REDEFINING HOMEOPATHY

Chandran K C Explains Homeopathy As Molecular Imprints Therapeutics (MIT)

Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy- Volume II


UPDATED ON 07-10-2012:

@Dana Ulman: You never answers my question, because you “do not believe that there are simple or single answers” to my questions. But I believe, there ‘should’ be ‘simple and single’ answers to fundamental questions.

You said, I am ” not worthy of “your time and attention”. Thank you for coming to the page of this worthless person, and make all these ‘worthy’ comments. This ‘worthless’ being is blessed by your ‘worthy’ presence.

I know there are are GOOD REASONS “that so many people appreciate” your work. It is very simple- you “prefer to report on multiple explanations”. You ‘support’ every conflicting and contradicting theories, and ‘report’ them. You never commit to any idea or theory. You ‘support’ even the most absurd theories and practices such as hair transmission, photo transmission, mp3 transmissions, telephone transmissions, sensation method, kingdom method, predictive, resonance, radionics, dowsing, mesmerism- every occult arts done in the name of homeopathy. You ‘support’ ghost molecule theory of luc monatigner, same time ‘supporting’ nanoparticle theory of iit-b scientists. You play a great circus, really. For you, all of them belong to your ‘homeopathic fraternity’! AS SUCH , ‘VAST MAJORITY’ OF HOMEOPATHIC COMMUNITY WILL OBVIOUSLY SUPPORT YOU.

I know, there are GOOD REASONS for my “work are ignored by the vast majority of our community”. My thinking, my ideas does not agree with the ‘energy medicine’ theories and practices of ‘vast majority’ of homeopathic community. I never support any thing that does not agree with scientific knowledge system, to enhance my ‘support’ base. I persistently try to expose unscientific and occult like practices in homeopathy, there by more and more reducing the number of ‘supporters’ to my concepts.

But, future of homeopathy lies in the hands of those ‘limited minority’ who understand, support, and promote my scientific concepts of homeopathy. There are ample examples in history that prove it is not the number of supporters that decide the final victory of TRUTH!

——————————————————————————–

Some of my friends accuse me of ‘over-simplifying’ homeopathy. They accuse that I am trying to give ‘simple/single’ answers to ‘complex’ questions involved in homeopathy. I don’t know why they want homeopathy to remain an unresolved mystery for ever. According to MIT concepts, homeopathy is very simple- there are ‘simple and single’ answers to ALL fundamental questions of homeopathy.

——————————————————————-

If I am right, I need not worry about ‘going global. ‘Global’ will come to me, wherever I am- even on facebook. I dont think my reach is limited. I publish my articles on my website http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/ on a regular basis. My articles on MIT concepts were so far read by more than 25000 people. That means there are ‘somebody’ who ‘care’ for what I am saying and doing. There are a lot of ‘authenticated’ and ‘peer reviewed’ articles about homeopathy which are actually nothing but pure rubbish theories, which shows ‘getting authenticated’ is not the final proof for truth. Let us wait and see how things are going to evolve.

————————————————————————–

One follower of Sankaran’s ‘Sensation Method’ today told me, he cured a patient by prescribing potentized ‘Indian Parrot’ based on his ‘vital sensation’ of ‘caged feeling’.

My question to this friend was, whether we can also use potentized ‘broiler chicken’ or ‘caged dog’ for such a ‘vital sensation of caged feeling’?

When using ‘Indian Parrot’ , should we ensure it is not a ‘wild’ parrot flying free in the woods, as they will not have ‘caged feeling’?

My friend disappeared without responding to my queries. Would any follower of ‘sensation method’ come forward and help me resolve my confusion on this point?

——————————————————————————

A term we frequently encounter in homeopathic literature as well as discussions is DRUG ENERGY. According to scientific understanding of ‘matter’ and ‘energy’, there cannot exist such a thing called ‘drug energy’. We should say ‘drug substance’. By ‘drug substance’, we mean forms of material substances that could be used as ‘medicinal agents’, which consist of ‘single’ or ‘multiple’ types of individual molecules having specific structures and shapes, and having specific physical and chemical properties. When introduced into a biological organism as part of drug proving protocol, these ‘individual’ molecules contained in the drug substance binds to different biological molecules in capacity of their affinities determined by their shapes, structures and electrical charges. Different molecules contained in same drug substance may bind to different biological targets, inhibiting their normal biochemical actions, thereby producing deviations in biochemical processes which are expressed through specific groups mental and physical ‘symptoms’.

It is also wrong to say ‘medicinal energy is transferred to medium’ during potentization. During potentization, only the ‘shape’ of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ into the supramolecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, as three-dimensional ‘nanocavities’ having ‘complementary’ or ‘negative’ shapes, which we call ‘molecular imprints’. Due to complementary configuration, these nanocavities can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathological molecules having shapes ‘similar’ to those of imprinted molecules, thereby producing a therapeutic agents when used as ‘similimum’. Obviously, it is not any mysterious ‘drug energy’, but the ‘shape’ of nanocavities that give potentized drugs specific medicinal properties they exhibit.

—————————————————————————

Once you start perceiving drug substances in terms of their ‘constituent’ molecules, and potentized drugs in terms of independent ‘molecular imprints’ of ‘individual’ drug molecules, you will experience a fundamental change in your whole approach to homeopathic theory and practice. You will see most of our existing ‘beliefs’ and ‘laws’ vanishing spontaneously. Questions regarding selection of potencies, single/multiple drugs, drug relationships, second prescriptions, fear of suppression, miasmatic analysis, and many other issues that confuse young homeopaths simply fade away in the light of this rational scientific approach. Collecting ‘complete’ symptoms of the patient, finding similimum that contain all the required molecular imprints, administering them in potencies just above 12c, and repeating doses appropriately until cure is ensured- homeopathy is so simple and straight forward. No scope for confusions once you understand MIT!

——————————————————————————————
There are already many imaginative and ‘scientific’ ‘theories’ going around that seek to explain everything about homeopathy but fail to predict or offer anything of relevance. If a hypothesis fails to predict some relevant practical outcomes, then it becomes scientifically untestable and, therefore, unusable in practice.Assumptions being proposed by a scientific hypothesis should be simple, tes

table and their numbers should be held to a minimum. The assumptions should also reflect the basic experience that is already generally held to be known.Any working hypothesis about homeopathy should clearly identify a ‘biological mechanism’ that represents the action-reaction homeostasis of ‘vital processes’, which is called as the ‘vital force’ in homeopathy. It should also be capable of explaining the molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics in a way fitting to the verified scientific paradigm of modern biochemistry and molecular biology.Once a working hypothesis is proposed, there is much more research to be done before that is accepted as a ‘scientific theory’. The hypothesis needs to offer predictions that can be repeatedly and conclusively proved or disproved in the laboratory and in the clinic with out any bias.From the scientific definitions of ‘hypothesis’, it is obvious that homeopathy so far lacks something that could be legitimately called ‘a scientific working hypothesis’ on homeopathy. We are learning, teaching, practicing and boasting about some thing that are not even ‘hypotheses’. Yet, we dare to declare that homeopathy is ‘ultimate science’! We dare to declare that ‘hypotheses are unnecessary’!For the first time in the history of homeopathy, Dialectical Homeopathy proposes some concepts that could be legitimate candidate to be called a ‘scientific working hypothesis’ that could be proved according to scientific methods.There lies the historical relevance of Dialectical homeopathy.
———————————————————————————

A question frequently asked by homeopaths is, whether potentized homeopathic medicines can CURE ‘genetic disorders’.

A ‘genetic disorder’ is an illness caused by abnormalities in genes or chromosomes, especially a condition that is present from before birth. Most genetic disorders are quite rare and affect one person in every several thousands or millions.

A ‘genetic disorder’ may or may not be a heritable disorder. Some genetic disorders are passed down from the parents’ genes, but others are always or almost always caused by new mutations or changes to the DNA. In other cases, the same disease, such as some forms of cancer, may be caused by an inherited genetic condition in some people, by new mutations in other people, and by nongenetic causes in still other people.

Diseases arising from ‘inherited’ genetic abnormalities cannot be CURED by homeopathy.

Diseases caused by ‘ new mutations or changes to the DNA’ could be ‘prevented’, cured, or at least ‘relieved’ by homeopathic treatment.

In any genetic disorders, there would be a cascading of molecular errors, which are caused by the absence of abnormality of some essential proteins or enzymes. Secondary diseases arising from such cascading actions resulting from genetic disorders could be treated by homeopathy, even though the basic abnormality of genes will remain untouched by such a treatment. We can say, we cannot CURE genetic disorders, but can give relief to many complaints associated with such disorders.

—————————————————————————

Most homeopaths have a lot of misunderstandings regarding what they call ‘body-mind relationship’. This confusion actually arises from viewing ‘mind’ and ‘body’ as different independent entities- or their dichotomy. According to scientific view, mind is integral part of our body, not alien to it- a product of chemical processes happening in a particular part of body (central nervous system). There is no mind without underlying ‘material’ chemical processes, or ‘body’.

—————————————————————————-

Every part of body -including mind- can influence each other, through chemical biological signalling pathways. Mind faculty of body also can influence ‘other’ faculties of body.

What we call ‘auto suggestion’ is nothing ‘immaterial’- it involves some complex chemical processes in brain, which activates endocrine system and biological signalling systems such as cytokines, which in turn affects other organs of body. It is this phenomenon that we call ‘influence of mind over body’. Nobody can do ‘auto suggestion’ without using brain, which is part of body What we call ’emotions’ and ‘moods’ are actually the effects of chemical processes in brain. Drug substances and nutrients can influence our moods and emotions through material level chemical interactions. Mind being the product of biochemical processes happening in central nervous system, nothing can influence our mind without the mediation or involvement of ‘matter’ in any form. Our sense organs convey sounds, smell, taste, touch, vision and other ‘material’ signals from environment to brain in the forms of chemical molecules and ion potentials. Spoken words and reading are actually part of second signalling systems involving the mediation of light and sound. Nobody can influence MIND ‘dynamically’, without a material means that invoke chemical processes in brain.

——————————————————————————-

In the PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION of ORGANON, Dr Hahnemann made the following statement:

“In this third edition I have not refrained from making any alterations and emendations suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

This statement is a fitting answer to those ‘dogmatic’ homeopaths who argue nothing could be changed or updated in homeopathy.

Hahenemann advises us not to “refrain” from making “alterations and emendations”, if “suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

—————————————————————————

It is wrong to say “homeopathy uses minute doses of drug substances”, since there cannot be even a single drug molecule present in dilutions above 12c. Something ‘absent’ cannot be called ‘minute’ or ‘nano’- it is ‘nil’. To be right, you have to say “homeopathy uses molecular imprints of drug molecules”. Dear homeopath, by hesitating to explain homeopathy in terms of ‘molecular imprints’, you are actually committing a grave mistake.

————————————————————————–

Dr. Prabhat Bhattacheryay , Professor & H.O.D. in the Dept. of Organon of Medicine in Burdwan Homoeopathic Medical College & Hospital, A P.G.Guide., U.G. & P.G. examiner of several universities, author of several books in homoeopathy, commented on my post on our discussion group as follows:

“Increased knowledge & experience of Hahnemann made drastic change in sixth edition. He has departed from

single dose to frequent repetitions. But my experience teaches me that even medicine of new dynamization if repeated frequently, unnecessary aggravation results what retard recovery.”I am re-posting his learned statement here, hoping for a nice discussion to happen on the topic of “Repetition of Doses”My response to his statement:Sir, while addressing the issue of ‘repetition of doses’, we have answer three fundamental questions first:1. What actually happens during potentization?2. What are the active principles of potentized drugs?3. What is the exact molecular level biological mechanism by which the active principles act up on the organism and produce a therapeutic effect?In the absence of rational and scientific answers to these questions, we will be talking only speculative interpretations based on purely subjective ‘personal experiences’If you are addressing this issue from ‘classical’ view of ‘dynamic drug energy’ getting ‘transferred’ to medium by potentization, and this ‘dynamic energy’ acting upon ‘deranged vital force’ to correct it and induce it to cure the disease, we cannot have an answer fitting to modern scientific models of therapeutics.

