greatest ever scientist’, ‘homeopathic drugs act by dynamic energy’, ‘vital force theory’, ‘laws and principles of homeopathy are eternally immutable’, and so on. You will go on arguing about what master said about miasms, single drug and single dose. You will go on asking people to ‘read organon and chronic diseases’ whenever hard questions are asked. You will continue to remain ridiculed as ‘intellectual morons’ in front of the scientific community.
———————————————————————–
Those who claim to ‘prove’ drugs in ‘high’ potencies are requested to submit themselves to a simple experiment to convince it to the world. We shall administer different well-known ‘polychrest’ drugs to 10 apparently ‘healthy individuals’ selected by you. You can decide the potency, number and frequency of doses to be administered, so that you can induce proving. But, you will be kept blind regarding the names of drugs used, as well as who received which drug. You should identify the drugs given to each individual by observing the symptoms produced in them due to ‘proving’, and comparing them with our existing materia medica. If you succeed in identifying at least 50% drugs, it will be considered as a proof for ‘high potency proving’. If you fail, you should agree to stop talking about ‘proving’ high potency drugs. ARE YOU READY?
—————————————————————————-
Once we administer a dose of potentized drug, Molecular Imprints contained in it permeates into the biological fluids, and scavenges the whole body. When the molecular imprints come in contact with exogenous or endogenous molecules having functional groups similar to those of constituent molecules of drug substances used for potentization, they binds to those molecules due to their complementary configurational affinity. By this binding, molecular imprints entraps pathological molecules and deactivates them, thereby removing the molecular inhibitions that caused pathological conditions. Same time, molecular imprints cannot interfere the interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands which have stronger configurational as well as charge affinities between them, which ensures that molecular imprints cannot act as pathological agents in any circumstances.
——————————————————————-
Potentized drug is actually an ’empty solution’-a solution from which ‘solute’ is completely removed, without disturbing the hydration shells. An ’empty solution’ is different from a ‘virgin solvent’. It contains ‘molecular imprints’ of solute molecules, imprinted into the supra-molecular matrix of solvent molecules as three-dimensional nanocavities. These molecular imprints are the active principles of this ’empty solution’, which can bind to and deactivate pathogenic molecules similar in configuration to ‘solute’ molecules, in capacity of configurational affinity
———————————————————
Once you learn to perceive diseases in terms of molecular inhibitions, drugs in terms of constituent functional groups, symptoms in terms of underlying molecular errors, potentization in terms of molecular imprinting, potentized drugs in terms of constituent molecular imprints, similimum in terms of similarity of functional groups, and cure in terms of removal of molecular inhibitions- you become a full-fledged scientific homeopath. You can see every thing in a new scientific light. You become capable of answering any questions anybody ask about homeopathy. You become theoretically strong enough to defend homeopathy from any attack from anti-homeopathic skeptics from side, as well as anti-scientific energy medicine ‘homeopaths’ from the other side.
————————————————————
‘Unlearning’ is an essential part of ‘learning’. Without going through a conscious process of self ‘unlearning’, you cannot learn or accept what I say about scientific homeopathy. If you are not willing to unlearn yourself, it means you are not willing to learn anything new. In such a mindset, I know, I cannot convince you through arguments.
Our consciousness is the sum total of what we have learned and experienced in the past. They form our ‘beliefs’. ‘ Beliefs’ are rock like sedimentation of acquired knowledge. Beliefs act as an intellectual barricade which try to prevent us from acquiring new knowledge that may contradict existing beliefs. By ‘unlearning’, I mean breaking of this stone wall of beliefs. Without that, we cannot learn new things.
—————————————————–
I think there a lot of very important secondary questions to be answered, which could be accomplished only after we reach a consensus regarding certain fundamental questions. In my opinion, fundamental questions to be answered are three:
1. What is the exact process happening during potentizatio?
2. What are the achieve principles of potentized drugs”
3. What is the molecular mechanism by which potentized drugs produces a therapeutic effect?
——————————————————
Appearance of new symptoms after application of potentized drugs is an indication that our prescription did not supply all the diverse types of molecular imprints required to remove all the diverse types molecular inhibitions existing in the patient.
———————————————————
If a drug substance contains more than ONE type of biologically active ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ as part of their constituent molecules, it is not a ‘SINGLE’ drug. It is a COMPOUND drug. If you cannot comprehend this simple scientific truth, you will go on talking about what ‘master’ said about ‘single’ drug and ‘multiple’ drugs in ORGANON 250 years ago!
————————————————————–
An elemental atom cannot have a ‘functional group’. An atom can be part of functional group of a complex molecule.
In organic chemistry, functional groups are ‘groups of atoms’ or bonds within molecules that are responsible for the characteristic chemical reactions of those molecules. The same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reaction(s) regardless of the size of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified by nearby functional groups.
The word moiety is often used synonymously to “functional group,” but, according to the IUPAC definition, a moiety is a part of a molecule that may include either whole functional groups or parts of functional groups as substructures. For example, an ester (RCOOR’) has an ester functional group (COOR) and is composed of an alkoxy moiety (-OR’) and an acyl moiety (RCO-), or, equivalently, it may be divided into carboxylate (RCOO-) and alkyl (-R’) moieties. Each moiety may contain additional functional groups–for example, methyl para-hydroxybenzoate contains a phenol functional group within the acyl moiety.
——————————————————————-
Diseases, other than those originating from genuine nutritional deficiencies and genetic abnormalities, are caused by diverse types of exogenous or endogenous pathological molecules, which inhibit the normal actions of essential biological molecules by binding to them. Exactly, it is the ‘functional groups’ of pathological molecules that bind to biological molecules and produce pathological inhibitions, which are expressed through subjective and objective symptoms we call as ‘diseases’.
Constituent chemical molecules of a drug substance interact with our body by binding their diverse types of ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ with specific biological target molecules in our organism and modifying their actions. This interaction is determined by configurational as well as charge affinities between those functional groups and biological target molecules. It is the number of types of biologically active ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ available in a drug substance that decides whether it is a ‘single’ drug or ‘multiple’ drug.
Different types of ‘functional groups’ of individual molecules contained in a drug substance bind to different biological target molecules, and produce different types of modifications. It is this ‘modifying’ or ‘inhibitory’ actions that produce molecular states of pathologies during drug proving, which are expressed through diverse types of subjective and objective symptoms.
Similar functional groups being part of different drug molecules of even different drug substances can bind to same target molecules and produce similar bio-molecular modifications and similar symptoms.
When a drug molecule has functional groups or moieties similar to those of a pathological molecule, they can attack same biological targets, and symptoms they produce would be similar. In such a situation, the drug molecule is said to be ‘similimum’ to that pathological molecule. Obviously, according to scientific perspective, we should understand the concept of ‘similimum’ in terms of similarity of ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ of pathological molecules and drug molecules.
Potentization is exactly a process of controlled ‘host-guest’ interactions, by which the three-dimensional configuration of ‘functional groups’ of individual constituent molecules of drug substances (host) are imprinted into a hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular matrix of water-ethyl alcohol molecules (guest) as ‘nanocavities’.
These nanocavities or ‘molecular imprints’ can bind to and deactivate any functional group having configuration similar to that of original ‘host’ molecule imprinted into it. As such, a potentized drug can act as biological antidote towards any pathological molecule, if the drug and disease were capable of producing ‘similar’ symptoms, which actually mean, they contain similar ‘functional groups’.
I hope, scientific meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’ is well explained here, and scientifically viable answers provided for the THREE fundamental questions of homeopathy- what happens during potentization, what are the active principles of potentized drugs, and what is the exact molecular mechanism by which potentized drugs produce a therapeutic effect. Answers to all other secondary questions could be easily evolved once you comprehend these fundamental answers.
—————————————————————————-
A ‘TOTAL CURE PRESCRIPTION’ is a prescription that is expected to contain ALL the diverse types of ‘molecular imprints’ required to remove ALL the diverse types of molecular inhibitions existing in the patient, thereby offering a TOTAL CURE.
You cannot follow this concept unless you could perceive potentized drugs in terms of diverse types of independent molecular imprints contained in them, representing the diverse types of constituent molecules of original drug substance used for potentization. You should also perceive ‘patient’ in terms of diverse types of molecular inhibitions caused by diverse types of pathogenic molecules, and expressed as diverse groups of ‘symptoms’.
HOW I MAKE A ‘TOTAL CURE PRESCRIPTION’?
Collect ALL symptoms of the patient- all mentals, physical generals and particulars, with the ‘qualifications’ of each symptom regarding its peculiar presentations, locations, sensations, modalities, and concomitants.
Search repertorieis, and select appropriate rubrics for all the collected symptoms .
Classify the rubrics into uncommon, common, subjective, objective, mentals, physicals, generals and particulars. Assign grades.
First repertorize using only mentals and physical generals and prepare a list of top-ranking drugs. Compare their symptomatology using a good materia medica book and determine one or more constitutional drugs that would ‘collectively’ cover all the important mentals and general symptoms.
Arrange the particulars into appropriate groups on the basis of their pathological relationships, and repertorize the groups separately and determine similimum for each group.
Select anti-miasmatic nosodes if necessary, on the basis of history of infectious diseases, anaphylaxis and vaccinations of the patient.
Take all the selected constitutional and particular similimums as well as nosodes in 30 c potency, and mix them in a bottle in equal quantities. Do not bother about number of drugs, or drug relationships.
Administer in drop doses thrice or 2-3 hourly until acute complaints are relieved. Then continue medication once or twice daily, until CURE IS COMPLETE. One drop per one drug is my dosage.
Such a well-worked-out ‘TOTAL CURE’ prescription would CURE not only acute complaints, but the PATIENT in his TOTALITY with in a very short span of time.
—————————————————————
Collect all mentals, physical generals and particular symptoms of your patient, with all qualifications such as causations, sensations, locations, modalities and concomitants. Then grade the symptoms into uncommon, common, mental, physical general and particulars. Then repertorize. Compare the materia medica of drugs coming top in repertorization, and decide a similimum. That is the simple way of homeopathic practice- and the most successful way.
If a drug is similimum according to totality of symptoms, it does not matter whether that drug belongs to animal, mineral or plant kingdoms. It does not matter to which ‘sub kingdom’ or ‘family’ the drug belongs. Such a knowledge does not make any difference in your similimum.
Selecting similimum is most important in homeopathy. Similarity of symptoms is our guide in selecting similimum. All these talk about ‘kingdoms’, sub kingdoms, families and such things only contribute in making homeopathy complex, and confuse the young homeopaths. It may help in creating an aura around the teacher, which would attract people to seminars. That is not a silly thing, where money matters above homeopathy!
——————————————————————————
Any project claiming to be ‘fundamental research in homeopathy’ should be aimed at providing scientifically acceptable answers to the following ‘fundamental’ questions in homeopathy:
1. What is the actual process happening during potentization?
2. What are the exact active principles of potentized drugs?
3. What is the exact molecular level mechanism by which these active principles act upon the biological system and produce a therapeutic effect?
Without answering these fundamental questions in a way fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system, homeopathy cannot exist and advance as a ”medical science’ in the modern knowledge environment.
Central council for Research In Homeopathy (CCRH) should urgently take up projects to answer these fundamental questions, if they w
————————————————————–
I do not think the term ‘body language’ is something different from what we actually mean by ‘symptoms’. ALL symptoms are part of ‘language’ of the BODY, by which it expresses itself- by which it expresses the phenotype constitution as well as pathological molecular errors. For me, ‘body language’ means ‘symptoms’. Even Hahnemann said, ‘symptoms are language of the body’. All genuine homeopathic prescriptions are ‘body language prescriptions’, if you want to use that term. Those much advertised ‘body language method’, ‘facial analysis method’ and such things are only money making gimmicks of certain clever people, who are experts in the art of ‘brand building’ and commercializing homeopathy, and extracting easy money from aspiring young homeopaths by selling ‘courses’, ‘seminars’ and ‘packages’.
————————————————————
We should learn different types of ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ of constituent molecules of our drug substances, as well as diverse types of pathogenic molecules.
We have to study our materia medica from this ‘functional group’ viewpoint, comparing symptoms of different drug molecules having same functional moieties.
Then we can logically explain our concepts regarding phenomena of ‘drug relationships’ such as complementary, inimical, antidoting etc..
We can explain the similarity of drugs belonging to different groups such as ‘calcarea’, ‘merc’, ‘kali’, ‘acid’, ‘sulph’, ‘mur’ etc. Such an approach will make our understanding of homeopathy more scientific and accurate.
——————————————————————
Except those substances of simple chemical formula belonging to mineral groups, most of the pathogenic agents as well as drug substances consist of complex organic molecules.
In the study of chemical interactions involving these complex organic molecules, understanding the concept of ‘functional groups’ is very important.
‘Functional groups’ are specific groups of atoms within large organic molecules that are responsible for their characteristic chemical reactions.
Different organic molecules having same functional group will interact with the same biological targets regardless of the size of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified or influenced to an extent by nearby functional groups.
In the case of smaller molecules such as minerals, we use the concept ‘moiety’ instead of ‘functional group’. Even though the word moiety is often used synonymously to “functional group”, according to precise definition,a moiety is a part of a molecule that may include either whole functional groups or a parts of functional groups as substructures.
The atoms of functional groups are linked to each other and to the rest of the molecule by covalent bonds. When the group of covalently bound atoms bears a net charge, the group is referred to more properly as a polyatomic ion or a complex ion. Any subgroup of atoms of a compound also may be called a radical, and if a covalent bond is broken homolytically, the resulting fragment radicals are referred as free radicals.
All chemical processes in the biological systems are facilitated and controlled by the functional groups of the reactants.
—————————————————————-
It is to be specifically noted that same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reactions regardless of the size or configuration of of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified by nearby functional groups known as facilitating groups. That means, different types of drug molecules or pathogenic molecules having same functional groups and facilitating groups can bind to same biological molecules, and produce similar molecular inhibitions and symptoms.
Homeopathic principle of ‘similimum’ is well explained by this understanding. If a drug molecule can produce symptoms similar to symptoms of a particular disease, it means that the drug molecules and disease-causing molecules have same functional groups on them, by which they bind to same biological molecules. Obviously, similarity of symptoms means similarity of functional groups of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules. To be similimum, the whole molecules need not be similar, but similarity of functional groups is enough.
Potentized drugs would contain the molecular imprints of drug molecules, along with molecular imprints of their functional groups. These molecular imprints will have specific configurational affinity towards any molecule having same functional groups, and can bind and deactivate them.
———————————————————————–
To understand the real science behind the phenomena of ‘similia similibus curentur’, ‘drug proving’ and ‘potntization’, we should study drug substances in terms of not only their ‘constituent molecules’, but in terms of ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ of those drug molecules.
A drug substance is composed of diverse types of drug molecules. A drug molecule interacts with ‘active groups’ of biological target molecules such as enzymes and receptors using their ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’. It is the ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ on the individual drug molecules that decide to which biological molecules they can bind to and produce molecular inhibitions.
Different drug molecules with different size and structures, but having same ‘functional group’ or ‘moiety’ can bind to same biological molecules and produce similar molecular errors and similar groups of symptoms.
A drug molecule become similimum to a disease when the drug molecule and disease-producing molecule have same functional groups, so that they could bind to same biological targets producing same molecular errors and same symptom groups.
—————————————————————————–
All of us know, a single case could be treated and cured by different homeopaths by using entirely different drugs. There is nothing to wonder in this common experience, if you understand the role of ‘functional groups’ in causing and curing diseases. Potentized form of any drug which contain a chemical molecule bearing the required functional group can cure, whether it comes from drug A or drug B. That means, different drugs could act as ‘similimum’ for a particular case, if they can supply molecular imprints of functional groups involved in its pathology.
—————————————————————-
‘Similimum’ should be scientifically understood as a drug that contains certain chemical molecules bearing ‘functional groups’ similar to the functional groups of the pathological molecules which produced the particular molecular inhibitions in that patient.
Since similar functional groups can bind to same biological targets, produce similar molecular errors and similar symptoms, we use ‘similarity of symptoms’ to indirectly identify the exact functional groups and biological targets involved in a particular case of pathology.
Potentized drugs contain ‘molecular imprints’ of functional groups of constituent drug molecules, and these molecular imprints can bind to similar functional groups in capacity of complementary configurational affinity, and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions caused by them in the organism.
This is the scientific meaning of ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’.
Once you understand this scientific explanation of fundamental principle of homeopathy, you will see all ‘riddles’ and ‘miracles’ in homeopathy getting automatically unraveled for you .
——————————————————————
Exactly, homeopathy is based on two fundamental observations made by hahnemann regarding the process of cure-
1. Similia Similibus Curentur: Hahnemann observed through his experiments that diseases could be cured by extremely diluted forms of drug substances, which could produce symptoms similar to disease when applied in large doses in healthy individuals.
2. Potentization: Hahnemann developed a special process of preparing drugs by serial dilution and shaking, and observed that such expremely diluted drugs could act as therapeutic agents when applied according to similia similibus curentur
Due to the limitations imposed by the infantile stage of scientific knowledge available to him during that period, hahnemann could not formulate a viable hypothesis to explain his observation in a way fitting to the scientific knowledge system then existed. In fact, science was not properly equipped to provide a reasonable explanation for the phenomena hahnemann observed.
Instead of leaving his observations unexplained as it should have been truthfully done, hahnemann resorted to building up of a system of philosophical speculations and imaginative theorizations to explain them. May be since he found that the contemporary scientific paradigms were not sufficient for his purpose, he tried to develop a speculative philosophical system utilizing concepts such as ‘vital force’, ‘dynamic energy’ being part of spiritualistic philosophy existed then.
Obviously, this speculative part of homeopathy does not agree with scientific knowledge or its methods. As such, scientific community adopted a skeptical approach towards homeopathy. They totally denied the existence of even the fundamental observations of hahnemaan, whereas it would have been judicious to deny the theoretical explanations of homeopathy and asking for a more viable explanation for the phenomena hahnemann observed.
From a rational perspective, we have to logically differentiate between observational part of homeopathy from its speculative part. Observational part is objective experience, which forms the basis of practical application of similia similibus curentur and potentization. They should not be denied on the reason that hahnemann’s theoretical explanations contradict scientific knowledge.
According to me, inorder to promote scientific homeopathy, we have to address fllowing preliminary tasks:
1. Convince the scientific community that homeopathy works, through demonstrations and scientifically acceptable clinical studies.
2. Convince them the importance of differentiating objective observational part of homeopathy from the unscientific theoretical or explanatory part of homeopathy.
3. Propose a scientifically viable working hypothesis regarding how homeopathy works, in a way fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system.
4. Prove the propositions of this hypothesis using scientific methods, in a way undisputable to the scientific community.
While addressing this four-pointed fundamental tasks, scientific homeopathy will have to relentlessly fight against the negative-minded skeptics as well as pseudo-scientific energy medicine theoreticians of homeopathy.
We have to consistently tell the world, real homeopathy is entirely different from those nonsense the pseudoscientific homeopathic theoreticians preach and practice.
We have to understand and tell the homeopathic community that the negative-minded anti-homeopathic skeptics are entirely different from real scientific community.
———————————————————–
Can we change ‘constitutions’ by homeopathic treatment? Thi question is a frequently asked one in homeopathic circles. Some believe they can, some believe they cannot.
Constitution of an individual has a ‘genotype’ and ‘phenotype’ aspects. ‘Genotype’ is the genetic material inherited from previous generation. It cannot be changed by homeopathic drugs. If homeopathic drugs could have produced changes in genotype, it would have to labelled as a most dangerous medical system.
What we call as ‘constitutions’ and ‘constitutional symptoms’ in homeopathy actually deals with ‘phenotype’ aspects of constitution. Phenotype is decided by the way genes are expressed. ‘Genetic expression’ happens through a complex chain of biochemical processes, by which proteins are synthesized using the genetic blueprint involved in genotype.
Synthesizing of proteins in accordance with the genetic blueprints is mediated by diverse types of enzymes, and it requires diverse types of aminoacids and other biological molecules. Hence, genetic expression or ‘phenotype’ could be influenced by many factors such as nutrition, environment, emotions, drugs, and many such things that could inhibit or activate the enzyme systems involved in protein synthesis.
Obviously, we can change or influence the ‘phenotype’ or genetic expression, but we cannot change the basic genetic material of an individual. Any ‘constitutional’ changes we produce by homeopathic treatment are confined to phenotype changes, not genotype changes.
—————————————————————————-
Possibilities of potentized homeopathic medicines interacting with genetic substance in the organism is a subject of much concern, speculations and controversy among homeopaths. Such controversies arise from the lack of sufficient understanding regarding the active principles contained in potentized medicines, and their exact mechanism of action in the living system.
With our new scientific understanding of potentization as a process of molecular imprinting, we are now in a better position to answer these questions satisfactorily. Since, molecular imprints contained in the potentized homeopathic preparations cannot successfully compete with natural ligands in binding with their target molecules, we need not be concerned about the possibility of potentized homeopatic medicines dangerously interacting with genetic material in any way.
Molecular imprints contained in the potentized homeopathic preparations bind to ligands or biological molecules merely due to their complementary cofigurations without any charge affinity, whereas natural ligands bind to their biological target molecules in capacity of their appropriate spacial configurations as well as charge affinities. So, the bindings of molecular imprints with biological molecules or their ligands will be very temporary and cannot stay long. Such bindings of molecular imprints cannot replace the natural ligand-target interactions happening as part of vital processes. Molecular imprints can not compete with natural ligands in binding to their natural biological targets. Hence it is obvious that potentized homeopathic preparations cannot interfere in biological ‘ligand-target’ processes such as ‘substrate-enzyme’, ‘antigens-antibodies’, ‘signal-receptor’ etc. As such, chances of potentized homeopathic medicines acting as pathological agents are very rare even if used indiscriminately.
Molecular imprints can interfere only in interactions between pathogenic molecules and biological molecules, as well as off-target bindings of ligands with biological molecules, where only configurational affinity is involved. Obviously, molecular imprints can act upon only the molecular blocks created by exogenous or endogenous foreign pathological molecules.
At the same time, these molecular imprints can effectively compete with the pathogenic actions of deformed proteins that may result from genetic errors, thereby preventing them from creating pathological molecular blocks at various targets. As such, homeopathic medicines can play a great role even in the treatment of certain diseases of genetic origin, at least as palliatives.
More over, potentized homeopathic medicines can safeguard genetic material from dangerous mutations that may be caused the by inhibitory actions of endogenous or exogenous pathogenicl agents such as toxic drugs, heavy metals, super-oxides etc., on enzymes related with nucleic acid synthesis and genetic expressions.
————————————————————————
Without a baseline knowledge of biochemistry- especially the mechanism of ‘ligand-target’ interactions of biological molecules, molecular basics of pathology, molecular inhibitions and dynamics of ‘cure’ as removal of molecular inhibitions, you cannot follow the scientific explanation of similia similibus curentur.
Without a scientific perspective of molecular composition of drug substances, and the molecular mechanism by which the drug substances interact with biological organism to produce pathological inhibitions and symptoms, you cannot follow the scientific explanations of drug proving.
Without getting yourselves introduced to the latest information regarding supra-molecular properties of water and ethyl alcohol, hydrogen bonding, hydration shells, supra-molecular nano-structures, guest-host complexes, molecular imprinting in polymers and related subjects, you cannot follow the scientific explanations of potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’.
Scientific understanding of homeopathy, similar to any rational science of medicine, should be primarily based on the realization of ‘life’ as a ‘material’ phenomenon. Living world represents a higher level of organization of same elemental factors existing in the non-living world, an advanced stage of its evolution that happened through millions of years.
‘Living organism’ is a highly complex and self-regulated material system that exists through ‘vital processes’ or metabolic processes, consisting of systematic chains of inter-dependant biochemical pathways of complex molecular interactions, enabling an unhindered flow and conversion of matter and energy between organism and its environment that ensures the existence of life.
Phenomena of ‘mind’ and ‘mental faculties’ are the ‘functional’ products of complex biochemical molecular processes happening in the central nervous system, which is an integral part of ‘body’, and as such, mind has no existence free from the material body.
If you cannot understand this basic scientific perspective of ‘life’, ‘vital processes’ and ‘mind’, you cannot follow the scientific explanations of homeopathy.
In the absence of these essential basic scientific knowledge, you will go on talking about ‘energy medicine’, vital force, dynamic drug energy, spiritual healing, vibrations, resonance, distance healing and such diverse unscientific and pseudo-scientific things, and continue to make homeopathy and homeopaths a subject of unending mockery and ridicule before the scientific community. And of course, you will go on declaring homeopathy is the ultimate science, hahnemann is the greatest scientist, and modern science is lagging far behind homeopathy!
—————————————————
If you are using similumum, why should you use it as mother tincture? if you are using mother tincture not as similimum, how can you claim you are doing homeopatjy? most homeopaths use MT allopathically
During earlier stages of evolution of homeopathy, before the invenrion of potentization, hahnemann used mother tinctures of similimum. After the invention of potentization, he stopped it.
In my opinion, similimum will act in mother tincture form also, but since they contain original drug molecules, there is chances for off target molecular inhibitions which will cause un expected bad effects.
Drugs potentized above 12c contain only molecular imprints, and cannot cause bad effects. I think only potentized drugs could be considered genuine homeopathy.
———————————————————————–
My special request to Homeopathy students:
Please be careful not to get confused and distracted by reading my articles. As a student, exam is very important for you. Study what is taught in college, face exams and get your degree. Then you can think about what I am saying about scientific homeopathy.
———————————————————
What are exactly the active principles of potentized drugs? What is the molecular mechanism by which these active principles interact with organism and produce a therapeutic effect?
I think these are the fundamental question to be addressed while trying to make homeopathy a scientific medical system. The answer we provide should be capable of explaining the time-proven experiences of homeopathic practice, same time fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system. Most importantly, it should be provable with scientific methods.
I was trying to explain homeopathic potentization on the basis of modern technology of ’molecular imprinting’, and ‘similia similibus curentur’ on the basis scientific understanding regarding molecular mechanism of resolving pathologic molecular inhibitions involved in therapeutics.
According to my concept, potentization involves a process of molecular imprinting in water, exactly similar to ‘molecular imprinting in polymers’. During this process, constituent drug molecules contained in drug substances are ‘imprinted’ into the supra-molecular matrix of water-ethyl alcohol mixture, generating three-dimensional nanocavities that can act as artificial ‘targets’ for pathological ligands that have configurations similar to the drug molecules used for imprinting. These ‘molecular imprints’, when introduced into the organism can selectively bid to the pathological molecules having complementary configurational affintity, thereby relieving the biological molecules from pathological molecular inhibitions. This is the most rational and logical explanation of molecular dynamics of homeopathic therapeutics.
—————————————————————–
Molecular Imprinted Drugs Will Provide A Converging Point For Homeopathy And Modern Molecular Medicine.
In a far distant historical perspective, I foresee the possibility of converging of modern medicine and homeopathy into a universal molecular medical science of ‘drug-less therapy’, where only molecular imprints will be used as therapeutic agents.
Modern Medicine is gradually evolving into ‘Molecular Medicine’. Molecular Medicine studies vital processes and diseases at molecular level, and deals therapeutics as an art and science of molecular level repairing.
Molecular medicine is the most advanced, most scientific and most recently originated discipline in modern medical science. It is a broad field, where physical, chemical, biological and medical techniques are used to describe molecular structures and mechanisms, identify fundamental molecular and genetic errors of pathology, and to develop molecular interventions to correct those errors.
‘Molecular Medicine’ emphasizes disease and cure in terms of cellular and molecular phenomena and interventions rather than the conceptual and observational focus on patients and their organs common to conventional medicine.
Molecular Medicine studies drug substances in terms of their molecular level structure and organization, and is more and more relying upon target-specific Designer Drugs synthesized by drug designing technology, supported by computer aided designing protocols.
Drug Designing Technology has recently started exploring the possibilities of Molecular Imprinting in the development of target-specific designer drugs. They are now experimenting for developing bio-friendly imprinting matrices and imprinting protocols, so as to prepare artificial binding surfaces for pathogenic molecules that could be utilized as therapeutic agents.
Even though not yet recognized as such, homeopathic potentization is a process of molecular imprinting, where artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules are produced by imprinting drug molecules into water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrices. Homeopathy identifies pathological molecular errors and selects the appropriate molecular imprints through a peculiar technique of ‘comparing symptoms’, which is expressed as the therapeutic principle, ‘simila similibus curentur’
Most probably, modern molecular medicine and drug designing technology is in the new future going to explore the possibilities of water as a molecular imprinting medium as part of their search for novel substances to be utilized as imprinting matrix.
It means, Modern Molecular Medicine is slowly advancing towards the realization of a drug designing technology that homeopathy invented as ‘potentization’ and utilized for preparing therapeutic agents 250 years ago. It is based on this understanding that I try to propagate the concept that ‘Homeopathy is Molecular Imprinting Therapeutics- An Advanced Branch of Molecular Medicine.
In a far distant historical perspective, I foresee the possibility of converging of modern medicine and homeopathy into a universal molecular medical science of ‘drug-less therapy’, where only molecular imprints will be used as therapeutic agents. Instead of our present ‘potentization’, modern science may develop more sophisticated ways of molecular imprinting, that would enable us to produce therapeutic agents more specific and perfect than our present day ‘potentized drugs’.
May be be distant dream. But it is a dream based on scientific knowledge.
———————————————————–
During my 40+ years of experience with learning, applying and experimenting with homeopathy, I could never come across with a single individual of ‘pure’ sulphur, calc, lyco or any other drug constitutions. Everybody has ‘mixed’ constitutions, which requires multiple drugs. Some individuals are ‘prominently’ lyco or ‘prominently’ calc- that is all. He will have many symptoms that are not covered by that prominent ‘constitutional’ drug, but indicate some other ‘constitutions’ also. As such, it is a utopian dream to ‘cure’ an individual in his ‘totality’ with a ‘single’ constitutional drug. More over, even those so-called ‘single’ drugs are actually not ‘single’ is you imagine, but contains diverse types of individual drug molecules with specific chemical and biological properties, and hence, are compound drugs.
You can understand the meaning of this statement only if you could perceive drug substances in terms of constituent molecules, and ‘symptoms’ in terms in terms of underlying bio-molecular processes.
—————————————————————–
Use of crataegus, cactus, digitalis and such drugs in crude form as ‘cardiac tonics’ is not the invention of homeopathy, but belongs to old school, which were later discarded by them due to bad long term effects. These drugs were subjected to homeopathic proving later, and incorporated into homeopathic materia medica. If you read the provings and materia medica of those drugs carefully, you can see they are not safe for our heart. Symptoms in our materia medica are actually the ‘diseases’ that could be produced by consuming those drugs in crude form. For applying them homeopathically, we should prescribe for those symptoms, in potentized form or ‘molecular imprints’ form. Using mother tinctures is no way different from allopathy.
See MM of CRATAEGUS:
“Produces giddiness, lowered pulse, and air hunger and reduction in blood-pressure. ·Myocarditis. ·Failing compensation. ·Irregularity of heart. ·Insomnia of aortic sufferers; anaemia; oedema; cutaneous chilliness.
·High arterial tension.
Chronic heart disease, with extreme weakness. ·Very feeble and irregular heart action. ·General anasarca. ·Very nervous, with pain in back of head and neck. ·Haemorrhage from bowels. ·Cold extremities, pallor; irregular pulse and breathing. ·Painful sensation of pressure in left side of chest below the clavicle. ·Dyspepsia and nervous prostration, with heart failure.
Cardiac dropsy. ·Fatty degeneration. ·Aortic disease. ·Extreme dyspnoea on least exertion, without much increase of pulse. ·Pain in region of heart and under left clavicle. ·Heart muscles seem flabby, worn out. ·Cough.
Heart dilated; first sound weak. ·Pulse accelerated, irregular, feeble, intermittent. ·Valvular murmurs, angina pectoris. ·Cutaneous chilliness, blueness of fingers and toes; all aggravated by exertion or excitement.
Diabetes, especially in children. ”
These are some of the symptoms ‘produced in healthy individuals’ by using crude forms of crataegus. If we could produce such serious pathologies during proving of that drug, it could be produced in anybody when we use it in MT or low potency forms. If you are a real homeopath, you should use only potentized forms of crategus for disease conditions having such a symptom picture.
————————————————————–
In a human being having average nutrition, ‘deficiency’ of minerals happens not from lack of supply, but due to some errors in biological processes involved in various stages of digestion, absorption, assimilation, transportation, conversion actual utilization of those minerals contained in food articles. Such secondary deficiencies cannot be rectified with extra ‘supply’. We have to remove the molecular errors in related biochemical pathways, not by using potentized minerals, but by using potentized similimum selected on the basis of totality of symptoms
If you are using ‘biochemic salts’ for supplying ‘deficiecies’, do homeopaths ever examine the body fluids to confirm ‘deficiency’ of particular mineral before using them? Do you ever consider the chances of intoxication that may be caused by ‘excess’ minerals?
Exactly, homeopathy is based on two fundamental observations made by hahnemann regarding the process of cure-
1. Similia Similibus Curentur: Hahnemann observed through his experiments that diseases could be cured by extremely diluted forms of drug substances, which could produce symptoms similar to disease when applied in large doses in healthy individuals.
2. Potentization: Hahnemann developed a special process of preparing drugs by serial dilution and shaking, and observed that such expremely diluted drugs could act as therapeutic agents when applied according to similia similibus curentur
Due to the limitations imposed by the infantile stage of scientific knowledge available to him during that period, hahnemann could not formulate a viable hypothesis to explain his observation in a way fitting to the scientific knowledge system then existed. In fact, science was not properly equipped to provide a reasonable explanation for the phenomena hahnemann observed.
Instead of leaving his observations unexplained as it should have been truthfully done, hahnemann resorted to building up of a system of philosophical speculations and imaginative theorizations to explain them. May be since he found that the contemporary scientific paradigms were not sufficient for his purpose, he tried to develop a speculative philosophical system utilizing concepts such as ‘vital force’, ‘dynamic energy’ being part of spiritualistic philosophy existed then.
Obviously, this speculative part of homeopathy does not agree with scientific knowledge or its methods. As such, scientific community adopted a skeptical approach towards homeopathy. They totally denied the existence of even the fundamental observations of hahnemaan, whereas it would have been judicious to deny the theoretical explanations of homeopathy and asking for a more viable explanation for the phenomena hahnemann observed.
From a rational perspective, we have to logically differentiate between observational part of homeopathy from its speculative part. Observational part is objective experience, which forms the basis of practical application of similia similibus curentur and potentization. They should not be denied on the reason that hahnemann’s theoretical explanations contradict scientific knowledge.
According to me, inorder to promote scientific homeopathy, we have to address fllowing preliminary tasks:
1. Convince the scientific community that homeopathy works, through demonstrations and scientifically acceptable clinical studies.
2. Convince them the importance of differentiating objective observational part of homeopathy from the unscientific theoretical or explanatory part of homeopathy.
3. Propose a scientifically viable working hypothesis regarding how homeopathy works, in a way fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system.
4. Prove the propositions of this hypothesis using scientific methods, in a way undisputable to the scientific community.
While addressing this four-pointed fundamental tasks, scientific homeopathy will have to relentlessly fight against the negative-minded skeptics as well as pseudo-scientific energy medicine theoreticians of homeopathy.
We have to consistently tell the world, real homeopathy is entirely different from those nonsense the pseudoscientific homeopathic theoreticians preach and practice.
We have to understand and tell the homeopathic community that the negative-minded anti-homeopathic skeptics are entirely different from real scientific community.
—————————————————————————
”Do not prescribe for the disease- prescribe for the patient”- this is a much quoted and much misunderstood cliche in homeopathy. What does it actually mean? I think we have to ponder over.
This statement is is understood in different ways by different homeopaths.
Some homeopaths understand it as ‘forget the disease, treat the person’. According to them, whatever the complaints the person heve, his constitutional similimum selected on the basis of physical generals and mentals is enough to remove all his ailments and bring him back to total cure. They call it ‘constitutional’ approach or ‘holistic’ approach. Some people with extreme approach believe we can cure with only ‘mental’ or even ‘sensational’ similimum. According to this people, if the patient is calc constitution, we should prescribe it only, whatever be the ailments- headache, digestive upset, piles, eczema, allergy, acute cold or anything else.
In my opinion, “prescribe not for the disease- prescribe for the patient” should be understood in a different way.
If we try to prescribe on the basis of a disease diagnosis only, it is ‘prescribing for the disease’. Same time, if we prescribe on the basis of totality of symptoms specifically expressed by the individual ‘patient’, it is ‘prescribing for the patient’.
Prescribing for a ‘headache’ on the basis of diagnosis of ‘migraine’ is ‘prescribing for disease’. Exactly, the homeopath should prescribe for the specific ‘patient’. If we collect the locations, sensations, modalities and concomitants of that ‘migraine’ in that particular patient and find a similimum, it is not prescribing for disease- it is a prescription for that ‘patient’. You cannot expect that prescription to cure a ‘migraine’ of another person. He will need another similimum based on his symptoms.
In my opinion, “prescribe not for the disease- prescribe for the patient” should be understood in this way. It doses not mean ignoring the ailments of the patient, and prescribing for his ‘constitution’.
A young homeopath asked me to suggest a drug for his patient with ‘violent knee pain’. When I asked him to provide symptoms, he said: “patient gives no other symptoms”. I get many such requests from young homeopaths daily.
An unqualified symptom is of no use in selecting a similimum.
I told him, we should get detailed symptoms for making a prescription: For example, he has knee pain(expression), right knee(location), swelling and redness(expression), throbbing pain(sensatin), relieved by warm application(modality) and rest(modality), worse by motion(modality), walking(modality), pain extending to heels(concomitants), it is a clear picture. We can prescribe.
‘No symptoms’ only means, we failed to collect symptoms. Collecting symptoms is an art, which needs great talent, creativity and observational and communication skills.
Once the patient reports a symptom, do not leave that symptom without collecting maximum information regarding that symptoms, such as its causations, expressions, locations, sensations, modalities and concomittants.
Same time, we should be careful not to break the flow of narrations by interfering with frequent questions. It would be ideal to allow the patient to complete his narrations uninterrupted, and then return back to each symptom and interrogate the patient to collect the qualifications.
Even a single symptom, if with all its qualifications, will by itself provide a strong foundation for a reliable prescription.
For example, if the patient has a headache (expressions), in forehead(location), bursting pains(sensations), amelioration by cold applications and sleep(modalities), aggravated during menses(modalities), with vomiting(concomitants) and blurred vision(concomitants), we can make a prescription for her headache without considering generals or mentals. Such a prescription will relieve the headache instantly.
If the complaints recur, we will have to find her constitutional similimum using physical generals and mentals, which will cure her permanently.
Homeopathic prescribing is an art of individualization. But ‘individualization’ should not be understood as prescribing ‘constitutional similimum’ always. Individualization exactly means finding a similimum considering the symptoms expressed by the patient in their totality. Qualified symptoms is the key to successful individualization of a case.
”Do not prescribe for the disease- prescribe for the patient” indicates the importance of this individualization. It does not mean ‘prescribe constitutional drugs’ only.
———————————————————————-
Most homeopaths understand homeopathy is a closed system of eternally immutable ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ every ‘true’ homeopath is bound to ‘obey’. They believe in ‘seven cardinal principles of hahnemann’, ‘hering laws’, ‘kents observations’ and many other ‘theories’ that rule the practice of homeopathy. Anybody violating or thinking beyond these ‘fundamental laws’ are considered to be ‘wrong homeopaths’. That is why they advise me not to use the term ‘homeopathy’ if I do not abide by the ‘fundamental principles.
We should remember, no ‘masters’ so far knew what really happens during potentization. Nobody so far knew what are the exact active principles of potentized drugs. Nobody so far knew the exact molecular level mechanism by which the active principles of potentized drugs interact with the biological organism and produce a therapeutic effect. Only things our masters actually knew was the objective natural phenomena of ‘likes curing likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’.
Everything else were mere speculations. Speculations based on unscientific philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’. All ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘methods’ and ‘doctrines’ we consider as ‘cardinal principles of homeopathy evolved from these speculative theories. All ‘directions’ regarding ‘doses’, repetitions’, ‘single drugs’, ‘follow ups’ and everything else were formulated without clearly knowing the substances we are actually dealing with or how they actually work. They were based on misinterpreted ‘experiences’ of ‘stalwarts’ with historically limited scientific knowledge.
Once we acquire scientific knowledge regarding the exact processes involved in potentization, active principles of potentized drugs and the molecular mechanism of their therapeutic action, all the existing ‘methods’, ‘laws’, ‘rules’ and ‘principles’ are bound to change. New ‘principles’ and ‘methods’will evolve.
What ever I talk about ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ of homeopathic practice such as ‘dose’ and ‘repetitions’ are based on my scientific understanding of potentization as ‘molecular imprinting’, active principles of potentized drugs as ‘molecular imprints’, and homeopathic therapeutics as removal of biochemical inhibitions. Unless you understand the concept ‘molecular imprinting’ of potentization and biochemistry of therapeutics, you are bound to fail to understand everything I say.
Acquiring a scientific understanding of the phenomena involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, and applying that knowledge judiciously for curing the sick- that should be the only ‘fundamental rule’ that guide a homeopath.
‘Likes cures likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’ represent the objective part of homepathy, which are concerned with truthful observations of natural phenomena involved in the process of ‘cure’. This is the strong and rational aspect of homeopathy that have to be preserved, explored and advanced into more and more perfection.
The theoretical explanatory part of homeopathy, which is based on totally unscientific and irrational philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’ of eighteenth century europe, as well as the ‘rules’, ‘laws’ and ‘methods’ formulated accordingly, is the real stumbling block that prevents this wonderful therapeutic art from advancing into a scientific medical system.
We have to preserve and strengthen the rational objective aspect of homeopathy, and explain it in terms of modern scientific knowledge. We should show the audacity to discard its irrational and unscientific theoretical parts. Once we understand the real science involved in the phenomena of ‘likes cure likes’ and ‘potentization’, a whole new set of practical ‘rules’ and ‘laws’ would spontaneously evolve.
————————————————————————–
It is wrong if anybody think I have proposed ‘some theories’ about homeopathy. I have proposed only ‘viable working hypothesis that could be presented as a candidate for scientific verification’. You have to know the difference between ‘hypothesis’ and ‘theory’. My hypothesis would become a theory only when it is proved by ‘scientific methods’.
Can anybody claim there is any ‘scientifically verified theory’ in homeopathy? What you say ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy are not even ‘scientific hypotheses’.
Did anybody prove ‘similia similibus curentur’ by scientific methods? Did anybody prove potentization through scientific methods? Did anybody prove ‘suppressions’, hering laws or any such things by ‘scientific methods’? Did anybody prove ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’ with any ‘scientific trials? NEVER! They are all mere speculative theorizations, without any scientific validity.
We have to prove similia similibus curentur and potentization with scientific methods. For that, first of all we have to propose a ‘working hypothesis’ that ‘fits well to the existing scientific knowledge system. Then we have to prove that hypothesis through ‘scientific methods’. Then only it will become a theory, and homeopathy become a science.
MIT is the working hypothesis i propose for homeopathy. It is the FIRST ‘scientific hypothesis’ being proposed during the 250 year history of homeopathy. First try to understand it before declaing it is ‘ridiculous’.