I am trying to address the issue of ‘repetition’ on the basis of MIT concepts which explains potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’, active principles of potentized drugs in terms of molecular imprints of individual drug molecules, and homeopathic therapeutics in terms of removal of molecular inhibitions, in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge.

If you cannot understand or agree with MIT concept I am proposing, we are bound to disagree on the issue of ‘repetition of doses’ also.

—————————————————————————————

In his eagerness to defend and ‘utilize’ his most cherished ‘nanopharmacology’ concept, respected Dana Ullman now gives a new twist to nanoparticle theory of IIT scientists. He says:

“It doesn’t necessarily assert that it is the nanoparticles that have ALL of the impact. It could also mean that the nanoparticles change the entire sovent (the water medium)”

This is really a new contribution from dana ulman to nanoparticle theory. But it makes the whole puzzle more mysterious and complex, which is the actual intention of dana. By this statement, he is trying to utilize the ‘nanoparticle theory for justifying the most pseudoscientific ‘energy medicine theories’ in homeopathy’, of which he is a prominent proponent along with his CAM counterparts.

He is going to say, nanoparticles are not the real active principles of potentized drugs that makes “all impacts”, but they ‘change the whole solvent’ by inducing it to ‘vibrate’ exactly similar to ‘vibrations of drug substance’, and that these ‘immaterial dynamic vibrations’ are the active principles of potentized drugs! He would also say, these ‘vibrations’ will act upon ‘vital force’ in a ‘dynamic way’ by ‘resonance’ and produce cure!

SEE how cleverly the ‘energy medicine’ proponents twist and convert the nanoparticle theory proposed by IIT scientists in a way fitting to their pseudoscientific ‘dynamic energy- vibration-resonance-vital force’ frame work!!

Now tt is very much obvious that dana ulmann and his ‘energy medicine’ friends are ‘supporting’ nanoparticle theory not to rationally resolve the riddles of homeopathy and make it more scientific, but hoping to utilize it to provide a ‘scientific’ glare to their nonsense ‘vibration’ theories.

———————————————————————————

@Dana Ullman: Sir, you are trying to teach me ” importance of humility”. But, do you think humility and respect are one sided affairs? It was YOU, who broke all limits of gentleman behavior in your very first comment on my post, by commanding me to STOP making posts- hope you verify it.

I have raised a lot of hard questions regarding IIT study, nanoparticle theory, energy medicine and such things here, all of which you conveniently ignored. You wanted to turn this discussion into a personal fight, and declare me ” strange, cruel, and insecure soul who tries to seem smart by attacking others”. I am not ‘attacking’ dana ullman as a person- but trying expose the hollowness of your pseudoscientific energy medicine theories about homeopathy. Anyhow, it is obvious that you are not intersted in a meaningful dialogue. SO, GOODBYE

————————————————————————

IIT-B scientists say they could detect ‘traces’ of nanoparticles of starting materials ‘floating in the upper layers’ of potentized drugs. If those ‘traces’ of nanoparticles ‘floating in upper layers’ were the active principles of potentized drugs, how can we explain the fact that each and every drops or fractions of drops of our drugs produce therapeutic effect? Can anybody say, only ‘upper layers’ of potentized drugs are medicinally active? How can you call something present in each and every minute fractions of our drugs as ‘traces’? I hope somebody enthusiastically promoting nanoparticle theory of homeopathy would come forward to answer these simple questions, please…

——————————————————————————-

Somebody if not crazy, with at least a high school level knowledge of scientific principles regarding maximum number of molecules that could be contained in a given quantity of any substance, will not even imagine about the possibility of ‘drug particles’ remaining in high dilutions such as 30c, 200c, 1m and more.

————————————————————————-

Please dont forget, number of molecules that could be present in a given quantity of substance is fixed ( decided by avogadro number) . How could you imagine drug molecules to be present in ‘each and every fraction’ of a preparation diluted millions of times above avogadro limit? Would you say, drug molecules ‘multiply’ in number during potentization? Can we be that much crazy?

——————————————————————————-

Sir, while saying IIT study ” found nanoparticles in SIX of the SIX homeopathic medicines tested…and at the 200C potency”, did you see their another statement that “there is no difference between 30c and 200c”? What is your learned comment on that wonderful observation? Would you agree with their observation that all potencies above 30c are similar?

Sir, how can “traces” of nanoparticles “floating in upper layer” ” change the entire sovent (the water medium)” as you imagine? Any idea about its possible molecular mechanism?

Sir, you said IIT team ” found nanoparticles in SIX of the SIX homeopathic medicines tested”. Did you ever think why they used only ‘elemental drugs’ for their study? Do you expect ‘nanoparticles of biological molecules’ if the study was done using drugs of complex structure such as animal or vegetable drugs?

———————————————————————————–

If anybody ‘detected’ nanoparticles of ‘starting material’ in samples of 30c and 200c, it only proves the samples were not genuine high potencies as they are deemed to be. Otherwise, ‘molecules’ will have to ‘multiply’ indefinitely during potentization! I fear proponents of nanoparticle theory may come with such a ‘molecular multiplication’ theory to prove that ‘avogadro law is not applicable’ to homeopathic dilutions!
Remember, ‘metallic elements’ are triturated before subjecting to the subsequent process of serial dilutionss and succussions. During this violent ‘rubbing’ of triturating, some metal ions may be converted into ‘nanoparticles’. If the higher potencies were not prepared exactly as prescribed, some of these nanoparticles may remain in traces in ‘higher’ potencies. The IIT team actually may have detected these remnants of nanoparticles ‘floating’ in upper layers of solutions. This finding by no way proves that these nanopartcles are the real active principles of homeopathic high potency drugs. The presence of traces of nanoparticles in high potency solutions only shows that the samples they ‘bought from neighboring shops ‘were not perfectly potentized.Only ‘elemental’ drugs and simple minerals can be converted into nanoparticles by process of trituration. Hence, nanoparticles of complex molecules of complex drugs can never be detected. No body can prepare nanoparticles of complex molecules such as atropine or strychnine by homeopathic potentization process.I think the IIT team was very clever to conduct their experiments with ‘metallic elements’ only
Do you subscribe to their reported observation that only “top layer” is therapeutically effective, since it is only there the nano particles are ‘floating”?What will happen if we remove not only ‘top layers’, but whole upper half from a bottle of potentized medicines? Do you think the remaining part will not be effective therapeutically?If the ‘nano particles’ are only in ‘traces’, and they ‘float’ on top layers of liquid, it is obvious that these nano particles are not the real active principles of potentized drugs. In order to explain our every day experience that every single drop of drug is powerful, the whole drug should be uniformly saturated with this nanoparticles, and if that were the case, we cannot say it is in trace amounts. Kindly think over.
Let me quote from the report: “Further they have shown that despite large differences in the degree of dilution from 6c to 200c, there were no major differences in the nature of the particles(shape and size) of the starting material and their absolute concentrations (in pg/ml).”What does this observation show? If “from 6cto 200c, there were no major differences in the nature of the particles (shapeand size) of the starting material and their absolute concentrations”, it leads to some serious doubts whether the samples used were really genuine. If dilutions were prepared in prescribed manner, 6c and 200c will never contain’same’ quantity and concentrations of starting material. This observation lacks logic.Over all, there are many gray areas in this study,which should be seriously considered by homeopaths.
Why can’t we examine this issue from another angle? The report says that the samples for study were products purchased from ‘neighboring shops’. What if the samples were not actually potentized to the level labeled on them, so as to get rid of traces of drug particles? Do you think it is correct on the part of such a reputed research house to purchase samples from open market for conducting such a sensitive experiment? They should have first devised some way to ensure the quality and potency of samples.
See the report. “IIT-B’s chemical engineering department bought commonly available homoeopathic pills from neighborhood shops, prepared highly diluted solutions and checked under powerful electron microscopes to find nanoparticles of the original metal.”Is this the way a sample is to be collected for a serious research study on such a sensitive subject?They purchased ‘homeopathic pills’ and prepared ‘high dilutions’. Is this the way homeopathic potencies are prepared?What about controls? They should have used control solutions of ‘unmedicated pills’ in same dilution and the out come compared.We all know, ‘trace’ particles of ‘metal elements’will be present in any sample of water we obtain from nature. They should have ensured that there is no ‘traces’ of ‘metal elements’ in control dilutions, before publishing this report.
Instead of ‘naturally occuring’ minerals, that may be present in any natural diluents, they should have conducted the study using potencies of complex drugs such as nux vomica, which contain complex molecules such as brucine, strychnine etc, and try to detect ‘traces’ nanoparticles of those molecules in high dilutions.“Traces’ of ‘elements’ cannot mimic the medicinal properties of complex molecules.Were there any homeopathic expert present in the team to over see this study? No body asked about it.This study only proves either the samples they collected were not properly potentized, the study was not well planned, or the outcome is not logically interpreted. Such half-cooked ‘researches’ and well planned hypes over them will only do harm to homeopathy.
Dear friends, , do you think this detection of some’ traces’ of nanoparticles of ‘metal elements’ floating on ‘top layers’ of the dilution in any way help homeopathy in providing a scientific explanation for ‘simila similibus curentur’, or mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics?The present hype has grown to such a stage that some homeopaths even declare that the IIT study has ‘proved’ that homeopathy is nanotechnology! IIT team only said that they could detect ‘traces’of ‘nano particles’ of naturally occurring ‘metal minerals’ in the samples they tested. “nano particles’ and nano technology is not the same. “Nano’ only refers to a range of measurement in the study of ultraminute forms of matter.Nanotechnology is a modern technology dealing with matter at nano range of measurement, and manipulating them to prepare various nano devices.No IIT scientist said nothing about ‘nanotechnology’ in homeopathy. They only said that they could detect traces of nanoparticles of ‘elements’ in homeopathic drugs. Why we utterly fail to note the difference and apply some logical thinking before being part of this hype?We should not forget that the reported IIT study was only a project work of IIT chemical engineering student, as part of his doctorate thesis.
Only because somebody could detect the presence of some’traces’ of ‘nanoparticles’ of original ‘metal elements’ floating on the surface of a ‘particular sample’ of homeopathic drug purchased from market, is it prudent to declare that these ‘traces’ are the active principles of homeopathic drugs, and that they have ‘shown the way homeopathy works’?This is a very hasty and unwise conclusion. One has to take into consideration a lot of other variables and factors before makingsuch a tall claims.What if that particular ‘sample’ was not properly potentized as per strict homeopathic guidelines? What if those drugs were not really ‘high’ potencies, as the labels indicated? What if those ‘traces’ of ‘elemental particles’ came from the water they used for making ‘dilutions’ from ‘medicated pills’ they purchased from ‘shop’?There are a lot of such possibilities.
———————————————————————————

Sir, while addressing the issue of ‘repetition of doses’, we have answer three fundamental questions first:

1. What actually happens during potentization?

2. What are the active principles of potentized drugs?

3. What is the exact molecular level biological mechanism by which the active principles act up on the organism and produce a therapeutic effect?

In the absence of rational and scientific answers to these questions, we will be talking only speculative interpretations based on purely subjective ‘personal experiences’

If you are addressing this issue from ‘classical’ view of ‘dynamic drug energy’ getting ‘transferred’ to medium by potentization, and this ‘dynamic energy’ acting upon ‘deranged vital force’ to correct it and induce it to cure the disease, we cannot have an answer fitting to modern scientific models of therapeutics.

I am trying to address the issue of ‘repetition’ on the basis of MIT concepts which explains potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’, active principles of potentized drugs in terms of molecular imprints of individual drug molecules, and homeopathic therapeutics in terms of removal of molecular inhibitions, in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge.

If you cannot understand or agree with MIT concept I am proposing, we are bound to disagree on the issue of ‘repetition of doses’ also.

————————————————————————————

In the PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION of ORGANON, Dr Hahnemann made the following statement:

“In this third edition I have not refrained from making any alterations and emendations suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

This statement is a fitting answer to those ‘dogmatic’ homeopaths who argue nothing could be changed or updated in homeopathy.

Hahenemann advises us not to “refrain” from making “alterations and emendations”, if “suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

————————————————————————-

It is the ‘private property/profit interests’ of influential people among homeopathic community that obstructs any new scientific advancement of homeopathy. They have vested interests in present theories, present methods and present state of affairs, which is well under their control, which they market profitably. They want to maintain status co. They realize, once the MIT concepts are accepted, syllabuses and curriculum of homeopathic courses will have to be remodeled, most of their ‘authoritative’ books will have to be withdrawn from market, their seminar businesses will have to be closed down, manufacturing and marketing of mother tinctures, triturations, mixtures and patented drugs will have to be stopped. No wonder why profit-motivated people fear MIT and desperately want to defeat it.Marx rightly said, “Capitalism is interested in science only if it helps to increase their profit”

—————————————————————————–
While hoping to get official recognition and support for research on MIT concepts, we should not under estimate the powerful influence those pressure groups of diverse colors with vested interests can exert in higher echelons and decision making bodies of homeopathy in India. Predictive homeopathy, Sankaran homeopathy, Sehgal homeopathy, Drug transmission homeopathy and various other schools propa

gating and marketing their own brands of homeopathy have great support base and influence among homeopathic community and its leadership. All of them will join hands for preventing MIT concepts getting recognized. Drug manufacturers who market mother tinctures, triturations, mixtured and other patented products also will do anything to see MIT concepts are defeated. Many senior homeopathic academicians and writers who have been propagating energy medicine theories about homeopathy are also not happy with MIT concepts due to obvious reasons. All these people have powerful representatives in our high level decision making bodies. I think it will not be an easy walk over for MIT.
—————————————————————————-
It would be a great breakthrough in healthcare sciences, if molecular imprints of native biological molecules could be used to protect our organism against the attacks of pathogenic molecules.Since most of the diseases are caused by pathological inhibitions of complex biological molecules by binding of exogenous or endogenous foreign molecules, it should be possible to protect our organism from

 damages if we could find a way to prevent such molecular inhibitions.We should remember, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for molecules having complementary configuration. That means, molecular imprints of biological molecules can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for those biological molecules which were used as templates for preparing molecular imprints. Molecular imprints will there by act as a protective barrier against the pathogenic molecules trying to bind to biological molecules. Same time, since molecular imprints cannot prevent the normal biochemical interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands, there will not be any hindrance to normal biological processes.We can prepare molecular imprints ff DNA, RNA, PROTEINS and other biological molecules by potentizing them, and these molecular imprints could be used to protect the organism from a wide range of diseases. Using his technology, we can prevent cancers, age-related diseases, oxidative damages etc etc.I think this idea has to be worked up on in more details. It will lead us to a new world of homeo-prophylaxis and overall health management.
——————————————————————————-

Success in homeopathic practice depends up on physician’s skills to collect ‘complete symptoms’ that would indicate most appropriate similimum.

First of all, we should be capable of differentiating between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ symptoms.

‘Normal’ symptoms are those which represent ‘normal’ physiological processes in organism, which have no role in determining a similimum. Normal thirst, norm

al perspiration, normal bowel movements, normal appetite, normal sleep, normal emotions, normal body temperature, normal thermal responses etc etc.’Abnormal’ symptoms are those symptoms that represent an ‘abnormal’ state of affairs in the organism- or, a molecular level pathology. It is these ‘abnormal’ symptoms that decide our selection of similimum. Abnormal thermal reactions, abnormal emotions, abnormal body temperature, abnormal appetite, abnormal thirst, abnormal sleep, abnormal perspiration, abnormal behaviors etc etc.Identifying ‘abnormal’ symptoms is a tough task, if we are not aware of ‘normal physiology’ that are represented by ‘normal symptoms’.Next stage is, identifying ‘basic symptoms’ and ‘accessory symptoms’.A ‘basic symptom’, such as headache, joint pain, abdominal pain or any such ‘complaints’ for which a person seeks medical aid, becomes a valuable homeopathic symptom, only when it is made ‘complete’ by adding with their ‘characteristic’ ‘accessory’ symptoms.’Accessory symptoms’ are factors that make a ‘basic’ symptom a ‘complete’ one. Locations, presentations, sensations, modalities, concomittants, extensions etc constitute ‘accessory’ factors.Accessory symptoms may be either ‘essential/common’ or ‘characteristic/uncommon’. We are concerned with only ‘characteristic/uncommon’ accessories.Once the patient describes a ‘basic symptom’, homeopath should be always on the look out for as many related characteristic accessories that would make it a ‘complete symptom’. Converting trivial ‘basic symptoms’ into valuable ‘complete’ symptoms need much observation and reasoning skills on the part of homeopath, which decides his success as homeopathAbnormal Basic symptom+ Characteristic Accessory symptoms = Complete Homeopathic symptom > Similimum.
—————————————————————————–

Dear friends, I have a good news to share with you. Yesterday night, Dr. Janardhanan Nair, Asst Director, CCRH, called me over phone. He told that Director General of CCRH has forwarded him my article ‘How Homeopathy Works?’ and directed him to examine it and and submit a report on the scope and feasibility of undertaking a collaborated research project on the subject. Dr Nair told me, he is in th

e process of studying my articles and preparing a project proposal. We discussed all aspects of the subject for a long time, and decided to meet shortly for further discussions.I feel this phone call initiates a new phase in my journey for making homeopathy a scientific medical system by explaining and proving it according to scientific method. I am sure, CCRH is the most appropriate institution in the world to take up this task. I am very much excited to know the wheels are now set to motion, and I look forward with great expectations.
—————————————————————————

I just remembered this wonderful case just now, when my grand son mentioned in the article spoke me over phone just now. I cry with joy whenever he talks to me over phone. He is just 4 years old now, asked many questions to me and answered

my questions very clearly over phone, just like any normal child of that age. He sang some nursery rhymes also, to impress me. Thanks homeopathy, for this unforgettable gift it offered to our family, saving us from a great disaster. This case is my greatest ever-live answer to all skeptics who declare homeopathy is mere ‘magic water’, placebo, quackery and belief.https://dialecticalohmeopathy.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/a-case-of-100-congenital-hearing-impairment-cured-by-homeopathic-treatment/
—————————————————————————–

A section of Homeopaths accuse me of being a SKEPTIC AGENT working with ulterior motives AGAINST homeopathy. Anti-homeopathic skeptics attack me accusing I am trying to DIGNIFY QUACKERY USING SCIENTIFIC PARADIGMS. Actually, I am a SKEPTIC HOMEOPATH, destined to fight against ‘Anti-Homeopathic Skeptics’ on one side, and ‘Unscientific Homeopaths’ on the other side. I know it is a tough and lonely fight. But I am going to be the final winner. Wait and see!

——————————————————————–

Skeptics think homeopathy will be ‘finished’ by laughing off ‘Homeopathy is Magic Water’. Actually, it is a ‘skeptic cliche’ that exposes their vanity and ignorance of ‘Molecular Imprinting in Water’.

————————————————————————-

I suspect an anti-homeopathy conspiracy brewing behind the ‘research’ and the orchestrated media hype that followed over ‘nanoparticle theory’ about homeopathy. My suspicion is based the fact that this theory is pregnant with that much dangers for homeopathy, but propagated as if it is a sincere endeavor to make homeopathy more ‘scientific’. I don’t think these scientists and corporate media have over night fallen in love with homeopathy. Excuse me, if my concerns are wrong.

———————————————————————-

If it is accepted true that homeopathic drugs contain nanoparticles of metallic elements as IIT team claims to have proved, we will have to address nanotoxicity concerns regarding homeopathic drugs in near future. Are you aware of its dangerous implications upon this medical system?? Kindly study about the topic ‘nanotoxicity’

—————————————————————

A section of homeopaths believe that homeopathy becomes more ‘scientific’ by saying our drugs are nanoparticles. Homeopathy community seems to be totally unaware of the dangers involved in propagating the nanoparticle theory of homeopathy p

roposed by IIT-B scientists. Once it is accepted that potentized drugs contain ‘nanoparticles’ of metal elements, ongoing nanotoxicology studies can be made mandatory to homeopathic medicines also, which will have disastrous consequences for homeopathy.If the present apprehensions in the scientific world regarding the nanotoxicity concerns finally turn out into a strict legislation and enforcement processes globally, and homeopathic medicines are included in the group of ’nanoparticle’ materials, homeopathy will have a very tough time to come.
——————————————————————

Many homeopaths believe in philosophy of ‘idealism’, according to which, ‘material body is the product of mind’- which means, mind is primary, and body is secondary. Vitalism, dynamism, spiritualism etc are part of this idealist philosophy. As per this approach, disease is produced by mind, and cured by mind. Treatment is primarily aimed at curing mind, which will then cure the body. Drugs act upon mind by dynamic energy- not materially.

As per scientific world outlook, ‘mind is the product of material body’, or, the product of complex molecular interactions happening in central nervous system. In turn, ‘mind can influence body’ by material means. Environmental factors, food, drugs etc can influence mind by producing changes in molecular processes that underlie mind. Diseases are produced by molecular level errors in vital processes. Mind ‘reflects’ the state of affairs existing in material level in the organism, and as such, mental symptoms of diseases are reliable minute ‘indicators’ of molecular level pathology, and help us in identifying exact pathology and selecting appropriate remedial agents . Scientific medicine is based on this approach.

To be a rational and scientific homeopath and a ‘physician’ in its true sense, one has to understand the difference between these two opposite approaches, and accept the scientific world outlook.

—————————————————————————-

What we call ’emotions’ and ‘moods’ are actually the effects of chemical processes in brain. Drug substances and nutrients can influence our moods and emotions through material level chemical interactions. Mind being the product of biochemical processes happening in central nervous system, nothing can influence our mind without the mediation or involvement of ‘matter’ in any form. Our sense organs convey sounds, smell, taste, touch, vision and other ‘material’ signals from environment to brain in the forms of chemical molecules and ion potentials. Spoken words and reading are actually part of second signalling systems involving the mediation of light and sound. Nobody can influence MIND ‘dynamically’, without a material means that invoke chemical processes in brain.

—————————————————————————

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THERAPEUTIC ACTIONS OF MOLECULAR FORMS ( MOTHER TINCTURES AND LOW POTENCIES) AND MOLECULAR IMPRINTS FORMS (POTENCIES ABOVE 12c) OF SIMILIMUM:

Molecular forms of drugs (Crude and Low potencies) can act ‘homeopathically’, but the molecular mechanism of action is different from that of similimum in ‘molecular imprints’ forms (potencies above avogadro limit).