——————————————————————————
You cannot ‘save’ homeopathy with noisy slogans or mass mobilizations. You cannot ‘save’ homeopathy with facebook polls. You cannot ‘save’ homeopathy using quotes from luminaries who supported it. To ‘save’ homeopathy, homeopaths should first of al stop talking nonsense ‘spiritualistic’ ‘energy medicine’ theories about homeopathy. They should explain homeopathy in scientific terms, and prove it according to scientific methods, in a way fitting to the modern scientific knowledge system, and in a way understandable and acceptable to scientific community. You cannot ‘save’ homeopathy in this advanced modern knowledge environment, using your 250 year old pre-scientific theories and ‘anti-scientific’ intellectual gimmicks. To save homeopathy, first of all we have to save it from the hands of ‘insane’ unscientific propagators.
——————————————————————————–
To understand the real science behind the phenomena of ‘similia similibus curentur’, ‘drug proving’ and ‘potntization’, we should study drug substances in terms of not only their ‘constituent molecules’, but in terms of ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ of those drug molecules. A drug substance is composed of diverse types of drug molecules. A drug molecule interacts with ‘active groups’ of biological target molecules such as enzymes and receptors using their ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’. It is the ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ on the individual drug molecules that decide to which biological molecules they can bind to and produce molecular inhibitions. Different drug molecules with different size and structures, but having same ‘functional group’ or ‘moiety’ can bind to same biological molecules and produce similar molecular errors and similar groups of symptoms. A drug molecule become similimum to a disease when the drug molecule and disease-producing molecule have same functional groups, so that they could bind to same biological targets producing same molecular errors and same symptom groups.
Drug molecules act upon the biological molecules in the organism by binding their ‘functional groups’ to the active groups on the complex biological molecules such as receptors and enzymes. These molecular interactions are determined by the affinity between functional groups or moieties of drug molecules and active sites of biological molecules. Here, the functional groups of drug molecules are called ‘ligands’, and the biological molecules are called ‘targets’. Ligand-target interaction is determined by a peculiar ‘key-lock’ relationship due to complementary configurational affinities.
It is to be specifically noted that same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reactions regardless of the size or configuration of of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified by nearby functional groups known as facilitating groups. That means, different types of drug molecules or pathogenic molecules having same functional groups and facilitating groups can bind to same biological molecules, and produce similar molecular inhibitions and symptoms. Homeopathic principle of ‘similimum’ is well explained by this understanding. If a drug molecule can produce symptoms similar to symptoms of a particular disease, it means that the drug molecules and disease-causing molecules have same functional groups on them, by which they bind to same biological molecules.
Obviously, similarity of symptoms means similarity of functional groups of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules. To be similimum, the whole molecules need not be similar, but similarity of functional groups is enough.
Potentized drugs would contain the molecular imprints of drug molecules, along with molecular imprints of their functional groups. These molecular imprints will have specific configurational affinity towards any molecule having same functional groups, and can bind and deactivate them.
According to the scientific definition proposed by Dialectical Homeopathy, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means:
“If a drug substance in crude form is capable of producing certain groups of symptoms in a healthy human organism, that drug substance in potentized form can cure diseases having similar symptoms”.
Potentization is explained in terms of molecular imprinting. As per this concept, potentized drugs contains diverse types of molecular imprints representing diverse types of constituent molecules contained in the drug substances used for potentization.
In other words, “potentized drugs can cure diseases having symptoms similar to those produced by that drug in healthy organism if applied in crude forms”.
Homeopathy is based on the therapeutic principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’, which scientifically means “endogenous or exogenous pathogenic molecules that cause diseases by binding to the biological molecules can be entrapped and removed using molecular imprints of drug molecules which in molecular form can bind to the same biological molecules, utilizing the complementary configurational affinity between molecular imprints and pathogenic molecules”.
So far, we understood ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ as ‘similarity of symptoms produced by drugs as well as diseases’. According to modern scientific understanding, we can explain it as ‘similarity of molecular errors produced by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules’ in the organism.
To be more exact, that means ‘similarity of molecular configurations of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules’. Potentized drugs contains ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules of drug used for potentization. ‘Molecular imprints’ are three-dimensional negatives of molecules, and hence they would have a peculiar affinity towards those molecules, due to their complementary configuration. ‘Molecular imprints’ would show this complementary affinity not only towards the molecules used for imprinting, but also towards all molecules that have configurations similar to those molecules. Homeopathy utilizes this phenomenon, and uses molecular imprints of drug molecules to bind and entrap pathogenic molecules having configurations similar to them.
Similarity of configurations of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules are identified by evaluating the ‘similarity of symptoms’ they produce in organism during drug proving and disease. This realization is the the basis of scientific understanding of homeopathy I propose.
To be ‘similar’ does not mean pathological molecule and drug molecules should be similar in their ‘whole’ molecular structure. To bind to same targets, similarity of ‘functional groups’ or even a ‘moeity’ is enough. If the adjacent groups that facilitate binding with targets are also same, similarity becomes more perfect. If a drug molecule could produce symptoms similar to a disease, that means the drug molecules contains some functional groups simialr to those of pathogenic molecules that caused the disease. By virtue of these similar functional groups, both pathogenic molecules and drug molecules could bind to same biological targets, producing similar molecular errors and symptoms in the organism.
Molecular imprints of similar functional groups will also be similar. As such, potentized forms of a drug substance can bind and deactivate the pathogenic molecules having similar functional groups. This is the real molecular mechanism of ‘similia similibus curentur’.
Except those substances of simple chemical formula belonging to mineral groups, most of the pathogenic agents as well as drug substances consist of complex organic molecules. In the study of chemical interactions involving these organic molecules, understanding the concept of ‘functional groups’ is very important. ‘Functional groups’ are specific groups of atoms within large organic molecules that are responsible for their characteristic chemical reactions. Different organic molecules having same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reactions regardless of the size of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified or influenced to an extent by nearby functional groups.
Even though the word moiety is often used synonymously to “functional group”, according to the IUPAC definition,a moiety is a part of a molecule that may include either whole functional groups or a parts of functional groups as substructures.
The atoms of functional groups are linked to each other and to the rest of the molecule by covalent bonds. When the group of covalently bound atoms bears a net charge, the group is referred to more properly as a polyatomic ion or a complex ion. Any subgroup of atoms of a compound also may be called a radical, and if a covalent bond is broken homolytically, the resulting fragment radicals are referred as free radicals.
Organic reactions are facilitated and controlled by the functional groups of the reactants.
A ‘moeity’ represents discrete non-bonded components. Thus, Na2SO4 would contain 3 moieties (2 Na+ and one SO42-). A “chemical formula moiety” is defined as “formula with each discrete bonded residue or ion shown as a separate moiety”.
We should learn different types of ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ of constituent molecules of our drug substances, as well as diverse types of pathogenic molecules. We have to study our materia medica from this viewpoint, comparing symptoms of different drug molecules having same functional moieties. Then we can logically explain the phenomenon of ‘drug relationships’. We can explain the similarity of drugs belonging to different groups such as ‘calcarea’, ‘merc’, ‘kali’, ‘acid’, ‘sulph’, ‘mur’ etc. Such an approach will make our understanding of homeopathy more scientific and accurate
——————————————————————————
If you know how to collect symptoms, find appropriate rubrics, grade them and use repertories and materia medica judiciously, you can manage almost any case using well-defined general rubrics (dont confuse with general symptoms) of our primary repertories, and a medicine chest containing around hundred well-proven drugs. All these running after ‘rare medicines’ and ‘biggest repertories containing largest number of rubrics’ shows the confusions created by the marketing strategies of compilers of modern materia medica books and repertories.
In my opinion, our materia medica and repertories should be updated not by additions, but by culling and elimination of unverified rubrics and un-proved drugs.
——————————————————————————-
Can we change ‘constitutions’ by homeopathic treatment? This question is a frequently asked one in homeopathic circles. Some believe they can, some believe they cannot.
Constitution of an individual has a ‘genotype’ and ‘phenotype’ aspects. ‘Genotype’ is the genetic material inherited from previous generation. It cannot be changed by homeopathic drugs. If homeopathic drugs could have produced changes in genotype, it would have to labelled as a most dangerous medical system.
What we call as ‘constitutions’ and ‘constitutional symptoms’ in homeopathy actually deals with ‘phenotype’ aspects of constitution. Phenotype is decided by the way genes are expressed. ‘Genetic expression’ happens through a complex chain of biochemical processes, by which proteins are synthesized using the genetic blueprint involved in genotype.
Synthesizing of proteins in accordance with the genetic blueprints is mediated by diverse types of enzymes, and it requires diverse types of aminoacids and other biological molecules. Hence, genetic expression or ‘phenotype’ could be influenced by many factors such as nutrition, environment, emotions, drugs, and many such things that could inhibit or activate the enzyme systems involved in protein synthesis.
Obviously, we can change or influence the ‘phenotype’ or genetic expression, but we cannot change the basic genetic material of an individual. Any ‘constitutional’ changes we produce by homeopathic treatment are confined to phenotype chages, not genotype changes.
———————————————————————–
Congratulations Chandran Namibiarji, It is great and I am of the opinion you are nearing what we all waiting for. There is a body said to be for Homoeopathy known as Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy.Are they all acting sleepy. They are supposed to say some answers to your questions querries or explanations, and or cooperate with you to bring out the scientific explanation to Homoeopathy.
Sincerly with Love,
Dr.Dinesh N Nair
—————————————————————–
I am publishing a message received from Soroush Ebrahimi RSHom, administrator of Mintus group, regarding my article “How The Concept Of Potentization As ‘Molecular Imprinting’ Was Evolved?”
Ref: https://dialecticalohmeopathy.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/molecular-imprints-as-the-active-principles/
This is a very good article – however, please could you give references to cover the statements you have made – Specifically the following:
7. Evaporation rates of potentized drugs and control solutions have been found to differ. That indicates change in hydrogen bond patterns and supra-molecular rearrangements.
8. Freezing point of potentized drugs and control solutions are different, which again indicates change in hydrogen bonding patterns and supra-molecular organization of medium during potentization.
9. Intensity of Brownian motions is less in potentized drugs when compared to control solutions. This observation shows that freedom of movements of molecules are comparatively restricted in potentized drugs, which indicates a supra-molecular clustering.
10. Solubility of salts in potentized drugs and control solutions are of different rates. This observation shows that the supra-molecular properties and hydrogen bonding patterns have changed during potentization, which also indicates some sort of supra-molecular clustering.
11. In spectroscopic studies, the rate of absorption, and refraction of light rays were found to be different in potentized drugs and control solutions. This showed that water/ethyl alcohol mixture have undergone some sort of supra-molecular clustering and re-organization during potentization.
12. Dielectric dispersions of potentized drugs were experimentally proved to be different from that of control solutions, which indicated a molecular re-arrangement of medium during the process of potentization.
13. In vitro and in vivo experiments proved that potentized drugs can antidote the biological effects of theirs crude forms. This convinced me that the potentized drugs contained some active principles that can act upon biological molecules in a way just opposite to the action of crude drug molecules.
14. Study of supra-molecular structure of water, hydrogen bonding, hydration shells, clathrate compounds and supra-molecular clusters convinced me that water can exhibit some polymer-like properties at supra-molecular level.
15. Study of molecular properties of ethyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol/water mixtures convinced me that the hydrogen bond strength of water can be enhanced by the presence of ethyl alcohol molecules in an appropriate proportion. Further, the heavy alcohol molecules can restrict the free movements of water molecules, there by helping in the stabilization of hydration shells.
16. Study of the technology of ‘molecular imprinted polymers’ done by polymer scientists convinced me of the use of ‘molecular imprints’ as artificial binding sites for biological target molecules.
17. Study of works done by Benveniste regarding ‘memory of water’ indicated some structural changes happening in water during successive dilution and succession. Benveniste failed to comprehend the real mechanism involved in the phenomenon of ‘water memory’ he observed.
18. Some Russian scientists have earlier observed a phenomenon they called ‘shape memory property of water’, which they could not explain scientifically, since they also did not understand the real process of ‘molecular imprinting’ involved in it.
With references, such an article would be come a very powerful tool – especially against those that deny .
Kind regards
Soroush Ebrahimi RSHom
Foxgloves
The Ridge
LITTLE BADDOW
Essex
UK
CM3 4SA
Tel: +44 1245 328 167
————————————————————–
I have no idea how many people have already understood what I have proposed as the scientific explanation of homeopathy. Most probably, that would be very very small in numbers. I know, even most of those who support my concepts have no a clear idea about ‘molecular imprints therapeutics’, which is the basis of my scientific explanations of homeopathy. Regarding those who oppose and try to disprove me, I am sure, their vision of my concepts are miserably out of focus.
I am sorry to say that homeopathy community have so far failed to realize the historical implications of ‘molecular imprints therapeutics’ up on the future advancement of hmeopathy.
I am not much concerned about my personal disappointmemts over this non-recognitipn. But, I am very much worried about what homeopathy is losing due to this indifference towards what I am saying.
Anyhow, I shally carry on my work, and continue talking what I think is right. It is my mission.
—————————————————————————-
Once you understand the scientific explanation of homeopathy on the basis of ‘Molecular Imprints Therapeitics’ (MIT) concepts, you would realize that there are no more unanswerable questions or riddles remaining in homeopathy. Nothing remains scientifically unexplainable or unverifiable. Homeopaths will become more rational in their approaches and methods, and every body will start talking about homeopathy more logically and in same language. You will see everything fitting well to the most updated scientific knowledge system on one end, and the time-proven, truthful homeopathic experiences on the other end. You will realize that through MIT explanation, homeopathy has finally evolved into the status of a perfectly scientific medical system- an advanced branch of modern molecular medicine. Homeopaths are raised to the status of modern scientific physicians. Homeopaths now become more self confident, and can hold their heads high. They can now give fitting, scientific answers to the skeptics who constantly try to malign and defame homeopathy.
—————————————————————————-
Prof. Rati Ram Sharma, DSc, PhD, MD(MA), MSc, MAMS, FIAMP ,
[Professor & Head (retired), Deptt. of Biophysics (with Nuclear Medicine), Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India], commented on my page:
“Hearty congratulations Dr. K.C Chandran Nambiar, for a masterly presentation. Well done, keep it up.
I completely agree that in pharmaceutical chemistry, a “single” drug is a molecule or ion that can independently interact with biological molecules. Such a molecule or ion is the active “unit” of the drug substance. If a drug substance contains more than one such active units, capable of independent biological activity, it is a compound drug, not a “single” drug.
Let us join minds and head to suggest homoeopathic pharmaceutics as is available in Modern Scientific Medicine or Allopathy. In fact we have to have a group of like minded ascietists along with a pharmceutical company and a Homoeopathic Research Institute.
Respectful regards from,
Rati Ram Sharma,
DSc, PhD, MD(MA), MSc, MAMS, FIAMP
[Professor & Head (retired), Deptt. of Biophysics (with Nuclear Medicine), Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India; Present Res. address: H. No. 615, Sector 10, Panchkula-134113, Haryana, India; Phone: (0091-172)-2563949, Mobile: 9317655775; email: rrjss615@gmail.com, ; web site: http://physicsrevolution.com/]
View this comment on this page: http://totalcurehomeopathicprescriptions.webs.com/apps/blog/entries/show/5577783-are-those-single-drugs-really-single-as-we-so-far-believed–
THANK YOU, PROF. SHARMA. I CONSIDER YOUR NICE APPRECIATION AS A GREAT HONOR CONFERRED UP ON ME, AND A VALUABLE AUTHORITATIVE RECOGNITION OF MY SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS OF HOMEOPATHY. THANKS A LOT.
——————————————————————
Without a baseline knowledge of biochemistry- especially the mechanism of ‘ligand-target’ interactions of biological molecules, molecular basics of pathology, molecular inhibitions and dynamics of ‘cure’ as removal of molecular inhibitions, you cannot follow the scientific explanation of similia similibus curentur.
Without a scientific perspective of molecular composition of drug substances, andthe molecular mechanism by which the drug substances interact with biological organism to produce pathological inhibitions and symptoms, you cannot follow the scientific explanations of drug proving.
Without getting yourselves introduced to the latest information regarding supra-molecular properties of water and ethyl alcohol, hydrogen bonding, hydration shells, supra-molecular nano-structures, guest-host complexes, molecular imprinting in polymers and related subjects, you cannot follow the scientific explanations of potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’.
To make a ‘homeopathic’ prescription, we need ‘homeopathic’ symptoms. Nobody can make a homeopathic prescription using ‘diagnostic’ symptoms alone.
We should collect all physical generals, mentals and particular symptoms, with all associated ‘qualifications’ such as sensations, modalities and concomitants of each symptom, so that we get a ‘homeopathic’ symptom picture of the patient. Then, we can repertorize the case to find most appropriate drugs, which should be applied in potencies above 12c.
Please do not worry much over imaginary issues such as ‘single/multiple drugs, remedy kingdoms, drug families, embryonic layers, drug relationships, selection of potencies, repetitions, medicinal aggravations, suppressions, miasmatic analysis and such things. If you selected right drugs, and administered enough doses in potencies above 12c, your patient will be CURED.
————————————————————————————–
First time in the history of homeopathy, here is a rational, scientifically viable ‘working hypothesis’ proposed, that exactly bridges existing scientific knowledge system on one side, and our time-proven homeopathic experiences on the other side. I dedicate this hypothesis to our great master on his birthday. In this article, I am trying to ‘follow’ hahnemann in a creative way, by taking forward and advancing his theories to keep them abreast with latest scientific knowledge. I hope soul of our master would have been only happy to see this happening. Bless me, and show me light in my mission, MASTER!
—————————————————————-
To combat skeptic attacks effectively, we should make homeopathy scientific. For that, homeopaths should develop a scientific outlook first
—————————————————————-
If we had a scientifically viable and rational theory about homeopathy, no skeptics could have attacked us- deficiencies make us vulnerable
——————————————————————-
First you stop talking unscientific theories, and make homeopaths aware of scientific homeopathy- Only then you can combat skeptic attacks
——————————————————————-
Talking nonsense, irrational theories, our unscientific homeopaths do more harm to homeopathy than anti-homeopathic skeptics and scientists.
—————————————————————
What Homeopathy Awareness Campaign you are doing, under the leadership of these people promoting unscientific theories and occult practices?
———————————————————————
If anybody says “HOMOEOPATHY is the only system of medicine which is scientific”, that only means he knows nothing about other medical systems except homeopathy, and nothing about science except ‘homeopathic science’. Only one who is blinded by ‘dedication’ to homeopathy can make such a statement. Do not forget, science has advanced through 250 years after homeopathy came into existence. Do you think during this 250 years, science could not advance a single step from the level of science homeopathy represents?
By saying ‘homeopathy is the only science and hahnemann is the greatest scientist’, you are actually belittling homeopathy and hahnemann. Be bold enough to accept historical reality. Such statements do not by itself make you a better or ‘true’ homeopath.
—————————————————————-
FOUR FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED TO EXPLAIN HOMEOPATHY SCIENTIFICALLY:
Question 1: What is the real science behind ‘similia similibus curentur’?
In scientific terms, ‘similia similibus curentur’ means, “pathological molecular inhibitions underlying a disease and expressed through specific groups of subjective and objective symptoms can be removed by applying ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances, which in crude form could produce similar molecular inhibitions in healthy individuals, expressed through similar groups of symptoms”.
Question 2: What really happens at ‘material’ level during the process of potentisation?
During initial stages of drug potentization, crude drug substances undergoes division and ionization, therby individual constituent molecules getting freed from intermolecular bonds. During progressive dilution and succussion, these constituent drug molecules undergo a process of ‘molecular imprinting’. During this process, three dimensional ‘molecular imprints’ or hydrosomes of drug molecules are formed in the supra-molecular clusters of water/alcohol medium through stabilization of hydration shells. Due to serial dilution, drug molecules gradually get removed from medium, and by 12c it becomes free of drug molecules and only ‘molecular imprints’ remain.
Question 3: What are the active principles of potentized medicines?
‘Molecular imprints’ of constituent drug molecules are the active principles of potentized homeopathic drugs.
Question 4: What is the molecular mechanism by which these potentized medicines interact with biological molecules and relieve the pathological molecular inhibitions?
‘Diseases’ are errors in vital processes due to derangement of biochemical pathways in the organism, caused by inhibitions of biological molecules by binding of exogenous or endogenous pathogenic molecules. ‘Molecular imprints’ contained in potentized drugs selectively binds to the pathogenic molecules having complementary affinity due to the configurational similarity of pathogenic molecules and original drug molecules used for potentization. This configurational similarity is decided by ‘similarity of symptoms’. Pathogenic molecules are thus entrapped by the ‘molecular imprints’, thereby relieving the biological molecules from inhibitions. Disease is cured at molecular level itself.
——————————————————————–
If I were viewing homeopathy as a mere outsider with a scientific outlook, and If I had not the wonderful life-long first-hand opportunity of producing and experiencing thousands of undeniable cures with homeopathy, I would have been the greatest skeptic ever, hearing all these foolish, unscientific theories promoted by international ‘leaders’ of homeopathy, and witnessing all these occult practices done under the umbrella of homeopathy. That is why I always keep a soft corner for that section of skeptics who are scientific and rational in their approach.
——————————————————————-
Mark Twain said: “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to your level, and then beat you with experience!”
Had I got this great quote a bit earlier, I would have been saved from a lot of humiliation
Here after, I will try to stay away from arguing with stupid people. I will not say ‘you are stupid’, but would politely say ‘excuse me’, meaning the same
2. They will not understand what you are saying
3. They will not try to understand what you are saying
4. They never answer any of your straight questions
5. They will not discuss any specific points you raise.
6. They always make sweeping, generalized comments
7. They always pretend to know everything
8. They prefer personal abusing, not discussing points
9. They will talk things that are not part of discussions
10. They will blindly follow and praise some ‘idols’.
Diseases in a person at a given point of time are never ‘single’ at molecular level, but comprising of ‘multiple’ molecular inhibitions and molecular errors arising from diverse types of genetic and acquired factors.
Even those drug substance we call ‘single’ are not really ‘single’, but contains diverse types of chemical molecules molecules having entirely different chemical and medicinal properties.
Potentized drugs, which we consider ‘single’, are actually combinations of diverse types of independent ‘molecular imprints’ representing different types of constituent molecules of drug substance used for potentization.
When used as therapeutic agents, all those potentized drugs we consider ‘single’, really act as ‘combinations’ of independent ‘molecular imprints’ they contain, each individual ‘molecular imprint’ acting upon specific pathogenic molecules having complementary configurational affinity, thereby removing the ‘molecular inhibitions created by them.
Once you understand these fundamental scientific factors, you can realize the futility of worrying about ‘single’ disease, ‘single’ drug and ‘single’ dose!!
———————————————————————–
In pharmaceutical chemistry, a “single” drug is a molecule or ion or ‘functional group’ that can independently interact with biological molecules. Such a molecule or functional group is the active “unit” of the drug substance. If a drug substance contains more than one such active units, capable of independent biological activity, it is a compound drug, not a “single” drug.
It is totally unscientific to say that a drug substance that contain more than one type of biologically active molecules or functional groups is a “single” drug, only because it comes from a “single” natural source, or it is administered as a “single” drug. Question is, whether it acts on biological molecules as a “single” unit or “multiple” units. Hahnemann considered such “compound drugs” as “single” drugs, only because modern scientific knowledge regarding the exact molecular composition of drug substances, as well as molecular mechanism of pathology and therapeutics were not available to him at that period.
It shows the totally unscientific and irrational mindset of our “classical” homeopaths that still they do not accept or try to think over this very simple scientific fact, which even a high school student is aware of. The “single drug/multiple drug” dilemma really indicates the very poor level of our scientific understanding of biochemistry and molecular processes involved in the phenomena of disease and cure. This situation is really pathetic.
———————————————————————–
’Classical homeopaths’ argue that the drug substances with compound molecular compositions act as ‘single’ unit when used as ‘single’ drug and produce the ‘drug picture’. That argument simply reflects their utter ignorance of dynamics of biochemical interactions. It is the individual drug molecules that act upon specific biological molecules and produce molecular inhibtions by virtue of their specific ‘ligand-receptor’ affinity, not the whole ‘drug substance’. What we call the ‘drug picture’ is actually the sum total of various symptom groups representing diverse types of molecular inhibitions produced by diverse types of constituent molecules in diverse biochemical pathways.
I wonder why the professional and academic homeopathic community fail to realize the implications of MIT concepts, in spite of it being a most logical explanation, and my unrelenting efforts day in and day out to explain it from different angles. Is it the failure of the ways I am explaining it? It it the lack of scientific awareness of homeopaths? Is it a willful negligence? Is it prejudice? Why everybody feigning dumb and deaf towards MIT? I am totally confused.
I am dismayed to see even such baseless and irrelevant ideas as ‘nano-particle theory’ are fervently celebrated as great ‘research’ and ‘breakthroughs’, nobody ever bothering to ponder over how it explains similia theory of homeopathy. Only reason is, it was proposed by some research students related with the a premier scientific institution!
I know, many scientific-minded young homeopaths and students really read and try to follow what I say, while those seniors and influential sections totally ignore me. May be, the number of people who understand or accept MIT will be below hundred or so in this whole world. By this negative attitude, Homeopathy is actually losing a great opportunity to advance into a scientific medical system. I feel very sorry for that.
BECAUSE, ‘MIT’ IS THE ONLY SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION OF HOMEOPATHY- BEYOND ANY DOUBT!
——————————————————
I am not “trying to change fundamental laws of homeopathy”. I am only trying to “explain fundamental observations” of homeopathy in terms of modern science. If you take some time to go through my articles on this topic, you would realize that I have “explained” ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ “as per ‘already proved’ modern science”. I am not proposing any “new theory” or trying to “change fundamental laws”.
Please note, so far there is no any ‘fundamental laws’ in homeopathy which anybody proved “as per modern science”. Not even “explained” as per modern science”. Not even a scientifically viable working hypothesis that could be verified. But we teach, learn, practice and celebrate those unproved ‘theories’ without any hesitation. Nobody ever asked any master to “prove” his ‘theories scientifically before propagating them. Why this indolence?
——————————————————————-
Only ‘Molecular Imprints’ proposed by dialectical homeopathy explains the molecular dynamics of Similia Similibus Curentur in a way fitting to the ‘key-lock’ mechanism involved in ‘ligand-target’ interactions of biological molecular processes as well as pathological inhibitions. Not a single other hypothesis such as ‘nano-particle theory’, ‘resonance theory’ or anything else provides such a rational explanation, fitting homeopathy exactly well into the paradigms of modern science.
——————————————————
Are ‘higher potencies’ more powerful than 12c or 30c??
Since I consider molecular imprints as the active principles of potentized drugs, I do not subscribe to the idea that ‘higher’ potencies are more ‘powerful’, and I see no special benefit by using ‘higher’ potencies. I think 12c is enough for completing molecular imprinting and removal of all drug molecules from the medium.
——————————————————————–
What may be the possible mechanism of processes happening in ‘high’ levels of potentization??
What happens at molecular level during further potentization is still an open question for me. In supra-molecular chemistry, there is research going on regarding a phenomenon known as ‘induced molecular assembly’. That means, supra-molecular clusters acting as templates and inducing other molecules to form similar clusters. We know, ‘induced molecular assembly’ is involved in crystallization, clathrate formation etc. Even ‘prions’, which are misfolded proteins, multiply by ‘induced misfolding’. Antibodies, which are ‘molecular imprinted proteins’, also multiply by ‘inducing’ other globulin proteins to change configuration. Molecular imprints, which are supra-molecular clusters of water, may also multiply by the process of ‘induced molecular assembly’, where existing ‘molecular imprints’ may act as templates and induce formation of similar molecular imprints. It is only a possibility, which need in-depth study, which may provide us a rational way of resolving the riddle of high potencies. For the time being, I leave it as an open question.
Even though ‘molecular imprints’ may be formed in higher potencies through the process of ‘induced molecular assembling’, by no way that makes higher potencies more ‘powerful’ or ‘potent’. By 12c, all drug molecules will be removed from the medium, and medium gets saturated with ‘molecular imprints’. 12c will be ideal homeopathic. therapeutic agent. I see no special benefits by going ‘higher’. But, diluting medicines while administering by mixing with water may be beneficial, by increase in the the number of molecular imprints by induced assembling.
——————————————————————–
’OPEN’ does not mean ‘OOOOOOOPEN’ sir. Any speculations on this ‘open question’ should be based on scientific knowledge of supramolecular chemistry of water and molecular imprinting. Chances of ‘induced molecular assembly’ does not indicate any ‘enhanced therapeutics at higher potencies’. At 12c, itself, it will be saturated with molecular imprints. Even if ‘molecular imprints’ could be duplicated by ‘induced assembling’, that would not increase the concentration of molecular imprints in high potencies. More over, ‘imprints’ of imprints’ will be of lower quality and functional specificity. When imprints are imprinted hundreds of times, it will only reduce the quality. That is why I say 12c is ideal. Please do not ignore my first question also. Without answering that question, we cannot talk about ‘properties’ of higher potencies.
——————————————————————-
One senior homeopath friend just messaged me: “Your ‘alpha potency’ seems to be reasonable and i am sure it will work. It will be a great revolution in homeopathy if all homeopathic drugs are made alpha and marketed. But why are you acting so foolishly by publishing all your great ideas on facebook? You could have kept your ideas secret and patented alpha potency first, and you could have earned millions by licensing this process to leading homeopathic manufacturers. You spoiled a big opportunity. I feel sorry for you”.
Thanks dear friend, for your appreciation and advice, and for feeling sorry for my ‘foolishness’. I love to remain a ‘fool’ by sharing all my thoughts with the community.
——————————————————
‘Alpha Molecular Imprints’ scientifically resolves all confusions related with selection of potency in homeopathy
——————————————————
Alpha Molecular Imprints- 80 step dilutions in 1:1 ratio, with 300 succussions and 10 minuets rest/cooling in each step. Homeopathy is MIT
——————————————————
ALPHA MOLECULAR IMPRINTS is a perfect method of preparing molecular imprints of drug substances, on the basis of MIT
——————————————————
’Homeopaths Experimenting With Alpha Molecular Imprints’- A platform for experimenting with ALPHA MOLECULAR IMPRINTS.
——————————————————
MIT hypothesis is the only way to advance homeopathy forward into a system of rational and scientific medical practice. For those who believe ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’, it will be difficult to understand the meaning of this statement
——————————————————
Failing to realize the implications of MIT, homeopathy will be losing a great opportunity to become a medical science
——————————————————
Do not worry about selection of potency- use just above avogadro limit. Selection of right similimum is the real issue
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, and see potentized drugs as ‘molecular imprints’, selection of potency becomes a simple task
——————————————————
If biological target molecules are ‘locks’, their natural ligands are ‘keys’ and pathogenic molecules are ‘fake keys’, Molecular Imprints are ‘artificial key-holes’. This is the real biochemistry behind the therapeutic principle of homeopathy
——————————————————
Molecular imprints are artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules having configuration similar to drug molecules
——————————————————
Molecular imprints of similar functional groups can bind to any similar functional groups, thereby deactivating them
——————————————————
Molecules with similar functional group bind similar target molecules, produce similar inhibitions and similar symptoms
——————————————————
Similarity of symptoms indicates similarity of ‘functional groups’ of drug molecules and those of pathogenic molecules
——————————————————
Here I am trying to address the question ‘how homeopathy works’, since I consider it as the most vital point to be resolved first. To be recognized as a branch of medical science, I think we have to be successful in explaining the molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics in a way fitting to the existing modern scientific knowledge system, and proving our explanations according to scientific methods.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you experience the self-confidence it provides, the great transformation it brings to your outlook as a homeopath
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that your whole perceptions of homeopathy is undergoing a wonderful change, your approaches undergoing a change. You will realize that you are no more a ‘healer’ practicing a ‘belief healing system’ but a proud scientific medical professional, capable of understanding and scientifically explaining your tools and activities to anybody. Your language becomes scientific, your thoughts become rational and your explanations becomes logical and convincing. You will no more have to talk about miracles, wonders, riddles and mysteries of homeopathy. Experience this change yourselves!
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you would realize that any individual will have diverse types of molecular errors in him, caused by diverse types of endogenous or exogenous pathogenic molecules, and as such, diverse types of molecular imprints will be required to remove all these multitudes of molecular inhibitions to effect a complete cure. In most cases, all these diverse molecular imprints required for the patient will not be available in a ‘single’ drug, and hence, we will have to select more than one drug according to similarity of symptom groups, and apply them simultaneously, alternatingly or serially as decided by the physician. In my opinion, there is no harm even if they are applied together.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, all your confusions over ‘miasms’ could be resolved by perceiving miasms as chronic disease dispositions caused by the off-target actions of antibodies generated against exogenous or endogenous proteins including infectious agents. It would help you in scientifically understanding and treating various types of chronic diseases including auto immune diseases
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that concepts such as ‘internal essence of drug substance’, ‘dynamic drug energy’, ‘drug personality’ etc are all scientifically baseless, and that the medicinal property of drug substance is decided by the structure and properties of constituent molecules, where as the medicinal properties of potentized drugs are decided by the 3-d configuration of molecular imprints they contain.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that when applied as similimum, potentized drug does not act as a ‘whole’ unit, but it is the individual constituent ‘molecular imprints’ that independently bind to the pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity, remove pathological molecular inhibitions and cure the disease.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that during ‘drug proving’, drug substance does not act as a ‘whole’ unit, but it is the individual constituent drug molecules that independently act up on the biological molecules, cause molecular inhibitions and produce symptoms.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that since molecular imprints do not interact each other, and since they act as individual units when applied as therapeutic agents, there cannot by any harm even if we mix two or more potentized drugs together, or prescribe them simultaneously- they will work.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that even so-called ‘single drugs’ are not really single, but combinations of diverse types of independent ‘molecular imprints’, representing diverse types of drug molecules, acting as independent units upon pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity and removing molecular inhibitions
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drugs cannot interact each other, and as such, one cannot antidote another, or act inimical to each other.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you will realize that there is no chance of so-called aggravations, suppressions, provings or any other harm even if ‘wrong’ drug, ‘wrong’ potency or ‘untimely repetitions are used, if you are using only ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drugs.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you realize that selecting drug, potency, dose and follow up and getting cure are not a so much complex thing as we are made to believe.
——————————————————
Once you understand MIT, you realize no more ‘riddles and mysteries’ remain in homeopathy that could not be explained
——————————————————
Only MIT provides a sound explanation of homeopathy, fitting well to modern science and our every day experiences
——————————————————
If molecular imprinting is the real process involved in homeopathic potentization, continuing it after crossing Avogadro limit has no logic
——————————————————
Once avogadro limit is crossed, there will not be a single drug molecule remaining, and no further molecular imprinting takes place.
In decimal scale, this happens at 23x. In centecimal scale, the crossing point is 12c.
In ALPHA method proposed by MIT, avogadro limit is crossed by 80th dilution. Hence the process is stopped here.
Even though 23x and 12c are similar in dilutions to 80th step of ALPHA method, they will be much different in medicinal properties, due to difference in perfection of molecular imprinting. To prepare a 23x potency, drug and medium is added in 1:10 ratio, to prepare 12c it is added in 1:100 ratio, where as in ALPHA method, dilution is done in 1:1 ratio. To prepare 23x, dilution and succussion is done in 23 stages, to prepare 12c it is done in 12 stages, whereas to prepare an ALPHA potency it is diluted and succussed in 80 stages. ALPHA method allows drug molecules to interact with vehicle molecules in a far better way, thereby ensuring better hydration and molecular imprinting. By this way, each and every single constituent molecule of drug substance is subjected to perfect molecular imprinting by the time avogadro limit is crossed. That is why the ALPHA potence is expected to be far superior to 12c and 23x in therapeutic action.
——————————————————
’Experience’ has subjective as well as objective aspects. We interpret the ‘objective’ in the light of our ‘subjective’ beliefs and outlooks
Even though the ‘objective’ is true, your interpretation, understanding and explanation of that ‘objective truth’ may be wrong. That is why I say, for an ‘experience’ of a person to be dependable, the observer should have scientific understanding of the phenomena he is observing, along with a rational outlook and approach. Otherwise, your ‘experience’ will be just like the experience of those ‘five blind men who saw the elephant’!
When we apply homeopathy drugs, we dont know exactly what it is, how it acts. When we ‘experience’ some new symptoms appearing after a ‘dose’, we come to the conclusion that it was caused by that ‘dose’. That is a ‘blind’ interpretation based on our belief that potentized drugs can cause that. If anybody suddenly dies immediately after that single dose, we infer that the death was caused by that dose. If the patient experience a skin eruption after that dose, we infer that erruption is an indication of disease getting driven outwards by our single dose. All these are examples where experiences are interpreted according to our beliefs and subjective outlooks. When I take my car out of garage in morning, a black cat jumped into the front. On the road during that journey, I had a severe accident. If I am a believer in omens, I would interpret that the accident was caused by that jumping of black cat to my way during morning.
Most homeopaths interpret their daily experiences in this way, on the basis of their beliefs.
——————————————————
The word ‘drug potency’ and ‘drug potentization’ is associated with the concept of ‘dynamic drug energy’. As per this view, every drug substance has its ‘inherent qualities’, which exist as specific ‘energy’ of dynamic in form, and act up on the ‘vital force’ of organism by a dynamic way. This dynamic drug energy can exist free from ‘material drug, substance and transferred into rectified spirit or sugar of milk through a process called ‘potentization’. By this process, the ‘dynamic drug energy’ gettin freed from the drug substance moves to the potentizing medium and ‘energizes’ it. By the process of serial dilution and succussion, this dynamic energy could be ‘raised’ to new energy levels, and as such, it is believed that ‘higher’ dilutions are more ‘potentized’ and more powerful. This ‘dynamic drug energy’ carried by the ‘potentized drugs’ act upon the vital force and induces a ‘healing process’.
According to the MIT concept I propose, I am explaining the process involved in potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’. It is not the ‘dynamic drug energy’ that is transferred into the medium during so-called process of potentization, but the three dimensional configuration of constituent drug molecules getting imprinted into the supra-molecular matrix of potentizing medium in the form of nanocavities, through a process of forming hydration shells. These nanocavities act as artificial binding sites or artificial ‘key holes’ for pathogenic molecules having configurational similarity to imprinted molecules. This concept scientifically explains the molecular dynamics of homeopathic therapeutics involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ in a way fitting to the concepts of modern biochemistry, molecular pathology and therapeutics.
Obviously, the term ‘potentization’ reflects the vitalistic philosophy behind it. It would be ideal to use the term ‘molecular imprinting’ to explain the exact process in scientific terms.
Once you understand and accept ‘molecular imprinting’ as the real process involved in potentization, and perceive ‘potentized’ drugs in terms of constituent molecular imprints, all confusions regarding selection of potencies will be scientifically resolved.
——————————————————
Organon is a great book on medicine- not bible. Hahnemann is not prophet or god. Any great book contains mistakes also
You are wrong if you say everything hahnemann said was wrong. You are wrong if you say everything hahnemann said was ‘ultimate truth’.
——————————————————
We should understand, learn and practice homeopathy in a way Hahnemann would have done it if he happened to live today
——————————————————
Had hahnemann lived 200 years later, he would not have written organon like this, or given us a homeopathy
——————————————————
Asking intelligent questions is a creative work, more creative than even finding answers. Answers are sought only when hard questions are asked. I am always indebted to those young friends on facebook who asked hard questions which ignited my grey matter, and led me into new ideas. Thanks, friends
——————————————————
Conducting or sponsoring seminars, and selling branded ‘methods and principles’ is a lucrative business in homeopathy
Scaring young homeopaths about ‘dangers of wrong prescriptions’ is a tactics to draw them to ‘seminars’, hoping to learn to prescribe right
If young homeopaths realize the truth that practicing homeopathy is very simple task, men of seminar business will have to shut down their shops.
By well-orchestrated campaigns about possibitity of ‘ dangers’ of suppressions, aggravations, provings, genetic errors and even death, that may be caused by ‘wrong’ selection of drugs, ‘unnecessary’ repetitions, ‘inappropriate’ potencies, and such things, young homeopaths get scared to prescribe even a single dose. Then they will throng into the seminar halls of ‘masters’, who promise them to teach wonderful methods of ‘curing’- of course, big money is involved in this game plan.
——————————————————
How can you say ‘how homeopathy works’, without knowing the process involved in potentization, and the active principle of potentized drugs?
How can you decide the ‘dose’ of a drug substance, without any idea of its active principles, and the molecular mechanism of their actions up on the organism?
How can you be sure the medicine you use as Nux Vomica is genuine Nux vomica? How can you be sure the drug you use as CM is genuinely CM? How can you be sure the manufacturer or pharmacist did not commit any error or malpractice at any of the stages before it reached your hands?
——————————————————
Long ‘experience’ does no make one a better or more knowledgeable homeopath, in the absence of scientific knowledge and rational outlook.
If you have no essential background knowledge of phenomena behind your experience, or don’t know how to rationally interpret your experiences, your ‘long experience’ will really be a disaster to the system, to the community, and to yourselves.
——————————————————
Without updating their background scientific knowledge systematically, homeopaths cannot follow what I say about advancement of homeopathy
——————————————————
Many homeopaths confuse ‘modern science’ and ‘modern medicine’. When I talk about modern science, they accuse me of ‘supporting allopathy’!
——————————————————
To honor our master, let us take homeopathy 200+ years forward through history of human knowledge and make it compatible with modern science
——————————————————
So-called ‘prominent’ homeopaths talking unscientific theories about homeopathy do more harm to this system than anti-homeopathic skeptics.
——————————————————
Exactly, I am not trying to find a new potency. I am searching for ways to get molecular imprinting done more perfectly and accurately, on the basis of MIT concepts. Better to say, I am trying to find a way of molecular imprinting, more perfect and scientific than ‘potentization’.Exactly, I am not trying to find a new potency. I am searching for ways to get molecular imprinting done more perfectly and accurately, on the basis of MIT concepts. Better to say, I am trying to find a way of molecular imprinting, more perfect and scientific than ‘potentization’.
I am not introducing a new ‘potency scale’. In ALPHA method, there only one end product, not a series of potencies.
In ALPHA method, the procedure is stopped once avogadro limit is crossed. By that time, all constituent molecules will be removed, after imprinting into the medium as supramolecular clusters. We do not subscribe to the idea of ‘potency increasing’ by going to higher dilutions, which is an idea related with ‘dynamic energy’ concept.
In ALPHA method, the procedure is stopped once avogadro limit is crossed. By that time, all constituent molecules will be removed, after imprinting into the medium as supramolecular clusters. We do not subscribe to the idea of ‘potency increasing’ by going to higher dilutions, which is an idea related with ‘dynamic energy’ concept.
——————————————————
Among modern homeopaths, only Vithoulkas talks reasonably and logically- though I disagree with him on many points, he is really a relief.
I shall mention some points one by one:
1. Vithoulkas believes drug proving can be done using high potencies. I do not agree. I think only ‘molecular forms’ can interact with biological molecules and produce symptoms. High potencies contain molecular imprints only, which can act up on only pathogenic molecules
2. Vithoulkas says:
The mechanism of action of both the “placebo effect” and the “homeopathic similimum” are the same.
The placebo effect can be initiated by the autosuggestion of the patient which forces a mobilization of the defense mechanism through strong feelings of faith. That is how all spiritual healing, radionics, yoga, meditation and all the other fringe therapies are working.
In homeopathy the cure takes place from a similar mobilization of the defense mechanism through the correct remedy, the similimum. I will say it more grossly in order to be understood more clearly. If the initial reaction of a defense mechanism mobilization is the discharge of serotonin in the blood then this reaction is similar in both cases.