SIMILIMUM means a drug having molecules with functional moieties similar to those of pathogenic molecules. When similimum is used in molecular forms, they can ‘compete’ with pathogenic molecules in binding to biological targets. In biochemical interactions, such a competitive relationship leads to freeing of biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. It is liketwo identical keys trying to enter same key hole, which prevents both keys from entering the keyhole.

Molecular imprints of ‘similimum’ are ‘artificial key holes’ that have special affinity to the pathogenic molecules, which consists of ‘molecular key’, which are actually ‘fake keys’ trying to mimic natural ligands which are ‘original keys’, and biological targets are their ‘natural key holes’. Artificial key holes of molecular imprints bind to the pathogenic molecules due to configurational affinity, thereby relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. This is the exact molecular mechanism of homeopathic cure produced by potentized drugs.

It is obvious that both molecular forms and molecular imprints forms of similimum can produce homeopathic cure, even though by fundamentally different molecular mechanisms. The draw back of using molecular forms of similimum is that being molecules, they can bind to unexpected biological targets, producing new inhibitions and pathologies, which we call side effects or unwanted effects. When using molecular imprints forms of similimum, they can bind only to pathogenic molecules having affinity, and cannot produce any new molecular inhibitions, as they consist of only water and ethyl alcohol molecules. That means, using similimum in crude forms and low potencies can have dangerous consequences exactly similar to allopathic drugs, where as using similimum in potentized forms above avogadro limit is completely safe.

———————————————————————-

I cannot tolerate ‘energy medicine’ concepts that discredit homeopathy, and prevent it from becoming a medical science. These energy medicine theories provide ammunition to skeptics for attacking homeopathy. Without discarding ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic energy’, you cannot expect homeopathy to be accepted as part of modern science. I consider ‘energy medicine’ is doing more harm to homeopathy than all skeptics do. MIT explains homeopathy in most scientific terms, without any involvement of vital force. I hate those who try to drag in ‘vital force’ during my discussion of scientific homeopathy. I have no doubt, discussing ‘energy medicine’ and ‘vital force’ in homeopathy is UTTER NONSENSE- whether anybody like my words or not.
——————————————————–

When asking to ‘discard’ vital force concepts from the theoretical system of homeopathy, I am not asking you to discard your religious beliefs, which may include god, vital force, dynamism, spirituality, metaphysical, non-material and such things from your individual belief system and world outlook. I am only asking you not to mix up such beliefs while discussing medical science, or the molecular mechanism of drug action. Most modern physicians also have such personal beliefs. But they never drag such beliefs into a discussion about topics such as how an antibiotic acts. Most great scientists believes in god, but they will not mix up god with the specific scientific topic they are dealing with. No scientist- even if he is strongly religious-, will not mix up vital force with biochemistry. Homeopaths should also learn to separate science and personal philosophy. You can have any personal philosophy and beliefs. But, when discussing homeopathy, discuss it as a science, during scientific paradigms. Avoid all religious and philosophical paradigms from homeopathy. Then only homeopathy will become a true medical science. Hope I have made my point clear.
————————————————————-

Homeopathic cure is an objective phenomenon existing in nature which the genius of hahnemann rightly observed. But due to historical limitations of scientific knowledge available during his period, he explained it using most unscientific concepts and theories such as ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’. Human knowledge has made great strides during last two centuries, and we are now in a position to explain homeopathy in more rational and scientific terms. We have to honor our ‘great master’ by updating homeopathy and making it capable of keeping abreast with modern scientific knowledge system, if we are his ‘real followers’.

——————————————————————

I want to rebuild homeopathy on a scientific foundation, which is impossible without demolishing- at least, disturbing- existing structure.
—————————————————————-

My scientific explanation of homeopathy could be abstracted as follows:

“Homeopathy is a therapeutic method of curing diseases by using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances, which in ‘molecular forms’ could produce ‘symptoms’ similar to those presented by the patient. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms indicate that the drug molecules and pathogenic molecules have ‘similar’ functional groups, by which they could bind to ‘similar’ biological molecules, produce ‘similar’ molecular inhibitions that caused ‘similar’ molecular pathology which are expressed through ‘similar’ subjective and objective ‘symptoms’. Molecular imprints of ‘similar’ drug molecules can act as artificial binding sites for ‘similar’ pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity, thereby deactivating them and relieving the biological molecules from pathological inhibitions, which amounts to ‘cure’. This the scientific meaning of Similia Similibus Curentur.”

This explanation has to be proved according to scientific methods, to make homeopathy a legitimate medical science.
———————————————————————

I am a SKEPTIC HOMEOPATH, exploring science behind homeopathy. Asking ‘what-why-how’ of everything
———————————————————————-

Skepticism is generally any questioning attitude towards knowledge, facts, or opinions/beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere. A skeptic inquires about ‘what-why-how’ of every claims and beliefs before accepting them as truth. He would be rational and logical in his thinking. A genuine skeptic is not a ‘denialist’, but one who explores truths hidden behind phenomena. I am a SKEPTIC HOMEOPATH, who accepts nothing only because it is said by some ‘masters’, but want to explore the scientific truth behind homeopathy.
——————————————————————–

Molecular imprinting involved in potentization is a bio-friendly adaptation of of principle of Molecular Imprinting In Polymers –

The technique of molecular imprinting allows for the preparation of synthetic polymers with specific binding sites for a target molecule. This can be achieved if the target is present during the polymerization process, thus acting as a molecular template. Monomers carrying certain functional groups are arranged around the template through either noncovalent or covalent interactions. Following polymerization with a high degree of cross-linking, the functional groups become fixed in defined positions by the polymer network. Subsequent removal of the template by solvent extraction or chemical cleavage leaves cavities that are complementary to the template in terms of size, shape and arrangement of the functional groups. These highly specific receptor sites are capable of rebinding the target molecule with high specificity, sometimes comparable to that of antibodies. Molecularly imprinted polymers have therefore been named “antibody mimics”. It has been shown that they can be substituted for biological receptors in certain formats of immunoassays and biosensors. They are characterized by high stability.

Target molecules for which we want to prepare ‘artificial binding sites’ or ‘molecular imprints’, which are normally large complex protein molecules, are identified and selected as ‘template molecules. These template molecules are added to a mixture of ‘monomers’ and ‘activators’ and thoroughly mixed. This mixture is allowed to undergo a process of ‘self assembling’ and ‘polymerization’, which is actually a ‘guest-host’ molecular complex, in which the template molecules are trapped in a hardened polymer matrix which act as ‘host’. This ‘host-guest’ complex is pulverized, and subjected to a process of ‘solvent extraction’, by which soluble template molecules are remove from insoluble polymer matrix. The resultant preparation consists of polymer matrix carrying empty spaces or ‘cavities’ where the template molecules were originally trapped. These cavities are called ‘molecular imprints’, which actually mimic the spacial configuration of template molecules. Due to this complementary configuration, these ‘molecular imprints’ exhibit a special affinity towards original template molecules, and act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for them. Due to this special affinity, they could be used as substitutes for biological receptors in certain formats of immunoassays and bio-sensors.

Since ‘molecular imprinted polymers’ prepared by this process are synthetic polymers, they cannot be used as drugs. Homeopathy uses water-ethyl alcohol mixture as ‘host’ in place of polymers, and drug molecules as ‘templates’ or ‘guests’ for preparing molecular imprints that could be used as drugs. Since molecular imprints prepared by this process consist of only water and ethyl alcohol molecules, they could be safely used as therapeutic agents.

It is obvious that homeopathic potentization is actually a biofriendly adaptation of molecular imprinting originally done in polymers.
————————————————————–

Genuine scientist inquires truth behind unknown phenomena. Skeptic ‘attacks’ everything unknown to him. That much difference between them

Dear skeptic, phenomenon of ‘gravitation’ is not yet well explained- but would you ‘attack’ gravity, and say that ‘gravity’ does not exist?

Skeptic, you may ‘attack’ those unscientific theories of homeopathy, but from the ‘premise’ that ‘homeopathic cure’ is an objective truth.

Somebody’s pathological ‘skeptic’ ignorance regarding homeopathy cannot be considered an evidence against homeopathy

Ernst categorizes “homoeopathy, acupuncture and reflexology” into same group, proving his utter ignorance of homeopathy

To accuse homeopathy a “faith-based medicine” and then attack it from that angle- it is a common game plan of skeptics

“Faith-based medicine”? Whose faith? Physician’s or patient’s? Faith will not cure in homeopathy, if the physician prescribed a wrong drug

If it were ‘faith’ that is the healing factor, any of the homeo drugs could have cured every patients having ‘faith’

What about new-borns and infants? Do you think ‘faith’ or ‘placebo’ will work on them? To say so is utterly ridiculous

Had you seen an infant persistently crying for days together in spite of using every allopathic drugs, getting calmed down within minutes by a dose of chamomilla 30 single dose, you would never say homeopathy is ‘faith-based’ medicine or placebo.

What about livestock getting cured by homeopathic drugs? Is also ‘faith’ that cures them? I have been working as a veterinary professional for years, in government-owned cattle farms, piggeries and poultry farms. I have seen thousands of cases of pigs cured of violent diarrhea with ars alb 30, devastating coccidiosis in poultry cured by merc cor 30, even gangrenous mastitis cured by phytolacca 30 and conium 30, which I am sure, no sane persons can say are ‘faith-cures’.

Ernst’s comments proves he ‘got trained in homeopathy’ under some unscientific ‘energy medicine’ CAM homeopaths

The ‘training’ Ernst got was obviously of an unscientific mode, which made his homeopathic career an utter disaster, ending in skeptic pit

It is obvious that Ernst was misguided by his training under ‘energy medicine’ teachers, and failed to approach homeopathy in scientific rational perspective

If you are not really biased and prejudiced against homeopathy, kindly look around. You can see hundreds of genuine homeopathic cures

For skeptics, science is a finished product. They think they already know everything. If anything they do not know, it simply do not exist!

‘Academics’ who lack scientific approach towards science and phenomena become skeptics, and ‘attacks’ everything they fail to understand

‘Academics’ having really scientific approach towards science and phenomena explores truth involved in phenomena they do not already know

Dear skeptic, if you are genuine ‘academics’, confine to your academic works. Stop maligning medical systems and physicians you do not like

————————————————————————

Genuine science is all about inquiring truth about unknown phenomena in this universe- not ‘attacking’ phenomena that could not be yet explained. Phenomenon of ‘gravitation’ is not well explained- but would you ‘attack’ gravity, and say that ‘gravity’ does not exist?

Homeopathy is not well explained. People talk different nonsense things about. In spite of all nonsense theories, phenomenon of ‘homeopathic cure’ exists as an objective truth, same way as ‘gravity’ exists. If you are a scientist, you can ‘attack’ those unscientific theories going around about’ homeopathy, but from the premise that ‘homeopathic cure’ is an objective truth.

————————————————————————–

Dear skeptic, do not be under the foolish notion that homeopaths are uneducated, uncivilized people, and less knowledgeable than you.

A homeopath in In India is a well educated physician. BHMS is a five and half year regular degree course, with one year rigorous internship.

Did you know, only toppers in entrance exams conducted after 12 years of schooling in science streams are admitted to BHMS course in India?

Curriculum of BHMS course constitutes Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Practice of Medicine and all subjects of modern health care science

Homeopathic education, research and practice in India.is controlled by Central Council of Homeopathy constituted as per a Parliamentary Act.

Homeopathy is a very important wing of public health care system in in India, and govt runs over 6000 dispensaries and about 250 hospitals

Did you know India is home to around 285,000 registered homeopaths, and 186 prestigious homeopathic colleges imparting UG and PG courses?

Many respected members of scientific community also use homeopathic medicines, well aware it is not ‘proven according to scientific methods.

Had you ever consulted a good homeopath and got treated for any illness, you would have stopped making demeaning comment against homeopathy

Visit any homeopathic clinic in any city in India, you would realize many people of well-educated and elite class also consult homeopaths.

Through long life experience, most people of India are convinced about effectiveness of homeopathy in treating a wide range of illnesses,

In India, even during sporadic and epidemic conditions, people tend to use homoeopathic drugs very effectively for prevention and treatment

Govt of India successfully ran a national health campaign ‘Homeopathy for a Healthy Mother & a Happy Child’, based on homeopathy.

Homoeopathic doctors provide treatment to millions of patients for different day-to-day illnesses through public health care system in India

————————————————————————

I propose to call homeopathy as NEW medicine (Not Explained, but Working). Means homeopathy works, but not yet explained scientifically. It also means it does not belong CAM, where all sorts of unscientific and occult ‘healing practices’ throng.

Medicines are of TWO types: 1. Scientifically explained and verified 2. Not scientifically verified or explained- but working in experience (NEW). Homeopathy belongs to the second type.

I hate homeopathy being called as CAM. All sorts of nonsense and occult practice throng under that umbrella, and being considered one among them is a grave injustice and insult to the great, rational therapeutic system of homeopathy. Tell the world- homeopathy is not CAM.

The term NEW will help to make that difference obvious.

——————————————————————————-

Whether we know it or not, TRUTH is there. Your level of knowledge is not the criterion that decides truth and fake.

Theories only explain phenomena, which are objective truths. If theories are wrong, change them- do not deny phenomena.

Until homeopathy is disproved, do not say it is ‘fake’. You can only say “I don’t know whether homeopathy works or not”I agree those theories about homeopathy are unscientific. But I also know homeopathy works. We should modify theoriesWhy cant homeopaths say “we know homeopathy WORKS- but do not know ‘HOW’ – we need the help of scientific community to resolve this riddle”?Skeptics should kindly co-operate to verify whether homeopathy works, without any prejudice, or ‘premise that it cannot’.
———————————————————————–

Edzard Ernst says: “We should start from the premise that homeopathy cannot work”. He ‘starts’ from a ‘conclusion’, It is not ‘scientific method’.

Edzard Ernst fears: “if homeopathy is correct, much of physics, chemistry, and pharmacology must be incorrect”. SUCH A FEAR IS UNFOUNDED

Once we prove homeopathy as per scientific methods, hope ERNST’s fear “much of physics, chemistry, and pharmacology must be incorrect” ENDS.

@EdzardErnst: Sir, you failed as a homeopath, and then turned a skeptic. Your failure is only your failure- it does not disprove homeopathy@EdzardErnst: There are many unexplained phenomena around. If they are objective TRUTH, will be gradually proved, as our knowledge advancesErnst turned skeptic after he failed as a homeopath. All proverbial jackals declared ‘grapes are sour’ when they fail to get it! No wonder!For me, the question ‘whether homeopathy works’ is already settled by experience. IT WORKS. How it works is the real question to be answered@EdzardErnst: Your failure as homeopath only proves you lack the ‘logic and brains’ essential to become a successful homeopath.We know many things our forefathers had no any idea. Our grand children will know many things we do not know now. Human knowledge advancesThere are a lot of unexplained phenomena around us. If they are objective TRUTH, they will be gradually proved, as human knowledge advancesHomeopathy is not yet explained by scientific methods- but it it does not mean it is ‘fake’. I am confident, we can prove it at the earliestIf you are not willing and capable of exploring beyond what you already know, and still you think you know everything, you become a skeptic.Somebody’s pathological ignorance regarding homeopathy cannot be considered an evidence against homeopathy

———————————————————————————-

Dear skeptic, while talking about ‘deaths caused by homeopathy’, do you know how many people allopathy kill everyday around the world?

You should also know how many lives homeopathy saves, before commenting on a death ’caused’ by homeopathy. Homeopathy cannot kill anybody.

If you are ‘not aware’, of ‘evidences for homeopathy’, how can you say it is a ‘superstitious health belief’? I am ‘aware’ that homeopathy works

For the last 40 plus years, I have been ‘live witness’ for homeopathy doing wonders in healing thousands of individuals. I am fully convinced, sir.

If you are not biased against homeopathy, kindly look around. You can see hundreds of genuine homeopathic cures.

Give me 15 genuine patients with different acute and chronic diseases. I will convince you by 15 days that homeopathy works

BY not accepting my challenge, you proved you are not genuinely interested to verify whether homeopathy works. This is what I call bias and prejudice.

You ‘believe homeopathy is quackery’, and you don’t want to verify for truth. YOU think your ‘lack of awareness’ is enough ‘evidence against homeopathy’

———————————————————————-

According to hahnemann, ‘psora’ is the miasm of itch disease- chronic disease dispositions caused by ‘infectious agents of itch’.

During his time, hahnemann was not in a position to understand or explain how an ‘infectious agent’ can cause chronic disease dispositions in the body, even after the infection is removed. Hence, he explained this phenomenon using his concept of ‘miasms’ or ‘maligning of vital force’.

Now we know, only way by which an infectious agent can ‘malign’ the organism life long is through antibodies, which are produced in response to alien proteins such as infectious matters, and remain in the body for very long period, even whole life time.

Now we know, apart from fighting infections, antibodies are capable of binding to unexpected biological target molecules in the organism, produce pathological inhibitions, resulting in diverse types of chronic immunological diseases we call ‘auto-immune’ diseases.

It is obvious that the great genius of hahnemann actually observed this aspect of chronic diseases, and called it ‘miasms’, in the absence of scientific knowledge of immunology or antibodies.

Understanding and explaining miasms as “chronic disease dispositions caused by off-target bio-molecular inhibitions produced by antibodies generated in the body in response to alien proteins such as infectious agents” is actually a great revolutionary advance of hahnemann’s theory of chronic diseases. Hope homeopathy community would recognize the importance and implications of this scientific understanding of ‘miasms’.

——————————————————————

As per MIT concepts, miasms are chronic disease dispositions caused by off-target bio-molecular inhibitions produced by antibodies generated in the body in response to alien proteins such as infectious agents, and circulating in the body for very long period, even whole life time.

———————————————————————–

What is ‘accessory symptoms’ or accessory factors’ in homeopathic symptomatology?

The word ‘accessory’ means something that ‘adds completeness’ to something else. In that sense an ‘accessory symptom’ might be a symptom that gives ‘completeness’ for another symptom. That means, modalities, concomittants and such factors that give completeness for a symptom has to be considered an ‘accessory symptom’. If a ‘headache’ is ‘amel by cold applications’, ‘amel by cold applications’ is the ‘accessory’ of the symptom ‘headache’, thereby making it a ‘complete symptom’.

In my opinion, factors explaining causations, locations, sensations, modalities and concomitants belong to the broad class of ‘accessory symptoms’. Such factors make the symptoms ‘complete’. Accessory factors are also known as ‘symptom qualifications’. ‘ACCESSORY’ seems to be more meaningful and appropriate.

——————————————————————-

When I read in organon that “measles and small pox are infected not by transfer of anything material, but ‘dynamically’, just like a magnet acting up on a needle”, I cannot think it is a statement ‘pregnant with meanings’, but pure ignorance and absurdity. I can forgive hahnemann , considering his historical limitations. But, a science-educated young homeopath cannot be forgiven for his ignorance, if he says in 2012 that “every word of organon is pregnant with meaning”.

————————————————————————

As per MIT concepts, miasms are chronic disease dispositions caused by off-target bio-molecular inhibitions produced by antibodies generated in the body in response alien proteins such as infectious agents, and circulating in the body for very long period, even whole life time.

—————————————————————-

I want to say you should learn organon with a scientific mind. I want to say you should learn to rationally differentiate between scientific and unscientific things in organon. I want to say you should be aware of the historical limitations of scientific knowledge available to hahnemann during his time. I want to say you should always think what hahnemann would have said if he was living now. I want to say, to follow hahnemann does not mean reciting aphorisms and applying them blindly, but to take his teachings 250 years forward through history and update them to make them fit to the modern scientific knowledge system. I want to say, homeopaths should think, talk and practice as scientific physicians, not ‘spiritual healers’.

———————————————————————–

Once you are genuinely convinced something is right and something is wrong, and that their interests are diametrically opposite, you cannot accept the philosophy of ‘live and let live’, especially when you want to promote the right one.

——————————————————————

If homeopathy works, it ‘proves’ potentized drugs has therapeutic properties. It proves drugs can be selected by similarity of symptoms. It does not prove all those absurd theories of vital force, dynamic drug energy or miasms written by hahnemann are right. Homeopathy  WORKS for me even without any such theories. Homeopathy works, but not the way hahnemann explained. It is for modern science to prove HOW HOMEOPATHY WORKS.

————————————————————–

In order to find similimum, we should first of all identify the CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOMS of the patient we are dealing with.

To be considered a CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM, a symptoms should be ‘abnormal’, ‘uncommon’ and peculiar’.

It may be ‘subjective’ or ‘objective’.

It may be mental or physical.
It may be ‘general’, or ‘particular’.
It may be a ‘presentation’, ‘causation’, ‘location’, ‘sensation’, modality, concomittant, ‘extension’, ‘desire’ or ‘aversion’.
DRUGS also have CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOMS, which are ABNORMAL- UNCOMMON-PECULIAR symptoms produced by them during drug proving.
Once case taking is completed and CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOMS of particular patient are identified, we can go for repertorization.In my opinion, our similimum should cover all CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOMS we selected.
If we could not find a single drug that cover all CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOMS, we can select more than one drug, and include them in our prescription. Then only it become a complete prescription, that would offer TOTAL CURE.
To be considered a CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM, it should be:
a) abnormal
Normal symptoms, which represent normal physiological processes, are never considered as CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM. We need symptoms that represent abnormal physiological processes, since we are in the look out for drugs that could produce similar molecular level abnormalities during drug proving.For example, normal thirst or lack of thirst is never a CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM. They represent normal physiology. But, if a person is thirstless in conditions where he should be thirsty, for example, when exposed in hot atmosphere for long time, it shows an abormality. To be extremely thirsty in very cold climate is also abnormal. Feeling extremely hot in chilly climates abnormal, and feeling chilly in very hot climate is also abnormal. They are CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOMS. Perspiring in hot climate is normal, but in cold climate is abnormal. Soft stool passed with difficulty is abnormal, but hard stool passed with difficulty is normal.
b) uncommon
A symptom that is common to a particular disease is not CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM, but if it is uncommon, it is CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM. A joint pain increasing by movement is common, but relieving by movement is uncommon. Sensation of heat relieving by cold application is common, but relieving by heat is uncommon. A joint pain increasing by movement is commonl, but relieving by movement is uncommonl. Sensation of heat relieving by cold application is common, but relieving by heat is uncommon. Toothache relieved by chewing is uncommon, but increased by chewing is common.
c) peculiarAn ordinary symptom need not be considered CHARACTERISTIC SYMPTOM for finding a similimum. Consider only symptoms which are of peculiar, striking nature.
———————————————————————————

It is terrible to talk to these skeptics who pretend to be last words in what is scientific. Full of ‘cocks’ and ‘bullshits’ in their mouth!

Wonder why these skeptics always talk ‘bullshit’ and ‘cocks’ like thugs and street goons. Why cant they behave like normal cultured people?