I DO NOT AGREE WITH VITHOULKAS ON THIS POINT ALSO
According to vithoulkas, “In homeopathy the cure takes place from a similar mobilization of the defense mechanism through the correct remedy, the similimum”.
In my view, molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics is not “mobilization of defense mechanism”, but removal of pathological inhibitions by the action of molecular imprints in our drugs up on pathogenic molecules.
——————————————————
Predictive homeopaths promote totally unscientific theory and practice in homeopathy, with mask of scientific verbosity
Vijaykar totally failed to comprehend the biochemistry involved in homeopathic therapeutics, and hence could not interpret the ‘directions of disease and cure’ in relation with the interactions of biochemical pathways. In the absence of essential scientific knowledge, he only tried to make his theories appear ‘scientific’ by utilizing some terms from embryology and genetics. Playing with scientific vocabulary, he was successful in marketing his theories well among the ‘science-starved’ sections of homeopathic community.
——————————————————
Many homeopaths believe clinical diagnosis is of no use in practice, except for ‘patient satisfaction’ or ‘prognosis’.
I think we should perceive the information provided by modern technological advancements and laboratory investigations as part of collecting ‘objective’ symptoms, and learn to utilize them in the search for similimum.
I hope future drug proving protocols will incorporate modern technology, and collect these ‘enhanced observations’ also and add them to future materia medica compilations. Then, homeopathy will be in a position to utilize these information also in finding appropriate similimum
——————————————————
Most homeopaths fail to differentiate ‘Before-After’ and ‘Cause-Effect’ Relationships. They reach queer conclusions
Some homeopaths have a wonderfully perverted sense of ‘Cause-Effect’ relationship. They consider every ‘Before-After’ chronological relationship as cause and effect, and jump into queer conclusions. Once they give a ‘single’ dose of drug to the patient, everything that ‘follows’ that act will be attributed as the ‘miraculos effect’ of their ‘single dose’. Many ‘cures’, many ‘aggravations’, many ‘side effects’ are actually the product of this perverted understanding of ’cause and effect’.
——————————————————
ALPHA potency will provide a most perfect method of preparing molecular imprints of drug substances, on the basis of MIT concepts
It is prepared by potentizing by adding mother tincture of drug substance to equal quantity of rectified spirit, and serially diluting it in 1:1 ratio up to 80 steps, so as to cross the avogadro limit. During each step, 300 succussions are given at a rate of 1 succussion per second (5 minutes). During each step, the solution is given 10 minutes before succussion. That means, each step takes 15 minutes. Solution gets total 24000 succussion during 80 dilution steps.During succussion, bottles should not be filled more than half, to enable free movement of contents while shaking. If you are using 50 ml bottle, use only 10ml drug and 10ml diluent. If 100ml bottle is used, you can add 20ml drug and 20ml diluent. Whole process will take 20 working hours to get the finished product.
By this process, drug molecules get maximum exposure and interaction with vehicle molecules, enabling perfect molecular imprinting of all individual constituent molecules. By 80th step, all drug molecules will be removed from the medium, and only the molecular imprints representing diverse types of constituent molecules remain. Molecular imprints will be more saturated, perfect and stable than those we get from conventional ways of potentization. If used as similimum, this preparation will be acting as most effective therapeutic agent.
Since we use 1:1 dilution ratio, this product may be called ALPHA potency, to differentiate from other potency scales. May be labelled as Nux Vomica α. A drug will have only a ‘single’ potency in this scheme. If we use ALPHA potency, all confusions associated with selection of potencies will be resolved once and for all.
I would request all my scientific-minded friends to make ALPHA potencies of one or two drugs commonly used, and verify their effectiveness. I hope, this may lead to a great revolution in homeopathy. Be a part of history by participating this experiment.
If anybody intend to work upon this, I would like to request them to keep all unused samples at least above 50th or 60th dilution step. They should be kept in separate bottles with dilution numbers, so that we can use the as back potencies in future, or share with our friends. That would save much labor later. All of us can mutually share such back potencies.
——————————————————
Homeopathic potencies are usually made using rectified spirit as the vehicle. But I am a bit concerned about the accuracy of this practice, since the protein molecules contained in the drugs would be denatured by the action of alcohol even before actual potentization happens. That means, the product we get will not be exact potencies of original drug substance used for drug proving, but those of denatured molecules. This possibility will have serious implications on the therapeutic properties of such potentized drugs when applied on the basis of similia principle.
Now we have to learn something about protein structures and phenomenon of ‘denaturation’.
Proteins are amino acid polymers. A protein is created by ribosomes that “read” RNA that is encoded by codons in the gene and assemble the requisite amino acid combination from the genetic instruction, in a process known as translation. The newly created protein strand then undergoes posttranslational modification, in which additional atoms or molecules are added, for example copper, zinc, or iron. Once this post-translational modification process has been completed, the protein begins to fold (sometimes spontaneously and sometimes with enzymatic assistance), curling up on itself so that hydrophobic elements of the protein are buried deep inside the structure and hydrophilic elements end up on the outside. The final shape of a protein determines how it interacts with its environment. The biological properties of proteins are due to their complex tertiary structure and three dimensional folding.
When a protein is denatured, the secondary and tertiary structures are altered but the peptide bonds of the primary structure between the amino acids are left intact. Since all structural levels of the protein determines its function, the protein can no longer perform its function once it has been denatured. This is in contrast to intrinsically unstructured proteins, which are unfolded in their native state, but still functionally active.
Denatured proteins can exhibit a wide range of characteristics, from loss of solubility to communal aggregation. Communal aggregation is the phenomenon of aggregation of the hydrophobic proteins to come closer and form the bonding between them, so as to reduce the total area exposed to water.
Ethyl alcohol, used as part of medium for potentization, is a very powerful ‘denaturing agent’ for protein molecules. Hence, protein molecules contained in the snake venoms and other products of biological origin undergo a process of ‘denaturation’ when added to alcohol-water mixture for potentization. It is these ‘denatured’ protein molecules that undergo ‘molecular imprinting’ during potentization.
This is applicable to all drug substances of protein nature, which would undergo denaturation at the initial stages of potentization, when added to water-ethyl alcohol medium. We have to remember this fact when discussing potentized drugs containing enzymes and other complex protein molecules.
This understanding also prompts us to search for other potential imprinting media that do not make molecular changes in proteins.
We have to search for an ideal potentizing medium for biological drugs of protein nature- a medium that do not contain denaturing agents such as alcohol
I am thinking about water-glucose mixture for that purpose
Potentizing medium should not chemically interact with drug molecules, and they should not be harmful to human organism
If pure water is used, the hydrogen bonding will be very temporary, and molecular imprints will not stand long. It will get dissociated. Presence of comparatively heavier molecules that can be part of supra-molecular networks of water is essential to make stable hydrogen bonding and molecular imprints.
——————————————————
Which is the optimum potency? As per MIT, just above Avogadro limit. Not lower, not higher. That is 23x or 12c among now available
——————————————————
Don’t say homeopathy uses ‘ultra-small’ doses of ‘drugs’. The ‘doses’ are drugless. Only ‘Molecular Imprints’ of drugs
——————————————————
Homeopathy identifies exact molecular inhibitions in the organism and selects remedial agents by observing and matching ‘totality of mental and physical symptoms’ of the patient. There is nothing more reliable than ‘symptoms’ to truthfully represent the specific molecular dynamics involved in pathology at molecular level. Since modern science of ‘molecular pathology’ is still in its infantile stage, this ‘symptom-based’ approach of homeopathy is far superior to the ‘biochemistry-based’ and ‘pathology-based’ approach of modern medicine, especially in combating nonspecific chronic constitutional ailments and complex life-style diseases.
——————————————————
Modern Medicine identifies therapeutic targets by studying biochemistry. Homeopathy does it by observing symptoms
——————————————————
Modern Medicine uses ‘drug molecules’. Homeopathy uses ‘molecular Imprints’ of drug molecules. That is the difference
——————————————————
Once modern science advances to realize Molecular Imprinted Drug Designing in Water, homeopathy will be recognized
——————————————————
Molecular Imprinted Drugs Will Provide A Converging Point For Homeopathy And Mode Medicine
——————————————————
I am a dialectical skeptic. It is a creative approach to knowledge. Different from dogmatic, negative skepticism.
——————————————————
A skeptic who once tried homeopathy for any ailments on himself will not say it is ‘placebo effect or observer bias’.
——————————————————
You can never expect a ‘generalized experimental proof’ for theory of similimum. Similimum is always ‘individualized’.
——————————————————
Allopathy invents new drugs and discards old ones. Homeopathy never deletes a drug from is materia medica. Know why?
Basically, it shows the soundness of therapeutic principle of homeopathy. Modern medicine has no such a principle.
”Soundness of therapeutic principle of homeopathy” does not by itself mean it is ‘scientific’. It only means ‘it works’. In order to claim to be scientific, we should explain it scientifically, and prove the explanations using scientific methods. Until doing that, homeopathy is not ‘scientific’, but ‘it works’. we should accept the reality.
——————————————————
Please try to understand the difference between ‘observational’ parts and ‘theoretical’ parts of homeopathy. Observational parts are objective and correct, but theoretical explanatory parts are totally unscientific. That is the inherent contradiction of homeopathy.
o be a ‘fact’, and to ‘prove’ scientifically are different. Science is involved with explaining and proving of facts, which exist here. Gravitation exists here, even if we dont explain it. Electricity is a fact, even if we explain it or not. Atoms and subatomic particles exist as a ‘fact’, irrespective of our explanations. Same with the observational part of homeopathy. It is a ‘fact’, whether you explain it or not
You are saying: ” since homeopathy is a fact, we need not bother to explain it and prove our explanations”. Your statement does not agree with the real spirit of science. Every facts should be explained and proved. Then only our knowledge becomes scientific.
’Apple falls to ground’. That is a fact everybody observed even before newton. He explained it as ‘gravitation’, and proved his theories through scientific experiments. That is why newton is a scientist. Al those who knew the fact of ‘falling apple’ did not become scientists. Hope the difference is evident
——————————————————
Homeopaths should discard dogmatism, and be dialectical in approach. Science is self-critical and self-correcting.
——————————————————
’Does homeopathy work’ is an irrelevant question- IT DOES. The real question is how it works. It remains to be answered
——————————————————
For skeptics, anything ‘unexplained’ is ‘non-existent’. Many things they accept now, were ‘unexplained’ in yesterdays
——————————————————
I am not less scientific than my skeptic friends. I know homeopathy as well, which they do not. That is the difference
——————————————————
I feel sympathy for those close-minded skeptics declaring ‘homeopathy is placebo’. Poor men- failing to realize truth
——————————————————
Don’t confuse scientific concept of Molecular Imprinting in Water with the pseudo-scientific theory of Water Memory
——————————————————
Homeopathy is molecular medicine- Potentization is ‘drug designing’ through molecular imprinting in water
——————————————————
By explaining ‘every thing’, Hahenemann preempted the scope for any scientific intervention in his theories later
——————————————————
Hahnemann could have left many questions about homeopathy unanswered, instead of providing unscientific answers.
——————————————————
Hahnemann did the greatest harm to homeopathy by trying to explain things that could not be explained during his time.
——————————————————
By explaining ‘every thing’, Hahenemann preempted the scope for any scientific intervention in his theories later
——————————————————
Hahnemann could have left many questions about homeopathy unanswered, instead of providing unscientific answers.
——————————————————
Hahnemann did the greatest harm to homeopathy by trying to explain things that could not be explained during his time.
——————————————————
I am with homeopathy for last 40 years. I am 100% convinced it works! It is not placebo or ‘belief’!
——————————————————
Lack of explanations or wrong explanations regarding how homeopathy works do not prove it does not work.
——————————————————
Homeopathy can advance only by fighting pseudo-scientific homeopaths as well as negative-mined skeptics.
——————————————————
Pseudo-scientific ‘energy medicine’ homeopaths provide arms and ammunition for anti-homeopathic skeptics
If we discard unscientific speculative parts of homeopathy and practice homeopathy as a scientific medicine, and ‘energy medicine homeopaths’ stop spinning fanciful nonsense theories about homeopathy, anti-homeopathic skeptics will get disarmed and become jobless.
——————————————————
We have to differentiate between objective observational part of homeopathy from its speculative part.
Even if the speculative theoretical parts are unscientific and irrational, that does not necessarily mean the objective observational parts of homeopathy are non-existent or unreal. That only means, we have to explain the whole things in a different way.
Similia Similibus Curentur and Potentization belong to objective observational parts of homeopathy, which are real natural phenomena related with the process of cure. We have to preserve them. This issue is related with the question ‘does homeopathy work’?
Vital force theory, dynamic drug energy and such things belong to speculative theoretical parts of homeopathy, which are unscientific, and we have to discard them. This issue is related with the question ‘how homeopathy works’?
We should explain the objective observational parts of homeopathy in a way fitting to scientific knowledge system, and prove it accordingly.
By scientific homeopathy, I mean this task.
——————————————————
Exactly, homeopathy is based on two fundamental observations made by hahnemann regarding the process of cure-
1. Similia Similibus Curentur: Hahnemann observed through his experiments that diseases could be cured by extremely diluted forms of drug substances, which could produce symptoms similar to disease when applied in large doses in healthy individuals.
2. Potentization: Hahnemann developed a special process of preparing drugs by serial dilution and shaking, and observed that such expremely diluted drugs could act as therapeutic agents when applied according to similia similibus curentur
Due to the limitations imposed by the infantile stage of scientific knowledge available to him during that period, hahnemann could not formulate a viable hypothesis to explain his observation in a way fitting to the scientific knowledge system then existed. In fact, science was not properly equipped to provide a reasonable explanation for the phenomena hahnemann observed.
Instead of leaving his observations unexplained as it should have been truthfully done, hahnemann resorted to building up of a system of philosophical speculations and imaginative theorizations to explain them. May be since he found that the contemporary scientific paradigms were not sufficient for his purpose, he tried to develop a speculative philosophical system utilizing concepts such as ‘vital force’, ‘dynamic energy’ being part of spiritualistic philosophy existed then.
Obviously, this speculative part of homeopathy does not agree with scientific knowledge or its methods. As such, scientific community adopted a skeptical approach towards homeopathy. They totally denied the existence of even the fundamental observations of hahnemaan, whereas it would have been judicious to deny the theoretical explanations of homeopathy and asking for a more viable explanation for the phenomena hahnemann observed.
From a rational perspective, we have to logically differentiate between observational part of homeopathy from its speculative part. Observational part is objective experience, which forms the basis of practical application of similia similibus curentur and potentization. They should not be denied on the reason that hahnemann’s theoretical explanations contradict scientific knowledge.
Skeptical scientists deny homeopathy works on the reason that nobody could explain how homeopathy works. They should understand, both issues should be considered as different questions. The issue of efficacy of homeopathy should not be confused with the lack of explanations or wrong explanations regarding how homeopathy works.
Pseudoscientific homeopathic theoreticians, starting from hahnemann himself have contributed a lot in alienating homeopathy from scientific community, through their utter nonsense vitalistic and energy medicine theories that never agree with scientific knowledge system or scientific methods.
——————————————————
According to me, inorder to promote scientific homeopathy, we have to address fllowing preliminary tasks:
1. Convince the scientific community that homeopathy works, through demonstrations and scientifically acceptable clinical studies.
2. Convince them the importance of differentiating objective observational part of homeopathy from the unscientific theoretical or explanatory part of homeopathy.
3. Propose a scientifically viable working hypothesis regarding how homeopathy works, in a way fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system.
4. Prove the propositions of this hypothesis using scientific methods, in a way undisputable to the scientific community.
While addressing this four-pointed fundamental tasks, scientific homeopathy will have to relentlessly fight against the negative-minded skeptics as well as pseudo-scientific energy medicine theoreticians of homeopathy.
We have to consistently tell the world, real homeopathy is entirely different from those nonsense the pseudoscientific homeopathic theoreticians preach and practice.
We have to understand and tell the homeopathic community that the negative-minded anti-homeopathic skeptics are entirely different from real scientific community.
Dialogue has to be between scientific homeopathy and scientific community
——————————————————
Scientific Homeopathy: Fight ‘Skeptics’ As Well As ‘Energy Medicine Homeopaths’ « Dialectical Homeopathy
——————————————————
What is the difference between ‘cure’ and ‘heal’?
Physicians try to ‘cure’ with scientific methods. They constantly study and update the tools and science of disease and cure. They are called ‘physicians’. Quacks ‘heal’ with pseudo-scientific methods known as ‘healing arts’. They hide their ignorance behind ‘holistic’ claims. They call themselves ‘healers’. That much difference!
Hahnemann was discussing ‘healing arts’ in organon. That is why he discussed even mesmerism there. For hahnemann, homeopathy was one form of healing arts. We have t make it a ‘science of cure’.
——————————————————
Potentized homeo medicines cannot act as pathological agents. They cannot interact with genetic material.
Possibilities of potentized homeopathic medicines interacting with genetic substance in the organism is a subject of much concern, speculations and controversy among homeopaths. Such controversies arise from the lack of sufficient understanding regarding the active principles contained in potentized medicines, and their exact mechanism of action in the living system.
With our new scientific understanding of potentization as a process of molecular imprinting, we are now in a better position to answer these questions satisfactorily. Since, molecular imprints contained in the potentized homeopathic preparations cannot successfully compete with natural ligands in binding with their target molecules, we need not be concerned about the possibility of potentized homeopatic medicines dangerously interacting with genetic material in any way.
Molecular imprints contained in the potentized homeopathic preparations bind to ligands or biological molecules merely due to their complementary cofigurations without any charge affinity, whereas natural ligands bind to their biological target molecules in capacity of their appropriate spacial configurations as well as charge affinities. So, the bindings of molecular imprints with biological molecules or their ligands will be very temporary and cannot stay long. Such bindings of molecular imprints cannot replace the natural ligand-target interactions happening as part of vital processes. Molecular imprints can not compete with natural ligands in binding to their natural biological targets.
Hence it is obvious that potentized homeopathic preparations cannot interfere in biological ‘ligand-target’ processes such as ‘substrate-enzyme’, ‘antigens-antibodies’, ‘signal-receptor’ etc. As such, chances of potentized homeopathic medicines acting as pathological agents are very rare even if used indiscriminately.
Molecular imprints can interfere only in interactions between pathogenic molecules and biological molecules, as well as off-target bindings of ligands with biological molecules, where only configurational affinity is involved. Obviously, molecular imprints can act upon only the molecular blocks created by exogenous or endogenous foreign pathological molecules.
At the same time, these molecular imprints can effectively compete with the pathogenic actions of deformed proteins that may result from genetic errors, thereby preventing them from creating pathological molecular blocks at various targets. As such, homeopathic medicines can play a great role even in the treatment of certain diseases of genetic origin, at least as palliatives.
More over, potentized homeopathic medicines can safeguard genetic material from dangerous mutations that may be caused the by inhibitory actions of endogenous or exogenous pathogenicl agents such as toxic drugs, heavy metals, super-oxides etc., on enzymes related with nucleic acid synthesis and genetic expressions.
——————————————————
Teachers and seniors make young homeopaths believe that administration of incorrect remedies especially in high potencies would do grave harm to the patients, and may cause even death. It is warned that our drugs should be handled with great care, and many young homeopaths are scared to prescribe, lest it may be a wrong prescription. If potentized drugs were dangerous, homeopaths would have been the greatest criminals in human history, each of us would have so far killed many innocent people! We would have already harmed a big section of human race by the time being through our wrong prescriptions. Even you and me make many many wrong prescriptions than right prescriptions everyday, believing that we are making correct prescriptions. Can anybody deny it with a sincere heart? Living proofs of safety of homeopathic medicines are the people we treated with wrong prescriptions and stay undamaged!
————————————————————————————————
For the last five years, I use only 30c. If a drug does not act as i expected, and i am sure my selection was right, I would switch on to another sample from another source- same drug, same potency. It will act. Some times I collect different samples of same drug same potency and mix them together. I have seen it giving better results
That is why I said, confusions regarding potency would be resolved only when we perceive potentization in terms of molecular imprinting. Any potency above 12c contains only molecular imprints
The term potency is irrelevant from MIT view. Only molecular forms and molecular imprint forms of drugs. bepow 12c and above 12c.
Quality of drugs may differ from sample to sample, depending upon source of drug substance, mwethod of potentization, genuineness of potentization, difference in keeping and exposure etc
——————————————————————————————–
Similia Similibus Curentur and potentization are two fundamental objective OBSERVATIONS the great genius of hahnemann made regarding the phenomenon of CURE, through his studies and experiments. But he explained these right observations using unscientific speculations and theorizations, due to the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him.
This underlies the fundamental internal conflict of homeopathy- conflict between correct observations and their wrong explanations. I am trying to resolve this inherent conflict, by explaining homeopathy in scientific terms.
If you understand homeopathy with a scientific perspective, it is great science. If you approach it with an unscientific mind set, you will talk nonsense theories about it.Similia Similibus Curentur and potentization are two fundamental objective OBSERVATIONS the great genius of hahnemann made regarding the phenomenon of CURE, through his studies and experiments. But he explained these right observations using unscientific speculations and theorizations, due to the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him.
This underlies the fundamental internal conflict of homeopathy- conflict between correct observations and their wrong explanations. I am trying to resolve this inherent conflict, by explaining homeopathy in scientific terms.
If you understand homeopathy with a scientific perspective, it is great science. If you approach it with an unscientific mind set, you will talk nonsense theories about it.
———————————————————————————————
Modern medicine uses drug molecules, whereas Homeopathy uses molecular imprints- that is the difference.
———————————————————————————————-
Struggling for existence and recognition for more than 200 years as an independent therapeutic system totally alienated from mainstream scientific knowledge, I think time is now ripe for homeopathy to converges into modern molecular medicine, as an advanced branch of medical science. It would be more accurate to say modern science is now ripe and equipped to accept homeopathy into the mainstream.
The great divide between ‘modern medicine’ and ‘homeopathy’ could now be effectively bridged through my scientific explanation of potentization and similia similibus curentur on the basis of molecular imprinting. If you understand the process of molecular imprinting involved in potentization, and the exact molecular dynamics of ‘similia similibus curentur’, you would realize that no more riddles remaiin in homeopathy.
Once the scientific community and people belonging to modern medicine realize the enormous implications of molecular imprinting as a most appropriate way of target-specific drug designing, homeopathy will be accepted and enthroned on its rightful status of an advanced discipline of modern molecular medicine.
————————————————————————————————-
Most of our counter parts in western homeopathic community, especially USA, do not understand or bother to understand the language of science. They are much comfortable by placing homeopathy under the umbrella of CAM. They want homeopathy to be practiced as ‘energy medicine’ and ‘spiritual medicine’. They want to alienate themselves from modern science, and love to theorize about ‘unscientificness’ and ‘limitations’ of modern science. They are more inclined towards spiritualism than science. Ultimate result is, all of them engage in all sorts of unscientific practices along with homeopathy, which discredits homeopathy as a whole before the scientific-minded people
Most wonderful thing is, they cannot understand the difference between ‘modern science’ and ‘modern medicine’. When I talk about ‘modern science’, they will take it as ‘modern medicine’, and accuse me as a supporter of modern medicine.
——————————————————————————————-
A lot of great researches are going on in various laboratories around the world regarding the role of ‘acetylation’ and deacetylation’ in vital molecular processes such as energy metabolism and genetic transcription.
“In organic chemistry, acetyl is a FUNCTIONAL GROUP, with chemical formula COCH3. The acetyl group contains a methyl group single-bonded to a carbonyl. The carbonyl center of an acyl radical has one nonbonded electron with which it forms a chemical bond to the remainder R of the molecule. The acetyl moiety is a component of many organic compounds, including the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, acetyl-CoA, acetylcysteine, and the analgesics acetaminophen and acetylsalicylic acid (better known as aspirin).
The introduction of an acetyl group into a molecule is called acetylation. In biological organisms, acetyl groups are commonly transferred from acetyl-CoA to coenzyme A (CoA). Acetyl-CoA is an intermediate both in the biological synthesis and in the breakdown of many organic molecules.
Histones and other proteins are often modified by acetylation. For example, on the DNA level, histone acetylation by acetyltransferases (HATs) causes an expansion of chromatin architecture, allowing for genetic transcription to occur. However, removal of the acetyl group by histone deacetylases (HDACs) condenses DNA structure, thereby preventing transcription. In addition to HDACs, Methyl group additions are able to bind DNA resulting in DNA methylation, and this is another common way to block DNA acetylation and inhibit gene transcription.
Acetylated organic molecules exhibit increased ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. Acetylation helps a given drug reach the brain more quickly, making the drug’s effects more intense and increasing the effectiveness of a given dose. The acetyl group in acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) enhances its effectiveness relative to the natural anti-inflammatant salicylic acid. In similar manner, acetylation converts the natural painkiller morphine into the far more potent heroin (diacetylmorphine).”
Various environmental chemicals and pharmaceutical drugs can interfere in ‘acetylatio-deacetylation’ processes, by blocking concerned enzymes, resulting in cancers and certain neurological complaints.
In my opinion, potentized drugs containing ‘molecular imprints’ of acetyl functional groups can rectify such molecular errors by binding and deactivating their functional groups. Special merit of molecular imprints is that they cannot interfere in normal biochemical interactions in the organisminvolving acetyl groups.
ASPIRIN, or acetyl salicylic acid has acetyl functional groups. As such, potentized ASPIRIN should be capable of curing many diseases-including cancers and alzheimers. We should wotk up on that lines and conduct studies to verify my point.
——————————————————
US may be a model for world on many things. But for homeopathy, sorry to say, it is the worst model. Pardon me for telling this hard truth.
Michael Law said: “Chandran, Just so you know. In the US for many years there was only one college a person could go to to become a homeopathic doctor. That was the Naturopathic college in Washington? or Oregon!. Any way they graduated Naturapathic doctors,. I thought of going there, but had no interest in anything but homeopathy. The school seemed to have a lot of herbalism. and other things. IMHO The best Homeopaths in the USA are still mostly lay people, with a handful of exceptions. Some of those NDs did become really good homeopaths”.
——————————————————
Imagine crude drug molecules as ‘fake keys’ acting upon biological molecules which are ‘locks’, thereby preventing ‘original keys’ or ‘normal ligands’ from entering the key holes. Molecular imprints are ‘artificial key holes’ fitting to the ‘fake keys’, binding to them and preventing them from acting on ‘original locks’. Remember, molecular imprints are ‘artificial key holes’, not ‘duplicate keys. Once you understand the molecular dynamics involved in the ‘key-lock’ imagery, you can understand the whole scientific explanation of similia similibus curentur’. PONDER OVER THIS POINT UNTIL YOU GET IT CLEAR!
——————————————————
A homeopath just requested me: “Don’t wash our dirt in public”. My answer: ‘Public dirt should be washed in public- let people know we wash”
——————————————————
A us-based lady homeopath claims she cures her patients using ‘water charged by keeping on paper on which name of similimum is written’!!!!
——————————————————
An international homeopath markets downloadable ‘mp3 files of homeopathic drugs’ to be played in poultry farms to prevent/cure ‘bird flu’!!!
He markets ‘homeopathic mp3 files’ for AIDS also! You can read his interview on Hpathy.com
Kindly see the interview of peter chappel in Hpathy.com. I wonder why Dr Manish Bhatia could not be a little selective in highlighting people and ideas
——————————————————
An Indian ‘homeopathic academician’ of high ‘credentials’ conducts seminars and schools to teach ‘distant drug transmission through hair’!!! He is a ‘big shark’ in Indian homeopathic academic community.
——————————————————
A London-based homeopath claims to cure patients all over world by applying drugs in the eyes of their photos downloaded from computers!!!!! This wonderful claim was made by the veteran homeopath, Dr Vaikuntanath Kaviraj!. See his article on homeopathy World Community. Big people also some times talks such fun!
He had ‘explained’ it. Using quantum theory, wave theory, bio-energetics, resonance theory, energy medicine, teleportation and such things. Myself being far less intellectual, I did not understand anything.
That is called ‘pseudoscience’. Utilizing ultra-scientific terms and concepts profusely for justifying totally unscientific and nonsense things. All ‘energy medicine’ theories do it. Kaviraj is a master of that art.
——————————————————
I know a homeopath distributing ‘yantras’, ‘bhasmas’ and ‘talismans’ from his clinic along with homeopathy drugs, claiming it helps healing!
HOMEOPATHS engaging in unscientific occult practices discredit homeopathy, and make it a subject of mockery. That is why I am bothered.
——————————————————
A homeopath practicing other ‘healing arts’ is illegal, unethical, and inappropriate. It shows unscientific approach and lack of confidence
Some friends argue a homeopath’s duty is to cure the patient using whatever means. A homeopath’s duty is to cure his patients using using homeopathy. If he feels he cannot cure a patient using homeopathy, he should refer the patient to other better homeopaths. If he thinks the patient could not be cured by homeopathy, advise him to consult good physicians or hospitals of other systems without wasting valuable time. That is the ‘duty’ of a genuine homeopath.
——————————————————
A genuine scientific homeopath should be a ‘physician’- not a ‘healer’. He should practice only homeopathy- not muddle with occult ‘healing’
——————————————————
Similia Similibus Curentur, if understood and applied in its scientific meaning, provides a therapeutic tool far superior to the sophisticated diagnostic tools of modern medicine. It is a tragedy to whole medical science that scientific community could not realize its potentials and implications yet, due to their closed-minded approach towards homeopathy.
Homeopathy utilizes the method of closely following even the minutest inhibitions and deviations in the biochemical processes in the organism, through a special strategy of monitoring and recording the perceivable symptoms caused by such deviations.
Obviously, a deviation happening in a particular biochemical pathway resulting from a nano-level molecular inhibition, and their cascading effects, produces a specific train of subjective and objective symptoms in the organism. In other words, each specific group of symptoms exhibited by the organism minutely indicates the particular error occurred in the molecular level. These symptoms are the real indicators of the exact molecular errors existing in the organism, more reliable than any laboratory investigations available now.
Homoeopathy chases these trains of symptoms to their minutest level, from periphery to interior, in order to study the exact molecular errors underlying any particular state of pathology. Symptoms are classified into categories such as subjective, objective, physical generals, mentals and particulars. All these symptoms are then grouped into common and uncommon symptoms. Symptoms are also analyzed regarding their bearings such as locations, presentations, sensations, modalities and concomitants. Causative factors are also evaulated in this process.
Not even the most sophisticated tools of ultra-modern technologies can surpass the accuracy of this method in monitoring the pathological molecular errors with such a perfection.
After collecting and analyzing the ‘total symptoms’, pathological molecular inhibitions are removed by applying appropriate ‘molecular imprints’ as therapeutic agents, selected on the basis of ‘law of similars’ or ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’. This fundamental strategy underlying the homeopathic system of therapeutics evidently surpasses any scientific methods of modern molecular medicine.
Obviously, “similia similibus curentur” is the most effective technique of identifying and removing the pathological molecular inhibitions in the organism. It is high time that the scientific world had realized and recognized this truth, and incorporated this wonderful tool into their armamentarium. I am sure, modern molecular medicine would inevitably realize the implications of similia similibus curentur in due course of its further development.
——————————————————
In the absence of an updated understanding of the latest revelations regarding the exact dynamics of molecular processes underlying the phenomena of life, disease and cure, a homeopath will not be able to comprehend the scientific interpretations of homeopathic principles, and as such, he will be doomed for ever to meddle with totally unscientific and irrational concepts inherited from the ‘masters’, alienating himself from the world of modern science.
——————————————————
For some people, to be a ‘follower of hahnemann’ means travelling 250 years backward into history and END the journey there. For me ‘to follow hahnemann’ means, BEGIN from hahnemann and take his ideas 250 years forward through the history of human knowledge into the present moment, and into future. That makes all the difference.
——————————————————
If I am asked what is similimum, I would say similimum is the drug that contains ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms in healthy organism EXACTLY SIMILAR to the molecular inhibitions and symptoms existing in the patient before us, by binding to same biological target molecules. Potentized forms of the similimum would contain molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance, which can bind to the pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions.
To be a PERFECT SIMILIMUM, our drug should contain ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms, so that in potentized form it would contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required to remove ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions in the patient. If the selected drug does not contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required for the patient, it will be PARTIAL SIMILIMUM. In such cases, we can make a PERFECT SIMILIMUM by combining two or more PARTIAL SIMILIMUMS indicated by the symptoms.
According to my view, even so called ‘single’ medicines are also ‘mixology’, since they are ‘mixtures’ of diverse types molecular imprints. Once we realize it and accept it, we need not worry about ‘dangers’ of ‘mixology’.
——————————————————
Many homeopaths are still doubtful whether science is more advanced than homeopathy, in spite of 250 years of knowledge divide! I cannot help them to come out of that willful blindness by arguing with them. Sitting before your computer and chatting on facebook, if you are still “not sure if i can think of anything science has done for me, i care to appreciate”, I would say it is nothing but intellectual blindness arising from devotion to homeopathy and its master.
Please read the following passage from Organon : Aphorism 11 : Sixth Edition to know the real level of ‘science’ available to hahnemann during his period:
“The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles,that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic proper ”
Would you argue the ‘science’ of hahnemann is right in saying “a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner the small-pox or measles,that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected”? Would you say science has not surpassed homeopathy regarding the knowledge of how measles and small pox are infected and transmitted. Would you still argue hahnemann was right in saying “measles and smallpox” is infected just as “steel needle becomes itself magnetic” by the presence of a magnet?
There are hundreds of such totally unscientific statements in organon and chronic diseases.
Hahnemann made such wrong observations due to limitations of scientific knowledge available during his time. But, if we NOW argue everything hahnemann said is ‘science’, it is nothing but pure nonsense.
And, you are still doubtful whether homeopathy or modern science represent more advanced stage of human knowledge! You forget the great strides science have made during last 250 years after hahnemann wrote organon! You are not sure whether ‘science has surpassed homeopathy’! You still love to believe and dare to argue that homeopathy is more scientific than modern science, and hahnemann is the ‘greatest scientist of all times’!
——————————————————
Had Hahnemann happened to live in this world 200 years later, the towering genius of Hahnemann would have presented to humanity a therapeutic system totally different, and much more advanced and scientific than what we now call Homeopathy. He would have definitely rewritten completely what we preach and practice in the name of Homeopathy today.
Whenever we try to learn the teachings of Hahnemann, we should be on the look out to understand what he would have said about those subjects, if he were elaborating them in the modern context. We should not take his written words as if they were ultimate immutable truth, unquestionable and beyond any scope of further revisions and improvements. We should honor the great master by following his teachings as valuable guide to tread forward, and not as lifeless dogmas.
If Samuel Hahnemann happened to live among us now, he would have mastered all the latest scientific knowledge available. He would be the greatest scientist of our era. He would explain “similia similibus curentur” on the basis of quantum theory, modern biochemistry and the latest understanding of molecular dynamics of disease and therapeutics. He would have explained “potentization” on the basis of modern ‘molecular imprinting’, and would have devised a more sophisticated and scientific method of molecular imprinting to replace the present process of potentization.
I am not asking to ‘surpass’ hahnemann. I am asking to take hahnemann 250 years forward through history and make homeopathy catch up with modern scientific knowledge, which has already surpassed homeopathy a lot
——————————————————
If you are still doubtful whether science is more advanced than homeopathy, I cannot help you to come out of that willful blindness. Sitting before your computer and chatting on facebook, you are still “not sure if i can think of anything science has done for me, i care to appreciate”! Do you think Rogers van Zandvorts could have compiled Complete Rep without “anything science has done”?
Please read the following passage from Organon : Aphorism 11 : Sixth Edition to know the level of ‘science of homeopathy’ during hahnemann’s period:
“The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles,that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic proper ”
Would you argue the ‘science’ of hahnemann is right in saying “a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner the small-pox or measles,that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected”? Would you say science has not surpassed homeopathy regarding the knowledge of how measles and small pox are infected and transmitted. Would you still argue hahnemann was right in saying “measles and smallpox” is infected just as “steel needle becomes itself magnetic” by the presence of a magnet?
There are hundreds of such totally unscientific statements in organon and chronic diseases.
Hahnemann made such wrong observations due to limitations of scientific knowledge available during his time. But, if we NOW argue everything hahnemann said is ‘science’, it is nothing but pure nonsense.
And, you are still doubtful whether homeopathy or modern science represent more advanced stage of human knowledge! You forget the great strides science made during last 250 years after hahnemann wrote organon.
——————————————————
@Michael Law: Sir, I would like to hear specific remarks on the statement I quoted from organon:
“The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles,that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic proper ”
Are you still of the opinion that hahnemann was talking ‘science’ more advanced than modern science?
It is good that you “agree Hahnemann did not know of Virus at that time”. You must also agree that hahnemann did not know about modern genetics. Hahnemann did not know biochemistry or the complex biochemical process underlying vital processes pathology. Hahnemann did not know the molecular dynamics of cure. Hahnemann did not know the molecular level structure of complex drug substances or how they interact with biological molecules. Hahnemann did not know the supramolecular structure of water or ethyl alcohol. Hahnemann did not know what actually happens at molecular level during potentization. Hahnemann did not know what are the exact active principles of potentized drugs, or how they act as therapeutic agents.
Hahnemann observed a natural truth regarding cure which he called ‘simila similibus curentur’. He observed that highly diluted drugs can act therapeutically if applied on the basis of this principle. He called this diluting process as potentization. These two observations are the main contributions of hahnemann to medical science. Everythig else, his theories about these observations, inevitable bear the limitations imposed by lack of scientific knowledge of his time
——————————————————
Even though Hanemann was indeed a great genius and visionary, it is impossible for anybody to proceed with his intellectual quest without drawing resources from the treasures of knowledge amassed by previous generations. Obviously, no genius can totally overcome the objective limitations imposed upon him by the space-time context of his life and activities.
We should never forget the objective historical context of 18th century Germany, where Samuel Hahnemann lived and developed his novel therapeutic system. Hahnemann had developed his ideas depending upon the existing knowledge about the universe available to him. It is not to be seen as a sin to say that his thoughts and words were more or less confined by the limitations imposed by the infantile level of science and technology then existed there. Even though the essence of the therapeutic principle he developed is capable of transcending the boundaries of centuries to come, it would be unfair to try to evaluate his achievements and contributions detached from his objective time-space framework.
——————————————————
Some people consider each and every word uttered by our ‘master’ as ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy. They would profusely quote his words from ORGANON whenever some body raises any hard questions. Some others would even include the words of other ‘stalwarts’ like Kent, Herring and the like also in the category of ‘fundamental’ principles.
They would declare that whatever ‘master’ and other ‘stalwarts’ said 200 years ago were “most scientific” and should not be changed. They would not tolerate any attempt of re-reading those ‘theories’ in the light of scientific knowledge humanity has amassed during last two centuries after Hahnemann lived on this earth.
——————————————————
Hahnemann made two important observations regarding therapeutics 250 years ago:
1. Diseases with specific symptoms can be cured by drugs that can produce similar symptoms in healthy individuals. He called it ‘similia similibus curentur’.
2. When used according to ‘similia similibus curentur’, dug substances can act as powerful therapeutic agents even in high dilutions through a process of serial ‘dilution and succussion’. He called this process as ‘potentization’.
These TWO are the main OBSERVATIONS made by Hahnemann, which are known as fundamental principles of Homeopathy.
Hahnemann tried to explain these OBSERVATIONS in terms of scientific and philosophical knowledge available to him in that POINT OF TIME. Organon consists of these theoretical explanations and speculations.
Since scientific knowledge was in its primitive stage at that time, Hahnemann’s explanations were bound to bear that limitations. ORGANON contains a lot of theorizations and speculations that do not agree with, or go against modern scientific understanding.
Equipped with modern scientific knowledge and its tools, we are now in a far better position than Samuel Hahnemann to explain the phenomena he observed 250 years ago. Now we can explain ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ more scientifically, rationally and logically. With full respect the great genius of our master, we should be truthful and bold enough to discard those evidently unscientific theoretical speculations of ORGANON.
These two FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS were based on experiences, experiments and logical evaluations of OBJECTIVE PHENOMENA OF NATURE done by a great intellectual person. But the ‘principles’ he used to explain these objective phenomena were unscientific, obviously due to the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him at that time.
We should accept his OBSERVATIONS, but judiciously discard or modify his unscientific PRINCIPLES.
——————————————————
Every body have their intellectual barricades! Barricades of strong convictions and philosophies, formed through long course of learning and experience. It is a very difficult task for me to break that barricades, get into your minds and convince you something that goes against what you believed so far. Now I am into that hard task- bit by bit, inch by inch, day by day forward. Like the legendary stone cutter of esop’s fable, I would keep on striking, until finally the stone is crushed to pieces by a last stroke. And I know, every seemingly futile single stroke made earlier matters a lot in making the final stroke a success.
——————————————————
Anybody who knows how to collect symptoms, how to find similimum and how to apply it judiciously, can make results. Because, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ is the law. If you know how to use that law, you would cure. But your cures do not justify all nonsense unscientific theories you talk about your cures. Many great homeopaths, who get 95% cures are talking great nonsense also. We swallow all those nonsense thinking that they would not talk nonsense, since they get 95% cures!’
——————————————————
Every scientist ‘should be wrong’, every science ‘should be wrong’ if it goes against our ‘master’! Every science is inferior to organon! Avogadro is wrong, if it does not agree with homeopathy! Science should change, not homeopathy! Homeopathy is ‘ultimate’ science, and hahnemann is ultimate scientist! Science have to ‘grow’ to understand homeopathy! Homeopaths need not ‘grow’ to understand science- they have the divine right to stay where they stood 250 years ago! REALLY GREAT, SIR. MOST HOMEOPATHS THINK SO!
——————————————————
Is there any logic in continuing potentization even after all the drug molecules removed from the medium, after crossing the Avogadro limit?
Here I am saying something that most homeopaths would not be very happy to hear, because my statement goes against their long-existing beliefs and practices. I expect strong opposition on this concept, which directly evolved from my scientific understanding and observations of potentization.
If ‘molecular imprinting’ is the real mechanism involved in homeopathic potentization, it is obvious that there is no likelihood of any special benefit by higher and higher potentisations above 12C. Logically, potentization need be continued only just beyond the limit of Avagadro number. By that stage, all the drug molecules would be removed from the medium, and the molecular imprinted water–alcohol mixture would have attained sufficient concentration of ‘molecular imprints’, which are the real active principles of potentized medicines. The three-dimensional structure of drug molecules used as ‘guests’ will have already got sufficiently imprinted into the hydration shells or hydrosomes by that time. There is no point in continuing potentization even after that stage.
Even those who believe that potentization is a process by which ‘medicinal energy’ of drug substances are transferred into the medium, would find it difficult to explain what ‘medicinal energy’ could be ‘transferred’ even after the whole drug molecules are removed through serial dilutions.
As per my observation, the medicinal property of any homeopathic drug beyond 12c will be the same. It is only a very rare possibility that there could be any significant difference between various so called higher potencies used by us, with regard to their content or medicinal qualities. Many master prescribers have already put on record that if the selection of similimum is correct, any potency would render the expected therapeutic result.
Since I consider molecular imprints as the active principles of potentized drugs, I do not subscribe to the idea that ‘higher’ potencies are more ‘powerful’, and I see no special benefit by using ‘higher’ potencies.