Scientific knowledge should make us better human beings. Behavior of skeptics make me think that they lack this quality of scientific awareness.

Healthy skepticism is part of scientific thought. But it becomes blind if not coupled with real scientific awareness and a desire for truth.

Science is all about inquiring truth that may be existing beyond what we already know. Not denying everything we do not know or understand.

For skeptics, science is a finished product. They think they already know everything. If anything they do not know, it simply do not exist!

———————————————————————-

If you cannot talk about homeopathy in a way fitting to existing scientific knowledge system, kindly keep quiet. Don’t talk foolish, please.

You cannot make the world recognize homeopathy by talking about ‘limitations of science’, and ‘ultra-science’ and ‘fringe science’ theories

Only way for homeopathy to get recognized as medical science is to explain it in scientific terms, and prove according to scientific methods

Homeopathy cannot be established as a legitimate medical science simply by quoting words of LUMINARIES. We need scientific proof for that.

Words of gandhiji, mother theresa, dalai lama, or such ‘great people’ about homeopathy have no role in scientific validation of homeopathy.

A homeopath being one of the personal physicians of a queen of britain no way contribute anything in the scientific validation of homeopathy

—————————————————————————

A young homeopath from kerala says, he cannot agree with my concepts or works, since he ‘loves’ homeopathy so much. He believes that by propagating ‘un-homeopathic’ and ‘anti-hahnemannian’ theories, I am doing great harm to young generation of homeopathy. He also believes, as a ‘dedicated ‘follower of master’, he is bound to resist my ‘anti-homeopathic’ activities.

I know, he is not alone in his way of thinking.

Dear friend, if you are a ‘dedicated’ homeopath with real ‘love’ for homeopathy, you should support my attempts to get it duly recognized and respected by scientific community by making it a scientific medical system, by explaining it in scientific terms and proving it according to scientific methods.

————————————————————————–

We cannot hope to establish homeopathy as a legitimate medical science by quoting words of gandhiji, mother theresa, tagore, einstein, bernard shaw, nobel laurettes, sports persons or such LUMINARIES. A homeopath being ‘personal physician’ of a queen of britain no way contribute anything in the scientific validation of homeopathy.To make homeopathy scientific, we should answer hard scientific questions, and explain and prove homeopathy according to scientific methods.

—————————————————————————

In Organon : Foot note of Aphorism 11 : Sixth Edition, we read:

“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 property. In a similar way, the effect of medicines upon living man is to be judged.”

This is a sample of ‘scientific thought’ of hahnemann. ” small-pox or measles” “infects at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected.” HOW IS IT?

We should know, hahnemann wrote these words 250 years ago, and the the knowledge environment available to him was very limited. History will forgive him on that account. But hahnemann will not forgive us if we say NOW that everything he said was scientific.

———————————————————————-

It is a very dangerous habit for a homeopath to start searching for similimum from a LIST OF BEST DRUGS expected to be useful for a PARTICULAR DISEASE. Start your search from a GROUP OF DRUGS indicated for a most characteristic SYMPTOM expressed by your particular patient, and then verify which among them is most appropriate, by comparing with other symptoms of the patient. ANY drug may be indicated in ANY patient, if symptoms agree.

—————————————————————

MY LATEST TWEETS:

Any working hypothesis about homeopathy should identify the biological mechanism underlying action-reaction homeostasis of vital processes.

Could Hahnemann explain his observations in a way convincing to scientific world, homeopathy would have changed the fate of medical science.

Homeopaths so far failed to explain and prove similia similibus curentur and potentization by scientific methods before scientific community.

‘Similia Similibus Curenter’ has sufficiently proved its right for existence through thousands of miraculous cures by homeopaths world over

‎’Not yet scientifically proved’ does not mean homeopathy is fake, or it cant be proved ever. Many things proved now were unproved yesterdays.

A radical re-building of the whole system of homeopathy on a rational and scientific foundation is essential to make it a medical science.

I would not blame any scientist for saying homeopathy Is not scientific, until somebody prove It by scientific methods.

Dana Ullman and other ‘international representatives’ of homeopathy damage its scientific credentials through nonsense theories and writings.

‎’Energy’ Medicine’ – an attempt to cover up lack of essential knowledge in basic sciences for explaining homeopathy.

Dana Ullman- foremost spokesman of pseudo-scientific Energy Medicine theories of homeopathy makes homeopathy a mockery http://t.co/2JqQryIF.

Nothing to wonder in scientific community dismissing homeopathy as ‘fake’, and ‘quackery’, unless we stop talking nonsense ‘energy medicine’.

Our ‘international masters’, through their unscientific Energy Medicine theories, do more harm to homeopathy than anti-homeopathic skeptics.

If you really want to ‘save’ homeopathy, first save it from the hands of those ‘international masters’ who propagate utter nonsense theories.

‎’Homeopathic’ Reflexology by David Little- ‘Quackery Unlimited’ by an ‘International Master’ maligning homeopathy: http://t.co/a2wXho4D.

PLEASE FOLLOW, SHARE AND RE-TWEET ME ON TWITTER: https://twitter.com/similimum

———————————————————————————

Here is my scientific definition for HOMEOPATHY:

Homeopathy is a therapeutic method of curing diseases by using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances, which in ‘molecular forms’ could produce ‘symptoms’ similar to those presented by the patient. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms indicate that the drug molecules and pathogenic molecules have ‘similar’ functional groups, by which they could bind to ‘similar’ biological molecules, produce ‘similar’ molecular inhibitions that caused ‘similar’ molecular pathology which are expressed through ‘similar’ subjective and objective ‘symptoms’. Molecular imprints of ‘similar’ drug molecules can act as artificial binding sites for ‘similar’ pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity, thereby deactivating them and relieving the biological molecules from pathological inhibitions, which amounts to ‘cure’. This is the scientific meaning of Similia Similibus Curentur.

———————————————————————

Probably in a bid to market as the ‘biggest repertory’, Complete Repertory has become extremely blown up by indiscriminately adding unverified new rubrics and new drugs under existing rubrics in the guise of ‘clinically proved symptoms’, that it is becoming more and more unreliable, day by day. Very sorry to say.

No doubt, Roger is doing admirable job. But, it should not be forgotten that symptoms obtained from drug proving is the basis of repertory.

We need ‘symptoms produced by drugs when used in molecular form’ . Clinical symptoms, or ‘symptoms considered to have been removed by using molecular imprints forms of drugs in patients’ are not dependable in selecting similimum. Subjectivity of physician plays a big role when a physician says such and such symptoms were removed by such and such drugs in clinical experience. ‘Symptoms produced’ and ‘symptoms removed’ are not of equal reliability.

I remember a recent incident which demonstrates how casually roger incorporates ‘clinical symptoms’ into his repertory. One of my good friend from kerala, who is a qualified allopath cum homeopath, posted a case on a discussion group. He said that he got instant cure for an infant’s nose block by giving a single dose of calc carb 200. When I asked on what symptoms he selected calcarea, he said he gives calc in routine way for nose block of infants, if there is difficulty in breas feeding due to nose block. I pointed out that ‘difficulty in breast feeding during nose block’ cannot be considered a peculiar symptom as it is very common, as infants have to breath through mouth. At this stage, roger intervened in discussion, and asked my friend whether he got same result with calcarea in nose block, and my friend answered positive. Then, to my great surprise, roger said that he is incorporating this rubric into his repertory as “Nose, obstructed in infants, difficulty to breast feed: CALC”. In fact, I know very well that my particular homeopath friend posted that case very casually, and he had many times confessed me that he has been practicing allopathy so far and started homeopathy very recently. He also confessed me that he is not much familiar with repertories and materia medica. I felt it very bad to see roger incorporating a rubric into repertory on the basis of a very casual case report posted by an inexperienced homeopath.

I feel a lot of culling has to be done for our repertories, to make them reliable.

—————————————————————————

Prescribing arnica for falls and contusions, typhoidinum for a person suffering from chronic effects of typhoid, thyroidinum in a case of hyperthyroid person, histamine in allergic cases, apis or ledum for insect bites, pepsinum for gastritis, adrenalin for persistently anxious individuals- there are hundreds of such examples where we find a similimum other than by ‘totality of symptoms’

—————————————————————

Some people believe that to be a ‘homeopathic similimum’, the drug should be selected only by ‘similarity of symptoms’, which I think is not absolutely right. According to scientific perspective, similimum is a drug that in potentized form contains molecular imprints that can remove the specific molecular inhibitions in the individual, by binding to the responsible pathogenic molecules in capacity of complementary configurational affinity. Even though ‘similarity of symptoms’ is the most ideal way of deciding similimum universally applicable even to cases of unknown pathology , it is not the sole way for that purpose. In many cases, we can find a similimum utilizing the knowledge of biochemistry and exact molecular level pathology. Aetiological factors, previous repeated experiences of similar cases (specifics), history of previous diseases and vaccinations- there are many many ways of finding similimum for a particular case in hand. Homeopaths should be capable and flexible for utilizing all these diverse methods, so that they can decide most appropriate similimum for a given case.

————————————————————————

Whether a drug is allopathic or homeopathic is not determined by who manufactured it, how it is labelled, who prescribed it or how it is prescribed. IT is determined by the way it acts upon the organism. All drugs, genuinely potentized above avogadro limit so as to contain only ‘molecular imprints’, are ‘homeopathic’, irrespective of prescriber, medical systems, principles or methods of prescribing. Molecular imprints can act only in ‘homeopathically’, by binding to pathogenic molecules having functional groups similar to those of imprinted drug molecules.

———————————————————————–

All drugs in ‘molecular forms’- crude, mother tinctures and dilutions below avogadro limit- ACT up on the organism ALLOPATHICALLY, even if it is labelled as homeopathic medicine, prepared by a homeopathic manufacturer, or prescribed by a homeopath. Only ‘molecular imprints’ can act in genuine ‘homeopathic’ way.

—————————————————————–

MIT concepts do not agree with “the theory of vital force, theory of ‘only’ SINGLE drug, and potencies below 12c or avogadro limit”.

Regarding ‘high’ potencies, MIT considers just above avogadro limit as ideal- 12c and above.

MIT considers potentization as a process of molecular imprinting. By crossing avogadro limit, the preparation will be concentrated with molecular imprints, which are the real active principles of potentized drugs.

Molecular imprints contained in potentized drugs act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathogenic molecules having complementary configuration, thereby relieving biological molecules from pathological molecular inhibitions. Put in simple language, this is the exact molecular level process involved in homeopathic therapeutics.

——————————————————————

MIT concepts are not ‘theories’ until they are ‘proved’ by scientific methods. But you cannot belittle it as mere ‘assumptions’. One cannot make ‘scientific assumptions’ without support of scientific facts. Explanations of a phenomenon based on existing scientific facts are called ‘hypothesis’. A viable hypothesis which fits well to the existing scientific knowledge system is called a ‘scientific hypothesis’. It should be then verified and proved by repeated scientific experiments to make it a ‘theory’. What is special about MIT concepts is that it explains homeopathy in scientific terms, in a way fitting to modern scientific paradigms, and could be presented as a candidate  for scientific verification.

While ‘doubting’ the validity of MIT concepts and belittling it as mere worthless ‘assumptions’, do you think there is any ‘theory’ in homeopathy that has been “based on scientific experimentation”? Do you think those aphorisms of organon, or ‘miasm’ theory or any such things are based on ‘scientific experimentation? You should remember, all those ‘theories’ you preach and practice under the banner of homeopathy are mere ‘assumptions’ and speculations, without any support of scientific verification. In fact in the long 250 year history of homeopathy, not even a single scientifically viable hypothesis has been developed in homeopathy. MIT is the first ‘scientific hypothesis’ in the history of homeopathy. To understand this statement, you should have a baseline knowledge of ‘science’ and ‘scientific methods’.

If you have ‘doubts’ only about MIT concepts, and have no any doubt or hesitation in preaching and practicing all those unscientific aphorisms, theories and ‘methods’ as ‘true’ homeopathy, it indicates a pathological mindset which I can comprehend, but cannot cure.

——————————————————————-

Discussions here may not directly ‘shake’ the skeptics. But, by enhancing the scientific awareness of homeopathic community gradually, these discussions will of course EMPOWER them to SHAKE skeptics in the long run.

—————————————————————————
Once somebody explains homeopathy in scientific terms, and succeeds in proving it according to scientific methods and publish it in peer-reviewed , scientific journals, IT WILL BE ACCEPTED by scientific community. No doubt. MY CONCEPTS ARE STILL IN HYPOTHETICAL STAGE- of course, a scientifically viable WORKING HYPOTHESIS that could be presented as a candidate for scientific verification. A lot remains to be done to claim it is a SCIENTIFIC THEORY. I am working on that agenda.
———————————————————————–
A homeopath hailing from Venice, Italy, commented on my post on my discussion group:”Friends and fellow Hanemannians, let us not spend time seeking the scientific nature of Homeopathy inorder to appear learned, but forgeting to follow the principles and laws in the Organon which makes Homeopathy a unique healing art, Even Hahnemann condenmed that in the Organon§1″.IT is gravely disastrous for our system to have such people in this community who think that we should not “spend time seeking the scientific nature of Homeopathy”. According to them, it is only an attempt to “appear learned”!!He should realize, one does not become ‘more learned’ by BLINDLY “following the principles and laws in the Organon”, or by denying all activities of “seeking the scientific nature of Homeopathy”.BELITTLING OUR EFFORTS OF “seeking the scientific nature of Homeopathy” ONLY AS AN ATTEMPT TO “appear learned’ IS MOST DEPLORABLE, AND SUCH A MEANNESS FROM A HOMEOPATH CANNOT BE TOLERATED.
—————————————————————–
By saying ‘homeopathy acts dynamically’, if you mean it acts  by ‘spiritual’ or ‘non-materialistic’ way, I will have to disagree. All molecular interactions are ‘materialistic’. Physiology is ‘materialistic’, pathology is ‘materialistic’, cure is ‘materialistic’. HOMEOPATHIC MEDICINAL ACTION IS ACTUALLY A MOLECULAR LEVEL INTERACTION BETWEEN PATHOGENIC MOLECULES AND ‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTS’, which are beyond any doubt, ‘materialistic’.
————————————————————————-
There cannot exist a ‘materialistic’ and ‘non-materialistic’ doses of drugs. All medicinal substances are ‘materialistic’- not ‘spiritual’ or ‘dynamic’. Difference between crude drugs and potentized drugs is, former contains crude drug molecules, whereas latter contains only ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules. Potentization is the process of preparing ‘molecular imprints’.
———————————————————————-

By detecting the presence of ‘nanoparticles’ in the samples of homeopathic drugs, what did the IIT-B team actually prove”? They only proved that the ‘market samples’ of 6c, 30c and 200c are not much different from each other, and the manufa

cturers are fooling the profession by selling very low potencies (below Avogadro limit) with labels of ‘ultra-high’ dilutions! The research team also got fooled by conducting this research using these fake ‘ultra-high’ potencies.Studying the IIT-B research findings carefully, I noted the following points:1. The team used ‘market samples’ of homeopathic dilutions 6c, 30c and 200c2. Homeopathic dilutions of ‘metal derived medicines’ only were used for the study.3. 2000 ml of dilutions of each drug was taken separately, and subjected for evaporation until 4ml remained. This ‘concentrated’ 4ml which remained was used for study.4. Using Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), electron diffraction and chemical analysis by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES), they “detected the presence of physical entities in these extreme dilutions, in the form of nanoparticles of the starting metals and their aggregates”.5. They also “found that the concentrations reach a plateau at the 6c potency and beyond.6. They also “have shown that despite large differences in the degree of dilution from 6c to 200c (1012 to 10400), there were no major differences in the nature of the particles (shape and size) of the starting material and their absolute concentrations (in pg/ml).5. They also found that these “nanoparticles” of starting materials were present only in the 1% top layer. The remaining part contained no nanoparticles. According to them, during potentization, “this nanoparticle/nanobubble complex rises to the surface and can be within a monolayer once the total metal concentrations are well below 1 ppm. It is this 1% of the top layer of the solution which is collected and added to the next vessel, into 99 parts of fresh solvent and the succession process is repeated. This transfer of the top 1% layer in each step will ensure that once we reach below a certain concentration i.e. well within a monolayer, the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next, resulting in an asymptote beyond 6c.”By detecting the presence of ‘nanoparticles’ in the samples of homeopathic drugs, what did the IIT-B team actually prove”? They only proved that the ‘market samples’ of 6c, 30c and 200c are not much different from each other, and the manufacturers are fooling the profession by selling very low potencies (below Avogadro limit) with labels of ‘ultra-high’ dilutions! The research team also got fooled by conducting this research using these fake ‘ultra-high’ potencies.
——————————————————————————-

Many homeopaths, in a bid to cover up their ignorance regarding modern science and scientific methods, hide themselves behind the argument that “homeopaths are doing cases and providing relief. It is for the scientists to find out how it works.”

Do they mean homeopaths ‘should not be’ bothered about how homeopathy works? I think such an argument reflects our laziness to learn, OR our ignorance of science. If ‘duty’ of homeopaths are only “doing cases and providing relief”, why should they spin and propagate all those ‘energy medicine’ theories about homeopathy? They should at least stop talking unscientific nonsense theories about homeopathy, and refrain from making ‘anti-scientific’ statements, and leave it for scientists to find out how homeopathy works, and wait for their explanations. How can we say it is the duty of of the scientists to find out how it works, same time making unscientific theories about homeopathy?

They argue: “Homeopaths work like operators of case management systems, they should not be be expected to know on what principles the engine works, and it is the botheration of automobile engineers”

OK. ‘Drivers’ need not know “on what principles the engine works”. But, drivers should only ‘drive’- not make absurd theories about ‘how engine works’, and talk theories that contradict all existing scientific laws of mechanics and physics. ONLY ‘DRIVE’.

AS mere ‘drivers’ or ‘operators’, homeopaths should show the minimum wisdom at least to confess ‘I DO NOT KNOW’ for questions such as ‘how homeopathy works’ or ‘what happens during potentization’. They should not talk theories about ‘dynamic drug energy’ and ‘vital force’. SIMPLY DRIVE! AND ‘PROVE’ THE ENGINE WORKS!

—————————————————————————-

I have my own observations and opinions regarding ‘theories and systems’ devised by vijayakar, shankaran, sehgal and such people, and I have already made them known. You can have your opinions. If you think ‘every body is right’, let it be so.

My approach to any such ‘creative’ ‘theory’ is determined by whether they agree with existing scientific knowledge system and scientific methods. I will have to criticize any ‘theory’ that contradicts or does not agree with that scientific criterion.

‘Creativity’ in thinking, in the absence of scientific knowledge and rational methodology results in fanciful imaginations, wild theorizations, empty speculations and nonsense ‘methods’. They contribute nothing for scientific advancement of homeopathy. I DO NOT THINK ‘EVERYBODY IS RIGHT’, which is the excuse of those who are unable or lazy to decide which is right and which is wrong. Everybody, or every theory, cannot be right. We have to differentiate what is right and what is wrong.

—————————————————————

We can learn a ‘master’ or his theory in two different ways- dogmatic way or creative way.

In the dogmatic way, we learn what is preached by the author or ‘master’. The teacher or his ‘book’ is 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- nly 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 the learning means ‘copying’. “LEARN ONLY WHAT MASTER HAS SAID, BELIEVE ONLY WHAT MASTER HAS SAID, DON’T THINK BEYOND MASTER’S WORDS, QUOTE MASTER’S WORDS CORRECTLY WHENEVER NECESSARY TO PROVE THAT YOU ARE A ‘LEARNED’ AND ‘DEDICATED FOLLOWER’ OF MASTER.

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.

THERE ARE NO UNQUESTIONABLE “BASIC TENETS” IN HOMEOPATHY. ACCEPT NOTHING AS “ULTIMATE TRUTH” ONLY BECAUSE IT WAS SPOKEN BY A “MASTER”.

————————————————————————–

Learning homeopathy does not mean learning only what hahnemann said, but taking the teachings of hahnemann 250 years forward through history.

There remains a lot to know than what you have already learned from hahnemann about similimum, miasms, potentization and such basic things.

Learning homeopathy means much more than mere reciting and applying aphorisms of Organon, and blindly ‘following’ and ‘defending’ Hahnemann.

Learning homeopathy means understanding, explaining and advancing it in scientific terms, in a way fitting to modern knowledge environment.

———————————————————————-

One young homeopath from Calicut, Kerala, commented on my post about my scientific explanations of miasms as follows:

“Without knowing knowledge about miasms please don’t open the talk about miasms sir. Without correct miasmatic analysis you can’t attain the proper simillimum and if one person doesnt understand about miasm, it is that person’s mistake of not understanding it. Not the mistake of miasm, homoeopathy and Dr Samuel Hahnemann.”

My answer: “Hope you will in course of time realize that there remains a lot to know than what you have already learned from hahnemann about homeopathy, miasms, potentization and such things. You will realize learning homeopathy does not mean learning only what hahnemann said, but to take the teachings of hahnemann 250 years forward through history. Learning homeopathy means much more than reciting and ‘applying’ aphorisms of organon. Learning homeopathy means understanding and explaining it it in terms of modern science, and advancing it in a way fitting to modern knowledge environment. For the time being, I see very limited scope for a discussion between us, as your opening comment itself reflects your thought that I KNOW VERY LITTLE, and I am ‘opening a talk’ about miasms ‘without knowing knowledge about miasms ‘ or how to find a similimum, and that you are in an illusion that you know much more about the topic. In such a mental condition, there cannot be a meaningful dialogue. I am not interested in an argument with you to prove that I know ‘better than you’. ”

———————————————————————

‎’A dose of CARBO VEG before last breath is one’s birth right!’

My father-in-law, 95 years, has been in bed under severe senile dementia for last three years. Since one week, his condition was rapidly worsening, with severe breathing difficulties. Last night, he was in a sinking stage, and everybody around expected the worst to happen. Violent ‘death rales’ in chest, body deadly cold, pupil reflexes lost, eye balls rolling back, almost breathless- it seemed his final moments. During that state of panic, I suddenly remembered the sentence quoted above, which I read somewhere earlier. I opened my medicine box, dropped a few drops of CARBO VEG 30 on his tongue. To every body’s surprise, his pupil reflexes returned with in five minutes. Improvement was very fast, almost unbelievable. A few drops of ANTIM TART 30 produced mouthfuls of expectoration, and breathing difficulties relieved. He is in a far better condition today morning. Identifying people around him, had a light breakfast, expressions brighter, responding to questions and answering in a feeble voice. HE IS BACK TO LIFE!!!

I am still wondering about carbo veg, and also about homeopathy!!

————————————————————————

Disease is the outcome of interactions between environment and our genetic substance. We have to learn the dynamics of ‘genotype-phenotype’ relationship to get a scientific answer to the question ‘why same disease express different symptoms in different persons’. Our genetic substance differs from person to person, and as such, our responses to disease-causing external agents also are bound to be different from person to person.