I think 12c is enough for completing molecular imprinting and removal of all drug molecules from the medium. What happens at molecular level during further potentization is still an open question for me. In supra-molecular chemistry, there is research going on regarding a phenomenon known as ‘induced molecular assembly’. That means, supra-molecular clusters acting as templates and inducing other molecules to form similar clusters. We know, ‘induced molecular assembly’ is involved in crystallization, clathrate formation etc. Even ‘prions’, which are misfolded proteins, multiply by ‘induced misfolding’. Antibodies, which are ‘molecular imprinted proteins’, also multiply by ‘inducing’ other globulin proteins to change configuration. Molecular imprints, which are supra-molecular clusters of water, may also multiply by the process of ‘induced molecular assembly’, where existing ‘molecular imprints’ may act as templates and induce formation of similar molecular imprints. It is only a possibility, which need in-depth study, which may provide us a rational way of resolving the riddle of high potencies. For the time being, I leave it as an open question.
Even though ‘molecular imprints’ may be formed in higher potencies through the process of ‘induced molecular assembling’, by no way that makes higher potencies more ‘powerful’ or ‘potent’. By 12c, all drug molecules will be removed from the medium, and medium gets saturated with ‘molecular imprints’. 12c will be ideal homeopathic. therapeutic agent. I see no special benefits by going ‘higher’. But, diluting medicines while administering by mixing with water may be beneficial, by increase the number of molecular imprints.
Based on this observation, for the last five years I use only 30c, and I get expected results in all cases where selection of similimum was correct.
——————————————————
Constantine hering ‘did’ great things in ‘curing’. But he also ‘said’ many unscientific things about those cures, since scientific knowlege available to him was in its primitive stage
——————————————————
Hahnemann was talking about SINGLE drug on the basis of scientific knowledge available to him during his period 250 years ago.
He had no idea about the molecular level structure of drug substances, or their molecular level interactions with biological molecules. He had no idea about the molecular level pathology and molecular inhibitions undelying diseases. He considered drugs as ‘single’ substance, and diseases as ‘singular’ entities.
For him, NUX was a ‘single’ substance, whereas we now know NUX tincture is a mixture of hundreds of types of alkaloids, gycosides and other phytochemicals, which act upon our body on the basis of their molecular structure and chemical properties.
We now know, NUX tincture prepared from different parts of that tree will have entirely different molecular constitution, and as such, the idea of NUX PERSONALITY does not have any logic or scientific validity.
We should update on the basis of new scientific knowledge available to us.
——————————————————
Anybody who knows how to collect symptoms, how to find similimum and how to apply it judiciously, can make results. Because, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ is the law. If you know how to use that law, you would cure. But your cures do not justify all nonsense unscientific theories you talk about your cures. Many great homeopaths, who get 95% cures are talking great nonsense also. We swallow all those nonsense thinking that they would not talk nonsense, since they get 95% cures!’
——————————————————
If we get a ‘single’ similimum that cover the ‘totality of symptoms’, should we think about a second drug? My answer is an emphatic NO. Homeopathy is all about finding ‘similimum’. Nothing more, nothing less.
Homeopathy was so far taught and practiced on the basis of idea of DRUG PERSONALITIES. As per this view, each individual will have an ideal SIMILIMUM for him, and if you succeed in finding that PERFECT SIMILIMUM, your work is done.
Once you start looking at your PATIENTS in terms of pathological molecular errors, and DRUGS in terms of constituent molecules and molecular imprints, You can start perceiving matters in a more realistic, scientific light.
In how many cases we get an exact similimum that cover the ‘totality’ of physical generals, mentals, miasms and particular disease symptoms? Very rare.
For example, a person with ‘Calc’ constitution may come with an acute shock from grief indicating ‘ignatia’. He may be having a skin eruption with symptoms indicating ‘ars’, and certain rectal symptoms indicating ‘nit acid’. We will not get a ‘single’ similimum that cover the complete ‘totality’ of this case.
In such cases, we are normally taught to start with a ‘single’ drug that would address his most disturbing complaints and step by step address the ‘total’ case ‘layer by layer’ with ‘single’ drugs. What I am now saying is that there is no harm in prescribing all these ‘similimums’ that cover the whole layers ‘together’. That way we can ensure a ‘total’ cure rapidly.
——————————————————
Potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, and individual constituent molecules of drugs are ‘imprinted’ in their individual capacities.
That means, even a drug we consider ‘single’ is in fact a mixture of different types of ‘molecular imprints’ of diverse constituent drug molecules, and they exist without interacting with each other.
According to this view, even if we mix two or more potentized drugs together, the constituent ‘molecular imprints’ will not interact each other, and will act up on the appropriate molecular targets in their individual capacities.
——————————————————
Single Drug-Multiple Drug’ dilemma could be resolved only if you perceive your potentized drugs in terms of diverse types of molecular imprints they contain, co-existing without any mutual interactions, and acting upon pathogenic molecules as independent entities due to the complementary configurational affinity between them.
——————————————————
Hahnemann was talking on the basis of scientific knowledge available to him during his period 250 years ago. He had no idea about the molecular level structure of drug substances, or their molecular level interactions with biological molecules. He had no idea about the molecular level pathology and molecular inhibitions undelying diseases. He considered drugs as ‘single’ substance, and diseases as ‘singular’ entities. For him, NUX was a ‘single’ substance, whereas we now know NUX tincture is a mixture of hundreds of types of alkaloids, gycosides and other phytochemicals, which act upon our body on the basis of their molecular structure and chemical properties. We now know, NUX tincture prepared from different parts of that tree will have entirely different molecular constitution, and as such, the idea of NUX PERSONALITY does not have any logic or scientific validity. We should update on the basis of new scientific knowledge available to us.
——————————————————
Any drug substance will act upon our mind also, since ‘mind’ is the product of our brain and central nervous system, which are also part of the ‘organism’. I meant, there is no such a thing as ‘nux personality’ or ‘puls personality’. Totality of symptoms produced by tincture prepared from nux seeds will be different from that of nux roots, leaves, flowers, bark or anything else, since their molecular constitutions are different. We know many plants, where fruits are edible, but roots are poisonous. In that case, which will decide the personality of that plant? I was talking about the concept of ‘drug personality’, not personality of human beings
——————————————————
Drug Designing Technology has recently started exploring the possibilities of Molecular Imprinting in the development of target-specific designer drugs. They are now experimenting for developing bio-friendly imprinting matrices and imprinting protocols, so as to prepare artificial binding surfaces for pathogenic molecules that could be utilized as therapeutic agents.
Even though not yet recognized as such, homeopathic potentization is a process of molecular imprinting, where artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules are produced by imprinting drug molecules into water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrices.
Homeopathy identifies pathological molecular errors and selects the appropriate molecular imprints through a peculiar technique of ‘comparing symptoms’, which is expressed as the therapeutic principle, ‘simila similibus curentur’
——————————————————
Modern Medicine is gradually evolving into ‘Molecular Medicine’. Molecular Medicine studies vital processes and diseases at molecular level, and deals therapeutics as an art and science of molecular level repairing.
Molecular medicine is the most advanced, most scientific and most recently originated discipline in modern medical science. It is a broad field, where physical, chemical, biological and medical techniques are used to describe molecular structures and mechanisms, identify fundamental molecular and genetic errors of pathology, and to develop molecular interventions to correct those errors.
‘Molecular Medicine’ emphasizes disease and cure in terms of cellular and molecular phenomena and interventions rather than the conceptual and observational focus on patients and their organs common to conventional medicine.
Molecular Medicine studies drug substances in terms of their molecular level structure and organization, and is more and more relying upon target-specific Designer Drugs synthesized by drug designing technology, supported by computer aided designing protocols.
——————————————————
Most probably, modern molecular medicine and drug designing technology is in the new future going to explore the possibilities of water as a molecular imprinting medium as part of their search for novel substances to be utilized as imprinting matrix.
It means, Modern Molecular Medicine is slowly advancing towards the realization of a drug designing technology that homeopathy invented as ‘potentization’ and utilized for preparing therapeutic agents 250 years ago.
It is based on this understanding that I try to propagate the concept that ‘Homeopathy is Molecular Imprinting Therapeutics- An Advanced Branch of Molecular Medicine.
——————————————————
In my futuristic vision, I foresee the fusion of Homeopathy and Modern Medicine into a universal scientific system of ‘Molecular Imprints Medicine’.
Modern physicians would laugh at my statement. Homeopaths would scorn. But I expect such a convergence to happen by next 10-20 years.
——————————————————
Psora- Chronic disease disposition from off-target actions of antibodies against Infectious Agents Of Itch
——————————————————
Study ‘Molecular Imprinted Polymers’-to follow The Scientific explanation Of Homeopathic Potentization
——————————————————
Luc Montagnier could have explained his observations of ultra-dilutions better using molecular imprinting
——————————————————
Hahnemann no where said Miasms are Genetically Inherited. Later interpreters created all confusions
——————————————————
Potentized drugs contain molecular imprinted hydrogen-bonded clusters of water-ethyl alcohol molecules
——————————————————
Molecular Imprints acts as ‘artificial key-holes’ or ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathogenic molecules
—————————————————–
MIT explains homeopathy in terms of latest scientific knowledge of kinetics of bio-molecular interactions
——————————————————
‘Molecular Imprints Therapeutics’ is the most scientific, viable, rock-solid explanation of homeopathy
——————————————————
To be a real medical science, homeopathy should be explained and proved according to scientific methods.
——————————————————
From my long experience, I am fully convinced ‘Homeopathy Works’. Now my concern is ‘How it Really Works’.
——————————————————
It is fact that nobody could so far propose a scientifically viable ‘working hypothesis’ about homeopathy.
—————————————————–
Learn About Nanotoxicity Concerns Before Prescribing Biochemic Salts Indiscriminately
—————————————————–
Dielectric Dispersion In Potentized Drugs Indicates ‘Rearrangement Of Molecules’ Or ‘Molecular Imprinting’
——————————————————
The argument that homeopathic drugs act not by their ‘material qualities’, but by an ‘immaterial’ medicinal force, called ‘dynamic force’ is nothing but absurdity.
Would these theoreticians agree that this so-called ‘dynamic power’ of individual drugs’ are determined by the specific ‘material’ properties of their constituent molecules? It is undeniable fact that this so-called ‘dynamic power’ varies from drug to drug, depending up on their molecular level structure and composition.
If we were dealing with an immaterial ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic power’, why should we use all those different types of drugs existing in homeopathy? While talking about ‘immaterial’ ‘spirit-like’ ‘dynamic healing power’, ‘liberated’ through potenization, which can be carried in corked bottles and swallowed as sugar pellets, we should be aware, how much homeopathy would become a laughing stock in the eyes of scientific community.
If we still continue to claim that there is a ‘spirit-like’ force in homeopathic medicines, independant of their material qualities, a ‘force’ that is soluble in water and alcohol, can be transferred from bottles to bottles, acts on the ‘vital force’ when applied on tongue, lost when subjected to physical forces such as heat or electricity, how can we engage in a scientific dialogue? What type of ‘liberated’ ‘non-corporeal ‘dynamic force’ are we talking about?
——————————————————
We have to be well aware that the theory of ‘vital force’ was adopted by Hahnemann from the vitalistic philosophy then existed in Europe. Since modern material science was only in its rudimentary stage, he was not able to explain the phenomena he observed, in scientific terms. Due to inescapable historical limitations, he was naturally compelled to accept some sort of vitalistic explanations for his new inventions.
Now, we live in a new era of enlightenment, totally different from that of Hahnemann. Modern science has unravelled the molecular processes of life and diseases to such a level that we can logically explain the fundamental principles of homeopathy on a new scientific basis.
It is an unpardonable injustice done to the great genius of Hahnemann, if we still continue to stick on to his obsolete unscientific explanations.
We should exhibit the intellectual courage to mercilessly discard the evidently irrational parts of Hahnemannian homeopathy. Same time, we should safeguard its inner kernel of the great natural therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and therapeutic application of ‘molecular imprints’, which our master called ‘potentized’ drugs. We should bravely replace the concept ‘vital force’ with scientific understanding of ‘vital process’.
——————————————————
Since we are now competent to offer a scientific molecualar interpretation of ‘similia similibus curentur’, and ‘potentization’, the main fundamental principles of homeopathy, there is no need for relying upon the obsolete vitalistic explanations and speculations of Hahnemann, based on the concept of ‘vital force’ and ‘non-cprporeal’ ‘spirit-like’ ‘dynamic medicinal force’. Instead of repeating the unscientific concept of ‘dynamic medicinal force’, we can now logically explain the homeopathic potencies on the basis of ‘molecular imprinting in water’.
——————————————————
The main challenge we face when attempting to offer a scientific explanation for homeopathy is that these homeopathic theoreticans make the situation more and more complicated by mixing up the basic concepts regarding life, disease, drugs and therapeutics, with their idealistic philosophical speculations and unscientific spiritualistic world outlook.
From the very onset, we have to adopt following fundamental factors as the basis of our intellectual inquiry:
1. ‘Vital force’ exists only through ‘vital processes’, which are complex chains of molecular level biochemical interactions purely material in nature.
2. A state of pathology is created by some or other deviations happening in these biochemical processes due to molecular errors of pure material nature.
3. Therapeutics is possible only through materialistic intervention in these biochemical processes.
4. Medicines are the material means for such an intervention.
5. It is due to the peculiar material properties of medicines that they are able to intervene in biochemical processes.
6. Therapeutics is a totally materialistic activity.
If we do not agree upon at least this much of fundamental propositions, no meaningful discussion will be possible regarding scientific understanding homeopathy.
——————————————————
Since homeopathy is practiced on the basis of therapeutic principle of ‘Similia Similibus Curentu’, many homeopaths think that clinical diagnosis has no place in homeopathic practice.They consider these factors only of lesser value, helpful only for ‘patient satisfaction’ or ‘prognosis’.
I think we should perceive the information provided by modern technological advancements and laboratory investigations as part of collecting ‘objective’ symptoms, and learn to utilize them in the search for similimum.
All diagnostic tools provided by ‘modern technology’ are only extensions of physician’s sense organs, which help in making ‘enhanced’ observation of his patient’s symptoms. Similar to the ordinary spectacle that enhances the vision or stethoscope enhances the sounds, laboratory tests and sophisticated equipments ‘enhances’ our observation. As such, information provided by these tests and tools should be considered as ‘Objective Symptoms’ similar to any other objective symptoms, and can be utilized in finding similimum. Only problem is, since our drug provings were not conducted insuch a technologically advanced environment, they do not provide these types of ‘enhanced symptoms’. Due to ill-equipped drug- provings so far conducted, we have no a systematic knowledge of such symptoms now available in our materia medica. But, we can collect such clinical observations from daily practice, and enrich our materia medica.
I hope future drug proving protocols will incorporate modern technology, and collect these ‘enhanced observations’ also and add them to future materia medica compilations. Then, homeopathy will be in a position to utilize these information also in finding appropriate similimum.
I am saying lab investigations should be made part of drug proving protocol, and such information included in materia medica as ‘symptoms’, so that they could be used for finding similimum. That is why I said lab investigations should be part of ‘homeopathic case taking’, not part of ‘homeopathic practice’. I wanted to highlight that difference.
Information obtained from such investigations could be utilized as ‘Objective Symptoms’, I mean. That means, we can make ‘homeopathic prescriptions’ based on lab investigations also, along with other symptoms
——————————————————
How can I convince you something, if you hesitate to read anything? I regularly post at least one article everyday explaining my concept of ‘molecular imprints’ and their implication in homeopathy? Without reading what I write, you ask me to “prove”! I once again request you to take some time to read at least some of those articles.
How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water?
How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology?
How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and molecular biology?
How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?
My request to those who ask for ‘proof for my concepts’ is, kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you.
Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.
—————————————————–
Concepts regarding ‘duration, depth and plane’ of actions of potentized drugs form another unverified part of homeopathic ‘belief system’. They would say, ‘aconite is short acting’, ‘sulphur is long acting’, ‘calcarea is deep acting’, ‘nux has only superfluous action’ and the like. We also hear statements like ‘low potencies are short acting’, ‘high potencies are long and deep acting’, ‘200c act longer and deeper than 30c’ etc. Some would say ‘higher potencies act on mental plane, lower potencies act on physiological plane’.
All these fanciful ideas regarding ‘duration’, depth’ and ‘plane’ of actions of potentized drugs are based on ‘words of masters’ and ‘experiences’. No scientific experiments needed, no rational and logical explanations needed- simply ‘believe’!
Nobody so far knows what actually happens during potentization, what is the exact ‘active principle’ of potentized drugs, or how they act therapeutically upon the organism. Without knowing these fundamental facts, how can we say our beliefs regarding ‘duration, depth and plane’ of action of potentized drugs are right?
A lot of research have to be conducted to verify these ‘belief’
——————————————————
David Moreira messaged me:
“I once took a dose of medhorrinum 1M, because I really wanted to know more about Homeopathy, and I got a date of symptoms for some time (a month or less), most corresponded well to the set of symptoms described in materia medica for medhorrinum… So you say that high dilutions is not good for experimentations…. I think it is not correct…”
Pure rubbish. If you wanted to “know more about homeopathy”, this is not the way you should do experiments. Taking oneself ‘single dose’ of a drug and waiting for ‘its symptoms’ to appear! And you got symptoms of that drug for one month! And you consider you have ‘proved’ that “high dilutions are good for experimentation” beyond any doubt!
If you really want to ‘prove’ that potentized drugs can produce symptoms, you should conduct the experiments according to scientific method. Person who is subjected to experiment should not know which medicine he is taking. Person conducting the experiment should not know which drug is given to which individual. There should be enough controls also. Then you should try to identify the drugs from comparing the symptoms produced with symptoms in materia medica. Only when you succeed in identifying drugs from symptoms in a well controlled blinded experiment, you can say you ‘proved’ that high potency drugs could produce symptoms.
Taking a dose of ‘known’ drug oneself, waiting for its symptoms for one month, and ascribing all symptoms you produced during one month to that single drug- it is a joke. After taking that ‘single dose’, you are ‘taking’ diverse types of exogenous molecules into your body- through food, water, drinks, air and many many other environmental factors. All those molecules can produce symptoms in you. How can you say all symptoms produced for one month ‘after’ a ‘single dose of medorrhinum 1m’ were due that ‘single dose’?
Only homeopaths, blinded by ‘beliefs’ can make such claims. For them, everything that happens ‘after’ their dose is the ‘effect’ of that dose! They never bother to consider the variables involved! I know it is a waste of time arguing to convince them. They cannot be convinced by logic or science. They are ‘believers’.
Let us experiment as follows: I shall send you the drugs to be proved by you. Five different drugs will be given in separate 30ml bottles, numbered 1 to 5. All five drugs will be well proved polychrest drugs in 30c or above. You should prove those drugs, and identify which bottle contained which drug. I shall send the name and bottle numbers of drugs to Dr Nirupam Joshi in advance to be kept in his custody. He would finally decide whether you could identify drugs by observing symptoms you get.
If you succeed in identifying drugs this way, we can decide high potency can be used for drug proving.
I have many times experimented by taking almost all major polychests myself in 30c and 200c in repeated doses, some of them even 30ml as single dose. I did not get any ‘proving’.
During October 2010, I recorded all my subjective, objective, mental, physical, general and particular symptoms in all minute details. After repertorization, I selected 10 drugs that would in combination cover all my symptoms. I mixed all those 10 drugs together in 30c potency, and prepared a 300ml stock. I started taking 10 drops of this mixture three times daily from 8-11-2010 onwards. According to my view, this mixture would contain all the molecular imprints I need. When I get any acute complaints, I use to add their indicated drugs also into the dose of my constitutional stock. Still continuing. I got all my ailments relieved, and I am in very good health till now. Now I am 61 years old. I never experienced any ‘drug proving’.
——————————————————
Potentized drugs can act only if it is indicated. In other words, molecular imprints can bind only to pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity. They cannot interfere in the interaction between biological molecules and their natural ligands. MOLECULAR IMPRINTS ARE ARTIFICIAL BINDING SITES FOR PATHOGENIC MOLECULES. Once you understand this basic point, all your confusions will be gone
——————————————————
Molecular imprints cannot interfere in the interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands. As such, they cannot create a state of pathology or produce symptoms. Some transient symptoms may appear (not pathological). Most opeople will have some molecular errors that could be removed by the drugs we used, and it may create some symptomatic changes. They cannot be considered pathology or drug symptoms. If anybody claim high potencies could ‘prove’, they can experiment by doing it themselves as i proposed above
————————————————
I support only scientific homeopathy. I will not support pseudo-scientific ‘energy medicine’ theories and practice in the name of homeopathy
——————————————————
My request to Dan Ullman is, he should be a little more cautious and consistent while explaining homeopathy. Being the most noted ”Foremost Spokesman” of homeopathy, he should be more responsible. While saying homeopathy is ‘hormesis’, ‘small doses’ and ‘nanopharmacology’, he should be aware that he is contradicting the concept of homeopathic potentization. He should try to explain how potentized drugs, even without a single drug molecule contained them, act therapeutically on the basis of ‘similia similibus curentur’. Any reasonable theory about homeopathy should explain what actually happens during potentization, what are the active principles of potentized drugs, and what is the exact molecular mechanism by which these active principles produces a therapeutic effect. We should explain potentization and similia similibus curentur in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge. Most importantly, we should be consistent in our explanation, whatever it be.
Energy medicine theory is the greatest enemy of scientific homeopathy. Scientific community will never accept homeopathy as a medical science, if we go on talking ‘energy medicine’. We have to use the paradigms of science, language of science, concepts of science, terms of science, methods of science. We should explain homeopathy as a science, fitting to modern biochemistry, molecular biology and pathology.
Dana Ulmann would be the first person to write articles supporting any emerging theories or new research reports appearing in homeopathy. As I already said, he instantly ‘supports’ every new theories, but commits to nothing. If you ‘accept’ a theory in its real sense, you will have to discard and disown its contradicting theories. Ulmann will ‘support’ molecular imprints, next day he will write an article supporting ‘energy medicine’ theories. Next day he will support nanoparticle theory. The moment the IIT B research report appeared in media, he wrote an article declaring ‘homeopathy is nanopharmacology’, same time adding that ‘nanopaticles’ act by ‘vibrations’ and ‘resonance’! It is a wonderful exercise. He never goes into the depth of any theory. He only quote others. His all articles always contains ‘it is said’ and ‘it is believed’. He ‘says’ nothing specific. He never antagonize any theory directly, but very cleverly utilize every new ‘researches’ to justify the ‘energy medicine concepts.
Dana Ullman, who is claimed to be described by TIME magazine as “the Leading Proselytizer of Homeopathy” and ABC News touted as “Homeopathy’s Foremost Spokesman”, is a prominent proponent of ‘ultra-scientific’ ‘energy medicine’ theories in homeopathy that severely discredit the scientific credentials of homeopathy.
——————————————————
Since ‘modern medicine’ requires a clear understanding of pathological molecular processes to decide an appropriate therapeutic agent, they cannot treat many diseases which are not well understood. For homeopathy, knowing the exact molecular error behind the pathology is not necessary, since homeopathy identifies the molecular errors and their remedial agents by observing subjective and objective ‘symptoms’ that express the molecular errors.
As such, homeopathy can cure any disease even without knowing the underlying molecular errors, merely on the basis of ‘symptoms’. This is a great advantage for homeopathy. Whereas modern medicine can hope for an effective treatment only for well understood diseases, that to with possibility of unwanted side effects, homeopathy can treat any disease effectively and safely.
Existing more than 250 years as an independent therapeutic system totally alienated from mainstream scientific knowledge, I think time is now ripe for homeopathy to converges into modern molecular medicine, as an advanced branch of medical science. The great divide between ‘allopathy and homeopathy’ could now be effectively bridged through my scientific explanation of potentization and similia similibus curentur. Once the people belonging to molecular medicine realizes the historical implications of this convergence, I hope they would also utilize ‘molecular imprinting’ as part of their target-specific drug designing technology.
——————————————————
Modern medicine has recently advanced into Molecular Medicine, where drugs are selected on the basis of scientific understanding of pathological molecular errors in vital processes.
Homeopathy selects drugs on the basis of ‘totality of symptoms’, which are the real indicators of those pathological molecular errors. As such, homeopathy can be defined as a specialized higher branch of ‘modern molecular medicine’.
Since ‘modern medicine’ uses highly reactive ‘drug molecules’ as therapeutic agents, they can create dangerous ‘off-target’ molecular errors in the organism. That is the main draw back of ‘modern medicine’. Since homeopathy uses only ‘molecular imprints’, they cannot cause any ‘off-target’ molecular errors. Hence homeopathy is very safe when compared to modern medicine.
——————————————————
I do not think modern medicine is irrelevant or unscientific. Exactly, modern medicine has been advancing in parallel with human scientific knowledge. It plays main role in the health care system all over the world.
Allopathy Hahnemann talks about is no more. It is not fair to call ‘modern medicine’ as allopathy. Modern medicine is ‘molecular medicine’, based on scientific understanding of vital processes. Remember this point when quoting ‘ant-allopathy’ statements of our masters.
Fundamental difference between homeopathy and modern medicine is that ‘modern medicine’ uses ‘drug molecules’ as therapeutic agents, where as homeopathy uses ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules. This is a very important difference, indeed.
——————————————————
To be recognized as a scientific medical system, we should explain ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ before the scientific community in a way fitting to the existing scientific paradigms, and should submit ourselves to be verified in accordance with scientific methods.
“Endogenous or exogenous pathogenic molecules that cause diseases by binding to the biological molecules can be entrapped and removed using molecular imprints of drug molecules which in molecular form can bind to the same biological molecules, utilizing the complementary configurational affinity between molecular imprints and pathogenic molecules”.
This scientific definition of ‘similia similibus curentur’ is the foundation of my claim that homeopathy is advanced branch of modern molecular medicine.
——————————————————
So far, we understood ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ as ‘similarity of symptoms produced by drugs as well as diseases’.
According to modern scientific understanding, we can explain it as ‘similarity of molecular errors produced by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules’ in the organism.
To be more exact, that means ‘similarity of molecular configurations of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules’. Potentized drugs contains ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules of drug used for potentization.
‘Molecular imprints’ are three-dimensional negatives of molecules, and hence they would have a peculiar affinity towards those molecules, due to their complementary configuration. ‘Molecular imprints’ would show this complementary affinity not only towards the molecules used for imprinting, but also towards all molecules that have configurations similar to those molecules.
Homeopathy utilizes this phenomenon, and uses molecular imprints of drug molecules to bind and entrap pathogenic molecules having configurations similar to them. Similarity of configurations of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules are identified by evaluating the ‘similarity of symptoms’ they produce in organism during drug proving and disease. This realization is the the basis of scientific understanding of homeopathy I propose.
——————————————————
’Molecular imprints’ can be compared to ‘antibodies’. Antibodies are native proteins subjected to ‘molecular imprinting’ by ‘antigens’, and acting as binding sites for the specific antigens. ‘Molecular imprints’ in potentized drugs are supra-molecular clusters of water/alcohol, subjected to ‘molecular imprinting’ by constituent molecules of drug substances, and acting as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules having configurational similarity to drug molecules used for imprinting.
——————————————————
In the present peculiar intellectual context, I am aware it will be extremely difficult for both scientific community as well as homeopathic community to accept my claim that homeopathy is an ‘advanced branch of modern molecular medicine’. I will have to struggle much to present the logic behind my statement in a convincing way.
If anybody asks me to explain what is homeopathy, I would prefer to say it is MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics. I think that reply would specifically define in minimum words my scientific meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’, the fundamental therapeutic principle of homeopathy.
If I am asked to explain further, now I am confident enough to say it is a higher specialized branch of modern Molecular Medicine. It is based on the therapeutic principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’, which scientifically means “endogenous or exogenous pathogenic molecules that cause diseases by binding to the biological molecules can be entrapped and removed using molecular imprints of drug molecules which in molecular form can bind to the same biological molecules, utilizing the complementary configurational affinity between molecular imprints and pathogenic molecules”.
My claim of homeopathy as a specialized branch of modern molecular medicine evolves from my understanding of homeopathic potentization as a process of molecular imprinting.
Conventionally, molecular imprinting is a technology of preparing three dimensional artificial binding sites for molecules in polymer matrixes, which are widely used in many biological assays, molecular separation protocols and many other laboratory applications. From studying the ‘polymer-like’ behavior of water in its ‘supra-molecular’ structural level, I am fully convinced that water, especially water-ethyl alcohol mixture can also be used as a medium for molecular imprinting similar to polymers, and the ‘molecular imprints’ thus produced can be safely used as therapeutic agents. They would act as selective artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules. In my opinion, this phenomenon of molecular imprinting is involved tin homeopathic potentization, and the active principles of potentized drugs are ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules.
Through this definition, potentization becomes a branch of modern drug designing technology, and homeopathy becomes branch of modern molecular medicine.
——————————————–
I am not happy to see myself losing some good old friends on facebook every day. Of course, I get new friends- especially from new generation, students and beginners.
When I post an article disagreeing with the ‘theory’ of vital force or dynamic drug energy, or any ‘aphorisms’ of master, I lose a few friends. When I question the belief that our master is the ‘greatest scientist’ and ‘organon is most scientific’, a few friends get displeased and leave me. When I comment on predictive method, sehgal method, sensation method, hair transmission and such established brands in homeopathy, most of their dedicated followers get annoyed and leave me. My comments on energy medicine, spiritual homeopathy, radionics, dowsing, reflexology etc also resulted in losing some valuable friends who do such practices. When I expressed my opinion on the admissibility of homeopaths practicing allopathy, some friends left my groups. My views about the scope of specialization, use of patent drugs and such issues also alienated a few friends. My concepts regarding miasms, potency, dose, repetition, multiple drugs, drug relationships and mother tinctures also resulted in losing some friends. Of course, my ‘arrogance’, ‘ego’ and ‘intolerance’ also will be blamed! I cannot tolerate people coming only for futile arguments, without any inclination to read or learn. I remove them.
Each new topic I post, each comment I make, each article I publish on my blogs- all of them alienates somebody from me. I know why that happens. But I am helpless. I cannot dilute my convictions or give up my mission of propagating scientific homeopathy to save friendships. I know, I have to pay a price.
Old friends-especially experienced, established, senior homeopaths- leave me once they understand I am saying something that goes against what they learned, taught and practiced so far. To support my views, they will have to come out of their comfort zones, which is not an easy task. Same time, homeopaths belonging to young generation- students, beginners and scientific minded people- come forward in large numbers for friendship. I see it as a positive indication.
——————————————————
A very special convenience of ‘energy medicine’ is, they can fit any scientific knowledge into their ‘theoretical system’. They can connect everything using their magic wands- ‘‘electromagnetic radiations’ and ‘bio-magnetic resonance’!
According to them, homeopathic medicines act by ‘resonance’, nanoparticles act by ‘resonance’, ‘ghost dna’ act by ‘resonance’. Everything is ‘energy’. Life is ‘resonance’, disease is lack of ‘resonance’, cure is re-establishment of ‘resonance’. Even cells and genes interact through ‘resonance! ‘Everything could fit comfortably well into this ‘resonance’ theory- let it be homeopathy, faith healing, acupressure, distant healing, radionics, dowsing, hair transmission, touch healing, mesmerism, prayers, pranic, reiki or any occult practice. ‘Radiations’ and ‘Resonance’explains everything.
Once you accept ‘energy medicine’ theory, everything is easy. You become a ‘healer’- not ‘physician’. You need not bother about learning difficult subjects such as biochemistry, genetics, anatomy, physiology, pathology, pharmacology, diagnosis, materia medica, similimum or anything else! You need not study biological molecules, drug molecules or their chemical interactions. Simply find out where the ‘resonance’ is missing, and re-establish ‘resonance’ using appropriate ‘healing methods’. You can use anything as therapeutic agents- your hands, charged water, dynamized drugs, prayers, healing touch, suggestions, mind power, magnets, hair, nail, excreta! It is a comfort zone for lazy and ignorant people who desire to be ‘healers’. If you are not willing to learn science, or if you do not understand science, be a proponent of ‘energy medicine’!
——————————————————
The term ‘molecular imprints’ is now almost hijacked by the proponents of all diverse shades of unscientific ‘energy medicine’ and ‘spiritual’ theories about homeopathy. It makes distinguishing between scientific and unscientific approaches very hard.
The term ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘molecular imprints’ originally comes from polymer chemistry, where these terms are used to describe a technique of creating template-shaped cavities in polymer matrices with memory of the template molecules, to be used as artificial molecular recognition sites.
This technique is based on the system used by enzymes for substrate recognition, which is called the “lock and key” model. The active binding site of an enzyme has a unique geometric structure that is particularly suitable for a substrate. A substrate that has a corresponding shape to the site is recognized by selectively binding to the enzyme, while an incorrectly shaped molecule that does not fit the binding site is not recognized.
In a similar way, molecularly imprinted materials are prepared using a template molecule and functional monomers that assemble around the template and subsequently get crosslinked to each other. The functional monomers, which are self-assembled around the template molecule by interaction between functional groups on both the template and monomers, are polymerized to form an imprinted matrix. They are known in the scientific community as a molecular imprinted polymer (MIP). Then the template molecule is removed from the matrix under certain conditions, leaving behind a cavity compl ementary in size and shape to the template. The obtained cavity can work as a selective binding site for a specific template molecule.
I have been using the concepts of ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘molecular imprints’ to explain homeopathic potentization in this scientific perspective. My contention is that water has polymer-like properties at supramolecular level, and as such, water can be used as molecular imprinting medium exactly similar to other polymer substances. During potentization, three dimensional configuration of drug molecules are imprinted as nanocavities into the hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular networks of ethyl alcohol-water matrix. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for the drug molecules used for imprinting, as well as to pathogenic molecules having similar configurations. Active principles of potentized drugs are these ‘molecular imprints’.
This is the scientific understanding of ‘molecular imprinting’ and ‘molecular imprints’.
Now, the proponents of ‘energy medicine’ theories are trying to hijack this scientific concept to promote their pseudo-scientific theories. They talk about ‘molecular imprints’ of ‘drug energy’ and even ‘spiritual energy’. They talk about ‘molecular imprinting’ of ‘thoughts’ into water. According to them, ‘molecular imprints’ act by ’emitting’ ‘radiations’, ‘waves’, ‘resonance’ and such things. They mix up ‘molecular imprinting’ with ‘water memory’ theories of people like Emotto, Chaplin and Rustum Roy. Their theories have nothing in common with the scientific concepts of ‘molecular imprinting’.
Anyhow, these people create a lot of confusions during our discussions about scientific homeopathy
To avoid confusions, now I prefer to use the term ‘hydrosomes’ instead of ‘molecular imprints’, to indicate ‘molecular imprinted nanocavities of water acting as artificial molecular binding sites’.
Modern biochemistry explains molecular mechanisms of disease and cure in terms of ‘key-lock’ relationship between ligands and their target molecules. This ‘key-lock’ concept has been proved right by the preparation and use of target specific designer drugs. Any scientific explanation we provide for molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ should be fitting to this ‘key-lock’ concept of molecular interactions. My explanation of of homeopathy on the basis of ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ acting as ‘artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules’ perfectly meets this fundamental condition.
——————————————————
Whether anybody is practicing or propagating CAM, ENERGY MEDICINE, FAITH HEALING or anything else is not my concern. It is for the law-enforcing authorities to decide whether a HOMEOPATH registered under the provision of CCH Act is permitted to engage in such practices ‘along’ with homeopathy. I do not intend to comment on it. I am questioning the widely propagated theory that ‘homeopathy is energy medicine’. I am questioning the practice of ‘homeopathic occults’ such as homeopathic drug transmission through hair, homeopathic drug transmission through photographs, mp3 file transmission, selecting similimum by radionics machine, dowsing and reflexology, and such things which gravely damage the scientific credentials of homeopathy. I object only when you make homeopathy a PART of ‘energy medicine’. Homeopathy is purely a method of ‘drug therapy’- not energy medicine or spiritual healing. Homeopathy should be understood, explained and practiced a MEDICAL SCIENCE. Homeopaths should be scientific medical professionals.
——————————————————
One senior homeopath friend commented on my discussions regarding ‘energy medicine theories of homeopathy’:
“In fact I treat my patients with energy medicine apart from Homoeopathy and magnetic therapy. Energy medicine is there and practiced from 4000 years and Homoeopathy is 250 years old. Study some more and learn to know before commenting on any subject. 4000 years back no labs, no trials, still medicine was being given in many ways and patients were being treated too. Just because you would not believe energy medicine, you cant call it funny and mock at it. Energy medicine is having its own value and such comments would not change its place in the Universe. Never think you can attack somebody like this and you do not have any right to discuss the unknown subject in the group.”
My friend is gravely mistaken. I am not discussing the “”value” or ‘efficacy’ of energy medicine. Nor its historical relevance. I am not interested in ‘knowing’ it. I would not question anybody’s right to practice ‘energy medicine’, ‘magnetotherapy’ or anything like that “apart” from homeopathy. It is up to you to decide what you should practice.
I was commenting on the widely propagated theory that “homeopathy is energy medicine”. In that case, it is a different matter. I did not criticize ‘reflexology’ per se; I criticized the method of selecting similimum using reflexology David Little talk about. I have nothing if anybody practice radionics or dowsing; but when somebody theorizes about using radionics machines to select homeopathic drugs, I have the right to comment. The age old occult practice using hair as as medium existed here since antiquity. I am not bothered. But when somebody talks about homeopathic drug transmission to distance through hair, and conducts courses and seminars for homeopaths on that topic, it becomes a matter of concern for every homeopath. I am not bothered about the ‘water memory’ theory of Emoto or Rustom Roy. But when a homeopath claims he writes name of homeopathic similimum on paper, keeps it under a glass of water to ‘charge’ it and treats his patients with that ‘charged water’, you should not expect me me to keep silent. When a reputed homeopathy claims he recorded the homeopathic drug information as mp3 file and cured AIDS by playing it to patients, you have no right to ask me to keep mum.
Anybody can practice any occults or woodoo as he like “apart” from homeopathy, if law permits a ‘physician’ to do so. I don’t bother. But when you make homeopathy “part” of your occult practices, and spin ‘ultra-scientific’ theories about homeopathy to justify such practices, I have the right to intervene and comment. I am bothered only about homeopathy- not about your ‘energy medicine’ or occults. You keep them “apart”, I will not “attack” you.
Regarding my “right to discuss the unknown subject in the group”, I would like to reserve my comments for the time being, hoping not to spoil our friendship. I expect you would discuss only “known” subjects hereafter.
——————————————————
I constantly try to expose all those ‘big’ people who are propagating homeopathy as a branch of ‘energy medicine’ or ‘spiritual healing’, not due to any personal vendetta. Actually, I do not know these people personally. I do this campaign as part of my mission of advancing homeopathy as a full-fledged ‘medical science’, which I think, cannot be achieved without freeing it from malignant influence of diverse shades of ‘energy medicine’ theories and their highly influential international propagators.
We cannot hope to advance homeopathy as a scientific medical practice unless we could explain ‘potentization’ and ‘similia similibus curentur’ in a way fitting to modern scientific paradigms, and prove them according to scientific methods. If you are genuine in this mission, you cannot move forward without settling accounts with pseudo-scientific ‘energy medicine concepts’ that have engulfed homeopathy.
Actually, ‘energy medicine’, energy therapy or energy healing is a branch of complementary and alternative medicine basically distinct from homeopathy. It is based on the belief that a healer is able to channel healing energy into the person seeking help by different methods: hands-on, hands-off, and distant (or absent) where the patient and healer are in different locations. There are various schools of energy healing. It is known as biofield energy healing,spiritual healing, contact healing, distant healing, therapeutic touch, Reiki or Qigong. Spiritual healing is largely non-denominational and traditional religious faith is not seen as a prerequiste for effecting a cure. Faith healing, by contrast, takes place within a religious context.
Homeopathy is essentially a form of ‘drug therapy’. It has nothing to do with ‘energy medicine’. Homeopathy should be understood, explained and practiced as a scientific medicine.
‘Homeopathy is energy medicine’- this theory is intentionally propagated world over by proponents of diverse colors of occult and pseudo-scientific practices destroying the scientific credentials of homeopathy. They spin fanciful theories about homeopathy using ‘vibration theory’, ‘bio-magnetism’,’wave theory’, ‘electro-magnetic radiations’, ‘frequencies’, ‘resonance theory’, ‘piezo-electricity’ and various other absurd theories, pretending themselves to be ‘ultra-scientific’. These people are gravely alienating homeopathy from mainstream scientific knowledge system.
Along with homeopathic practice, these people are actually doing spiritual healing, psychic healing, Therapeutic touch, Healing Touch, Esoteric healing, Magnetic healing, Qigong healing, Reiki, Pranic healing, Crystal healing, distant healing, intercessionary prayer, Acupuncture, biofield energy healing,spiritual healing, contact healing, distant healing and various other occult practices. They prefer to call themselves as CAM practitioners. That is why they want to include homeopathy in the category of ‘energy medicine’, and try to explain homeopathy in that terms.
These people propagate hair transmission, telephone transmission, photo transmission, mp3 file transmission, telepathy, radionics, dowsing, spiritual homeopathy and such things in the name of homeopathy.They have great influence and dominance in international homeopathy.
If you genuinely want homeopathy to be a real ‘medical science’, it is inevitable that you will have to fight for freeing homeopathy from the influence of ‘energy medicine’ theories and associated occult practices. I take up this fight as part of my mission of propagating scientific homeopathy. Kindly do not minimize it into an issue of ‘personality clashes’ or ”ego conflicts.
—————————————————-
Dana Ulmann commented on my article:
“If THAT critique of me and my work is the best you have, you’ve got nothing…you are shooting blanks.
And for the record, “energy medicine” is not the “enemy” of scientific homeopathy (or scientific anything).
And by the way, thanx for the promotion of my work, even if you twist it and obviously don’t understand it…oh well, I don’t have high expectations about “medical fundamentalists” like yourself. Heck, people who follow James Randi even though he is an admitted master of deception and misdirection has my most sincere sympathies.
Peace out… Based on the Alexa ranking of your site, virtually no one comes here. It seems that your blog is a placebo.
I would expect Dana Ulman to provide specific answers to following direct questions, if he is serious in his inquiry ‘how homeopathy works’
1. What exactly happens during potentization? What is the exact process involved?
2. What are the active principles of potentized drugs?
3. What is the exact process by which these active principles of potentized drugs interact with the organism and produce a therapeutic effect?
4. How would you explain ‘similia similibus curentur’ in the light of your understanding of potentization and therapeutic action of potentized drugs?
——————————————————
For making a prescription that would offer a ‘Total Cure’ of the individual, we have to get his ‘Totality of Symptoms’ which constitute the his ‘constitutional totality’ as well as various ‘’particular totalities’. Presence of underlying miasms, or ‘chronic disease dispositions arising from off-target effects of antibodies generated against exogenous proteins such as infectious agents’ should also be considered and appropriate ‘anti-miasmatic’ drugs included in the ‘total cure’ prescriptions.
A patients Mental symptoms and Physical generals constitute the ‘constitutional totality’.
Particular disease symptoms consisting of their Causations, Appearance, Locations, Sensations, Modalities and Concomitants constitute ‘particular totality’ .
There may me more than one ‘particular totality’ existing an individual simultaneously, arising from different types of molecular inhibitions. He may be having headache with a ‘particular totality’, with some skin eruptions with yet another ‘particular totality’ , and a gastric complaint with yet another ‘particular totality’, all existing simultaneously.
Case taking and repertorizing using mental symptoms and physical generals according to classical KENTIAN METHOD would be ideal to find out ‘constitutional totality’ and a ‘similimums’ for that totality.
Case taking and repertorization using causations, locations, sensations, modalities and concomitants according to BOENNINGHAUSSEN’S METHOD would be ideal to find out’particular totalities’ , and appropriate ‘similimums’ for each ‘particular totality’ .
If we get a ‘single’ drug as similimum’ for ‘constitutional totality’ and ‘particular totality’ , and the symptoms of miasmatic aspects also covered by that drug, we can prescribe a ‘single drug’.
IF different ‘similimums’ comes out for ‘constitutional totality’ and different ‘particular totalities’, we will have to make a ‘multiple drug’ prescription. In most chronic cases, nosodes will be required to tackle miasms.
Concept of ‘constitutional totality’ evolves from KENTIAN METHOD of case taking and repertorization, whereas the concept of ‘particular totality’ is based on BOENNINGHAUSSENS method. In my opinion, KENT and BOENNINGHAUSSEN has their own limitations, and hence a synthesis of both approach is necessary for finding a similimum that cover the ‘Complete Totality’ of the patient.
In brief, this is the practical way to make individualized ’Total Cure Prescritptions’ for our patients.
——————————————————
If we browse through various leading homeopathic websites, we come across hundreds of ‘research articles’ propagating diverse types of imaginative ‘theories’ and ‘hypotheses’ written in highly scholastic and ‘scientific’ language, claiming to unravel the riddles of homeopathy once and for all. The authors will be ‘scientists’ or ‘academicians’ so much revered by the homeopathic community for their high academic ‘authority’, ‘professional credentials’ and ‘institutional background’ that no average person would dare to question their wisdom. Most of them are ‘prominent faces’ and ‘representatives’ of international homeopathy.
Most funny part about these ‘knowledge explosions on internet’ is that most of us never read those article, or fail to understand even if we dare to read them. Nobody is interested in what is actually said in them. Nobody makes even a simple comment. Nobody verifies the claims made in those articles. Nobody tries to differentiate grains from pebbles. We simply wonder at this ‘great’ piece of knowledge, and go on broadcasting this ‘wonderful knowledge’ by keeping on posting these ‘links’ wherever we have access, in a desperate endeavor to ‘educate’ the whole community!
No wonder, in spite of all these ‘ground-breaking’ researches, theories and hypotheses being regularly broadcast, homeopathy still remains where samuel hahnemann left it 200 hundred years ago. Nobody could so far provide even a scientifically convincing answer to the basic question “how homeopathy works”. All these great authors only contribute their best in enhancing confusions among homeopathic community through their writings and seminars- that is all.
To safeguard ourselves from confusions being created by these ever-new flooding of ‘researches’ ‘theories’ and ‘hypotheses’, I would suggest to use following questions as touch stones for their primary evaluation whenever you are introduced to a ‘new theory’:
1. Does this theory scientifically and logically explain the exact processes involved in homeopathic potentization?
2. Does this theory scientifically and logically answer the question ‘what are the exact active principles contained in potentized medicines”?
3. Does this theory scientifically and logically explain the exact molecular mechanisms by which these active principles act up on the organism to produce a therapeutic effect?
4. Does this theory scientifically and logically explain ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge on one side, and to our homeopathic experiences on the other side?
If the answers for these FOUR FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS are found to be negative, simply dismiss those ‘theories’. They are nothing but hollow ‘scientific’ verbosity.
——————————————————
Most homeopaths are ‘believers’. For them, homeopathy is a sacred ‘belief system’.
This statement may seem to be some what provocative. Excuse me for that. Speaking hard truths may feel bitter and provocative. Ancient Indian scriptures warning me: “sathyam bruyal, priyam bruyal; na bruyal sathyam apriyam”. I know, I am speaking ‘sathyam apriyam’.
Most homeopaths ‘believe’ that ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’ and ‘our master’ is ‘greatest scientist of all times’. They ‘believe’ in master, ‘believe’ in organon’, ‘believe’ in ‘similia similibus curentur’, ‘believe’ in ‘vital force’, ‘believe’ in ‘dynamic drug energy’, ‘believe’ in ‘miasms’, ‘believe’ in ‘immutable fundamental principles’, ‘believe in ‘single drug-single dose’, ‘believe’ in ‘hering laws’, ‘believe’ in ‘drug relationships’, ‘believe’ in ‘words of stalwarts’, ‘believe’ in ‘teachers’ and ‘gurus’. This list of ‘homeopathic beliefs’ is fascinating as well as unending. They ask me: “do you believe in homeopathy?”
They hesitate to accommodate new knowledge. They never ask ‘why-what-how’ about their beliefs. They would never tolerate anybody asking such hard questions
Most of them prefer to be die-hard fundamentalists- homeopathic fundamentalists. Tougher than even those dreaded religious fundamentalists. They behave themselves like ‘faith-healers’ than scientific medical professionals and physicians. To talk logic, reason and science to such a closed-minded ‘believers community’ is a tough task indeed- and dangerous to some extent.
Without displacing our deep-rooted ‘blind beliefs’ with ‘scientific knowledge’, we cannot hope homeopathy to become a scientific medical system. Study, research, experiment, learn, know and apply- that is the way of science. Not blind believing and following.
One of the unshakable beliefs among homeopaths is regarding the ‘great damage’ that could be done to the patient by giving an ‘unnecessary’ dose of potentized drug, including untimely repetition of even indicated drug. Did anybody any body conduct any scientific experiments to verify whether this ‘belief’ is right or wrong? Never! They would claim, they had such ‘experiences’.
Some homeopaths have a wonderfully perverted sense of ‘cause-effect’ relationship. They consider every ‘before-after’ chronological relationship as cause and effect, and jump into queer conclusions. Once they give a ‘single’ dose of drug to the patient, everything that ‘follows’ that act will be attributed as the ‘miraculos effect’ of their ‘single dose’. Many ‘cures’, many ‘aggravations’, many ‘side effects’ are actually the product of this perverted understanding of ‘cause and effect’.
One doctor said: “My patient had a severe heart attack ‘after’ an ‘untimely’ second dose of Lachesis 200”.
We hear this type of incidents and experiences reported by homeopaths in their practice. Somebody said: “my patient got delirious attack’ after a dose of Bell200. Another homeopath argues: “A patient showed eruptions all over body after a dose of merc sol 200, that is a proof that homeopathy drugs have dangerous side effects”.
Why not these friends do some experiments by giving bell 200 or merc sol to a few more persons and watching the outcome before reaching this type of conclusions? At least on some pet animals?
Dear friends, ‘cause-effect’ relationship is different from ‘Before-After’ relationship. Kindly use some logical thinking and rational experiments before declaring foolish conclusions. That is scientific method.
Another unshakable ‘homeopathic belief’ is regarding the ‘dangers’ of ‘mixing’ two or more drugs. Did anybody ever conduct a scientific study to verify it? Never. But they ‘believe’ so. Remember, we are not even sure about the active principles of potentized drugs. We just ‘believe’ that our drugs contain ‘dynamic drug energy’, only because our ‘great master’ said so! Without knowing the active principles and their interactions, how can we say ‘mixing’ of drugs is harmful?
Homeopaths ‘believe’ in ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’, even though they know all the sciences they learned in schools and colleges do not justify those beliefs. They ‘believe’, only because they are expected to ‘believe’ all those absurd things as the ‘true followers’ of our ‘great master’. They are trained not to ask “why?”.
Take the ‘belief’ regarding ‘drug relationships’. Nobody ask whether any scientific studies were ever done on that subject. Without any scientific proof, we repeat what we were taught by our teachers or read in books- Drug A will antidote Drug B, Drug C is complementary to Drug D, Drug X is inimical to Drug Y and so on, very well ‘proving’ from hundreds of daily experiences that all these things are utter nonsense!
——————————————————
Organon is a great work, unmatched in history of medical literature. But that does not mean each and every words of organon are ‘immutable’ truths. If you study organon with a rational and scientific mindset, you will see that there are a lot of unscientific ideas in organon, necessitated by the infantile state of scientific knowledge available to hahnemann 250 years ago. But homeopaths prefer to ‘believe’ organon is ‘ultimate science’.
Hahneman was a great philosopher, innovator, physician and visionary. But he was a human being- not a prophet or a god. He lived and worked in 18th century Germany. His works, ideas and theories would bear the historical marks of time-space he lived and developed his ideas- of course its limitations also. In spite of his great vision that transcends the boundaries of centuries to come, hahnemann also made a lot of speculations that are obviously unscientific in the present knowledge context.
We can learn it in two different ways- dogmatic way or creative way.
Most homeopaths prefer to study organon and other works of hahnemann in the dogmatic way. The teacher or his ‘words’ are considered to be the ultimate authority here. His words are the ultimate truth. Master is considered to be beyond any mistakes, a ‘know-all’ without any limitations. The learner’s only duty is to grasp what is spoken by the master. Questions should be asked only to clear any doubts regarding ‘master’s words- only to clearly understand the meaning of what he is saying. His theories should be discussed only to learn it ‘perfectly’. If you try to question the correctness of ‘master’s words it will never be tolerated. Only permitted relationship between the teacher and learner is ‘guru-disciple’ relationship. Here learning means ‘believing’ and ‘following’.
The other way of learning is ‘creative learning’. Here, the learning by itself becomes a creative process. The books, the ideas, the theories and even the teacher- all are tools for the learner in this creative process. Utilizing these available materials and tools, the learner creates his own ideas through this process of learning. In this process, he will have to discard what ever he finds incorrect or unfitting to the ever-growing knowledge system. Learner digests and assimilates the ideas he get from books or teachers. He asks question like ‘why-how-what’ regarding everything preached. He earnestly verifies the correctness of every idea before they are accepted. Every lesson is dissected, analyzed, verified and then synthesized in a new higher dimension. Creative learning involves creation of new ideas using existing ones.
Homeopathy can be learned either way- dogmatically or creatively. My method of learning is latter one. I prefer to call this method ‘dialectical learning’. I cannot copy the words of ‘masters’ and ‘quote them as ultimate truth. Since most of the concepts, ‘tenets’ and ‘doctrines’ of homeopathy still remain unverified in a scientific way, I need answers for ‘what-why-how” about them to satisfy my scientific mind.
Dogmatic preachers and learners may find it difficult to follow or tolerate what I say about homeopathy. I beg to be excused.
According to my scientific approach, there are no unquestionable ‘basic tenets’ in homeopathy- as in any science. Accept nothing as ‘ultimate truth’, only because it was spoken by a ‘master’.
Learning Hahnemann does not mean merely reading and reciting Organon, Chronic Diseases, Materia Medica and other works written by him. We should read not only the printed lines, but read in between lines. I call it ‘Creative Reading’. Creating our ‘own’ ideas by reading what was written by hahnemann. We should use our ‘own’ brains, our ‘own’ logic, living in our ‘own’ space-time context. Do not be misguided by reading the works of ‘interpreters’, before you are ideologically well-equipped.
How should we learn the ‘master’ and his works?
1. Always keep abreast with modern scientific knowledge
Only by keeping ourselves armed with latest scientific knowledge as well as modern tools of scientific methods, we can identify what is scientific and what is unscientific in hahnemann’s theories and observations. Scientific world out look will keep us always on right path.
2. Read in between lines
Reading ‘in between lines’ means, understanding beyond the meaning of words we read.Readingis an interaction between the author and the reader. What is written in texts would reflect only fractions of author’s real thought process. Understanding his thought process is essential to grasp the real meaning of his words. There would be a lot of ideas lying hidden between lines, that could be read by an intelligent reader.
3. Creative Reading
’Creative reading’ involves the synthesis of new ideas through the process of reading, which were so far unknown to the reader and not said by the author. Here, reading becomes a creative process. Some ideas getting from the author acts like a spark that ignites the mind of reader, and leads to synthesis of new ideas. We should consciously build up a habit of ‘creative reading’.
4. Use our ‘own’ brains, our ‘own’ logic
We should “use our own brains, our own logic” while reading the works of hahnemann. Hahnemann is explaining his theories on the basis of his experiences and observations. He used his brain and his logic in doing so. We should ask ourselves ‘what-why-how’ of everything hahnemann said. This way of learning is called ‘dialectic’ learning, which is different from ‘dogmatic’ learning.
5. Live in our ‘own’ space-time context.
“Live in our ‘own’ space-time context”. Knowledge is evolving through space and time. Hahnemann was talking 250 years ago, sitting inGermany. That was his ‘space-time context’. He developed his concepts and theories utilizing the knowledge available to him in his ‘space-time context’. Human knowledge has evolved a lot there after. We know many things regarding phenomena of nature that hahnemann was not fortunate to know. Now we should learn hahnemann in the light of latest scientific knowledge available to us.
6. Do not be misguided by the works of ‘interpreters’
Do not be misguided by reading the works of interpreters. This is very important if you want to understand what hahnemann really said. Interpreters had done great damage to homeopathy and original teachings of hahnemann. Many people learn homeopathy using the books written by various authors who interpreted hahnemann’s teachings according to their whims and fancies. The most outstanding example is theory of miasms. IIf you read hahnemann’s ‘chronic diseases’ carefully, it would be very clear that hahnemann was talking about miasms as a ‘chronic disease dispositions caused by the infectious agents of itch, syphilis and gonorrhoea’. He did not hink about ‘miasms’ unrelated with ‘infectious materials’.
But the interpreters made ‘miasmatic analysis a total mess, dragging even genetics and heridity into it. Now, most homeopaths learn ‘miasms’ from interpreters. We have lot of such examples where interpreters have totally misguided homeopathy. We should learn homeopathy from original works of hahnemann, using our own brains and logic, to keep ourselves not misguided.
——————————————————
An Appeal To Scientific-minded Homeopathy Students And Teachers- Please Take Up Some ‘Small’ Research Projects On Potentized Drugs
When I posted an opinion poll to know how homeopaths think about the effects of certain physical influences such as exposure to sunlight, ionizing radiations etc on the medicinal properties of potentized drugs, I was shocked to note that we have no any idea regarding even such preliminary facts about our therapeutic tools. Everybody opines according to his whims and fancies. It is very much disappointing to know that homeopathic community has not even ‘researched’ on these primary questions. Everybody talk about ‘big research’ only. We know a lot about organon, miasms, similimum, vital force and such ‘big’ things, but know very little about ‘small’ things. It is really pathetic.
I would request scientific-minded professors of homeopathic medical colleges to guide their PG students to take up some research projects for answering some questions, which are very primary steps in the scientific understanding of our drugs.
Questions to be researched are: What are the effects of following influences on medicinal properties of homeopathic drugs potentized above 12c?
1. Exposure to direct sunlight
2. Exposure to strong artificial light including fluorescent lights
3. High temperature
4. Refrigeration
5. Ionizing radiations
6. Exposure to strong magnetic fields
7. Exposing to perfumes, volatile oils, strong odors
8. Keeping near computers-mobile phones-electronic gadgets
9. Exposing to electric currents
10. Nearness of mobile towers
11. Violent shaking
Projects can be undertaken for comparative study of potentized drugs and control solutions(water-ethyl alcohol mixture) regarding following physical parameters:
1. Evaporation rates
2. Freezing points
3. Boiling points
4. Browninan motions
5. Viscosity and flow rates
6. Solvent properties
7. Refraction of light
8. Absorption of light
9. Transmission rates of sound
Outcomes of all these studies will be helpful in resolving the fundamental question- ‘what is the exact process involved in potentization”?
A word of caution: Never use commercial samples of potentized drugs for research studies. They are not so much reliable. We should prepare our own samples under strictly monitored conditions to ensure genuine potencies. Never use so-called ‘back potencies’ supplied by commercial manufacturers. We should start potentization from the crude samples themselves.
——————————————————
DrAbhay Meghaji Chheda commented on my article on Dr Praful Vijaykar’s “Embryonic Theory”:
“Mr. Nambiar, All your comments are welcome. But there should be certain decorum maintained while making comments. After all dr. Prafull Vijaykar’s contribution to Homoeopathic System is immense and lots of successful doctors have Dr. Vijaykar’s teaching as a solid foundation. We do respect your zeal and enthusiasm for Homoeopathy but we also respect great teachers like Dr. Prafull Vijaykar as well. Thanks. DrAbhay Meghaji Chheda”
My reply: “My comments are not meant personal. I was commenting on the ’embryonic layer’ theory of dr vijaykar. It is not a matter of respect or disrespect towards any individual. If you feel I have made any wrong points in my post, you can counter them point by point, participating the discussion. Please dont make it a personal issue, sir.
By saying “there should be certain decorum maintained while making comments”, what do you actually mean, sir? Do you mean we should not discuss or criticize what have been spoken by ‘great teachers’? In my article, I did not discuss “Prafull Vijaykar’s contribution to Homoeopathic System “, but only his ’embryonic layer’ theory. Let us confine to that specific topic.
I agree that there are “lots of successful doctors”. All of those “successful” homeopaths are not followers of Dr Viayakar. “Solid foundation” of all “successful homeopaths” are “similia similibus curentur” taught by hahnemann, not ‘vijaykar’s teachings. Anybody judiciously applying ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentized drugs’ will become “successful” even if they know nothing about vijaykars methods. Success belongs to hahnemann, not vijaykar. You make success using ‘similia’ theory, and deliberately ascribe those successes to ‘teachings’ of vijaykar. It is totally inappropriate, irrational and unacceptable.”
Dr Vijaykar’s ’embryonic theory’ do not agree with concepts of modern embryology, and his explanations of ‘suppression’ and ‘directions of cure’ in the light of ’embryonic theory’ is plainly irrational, unscientific and contradicts all knowledge we get from modern life sciences. Keeping all these things in mind, how can I say ‘vijaykars theory is “great contribution to homeopathic system”, to show respect to that “great teacher”?
——————————————————
Propagators of ‘hair transmission’ and such things in homeopathy think that their occult practices will become ‘medical science’ by merely sprinkling some scientific and ultra-scientific terms such as ‘genetic’, ‘quantum’, ‘embryonic’, ‘particles’, ‘vibrations’ ‘resonance’, ‘energy field’, ‘teleportation’, ‘radiations’, ‘frequency’, ‘string’ and the like here and there in their articles and lectures.
Same time they would talk about ‘unscientificness’ and ‘limitations’ of modern science.
Next moment they would explain homeopathy in terms of ‘vital force’, ‘dynamic energy’, ‘mind remedy’, ‘spiritual remedies’, ‘hair transmissions’, ‘photo-transmissions’, ‘radionics’, and such other absurd occult practices. These people make homeopathy a subject of unending laughter and mockery before the scientific community.
These people are not interested in real scientific understanding of homeopathy. All of them are marketing their own ‘theories’ and ‘methods’, and have built up a closed community of ardent followers around them. They fear any new wave of scientific understanding in homeopathy would sweep away their sand hills of fame and fortunes.That is why they are desperately fighting tooth and nail to resist any attempts of real scientific awareness.
If ‘drug energy’ can be “transmitted” to me from long distances through a hair, nail, blood or other tissues removed from my body, and even photographs, how can I dare to throw away my hair in a garbage pit? What if somebody unknowingly deposits some toxic substances on it? How can I entrust my blood sample to a clinical lab, without fearing that they can do some mischief to me by putting some harmful medicines in my blood sample? I think I have to be very cautious to preserve my cut hair and nail without reaching the hands of my enemies!
If we want to make homeopathy a scientific medical system, homeopaths should at least start to evaluate things by studying ‘what is said’, than ‘who said it’. Even the UKbased ‘international’ homeopath claims he get excellent ‘results’ even in ‘incurable’ cases by using ‘medicines’ in the eyes of photographs of patients downloaded from computer around the world!. He is also a man of ‘great credentials’. Same with ‘masters’ of ‘hair transmission’ method. That man who sent ‘mp3 files of drugs’ to Haiti also is a revered name in international homeopathy. ‘Five-cups -spoon’ method also is contributed by a famous Indian homeopath. We cannot question them, because they are men of great credentials and positions. Until unless we succeed in understanding the exact active principles of homeopathic drugs, and the real mechanism of their therapeutic action, this will go on. And people will ‘follow’ the ‘foolishness’ of ‘masters’ having ‘credentials’ and ‘positions’.
All those ‘masters’ I referred above conducts seminars, write books, and are ‘followed’ by thousands of homeopaths. But I have decided to listen only to ‘what is said’, ignoring ‘who said it’, and I believe, only that way we can make homeopathy a scientific medical system.
If somebody claims “took the mp3 files of drugs and gave the vibration of the remedy, it worked”, why should we hesitate to call them ‘unscientific’? I don’t think there is anything to ‘investigate’ in it. If a ‘homeopath’ claims he is treating ‘patients all over the world sitting in UK’, sending ‘medicinal energy’ by applying drugs in the eyes of photographs downloaded from computer, what investigation you are talking about to be conducted to call him a ‘fraud’? Same with ‘hair transmission’, dowsing’, ‘radionics’ and such things, which are beyond any doubt unscientific, as far as i am concerned. Should we swallow all these garbage to ‘prove’ that we are not prejudiced?
WHOLE SCIENTIFIC MINDED HOMEOPATHS AND PROFESSIONAL BODIES SHOULD COME FORWARD AGAINST THESE “OCCULT” PRACTICES DONE IN THE NAME OF HOMEOPATHY. THESE PEOPLE ARE MAKING HOMEOPATHY A SUBJECT OF MOCKERY BEFORE THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY
——————————————————
Dr. Vijaykar totally failed to comprehend the biochemistry involved in homeopathic therapeutics, and hence could not interpret the ‘directions of disease and cure’ in relation with the interactions of biochemical pathways. In the absence of essential scientific knowledge, he only tried to make his theories appear ‘scientific’ by utilizing some terms from embryology and genetics. Playing with scientific vocabulary, he was successful in marketing his theories well among the ‘science-starved’ sections of homeopathic community.
David Witko, in his book review published in ‘The Homoeopath’,The Society of Homeopaths. 2 Artizan Road,NorthamptonNN1 4HU, United Kingdom, on ‘Predictive Homeopathy Part One – Theory of Suppression’ by Dr Prafull Vijayakar, said as follows:
“Essentially, and in outline, he charts the development of the human embryo in seven stages, from the cells and mind to the neural plate, neuro-endocrine system, mesoderm, connective tissues, endoderm, and its eventual cornpletion at the ectoderm”
“All of the organs of the body derive from these seven layers of development. To illustrate, the GI tract is formed as part of the endoderm, whilst the kidneys were formed earlier in the mesoderm”
“Vijayakar reasons that as natural embryonic growth progresses from the inside to the outside (even our bones develop this way), disease and ill-health will inevitably move in the reverse direction, i.e. from the outside (in Hering-speak) to the inside. From the ectoderm to the endoderm. From the endoderm to the mesoderm. Deeper and deeper. So if you know which parts of the body are associated with each level you can clearly see the progression of disease”.
This review of David Witko amply illustrates the essence of Vijaykar’s theory of ‘embryonic layers’ relating with hering’s law, on which his whole ‘methods’ and systems’ are built up on.
Which text book of embryology says about the development of human embryo starting from “cells and mind”? Is it vijaykar’s invention? Embryology never deals with ‘mind’, but only ‘cells’.
Obviously, vijaykar wanted to make a theory seemingly scientific utilizing some concepts borrowed from genetics, but same time he wanted to establish that ‘mind’ is primary in the development of embryo. Hence, he added the word ‘mind’ along with ‘cells’ while describing the initial stages of embryonic development.
According to his interpretation of ‘embryology’, development of human embryo ‘starts’ from ‘cells and mind’, then advances “to the neural plate, neuro-endocrine system, mesoderm, connective tissues, endoderm, and its eventual completion at the ectoderm”.
—————————————————-
The phenomenon we call ‘MIND’ do not exist without specialized cells called neurons, as well as complex biochemical interactions involving diverse types of neurochemicals. It is utter foolishness to say that a single cell detached from a complex multicellular organism, devoid of any neurons, will have its own ‘mind’.
——————————————————
By ‘scientific homeopathy’, I mean an open system of theory and practice of Homeopathy that spontaneously updates and advances along with our ever-growing scientific knowledge system, which could be verified with available scientific methods and tools, with the involvement of scientific community. At least, we have to make it a theory and practice that do not go against the fundamental directions and world outlook of modern science. Our theory and practice should fit into the scientific paradigms of modern biochemistry, molecular biology and life sciences. Our explanations should agree with the proven wealth of information provided by modern physiology, pathology, therapeutics and pharmacology.
—————————————————–
Hahnemann said in ORGANON OF MEDICINE (Sixth Edition): Aphorism 11 (FootNote) as follows:
“A child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles, that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected”
We cannot blame Hahnemann for saying so. He was talking this 200 years ago, when there was no scientific knowledge available regarding the viruses and virus infections. HE WAS TALKING ON THE BASIS OF KNOWLEDGE AVAILABLE TO HIM DURING HIS TIME.
But, if some body say the same thing NOW, it becomes a grave offense towards science and advanced human knowledge system existing here. In their eagerness to be known as TRUE DISCIPLES OF THE MASTER, we hear some homeopaths declaring that each and every word spoken by the master is ULTIMATE SCIENCE! They even dare to declare that IT IS MODERN SCIENCE THAT WENT WRONG!
Had the master lived and written organon 50 years later, he would not have included this passage in his organon.
——————————————————
In ‘Chronic Diseases : Para 139’ Hahnemann says:
“Sucklings never receive medicine; the mother or wet-nurse receives the remedy instead, and through their milk it acts on the child very quickly, mildly and beneficially”.
I think Hahnemann has turned his whole principles upside down here.
1. He is asking to give ‘similimum of the infant’ to mother or wet nurse, for whom that drug is not be symptomatically indicated. As such, if ‘similimum of infant’ is given to nurse, it will not act upon her vital force. If the infant gets that medicine through breast milk of nurse, it means our medicine contains some active factors that could be transferred through breast milk, without acting on her vital force.
2. Homeopaths believe potentized medicines are said to act through ‘nerves’ on the vital force. There is no ‘nerve cells’ present in ‘milk’. How can then it act through milk?
3. If homeopathic drugs are actually conveyed from mothers body to infants body through the milk, that only means our drugs contain some ‘material’ factors that can be conveyed through milk, not through ‘nerves’ as it is believed. More over, can ‘vital force’ be transferred through breast milk that do not contain living cells?
4. If homeopathic drugs are transferred from mother to child through milk, will not the blood and other body fluids of mother also contain those drugs? Could homeopathic drugs be administered through blood transfusions? If a person under homeopathic treatment donates blood, will not the recipient also get drugged by our medicines?
Administration of homeopathic drugs by transmission through milk raises a lot of questions regarding active principles of potentized drugs, their mode of conveyance in the body and the mechanism of its action that could not be answered by ‘vital force’ theory.
What if we administer the medicines to a wet nurse, and collect her breast milk in a bottle, will it still preserve its medicinal properties? Can we give that bottled milk to the infant as medicine? Then, in what form medicine exist in that bottled milk? Should this bottled Milk to be considered an organism, with ‘vital force’ present in it?
Some homeopaths believe that “our dynamic homeopathic medicine when work on vital force that is produce some required chemical changes in body, and infant receive medicinal effect by mother’s milk because infant vital energy is strong that is receive this vital effect frequently”.
But remember, we are not selecting a similimum for mother or wet nurse, according to their ‘totality of symptoms’. We are selecting similimum for infant. How can an un-indicated homeopathic medicine “work on vital force” and “produce some required chemical changes in body” of mother or wet nurse? Even if it acts up on their organism, it is said that an un-indicated medicine will have only negative influence. Would anybody say this ‘adverse chemical changes’ produced by these ‘negative influence’ are conveyed by the milk to the infant and curing his disease?
If you want to get a ‘positive’ influence, you will have to determine the similimum for wet nurse by collecting totality of her symptoms, not for infant.
Let us consider the argument “dynamic homeopathic medicine when work on vital force that is produce some required chemical changes in body”. If so, the infant is getting the milk subjected to “chemical changes” by the action of drug upon the “vital force of mother”. It is this “chemically changed milk” that is consumed by the infant. How this “chemically changed” milk would act homeopathically on the organism of ‘infant’? If anybody argue that the “vital force” of mother is acting on infant through milk, how would you explain this phenomenon if the milk is collected in bottles and given to infant? Would you say “the changed vital force” of mother is collected in a bottle and transferred to infant?
I think we can explain this phenomenon more rationally and without any confusion. The ‘active principles’ of potentized drugs selected as similimum for the infant is conveyed through blood of mother to the milk, and thereby into the organism of the infant. The active principles act in the infant the same way as a similimum given directly. Is not this explanation more rational and simple?
This phenomenon clearly proves that active principles of potentized drugs are conveyed through body fluids, not through the ‘nerves’ as commonly believed. I wanted only to make that point clear. If it were ‘nerves’, it will never be conveyed to infants through mother’s breast milk.
——————————————————
Hahnemann never said ALL chronic diseases are MIASMATIC, as our ‘miasmatic experts’ teach. He talks about NON-MIASMATIC chronic diseases also.
Please listen: In Organon : Aphorism 204(Sixth Edition) Hahnemann says:
“If we deduct all chronic affections, ailments and diseases that depend on a persistent unhealthy mode of living, as also those innumerable medicinal maladies caused by …the irrational,… persistent, harassing and pernicious treatment of diseases often only of trivial character by physicians of the old school, most the remainder of chronic diseases result from the development of these three chronic miasms, internal syphilis, internal sycosis, but chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”
This statement shows, Hahneman considered a class of ‘chronic’ diseases’ originating from ‘persistent unhealthy mode of living’ and ‘innumerable medicinal maladies’, other than ‘miasmatic chronic diseases’.
That means, when treating ‘chronic diseases’ originating from ‘persistent unhealthy mode of living’ and ‘innumerable medicinal maladies’, we need not worry about psora, syphilis or sycosis, but we can treat according to ‘similia similibu cu……rentur’. Remember, most of the ‘chronic diseases’ originating from occupational, environmental, nutritional, drug-induced, infectious and such others belong to the class of “chronic diseases originating from ‘persistent unhealthy mode of living’ and ‘innumerable medicinal maladies”. THEY ARE NOT CAUSED BY MIASMS OF PSORA, SYPHILIS OR SYCOSIS.
It is obvious that Hahnemann excluded “all chronic affections, ailments and diseases that depend on a persistent unhealthy mode of living, as also those innumerable medicinal maladies” while talking about “chronic diseases” of “miasmatic origin”.
When treating chronic diseases, first we have to examine whether they belong this group of “chronic affections, ailments and diseases that depend on a persistent unhealthy mode of living, as also those innumerable medicinal maladies” . If so we need not consider miasms, but to find a similimum on the basis of ‘similia similibus curentur’.
Hahnemann even sub-divided “non-miasmatic chronic diseases” into two: a) All chronic affections, ailments and diseases that depend on a ‘persistent unhealthy mode of living’. b) those ‘innumerable medicinal maladies’. Why the ‘followers of …the master so far ignored this? When selecting a drug on the basis of ‘miasmatic analysis’, can we ignore ‘similia similibus curentur’? If you prescribe a drug without considering ‘similarity’ of symptoms, how can we claim that it is homeopathy? Did Hahnemann ever advise to replace the therapeutic principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’ with ‘theory of miasms’?
——————————————————
Homeopaths should start defining homeopathy as a therapeutic system that cures diseases using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances which could produce symptoms similar to the disease in healthy people when used in ‘molecular forms’.
——————————————————
Oxford Dictionary defines homeopathy as : “A system of complementary medicine in which ailments are treated by minute doses of natural substances that in larger amounts would produce symptoms of the ailment”.
Even homeopaths define homeopathy as a therapeutic system that cures diseases with “small doses” of drug substances which could produce similar symptoms in healthy people when used in “large doses”.
I think calling potentized drugs as ‘small’ doses of ‘drug substance’ is factually incorrect. A homeopathic preparation in 30c or 200c is not a ‘small’ dose of drug substance. They are actually ‘no doses’ of drug substances, since they contain not even a single drug molecules. There is no ‘drug substance’ in them.
You cannot explain this phenomenon of curing with ‘no doses’ logically unless you understand and accept ‘Molecular Imprints’ concepts. Once you start thinking in terms of molecular imprints, you will realize that everything fits well with our homeopathic experience on one end, and modern scientific knowledge on other end. There is no way out without accepting MI concepts, because it is the ONLY truth regarding homeopathy.
Homeopaths should start defining homeopathy as a therapeutic system that cures diseases using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances which could produce symptoms similar to the disease in healthy people when used in ‘molecular forms’.
——————————————————
If I am asked to define homeopathy, I would say:
Homeopathy is a therapeutic method proposed by Samuel Hahnemann, based on his observations that extremely diluted forms of drug substances were capable of curing diseases, if the symptoms of diseases expressed by the patients were similar to the symptoms produced by the same same drug substance in crude form when applied in healthy individuals.
Hahnemann termed this phenomenon as ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’. Based on this fundamental observation, he developed a therapeutic system named ‘homeopathy’, which was explained in detail in his ‘Organon of Medicine’.
Constrained by the primitive state of scientific knowledge available to him during his period, hahnemann could not explain the mechanism of therapeutic actions of extremely diluted medicinal substances in scientific terms. Hence, he tried to construct theoretical system based on ‘vital force theory’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’, which do not agree with our present scientific knowledge system. It is the duty of present generation of homeopaths to make homeopathy a scientific medical system.
In scientific terms, we can explain ‘similia similibus curentur’ as follows:
‘Molecular imprints’ of drug molecules contained in extremely diluted forms of drug substances can bind to the pathogenic molecules and thereby relieve the biological molecules from pathological molecular inhibitions, if the pathogenic molecules have ‘functional moieties’ similar in configuration to those of the drug molecules used for preparing the molecular imprints. This similarity and configurational affinity between pathogenic molecules and molecular imprints can be ascertained by comparing the totality of symptoms expressed by the patient with the symptoms that could be produced by the drug substance in healthy individuals.
I would like to know how all of you think about this definition. Do you think it defines homeopathy well, or it is not appropriate? Would you suggest any modification for this definition?
——————————————————
Molecular imprints of drug molecules contained in potentized drugs cannot be called ‘small doses’ of drug substances. There is no even a single molecule of drug substance present. Call it ‘ghost doses’ of drug substances, if you want.
——————————————————
Even regarding the discovery of hippocrates, the fundamental question remains unanswered. HOW? What is the exact molecular mechanism by which “small doses of that which caused an ailment would cure”? Nobody answered that question scientifically so far.
What hippocrates discovered is the same phenomenon which was later known as ‘hormesis’. Nobody could so far explain the molecular mechanism involved in ‘hormesis’. In my opinion, only ‘molecular imprints’ can explain ‘hormesis’ or hippocrates’ discovery in scientific terms
To get an answer to the question how ‘hormesis’ works or ‘small doses’ work, we have to understand the process of ‘dilution’ in terms of ‘size’ of drug molecules. Any drug substance of animal or vegetable origin contain diverse types of drug molecules. Some complex molecules will be very ‘big’ in size, and their number in a given quantity of solution will be comparatively very small as per avogadro theory. Smaller molecules will be present in larger quantities. When we start diluting serially, larger molecules will be ‘imprinted’ into the medium, and molecules get removed from the solution in very early stages of dilution process. Smaller molecules undergo imprinting and removal at later stages only. By reaching 12 c, even the smallest molecules get imprinted and removed. That is why I say potencies above 12c contain molecular imprints only.
Obviously, lower potencies below 12c will be a mixture of small molecules as well as molecular imprints of larger molecules. We can explain hormesis, hippocrates phenomenon and low potency
——————————————————
Did anybody detect presence of any ‘antibodies’ in the body of anybody while using ‘small’ doses of substances, and absence antibodies when same substance is used in ‘large’ doses? Allergens will produce antibodies not only in ‘small’ doses, not ‘large’ doses also. Sorry, sir. Until and unless you understand and accept the concept of ‘molecular imprints’, you cannot answer these questions scientifically.
——————————————————
A drug in 30c or 200c is not a ‘small’ dose of drug substance. They are actually ‘no doses’ of drug substances, since they contain not even a single drug molecules. Calling potentized drugs as ‘small’ doses of ‘drug substance’ is factually incorrect. There is no ‘drug substance’ in them. You cannot explain this phenomenon logically unless you understand and accept MI concepts. When you start thinking in terms of molecular imprints, you will realize that everything fits well with our homeopathic experience on one end, and scientific knowledge on other end. There is no way out without accepting MI concepts, because it is the ONLY truth regarding homeopathy.
—————————————————–
Some people points to Aphorism 81 as an “evidence” to “prove” that Hahnemann
considered miasms as “genetically inherited”. This aphorism is the most “powerful evidence” they produce in favor of “genetic theory of miasms”.
Let us see what HAHNEMANN says in Organon : Aphorism 81:
“The fact that this extremely ancient infecting agent has gradually passed, in some hundreds of generations, through many millions of human organisms and has thus attained an incredible development, renders it in some measure conceivable how it can now display such innumerable morbid forms in the great family of mankind, particularly when we consider what a number of circumstances contribute to the production of these great varieties of chronic diseases (secondary symptoms of psora), besides the indescribable diversity of men in respect of their congenital corporeal constitutions, so that it is no wonder if such a variety of injurious agencies, acting from within and from without and sometimes continually, on such a variety of organisms permeated with the psoric miasm, should produce an innumerable variety of defects, injuries, derangements and sufferings, which have hitherto been treated of in the old pathological works, under a number of special names, as diseases of an independent character.”
In this aphorism, master says about psora: “this extremely ancient infecting agent has gradually passed, in some hundreds of generations, through many millions of human organism”.
He is talking about an “infectious agent” that “passed through generations”. He has explained in “chronic diseases” how this “infectious agent” “passed through generations of humanity”, in various forms of “skin infections” such as “leprosy, scarlatina, scabies” and many other forms. Can we infer that by using the word “generations”, he was talking about “genetic inheritance” of leprosy, scarlatina, scabies and other infectious agent”? He only meant that those infections were carried down through ‘generations’ of humanity as “infectious agents”, not as “genetic material”. If somebody talk about “inheritance of property rights through generations”, would anybody interpret it as “inheritance of property rights as genetic material”? How can “infectious agents” of itch, syphilis and gonorrohea can be “inherited through genes”?
Further, Hahnemann has said about transfer of psora from “nurse to infant”, “mother to infant from womb and genital tract”, “between family members”, “physician to patient”, “physical contacts” and many other modes. Can genetic materials be “inherited” through these modes?
The problem is, our modern ‘miasmatic analysis experts’ have made us think all diseases in terms of ‘miasms’. The moment we mention a disease or symptom, or name of a drug, they start talking about ‘prominent miasm’, ‘tubercular spetrum’, ‘polymiasmatic’ and such phrases. The most funny thing is that ‘analysis’ of two experts never agree. They are confused, and make others confused. When talking about ‘miasms’ hahnemann was concerned only about ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agent’. He asked to consider the presence of chronic ‘infectious miasms’ in cases where the diseases are not belonging to nutritional, environmental, occupational, iatrogenic and such causes. He used the term ‘faulty living’ and ‘faulty drugging’, which contain all these. In his perod, he knew nothing about ‘genetic causes’, and he did not mention those group of chronic diseases.
Since he expressly said about miasms as ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agents’, we can include ‘genetic diseases’ also in ‘non-miasmatic’ category. In fact, all chronic diseases, which are not mediated by ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions caused by ‘anti-bodies’ formed in the body against ‘exogenous’ proteins, belong to ‘non-miasmatic’ category.
——————————————————
I don’t agree with roberts. According to hahnemann, psora is the ‘chronic disease dispositions’ caused by ‘infectious agents of itch’. As per our modern scientific understanding, only way an ;infectious agent’ can cause ‘chronic disease dispositions’ is by generating antibodies, which can exist life long and create off-target molecular inhibitions amounting to chronic diseases. Hence, I perceive miasms as chronic diseases arising from antibodies formed against ‘infectious agents’. ‘Deficiency’ cannot be related with infectious agents.
——————————————————
Kent said in Lesser Writings: “You cannot divorce medicine and theology. Man exists all the way down from his innermost spiritual to his outermost natural”.
Remember, this is not the words of a religious preacher. These words were spoken by a great physician while explaining the philosophy of homeopathy to his students. This statement clearly exposes the world outlook of Kent, which he used abundantly while explaining homeopathic philosophy.
By saying “you cannot divorce medicine from theology”,Kent actually ‘divorced homeopathy from scientific thought’ for ever.Kent remains to be the most quoted and most followed ‘homeopathic philosopher’ for that class of ‘spiritual homeopaths’, who want homeopathy to remain ‘divorced’ from modern scientific knowledge and scientific methods.
——————————————————
Hahnemann only said that Psora was the most ancient and insidious miasm, and that it was derived from skin eruptions of various types in the past, such as scabies (Itch), leprosy and psoriasis. These had been contracted by ancestors or in one’s own early childhood. The suppression of these conditions especially through the use of ointments he held to be the primary cause of Psora.
“Psora is that most ancient, most universal, most destructive, and yet most misapprehended chronic miasmatic disease which for many thousands of years has disfigured and tortured mankind… and become the mother of all the thousands of incredibly various chronic diseases… [Chronic Diseases, p9]”
But Kent, in his Lectures, greatly enlarged upon the theory of miasms, proposing that Psora was the foundation of all other illness, without which mankind would be pure and healthy both in mind and body, as in the Garden of Eden. He thus regarded Psora as being equated with the ‘Fall of Man’ and with original sinfulness. He portrayed Psora in this highly moralistic light as also being the foundation of the sexual miasms that came later.
Beyond any doubt,Kent here deviated a lot from original concepts of Hahnemann regarding miasms, there by making homeopathy more of theology than medical science.
From the quotes above, it is clear that Kentemphasized the moral aspect of origin of miasms, connecting it with ‘sexual sins’. Hahnemann unlike Kent, attached no moral dimension whatsoever to the sexual nature of the two latter miasms.
See Kent saying: ‘You cannot divorce medicine and theology”. And, ‘A man who cannot believe in God cannot become a homeopath.”
Being spiritual does not necessarily make one a ‘good’ homeopath or ‘bad’ homeopath. If one know how to apply simila similibus curentur correctly, and have enough knowledge of materia medica, anybody can be a ‘good’ homeopath.
It was Kent, who unnecessarily introduced the issue of being spiritualist or not as a condition to be a ‘good’ homeopath. His statement that “one who does not believe in god cannot be a homeopath” is totally irrelevant. Hahnemann never placed that condition. It was kent who ‘married’ homeopathy with theology- not hahnemann. I was discussing that aspect of kent’s contribution in my article. In my opinion, without freeing homeopathy from this ‘theological’ and ‘spiritualistic’ philosophy of kent, we cannot study and practice homeopathy as a ‘medical science’. Homeopathy will remain a ‘theological’ or ‘spiritualistic’ healing art as kent wanted it to be.
A scientist can be a spiritualist also. But a man with ‘scientific world outlook’ cannot be a spiritualist. You can give any number of great scientists who were spiritualists. Being a spiritualist, a scientist cannot utilize full potentials of scientific knowledge. To follow a ‘scientific world out look’ is is entirely different from ‘knowledge in science’.
Homeopathy cannot be a ‘scientific medicine’, if you understand and practice it as ‘spiritual medicine’ or ‘theological medicine’. I know the influence of spiritualism and kentian philosophy is very deep rooted among homeopaths, and my statement in this regard will not be easily accepted by the profession. But I am sure, homeopaths having ‘scientific world outlook’ will accept my statement.
Kent said “one who do not believe in god cannot be a homeopath. No man with a scientific world outlook can agree to this statement.
Homeopathy as a medical science has nothing to do with ‘believing in god’. You can believe or not believe in god, and be a good homeopath.
I am fully convinced that without freeing homeopathic philosophy and homeopathic community from the spiritualistic or theological influence of ‘kentian philosophy’, we cannot hope homeopathy to become a scientific medical system.
Studying homeopathic philosophy directly from the original works of hahnemann such as organon and chronic diseases, using scientific and logical mindset is essential first step to free oneself from the influence of ‘spiritualistic’ philosophy ofKent. Only then can we realize the importance of scientific understanding of homeopathy.
——————————————————
Hahnemann says in Organon : Aphorism 1: Footnote:
“His(physician’s)) mission is not, however, to construct so-called systems, by interweaving empty speculations and hypotheses concerning the internal essential nature of the vital processes and the mode in which diseases originate in the interior of the organism, (whereon so many physicians have hitherto ambitiously wasted their talents and their time); nor is it to attempt to give countless explanations regarding the phenomena in diseases and their proximate cause (which must ever remain concealed), wrapped in unintelligible words and an inflated abstract mode of expression, which should sound very learned in order to astonish the ignorant – whilst sick humanity sighs in vain for aid. Of such learned reveries (to which the name of theoretic medicine is given, and for which special professorships are instituted) we have had quite enough, and it is now high time that all who call themselves physicians should at length cease to deceive suffering mankind with mere talk, and begin now, instead, for once to act, that is, really to help and to cure.”
What he actually meant by this statement? By saying “we have had enough” of “theoretic medicine”, does he mean “theoretical medicine” has no any relevance in medical science? If he actually meant so, how could he justify his ‘organon’ and ‘chronic diseases’ which are classical examples of texts on ‘theoretical medicine’, both of which obviously contain a lot of “speculations and hypotheses”?
——————————————————
Hahnemann says: “it is now high time that all who call themselves physicians should at length cease to deceive suffering mankind with mere talk, and begin now, instead, for once to act, that is, really to help and to cure.”
I think he was referring to those physicians, who “deceive suffering patients with talk”, instead of “really help to cure”.
Thinking, writing, teaching and studying theoretical medicine has nothing to do with what hahnemann considered ‘deceiving suffering people with talk”.
I think, by this statement hahnemann meant that a ‘true’ physician should not try to ‘deceive his patients’ by ‘talking theories, speculations and hypotheses, but should “act”, “really help and to cure”.
Most funny thing about this thing is, homeopaths use this “statement of master” to cover up their lack of knowledge in theoretical medicine, and their laziness to learn theoretical medicine. They pretend to be “following the guideline of master” by not learning ‘theoretical medicine’!. They say, MASTER HAS ASKED US ONLY TO CURE, NOT TO LEARN THEORIES!
These lazy people conveniently ignore what master said in third aphorism: “To be “a true practitioner of the healing art”, the physician should “clearly perceive what is to be cured in diseases”, “what is curative in medicines”, and how to adapt, the “curative” to the “to be cured”. He should also know the “exact mode of preparation and quantity”, “proper period for repeating the dose” and how to remove “obstacles to recovery””.
Nobody can “clearly perceive” “what is to be cured”, “what is curative” and “how to adapt the ‘curative’ to ‘to be cured’ without learning theoretical medicine. In modern times, that include learning and updating of biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, anatomy, physiology, pathology and all such subjects. You cannot become a ‘true’ physician, or ‘cure’ suffering people without this knowledge. Hahnemann only said, you should not deceive suffering people by talking theory. He did not say you need not learn theory!
——————————————————
According to Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, the highest ideal of a physician is to get a “rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of health” of his patient “on easily comprehensible principles”.
To be “a true practitioner of the healing art”, the physician should “clearly perceive what is to be cured in diseases”, “what is curative in medicines”, and how to adapt, the “curative” to the “to be cured”. He should also know the “exact mode of preparation and quantity”, “proper period for repeating the dose” and how to remove “obstacles to recovery”.
Except the possibility of any “exciting or maintaining cause”, “a miasm”, and “accessory circumstances”, nothing but the “morbid symptoms”, should be considered by the physician, and “totality of symptoms”, should be the sole means to “determine the choice of the most appropriate remedy”.
Homeopath should clearly perceive “what is to be cured in diseases”, “what is curative in medicines”, and how to adapt, the “curative” to the “to be cured”. And, ““totality of symptoms”, should be the sole means to “determine the choice of the most appropriate remedy”.
——————————————————
I. A TRUE PHYSICIAN SHOULD KNOW:
1. What is to be cured in diseases.
2. What is curative in medicines
3. How to adapt the ‘curative’ to the ‘to be cured’
4. Exact mode of preparation and quantity of medicine
5. Proper period of repeating the dose
6. How to remove obstacles to recovery
II. PHYSICIAN SHOULD CONSIDER:
1. Exiting or maintaining cause
2. Presence of a miasm
3. Accessory circumstance
4. Morbid symptoms
III. CHOICE OF REMEDY SHOULD BASED ON:
Totality of symptoms only.
——————————————————
By ‘totality of symptoms’, did hahnemann actually mean ‘morbid symptoms only’, or does he include exiting or maintaining cause, miasms, accessory circumstances and morbid symptoms within the purview of ‘totality of symptoms’? Kindly note, he used the term ‘totality of symptoms’ NOT ‘morbid symptoms’, as the “the sole means to determine the choice of the most appropriate remedy”. I think he made the distinction on this point very intentionally.
Obviously, by ‘totality of symptoms’, hahnemann indicates totality of exciting and maintaining causes, miasms morbid symptoms as well as accessory circumstances. Prescriptions should be based on ‘totality’ of all these factors.
—————————————————-
Fundamental difference between homeopathy and modern medicine is that ‘modern medicine’ uses ‘drug molecules’ as therapeutic agents, where as homeopathy uses ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules. This is a very important difference, indeed.
Modern medicine has recently advanced into Molecular Medicine, where drugs are selected on the basis of scientific understanding of pathological molecular errors in vital processes.
Homeopathy selects drugs on the basis of ‘totality of symptoms’, which are the real indicators of those pathological molecular errors. As such, homeopathy can be defined as a specialized higher branch of ‘modern molecular medicine’.
Since ‘modern medicine’ uses highly reactive ‘drug molecules’ as therapeutic agents, they can create dangerous ‘off-target’ molecular errors in the organism. That is the main draw back of ‘modern medicine’. Since homeopathy uses only ‘molecular imprints’, they cannot cause any ‘off-target’ molecular errors. Hence homeopathy is very safe when compared to modern medicine.
Since ‘modern medicine’ requires a clear understanding of pathological molecular processes to decide an appropriate therapeutic agent, they cannot treat many diseases which are not well understood. For homeopathy, knowing the exact molecular error behind the pathology is not necessary, since homeopathy identifies the molecular errors and their remedial agents by observing subjective and objective ‘symptoms’ that express the molecular errors. As such, homeopathy can cure any disease even without knowing the underlying molecular errors, merely on the basis of ‘symptoms’. This is a great advantage for homeopathy. Whereas modern medicine can hope for an effective treatment only for well understood diseases, that to with possibility of unwanted side effects, homeopathy can treat any disease effectively and safely.
Existing more than 250 years as an independent therapeutic system totally alienated from mainstream scientific knowledge, I think time is now ripe for homeopathy to converges into modern molecular medicine, as an advanced branch of medical science. The great divide between ‘allopathy and homeopathy’ could now be effectively bridged through my scientific explanation of potentization and similia similibus curentur. Once the people belonging to molecular medicine realizes the historical implications of this convergence, I hope they would also utilize ‘molecular imprinting’ as part of their target-specific drug designing technology.
——————————————————
Everyday I make two or three posts dealing with various fundamental questions involved in the scientific understanding of homeopathy. I wonder why nobody interested in meaningful discussions about these concepts I propose in these posts? Why everybody ignoring, or not interested? Does it mean I failed to make my points clear? Or does it mean all members think these thoughts are ‘inconsequential’ for homeopathy, as somebody said on this group yesterday?
One senior homeopath commented: “we are not at all bothered about how homeopathy works. IT WORKS- that is enough for us”!
Another friend commented: “We are interested only in showing results- not theories and hypotheses”
Newton should have said: “We are not bothered why apples falls to the ground. IT FALLS- that is enough for us”!
Everyday I get hundreds of application requests and games requests from my friends- even from very senior homeopaths who are considered to be very much busy with practice. They tag me nonsense photographs, and send links to funny and sexy videos. Deleting and untaging them is a most time consuming job for me. Even today, have 230 such requests to delete. That means, all of these people are regularly coming to facebook and playing games and enjoying fun videos. But none of them are interested in discussing serious topics that would resolve misunderstandings, enhance knowledge level and make them better scientific homeopaths. WHY SO?
——————————————————
In my opinion, phenomenon known as ‘hormesis’ could be scientifically explained only using the concepts of ‘molecular imprints’.
Attempts to explain the properties of higher homeopathic potencies basing on the phenomenon of ‘hormesis’ had been done by some people earlier. This phenomenon was proposed by Southam and Ehrlich and Stebbing. They proposed that a substance which acts as a toxin in high concentrations, acts as a stimulant in low concentrations. This phenomenon is known as ‘hormesis’. There is a theory known as Arndt-Schulz rule or Schulz’ law to explain this phenomenon. The essence of this theory is “For every substance, small doses stimulate, moderate doses inhibit, and large doses kill”. Hugo Paul Friedrich Schulz and Rudolf Arndt are the exponents of this theory. Toxins in their highly diluted form stimulates biological processes. In their concentrated forms the toxins inhibit or kills the biological processes. But even today it has not been possible to explain this phenomenon scientifically.
The scientific experiments conducted at Utrecht University, undertaken by a team under the leadership of Roeland van Wijk and Fred A.C. Wiegant tried to explain homeopathy on the basis of theory of ‘hormesis’. Even though these experiments succeeded in proving the therapeutic properties of potentized drugs to a certain extent, they failed to correlate it with the phenomenon of ‘hormesis’, and to uncover the molecular kinetics of ‘hormesis’. In my opinion, the phenomenon of ‘hormesis’ could have been better explained on the basis of ‘hydrosomes’ or ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules, which are likely to be formed in the highly diluted solution of a toxic substance.
——————————————————
Many homeopaths believe that drug substances are converted to ‘energy’ during potentization. ‘Matter’ getting ‘converted’ to ‘energy’ during potentization is a concept widely propagated by people trying to establish that homeopathy is ‘energy medicine’.
I would request them to seriously think over the point I try make out here. No doubt, “matter is nothing but a package of ENERGY as you say. But do you think matter can be ‘unpacked’ into energy by the simple process of ‘succussion and dilution’ involved in potentization? Do you know how much energy you need to break even the chemical bonds that holds atoms together in a molecule? ‘Converting matter into energy’ means not only breaking of chemical bonds, but breaking atoms into subatomic particles, and subatomic particles into ‘energy’. How can anybody imagine we can make atomic division happening through our simple process of potentization? Even if you make it to happen, how can this ‘energy’ you expect to preserve the ‘medicinal properties’ of drug substances? Do you know ‘medicinal properties’ of drug substances are related with the structure and properties at molecular level?
When matter is converted to energy, that energy will be same, whether you make it from sulphur, nux vomica or calcarea. Once you break the inter-atomic bonds within molecules, the atoms cannto preserve the properties of molecules from where they came from. An oxygen atom will have the properties of oxygen atom only, whether it come from nux, water or any other molecule. When you divide the atoms further into subatomic particles, protons and electrons will be same, irrespective of atoms they came from. If you further divide atoms to ‘release’ energy, the energy so produced will not differ according to the atoms it originated. With this primary scientific knowledge, how could yo imagine the ‘drug energy’ of complex substance to be preserved in the ‘energy’ produced by ‘unpacking’ of matter?
Please remember, the medicinal property is decided by the molecular structure and chemical properties of drug substances, not by the universal ‘atomic energy’.
You know, water contains hydrogen and oxygen atoms. But the properties of water is not exhibited by hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen coming from water or any other source will have same properties. If hydrogen is divided into protons and electrons, they will not show any property of hydrogen. Protons coming from division of any atom will be similar in properties. If we further split these subatomic particles into ‘energy’, how can you expect that energy to show the properties of water?
——————————————————
Medicinal properties of substances are decided by their molecular level structure an chemical properties. That cannot be preserved in the ‘energy’ generated by division of that matter into subatomic level. This is primary scientific knowledge, even any high school student knows. But homeopaths prefer to forget all science they learned, in their eagerness to justify the unscientific theories they learned in the name of homeopathy. This is a very disappointing situation
For example, Atropine is a chemical compound with formula C17H23NO3 . It acts upon biological molecules and produce various molecular errors, expressed through certain groups of symptoms. But, if we divide that atropine into carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen, they will have properties entirely different from atropine. That is why i say, medicinal properties of drugs are determined by the structure and properties of molecules, not the ‘energy’ packed in themAtropine is a chemical compound with formula C17H23NO3 . It acts upon biological molecules and produce various molecular errors, expressed through certain groups of symptoms. But, if we divide that atropine into carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen, they will have properties entirely different from atropine. That is why i say, medicinal properties of drugs are determined by the structure and properties of molecules, not the ‘energy’ packed in them
——————————————————
I believe the greatest ‘limitation’ of homeopathy is that we do not know ‘how homeopathy works’. My only mission is to find an answer to that fundamental question in terms of modern scientific knowledge, in a way convincing to scientific community. I believe all other riddle of homeopathy will be spontaneously resolved once this fundamental question is answered.
I have no ‘methods’, ‘systems’ or ‘theories’ to own, propagate or market. I do not want ‘followers’ ‘believers’ or ‘defenders’. I simply talk what I am convinced, what I feel right. If anybody think I am wrong, let it be so. Not interested in ‘proving’ anything through arguments.
If anybody is interested to know more about my concepts, I am ready to explain. If anybody is convinced with my explanations, I am happy. If not convinced, kindly leave me alone.
I am not an academician, scientist or professional with high credentials, positions, qualifications, achievements, fame or authorities- an ordinary old lay man. But do not question my natural right for thought and expression.
——————————————————
Concept of MIT is not a new ‘theory’ or ‘method’. It is only an approach to homeopathy. It is only a scientific and logical way of understanding an explaining how homeopathy works.
MIT is only a scientific and logical way of understanding and explaining the real processes involved in potentization.
MIT is only a scientific and logical way of understanding and explaining what are the active principles of potentized drugs.
MITis only a scientific and logical way of understanding and explaining the molecular mechanism of therapeutics involved in the principle of ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’.
When somebody ask me “how many cases you cured with MIT”, or “tell us a case you cured with MIT to prove your theory”, I instantly realize the guy did not get even a preliminary idea of MIT. All cases cured by all homeopaths are actually examples of how MIT works. MIT explains the molecular mechanism involved in those cures in terms of modern scientific knowledge. Scientific assumptions and interpretations underlying MIT concepts have actually to be proved not by ‘cured cases’, but by scientific experiments designed and executed according to scientific methods.
——————————————————
Some homeopaths have a wonderfully perverted sense of ‘Cause-Effect’ relationship. They consider every ‘Before-After’ chronological relationship as cause and effect, and jump into queer conclusions. Once they give a ‘single’ dose of drug to the patient, everything that ‘follows’ that act will be attributed as the ‘miraculos effect’ of their ‘single dose’. Many ‘cures’, many ‘aggravations’, many ‘side effects’ are actually the product of this perverted understanding of ’cause and effect’.
Once I heard a ‘teacher’ talking at a seminar. He was talking about the probable consequences of ‘unwanted repetitions’ of potentized drugs. He explained his experience of an incident of his middle aged patient having a serious heart attack after an ‘untimely’ second dose of lachesis 200, which was given for an eczema. First dose was given, and there was ‘miraculous’ improvement. after one weak, he happened to give a second dose, which was ‘untimely hurried’. That night, doctor got a phone call informing him that the patient was admitted in ICU following a massive cardiac arrest. ‘I was very sorry for that, because that cardiac arrest was due to the driving of disease to inner layer by untimely repetition of lachesis”- said the doctor.
It is common sense that a ‘cardiac arrest’ in a middle aged man is not that much ‘sudden’ as we think. There should be hyperlipidemia, atherosclerosis, narrowing of coronary arteries happening through years, which finally led to the blockage of arteries and heart attack. Why should a homeopath relate that ‘heart attack’ to a ‘dose of lachesis 200? Only logic is, that happened ‘following’ that dose!
We hear this type of incidents and experiences reported by homeopaths in their practice. Somebody said: “my patient got delirious attack’ after a dose of Bell 200. Another homeopath argues:”A patient showed eruptions all over body after a dose of merc sol 200, that is a proof that homeopathy drugs have dangerous side effects”.
Why not these friends do some experiments by giving bell 200 or merc sol to a few more persons and watching the outcome before reaching this type of conclusions?
Dear friends, ‘Cause-Effect’ relationship is different from ‘Before-After’ relationship. Kindly use some logical thinking and rational experiments before declaring foolish conclusions. That is scientific method
Once there was a question posted on ‘predictive’ page by a ‘follower’. He said, his patient was on lachesis, and recently had a fracture on right hand. ‘Master’ answered, the fracture happened due to driving of symptoms in ‘wrong’ direction, ie; from left to right. Can lachesis cause fracture on right side, if it was wrongly prescribed? The ‘follower’ did not ask any question before swallowing this wonderful answer from the master. Since ‘fracture of right side’ happened ‘after’ lachesis, it should be considered as ’caused by’ lachesis. This is the logic!
Same thing happens during ‘drug proving’. Once a dose of drug is given to a volunteer for proving, each and every sensations, feelings, mood changes, pains… everything is recorded and ascribed to the drug used for proving. They are included in materia medica at least as a one mark symptoms. We forget the fact that even without that dose of drug, a living human being will experience different sensations, feelings, pains and mood changes!Same thing happens during ‘drug proving’. Once a dose of drug is given to a volunteer for proving, each and every sensations, feelings, mood changes, pains… everything is recorded and ascribed to the drug used for proving. They are included in materia medica at least as a one mark symptoms. We forget the fact that even without that dose of drug, a living human being will experience different sensations, feelings, pains and mood changes!
——————————————————
If anybody is so much sure that we can prove drugs using high potencies, kindly submit yourself with following experiment before an impartial team of experimentors:
You can recruit 10 individuals apparently healthy, and record all their symptoms and keep them in your custody, giving attested copies to the observing team.
Then the team would split the volunteers into TWO groups, totally keeping you blinded. They would give a well proved polychrest remedy in high potency to first group, and second group will be kept as control group, giving only unpotentized alcohol-water mixture.
Drugs will be continued for a period you agree to, and you can record the symptoms of all individuals daily, for a period we mutually agree.
Then, using the symptoms collected from proving, you should identify the persons who were controls, and should identify the drugs which was administered for this ‘proving’.
If interested in such an experiment, you can propose modifications in this protocol
——————————————————
A veteran homeopath from India, author of 12 books on homeopathy, posted on our group explaining his wonderful insight regarding ‘vital force’ and ‘energy of medicines’ as follows:
“The materialists/scientists have no means to verify the materialistic existence of substances that are non-existing on the scientific- apparatus or in laboratory. The potentization (energy) of homoeopathic medicines is, therefore, unacceptable scientifically. See the irony here. Scientists agree that life is energy and all energy is living energy. They also agree that within every living creature there exists a vital and mental organism, the invisible counterpart of the physical structure and that the source of all vital and physiological phenomena is originally contributed by the Creative Will (Mind-Life-Spirit). The scientists agree to all this logically. All this cannot be proved in a laboratory.”
“Similar is the case of the energy of medicines and also the vital force. We cannot see them but they exist. They exist because we see our whole of organism working.
We call India ‘Bharat Mata’or mother India. Can we prove that India is our mother? No, we cannot prove it. Still we respect it as our mother. Saint Arvind said that India couldn’t be called only a geographical state with its borders and limitations of boundaries. During struggle for Indian independence, Arvind appealed to people to make India free because it is our mother and no child would like to see mother imprisoned under British regime. India has a soul called ‘Mother’. In the same way, our body has a soul, the vital force. We cannot prove India as our mother. We cannot prove our body has our soul.”
I quote this post here to demonstrate the pathetic level of scientific understanding existing in even our very senior homeopaths who ‘author’ bundles of books to ‘educate’ the next generation of homeopaths.
He says: “India has a soul called Mother. In the same way, our body has a soul, the vital force.”
How could our respected homeopaths be so childish and silly like this? How can I discuss science of therapeutics with this type of people? Personally I feel very much disappointed to know that he is author of 12 books on homeopathy. I was wonder-struck to hear him saying ‘India has a soul’, and comparing the concept of ‘bharat mata’ with ‘vital force’ concept of homeopathy. Sorry to say, this is a grave situation. My only request to him was, kindly write only ‘clinical’ works on homeopathy- never ‘publish’ books on ‘homeopathic philosophy’ of this type. At least he should do that much favor to coming generation of homeopathy.
——————————————————
If you take some time to go through my articles on MIT, you would realize that I have “explained” ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ “as per ‘already proved’ modern science”. I am not proposing any “new theory” or trying to “change fundamental laws”.
We cannot ‘show’ anybody supra-molecular formations of water. It should be ‘understood’, not ‘seen’. To understand MIT concepts I propose, learn the supra-molecular properties of water. Learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology. Learn the modern biochemistry and molecular biology. Learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology. We have to update our basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you.
Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.
I would like to make it clear that I did not produce any ‘theories’ artificially. All these proposals on various aspects homeopathic practice are logical extensions evolved naturally from the fundamental concept of ‘molecular imprinting’ as the process involved in potentization. Once we accept ‘molecular imprints’ as the active principles of potentizaed drugs, and that they act therapeutically upon the organism by selectively binding to the pathogenic molecules, we cannot perceive or resolve these practical issues from another angle.
We should come out our “comfort zones” and get ourselves exposed to a new knowledge environment, which would demand a fundamental re-thinking and modifying of many things we ‘believed’, learned, taught and practiced as ‘homeopathy’ so far. That would not be a simple task.
——————————————————
PLEASE REMEMBER THESE FUNDAMENTAL POINTS ABOUT MOLECULAR IMPRINTS:
1. Molecular imprints are not ‘mimics’ of drug molecules, but ‘configurational negatives’ that can bind to drug molecules or similar molecules. Hence potentized medicines act not similar to, but as antidites to original drugs.
2. If drug molecules and pathogenic molecules are ‘molecular keys’, and biological target molecules are ‘molecular locks’, molecular imprints are ‘artificial keyholes’. Not ‘duplicate keys’.
3. Molecular imprints can bind only to pathogenic molecules having complementary configuration. If pathogenic molecules having complementary affinity are not present, molecular imprints are inert. Hence, potentized drugs act only if indicated.
4. Molecular imprints cannot interact each other, and hence potentized medicines never antidote each other.
5. Molecular imprints act in capacity of their configurational affinity with ligand molecules. Biological molecules interact with their natural ligands in capacities of ‘configurational affinity’ and ‘charge affinity’. Hence, molecular imprints cannot interfere in the interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands. That means, potentized drug never act as pathological agents, and cannot do any harm even if applied without indications.
——————————————————
If drug molecules are ‘keys’, ‘mimics’ would act as ‘duplicate keys’. But ‘molecular imprints’ act as ‘artificial keyholes’ for those ‘keys’ and ‘similar ‘ keys. This point is very important. If we forget this point, we cannot explain ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘similia similibus curentur’.
If beneviste could have perceived the concept of ‘molecular imprints’ acting as not as ‘duplicate keys’ but as ‘artificial keyholes’, he would have designed his experiments accordingly, so that he can prove that ‘molecular imprints’ can ‘antidote’ or ‘deactivate’ original molecules, thereby preventing them from interacting with biological molecules.
Since ‘anti- IgE antiserum’ contains natural ligands of enzymes involved in human basophil de-granulation, ‘molecular imprints’ of anti- IgE antiserum cannot be prevent their natural interaction. We should not forget that ‘molecular imprints’ cannot interfere in the interaction between biological targets and their natural ligands. In the absence of this understanding, the experiments of beneveniste were wrongly designed, and were inevitably bound to fail.
’Molecular imprints’ can prevent only ‘off-target’ actions of biological ligands. For example, we use potentized thyroid extract, which contain molecular imprints of various thyroid hormones having specific roles in metabolism. Potentized thyroidinum never interferes in the natural biological actions of thyroid hormones. But those molecular imprints can rectify the pathological conditions caused by ‘off-target’ bindings of thyroid hormones, especially in situations of hyperthyroidism. This is applicable to all potentized hormone remedies. They never interfere in normal biological actions of those hormones.
Reason behind this phenomenon is related with the dynamics of molecular interactions. Interactions between natural targets and their ligands involves two factors: configurational affinity and charge affinity. But interactions of ‘molecular imprints’ and their ‘ligands’ involves ‘configurational affinity’ only, without any charge affinity.
——————————————————
Kindly avoid talking ‘vital force’, ‘non-material’, ‘spirit-like’, ‘dynamic’ and such things from our discussions about scientific homeopathy.
The concepts of ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’, on which the whole philosophical system of homeopathy is believed to be built up on, stands as a formidable stumbling block in its way of harmony with modern science and its methodology.
From the very onset, we have to adopt following fundamental factors as the basis of our intellectual inquiry:
1.Life exists only through ‘vital processes’, which are complex chains of molecular level biochemical interactions purely material in nature.
2. A state of pathology is created by some or other deviations happening in these biochemical processes due to molecular errors of pure material nature.
3. Therapeutics is possible only through materialistic intervention in these biochemical processes.
4. Medicines are the material means for such an intervention.
5. It is due to the peculiar material properties of medicines that they are able to intervene in biochemical processes.
Therapeutics is a totally materialistic activity. If we do not agree upon at least this much of fundamental propositions, no meaningful discussion will be possible regarding scientific understanding homeopathy.
Since we are now competent to offer a scientific molecualar interpretation of ‘similia similibus curentur’, and ‘potentization’, the main fundamental principles of homeopathy, there is no need for relying upon the obsolete vitalistic explanations and speculations of Hahnemann, based on the concept of ‘vital force’ and ‘non-cprporeal’ ‘spirit-like’ ‘dynamic medicinal force’. Instead of repeating the unscientific concept of ‘dynamic medicinal force’, we can now logically explain the homeopathic potencies on the basis of ‘molecular imprinting in water’.
Even if we subscribe to the concept of ‘vital force’ at the ideological level, we have to answer the question: “How that vital force expresses in a living organism?” Only as molecular level ‘vital processes’. Using medicinal agents of material qualities, we can deal with these ‘vital processes’ only at the material level. It is an absurdity to think that as physicians, we are dealing with an ‘immaterial’, ‘spirit-like’ ‘vital force’, that too, using instruments and medicinal agents of purely material nature. If homeopathic physicians were dealing with ‘immeterial dynamic forces’, instead of using ‘material medicines’, they could have done it better through prayers, ‘pujas’ and other occult practices!
The argument that homeopathic drugs act not by their ‘material qualities’, but by an ‘immaterial’ medicinal force, called ‘dynamic force’ is nothing but absurdity. Would these theoreticians agree that this so-called ‘dynamic power’ of individual drugs’ are determined by the specific ‘material’ properties of their constituent molecules? It is undeniable fact that this so-called ‘dynamic power’ varies from drug to drug, depending up on their molecular level structure and composition.
If we were dealing with an immaterial ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic power’, why should we use all those different types of drugs existing in homeopathy? While talking about ‘immaterial’ ‘spirit-like’ ‘dynamic healing power’, ‘liberated’ through potenization, which can be carried in corked bottles and swallowed as sugar pellets, we should be aware, how much homeopathy would become a laughing stock in the eyes of scientific community. If we still continue to claim that there is a ‘spirit-like’ force in homeopathic medicines, independant of their material qualities, a ‘force’ that is soluble in water and alcohol, can be transferred from bottles to bottles, acts on the ‘vital force’ when applied on tongue, lost when subjected to physical forces such as heat or electricity, how can we engage in a scientific dialogue? What type of ‘liberated’ ‘non-corporeal ‘dynamic force’ are we talking about?
’Personality’ of a plant or animal has different levels. Kingdoms, family, species, individual- there are a lot of such levels. There will be molecules specific to kingdom, families, species as well as individual-specific- organ specific- tissue specific. Which level ‘personality’ you are talking about?
We should learn to think about our drug substances in terms of their constituent molecules- not as ‘personalities’ of a plant or animal
Proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, nucleic acids- these are present in all living beings. They are not present in non-living world. That way, there will be kingdom-specific, family-specific, species-specific, individual-specific, organ-specific and tissue specific molecular constitution. Which of them are contained in our drug sample decides its medicinal properties.
——————————————————
By ‘drug proving’, we are actually administering a drug sample with specific molecular constitution. The constituent molecules act upon different biological molecules in their individual capacities, and produce diverse types of molecular inhibitions, which expressed as diverse groups of mental and physical symptoms. Our materia medica is a collection of such symptoms. If you closely observe different materia medica of same drug, you can see a lot of difference in symptoms. Those differences are due to differences in molecular level constitutions of drug samples used for proving. Some symptoms will be common to all materia medica of a drug. Those symptoms represent the kingdom-specific, family specific and species specific molecules. Some times we can see a lot of symptoms common to different plants of same species, same family or same kingdom. But, symptoms representing ‘individual-specific’ molecules will be different in different materia medica based on different provings. All these factors show the importance of perceiving our drugs in terms of their constituent molecules.
If we prepare NUX tincture separately from root, bark, leaves, seeds, flowers etc and prove them, we will get entirely different materia medica. But there will be some symptoms common to all those samples. Those symptoms represent the action of ‘species-specific’, family-specific, and kingdom-specific chemical molecules.
We can see some symptoms of a plant remedy similar to a mineral remedy. For example, pulsatilla has many symptoms similar to silicea. That is why we say silicea is the chronic of pulsatilla. Pulsatilla plant contains large amount of silicic acid absorbed from silicea rich sandy soil where they grow. Nux vomica has many symptoms similar to that of copper. Nux plant absorbs large amount of copper from soil. It is this copper factor that produces such symptoms in the proving of NUX.
There was a NUX VOMICA tree in my backyard. I happened to plant some cucumbers near to them, and the cucumber vines covered the whole nux tree. But the cucumbers harvested from it was very bitter in taste, and it produced symptoms of nux poisoning in those who consumed those cucumbers. I suspect the cucumber plant somehow happened to share the molecules of nux plant, may be from fallen and disintegrated nux leaves. Had I proved a tincture prepared from that cucumber plant, it would have given a lot of NUX symptoms
SEPIA has many symptoms similar to iodine, natrum mur, bromium, fluorine etc. Ink of cuttle fish is concentrated with these minerals absorbed from sea water in which they live
NATRUM MUR and IODUM have a lot of common symptoms. We know, iodine is commercially extracted from see weeds. Obviously, iodine will be contaminated with sodium chroride, and NAT MUR will be contaminated with iodine of see water.
——————————————————
MIT concepts empowers homeopathy a lot by providing a strong scientific foundation for our theory and practice. It gives us confidence to face and interact with our counterparts in modern medical and scientific community as professional equals, enabling us to discuss the basic principles and modus operandi of our therapeutic art with them in a language understandable and convincing to them. MIT concepts effectively resolves the paradigm divide between modern science and homeopathy. Try to explain homeopathy to your critics and skeptics in terms of scientific concepts of MIT, and experience how they respond in a way totally different from earlier ones. You can see, now it is not so easy for them to sweep aside homeopathy as ‘fake’, ‘unscientific’, placebo’ or ‘belief’. Try it with confidence, and experience the difference.
——————————————————
Without knowing what exactly happens during potentization, what are the active principles of potentized drugs, and what is the exact molecular mechanism by which they act as therapeutic agents, there is no meaning in speculating about potency selection, dosage, mode of administration, repetition, drug relationships and such things. Once we answer the fundamental questions in terms of MIT concepts, all other riddles will be easily resolved.
——————————————————
Concept of ‘Molecular imprinting in Water’ involved in homeopathic potentization could have many unpredictable and unforeseen implications in the field of genetic engineering and gene therapy. Molecular imprints of genes or ‘DNA fragments’ could be utilized as templates for preparing ‘designer genes’ as per requirement in laboratories, that could be utilized for ‘genetic repairing’ protocols.
Extract the required genes or DNA fragments from healthy genomes and potentize them according to homeopathic procedures. These potencies would obviously contain ‘molecular imprints’ of DNA fragments used for potentization.
Add these potentized ‘DNA’ to a mixture of neucleotide primers and DNA polymerase enzymes involved in the biochemical process of DNA synthesis. ‘Molecular imprints’ can act as templates and selectively bind and hold the neucleotide primers in correct positions and sequences exactly similar to original DNA fragments used for imprinting. Polymerase enzymes will then link the individual neucleotides together to form DNA fragments exactly similar to original ones in terms of neucleotide structure and sequence.
This is a possibility I foresee when thinking about ‘molecular imprints’. Interested scientists are free to work upon this idea.
——————————————————
Modern scientists would any time arrive at ‘drug designing by molecular imprinting in water’, and utilize it with out any mention of homeopathy or potentization. Actually, I am making all my ideas about MIT public with the hope that it may some how prevent allopaths from turning “this discovery in ther side by some way” without recognizing homeopathy.
I see the danger in the hesitation of homeopathic community to accept MIT concepts at the earliest. By this hesitation and negligence, we are actually giving allopaths a chance to “turn this discovery in ther side by some way”.
They will have no choice if homeopathic community explains homeopathy and potentization using MIT concepts, before allopaths “turn this discovery in ther side by some way”.
If homeopathic community fail or delay to recognize and accept ‘molecular imprinting’ as part of their theoretical system, it would be easy for modern medicine to interpret it as their independent invention, and incorporate it into their ‘science’ as a new technology of target-specific drug designing. They can easily ‘hijack’ molecular imprinting without any mention or recognizing of homeopathy, potentization or samuel hahnemann. Hope homeopaths would realize the gravity of this imminent danger.
——————————————————
Dr. Dinesh N Nair, a veteran homeopath from kerala, posted as follows:
“Dear Chandran Nambiar, How Homoeopathy works,was a big question mark among the believers of Homoeopathy. Many made different explanations from their imaginative capacity and powers. I had not find any scientific explanation better than yours till date. It,s a fact that they can’t appreciate you because of a better explanation based on scientific base and theories, will make their theories discarded. I appreciate you even though there are many nuts yet to be cracked.
It,s a fact that we live with Homoeopathy, and you live for Homoeopathy. Dr.Dinesh N Nair”.
Thank you, sir. Such an appreciation from a veteran like you is really a matter of pride for me.Dr. Dinesh N Nair, a veteran homeopath from kerala, posted as follows:
“Dear Chandran Nambiar, How Homoeopathy works,was a big question mark among the believers of Homoeopathy. Many made different explanations from their imaginative capacity and powers. I had not find any scientific explanation better than yours till date. It,s a fact that they can’t appreciate you because of a better explanation based on scientific base and theories, will make their theories discarded. I appreciate you even though there are many nuts yet to be cracked.
It,s a fact that we live with Homoeopathy, and you live for Homoeopathy. Dr.Dinesh N Nair”.
Thank you, sir. Such an appreciation from a veteran like you is really a matter of pride for me.
——————————————————
Even though modern medicine is more and more turning to target-specific designer drugs, ‘drug designing’ using water molecules and molecular imprinting in water are subjects still unknown to modern drug designers. Homeopathy has been using this technique for last 200+ years in the form of potentization. Once the ongoing search for new drug designing techniques and new substances for molecular imprinting finally land them inevitably into the understanding of ‘molecular imprinting in water’, modern medicine and scientific community will have to recognize homeopathy and its potentization. At that moment, they will have to recognize the genius of samuel hahnemann. It is only a matter of time to happen that. Wait and see.Even though modern medicine is more and more turning to target-specific designer drugs, ‘drug designing’ using water molecules and molecular imprinting in water are subjects still unknown to modern drug designers. Homeopathy has been using this technique for last 200+ years in the form of potentization. Once the ongoing search for new drug designing techniques and new substances for molecular imprinting finally land them inevitably into the understanding of ‘molecular imprinting in water’, modern medicine and scientific community will have to recognize homeopathy and its potentization. At that moment, they will have to recognize the genius of samuel hahnemann. It is only a matter of time to happen that. Wait and see.
Modern scientists would any time arrive at ‘drug designing by molecular imprinting in water’, and utilize it with out any mention of homeopathy or potentization. Actually, I am making all my ideas about MIT public with the hope that it may some how prevent allopaths from turning “this discovery in ther side by some way” without recognizing homeopathy.
I see the danger in the hesitation of homeopathic community to accept MIT concepts at the earliest. By this hesitation and negligence, we are actually giving allopaths a chance to “turn this discovery in ther side by some way”.
They will have no choice if homeopathic community explains homeopathy and potentization using MIT concepts, before allopaths “turn this discovery in ther side by some way”.
——————————————————
Molecular Imprinting involved in Potentization can be perceived as a sort of ‘molecular engraving’, in which ‘drug-molecule-shaped’ cavities are engraved into supra-molecular clusters of water and ethyl alcohol. These nanocavities can act as artificial binding sites or ‘locks’ for ‘drug-molecule-shaped’ pathogenic molecules through a ‘key-lock’ interaction, thereby relieving the biological molecules from pathological molecular inhibitions. This is the exact molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.
——————————————————
Some of my dear friends think that I “shoot down a lot of great homeopaths” through my articles and comments. I “do shoot down” not for some personal vendetta. I am criticizing the ideas they propagate, which I think are unscientific and harmful for future evolution of homeopathy into a scientific medicine. When I criticize somebody, I have only his ideas before me. My criticisms no way imply any sort of disrespect towards those great human beings. I have criticized hahnemann many times for his unscientific speculations. But that does not mean I disrespect that great genius. I consider ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ as two great inventions in human history. I always try to perceive people in their totality of personality, logically balancing their negative and positive contributions.
I was always a critic of KENT regarding his spiritualistic approach towards homeopathy. In my article “‘Kentian Philosophy’- Theological Influence That ‘Divorced’ Homeopathy From Scientific Knowledge System For Ever” I have made a hard criticism against him. But I regularly use KENT repertory for my clinical work, and consider the hard work he put into the compilation of that monumental work has no parallel in homeopathic history. I regularly study KKENT’s Lectures on materia medica, as I consider it very useful in studying ‘constitutions’. My criticism and appreciation of KENT is balanced and logical. I have great respect for that great homeopath.
——————————————————
Hahnemann made two important observations regarding therapeutics 250 years ago:
1. Diseases with specific symptoms can be cured by drugs that can produce similar symptoms in healthy individuals. He called it ‘similia similibus curentur’.
2. When used according to ‘similia similibus curentur’, dug substances can act as powerful therapeutic agents even in high dilutions through a process of serial ‘dilution and succussion’. He called this process as ‘potentization’.
These TWO are the main OBSERVATIONS made by Hahnemann, which form the fundamental principles of Homeopathy.
Hahnemann tried to explain these OBSERVATIONS in terms of scientific and philosophical knowledge available to him in that POINT OF TIME. Organon consists of these theoretical explanations and speculations. Since scientific knowledge was in its primitive stage at that time, Hahnemann’s explanations were bound to bear that limitations. ORGANON contains a lot of theorizations and speculations that do not agree with, or go against modern scientific understanding.
Equipped with modern scientific knowledge and its tools, we are now in a far better position than Samuel Hahnemann to explain the phenomena he observed 250 years ago. Now we can explain ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ more scientifically, rationally and logically. With full respect the great genius of our master, we should be truthful and bold enough to discard those evidently unscientific theoretical speculations of ORGANON.
I would like to call ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ and ‘Potentization’ as FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS OF HOMEOPATHY, rather than using the term ‘fundamental principles’. That would be more close to truth.
These two FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS were based on experiences, experiments and logical evaluations of OBJECTIVE PHENOMENA OF NATURE done by a great intellectual person. But the ‘principles’ he used to explain these objective phenomena were unscientific, obviously due to the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him at that time. We should accept his OBSERVATIONS, but judiciously discard or modify his unscientific PRINCIPLES.
——————————————————
I have also a small ambition- a small dream of being myself immortal. I hope I can continue to live here among you for ever through my MIT concept of homeopathy, even after I cease to physically exist in this world. You may feel it is too much to have such a ‘big’ dream for a humble human being like me. Any how, I dare to dream so, and I dare to put it on record here, as I have already crossed my 61 years of existence on this earth, and am not sure how much time remains for me.
——————————————————
What I say about homeopathy in terms of ‘molecular imprints’ cannot be seen in any of the aphorisms of organon, and as such you cannot discuss this topic only in the light of knowledge you get from ORGANON. We cannot get scientific answers for all our questions from organon. ORGANON is only a BOOK written by a GREAT MAN 250 years ago to explain the phenomena he observed, in terms of knowledge available to him at that point of time.
If you want, you can even say: “nothing is said in organon about molecular imprinting, and as such, it is not acceptable”. Organon perceives homeopathic drugs in terms of ‘non-material and dynamic drug energy released through potentization’, which act upon the ‘vital force’ in a ‘dynamic way’. If you consider ORGANON as the ultimate authority in scientific knowledge of therapeutic art, you cannot agree with my scientific explanations of homeopathy.
——————————————————
Even a single dose may give permanent cure in some cases. But many cases need frequent repetition and even changing of drugs. I would say, repeat frequently until cure. Repetition do no harm, but lack of repetition may harm. Better to repeat than not to repeat.
I think many a excellent homeopathic prescriptions are spoiled only due to our ‘theoretical’ hesitation to repeat the doses in adequate intervals, and these failures are wrongly attributed to ‘wrong similimum’ or ‘wrong potency’ selection. We could have avoided such failures by repeating the doses frequently so as to maintain the drug action at optimum levels to effect a complete cure. I know ‘classical homeopaths’ would tear me into pieces for proposing this ‘unhomeopathic’ concept, which according to them would be an unpardonable offence against the ‘purity of homeopathy’ and a gross disrespect to our ‘masters and stalwarts’.
My concepts regarding ‘repetitions’ come from the scientific understanding of potentization as ‘molecular imprinting’ and the active principles of potentized medicines as ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent drug molecules used for potentization. You cannot follow me without understanding the concept of ‘molecular imprints’.
According to me, Molecular Imprints are the active principles of potentized drugs. These ‘molecular imprints’ bind to the pathological molecules having ‘complementary’ configuration, there by relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions and effect Cure. Same time,these ‘molecular imprints’ could be antidoted or deactivated by by molecules or ions having complementary configurations. That means, ‘molecular imprints’ we introduced into the body get deactivated by pathological molecules or other molecules having congigurational affinity. Molecules and ions of vegetable alkaloids, enzymes, food additives, environmental toxins, infectious agents, bacterial-viral toxins and a host of other agents may antidote these ‘molecular imprints’. Hence, it is necessary to replenish the supply of ‘molecular imprints’ at frequent intervals to ensure a complete cure. That is my point.
——————————————————
what I say about ‘molecular imprints’ cannot be seen in any of the aphorisms of organon, and as such you cannot discuss this topic in the light of knowledge you get from ORGANON. We cannot get scientific answers for all our questions from organon. ORGANON is only a BOOK written by a GREAT MAN 250 years ago to explain the phenomena he observed, in terms of knowledge available to him at that point of time.what I say about ‘molecular imprints’ cannot be seen in any of the aphorisms of organon, and as such you cannot discuss this topic in the light of knowledge you get from ORGANON. We cannot get scientific answers for all our questions from organon. ORGANON is only a BOOK written by a GREAT MAN 250 years ago to explain the phenomena he observed, in terms of knowledge available to him at that point of time.
If you want, you can even say: “nothing is said in organon about molecular imprinting, and as such, it is not acceptable”. Organon says only about ‘dynamic drug energy released through potentization’, which act upon the ‘vital force’ in a ‘dynamic way’. If you consider ORGANON as the ultimate authority in scientific knowledge of therapeutic art, you cannot agree with my scientific explanations of homeopathy.
——————————————————
’Supra molecular nanostructures’ is an important topic of study with implications in areas of nanotechnology, supramolecular chemistry, molecular imprinting in polymers etc. I was trying to explain homeopathic potentization from this perspective.
Polymer-like supramolecular behavior of water and its capacity to form ‘supramolecular nanostructures’ through hydrogen bonding make water an ideal medium for molecular imprinting for preparing target-specific therapeutic agents. Through the process of molecular imprinting involved in potentization, three dimensional configuration of individual drug molecules are imprinted into these supramolecular nanostructures of water as ‘nanocavities’, which can act as ‘artificial key-holes’ or ‘binding sites’ for the drug molecules as well as pathogenic molecules having simialar functional groups. This is the scientific explanation I provide for homeopathic potentization
——————————————————
Understanding the concept of ‘Molecular Imprinting’ in its correct meaning is essential to follow my scientific explanations of homeopathy:
Perceive drug molecules as well as pathogenic molecules as ‘keys’, their biological target molecules as ‘locks’, and their interactions in terms of ‘key-lock’ relationships. Perceive homeopathic potentization as a process of making ‘artificial key-holes’ that can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for the drug molecules as well as pathogenic molecules having similar configuration, thereby preventing them from interacting with ‘natural locks’. Exactly, these ‘artificial key-holes’ are ‘Molecular Imprints’, and the process of their preparation is ‘Molecular Imprinting’.
——————————————————
Can anybody define the concept ‘sensitivity to drugs’ in rational terms? When you say an individual is ‘sensitive’ to lachesis, does it mean lachesis is symptomatically indicated similimum for him? If not, what may be the underlying reason for this ‘peculiar sensitivity’?
According to dictionaries, IDIOSYNCRASY means “a peculiarity of the physical or the mental constitution, especially susceptibility toward drugs, food, etc.”. According to this scientific meaning, it should be towards materials such as “susceptibility toward drugs, food, etc.” In potentized forms of our medicines, only ‘material’ that can produce ‘idiosyncrasy’ is water and ethyl alcohol. That means, nobody will have ‘idiosyncrasy’ towards potentized drugs that do not contain any ‘drug substances’. Homeopaths are talking about ‘idiosyncrasy’ towards potentized drugs! That concept has nothing to do with the scientific concept of ‘idiosyncracy’ towards particular ‘drugs or food substances’.
Sir, are you talking about an ‘energy level’ or ‘vital force level’ idiosyncrasy, instead of ‘material level’ idiosyncrasy? Such a ‘spiritual’ level idiosyncracy cannot be part a scientific discussion on homeopathy
There can be peculiar sensitivity towards drug ‘substance’. But there cannot be such a thing called ‘idiosyncrasy’ towards potentized drugs that do not contain any drug ‘substance’.There can be peculiar sensitivity towards drug ‘substance’. But there cannot be such a thing called ‘idiosyncrasy’ towards potentized drugs that do not contain any drug ‘substance’.
——————————————————
What is your opinion about drug provings said to be conducted using ‘high potencies’? Do you think ‘high potencies’ can produce all the symptoms of a drug substance in a healthy individual? Do you think symptoms produced by ‘high poteny’ and ‘crude form’ of a drug will be similar or different? Did you ever personally experience any drug ‘proving’ in high potencies in a healthy individual when administered without indications?
Instead of arguing, let us conduct a simple experimental study to verify whether we can ‘prove’ drugs in high potencies. I shall give a particular polychrest drug in 200c to 10 healthy individuals you select. You should record the symptoms produced by them for a particular period of time , and identify which drug was given to them. Anybody willing to participate in this experimental study to verify whether high potencies can prove or not?
“Similia similibus curentur” actually means, “something that produces a set of symptoms when given in crude form, can cure them if given in potentized form”. That is homeopathy. You can CURE diseases having symptoms of NUX by giving NUX in potentized form. But you cannot produce symptoms of NUX by giving potentized NUX. By saying ‘potentized’, I mean potentized above 12c, that do not contain any drug molecules.
That is why I am asking whether you have any experience of producing NUX symptoms in healthy individuals by giving HIGH potencies of NUX. Instead of answering that question directly, you are saying “thousands of people” are required to produce NUX symptoms.
If you give a few drachms of NUX tincture to a healthy individual, he will start producing symptoms of NUX. That means, NUX is proved even in ‘single’ individual. It is the ‘drug molecules’ contained in the NUX tincture that act upon various biological molecules and produce symptoms by creating molecular inhibitions and derangements in vital processes. Potentized NUX does not contain drug molecules, but only ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules. Molecular imprints cannot inhibit biological molecules, and as such cannot produce symptoms.
Potentized drugs can only cure; they cannot produce diseases.
I am not questioning homeopathic proving. I did not question law of similars. I did not say proving is your idea. I am asking about the ‘belief’ that you can produce symptoms in our materia medica using ‘high potencies’. HIGH POTENCIES, above 12c that do not contain original drug molecules. Sir, hope you understand what I am saying.
I am asking whether you ever experienced producing of symptoms by giving HIGH potencies of drugs. Hahnemann ‘proved’ cinchona tincture on himself and produced symptoms. He did not say “large number of persons are necessary in order for provings” or, “symptoms could not be produced in if proved in a few individulals”.
I am asking this question because i have conducted many experiments to verify whether HIGH potency drugs can produce symptoms in our materia medica. I could not produce symptoms. I know my experience is not enough. That is why I am trying to collect experiences of others also. If you believe you can produce symptoms using potentized drugs, in your opinion, how long we should give a drug in HIGH potency to produce symptoms?
Can anybody produce symptoms of our drugs in healthy individuals by using potencies above 12c? All my experiments and experiences prove otherwise. That is why I raise this question. “Potentized drugs such as 3x, 6x and 6c actually contain ‘drug molecules’, and may produce symptoms. Above 12c, there will not be any drug molecules present, but only ‘molecular imprints’ of original drug molecules. Molecular imprints cannot create molecular inhibitions in biological molecules, but only act upon pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity.
If we can ‘prove’ drugs using high potency drugs, why cant we conduct an experiment by giving a drug in high potency to a group of healthy people for some period without disclosing which drug is given, entrusting a group of ‘blinded’ homeopaths to record the symptoms produced and asking them to IDENTIFY the drug by comparing the symptoms they recorded with symptoms in our materia medica?
I hope, such an experiment conducted with necessary planing and monitoring will resolve this issue for ever.
——————————————————
Fundamental point I am trying to make out here is, only drug ‘molecules’ can bind to biological molecules, create molecular inhibitions and produce symptoms. Potentized medicines contain ‘molecular imprints’ which act as ‘artificial key-holes’ for drug molecules and similar pathogenic molecules. Hence, molecular imprints cannot bind to biological molecules or produce molecular inhibitions. That is why I say potentized medicines cannot produce any pathological molecular errors or symptoms.
If you cannot perceive drug substances in terms of constituent molecules, and potentized drugs in terms constituent molecular imprints, we cannot follow what I am saying. That is why you go on talking about “essence of drugs” “coming up” during potentization. I would request you to think about drugs in terms of constituent molecules, rather than sticking to the concept of ‘essence of drugs’. This concept of ‘essence’ of drugs is part of theory of ‘dynamic drug energy’ to which I totally disagree.
I dont classify our drugs as ‘low potency’ and ‘high potency’, but as ‘molecular forms’ and ‘molecular imprints forms’. For poroving, drugs should be used in ‘molecular forms’, where as ‘molecular imprints forms’ should be used as therapeutic agents.
——————————————————
I hope homeopaths would refrain from the habit of questioning ‘scientificness’ of science and scientific methods. Such an approach is not at all helpful for the interests of homeopathy. We have to explain and prove homeopathy according to scientific methods, in a way understandable to scientific community. We can do that, and should do that. Talking about ‘limitations’ of science, ‘science lagging behind homeopathy, and ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’, is the way of pseudo-scientific’ theoreticians who want to promote homeopathy as ‘spiritual medicine’, ‘energy medicine’ and ‘consciousness medicine’. Scientific-minded homeopaths should think rationally, talk rationally.
Homeopaths should place themselves as part of scientific community, and try to resolve the riddles of homeopathy scientifically. Positioning it as an issue of science vs homeopathy is the way of ‘anti-scientific homeopaths’ and ‘anti-homeopathic scientists’. I prefer to think, talk and work upon homeopathy as a scientific discipline.
——————————————————
If homeopathy is only a ‘practical science’, why should homeopaths talk ‘ultra-scientific’ and ‘beyond matter’ theories about homeopathy? Such nonsense talks makes scientists to think homeopathy is utter nonsense.
We know homeopathy is not nonsense. IT WORKS. But same time we actually dont know HOW IT WORKS. Our theoreticians were never successful even in presenting a scientifically viable working hypotheseis regarding how homeopathy works. Instead, they spin utter nonsense theories that are totally against all known science and laws of nature. They spin theories about ‘limitations’ of science and raise questions about ‘scientificness’ of scientific knowledge and methods. They design new ‘principles and methods of practice’ that imitate occult practices. They market homeopathy with ads and testimonials just like any street marketer promote his fraud products.
Our theoreticians and ‘brand builders’ are actually alienating homeopathy from scientific community. They are making homeopathy a subject of unending ridicule and mockery. They are responsible for providing sufficient materials to skeptics to attack homeopathy. HOMEOPATHY IS NOT NONSENSE- BUT NONSENSE THEORETICIANS MAKING IT APPEAR NONSENSE!
——————————————————
So long as homeopathic professionals and academicians cannot discard the “beyond matter” and “beyond science” theories about homeopathy, and start thinking and talking as “material scientists”, homeopathy will continue to remain aliented from mainstream scientific community.
An ‘unscientific’ homeopathic practitioner damages his career only. But an ‘unscientific’ teacher or academician propagating ‘beyond matter’ theories about homeopathy maligns a whole generation of disciples, and the damage done to future of homeopathy is beyond imagination.
A well respected, prominent homeopathic academician posted as follows:
“So long materialistic scientists can not view anything beyond matters, homoeopathy to them will remain ever mysterious. It is not the duty of homoeo professionals to prove scientificity in homoeopathy, rather this responsibility goes to scientists itself and it is their fault that the truth what they are witnessing regularly, fail to establish them scientifically. Fortunately modern discoveries gradually opening unbelievable fields beyond so called matter and it is expected that in future homoeopathy will not only be scientifically explainable and acceptable but rather it will show light in discovering new science theories”.
I wonder what he meant by “materialistic scientists”. Does he mean there is a ‘non-material science” and “non-materialistic” scientists? What he meant by “unbelievable fields beyond so called matter”? Does he mean homeopathy is some thing “beyond matter”? And it is the “fault of scientists” not seeing that something “beyond matter”?
According to his argument, “it is not the duty of homoeo professionals to prove scientificity in homoeopathy”. But does he think “homoeo professionals” have the divine right to generate any nonsense “ultra-scientific” and “beyond matter” theories about homeopathy? If it is not their duty, why should they make such theories and unverifiable claims, instead of confining to their ‘duty’ of treating patients?
I was dismayed to know that this respected homeopath talking ‘beyond matter’ theories about homeopathy is a “Professor & H.O.D. in the Dept. of Organon of Medicine in a Homoeopathic Medical College & Hospital, P.G.Guide., U.G. & P.G. examiner of several universities and author of several books in homoeopathy”.
——————————————————
You are much worried when a scientist says ‘homeopathy is based on beliefs’. But why you are not worried when ‘master homeopaths’ propagate ‘hair transmission’, ‘photo transmission’, teleporting, radionics, dowsing and such occult practices in the name of homeopathy? Why you have no hesitation to welcome them to your seminars? Why you are not worried about those theories of vibrations, resonances, frequencies, energy medicine, consciousness medicine, spiritual homeopathy and the like? Do you believe homeopaths have the divine right to say any nonsense theories, and scientists have no right to say it is nonsense?
Head of curriculum committee of CCH is propagating ‘hair transmission homeopathy’ , and conducting seminars on it. No body is worried about. He is considered a BIG man in Indian homeopathy. Are you not aware of it?You are much worried when a scientist says ‘homeopathy is based on beliefs’. But why you are not worried when ‘master homeopaths’ propagate ‘hair transmission’, ‘photo transmission’, teleporting, radionics, dowsing and such occult practices in the name of homeopathy? Why you have no hesitation to welcome them to your seminars? Why you are not worried about those theories of vibrations, resonances, frequencies, energy medicine, consciousness medicine, spiritual homeopathy and the like? Do you believe homeopaths have the divine right to say any nonsense theories, and scientists have no right to say it is nonsense?
Head of curriculum committee of CCH is propagating ‘hair transmission homeopathy’ , and conducting seminars on it. No body is worried about. He is considered a BIG man in Indian homeopathy. Are you not aware of it?
——————————————————
Science may not have answer for every questions. But science has ‘scientific’ a way of talking about unknown things. Simply admit it is not known yet. And try to explain the probabilities, using existing scientific concepts, in a fitting to the existing knowledge system. Never talk ‘ultra- scientific’ theories about unknown things.
——————————————————
If you are asking whether I had tried hair transmission, dowsing, radionics, astrology and such occult things, NO. I need not relish each and every piece of garbage to verify whether it is garbage. I know, you are not asking “just for curiosity”. We had an argument over this point earlier. I know, you wanted to say I should not question these unscientific practices until I personally ‘try it”. If you are asking whether I had tried hair transmission, dowsing, radionics, astrology and such occult things, NO. I need not relish each and every piece of garbage to verify whether it is garbage. I know, you are not asking “just for curiosity”. We had an argument over this point earlier. I know, you wanted to say I should not question these unscientific practices until I personally ‘try it”.
As a person constantly updating myself for years on advancements in diverse fields of science, I have the necessary basic knowledge about human body, natural forces and drug substances to say ‘hair transmission theory’ is nonsense. I need not ‘try’ or ‘research’ over it.
——————————————————
Try to perceive diseases in terms of molecular inhibitions, cure in terms of removal of molecular inhibitions, drugs in terms of constituent molecules, and potentized drugs in terms of constituent ‘molecular imprints’. Then you will realize that disease is not ‘single’ and drugs are not ‘single’. Even those drugs you call ‘single’ contains multitudes of independent molecular imprints representing different constituent molecules of original drug substances, which act independently on the biological molecules. Then only you can understand what I say about ‘single-multiple’ drug issue.
——————————————————
Any fraud products are marketed with impressive testimonials of live witnesses, experiences and ‘miraculous’ results. You can watch this phenomenon on totally misguiding commercial tv ads of worthless products. Such ads of testimonials will attract huge numbers of new customers irrespective of quality of products. A small percentage of them will be satisfied from various psychological and personality traits, even though majority get dissatisfied. But that small percentage of ‘satisfied’ customers are used to advance the advertisement and promotion. Nobody knows about dissatisfied customers. Same tactics is very successfully utilized by commercial ‘brands’ of homeopathy such as ‘drug transmission’, ‘predictive’ etc. Please remember, what ever nonsense theories you are talking, if you give the patient his homeopathic similimum, he will get relief. That relief is not the ‘success’ of your nonsense theory, but the success of homeopathy.
——————————————————
In my opinion, number of drugs included in a prescription should not be the primary concern. Our concern should be to ensure that all the diverse types of ‘molecular imprints’ required for the patient are made available in our prescription. A patient will have multiples of molecular errors in him, which may need multiple types of ‘molecular imprints’ to rectify them. In some cases, all the required ‘molecular imprints’ may be available in a ‘single drug’, where as in most cases we may need more than one drug for getting all required ‘molecular imprints’. ‘Single drug-multiple drug’ issue has to be resolved from this angle.
——————————————————
When talking theory, we claim that there will be a ‘most appropriate’ similimum for any particular patient, that cover ‘totality’ of his symptom. But, if many homeopaths are asked to prescribe for a single case, the diversity of prescriptions they provide will be really amazing. Each homeopath is deemed to have selected a ‘similimum’. If we ask ten homeopaths how homeopathy works, they will talk ten different theories. That shows our confusions regarding theories, lack of uniform methodology as well as imperfection of our tools. Subjectivity of the prescriber, not objective scientific rules and factors decides our prescriptions. To be a medical science in its real sense, we have to establish a minimum level uniformity in theories, approaches, tools, methods, outputs and ultimate results.
——————————————————
I am trying to approach homeopathy with a rational mindset, in a logical and scientific perspective.
“Homeopathy works- but we do not know exactly how it works yet. We are trying to know how it works, using scientific methods and research tools”.
This is sum total of my rational approach to homeopathy.
——————————————————
“Science lagging behind homeopathy” means “homeopathy is much advanced than modern scientific knowledge”! “Proper equipment does not yet exist to give the ‘scientific community’ the proof they require”. Wonderful! Only homeopaths Can raise such claims.
Astrologers can say same thing- modern science is lagging behind, and is not equipped to understand them. Black magicians and faith healers also claim the same. Proponents of ‘hair transmission homeopathy’ say ‘science lags behind’ them. MODERN SCIENCE IS LAGGING BEHIND EVERY OCCULT SCIENCE! REALLY GREAT!!!!
”SCIENCE LAGGING BEHIND HOMEOPATHY”! Such claims are usually made by crazy people. They would say everybody else except himself are crazy. But friends, homeopaths should not be that much crazy, in their eagerness to show their commitment and dedication to homeopathy and ‘master hahnemann’.
——————————————————
I am not “trying to change fundamental laws of homeopathy”. I am only trying to “explain fundamental observations” of homeopathy in terms of modern science. If you take some time to go through my articles on this topic, you would realize that I have “explained” ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ “as per ‘already proved’ modern science”. I am not proposing any “new theory” or trying to “change fundamental laws”.
Please note, so far there is no any ‘fundamental laws’ in homeopathy which anybody proved “as per modern science”. Not even “explained” as per modern science”. But we teach, learn and practice those “unproved” laws without any hesitation.
One of my friend even asked me to “show molecular imprints present in potentized drugs”, as if he understands molecular imprints as something that could be picked by a forceps and shown to him! Can anybody ‘show’ him supra-molecular formations of water? It should be ‘understood’, not ‘seen’.
How can I convince you something, if you hesitate to read anything? How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and molecular biology? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?
Kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you. Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.
I can understand the discomfort brewing among ‘settled’ homeopaths when hearing MIT concepts, since they fear it would ‘change their ‘fundamentals’. “Coming out of comfort zones” is not an easy task, especially for ‘seniors’. It is very difficult to get exposed to a new knowledge environment, which would demand a fundamental re-thinking and modifying of many things they ‘believed’, learned, taught and practiced in their whole life. That would be a very uneasy situation, very hard to cope with.
——————————————————
Possibilities of potentized homeopathic medicines interacting with genetic substance in the organism is a subject of much concern, speculations and controversy among homeopaths. Such controversies arise from the lack of sufficient understanding regarding the active principles contained in potentized medicines, and their exact mechanism of action in the living system.
With our new scientific understanding of potentization as a process of molecular imprinting, we are now in a better position to answer these questions satisfactorily. Since, molecular imprints contained in the potentized homeopathic preparations cannot successfully compete with natural ligands in binding with their target molecules, we need not be concerned about the possibility of potentized homeopatic medicines dangerously interacting with genetic material in any way.
Molecular imprints contained in the potentized homeopathic preparations bind to ligands or biological molecules merely due to their complementary cofigurations without any charge affinity, whereas natural ligands bind to their biological target molecules in capacity of their appropriate spacial configurations as well as charge affinities. So, the bindings of molecular imprints with biological molecules or their ligands will be very temporary and cannot stay long. Such bindings of molecular imprints cannot replace the natural ligand-target interactions happening as part of vital processes. Molecular imprints can not compete with natural ligands in binding to their natural biological targets. Hence it is obvious that potentized homeopathic preparations cannot interfere in biological ‘ligand-target’ processes such as ‘substrate-enzyme’, ‘antigens-antibodies’, ‘signal-receptor’ etc. As such, chances of potentized homeopathic medicines acting as pathological agents are very rare even if used indiscriminately. Molecular imprints can interfere only in interactions between pathogenic molecules and biological molecules, as well as off-target bindings of ligands with biological molecules, where only configurational affinity is involved. Obviously, molecular imprints can act upon only the molecular blocks created by exogenous or endogenous foreign pathological molecules.
At the same time, these molecular imprints can effectively compete with the pathogenic actions of deformed proteins that may result from genetic errors, thereby preventing them from creating pathological molecular blocks at various targets. As such, homeopathic medicines can play a great role even in the treatment of certain diseases of genetic origin, at least as palliatives.
More over, potentized homeopathic medicines can safeguard genetic material from dangerous mutations that may be caused the by inhibitory actions of endogenous or exogenous pathogenicl agents such as toxic drugs, heavy metals, super-oxides etc., on enzymes related with nucleic acid synthesis and genetic expressions.
——————————————————
So far, we understood ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ as ‘similarity of symptoms produced by drugs as well as diseases’.
According to modern scientific understanding, we can explain it as ‘similarity of molecular errors produced by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules’ in the organism. That means, ‘similarity of molecular configurations of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules’. To be more exact, it should be understood as ‘similarity of functional groups of pathogenic molecules as well as drug moecules.
Potentized drugs contains ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules or functional groups of drugs used for potentization. ‘Molecular imprints’ are three-dimensional negatives of molecules, and hence they would have a peculiar affinity towards those molecules, due to their complementary configuration. ‘Molecular imprints’ would show this complementary affinity not only towards the molecules used for imprinting, but also towards all molecules that have configurations similar to those molecules.
Homeopathy utilizes this phenomenon, and uses molecular imprints of drug molecules to bind and entrap pathogenic molecules having configurations similar to them. Similarity of configurations of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules are identified by evaluating the ‘similarity of symptoms’ they produce in organism during drug proving and disease. This realization is the the basis of scientific understanding of homeopathy I propose.
——————————————————
‘Molecular Imprinting’ is the key word in the scientific understanding of homeopathic ‘potentization’ and ‘simila similibus curentur’. I am not talking about ‘water memory’ or such things you would have already heard a lot. Once you get the concept of ‘molecular imprinting’ in its right perspective, everything will be clear and simple. Then you will instantly see that homeopathy fits well into the scientific paradigms of modern biochemistry and molecular medicine.
Please google to learn the modern technology of ‘Molecular Imprinted Polymers’ and ‘guest-host’ molecular formations. Then learn supra-molecular properties of water, such as di-electric properties, hydrogen bonding, hydration shells, supra-molecular networks, polymer-like behaviors, clathrates, liquid crystals etc. You can understand what I mean by ‘molecular imprinting’ in water.
At that stage, take a little time to study supra-molecular properties of ethyl alcohol, and water-alcohol complexes. Understanding the molecular structure of oligosaccharides such as lactose and sucrose also will be useful.
Then update your biochemistry from latest textbooks or internet, especially regarding proteins and protein inhibitions, and understand the ‘key-lock’ mechanism involved in ligand-target, substrate-enzyme, antigen-antibody and signal-receptor relationships. Now will be clear on the molecular mechanisms of pathologic molecular inhibitions and therapeutics. Try to understand homeopathic ‘drug proving’ from this angle.
Once you are clear on these subjects, it will be easy for you perceive ‘potentization’ in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’, and potentized drugs in terms of ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent drug molecules. You will understand the real science involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’.
—————————————————–
Carefully read the materia medica of HYDRASTIS.
Clarke’s Materia Medica : Hydrastis: Stomach: “Indigestion from atony of the stomach, esp. in old people.-Bread or vegetables cause acidity, weakness, indigestion.-Eructations of sour fluid.-Vomits all she eats, except milk and water mixed.-(Cancer.).-Faintness at the stomach; sinking, gone feeling, with continued violent palpitation of the heart, preceded by dull aching pains.-Marasmus.-Acute, distressing cutting pains.-Chronic gastric catarrh; ulceration.-Carcinoma, with emaciation, goneness”.
These are the symptoms that could be produced by hydrastis in crude forms, and could be cured by hydrastis in potentized forms.
Our materia medica are authentic references that describes the symptoms representing the molecular level pathology that could be produced by crude forms of our drugs in healthy individuals. Dont take materia medica lightly. Our materia medica provides a lot of information to show crude hydrastis can produce cancerous changes.
Clarke’s Materia Medica : Hydrastis : female:
“Lancinating pain in breast extending up to shoulder and down arm.-(Cancer of breast, pains like knives thrust into part.).-Hard, irregular tumour of l. breast, nipple retracted, glands in axilla enlarged and painful, cachectic appearance.”
——————————————————
I think aggravation after administering homeopathic drug shows our prescription was only ‘partial similimum’. It missed some of the molecular imprints required for removing all the molecular inhibitions. If it was a perfect similimum containing all the required molecular imprints, we get cure without any aggravations.
—————————————————–
Which part of NUX plant would represent the ‘personality’ of that plant? Roots? Bark? Seeds? Flowers? Leaves? Fruits? Raw? Dry? We are not preparing Nux tincture from the whole plant! Are you of the opinion that tinctures prepared from all parts would have same medicinal properties and same ‘personality’?
Molecular constitution of tinctures prepared from different parts of same plant will be different. And their medicinal properties will be different. It will change in different seasons, different soils, different climates, different growth stages.
’Personality’ of a plant or animal has different levels. Kingdoms, family, species, individual- there are a lot of such levels. There will be molecules specific to kingdom, families, species as well as individual-specific- organ specific- tissue specific. Which level ‘personality’ you are talking about?
——————————————————
Dr Andrés Amado Zuno Arce, Profesor Asociado at Universidad Candegabe de Homeopatía, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico explains his ‘scientific’ theory of homeopathy as follows:
“Brain is like a computer and works with information, and can identify it and need to do so in order for life to be possible. I call “bioinformatics” my ideas and interpretations of homeopathy because we handle the information in the homeoremedy the way we work with information in mechanical-electronic computers. With the mechanical-electronic media of the no bioinformatics we make the computer to do something. With the information in the homeoremedy we make the brain to do something. That is the way the cure is done.”
THAT IS THE WAY THIS PROFESSOR ‘SCIENTIFICALLY’ EXPLAINS ‘SIMILIA SIMILIBUS CURENTUR’!
I could not find any point worthy of discussing in this “theory”. He says “we handle the information in the homeoremedy the way we work with information in mechanical-electronic computers”. “With the information in the homeoremedy we make the brain to do something. That is the way the cure is done.”
I would have asked and answered questions with him and submitted myself to discussing the topic minutely, if it was a student or a fresher on the other end. But here, it is an ‘associated professor of homeopathy’ talking such silly theories. His ‘computer’ theories of homeopathy show his utter lack of even basic knowledge in biochemistry, molecular biology and other fundamental disciplines of modern science that are essential for understanding science of therapeutics. I preferred to quit, since my previous bitter experiences have taught me that I cannot discuss science with these people propagating ultra-scientific theories of ‘bio-informatics’, ‘bio-magnetism’, ‘energy medicine’ and such absurdities about homeopathy. My only worry is, what would be the fate of those students who are trained under these ‘pseudo-scientific’ theoreticians.
Common factors of ‘scientific explanations’ proposed by this class of these people are “everything is vibrations”, “everything is energy”, or “everything is information”. For them, life is vibrations, disease is errors in vibrations, medicine is vibrations, and cure is correction of vibrations! Instead of the term ‘vibrations’, they may use ‘energy’ or ‘information’. We need not worry about learning complex bio molecular interactions, chemical properties of drug substances or molecular mechanism of therapeutics! This ‘energy medicine’ theory is very much dear to all diverse shades of occult practitioners in homeopathy ranging from hair transmission to radionics.
——————————————————
Homeopathy, as it is learned, taught and practiced today, is not a ‘science’ in its real sense. It consists of a system of unverified beliefs, theoretical speculations, stagnant dogmas and insufficiently explained ‘experiences’. No doubt, it ‘works’. But, to be a science, that is not enough. We should explain and prove ‘how it works’, in a way understandable and acceptable to scientific community, using scientific methods.
I believe I have made a decisive step in this direction, by proposing a working hypothesis based on the concept of ‘molecular imprinting’.
——————————————————
Antidoting happens only if there are similar functional groups on constituent molecules of drug substances. I am of the opinion that molecular forms of drug substances molecules can antidote only molecular imprints of drug molecules having similar functional groups. As such, antidoting will be in most cases partial. If nux vom contain any molecules having functional groups similar to camphor, they will antidote only the molecular imprints of that particular molecule, not Nux Vom as a whole.
Chemical compounds belonging to groups such as Aldehydes, Ketones, Carboxylic Acid, Esters, Amides, Enones, Acyl halide, Acid anhydride etc contains C=O functional groups(carbonyl groups). Most of the volatile oils, perfumes and spices contains such molecules, especially ester groups. Many molecules contained in peppermint have carbonyl functional groups.
In organic chemistry, a carbonyl group is a functional group composed of a carbon atom double-bonded to an oxygen atom: C=O. It is common to several classes of organic compounds, as part of many larger functional groups. Other organic carbonyls are urea and the carbamates, the derivatives of acyl chlorides chloroformates and phosgene, carbonate esters, thioesters, lactones, lactams, hydroxamates, and isocyanates. Examples of inorganic carbonyl compounds are carbon dioxide and carbonyl sulfide.
Esters are chemical compounds having carbonyl functional groups derived by reacting an oxoacid with a hydroxyl compound such as an alcohol or phenol. Esters are usually derived from an inorganic acid or organic acid in which at least one -OH (hydroxyl) group is replaced by an -O-alkyl (alkoxy) group, and most commonly from carboxylic acids and alcohols. That is, esters are formed by condensing an acid with an alcohol.
Esters are ubiquitous. Most naturally occurring fats and oils are the fatty acid esters of glycerol. Esters with low molecular weight are commonly used as fragrances and found in essential oils and pheromones. Phosphoesters form the backbone of DNA molecules. Nitrate esters, such as nitroglycerin, are known for their explosive properties, while polyesters are important plastics, with monomers linked by ester moieties.
Esters are responsible for the aroma of many fruits, including apples, pears, bananas, pineapples, and strawberries.
ESTER COMPOUNDS HAVING CARBONYL FUNCTIONAL GROUPS, WHICH ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR VARIOUS ODORS AND FLAVORS:
Allyl hexanoate -pineapple
Benzyl acetate- pear, strawberry, jasmine
Bornyl acetate- Pine
Butyl butyrate- pineapple
Ethyl acetate- nail polish remover, model paint, model airplane glue
Ethyl butyrate- banana, pineapple, strawberry
Ethyl hexanoate- pineapple, waxy-green banana
Ethyl cinnamate- cinnamon
Ethyl formate- lemon, rum, strawberry
Ethyl heptanoate- apricot, cherry, grape, raspberry
Ethyl isovalerate- apple
Ethyl lactate- butter, cream
Ethyl nonanoate- grape
Ethyl pentanoate- apple
Geranyl acetate- geranium
Geranyl butyrate- cherry
Geranyl pentanoate- apple
Isobutyl acetate- cherry, raspberry, strawberry
Isobutyl formate- raspberry
Isoamyl acetate- pear, banana (flavoring in Pear drops)
Isopropyl acetate- fruity
Linalyl acetate- lavender, sagelavender, sage
Linalyl butyrate- peach
Linalyl formate- apple, peach
Methyl acetate- glue
Methyl anthranilate- grape, jasmine
Methyl benzoate- fruity, ylang ylang, feijoa
Methyl butyrate (methyl butanoate)- pineapple, apple, strawberry
Methyl cinnamate- strawberry
Methyl pentanoate (methyl valerate)- flowery
Methyl phenylacetate- honey
Methyl salicylate (oil of wintergreen)- Modern root beer, wintergreen, Germolene and Ralgex ointments
Nonyl caprylate- orange
Octyl acetate- fruity-orange
Octyl butyrate- parsnip
Amyl acetate (pentyl acetate)- apple, banana
Pentyl butyrate (amyl butyrate)- apricot, pear, pineapple
Pentyl hexanoate (amyl caproate)- apple, pineapple
Pentyl pentanoate (amyl valerate- apple
Propyl acetate- pear
Propyl hexanoate- blackberry, pineapple, cheese, wine
Propyl isobutyrate- rum
Terpenyl butyrate- cherry
Molecular imprints cannot deactivate each other. Drug ‘molecules’ having C=O functional groups can deactivate ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules having similar functional groups
——————————————————
Any individual will have diverse types of molecular errors in him, caused by diverse types of pathogenic agents affecting diverse types of biological molecules in his organism. Any drug substance consists of diverse types of constituent molecules that can bind to diverse types of biological molecules when applied on the organism for drug proving, and produce diverse groups of symptoms collected in the materia medica. Potentized drugs contain diverse types of molecular imprints of diverse types of constituent drug molecules, which can act up on diverse types of pathogenic molecules and deactivate them when used as therapeutic agents.
We have to cure individuals having ‘multiple’ molecular errors in vital processes, any drug substance in crude forms as well as potentized forms are ‘multiple’ in molecular constitution, and as such, talk about ‘curing with single drug’ is only an utopian dream
——————————————————
Removal of symptoms is not the real goal of homeopathic treatment. Actually, homeopaths are using symptoms only as indicators to locate the exact molecular level pathology existing in the patient, and to identify an appropriate drug which in ‘molecular imprints’ form can remove those molecular errors. ‘Similia similibus curentur’ means, ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules can remove the pathological molecular errors which are similar to those created in by the drug substances when applied in molecular form upon healthy organism, and expressed through similar symptoms.
——————————————————
’Similimum’ is the drug that contains some constituent molecules having ‘functional groups or moieties siimilar to those of the pathogenic molecules that caused the molecular inhibitions underlying the particular disease in the patient. Due to the presence of same functional groups, drug molecules of similimum and particular pathogenic molecules can bind to same biological target molecules, create similar molecular errors, and produce similar symptoms. That is why homeopathy determines similimum by comparing disease symptoms and drug symptoms. Due to complementary configuration, molecular imprints contained in potentized forms of similimum can selectively bind to the functional groups of pathogenic molecules and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from molecular inhibitions. This is the molecular dynamics involved in homeopathic therapeutics, which is known as ‘similia similibus curentur’.
——————————————————
If any body want to ‘practice’ ‘drug transmission’ or any other such occult practices, it is their choice. But when you link those unscientific practices with homeopathy, and to conduct ‘courses’ and seminars for attracting homeopaths into it, it is a different matter. Homeopathy is a system of therapeutics. Any ‘therapeutic’ system uses one or other drug substance into the body of the patient. Nobody can practice ‘drug transmission’ in the name of homeopathy. Sir, did you ever think about the harm you are doing to our attempts to make homeopathy accepted as part of modern scientific medical practice? Adding something that goes completely against accepted scientific knowledge system into homeopathy will create a lot of difficulties to the homeopathic profession who try it it to establish as a scientific therapeutics. You are making homeopathy a subject of constant mockery before the scientific community.I feel very much disgusted to see eminent respected homeopaths like you being part of these unscientific practices. I can only pray your goodness to return back to your rational senses.
——————————————————
To understand the real science behind the phenomena of ‘similia similibus curentur’, ‘drug proving’ and ‘potntization’, we should study drug substances in terms of not only their ‘constituent molecules’, but in terms of ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ of those drug molecules. A drug substance is composed of diverse types of drug molecules. A drug molecule interacts with ‘active groups’ of biological target molecules such as enzymes and receptors using their ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’. It is the ‘functional groups’ and ‘moieties’ on the individual drug molecules that decide to which biological molecules they can bind to and produce molecular inhibitions. Different drug molecules with different size and structures, but having same ‘functional group’ or ‘moiety’ can bind to same biological molecules and produce similar molecular errors and similar groups of symptoms. A drug molecule become similimum to a disease when the drug molecule and disease-producing molecule have same functional groups, so that they could bind to same biological targets producing same molecular errors and same symptom groups.
——————————————————
There are a lot of unanswered, insufficiently answered and improperly answered questions in homeopathy. A lot of grey and dark areas there, which need to be explored using the searchlight of modern scientific knowledge. Homeopathy is now learned and practiced on the basis of certain ‘dogmas’ and ‘beliefs’, more than actual ‘knowledge’. More ‘misunderstandings’ than ‘understandings’. We have to try to systematically resolve each and every riddles involved in homeopathy in terms of modern scientific knowledge. I am trying to do that, within my limitations. I know, it is bound to be a slow process, through which homeopathy will progressively evolve into a full-fledged system of medical science.
——————————————————
According to me, ‘vital force theory’ has no relevance in a discussion on medical science. That topic should be discussed as part of philosophy, if anybody is interested in it. It is one’s approach to ‘vital force theory’ that determines to which class he belongs: the class of scientific homeopaths or unscientific homeopaths. I prefer to stay away from those who are so much interested in in discussing vital force. I know, nobody can convince science to them.
——————————————————
To day I had an encounter with a young homeopath who wanted to convince me regarding the existence of ‘Vital force’.
His main arguments: “If vital force does not exist, then there is no difference between dead body and living one. Because, all the molecules are there in the body even after the death of the person, except the ‘vital force’. If only the molecules makes the man, then our medicine will have to act on dead”.
His arguments are based on the mis-conceived idea that there is no difference between a ‘dead body’ and living body’ except the presence of ‘vital force’.
What is death, in scientific perspective? “Death is the permanent termination of the biological functions that sustain a living organism. Phenomena which commonly bring about death include old age, predation, malnutrition, disease, and accidents or trauma resulting in terminal injury”.
It is material level process involving the “permanent termination” of molecular level “biological functions”. Factors which bring about such a “termination of biological functions” are also “material”- old age, predation, malnutrition, disease, accidents or trauma. All these factors affect the organism at molecular level, creating unrepairable molecular errors in biological pathways, culminating in “permanent termination of biological functions”
Obviously, death is a “material level” molecular process. There is nothing “immaterial” or “dynamic” in the phenomenon of death.
The statement “molecules of living body and dead body are the same” is pure ignorance of biochemistry of life, disease and death. They are not same. It is the “molecular level derangement” that bring “permanent termination” of functions. Death is not the “leaving of an immaterial vital force” from the body, but a series of complex biochemical molecular processes leading to “termination of functions”.
I felt very sorry to hear a young, science-educated homeopathy graduate repeating the obsolete argument that “molecules of a living body and dead body are same”, which demonstrates how much our young generation is deprived of even basic knowledge of biochemistry. How can I talk science of homeopathy to them?
When a homeopathy student of tender age with very limited knowledge just jump in and try to ‘teach’ me his foolish unscientific ideas pretending himself to be a ‘know- all”, even without bothering to listen or understand what I persistently keep on saying, I just lose my cool. I know it is very bad for an old man like me. It shows I am not a good teacher. Excuse me, friends. Especially this slippery talk about ‘vital force’ always irritates me, because I think it is the greatest stumbling block that prevents homeopathy from becoming a real medical science.
According to me, ‘vital force theory’ has no relevance in a discussion on medical science. That topic should be discussed as part of philosophy, if anybody is interested in it.
It is one’s approach to ‘vital force theory’ that determines to which class he belongs: the class of scientific homeopaths or unscientific homeopaths. I prefer to stay away from those who are so much interested in in discussing vital force. I know, nobody can convince science to them.
——————————————————
A young homeopath asks: “How can we prove the ‘scientificity’ of ‘vital force’?”
How can anybody prove the scientificity of a theory that is totally unscientific and metaphysical?
Trying to prove scientificity of vital force is just like trying to prove the scientificity of GOD! If you believe in god, you can say this world is the ‘proof’ for God’s existence. Same way, if you believe in vital force , you can say LIFE is the proof for ‘vital force’. JUST BELIEVE IT, DISBELIEVE IT OR IGNORE IT. Vital force theory is a part of spiritualistic philosophy and theology. Do not drag ‘vital force’ into our scientific discourse of homeopathy. Homeopathy is a medical science. Learn it, teach it and practice it as a subject of science.
250 years ago, when hahnemann happened to observe the objective natural law of cure he named ‘similia similibus curentur’, and realized that extremely diluted medicinal substances acted therapeutically, he had no scientific knowledge available to explain these phenomena. So he tried to explain his newly invented therapeutic method by utilizing vital force theory and concept of dynamic medicinal power. He was compelled to do so due to the primitive state of scientific knowledge that existed during his time.
Now we are living a new era of scientific awareness. Modern biochemistry, molecular biology and supramolecular chemistry have provided us with enough scientific tools and information to explain similia similibus curentur and potentization in scientific terms. It is a gross injustice and insult to the great genius of hahnemann if we still explain his noble therapeutic method in terms of vital force and dynamic drug energy.
—————————————————–
Responding to my post on ‘blind beliefs in homeopathy’, a friend asked me:
“What about Homeopathy? Is it a blind belief or scientific fact?”
When I say something is “blind belief”, that does not mean there is no any “scientific fact” in that phenomenon you ‘believe’. It only means you are believing something without actually knowing “scientific fact” behind it.
Until and unless we succeed in knowing and explaining the ‘scientific facts’ behind the ‘principles’ of homeopathy in scientific terms, and prove them according to scientific methods, everything we talk as ‘principles of homeopathy’ are ‘blind beliefs’.
Please note, I am not saying “homeopathy is blind belief”, but that so-called “principles of homeopathy” are ‘blind beliefs. Homeopathy is ‘experience’ of a natural phenomenon, but the ‘principles’ we use to explain that phenomenon are speculations and blind beliefs based on 250 year old human knowledge.
We have to know and explain the ‘scientific facts’ behind the ‘homeopathic experience’ on the basis of present day scientific knowledge, so that we can eliminate ‘blind beliefs’ from it and make it a real science.
——————————————————
Most homeopaths believe CAMPHOR is a ‘universal antidote’ to homeopathic medicines. What is your opinion? What is your experience? Did anybody conduct well-planned experiments to resolve this question? Is it a ‘blind belief’ or a scientific fact? What is special about camphor to make it a ‘universal antidote’?
Just now, a homeopath commented on ‘SIMILIMUM ULTRA’ group that camphor antidotes only ‘medicines belonging to animal kingdom’. Now you are saying it antidotes only ‘vegetable kingdom’. This shows there is no uniform opinions. There are also homeopaths who believe it antidotes all drugs irrespective of ‘kingdoms’. All these are ‘beliefs’. I am trying to search for scientific truths. in your opinion, why it antidotes ‘medicines of vegetablel kingdom’ only? Why not ‘animal’ or ‘mineral’ kingdoms? What protects them from getting antidoted by camphor?
I am not asking “what master said”. My question is “What is your opinion- What is your experience- Did anybody conduct well-planned experiments to resolve this question- Is it a ‘blind belief’ or a scientific fact- What is special about camphor to make it a ‘universal antidote’?”
All of us know what “master said”. We want to know “WHY master said so”? “HOW camphor becomes a ‘universal antidote”? “WHAT is the mechanism of this antidoting action”? WE NEED SCIENTIFICALLY VIABLE ANSWERS- NOT QUOTES FROM MASTERS.
You are repeating what all of us ‘believe’. But that does not provide logical answers to my questions. Kindly read the questions I asked.
Observation that “substances which has strong odour has antidots to the homoeopathic medicines” has nothing to do with the belief that “camphor is a universal antidote”. There are hundreds of substances and drugs that contain chemical compounds having “strong odors”, even “stronger” than camphor. But why only camphor is called “universal’ antidote? What is special about camphor that makes it different from other drugs having “strong odors”?
If “strong odor” is the factor that gives a substance its “antidoting” power, please remember, no potentized drugs have “strong” odor. All drugs potentized above 12c have same odor and chemical properties, since they do not contain original drug molecules. Potentized camphor has no a special odor of its own. How can anybody say that potentized camphor acts as ‘universal antidotes” due to “strong odor”? Your statement “all medicines are also susceptible to capmor either in crude or in potency” is not at all logical. May be in “crude” form- how can you say “and in potency”?
——————————————————
When I say something is “blind belief”, that does not mean there is no “scientific fact”. It only means you are believing something without actually knowing “scientific fact” behind it. Until and unless we succeed in knowing and explaining the ‘scientific facts’ behind the ‘principles’ of homeopathy in scientific terms, and prove them according to scientific methods, everything we talk as ‘principles of homeopathy’ are ‘blind beliefs’. Please note, I am not saying “homeopathy is blind belief”, but what we call “principles of homeopathy” are ‘blind beliefs. Homeopathy is ‘experience’, but its ‘principles’ are speculations and blind beliefs based on 250 year old human knowledge. We have to explain our ‘homeopathic experience’ on the basis of present day scientific knowledge, so that we can eliminate ‘blind beliefs’ from it and make it a real science.
——————————————————
In your opinion, what are the physical influences that will negatively affect the medicinal properties of potentized drugs (above 12c)?
Exposure to direct sunlight- Exposure to strong artificial light, including fluorescent lights – High temperature – Refrigeration – Ionizing radiations – Exposure to strong magnetic fields – Exposing to perfumes, volatile oils, strong odors – Keeping near computers, mobile phones, electronic gadgets – Exposing to electric currents – Nearness of mobile towers – Violent shaking
——————————————————
In Chronic Diseases – Anti-psoric Drugs, see how CALCAREA CARBONICA is prepared:
“Break in pieces a clean, somewhat thick oyster shell, take one grain of the softer, snow-white calcareous substance found between the outer and the inner harder shell. This is prepared in all the degrees of potencies up to X in the manner directed as to the preparation of dry medicinal substances for homoeopathic use, given at the conclusion of Part I. This is preserved from sunlight and great warmth, to be used for its various purposes”.
That means, CALC CARB is the middle layer of ‘oyster shell’, a part of ‘biological tissue’, which belongs to animal kingdom. It contains not only calcium carbonate, but various biological molecules. HOW CAN WE CONSIDER ‘CALC CARB’ AS A MINERAL DRUG?
Since it is procured from animal tissue (middle layer of oyster shell) , I think it should be considered as ‘animal drug’, exactly similar to CASTOR EQUI (Rudimentary Thumb-nail of the Horse). We know Conchiolinum (Mother-of-Pearl) and Ova Tosta ( egg shell) also belong the category of ANIMAL ORIGIN, similar to CALC CARB. It would be more appropriate call CALC CARB as OYSTER SHELL.
Calcium carbonate is a chemical compound with the formula CaCO3. It is a common substance found in rocks in all parts of the world, and is the main component of shells of marine organisms, snails, coal balls, pearls, and eggshells.
To process calcium carbonate from oyster shells, first we have to make Calcium Oxide or quick lime by subjecting it to thermal decomposition.
Then, calcium carbonate is made by mixing calcium oxide into water, and then bubbling carbon dioxide into the solution.Water is added to give calcium hydroxide, and carbon dioxide is passed through this solution to precipitate the desired calcium carbonate, referred to in the industry as precipitated calcium carbonate.
How can you say ‘the middle layer of oyster shell’ potentized without any such processing is pure Calcium Carbonate, and is a ‘mineral kingdom’ drug. We can only say it is an ‘animal kingdom drug’ containing calcium carbonate. No doubt, it will contain various other biological molecules also, since it is an ‘animal tissue’.
——————————————————
Kindly understand, molecular constitution of an “animal tissue containing calcium carbonate” will be entirely different from that of pure “calcium carbonate”. As such, their medicinal properties also will be different.’
NASH uses the term CALCAREA OSTREARUM instead of CALC CARB. I think it is the correct term we should use. We can procure mineral calcarea carb, prove it and potentize it and then call it CALC CARB. That is a different matter. No doubt. Materia Medica of pure CALC CARB thus processed will be different from Materia Medica of CALC OSTREARUM now we have.
How could you ignore the fact it is the ‘middle layer of oyster shell”- an animal tissue?
——————————————————
Below 12c, molecules of drug substances may be present in potentized drugs. It is safe to avoid potencies below 12c, especially toxic substances such as ars. It may produce unknown effects in the organism. I would say it would be better to confine 12c-30c potencies.
——————————————————
If potentized in genuine way, dilutions above 12c will no contain any drug molecules, but only ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent drug molecules
Constituent molecules of drug substance bind to various biological molecules and create pathological molecular inhibitions, which are expressed through diverse groups of subjective and objective symptoms.
Molecular imprints cannot bind to biological molecules and interfere in normal biochemical processes. They can act only on pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity. As such, molecular imprints contained in potentized drugs cannot create any pathological molecular errors or associated symptoms. Hence, ‘proving’ with potentized drugs above 12 c is improbable, if the sample used is ‘genuinely’ potentized.
But, if the samples we use contain drug molecules due to faulty potentization, it may produce some symptoms in healthy individuals.
If there are any molecular inhibitions already insisting in the prover, caused by pathogenic molecules which have configurational affinity towards the potentized drugs we use, it may produce some changes in the organism which will be reflected as changes in symptoms, it may be misinterprested as ‘drug proving’.
Over all, I am of the opinion that drugs cannot be proved using 12c or above, if the samples are genuinely potentized.
Potencies above 12c contains ‘molecular imprints’, which are the exact active principles of our drugs. They can bind to pathogenic molecules and produce therapeutic effects. I said ‘molecular imprints’ cannot interfere the normal interactions of biological molecules, and hence cannot produce molecular inhibitions or symptoms. Kindly try to understand the difference between ‘drug molecules’ and ‘molecular imprints’.
Homeopathic “drug proving’ and ‘therapeutic actions’ involves different molecular processes. First is ‘creating molecular errors’, second is ‘resolving molecular errors’. Potentized drugs cannot produce molecular errors, but can resolve molecular errors.
The question “so what is the use of potency above 12c as it dosen’t proved if acording to this” evolves from the misunderstanding that it is the “disease producing power” that gives our drugs their “curative power”. That is the way we are taught homeopathy. Exactly, it should be understood as “disease producing power” of “molecular forms” of drug substance gives their “molecular imprints” the “curative power”. Homeopathic “curative power” of drugs is in “molecular imprints”, whereas their “disease-producing power” is in their “drug molecules”. This fundamental difference between “drug molecules” and their “molecular imprints” should be clearly understood. There lies the difference between mother tinctures and potentized drugs.
“Some” provings are done using ‘higher’ potencies. Most provings are done using ‘mother tinctures’ and ‘low potencies’. I have explained why some ‘high potencies’ produce ‘some’ symptoms. To be reliable, provings should be done using ‘molecular forms’. To study the difference, I had suggested CCRH to prove same drugs in crude forms and potentized forms in different groups of provers, and do a comparative study of symptoms. Nobody did such a comparative study earlier.
If you study our materia medica works carefully, you can see that they are mix-ups of symptoms not only from actual provings, but also collected from toxicological studies, pharmacological studies, accidental poisonings, ancient medical literature and so called ‘clinical provings’.
For example, Lachesis known to be proved in high potency. Do you think anybody can produce all those symptoms recorded in materia medica of lachesis, by proving high potency? Most symptoms in materia medica of lachesis are the symptoms caused by bites of lachesis which are collected from medical texts and clinical observations.
——————————————————
If ‘wrong prescriptions’ can harm ‘human economy’, homeopaths would have been the greatest criminals in human history. What ever we claim, we make more ‘wrong’ prescriptions everyday than we make ‘right’ prescriptions.
If we give ask 10 doctors to prescribe for a single patient, they would make TEN or more different prescriptions. That means, at least NINE of them are ‘wrong’ prescriptions. Remember, all these homeopaths make ‘wonderful’ results in their practice!!
I am bit confused to hear you saying ‘physiological symptoms’ produced by proving. How can you say the symptoms produced by drug proving as ‘physiological symptoms’? By ‘physiological symptoms’ we can mean only those symptoms that represent the normal ‘physiological processes’ of the organism. When the drug substance act upon the organism, normal physiological processes are deranged by molecular level pathological changes, which is expressed as ‘drug symptoms’. These ‘drug symptoms’, how much mild they may be, are ‘pathological’ symptoms produced by molecular level derangement created by drug substance.
Pathological molecular errors later advances to tissue level pathologies, which will be expressed as observable tissue changes. Whether observable tissue changes are produced or not, drug proving always produces ‘molecular level’ pathologies, and Similia similibus curentur is applicable to them.
we need not perceive ‘symptoms’ and ‘structural changes’ as different entities. “Structural changes” or “tissue changes” are actually “molecular level pathology” advanced to an “objective” level. You can see, any ‘structural change’ has a ‘MOLECULAR LEVEL PATHOLOGY’ underlying it. Pathology is always ‘molecular level’, and cure is also always happening at ‘molecular level’. Therapeutics is always a ‘molecular level intervention’ in the biological processes by the physician, using ‘molecular tools’ we call ‘drugs’
——————————————————
I have read about a ‘proving’ done by an ‘internationally famous’ homeopath from UK. He ‘proved’ drugs by applying in the eyes of photographs of provers around the world, downloaded from computer. And he got a ‘great collection of symptoms’ by that proving!.
Kindly give some drugs in high potencies to a few close friends of your, and watch any ‘symptoms’ of that drug you could produce in them. It is very simple. I have tried it on myself, my family members and my friends hyndreds of times using different drugs in high potencies, and I am fully convinced “proving with high potencies” will not be much different from “proving with water”. PLEASE TRY IT, AND GET CONVINCED, SIR.
I had consumed even ounce doses of LACH 200 to verify its ‘proving’. Nothing happened!. If the prover has any symptoms of the drugs used for proving, that symptom will be removed. That is all
Please conduct some double blinded provings using high potencies as well as unpotentized water-alcohol mixture for controls. Volunteers should not know what drug they got, those who conduct proving should not know who are real provers and who are controls. Then record symptoms. AND SEE THE FUN!
You can see many faith healers, street magicians and occult practitioners in indian villages, who can do better magics! But homeopathy is not magic, but scientific therapeutics
Select 10 volunteers, put potentized drugs under the pillows of five of them, and placebo under other five. Dont allow the conductor or volunteers to know who got placebo and who got drug. Then record the symptoms. You can see how the magic works!
——————————————————
’Beliefs’ that could not be logically explained, contradicts the known scientific truths and reasoning, and not willing to be verified by scientific methods are called ‘blind beliefs’. ‘Blind believers’ never ask logical questions about ‘what-why-how’ of what they ‘believe’, or tolerate anybody asking such questions that may undermine their ‘beliefs’.
Homeopathic practice is ruled by hundreds of such ‘blind beliefs’, handed down through generations of homeopaths. We have to subject each and every ‘beliefs in homeopathy’ for scientific scrutiny, and prove which are right and which are wrong.
——————————————————
”Mother tincture use only nd only for pallative treatment, later on goes to potency for curative”. This is another ‘blind belief’. Did any scientific study prove ‘mother tinctures cannot cure’, or ‘potencies cannot palliate’?
”Palliative treatment” is intended only for hopeless “incurable cases”. Why should we think about “palliative” treatment, if a case is “curable”? “Palliative treatment first”, and “then curative treatment” is an unhomeopathic approach.
“Palliative treatment first, then curative treatment” is only an argument to cover up un-homeopathic use of mother tinctures, when a homeopath fails to find out an appropriate similimum that would give relief to their patients.
——————————————————
I did not say “all believers are unscientific”. I was pointing to various blind, unfounded beliefs among homeopaths. For example, we believe such and such drugs would antidote such and such drugs, or are inimical to such and such drugs, based on the ‘words of masters’. Did anybody conduct any scientific study on that ‘belief’? There are many homeopaths prescribing drugs and getting good results without any concern for ‘drug relationships’. Right or wrong, is not ‘drug relationships’ a ‘blind belief’? I am only saying we have to ‘displace’ beliefs’ with ‘scientific knowledge’.
Many homeopaths ‘believe’ that ‘mixing’ of two or more potentized drugs are extremely harmful. Did anybody do scientific studies to verify whether this belief is right or wrong?
We ‘believe’ homeopathic drugs act through nervous system and ‘mind’. Is that belief supported by scientific studies. In vitro studies using potentized drugs and biological molecules have proved that potentized drugs act even in the absence of nerves or nerve cells or ‘mind’. But we continue to ‘blindly believe’ that our drugs act upon nervous system and ‘mind’.
We believe potentized drugs if taken without indications may ‘prove’ or even cause death. Any studies on that? Many doctors knowingly or unknowingly use drugs without indications. Nothing happens. But we continue to ‘believe’…
Beliefs about suppression, single drug-multiple drugs, homeopathic aggravation, directions of cure, genetic inheritance of miasms… there are hundreds of such ‘blind beliefs’ among homeopaths. Is it wrong for me to say we should displace these ‘blind beliefs’ with ‘scientific knowledge’?
We are taught that silicea if given to tuberculous patients may cause grave complications, even resulting in death. Did anybody conduct a scientific study to verify whether this ‘belief’ is right or wrong. I am not asking for random ‘experiences’ of some ‘masters’. Any scientific study? No! We never bother to do that, but continue believing and teaching it to next generation. Is it not ‘blind belief’?
It is believed that CAMPHOR is a universal antidote, antidoting all other potentized drugs. During my forty years of experience with homeopathy, I am sure, it is a ‘blind belief’. Crude camphor and volatile oils may antidote certain potentized drugs having molecular affinity. But there is no any justification to believe that potentized camphor is by any way different from other potentized drugs. Nobody bothers to verify whether this ‘universal antidote’ theory is right or wrong, but we simply believe…
Sir, can you say, by being ” teaching since decades and finding of old experienced teacher and practioner” will make such ‘beliefs’ scientific? Why nobody bother to verify such beliefs according to scientific method? Why not CCRH or such authorized bodies think on that lines?
For centuries, not ‘decades’, humanity believed and taught that ‘sun revolves around earth’. But that belief was scientifically proved to be wrong!
These ‘beliefs’ could be verified by simple experiments. Even students can do it as part of project works. Why nobody thinking about such projects?
I agree, there may be some scientific truths behind some of those beliefs. But they should be verified and proved according to scientific methods.
——————————————————
Excuse me for that. Speaking hard truths may feel bitter and provocative. Ancient Indian scriptures warning me: “sathyam bruyal, priyam bruyal; na bruyal sathyam apriyam”. I know, I am speaking ‘sathyam apriyam’.
Most homeopaths are ‘believers’. For them, homeopathy is a sacred ‘belief system’. They ‘believe’ that ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’ and ‘our master’ is ‘greatest scientist of all times’. They ‘believe’ in master, ‘believe’ in organon’, ‘believe’ in ‘similia similibus curentur’, ‘believe’ in ‘vital force’, ‘believe’ in ‘dynamic drug energy’, ‘believe’ in ‘miasms’, ‘believe’ in ‘immutable fundamental principles’, ‘believe in ‘single drug-single dose’, ‘believe’ in ‘hering laws’, ‘believe’ in ‘drug relationships’, ‘believe’ in ‘words of stalwarts’, ‘believe’ in ‘teachers’ and ‘gurus’. This list of ‘homeopathic beliefs’ is fascinating as well as unending. They ask me: “do you believe in homeopathy?”
They hesitate to accommodate new knowledge. They never ask ‘why-what-how’ about their beliefs. They would never tolerate anybody asking such hard questions
Most of them prefer to be die-hard fundamentalists- homeopathic fundamentalists. Tougher than even those dreaded religious fundamentalists. They behave themselves like ‘faith-healers’ than scientific medical professionals and physicians. To talk logic, reason and science to such a closed-minded ‘believers community’ is a tough task indeed- and dangerous to some extent.
Without displacing ‘blind beliefs’ with ‘scientific knowledge’, we cannot hope homeopathy to become a scientific medical system. Study, research, experiment, learn, know and apply- that is the way of science.
I did not say “all believers are unscientific”. I was pointing to various blind, unfounded beliefs among homeopaths. For example, we believe such and such drugs would antidote such and such drugs, or are inimical to such and such drugs, based on the ‘words of masters’. Did anybody conduct any scientific study on that ‘belief’? There are many homeopaths prescribing drugs and getting good results without any concern for ‘drug relationships’. Right or wrong, is not ‘drug relationships’ a ‘blind belief’? I am only saying we have to ‘displace’ beliefs’ with ‘scientific knowledge’.
Many homeopaths ‘believe’ that ‘mixing’ of two or more potentized drugs are extremely harmful. Did anybody do scientific studies to verify whether this belief is right or wrong?
We ‘believe’ homeopathic drugs act through nervous system and ‘mind’. Is that belief supported by scientific studies. In vitro studies using potentized drugs and biological molecules have proved that potentized drugs act even in the absence of nerves or nerve cells or ‘mind’. But we continue to ‘blindly believe’ that our drugs act upon nervous system and ‘mind’.
We believe potentized drugs if taken without indications may ‘prove’ or even cause death. Any studies on that? Many doctors knowingly or unknowingly use drugs without indications. Nothing happens. But we continue to ‘believe’…
Beliefs about suppression, single drug-multiple drugs, homeopathic aggravation, directions of cure, genetic inheritance of miasms… there are hundreds of such ‘blind beliefs’ among homeopaths. Is it wrong for me to say we should displace these ‘blind beliefs’ with ‘scientific knowledge’?
We are taught that silicea if given to tuberculous patients may cause grave complications, even resulting in death. Did anybody conduct a scientific study to verify whether this ‘belief’ is right or wrong. I am not asking for random ‘experiences’ of some ‘masters’. Any scientific study? No! We never bother to do that, but continue believing and teaching it to next generation. Is it not ‘blind belief’?
It is believed that CAMPHOR is a universal antidote, antidoting all other potentized drugs. During my forty years of experience with homeopathy, I am sure, it is a ‘blind belief’. Crude camphor and volatile oils may antidote certain potentized drugs having molecular affinity. But there is no any justification to believe that potentized camphor is by any way different from other potentized drugs. Nobody bothers to verify whether this ‘universal antidote’ theory is right or wrong, but we simply believe…
——————————————————
We time and again hear our critics sarcastically declaringthat homeopaths indulge in a totally unscientific way of medical practice, considering the external symptoms alone, and accuse that the basic causes of diseases are not dealt with in homoeopathic treatment. ‘Homoeopaths treat only the symptoms, not the disease’- they say. Even now these learned friends utterly fail to understand the logic of homoeopathy, and the fact that it is a highly scientific method of therapeutics. The subjective and objective symptoms presented by the organism are the only reliable indicators to help us correctly understand the minute molecular deviations underlying a state of pathology. Each group or train of symptoms represent a specific molecular error that had occurred in a particular biochemical pathway. These symptoms invariably indicates the specific type and character of the endogenic or exogenic foreign molecules or ions responsiblefor the particular molecular inhibition. By studying the train of symptoms carefully and systematically, homoeopaths are really observing these exact molecular inhibitions. This symptomatology-based analytical method of homoeopathy is far more exact and superior to the multitude of expensive complex laboratory chemical tests and imaging technologies we consider to be scientific. Identifying the exact molecular errors in the organism of the patient by observing the expressed symptoms, and identifying the most appropriate therapeutic agents from the similarity of symptoms the drugs could produce in healthy organism- this is the scientific essence of “similia similibuscurentur”.
——————————————————
If anybody has least doubt whether or not hahnemann was talking about the ‘miasm of psora’ as originating from ‘infection of itch disease’, kindly read this part from ‘Chronic Diseases’-Para 37:
“Psora (itch disease), like syphilis, is a miasmatic chronic disease, and its original development is similar. The itch disease is, however, also the most contagious of all chronic miasmata, far more infectious than the other two chronic miasmata, the venereal chancre disease and the figwart disease”.
“But the miasma of the itch needs only to touch the general skin, especially with tender children”.
“No other chronic miasma infects more generally, more surely, more easily and more absolutely than the miasma of itch; as already stated, it is the most contagious of all. It is communicated so easily, that even the physician, hurrying from one patient to another, in feeling the pulse has unconsciously inoculated other patients with it; wash which is washed with wash infected with the itch; new gloves which had been tried on by an itch patient, a strange lodging place, a strange towel used for drying oneself have communicated this tinder of contagion; yea, often a babe, when being born, is infected while passing through the organs of the mother, who may be infected (as is not infrequently the case) with this disease; or the babe receives this unlucky infection through the hand of the midwife, which has been infected by another parturient woman (or previously); or, again, a suckling may be infected by its nurse, or, while on her arm, by her caresses or the caresses of a strange person with unclean hands; not to mention the thousands of other possible ways in which things polluted with this invisible miasma may touch a man in the course of his life, and which often can in no way be anticipated or guarded against, so that men who have never been infected by the psora are the exception. We need not to hunt for the causes of infection in crowded hospitals, factories, prisons, or in orphan houses, or in the filthy huts of paupers; even in active life, in retirement, and in the rich classes, the itch creeps in.”
It is obvious that hahnemann considered human beings aquiring ‘miasm of psora’ only by getting ‘infected’ with ‘itch’ disease. But our ‘miasmatic experts’ make theories about even ‘genetic inheritance’ of ‘psora’! I would request young homeopaths to carefully read the original works of hahnemann with a logical and scientific mindset, instead of ‘learning miasms’ from modern interpreters.
Listen to hahnemann saying: “not to mention the thousands of other possible ways in which things polluted with this invisible miasma may touch a man in the course of his life, and which often can in no way be anticipated or guarded against, so that men who have never been infected by the psora are the exception”.
Hahnemann explains the diverse ways of getting infected by itch to show why “men who have never been infected by psora are the exception”. But our miasmatic experts would say that it is due to ‘genetic inheritance’!
——————————————————
Mother tinctures and crude drugs also can act as ‘similimum’. But the molecular mechanism of action is different from that of potentized drugs.
Drug molecules contained in mother tinctures and crude drugs ‘compete’ with pathogenic molecules having similar molecular configuration in binding to biological molecules and displace them, thereby relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. By this ‘competitive’ relationship to pathogenic molecules, mother tinctures and crude drugs can act as similimum and produce therapeutic results.
‘Molecular imprints’ contained in potentized drugs act by an entirely different molecular mechanism. Molecular imprints binds directly to the pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. This is the molecular mechanism involved in the therapeutic action of potentized drugs.
Most notable difference is, drug molecules act as similimum by ‘competitive’ relationship toward pathogenic molecules, whereas ‘molecular imprints’ act by ‘complementary’ relationship.
Since crude drugs and mother tinctures contain drug molecules that can act upon biological molecules, they can also bind to various biological targets in the organism. Obviously, there is always chance for creation of new molecular inhibitions and drug-induced pathologies when we use crude drugs and mother tinctures. That is the draw back of using mother tinctures even if they are similimum.
Advantage of potentized drugs is that they do not contain any drug molecules, but only molecular imprints, which are only supra-molecular clusters of water and alcohol molecules. They can act upon pathogenic molecules only, not upon biological molecules. As such, potentized drugs cannot do any further harm to organism.
That is why we say potentized drugs are safer than mother tinctures and molecular forms of drugs
Hope I have explained the difference between therapeutic actions of mother tinctures and potentized drugs, even when they are used as similimum.
——————————————————
If we agree that hahnemann explained miasms in terms of ‘infectious agents’, we cannot or limit miasms to three. Hahnemann worked upon three miasms he considered prominent during his time. That is all. Any ‘infectious disease’ can act as a chronic miasm.If we agree that hahnemann explained miasms in terms of ‘infectious agents’, we cannot or limit miasms to three. Hahnemann worked upon three miasms he considered prominent during his time. That is all. Any ‘infectious disease’ can act as a chronic miasm.
——————————————————
According to hahnemann, there are no ‘miasms’ unrelated with infectious agents. He explains psora as miasm of ‘infectious agents of itch’, sycosis as miasm of ‘infectious agents of ‘figwart disease’, and syphilis as miasm of ‘infectious agents of syphilis’.
My inquiry is, how an infectious agent can create a life long ‘chronic multi-system disease disposition’. My answer is, only through antibodies generated in the body against infectious agents. Antibodies remain life long in the body, creating off-target molecular inhibitions and chronic multi-system disease dispositions. We can explain miasms scientifically only in terms of antibodies.
——————————————————
There are many homeopaths using mother tinctures in their practice. I would like to know how the mother tincture is selected for prescribing. Are you using mother tinctures of drugs selected as similimum on the basis of symptoms? If yes, is it not be better if you use similimum in potencies than as mother tinctures? If you are selecting mother tinctures disregarding the principle of similia, how would you claim you are doing homeopathy? How can you say your prescriptions are different from ayurveda or herbal remedies?
——————————————————
I think we have to re-invent ‘miasm of sycosis’ of Hahnemann on the basis of modern understanding of gonorrhoea and Human Papillomma Virus infections.
We are taught that ‘sycosis’ is the miasm of gonorrhoea. But on closely observing the symptoms said to be of ‘sycotic miasm’, we can understand that many of those symptoms like warts belong to human papilloma virus infection. Gonorrhoea and HPV comes mostly as mixed infections. Since much information was not available during Hahnemann’s time about HPV as the causative agent of ‘ano-genital warts’ or ‘figwart disease’ and ‘uterine fibromas’, he attributed all these complaints and symptoms to gonorrhoea, and called it ‘sycotic miasm’. In most occasions he refers his miasm of ‘sycosis’ as ‘miasm of figwart disease’, not ‘miasm of gonorrhoea.. ‘Figwart disease is not gonorrhoea; it is Human Papilloma Virus disease. It is obvious that hahnemann was confused about gonorrhoea and figwart disease. Since he could not differentiate between gonorrhoea and HPV, he wrongly considered ‘figwart disease’ as part of gonorrhoea.
——————————————————
Drug relationship is a subject about which most homeo practitioners are very much worried and confused. Some practitioners very much rely upon ‘drug relationships’ even in deciding their treatment protocols. Concepts such as ‘complementary’, ‘inimical’, ‘antidotal’ etc. are frequently utilized in everyday practice. Some doctors even deviate from the theory of similimum, due to their over indulgence with ‘drug relationship’ protocols. When prescribing a drug based on its so-called complementary relationship to the earlier prescriptions, we forget to consider whether it is a similimum by totality of symptoms. Yet, we call it ‘classical’ homeopathy. When searching through the literature and authorities regarding drug relationships, it will be seen that no serious scientific studies have been done on this subject. Most of the drug relationships are proposed by empirical clinical observations of practitioners, and not corroborated by scientific studies or evidences. More over, practitioners who are not much bothered over this relationships between drugs swear that their experiences prove otherwise. Some homeopaths prescribe so-called inimical drugs even simultaneously or alternatingly, and get expected clinical results.
I mean there is no harm in using more than two drugs in potencies above 12c, if you think single remedy does not cover your case in its totality.
Hahnemann do not mention to consider ‘drug relationship’ when switching over to another drug. He only says “a new examination of the disease must be instituted, the status morbi as it now is must be noted down, and a second homoeopathic remedy selected in accordance with it, which shall exactly suit the present state, and one which shall be all the more appropriate can then be found”. His advice is “a second homoeopathic remedy selected in accordance with” new symptoms.
According to hahnemann, “a new drug” should be selected only on the basis of “the status morbi as it now”. Not from ‘drug relationships’.
——————————————————
Homeopathic mother tinctures act the same way as Herbal medicines, Ayurveda or Allopathy. They do not work on similia principle, and hence, is not homeopathic. Can we say all those drugs do not play any role in therapeutics? NO. They act as ‘molecular forms’ of drugs, which act antipathically, due to the molecular level structure and properties of those drugs. Mother tinctures also may be also helpful in providing relief by the action of their ‘molecular’ contents. But that cannot be considered ‘homeopathic’ drug action. When we give Alfalfa Q to improve appetite, we are using its ‘allopathic’ action. If we read the materia medica of that drug, it is said that alfalfa increases appetite even up to bulimia. To be genuinely homeopathic, we should use only potentized drugs that do not contain drug molecules, but molecular imprints only- above 12c. While prescribing crude drugs, low potencies or mother tincture on the basis of our old literature like boericke or clarke, we should remember that knowledge of pharmacology was very limited during their period. ARS BROMIDE Q is recomended as a drug for diabetes in boericke materia medica. With the knowledge now available about the toxic properties of ARS COMPOUNDS, would anybody dare to use ars bromide Q now? In old literatures, many mercury compounds are recomended to be used as triturations. In my opinion, without modern scientific studies about pharmacological aspects of our mother tinctures and crude drugs, we should not use them on the reason that it is recmomended in old literatures. Many homeopaths use URAN NIT 1x and 3X, which is beyond any doubt, dangerous substance in molecular forms. In my opinion, homeopaths should use only above 12c, if our claim ‘homeopathy is SAFE’ is justified.
——————————————————
Whether prescribed ‘blindly’ or ‘wisely’, if mother tinctures are prescribed without considering ‘similia’ principle, I would say it is not a homeopathic prescription.
——————————————————
’Molecular imprinting’ in water evolves from the scientific ideas utilized in the technology of ‘molecular imprinted polymers’. Mixing up this concept with the concept of “imaging of drug substance into water” may create confusions. ‘Drug substance’ cannot be ‘imprinted’ as such. Only ‘independent’ constituent molecules are ‘imprinted’. That makes a great difference in our understanding. Talking about ‘image of nux vomica’ is totally different from the concept of ‘molecular imprints’ of individual constituent molecules of drug substance nux vomica. ‘Memory of water’, ‘body imaging’,’energy imprinting’ and such concepts basically differ from the scientific concept of ‘molecular imprinting’. Kindly do not create confusions by mixing up these concepts. ‘Memory of water’, ‘body imaging’,’energy imprinting’ and such concepts are very dear to proponents of various occult practices in homeopathy, such as drug transmission, telepathy, mp3 files, radionics, dowsing, energy medicine and the like. ‘Molecular Impriniting has nothing to do with such ‘ultra scientific’ and pseudoscientific theories. Such theories have already done much harm to homeopathy, making it a piece of mockery before scientific community, and thereby strengthening the hands of anti-homeopathic skeptics. Molecular Imprinting in Water is Molecular Imprinting in Water, just like “molecular imprinting in polymers’. Nothing else. Kindly do not create confusions about this scientific concept, by mixing it up with those ‘energy medicine’ theories. Please google on ‘molecular imprinting’ and read some articles about the technology of ‘molecular imprinted polymers’, to avoid confusions and misinterpretations.
——————————————————
I do not agree with the thinking that Hahnemann “was wrong” or his “concept of miasm is not fully correct”. Actually, he was thinking far ahead of his time while introducing the concept of ‘miasms’ as a factor of ‘chronic disease dispositions remaining after “infectious diseases”. He is absolutely correct even in the light of modern understanding of immunology and “antibody mediated chronic diseases”. Modern science has only just started to realize the role of antibodies as a major class of disease-producing molecules, which were so far considered only as ‘defense molecules’. Study of ‘off target’ inhibitions caused by antibodies as a major factor in chronic diseases so far called as ‘auto-immune’ diseases shows that hahnemann was thinking 200 years ahead of his time while introducing the concept of miasms. I just bow my head before the memory of that great genius, whose observational and reasoning skills transcended the limitations of not only his time and knowledge available to him, but even coming centuries.
——————————————————
While introducing the concepts of miasms, I think hahnemann was actually talking about the ‘chronic disease dispositions’ resulting from infectious diseases. He limited to ‘three’ miasms, since according to him, itch, syphilis and gornorrhoea were the most widely distributed infectious diseases during his time. How an ‘infectious agent’ can produce a ‘chronic disposition’ even after the infectious disease is cured, is the subject of my inquiries. According to me, it is through the antibodies generated in the organism against those infectious substances, which contain protein molecules alien to the organism. These antibodies remain lifelong, and can bind to ‘off-target’ biological molecules, there by producing diverse types of chronic diseases. Antibodies are the carriers of miasms- this is what I try to make out. Antibodies formed against diverse types of infections are a major class of pathogenic molecules. Hahnemann called it ‘miasms’, as he was not much aware of antibodies and immunology during his period
——————————————————
There is no ‘scientific homeopathy’ and ‘unscientific homeopathy’. In my opinion, it is the difference between ‘scientific approach’ and ‘unscientific approach’ towards homeopathy.
I would not say homeopathy is originally ‘unscientific’, but many observations and theories of homeopathy are ‘pre-scientific’, which need to be updated into ‘scientific’.
There is no ‘immutable’, ‘eternal’ principles in science. Every laws, every principles, every theories change and become more and more perfect through an evolutionary process of human knowledge, experience and collective thought. Science never remains static.
By ‘dialectical homeopathy’, I only mean that this scientific method of constant rejuvenation and advancement should be brought into homeopathy. That is the only way of making homeopathy scientific. Scientific homeopathy means ‘dialectical homeopathy’. It is an approach towards homeopathy.
============================================================================================================
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTING IN POLYMERS’ AND ‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTING IN WATER’:
Molecular Imprinting in Polymers is done by mixing the ‘guest’ molecules (molecules so be imprinted) into a mixture of monomers and reactants, allowing them to polymerize, and then removing the ‘guest’ molecules from the ‘guest-host’ complex. The methods discussed in this article explains the ways to remove ‘guest’ molecules using appropriate solvents. 3-dimensional ‘memory’ of guest molecules remain engraved in the polymer matrix.
When molecular imprinting is done in water, even though water exhibits polymer-like behavior at supra-molecular level, we have to apply different methods to remove ‘guest’ molecules from ‘guest-host’ complexes. Since we are imprinting in an aqueous medium, we cannot extract ‘guest’ molecules using any solvents. More ove, we cannot use any substance that may interact with water or dissolve in water.
We have to remove ‘guest’ molecules by some other means. I think continuous strong succussions would break open the hydration shells and help ‘guest molecules to come out. Hence, immediately after succussions, the medium would contain a mixture of free hydration shells, guest molecules as well as ‘guest-host complexes. By serially diluting and succussing, drug molecules (guests) will gradually diminish in number, same time the number of empty hydration shells increasing. By the time avogadro limit is crossed, guest molecules will be completely removed, and only empty hydration shells remain. Due to the presence of comparatively heavy ethyl alcohol molecules, which reduce the rate of protonation-deprotonation, the empty hydration shells get stabilized, in which 3 dimensional configuration of guest molecules will be ‘engraved’ . We call these empty hydration shells as ‘molecular imprints’.
——————————————————
In western countries, homeopathy is included under the umbrella class of ‘Complementary And Alternative Medicine(CAM’, which includes all sorts of unscientific, pseudo-scientific and even occult ‘healing arts’.
See the list of healing practices grouped under CAM :
Spiritual healing, shamanic healing, acupuncture, acupressure, chiropractic, sonopuncture, Affirmative prayer, Alexander Technique, Apitherapy, Applied kinesiology, Aromatherapy, Astrology, Auriculotherapy, Autogenic Training, Autosuggestion, Bach Flower Therapy, Balneotherapy, Bates Method, Biodanza, Bioresonance therapy, Blood irradiation therapies, Body-Based Manipulative Therapies, Massage therapy, Chelation therapy, Chinese food therapy, Chinese pulse diagnosis, Chromotherapy, Coding therapy, Coin rubbing, Colloidal silver therapy, Colon hydrotherapy, Color Therapy, Craniosacral Therapy, Creative Visualization, Crystal healing, Cupping, Dowsing, Ear Candling, Electromagnetic therapy, Energy therapies, Magnet therapy, Reiki, Qigong, Shiatsu,
Therapeutic Touch, Faith healing, Fasting, Feldenkrais method, Feng shui, Five Elements, Flower essence therapy, Hair analysis therapy, Facial Analysis, Hatha yoga, Hawaiian massage, Herbalism, Herbal therapy, Herbology, Holistic living
Holistic medicine, Homeopathy, Home remedies, Hypnosis, Hypnotherapy, Iridology,
Isopathy, Light therapy, Macrobiotic lifestyle, Magnetic healing, Manipulative therapy, Medical intuition, Meditation, Meridian, Mindfulness meditation, Transcendental meditation, Vipassana, Mega-vitamin therapy, Mind–body intervention, Feldenkrais method, Moxibustion, Music therapy, Natural Health, Natural therapies, Naturopathic medicine, New Thought, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Nutritional healing, Nutritional supplements, Orgonomy, Orthomolecular medicine, Osteomyology, Osteopathy, Pilates, Polarity therapy, Power yoga, Pranic healing, Prayer, Psychic surgery, Radionics, Rebirthing, Reflexology, Rolfing, Seitai, Self-hypnosis, Shiatsu, Siddha Medicine, Sonopuncture
Sound therapy, Spiritual Mind Treatment, T’ai Chi Ch’uan, Thai massage, Thalassotherapy, Therapeutic horseback riding, Therapeutic Touch, Tibetan eye chart, Traditional Japanese medicine, Traditional Mongolian medicine, Traditional Tibetan medicine, Trager Approach, Transcendental meditation, Trigger point, Tui Na, Unani medicine, Urine therapy, Water therapy, Yoga, Zang Fu theory etc etc.
I think the inclusion of homeopathy in this group is totally inappropriate, and is a grave injustice. Homeopaths, at least those want to promote homeopathy as a scientific medical system should strongly oppose this. Actually, homeopathy is an off-shoot of modern medicine.
Fundamental difference between homeopathy and modern medicine is that homeopathy uses molecular imprints of drug molecules as therapeutic agents, where as modern medicine uses drug molecules themselves. This difference will be melting away once modern medicine advances into molecular medicine, and molecular medicine realizes the implications of molecular imprinted drug designing technology. At that point, homeopathy and modern medicine would converge into a higher stage of Molecular Imprints Therapeutics.
Let us declare- Homeopathy is not CAM, it is MIT!.
——————————————————
Opium Induces Profound Sleep, Followed By Sleeplessness- Study The Biochemistry of ‘Rebound Actions’ and ‘Secondary Actions’ Of Drugs
We should study the biochemistry involved in ‘biomolecular feedbacks’, ‘cascading of molecular inhibitions’ and ‘upregullation-down regulation’ mechanisms of cellular receptors, to understand the phenomena of ‘rebound actions’ and ‘secondary actions’ of drugs. Trying to explain these complex biochemical interactions using 250 year old concepts and ideas of hahnemann will lead us no where.
For example, the “action of opium causing deep sleep followed by much longer lasting wakefulness” is related with the phenomenon of ‘nerve receptors getting blocked by accumulation of ligand molecules, thereby initiating feedback mechanisms’ inducing the up-regulation of glutamate and other pathways in the brain induced by the over-activation of opioid receptors, thereby exert an opioid-opposing effect and so reduce the effects of opioid drugs by altering downstream pathways.
The terms ‘potency’, ‘infenitsmel’ all comes from the concept of ‘dynamic drug energy’, which is part of vitalistic or ‘energetic’ approach to homeopathy.
According to me, drugs belongs to only two groups- molecular forms and molecular imprints forms. All allopathic drugs, homeopathic mother tincures, low potencies belong to molecular forms. They act by their molecular level chemical properties. Molecular imprints forms are drugs diluted above avogadro limit, which do not contain drug particles. As per calculations, this limit comes around 12c. Molecular imprints act by their complementary configurational affinity towards pathogenic molecules.
We cannot expect molecular imprints to create molecular inhibitions in biological molecules. Natural ligands and their biological targets interact by a double affinity- configurational and energectic. Since molecular imprints have only configurational affinity, they cannot compete with natural ligands to bind with biological molecules. Only molecules can create molecular inhibitions- molecular imprints cannot. As such, potentized drugs above 12c will not create any molecular inhibitions or pathological response in organism, in the absence of endogenous or exogenous pathological molecules. ‘Actions’ and ‘reactions’ happen only when we use molecular forms of drugs.
Actually, so called ‘rebound actions’ have to me studied on the basis of scientific knowledge of ‘biomolecular feedback systems’- not in a vitalistic view point. We can explain any rebound actions or secondary actions using biochemistry.
Since potenized forms of opium do not contain ‘molecules’ to block the nerve receptors, they cannot cause any ‘secondar’ action. In a crude opium-dosed individual, only thing molecular imprints contained in potentized opium is to bind to the molecules of opium, and relieve the nerve cells from ‘block’. That means, potentized opium can antidote the biological actions of crude opium- that is all.
——————————————————
The word ‘drug potentization’ is part of unscientific concept of ‘dynamic drug energy’, Better say Molecular Imprinting
Exactly, the word ‘Potentization’ comes from vitalistic or energy medicine theories of homeopathy. As per this view, every drug substance has its ‘inherent qualities’, which exist as specific ‘energy’ of dynamic in form, and act up on the ‘vital force’ of organism by a dynamic way. This dynamic drug energy can exist free from ‘material drug, substance and transferred into rectified spirit or sugar of milk through a process called ‘potentization’. By this process, the ‘dynamic drug energy’ gettin freed from the drug substance moves to the potentizing medium and ‘energizes’ it. By the process of serial dilution and succussion, this dynamic energy could be ‘raised’ to new energy levels, and as such, it is believed that ‘higher’ dilutions are more ‘potentized’ and more powerful. This ‘dynamic drug energy’ carried by the ‘potentized drugs’ act upon the vital force and induces a ‘healing process’.
According to the MIT concept I propose, I am explaining the process involved in potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’. It is not the ‘dynamic drug energy’ that is transferred into the medium during so-called process of potentization, but the three dimensional configuration of constituent drug molecules getting imprinted into the supra-molecular matrix of potentizing medium in the form of nanocavities, through a process of forming hydration shells. These nanocavities act as artificial binding sites or artificial ‘key holes’ for pathogenic molecules having configurational similarity to imprinted molecules. This concept scientifically explains the molecular dynamics of homeopathic therapeutics involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ in a way fitting to the concepts of modern biochemistry, molecular pathology and therapeutics.
From a scientific perspective of homeopathy, tt would be ideal to replace the term ‘potentization’ with ‘molecular imprinting’ to explain the exact process in scientific terms.
IT IS ONLY A PROPOSAL BASED ON MY CONVICTIONS. I KNOW WELL, IT IS NOT GOING TO BE ACCEPTED OR APPRECIATED.
——————————————————
I see facebook not as a place of fun or leisure. I consider it as a serious and effective WORK PLACE. I make hundreds of posts and comments daily on my facebook timeline, discussion groups, pages as well as on twitter, as part of my endeavor to evolve and promote MIT concepts of scientific homeopathy. My friends, who come on face book only occasionally, and those who are able to spend very limited time here, may miss most of my updates. There are also many late comers in my growing friends list. There may be also some people willing to read some of my posts again and again. In order to ensure my works are secured for future use, and to make them easily available for everybody any time, I regularly compile my face book posts and updates into large volumes. So far, EIGHT volumes have been compiled.
VOLUME- I: https://dialecticalohmeopathy.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/selected-facebook-updates/
VOLUME- III: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/05/12/volume-three/
VOLUME- IV: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/06/04/selected-facebook-updates-volume-four/
VOLUME VI: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/11/volume-vi-selected-facebook-updates/
SHARE THIS PAGE
- Posted in: Homeopathy Articles
REDEFINING HOMEOPATHY 
Recent Comments