—————————————————————————-

First of all, we should understand what hahnemann actually meant by miasms. He was talking about the causative factors of chronic diseases. He noticed that many infectious diseases such as itch, gonorrhoea, syphilis etc do not leave once their acute manifestations disappear, but cause chronic disease dispositions for the whole life. He advised to deal with this ‘miasmatic’ background of chronic diseases.

Secondly, we should understand how an infectious disease can cause life long disease dispositions. Modern immunology has revealed that any protein substance which are alien to our genetic blue print entering our body results in production of specific antibodies in order to combat the invaders. All infectious agents contains proteins alien to our system. These antibodies, even though intended to combat alien proteins, circulates in the system, and can also bind to unexpected native biological targets and cause off target molecular inhibitions, which may cause pathological molecular errors. Modern immunology has made a lot of studies on this aspect of chronic diseases, which are called autoimmune diseases or immune-mediated diseases. While proposing miasms as an important factor in chronic diseases, hahnemann was actually talking about this anti-bodies mediated diseases.

We should understand, miasms are chronic disease dispositions caused by off target molecular inhibitions produced by antibodies generated against infectious agents and alien proteins entering our organism. This is the only viable scientific explanation for MIASMS First of all, we should understand what hahnemann actually meant by miasms. He was talking about the causative factors of chronic diseases. He noticed that many infectious diseases such as itch, gonorrhoea, syphilis etc do not leave once their acute manifestations disappear, but cause chronic disease dispositions for the whole life. He advised to deal with this ‘miasmatic’ background of chronic diseases.

Secondly, we should understand how an infectious disease can cause life long disease dispositions. Modern immunology has revealed that any protein substance which are alien to our genetic blue print entering our body results in production of specific antibodies in order to combat the invaders. All infectious agents contains proteins alien to our system. These antibodies, even though intended to combat alien proteins, circulates in the system, and can also bind to unexpected native biological targets and cause off target molecular inhibitions, which may cause pathological molecular errors. Modern immunology has made a lot of studies on this aspect of chronic diseases, which are called autoimmune diseases or immune-mediated diseases. While proposing miasms as an important factor in chronic diseases, hahnemann was actually talking about this anti-bodies mediated diseases.

We should understand, miasms are chronic disease dispositions caused by off target molecular inhibitions produced by antibodies generated against infectious agents and alien proteins entering our organism. This is the only viable scientific explanation for MIASMS

————————————————————————–

The intellectual exercises happening in the name of ‘miasmatic analysis’ is making homeopathy an unending mockery.

Some homeopaths appear to be experts in ‘miasmatic analysis’. Once a case is presented to them, they cannot avoid ‘miasmatic analysis’ of patients, drug substances, diseases and even rubrics. Instead of discussing symptoms and similimum, they would go on talking about miasms.

I have never seen two ‘miasmatic experts’ talking about miasms in similar language. You give them a case for ‘miasmatic analysis’. Each would come with different analysis.

I never seen two homeopaths agreeing up on ‘miasmatic analysis’ of same case, same symptom or same medicine. Everybody talk differently. Does itnot indicate confusions? If you have any doubt on what I said, kindly post a case for ‘miasmatic analysis’ here. ‘Miasmatic experts’ would fight each other with their strange ways of analysis. They would discuss strange concepts such as “psora merging into tuberculous spectrum”, or “psora converting into sycosis and then to syphilis as disease advances”. They would talk about ‘tri-miasmatic’ drugs, patients and diseases!

’Miasmatic analysis’ is the sum total of ‘confusions’ created in the minds of already ‘confused’ learners, by ‘teachers’ who are gravely ‘confused’ themselves. The final outcome is ‘Utter Confusion for All’!

——————————————————————–

Any ‘symptom’ -mental or physical- represents an underlying physiological process happening in the organism at molecular level. Normal physiological processes are represented by ‘normal’ symptoms. A state of pathology is an ‘abnormal’ state of physiology at molecular level, and they are expressed through ‘abnormal’ symptoms. For finding a similimum for removing a state of pathology, we need to consider the ‘abnormal’ symptoms that represent the abnormal state of affairs in the organism. A homeopath should be capable of differentiating ‘abnormal’ and ‘normal’ symptoms. Abnormal anger, abnormal fear, abnormal anxiety, abnormal thirst, abnormal desires, abnormal behaviors, abnormal pains, abnormal sensations, abnormal emotions, abnormal appetite, abnormal thermal reactions, abnormal sensitivities….. ABNORMAL is the keyword in selecting a symptom for homeopathic analysis of a case.

Most homeopaths try to know whether a patient is ‘hot’ or ‘chilly’ while case taking. There are ‘hot’ remedies and ‘cold’ remedies. In my opinion, these rubrics are relevant only if patient is ‘abnormally hot’ or abnormally chiily’ in his

thermal responses. Feeling ‘hot’ in a hot atmosphere is normal, but feeling chilly in a hot atmosphere is ‘abnormal’. Feeling chilly in a cold atmosphere is normal, but feeling hot in a chilly atmosphere is ‘abnormal’. Desire for cold drinks in a hot climate is normal, but craving hot drinks in hot climate is ‘abnormal’. Desire sweets is normal for a human being, but aversion to sweets is abnormal. EXCESSIVE craving for sweets is also abnormal. In my opinion, we should consider only those symptoms which are expressive of ‘abnormal’ physiology

——————————————————————

Many simple-minded homeopaths point out that vijayakar, shankaran and such people are making ‘excellent’ results. They ask, are not these results convincing ‘proof’ for the correctness of their ‘theories’ and ‘methods’?

My answer is ‘NO’! All these ‘excellent’ results they produce are ‘proof’ for homeopathy- nothing else. These people are well experienced homeopaths. They know well how to find similimum and apply it. Anybody get results if they prescribe correct similimum, and use potentized drugs. Game plan of all these proponents of commercially branded METHODS is to make results by prescribing correct similimum according to symptoms, and then pretend it was done using special METHOD they are marketing. VIJAYKAR, SHANKARAN and all such people actually do this trick to convince their followers. Followers, who try to ‘follow’ the ‘teachings’ and ‘methods’ of these ‘gurus’ fail miserably in practice, as they do not know how to find similimum. They should understand, the results their gurus make are the success of applying ‘similia similibus curentur’- not any particular ‘method’ or ‘theory’ they preach and market.

—————————————————————————————

In the absence of essential scientific knowledge, vijaykar tries to appear ‘scientific’ by sprinkling terms from ’embryology and genetics’.

Wearing a ‘scientific’ mantle, vijaykar successfully marketed his ‘methods’ among the ‘science-starved’ sections of homeopathic community.

Vijaykar plays with some scientific terms, but failed to comprehend the biochemistry behind homeopathic therapeutics.

Vijaykar has gone totally wrong and self contradicting in his understanding of ’embryonic layers’ and ‘direction of embryonic development’Vijayakar’s understanding of ‘herings laws’, ‘embryonic layers’ and ‘suppression’ are is fundamentally wrongVijaykar’s concept of ‘suppression’ is based on unscientific understanding of disease, cure, potentization and similia similibus curentur.Vijaykar over-extended Hering law, and mis-interpreted embryology. His ‘theory of suppression’ built up on these foundations are irrationalAwareness of biochemical processes of disease and cure would end the persistent ‘fear of suppression’ that prevent logical prescriptionsHomeopaths should realize that no potentized homeopathic drugs can make any ‘suppression’ or ‘dangerous consequences’, even if used wrongly‘Fear of Suppression’- is a prominent symptom of homeopaths who suffer from severe deficiency of scientific knowledge regarding therapeutics
—————————————————————————

Drug molecules as well as pathogenic molecules with similar functional groups can bind to similar biological molecules and produce similar molecular inhibitions and similar symptoms. Molecular imprints of similar molecules can act as artificial binding sites for similar molecules and remove similar molecular inhibitions. This is the ONLY scientific explanation for ‘similia similibus curentur’, the therapeutic principle of homeopathy. Unless you understand this statement in its right perspective, you will continue to grope in the dark, meddling with all sorts of unscientific ‘theories’.
———————————————————————

Functional group of pathogenic molecule bind to the biological molecules only if they have ‘complementary’ configuration. It is comparable with blocking of a key hole with a fake key. Only legitimate key can enter the key hole perfectly and open it. Natural ligands are the legitimate keys of biological molecules. Molecular imprints have ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathogenic molecules, with better configurational affinity than biological molecules. As such, due to this comparatively higher affinity, molecular imprints can bind to pathogenic molecules , thereby relieving the biological molecules. This phenomenon could be better understood if we study the dynamics of ligand-receptor interactions, molecular inhibitions and reactivations, especially competitive inhibitions and competitive reactivation
————————————————————————-

Homeopaths feel that they have to ‘prove’ modern science ‘wrong’, for ‘proving’ homeopathy. Hence, they talk about ‘limitations of science’!

We can, and have to, explain and ‘prove’ homeopathy with in the ‘limits’ of modern science- using paradigms, tools and methods of science.

Homeopaths should stop ‘ultra-science’ and ‘fringe science’ pretensions. Think, talk, explain, prove and apply in terms of MODERN SCIENCE.
——————————————————————-

Propagating homeopathy in terms of ‘Water Memory’ and ‘Energy Medicine’, no hope for homeopathy to get accepted by scientific community

‎’Water memory’ theory says water can carry the memory of any ‘energy’ to which it is exposed- even ‘drug energy’ and ‘mind energy’. NONSENSE

They believe, we can ‘medicate’ water by simply keeping bottles of potentized drugs near it, and that ‘energized’ water could be used as medicine! Some western ‘homeopaths’ claims they ‘medicate’ water by keeping bottles of water on paper in which the name of ‘similimum’ is written. Then it is given to patients, which gives ‘excellent’ results!!. With this type of utter nonsense propagated as homeopathy, how can we hope homeopathy to be accepted by scientific community?

Scientific community should differentiate the scientific concept of ‘molecular imprinting in water’ from nonsense ‘theory of water memory’.
————————————————————————-
Truth is objective, and explanations are subjective. Don’t deny natural objective truth, even if explained wrongly, Change the explanation.

Scientists should not deny the objective natural phenomena involved in homeopathy, only because it was so far explained unscientifically.

Homeopathy works. No truthful person can deny. But HOW? Not the way Hahnemann or his followers explained. Scientists should find it out NOW.

Similia Similibus Curentur and Potentization involve objective phenomena of nature. But they were so far explained in most unscientific ways

Scientific community should explore and realize TRUTH that exists beyond what those nonsense homeopathy theoreticians say about homeopathy.

Science is all about inquiring truth- not denying anything without verifying. Homeopathy deserves a better treat from scientific community.

Instead of out-rightly denying homeopathy and safeguarding big pharma interests, scientific community should try to find out the truth in it

 

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- II: https://dialecticalohmeopathy.wordpress.com/2012/08/04/volume-ii-compilation-of-my-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 V: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/09/volume-v-selected-facebook-updates-and-tweets-of-chandran-k-c-on-scientific-homeopathy/

VOLUME VI: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/11/volume-vi-selected-facebook-updates/

VOLUME VII: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/24/volume-vii-selected-facebook-updates-and-tweets-of-chandran-k-c-on-scientific-homeopathy/

VOLUME VIII: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/12/16/volume-viii-selected-facebook-updates-and-tweets-of-chandran-k-c-on-scientific-homeopathy/

2 Comments

  1. Enjoyed re-reading this volume; needless to say I agree with all the theories put forward by Chandran KC

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. VOLUME- I: Compilation Of My Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets On Scientific Homeopathy « Dialectical Homeopathy

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: