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

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

Any substance use as DRUGS are composed of one or more types of simple or complex molecules having their own individual structures and chemical properties. When the drugs enter the living bodies, it is those INDIVIDUAL chemical molecules that act up on different biological target molecules according to their specific affinities, producing conformational changes in them that affect the biochemical processes they are involved. Different chemical molecules contained in same drug substance act up on different biological molecules and produce different types of biochemical effects that are expressed through different trains and GROUPS OF SYMPTOMS depending up on the biochemical pathways affected.

Once you understand drug substances in terms of individual chemical molecules they contain, and understand symptoms as the expressions of bio-molecular errors produced in individual biochemical pathways by molecular level interactions between drug molecules and biological molecules, you will realize the folly involved in the concept of a ‘holistic’ ‘immaterial’ DRUG ENERGY we profusely talk about. Kindly be reminded, different groups of symptoms produced in different systems of our body by the administration of crude NUX VOMICA are the effects of hundreds of types of individual chemical molecules contained in nux vomica. If any particular type of constituent chemical molecules could be selectively removed from nux vomica before administration, the symptomatology produced during proving will be deficient in some groups of symptoms that are attributed to that particular chemical molecules. That means, there does not exist such a thing called NUX VOMICA DRUG ENERGY that act as a holistic unit, but only the different groups of symptoms arising from the biological effects of individual chemical molecules contained in NUX VOMICA.


I am not “trying to change fundamental laws of homeopathy”. I am only trying to “explain fundamental observations” of homeopathy in terms of modern science. If you take some time to go through my articles on this topic, you would realize that I have “explained” ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ “as per ‘already proved’ modern science”. I am not proposing any “new theory” or trying to “change fundamental laws”.

Please note, so far there is no any ‘fundamental laws’ in homeopathy which anybody proved “as per modern science”. Not even “explained” as per modern science”. But we teach, learn and practice those “unproved” laws without any hesitation. you never asked anybody to “prove” them before accepting.

One friend even asked me to “show molecular imprints present in potentized drugs”, as if he understands molecular imprints as something that could be picked by a forceps and shown to him! Can anybody ‘show’ him supra-molecular formations of water? It should be ‘understood’, not ‘seen’. Either they did not read what I have written, or failed to follow the concepts due to poor back ground knowledge in the scientific topics I have discussed to ‘prove’ molecular imprints concept. Or, it may be that they do not want to understand on reasons known only to them!

How can I convince you something, if you hesitate to read anything? I regularly post at least one article everyday explaining my concept of ‘molecular imprints’ and their implication in homeopathy. Without reading what I write, you ask me to “prove”! I once again request you to take some time to read at least some of those articles.

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and molecular biology? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?

My request to those who ask for ‘proof for my concepts’ is, kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you. Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.

I would like to make it clear that I did not produce any ‘theories’ artificially. All my proposals on various aspects homeopathic practice are logical extensions evolved naturally from the fundamental concept of ‘molecular imprinting’ as the process involved in potentization. Once we accept ‘molecular imprints’ as the active principles of potentizaed drugs, and that they act therapeutically upon the organism by selectively binding to the pathogenic molecules, we cannot perceive or resolve these practical issues from another angle.

How can I ‘modify’ or distort logical and obvious scientific truths to satisfy our erstwhile habits, deep-rooted beliefs and long continued comfortable ways of practicing?

I can understand the discomfort brewing among ‘settled’ homeopaths when hearing my concepts that they fear would ‘change their ‘fundamentals’. “Coming out of comfort zones” is not an easy task, especially for ‘seniors’. It is very difficult to get exposed to a new knowledge environment, which would demand a fundamental re-thinking and modifying of many things they ‘believed’, learned, taught and practiced in their whole life. That would be a very uneasy situation, very hard to cope with.


Normally, a drug is said to be ‘similimum’ to a given case if the symptomatology expressed by the patient is matching to the recorded symptomatology of that drug. In other words, if the drug picture is similar to a disease picture, the drug is said to be ‘similimum’ to that disease. This ‘matching’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms are the basis of homeopathic prescriptions guided by the principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’

Since ‘life’ consist of complex chains of inter-related biochemical pathways involving interactions of diverse biological molecules, pathology also should be understood at molecular level. Every state of pathology has an underlying ‘molecular error’ created by an endogenous or exogenous factor that inhibits the normal functioning of a biological molecule. These molecular errors lead to deviations in related biochemical pathways which amount to a state of pathology. Such molecular errors are expressed in the living organism through subjective and objective ‘symptoms’.

Molecular processes being inter related and inter dependant, a particular ‘molecular error’ happening in a particular biochemical pathway may inevitably lead to cascading of molecular errors and biochemical deviations. This is expressed as ‘trains’ of symptoms called ‘symptom complexes’. Observing the ‘symptom complexes’ carefully, we can infer the type and character of molecular errors underlying them. This is the basis of homeopathic methodology of therapeutics.

When crude drugs are introduced into the healthy organism as part of homeopathic drug proving, the constituent drug molecules binds to various biological molecules resulting in diverse types of ‘molecular errors’ expressed in the form of different groups of subjective and objective symptoms. These symptoms are called ‘drug symptoms’ representing molecular level states of ‘drug pathology’.

If the ‘symptom complexes’ expressed by a particular state of pathology happens to be ‘similar’ to certain ‘symptom complexes’ produced by a particular drug, that means, the ‘molecular errors’ underlying that state of pathology was same as the ‘molecular errors’ that could be created by the constituent molecules of that drug in a healthy organism. Obviously, the drug substance contains some molecules that could bind to the biological molecules in the same way as the particular pathogenic molecules did. It further means that the drug contained some molecules that have molecular configurations exactly similar to the particular pathogenic molecules.

Potentized drugs contains ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules contained in the drug used for potentization. These ‘molecular imprints’ are nothing but ‘supra-molecular’ clusters of water/ethyl alcohol molecules, into which the three dimensional special configuration of individual drug molecules are imprinted in the form of ‘nanocavities’. Due to their complementary configuration, these nanocavities can specifically bind to the drug molecules or pathogenic molecules having similar configuration. This is the molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics explained as the fundamental principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’.

Exactly, a ‘similimum’ is a drug that contains some molecules that can produce ‘molecular errors’ in a living organism similar to the ‘molecular errors’ underlying a given state of pathology, attacking same biological molecules.

Since ‘symptoms’ are the only indicators available to identify the exact molecular errors underlying a state of pathology, homeopaths collects these symptoms and try to find out a drug that could produce similar ‘symptoms’ in a healthy organism.

If we could identify the exact molecular errors involved in a state of pathology by any way other than observation of symptoms, we can select a ‘similimum’ that way also. That means, ‘matching disease symptoms and drugs symptoms’ is not the only way to decide a similimum. If we know the exact pathogenic molecules that caused a given pathologic condition, we can select the molecular imprints of that pathogenic molecule as the homeopathic therapeutic agent without matching the symptomatology.

This is what happens when we prescribe various specifics, nosodes and sarcodeswhich are not selected by ‘matching of symptoms’. Autopathic and tautopathic prescriptions are also not based on similarity of symptoms. When we prescribe PEPSINUM 30 for gastritis, it is not based on ‘similarity of symptoms’, but the knowledge that PEPSIN can cause gastritis. Many wonderful homeopathic prescriptions are made without any ‘matching of disease symptoms and drug symptoms’.

This deliberations show that similimum does not necessarily mean only a drug selected on the basis of similarity of symptoms. ‘Similimum’ exactly means ‘similiarity of drug-induced molecular errors and pathological molecular errors’, or ‘similarity of configurations of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules’.

If I am asked what is similimum, I would say similimum is the drug that contains ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms in healthy organism EXACTLY SIMILAR to the molecular inhibitions and symptoms existing in the patient before us, by binding to same biological target molecules. Potentized forms of the similimum would contain molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance, which can bind to the pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions.

To be a PERFECT SIMILIMUM, our drug should contain ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms, so that in potentized form it would contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required to remove ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions in the patient. If the selected drug does not contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required for the patient, it will be PARTIAL SIMILIMUM. In such cases, we can make a PERFECT SIMILIMUM by combining two or more PARTIAL SIMILIMUMS indicated by the symptoms.


If a homeopath is convinced that a particular case seen by him is beyond the scope of homeopathy, he should refer the case immediately to a modern physician. He has no legal or moral right to prescribe allopathic medicines, for which he is not qualified, trained or authorized. A homeopath is only a homeopath.


Converting symptoms into rubrics and selecting similimum using a repertorization software is very simple if you have collected the right symptoms.

Young homeopaths should understand, a symptom is of no use if it is not qualified with its peculiar accessory details such as causations, presentations, locations, sensations, concomitants, modalities, extensions, alternations etc. Always concentrate in hunting for accessory symptoms associated with each basic symptom, instead of making an elaborate list of unqualified basic symptoms which are useful only for diagnosis- not for making homeopathic prescriptions


When a modern physician uses homeopathic drugs, I feel proud and delighted as I see it as a recognition of the efficacy and superiority of homeopathy even by a practitioner of other system. When a homeopath uses allopathic drugs in his practice, I feel shame and indignation, as it is an indication that the homeopath is recognizing his failure to utilize the full potentials of homeopathy.


There are a lot of people suffering from diseases any where around us. If a homeopath can attract minimum ten patients to him per day, he can earn a decent living without any allopathic quackery. Only thing is, you have to know how to find similimum, and how to give relief to your patients using homeopathic drugs. All these talks about ‘jobs’ arise from lack of knowledge in homeopathy.


As an old layman without any professional opportunities or ambitions, personally I have nothing to gain or lose whether MIT get recognized or not. But for the young and coming generations of homeopaths, such a recognition and acceptance of MIT will surely open up great avenues of professional status and opportunities, since it will inevitably lead into the recognition of homeopathy as an advanced branch of modern molecular medicine by the scientific community. I am dedicating my remaining life span to make it happen at the earliest


A young lady homeopath, daughter of a friend of mine, was very energetic, ambitious and a topper in her studies. After getting her degree, she started a clinic in nearby place. Since patients did not turn up in high numbers as she expected by three months, she shifted her clinic to a new place, ignoring my advice to hold on. She was very impatient and in a hurry to become a busy practitioner. After six months, she shifted her clinic again. With in four years, she shifted to seven places, and desperately failed in her practice. She became very despondent, began to curse homeopathy and her fate, and quarrelled with her father for making her a homeopath and decided to stop practicing.

I advised her to set up practice in her house itself, and converted a room into a clinic. Being a village, initial response was very poor. But gradually, number of patients increased. As she concentrated in producing results in whatever cases she got, her popularity increased, and patients began to come from distant places also. By next four years, she became a very successful practitioner. Her energy and confidence returned.

I happened to visit her house a few months later to meet her ailing father . Around fifty patients were waiting outside her consulting room. I felt very happy.

I always use to advice young homeopaths to hold on to same place without shifting clinics frequently, even if number of patients are not satsfactory. It will take time to build up practice. You may suffer a lot initially, and even find it hard to earn your daily bread. But hold on with confidence, and work hard. If you can produce results, patients will gradually come, where ever you are. You will finally succeed.

On the other side of the matter, you are bound to fail ultimately in your practice if you fail to produce results, even if you have set up a posh clinic investing lakhs in the heart of a city or in the ground floor of a popular shopping center. It is the CURES you produce that decide your failure or success- not the PLACES.


A 2nd year BHMS student asked:

“I know what we are taught in our colleges as homeopathy are unscientific, whereas you are showing us light by teaching us scientific homeopathy through your posts. My present dilemma is, what should I learn as a student, as what you teach and what is taught in our colleges contradict each other”.

ANSWER: “I have addressed this question earlier. As a student, your primary concern at this stage is to earn your degree, for which you have to pass your exams. Learn your lessons as prescribed in your syllabus and taught in your class rooms, even though they are obviously unscientific. I call it ‘official’ learning.

Same time, I would advice you to keep on a stream of ‘parallel’ learning essential to become a scientific medical professional in future. Study modern biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, supra-molecular chemistry, modern pharmacology, molecular imprinting, modern diagnostics, pathology- every knowledge out side the prescribed syllabus, to prepare yourself to become a scientific physician. Of course, learn MIT also, as it provides the most rational and scientific model for biological mechanism of homeopathic cure.

‘Official’ learning for earning degree, and ‘parallel’ learning for acquiring knowledge should go simultaneously. Then only you can differentiate what is unscientific and what is scientific in the lessons you are taught as homeopathy.”


A BHMS student from Assam asks:

“Sir, I am a student of BHMS 1st year . I am studying in Assam. In Assam there is no good scope for BHMS. Sir, it seems that my future is very dark. Sir should i try for MBBS, or should I continue with this system?”

MY ANSWER: “As far as there are people suffering from diseases, homeopathy has scope in any place where human beings live. Only thing is, you should know HOW to apply homeopathy and give relief from diseases. Scope of homeopathy depends upon the efficiency and dedication of homeopaths who practice it. Learn homeopathy with full involvement and confidence, and try to become a skilled ‘scientific’ homeopath. Be sure, your future will be very bright”.


Dear homeopaths, hold your heads high with pride and self-confidence and tell the world aloud: “Homeopathy is Molecular Imprints Therapeutics- science of curing diseases using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules; it is an advanced specialized branch of modern molecular medicine”!



The term TEMPERAMENT indicates the ‘psychological constitution’ of an individual, or the way he responds to various sensory stimuli. From homeopathic point of view, TEMPERAMENT is nothing but the ‘totality of mental symptoms’.

It basically refers to those aspects of an individual’s psychological personality, such as introversion or extroversion. Extroversion tends to be manifested in outgoing, talkative, energetic behavior, whereas introversion is manifested in more reserved and solitary behavior. Every individual has both an extroverted side and an introverted side, with one being more dominant than the other. Karl Jung defined introversion as an “attitude-type characterized by orientation in life through subjective psychic contents or focusing on one’s inner psychic activity”; and extroversion as “an attitude type characterized by concentration of interest on the external object or the outside world”. In any case, people fluctuate in their behavior all the time, and even extreme introverts and extroverts do not always act according to their type. Although many people view being introverted or extroverted as a question with only two possible answers, most contemporary trait theories measure levels of extroversion-introversion as part of a single, continuous dimension of personality, with some scores near one end, and others near the half-way mark.

Temperament has been defined as individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation that manifest in the domains of emotion, activity and attention.

Temperament of an individual is determined through specific behavioral profiles, usually focusing on those that are both easily measurable and testable early in childhood. Commonly tested factors include irritability, activity, frequency of smiling, and an approach or avoidant posture to unfamiliar events. The specific behaviors are: activity level, regularity of sleeping and eating patterns, initial reaction, adaptability, intensity of emotion, mood, distractibility, persistence and attention span, and sensory sensitivity.

Following nine traits have been identified by researchers as the basis of evaluating one’s temperament:

1. Activity: Activity refers to the person’s physical energy. Is he constantly moving, or does the has a relaxing approach? A high-energy person may have difficulty sitting still at work, where as the low-energy type will remain calm.

2. Regularity: Regularity refers to the level of predictability in a person’s biological functions, such as waking, becoming tired, hunger, and bowel movements. Does the he has a routine in eating and sleeping habits, or are these events more random? For example, a person with a high regularity rating may want to eat at 2 p.m. every day, whereas one lower on the regularity scale may eat at sporadic times throughout the day.

3. Initial reaction: Initial reaction is also known as Approach or Withdrawal. This refers to how the person responds (whether positively or negatively) to new people or environments. Does he approach people or things in the environment without hesitation, or does he shy away? A bold person tends to approach things quickly, as if without thinking, whereas a cautious one typically prefers to watch for a while before engaging in new experiences.

4. Adaptability: Adaptability refers to how long it takes the person to adjust to change over time (as opposed to an initial reaction). Does he adjust to the changes in their environment easily, or is he slow to adapt? One who adjusts easily may be quick to settle into a new routine, whereas a resistant person may take a long time to adjust to the situation.

5. Intensity: Intensity refers to the energy level of a positive or negative response. Does the person react intensely to a situation, or does the respond in a calm and quiet manner? A more intense person may burst screaming with excitement, whereas a mild-mannered person may smile or show no emotion.

6. Mood: Mood refers to the person’s general tendency towards a happy or unhappy demeanor. All persons have a variety of emotions and reactions, such as cheerful and stormy, happy and unhappy. Yet each person biologically tends to have a generally positive or negative outlook. A person who frequently smiles could be considered a cheerful one, whereas one who frequently fusses might be considered the opposite.

7. Distractibility: Distractibility refers to the individual’s tendency to be sidetracked by other things going on around them. Does he get easily distracted by what is happening in the environment, or can he concentrate despite the interruptions? An easily distracted person is engaged by external events and has difficulty returning to the task at hand, whereas a rarely distracted person stays focused and completes the task at hand.

8. Persistence and attention span: Persistence and attention span refer to the individual’s length of time on a task and ability to stay with the task through frustrations—whether he stays with an activity for a long period of time or loses interest quickly.

9. Sensitivity: Sensitivity refers to how easily an individual is disturbed by changes in the environment. This is also called sensory threshold or threshold of responsiveness. Is the person bothered by external stimuli like noises, textures, or lights, or does he seem to ignore them? A sensitive person may lose focus when a door slams, whereas one less sensitive to external noises will be able to maintain focus.

Factors determining the temperament of a person also includes anticipation, impulsiveness, increased or decreased levels of activity, desire for sensation seeking, shyness, self-esteem or lack of it, fear, frustration, sadness, discomfort, anger, fearfulness, aggression, attention, sensitivity, pleasure threshold, irritability, alertness, etc etc.

Psychologists have developed a theory of FIVE TEMPERAMENTS, which classifies individuals into five distinct categories. Five temperaments is a theory that expands upon the Four Temperaments proposed in ancient medical theory based on the concept of ‘body humors’. It is a measure of interpersonal relations orientations that calculates a person’s behavior patterns based on the scoring of a questionnaire. This system of analysis graded questionnaires on two scales in three dimensions of interpersonal relations. When paired with temperament theory, a measurement of five temperaments resulted.

These FIVE temperamental categories are SANGUINE (quick, impulsive, and relatively short-lived reactions), PHLEGMATIC (a longer response-delay, but short-lived response), CHOLERIC (short response time-delay, but response sustained for a relatively long time), MELANCHOLIC (long response time-delay, response sustained at length, if not, seemingly, permanently) and SUPINE (more needy for acceptance from people, yet less able to initiate and express this need, frustrated)

TEMPERAMENTS of individuals are identified by their DRIVING NEEDS. For the Melancholic, the motivation is fear of rejection and/or the unknown. They have a low self-esteem and, figuring that others do not like them, they reject others first. The Supine also has low self-esteem, but is driven to try to gain acceptance by liking and serving others. The Sanguine is driven by the need for attention, and tries to sell themselves through their charm, and accepts others before those others can reject them. Their self-esteem crashes if they are nevertheless rejected. Yet, they will regain the confidence to keep trying to impress others. The Choleric is motivated by their goals, in which other people are tools to be used. The Phlegmatic’s lack of a motivation becomes their driving need: to protect their low energy reserve.

TEMPERAMENTS is determined by the complex bio-molecular processes happening in the central nervous system. Most experts agree that temperament has a GENETIC, EPIGENETIC and biological basis, although environmental factors, nutrition and maturation modify the ways an individual’s personality is expressed. For scientific understanding of the bio-molecular processes involved in ‘temperaments’, we need the help of Behavioral genetics, Behavioral epigenetics and Behavioral neuroscience.

The Human Genome Project has allowed scientists to understand the coding sequence of human DNA nucleotides. Once candidate genes for behaviors are discovered, scientists may be able to genetically screen individuals to determine their likelihood of developing certain pathologies.

Behavioral neuroscience, also known as biological psychology, is the application of the principles of biology, in particular neurobiology , to the study of physiological, genetic, and developmental mechanisms of behavior in humans and non-human animals. It typically investigates at the level of neurons, neurotransmitters, brain circuitry and the basic biological processes that underlie normal and abnormal behavior.

Behavioral epigenetics is the field of study examining the role of epigenetics in shaping human behaviour. It is an experimental science that seeks to explain how nurture shapes nature, where nature refers to biological heredity and nurture refers to virtually everything that occurs during the life-span such as social-experience, diet and nutrition, and exposure to toxins). Behavioral epigenetics attempts to provide a framework for understanding how the expression of genes is influenced by experiences and the environment to produce individual differences in behavior, cognition, personality, and mental health. Epigenetic gene regulation involves changes other than to the sequence of DNA and includes changes to histones (proteins around which DNA is wrapped) and DNA methylation. These epigenetic changes can influence the growth of neurons in the developing brain as well as modify activity of the neurons in the adult brain. Together, these epigenetic changes on neuron structure and function can have a marked influence on an organism’s behavior.

Endogenous or exogenous chemical molecules such as bacterial and viral toxins, food articles, antibodies, hormones, metabolic byproducts, drugs, environmental pollutants etc, that can produce modifications in the actions of enzymes involved in histone mythylation and acetylization can thereby epigenetically influence the genetic expression and protein synthesis. When this happens in the cells of central nervous system, it may bring behavioral and temperamental changes.

If a drug substance could produce ‘temperamental’ changes in healthy individuals when applied in crude form as part of drug proving, that means the drug substance contains some chemical molecules that could act upon certain epigenetic factors in the neurons in a way influencing genetic expression of ‘temperamental’ genes. In molecular imprints forms, such drug substances can rectify such molecular errors and cure those ‘temperamental, behavioral or mood-related disorders.


My advice to young homeopaths is, try to set up your OWN clinics as far as possible, instead of getting lucratively employed in a private institution owned by individuals or corporates, especially if you are not permitted to do at least a part-time private practice there.

Most precious and long-standing ‘property’ of a homeopath is the good will and publicity propagated by his dedicated patients, and the ever-growing chains of new patients gradually forming around every successful cases. It is on this foundation one’s career should grow. When you work in an institution owned by another individual or corporate, you lose that precious property. Once you are compelled to leave the job or thrown out by the management on any reason, you will have to rebuild your career from a big zero!

You may feel it a bit hard or risky to set up a new clinic. You may earn very little initially, when compared to the lucrative salaries the institutions offer. But remember, you are making a long term investment in your life, and returns come gradually.

The difference is between whether you work to ‘cultivate’ in your own farm, or work as a wage laborer in another’s farm. If it is your farm, you will reap the final crops and the happiness- otherwise you get only your wages!

“As long as one is a good prescriber”, why should you have a sense of insecurity in running your own clinic, where you are the master?

There is a always a factor of insecurity and and unpredictability anywhere in life. You may lose your ‘job’ any time, if you fail to attain your targets. Is it not an “unpredictable” factor? No corporate will or can give you salary for long, if you fail in generating income. They will throw you out earlier or later. If you can make results, income in your own clinic is not unpredictable. It may be small initially, but it will grow gradually. It is an issue of skills and confidence, sir. If you can attract minimum 10 patients per day, you can generate an income much more than a corporate will offer you.

Final choice depends upon individual homeopath. His skills, confidence, financial position, location- everything will have to be considered


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, normal perspiration, normal bowel movements, normal appetite, normal sleep, normal emotions, normal body temperature, normal thermal responses etc etc.

Normal thirst represents 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. 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.

‘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’.

An ‘abnormal 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.


I would suggest CCH for ‘hair transmission’ experts from ‘sahni institute’ to be appointed as faculty members in all all homeopathic colleges in India. Teaching and learning process will be very simple- teacher will collect strands of hair from every student, and send aphorisms and other homeopathy lessons to their brains ‘dynamically’ by hair transmission mode! LOL!!!


I am a perennial ‘free’ learner. I learn not by ‘following’ the ‘teachings of masters’, but by observing and experimenting objective reality myself, and by making my own interpretations and evolving my own conclusions. In this learning process, I would rationally ‘utilize’ any available piece of knowledge imparted by anybody. I accept nothing blindly without questioning and analyzing, until it satisfies my rational thinking.


Homeopathic mother tinctures act the same way as Herbal medicines, Ayurveda or Allopathy.

They do not work on similia principle, and hence, is not homeopathic.

Can we say all those drugs do not play any role in therapeutics? NO. They act as ‘molecular forms’ of drugs, which act antipathically, due to the molecular level structure and properties of those drugs. Mother tinctures also may be also helpful in providing relief by the action of their ‘molecular’ contents. But that cannot be considered ‘homeopathic’ drug action.

When we give Alfalfa Q to improve appetite, we are using its ‘allopathic’ action. If we read the materia medica of that drug, it is said that alfalfa increases appetite even up to bulimia.

To be genuinely homeopathic, we should use only potentized drugs that do not contain drug molecules, but molecular imprints only- above 12c.

While prescribing crude drugs, low potencies or mother tincture on the basis of our old literature like boericke or clarke, we should remember that knowledge of pharmacology was very limited during their period.

ARS BROMIDE Q is recomended as a drug for diabetes in boericke materia medica. With the knowledge now available about the toxic properties of ARS COMPOUNDS, would anybody dare to use ars bromide Q now? In old literatures, many mercury compounds are recomended to be used as triturations.

In my opinion, without modern scientific studies about pharmacological aspects of our mother tinctures and crude drugs, we should not use them on the reason that it is recmomended in old literatures.

Many homeopaths use URAN NIT 1x and 3X, which is beyond any doubt, dangerous substance in molecular forms. In my opinion, homeopaths should use only above 12c, if our claim ‘homeopathy is SAFE’ is justified.


Have you heard the good old proverbial story of five blind ‘scholars’ who ‘saw’ the elephant by touching the different parts of its body? Each of them narrated their ‘experience’ with the elephant in entirely different ways. Even though all of them ‘saw’ the same elephant, their explanations were not at all the same!

Objective truth of homeopathy, involved in the therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, is like that proverbial ‘elephant’, which was ‘seen’ by different ‘blind’ theoreticians through generations, who explained it using entirely different ‘theories’ according to their fancies and fantacies. Nobody so far succeeded in seeing this great ‘elephant’ in its real form, and explained it in a rational, logical and scientific way.


World Health Organization has declared an ‘international health emergency’, due to the spread of EBOLA virus disease around the world in pandemic proportions.

In modern medicine, there is no specific treatment for EVD; efforts to help persons who are infected include giving either oral rehydration therapy (slightly sweet and salty water to drink) or intravenous fluids. The disease has high mortality rate: often killing between 50% and 90% of those infected with the virus. Efforts are ongoing to develop a vaccine; however, none yet exists.

Homeopathy can help people to overcome this hazardous situation. Hope WHO, health authorities of various countries, homeopathic professional bodies and the whole homeopathic community will rise to meet this challenge.

Molecular imprints of ‘Ebola Glycoprotein’, a chemical molecule secreted by ebola virus, could be probably used to effectively prevent the dreaded infection without any harmful effects. Molecular imprints could be be prepared by procuring a sample of ‘ebola glycoprotein’ and potentizing it upto 12c or above avogadro limit. Hope somebody in responsible positions may note this suggestion seriously.

Homeopathically, CROTALUS HORRIDUS 30 seems to the ideal similimum for EBOLA VIRUS DISEASE. Use it frequently until cure, even along with other treatments or medications.


Molecular imprints of ‘Ebola Glycoprotein’, a chemical molecule secreted by ebola virus, could be probably used to effectively prevent the dreaded infection without any harmful effects. Molecular imprints could be be prepared by procuring a sample of ‘ebola glycoprotein’ and potentizing it upto 12c or above avogadro limit. Hope somebody in responsible positions may note this suggestion seriously.

Homeopathically, CROTALUS HORRIDUS 30 seems to the ideal similimum for EBOLA VIRUS DISEASE. Use it frequently until cure, even along with other treatments or medications.


An allopath asks: “Say me what is the treatment u give for a myocardial infraction, how u will save the dying patient, say what u can pluck in homeopathy ? Huh ?”

My question to that allopath: “What is your treatment for EBOLA VIRUS infection? How will you treat MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS? How will you treat DOWNS SYNDROME? Can you cure HIV/AIDS? Can you cure PARKINSONISM?”

Actually, no allopathic doctor can save the life of a person “dying with myocardial infarction” with his DRUGS only, better than a homeopath can do it with his drugs.

Allopaths ‘save’ such patients by emergency angioplasty, which is only an interventional surgical procedure. SURGERY is not ALLOPATHY. SURGERY is only MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY, which is the common ‘accessory’ property of all medical systems and professionals. If there were homeopathic hospitals equipped with ANGIOPLASTY facilities and technicians, homeopaths can save cardiac patients using homeopathy drugs, much better than allopathy doctors do.




SURGERY is not ‘allopathy’. It is true that allopathy utilizes surgery more frequently and effectively than other medical systems do- that does not make surgery a ‘sole property’ of allopathy.

SURGERY is ‘mechanical intervention’ into the human body using some tools, equipment and other technological gadgets. Actually, surgery belongs to the realm of ‘medical technology’- not ‘medicine’.

ALLOPATHY is the art and science of treating diseases using ‘chemical molecules’ called drugs.

HOMEOPATHY is the art and science of treating diseases using ‘molecular imprints’, instead of drug molecules.

‘Medical Technology’ of SURGERY is the common ‘accessory’ property of all medical systems.


If the process of dilution is done strictly as per directions given by Samuel Hahnemann, 99 ml alcohol/water mixture has to be thrown away to get 1 ml of 1c potency, which is used as the back potency for 2c stage of potentization. That means, to prepare 1ml of DM potency we will have to throw away 999999.999 litres of water/ alcohol mixture. Do you believe one lac litres of ethyl alcohol is thrown away by the manufactures while preparing 1 ml of homeopathic medicine in DM potency? If you claim that this is not thrown away but kept as various potencies, can you imagine the size of storage facilities required for each drug? Please remember, we have around 1000 drugs in homeopathy, which means 1000000000 litres of wastage of ethyl alcohol-water mixture! And also calculate the time, energy utensils, bottles and labor required for handling all this! Do you believe all this happening?

Every manufacturer claim that they use back potencies, and hence no wastage of alcohol happens. But somebody in the line has to do the job of raising 30c into 199c, 200c into 999c, 1m into 9999c and so on. To raise 10m to 50m, 40000 stages of potentization have to be done in betwee, and all those discarded, except the product obtained at last stage. Better you calculate the wastege in between 50m and cm! If those people do it genuinely as per Hahnemannian method, they will have to bear all these wastage, and the cost of back potencies will be unimaginably high!

In the present atmosphere of profit-oriented pharmaceutical business managed by professional business administrators, we cannot be so naïve to believe that the manufacturers of homeopathic medicines would be so much dedicated to the philosophy of Hahnemann to bear such huge holes in their money bags. Remember, these same people are flooding the market with all sorts of unethical patented mixtures in the name of homeopathy, and bribing the homeopaths to market them, in their greed to amass wealth. How can we expect them to be so much sincere in the service of homeopathy only while preparing potencies? How much pathetic is the situation since there exist no any scientific mechanism to verify the exact identity and potency of a drug other than to trust the labels on the bottles! If somebody make an error knowingly or unknowingly in sticking a label to a stock bottle of back potency, can you imagine the consequences that will continue to haunt generations of homeopaths to come? We have to be consoled that potentized homeo medicines cannot kill human beings.

Believe it or not,if you closely monitor what is happening behind the walls of commercial homeopathic manufacturing units, you will lose all your trust in our ‘very high’ potencies. I had personally discussed with some retired supervisers and managers of certain famous production units, and they confessed some bitter truth. After 30c, most units do not carry on potentization strictly as Hahnemann directed. A few additional shakes is given to 30c and marked as 199c, which is used as the back potency for 200c. Again with few additional shakes, and 200c becomes 999c used as back potency for 1m. Over all, we can see that practically, in most cases, the difference between 30c and DM potency is only a four to ten stage dilution and a few additional shakes!. Finished! And we call it ‘ultra-high’ potencies!. Only consolation is that 30c is enough for optimum molecular imprinting to happen, and our drugs will work if used as similimum, since they contain ‘molecular imprints’, and that is enough. This shows that the difference between 30c and CM or DM is very narrow. Our talk about ‘very high’ dilution is practically meaningless. Most homeopaths and manufacturers will not tolerate my statement, because that may undermine the ‘sand hills’ of fame they have built in the name of ‘high potencies’.

Teachers and seniors make young homeopaths believe that administration of incorrect remedies especially in high potencies would do grave harm to the patients, and may cause even death. It is warned that our drugs should be handled with great care, and many young homeopaths are scared to prescribe, lest it may be a wrong prescription. If potentized drugs were dangerous, homeopaths would have been the greatest criminals in human history, each of us would have so far killed many innocent people! We would have already harmed a big section of human race by the time being through our wrong prescriptions. Even you and me make many many wrong prescriptions everyday, believing that we are making correct prescriptions. Can anybody deny it with a sincere heart? Living proofs of safety of homeopathic medicines are the people we treated with wrong prescriptions and stay undamaged!


SCIENCE cannot be ‘limited’ to any particular book, author, inventor or time. It grows infinitely through generations, by imbibing new knowledge evolving through human experience and thinking. If you think HOMEOPATHY is some thing limited and confined to ‘organon’ and the ‘master’, that means your perspective of homeopathy is unscientific and dogmatic.






I ‘believe’ only what I ‘know’, and what could be explained rationally. There are many things and phenomena around me remaining to be explained, about which I am still undecided, and probably in confusion. I am continuing my efforts to understand them using the knowledge and its tools already available to me. There is no meaning in jumping into conclusions about them. I will not ‘believe’ anything blindly.

I do not ‘believe’ in god, due to the simple reason that I do not ‘know’ whether god exists or not. That does not mean I am ‘against’ god. We cannot be ‘against’ something, without knowing about it clearly. As per my present state of knowledge about this universe and the phenomena around me, I could not see any rational justification for ‘believing’ in god. Abscence of knowledge about something cannot be a justification for believing that it exists or does not exist. Obviously, my ‘beliefs’ will undergo changes in course of time, as my knowledge constantly advances to more and more perfection.

I will say “I believe in god” only when my knowledge advances to such a position that I can tell you ‘what is god’, ‘how it exists’ and ‘how it works’.


Once you fall into a deep sea where land is not seen anywhere within your reach, only thing you can do is to to keep on swimming and swimming, if you want to stay alive without drowning!

I keep on talking about MIT day in and day out, even though I do not see any chance of its recognition within my reach during my life time, hoping at least to keep my ideas alive for the future generation.


It is a clinically experienced and experimentally verified fact that potentized drugs act upon organism in a way exactly opposite to the parent drugs. Actually, this observation is the basis of the concept of homeopathic ‘drug proving’ as well as ‘similia similibus curentur’.

Why a drug substance in ‘potentized’ form act upon living organism in a reverse direction to its action in crude or ‘molecular’ form? What may be the molecular mechanism involved in this ‘reverse’ action?

Whole riddles of homeopathy will be resolved once we could explain this phenomenon of ‘reverse action’ rationally and scientifically in a way fitting to modern biochemistry and kinetics of biomolecular interactions.

Phenomenon of ‘reverse actions’ of potentized forms and crude forms of same drug substance could be rationally explained only if we perceive potentized drugs in terms of MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules, and understand these molecular imprints as three-dimensional nanocavities’ or ‘depressions ‘engraved’ into a water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrix.

Beyond any doubt, only MIT concepts can answer the fundamental questions of homeopathy, and resolve the riddles haunting this wonderful therapeutic art.


What is my ‘reccomendation’ regarding vaccinations? My “reccomendation” will depend up on situations- rather practical than theoretical. I will prefer to chose ‘lesser evil’ than ‘bigger evil’. ‘Later evils’ than ‘immediate evils’. Evils that give us time to rectify, than evils that give us no chance to rectify. There is no point in being “against” vaccines when a mad dog bites me.

I am sure vaccination can cause chronic ‘miasms’ in our body, which may result in diverse types of chronic disease dispositions and ‘autoimmune’ diseases. Knowing this evil effects very well, I have to accept vaccinations in situations where life is in serious irreversible danger.


Vaccines are ‘protein’ substances ‘alien’ to the genetic blueprint of the individual. Alien proteins induce the production of antibodies in a similar way as infectious agents, which remain in the body for long petiods, in many instances for the whole life. Even though we understand antibodies as ‘defense’ molecules, they can play a ‘pathogenic’ role also, since they can bind to off-target biological targets, resulting in chronic disease dispositions. Hahnemann called this chronic residual effects of antibodies as ‘miasms’. Vaccinations, similar to infectious diseases, results in chronic miasms, known as vaccinosis, producing various chronic diseases including those which are so far considered as ‘autoimmune’ diseases.


In order to explain homeopathic cure in scientific terms, first of all you should explain DISEASE and CURE in scientific terms, in a way fitting to existing scientific knowledge system.

If you keep on talking about ‘deranged vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’, nobody belonging to science-minded community is going to listen what you are talking about, or take homeopathy seriously. Talk science, please!


Please remember, homeopathy so far lacks something that could at least be legitimately called ‘a scientific working hypothesis’. We are learning, teaching, practicing and boasting about some ‘theories’ that are not even ‘hypotheses’ in the scientific sense of that term.

For the first time in the history of homeopathy, MIT proposes some concepts that could be presented as a legitimate candidate to be called a ‘scientific working hypothesis’ that could be proved according to scientific methods.

There lies the historical relevance of concepts put forward by MOLECULAR IMPRINTS THERAPEUTICS, which proposes for the first time a scientifically TESTABLE model for BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM of homeopathic therapeutics, in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge system.

MIT is not to be “followed” or “practiced” in its present state of evolution- It has to be understood, verified and proved.


From scientific point of view of pharmaceutical chemistry, a DRUG is a biologically active unit contained in a substance used as therapeutic agent. IT is the structure and properties of that chemical molecule that decides its medicinal properties and therapeutic actions. If such as substance contains only ONE type of biologically active unit, it is a SINGLE drug. If it contains different types of biologically active units, it is a COMPOUND drug. It is obvious that most of the drugs we use in homeopathy – especially drugs of biological origin and complex minerals- contain diverse types of biologically active units, and hence they cannot be considered SINGLE drugs.

Molecular imprinting happens as individual molecules, and as such, potentized drugs prepared from a SINGLE drug substance will contain diverse types of molecular imprints representing the diverse types of individual constituent molecules contained in the substance. Those molecular imprints also act as individual units when applied in the organism. Hence, potentized drugs prepared by using a complex, seemingly single drug substance is actually a COMPOUND drug, containing diverse types of biologically active units.

IF you still cannot realize the meaninglessness and utter folly involved in talking about SINGLE DRUGS, it is the blindness caused by your dogmatic learning and lack of scientific awareness.


What is MIT?

MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics refers to a scientific hypothesis that proposes a rational model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and diseaes indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.


Homeopathy is taught as a closed system of eternally immutable ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ every ‘true’ homeopath is bound to ‘obey’. We hear ‘seven cardinal principles of hahnemann’, ‘hering laws’, ‘kents observations’ and many other ‘theories’ that rule the practice of homeopathy. Anybody violating or thinking beyond these ‘fundamental laws’ are considered to be ‘wrong homeopaths’.

We should remember, no ‘masters’ who made these ‘rules’ so far knew what really happens during potentization. Nobody so far knew what are the exact active principles of potentized drugs. Nobody so far knew the exact molecular level mechanism by which the active principles of potentized drugs interact with the biological organism and produce a therapeutic effect. Only things our masters actually knew was the objective natural phenomena of ‘likes curing likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’.

Everything else were mere speculations. Speculations based on unscientific philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’. All ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘methods’ and ‘doctrines’ we consider as ‘cardinal principles of homeopathy evolved from these speculative theories. All ‘directions’ regarding ‘doses’, repetitions’, ‘single drugs’, ‘follow ups’ and everything else were formulated without clearly knowing the substances we are actually dealing with or how they actually work. They were based on misinterpreted ‘experiences’ of ‘stalwarts’ with historically limited scientific knowledge.

Once we acquire scientific knowledge regarding the exact processes involved in potentization, active principles of potentized drugs and the molecular mechanism of their therapeutic action, all the existing ‘methods’, ‘laws’, ‘rules’ and ‘principles’ are bound to change. New ‘principles’ and ‘methods’will evolve.

What ever I talk about ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ of homeopathic practice such as ‘dose’ and ‘repetitions’ are based on my scientific understanding of potentization as ‘molecular imprinting’, active principles of potentized drugs as ‘molecular imprints’, and homeopathic therapeutics as removal of biochemical inhibitions. Unless you understand the concept ‘molecular imprinting’ of potentization and biochemistry of therapeutics, you are bound to fail to understand everything I say.

Acquiring a scientific understanding of the phenomena involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, and applying that knowledge judiciously for curing the sick- that should be the only ‘fundamental rule’ that guide a homeopath.

‘Likes cures likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’ represent the objective part of homepathy, which are concerned with truthful observations of natural phenomena involved in the process of ‘cure’. This is the strong and rational aspect of homeopathy that have to be preserved, explored and advanced into more and more perfection.

The theoretical explanatory part of homeopathy, which is based on totally unscientific and irrational philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’ of eighteenth century europe, as well as the ‘rules’, ‘laws’ and ‘methods’ formulated accordingly, is the real stumbling block that prevents this wonderful therapeutic art from advancing into a scientific medical system.

We have to preserve and strengthen the rational objective aspect of homeopathy, and explain it in terms of modern scientific knowledge. We should show the audacity to discard its irrational and unscientific theoretical parts. Once we understand the real science involved in the phenomena of ‘likes cure likes’ and ‘potentization’, a whole new set of practical ‘rules’ and ‘laws’ would spontaneously evolve.

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.”


How to repertorize cases as ‘Symptom Groups’ using Similimum Ultra Software to generate ‘total cure’ prescriptions:

For making ‘multiple drug prescriptions’, we have to repertorize symptoms as different symptom groups. Logic of method is simple. A patient coming to us may be suffering from entirely different disease entities at the same time, related with entirely different molecular errors. If you believe the ‘constitutional similimum’ will correct all molecular errors and cure the patient ‘holistically’, you may go that way. But practically, we may need entirely different drugs for his different complaints, where ‘multiple drug’ approach may give the patient immediate relief for his complaints, as well as ‘total cure’. Whether you call it multiple drugs, polypharmacy, layer method, complementary drugs, intercurrent or any thing, you are actually doing the same. Only difference is, some people ‘mix’ drugs inside the body by giving one drug at a time, where as others ‘mix’ them outside the body. Multiple drugs are multiple drugs- whatever name you call it, or whatever way you use it.

Apart from constitutional and miasmatic drugs, a particular patient may need different drugs for his different ailments such as headache, hypertension, haemorrhoids, gastric ulcer, joint pains, ringworm etc, disturbing him at the same time. Each ailment will have different locations, expressions, sensations, modalities, concomitants- which are collectively called ‘qualifications’- requiring different similimum. Hoping a ‘single’ ‘constitution drug’ to ‘cure’ all these complaints by a ‘single’ dose may be the ‘classical’ approach, but I am not so much optimistic about such a hope in all cases. Different co entirely different complaints will have totally unrelated molecular inhibitions underlying them, caused by entirely different pathogenic molecules, which would require entirely different ‘molecular imprints’ to remove those inhibitions.

Each molecular error, caused by a particular molecular inhibition due to a specific pathogenic molecular factor, will be expressed through a specific group of symptoms and their ‘qualifications’. Hence, we have to select ‘molecular imprints’ on the basis of those ‘symptom groups’. Since the individual’s constitutional background also plays a role in disease process, his ‘constitutional remedy’ also will have to be used over and above the ‘particular remedies’.

Diseases in a person at a given point of time are never ‘single’ at molecular level, but comprising of ‘multiple’ molecular inhibitions and molecular errors arising from diverse types of genetic and acquired factors.

Even those drug substance we call ‘single’ are not really ‘single’, but contains diverse types of chemical molecules molecules having entirely different chemical and medicinal properties.

Potentized drugs, which we consider ‘single’, are actually combinations of diverse types of independent ‘molecular imprints’ representing different types of constituent molecules of drug substance used for potentization.

When used as therapeutic agents, all those potentized drugs we consider ‘single’, really act as ‘combinations’ of independent ‘molecular imprints’ they contain, each individual ‘molecular imprint’ acting upon specific pathogenic molecules having complementary configurational affinity, thereby removing the ‘molecular inhibitions created by them.

Once you understand these fundamental scientific factors, you can realize the futility of worrying about ‘single’ disease, ‘single’ drug and ‘single’ dose!!

Constitutional remedy of the patient could be determined using physical generals and mentals. To decide the ‘particular remedies’ for different complaints, we have repertorize each ‘symptom group’ separately. Each ‘symptom group’ will consist of the ‘basic symptom’ of particular complaint, along with its ‘qualifications’ such as ‘locations, expressions, sensations, modalities, alternations, concomittants and extensions’.

Repertorizing in ‘symptom groups’ is very simple using ‘Similimum Ultra Software. Select all basic symptoms and their qualifications first. Then collect all physical generals and mentals. Add all these symptoms to ‘worksheet’ of software, and grade them using ‘grade rubric’ tool. Then, go to ‘repertorize’. Select ‘totality method’, with ‘selected symptoms’ protocol’.

Repertorization window appears, with all rubrics listed, with check boxes. Select check boxes of physical generals and mentals only, and repertorize. Result will appear in chart for. Click ‘add to reference tray’. Save reference tray, marking the result as ‘constitution’. Then remove all selected check boxes, and select all check boxes of rubrics related with a particular complaint. Add the result to reference tray, mark it. In this way, select rubrics of all ‘symptom groups’ separately and repertorize. Results of repertorizations done for each group will be saved separately in ‘reference tray’, from where we can select the final prescription. In some cases, we may get same drug for different ‘symptoms groups’, which is most welcome from a homeopathic perspective. Since ‘antimiasmatic’ drugs such as nosodes are not well represented in our repertories, we will have to consider them separately, after repertorization is completed. If necessary, they should be included in our prescription.

This method of ‘total cure prescriptions’ is a deviation from what is taught in classical homeopathy. I would not advise any body to follow this method. This is my method- that is all.

Anybody can think about the logic behind this method, and reach their own conclusions. I do not want to ‘misguide’ anybody.


A 75 year old man, with complaints of asthma, haemorrhoids, constipation, fistula and itching all over. Symptoms were collected in detail, and following rubrics selected using Similimum Ultra Software:

1. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
2. [Kent]Expectoration : TASTE : Salty
3. [Kent]Expectoration : GRAYISH
4. [Kent]Expectoration : VISCID
5. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
6. [Kent]Respiration : WHISTLING
7. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC : Eating : amel
8. [Kent]Rectum : URGING, desire : Eating, after
9. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION
10. [Kent]Rectum : MOISTURE
11. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : External
12. [Kent]Rectum : LUMP, sensation of
13. [Kent]Rectum : ITCHING
14. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION : Old people
15. [Kent]Rectum : FISTULA
16. [Kent]Rectum : FLATUS : Loud
17. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : Cold amel.
18. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
19. [Kent]Generalities : LEAN people
21. [Kent]Mind : ANGER, irascibility
22. [Kent]Mind : CENSORIOUS, critical
23. [Kent]Mind : HURRY
24. [Kent]Mind : IMPATIENCE
25. [Kent]Mind : SUSPICIOUS
26. [Kent]Mind : QUARRELSOME
27. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Night
28. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Eruption, without
29. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Scratching : Agg
30. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Warm : In bed, on becoming

When repertorized by classical totality method, outcome was as follows: Sulph.(61/26), Ars.(45/19), Lyc.(44/20), Lach.(41/22), Sep.(41/19), Caust.(39/18), Phos.(39/20), Nux-v.(38/19), Puls.(36/16),

Then I decided to go for ‘Group Repertorization’ method. Symptoms were grouped into CONSTITUTION, RESPIRATORY, RECTUM and SKIN, and repertorized separately using Similimum Ultra

1. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
2. [Kent]Generalities : LEAN people
3. [Kent]Mind : ANGER, irascibility
4. [Kent]Mind : CENSORIOUS, critical
5. [Kent]Mind : HURRY
6. [Kent]Mind : IMPATIENCE
7. [Kent]Mind : SUSPICIOUS
8. [Kent]Mind : QUARRELSOME

Sulph.(24/9), Lyc.(20/9), Ars.(17/7), Nux-v.(17/7), Bry. (16/8), Nat-m.(16/7), Lach.(15/8), Acon.(14/7), Aur.(14/7),

1. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
2. [Kent]Expectoration : TASTE : Salty
3. [Kent]Expectoration : GRAYISH
4. [Kent]Expectoration : VISCID
5. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
6. [Kent]Respiration : WHISTLING
7. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC : Eating : Amel

Ambr.(15/7), Ars.(15/6), Lyc.(11/5), Phos.(11/5), Stann. (11/5), Carb-v.(10/5), Calc.(9/5), Chin.(9/5), Puls.(9/3),

1. [Kent]Rectum : URGING, desire : Eating, after
2. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION
3. [Kent]Rectum : MOISTURE
4. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : External
5. [Kent]Rectum : LUMP, sensation of
6. [Kent]Rectum : ITCHING
7. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION : Old people
8. [Kent]Rectum : FISTULA
9. [Kent]Rectum : FLATUS : Loud
10. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : Cold amel.

Aloe.(21/10), Caust.(19/7), Lach.(18/8), Sulph.(18/8), Phos.(16/8), Sep.(15/6), Sil.(15/6), Nit-ac.(14/5), Calc. (13/5),

1. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Night
2. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Eruption, without
3. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Scratching : Agg
4. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Warm : In bed, on becoming

Sulph.(11/4), Mez.(9/4), Alum.(7/3), Ars.(6/2), Dol.(6/3), Led.(6/3), Merc.(6/4), Puls.(6/3), Anac.(5/2).

SULPH, ALOES and AMBRA were prescribed. In 30 potency, one dose each daily for three months.
Occasional doses of ARS 30 also was used during aggravated states of asthmatic attacks. Cure was total.


A 48 yr old obese woman with chronic headache, pain in joints, and warts on various parts. Symptoms were collected and following rubrics selected using Similimum Ultra Software:1.

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses : During
2. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : After : Amel.
3. [Kent]Stomach : NAUSEA : Headache, during:
4. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Cold applications amel.
5. [Kent]Mind : IRRITABILITY : Headache, during
6. [Kent]Genitalia – Female : MENOPAUSE
7. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
8. [Kent]Mind : ANXIETY
9. [Kent]Generalities : OBESITY
10. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN : Joints
11. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN : Cold : Applied amel.
12. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN : Joints : Walking : After
13. [Kent]Skin : WARTS
14. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Smooth
15. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Soft
16. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general
17. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN

I decided to use multiple repertorization method in this case. Rubrics were divided into four groups: CONSTITUTION, HEADACHE, JOINT PAINS and WARTS, and repertorized separately:

A. Constitution:
1. [Kent]Genitalia – Female : MENOPAUSE
2. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
3. [Kent]Mind : ANXIETY
4. [Kent]Generalities : OBESITY
5. Stomach : DESIRES : Salt things

Arg-n.(10/4), Sulph.(12/5), Puls.(9/4), Calc.(9/4), Verat. (9/4), Con.(8/4), Graph.(8/3), Lach.(8/4), Nat-m.(8/3),

B. Headache:
1. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses : During
2. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : After : Amel.
3. [Kent]Stomach : NAUSEA : Headache, during:
4. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Cold applications amel.
5. [Kent]Mind : IRRITABILITY : Headache, during
6. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general

Phos.(14/6), Glon.(12/5), Nat-m.(11/5), Ars.(10/5), Bell. (10/5), Bry.(10/5), Lach.(10/5), Puls.(10/5), Sep.(10/4)

C. Joint pains:
1. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN
2.. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN : Joints
3.. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN : Cold : Applied amel.
4.. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN : Joints : Walking : After

Led.(10/4), Bry.(9/3), Puls.(9/3), Colch.(8/3), Guai.(8/4), Arn.(7/3), Kalm.(7/3), Nux-v.(7/3), Phyt.(7/3),

D. Warts:
1. [Kent]Skin : WARTS
2. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Smooth
3. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Soft

Dulc.(9/3), Ant-c.(5/2), Calc.(5/2), Caust.(5/2), Thuj.(5/2), Sep.(4/2), Bar-c.(3/1), Bell.(3/1), Calc-s.(3/1).

SULPHUR, PHOS, LEDUM and DULCAMERA were given in 30c potencies. one dose each daily. Headache cured first, then joint pains relieved, and warts disappeared by three months. Cure was complete.


Homeopathy cannot advance further as a medical science without accepting MIT concepts as an integral part of its theoretical and practical framework, because it is the most perfect, rational and scientific explanation for homeopathy.

MIT is not ‘just another’ brand or school, competing for appropriating a share in the homeopathic market, already saturated with and spoiled by various commercial brands and schools. MIT is only a scientific explanation of homeopathy. An advanced phase in the historical evolution of homeopathy. A new approach. A new perspective. Nothing else.

Vested interests and prejudices of influential people may create hurdles and delay its universal acceptance for some time, but it is inevitable that it should be accepted. MIT will decide the future course of homeopathy. Wait and see.


CASE TAKING and PRESCRIBING become very simple, fast and perfect if you are doing it by ‘Simultaneous Case taking and Repertorization’ (SCR METHOD), using Similimum Ultra- Homeopathic Software:

CASE TAKING is the most important step that decides the final outcome of a homeopath’s clinical work. It is said: “a well taken case is half way to cure”. Classical methods of case taking are much time consuming, and involves much writing or typing. Similimum Ultra Software introduces novel tools and methods of case taking, over and above classical methods.

‘Search-and-add Rubric While You Talk’ is a very simple and efficient way of case recording, especially for busy practitioners, who have no time and inclination to type down complete case history, but desires a full case taking. Typing work is very nominal in this method. Symptoms are recorded not in patients own words, but as exact repertorial rubrics. Much time and labor is saved, without compromising quality and accuracy of outcome.

To record cases using this method, open ‘Search Repertory’ tool from ‘Case Record’ window. Select the preferred Repertory from drop-down list. Simultaneous with interrogation of the patient, type down one or more key words that are expected to be part of the repertorial rubric appropriate for the symptom the patient is elaborating. Click ‘Go’ or press ‘Enter’. A list of all rubrics from all chapters of the selected repertory, containing the selected key words will be displayed instantly. Scrolling through this rubric list, select the appropriate rubric for your symptom and click ‘Add to Basket’. Repeat this process for all the important symptoms described by the patient. After case taking is over, click “Rubric Basket’ icon above the ‘symptoms’ field to open the ‘Rubric Basket’. A complete list of rubrics already added, along with their drug lists are displayed in the ‘rubric basket’. You can ‘delete’ unwanted rubrics from here. Then click “ Add to Case record’ . All the rubrics are instantly transferred to ‘symptoms’ panel of Case Record.

Case Taking is now complete! You have not even bothered about opening your Repertories, and looking for chapters and Rubrics!

Now you can open the RUBRIC BASKET, and find a remedy using QUICKPICK tool provided there.

QUICK PICK is a very innovative expert tool to find similimum instantly by elimination method, during busy clinical practice

After selecting and adding all the relevant rubrics from the REPERTORY into the RUBRIC BASKET simultaneous with talking to the patient, click ‘QUICKPICK’ button from ‘rubric basket’ or ‘case record’ window. A small QUICK PICK window pops-up.

All the rubrics we had added to the rubric basket are appear listed in the upper panel with of the new window, with a check box against each rubric. Tick the most important or ELIMINATING rubric first. List of drugs covered by that particular rubric is now seen displayed in the lower panel of the QUICK PICK window. Then select the second eliminating symptom. Now, only the drugs covered by both SELECTED rubrics are displayed. In this way, eliminate systematically, until we reach a single drug , covered by all the rubrics used for ELIMINATION. This drug will be the similimum for the case. Utmost care should be employed in the selection of eliminating rubrics and their sequences, to ensure correct output. Never do it mechanically.

When elimination has given a satisfactory output, click ‘add to reference tray’ button. The result of quick pick method will be saved into the reference tray attached to the CASE RECORD of the particular patient.

Once you master this QUICK PICK technique of repertorization, you will realize what a nice experience it is to work up on cases using SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE


‘Simultaneous Case Taking and Repertorizing’- A Simple Method Of Finding Perfect Similimum (SCR METHOD):

By performing CASE TAKING and REPERTORIZATION simultaneously, we can save much time, same time aking very accurate prescriptions. Innovative tools and
platforms provided in my SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE is very helpful in this regard.

I am reporting a case of pre-menstrual headache in a 35 yr old lady, cured by a drug selected using only ‘particular modalities’. I worked out the case and
reached similimum with in 5 minutes using Similimum Ultra Software.

The lady first told me she is having violent headache before ever menses. Using key-words ‘headache’, ‘menses’ and ‘before’, I instantly located following rubric
and added to the RUBRIC BASKET of my software:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses :Before: – Acon., Agn., Alum., Am-c., Arg-n., Ars., Asar., Bell., Bor., Bov., Brom., Bry., Bufo., Calc., Calc-p., Calc-s., Carb-an., Carb-v., Caust., Cimic., Cinnb., Cupr., Ferr., rr-ar., Ferr-i., Gels., Glon., Graph., Hep., Hyper., Iod., Kali-p., Kreos., Lac-c., Lac-d., Lach., Laur., Lil-t., Lyc., Manc., Meli., Merc., Nat-a., Nat-c., Nat-m., Nit-ac., Nux-m., Nux-v., Ol-an., Petr., Phos., Plat., Puls., Sep., Sil., Stann., Sulph., Thuj., Verat., Vib., Xan., Zinc.

Next, she said she had vomiting along with this menstrual headache. Using key words ‘headache’, and ‘vomit’, I located and added this rubric:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting: – Ars., Asar., Bar-m., Con., Eug., Ferr-p., Glon., Iris., Lach., Lyc., Mez., Nux-v., Phyt., Sec., Sep., Verat.

Then I asked her, are there any factors that gave any relief to this headache. She told, she would get some relief if she lie in a dark room and get some sleep. I used
key words ‘headache’ ‘sleep’ and ‘amel’, and got this rubric, and added it:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : Amel.: – Acon., Bad., Glon., Hell., Ign., Pall., Sep., Sil.

Then I used ‘head ache’ and ‘dark’ as key words, and located this rubric, added it to the RUBRIC BASKET:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Lying : In a dark room : Amel.:- Acon., Bell., Brom., Bry., Lac-d., Podo., Sang., Sep., Sil.

At this stage, I used QUICK PICK tool in my software to see which are the drugs that cover these FOUR particular symptoms. Only SEPIA was there!

Case taking, repertorization and prescribing were over by FIVE MINUTES!

Her facial expressions, body structure, way of talking, everything reminded me she is SEPIA. I decided to try SEPIA without further workout. SEPIA 30 was given TDS
during headache, followed by BDS until next menstrual period. Headache never recurred. This case taught me how simple it is to make a homeopathic prescription and get a nice cure.


Most simple and perfect method of case taking is ‘Simultaneous Case taking and Repertorization’ (SCR METHOD) proposed by SImilimum Ultra Software. It saves much time, and produces best results. By the time case taking is over, your prescription will be ready. You can work out even a very complex case within a few minutes by this method.


Homeopathic CASE FOLLOW UP consists of watching for RESIDUAL SYMPTOMS and EMERGING SYMPTOMS, and re-adjusting prescriptions as indicated by them.

After making a homeopathic prescription, whether it be ‘single’ or ‘multiple’, and ensuring that the doses are repeated in optimum frequencies, the physician should see the patient at reasonable intervals and carefully watch how the case is progressing.

Periodically watch for ‘residual’ symptoms that do not subside, as well as newly ’emerging’ symptoms.

If a particular ‘group of symptoms’ remain in spite of frequent repetitions of doses for a reasonable period, that means our prescription failed to provide the particular ‘molecular imprints’ required to remove the molecular inhibitions underlying that particular ‘group of symptoms’. Repertorise using those ‘residual’ symptoms, find a similimum for them, and add it to the original prescription.

If new symptoms ’emerge’, and they are not subsiding within a reasonable period, that means some ‘hidden’ molecular inhibitions not covered by the original prescription has come to the forefront during the removal of some other molecular errors. Find a new similimum for these newly emerged symptoms and add it to the original prescription.

We will have to continue this constant watch for ‘residual’ symptoms and ’emerging’ symptoms and adjust prescriptions all through the whole course of treatment, in order to ensure a TOTAL CURE.


Why our homeopathic ‘theoreticians’ do not realize how irrational and ridiculous it is to claim that homeopathic medicines contain a ‘spirit-like force’, independent of any material existence and properties?

An ‘immaterial dynamic force’ that could be ‘carried’ in glass vials, transferred from bottles to bottles, dissolved in water and alcohol, adsorbed on to sugar pills, and acting ‘dynamically’ upon the ‘vital force’ when applied on tongue? If it is ‘immaterial’ and ‘spirit-like’, how it is preserved in glass vials, without escaping through the ‘material’ glass walls of the bottles?

Do you think we can engage a science-conscious elite community of 21st century by talking these nonsense theories and pretending to be ‘ultra-scientific’?

Do you think you can convince these foolish ‘theories’ to anybody who knows at least some high school level science lessons?


Not a single day passes for me without posting at least one article explaining my concept of ‘Molecular Imprints Therapeutics (MIT)’ and exploring its implications upon homeopathy.

Without even reading what I have laboriously written about homeopathy, or trying to understand anything about the ideas I am talking about, some friends jump in and challenge me to “prove” MIT, and attack me as if I had done something very bad to homeopathy!

While asking me to prove MIT, at least you have to ensure that you have understood what is MIT, so that you can know what are the exact points to be ‘proved’ in it.

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and bio-molecular mechanism of disease and cure?

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?

My request to those who ask for ‘proof for MIT concepts’ is, kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you.

Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.


In ‘Chronic Diseases : Para 139′ Hahnemann says:

“Sucklings never receive medicine; the mother or wet-nurse receives the remedy instead, and through their milk it acts on the child very quickly, mildly and beneficially”.

There are many homeopaths who use this method for treating infants, and they say it works.

If similimum selected for a patient (infant) could be administerd to another healthy individual (nurse), and if the drug will act on the patient through the breast milk fed by the nurse, it raises many questions regarding basic assumptins of homeopathy.

I wonder will it act if we collect the breast milk of the nurse after administering the drug, and then bottle feeding it to the infant. Will it produce a therapeutic effect?

If potentized drugs could be delivered through breast milk of a nurse, that means the ‘active principles’ of potentized drugs consist of SOMETHING ‘material’, that could travel to the milk through blood circulation of the nurse. It disproves our belief that potentized drugs act through ‘nerves’, as there are no nerve cells present in blood or breast milk.

What if we collect the blood of the nurse after medication and transfuse it into the infant? It should work, as the active principles of medicines will be present in blood, if it has to be transferred to the breast milk.

In fact, hahnemann’s advice to administer similimum to the infant through breast milk of nurse seems to undermine some of our beliefs which are considered to be BASIC principles of homeopathy.


Kindly think over the points I raised, and comment on it…


Kindly read carefully what hahnemann said in Organon : Aphorism 204(Sixth Edition):

“If we deduct all chronic affections, ailments and diseases that depend on a persistent unhealthy mode of living, as also those innumerable medicinal maladies caused by …the irrational,… persistent, harassing and pernicious treatment of diseases often only of trivial character by physicians of the old school, most the remainder of chronic diseases result from the development of these three chronic miasms, internal syphilis, internal sycosis, but chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”.

What does this statement of hahnemann show?

This statement shows beyond any doubt that hahneman did not consider ALL chronic diseases as ‘miasmatic’, as our respected ‘interpreters’ of the master have been teaching us all through these years.

According to the above statement, master says that ‘all chronic affections, ailments and diseases’ ‘that depend on persistent unhealthy mode of living’ are NOT MIASMATIC!

He also says that “those innumerable medicinal maladies caused by …the irrational,… persistent, harassing and pernicious treatment of diseases often only of trivial character by physicians of the old school” are NOT MIASMATIC!

He asks to “deduct” all the diseases belonging to above categories, and says that “most the remainder of chronic diseases result from the development of these three chronic miasms, internal syphilis, internal sycosis, but chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”. Only “most of the remainder” of diseases- please note.

Even among these “remainder of diseases”, “chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”. PSORA underlies “infinitely greater proportion” of even this “remainder” of chronic diseases- means, syphilis and sycosis plays a role in “infinitely smaller proportion” of the miasmatic diseases.

As per this definition of master, most of the ‘chronic affections’ originating from occupational, environmental, nutritional, drug-induced, faulty life styles and such others that belong to the class of ‘persistent unhealthy mode of living’ and ‘innumerable medicinal maladies” are outside the purview of MIASMATIC ANALYSIS.

Our respected ‘experts’ of ‘miasmatic analysis’ who confuse our homeopaths by theorizing that all ‘constitutions’ and CHRONIC DISEASES are MIASMATIC, and even all acute diseases are ‘acute exacerbation’ of chronic miasms, may kindly note this aphorism.

Miasm of PSORA will be present only in persons who had a history o INFECTION OF ITCH in his life. Miasm of SYPHILIS will be present only in persons who had a history of INFECTION OF SYPHILIS in his life. Miasm of SYCOSIS will be present only in persons who had a history of INFECTION OF GONORROEA or HPV in his life. According to hahnemann, there is no miasm unrelated with an infectious disease.


Homeopathy has been consistently attacked for last 250 years since its inception, but in spite of all these malicious attacks, homeopathy is thriving in India as a major recognized branch of public health care system.

Hope you would know India is home to around 285,000 registered homeopaths, 186 prestigious homeopathic colleges imparting UG and PG courses, over 6000 government homeopathic dispensaries and about 250 government hospitals. More than 15000 student come out of these colleges every year with BHMS degree, after completing a rigorous five and half year course of study and internship, for which they got admission by scoring top rankings in entrance examinations after 12 years of schooling in science streams. Curriculum of BHMS course constitutes Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Practice of Medicine and all subjects of modern health care knowledge. There is a Central Council of Homeopathy under Government of India, constituted as per a n Central Act passed by Indian parliament, overseeing everything in the field of homeopathic education, research and practice in India.

Homeopathy is a very important wing of public health care system in inIndia. Homoeopathic wings are working in many allopathic hospitals and dispensaries, both government and private. Homoeopathic doctors provide treatment to millions of patients for different day to day illnesses in the public health care system. Even during sporadic and epidemic conditions, people tend to use homoeopathic drugs for prevention. Recently, the Indian Government successfully ran a national health campaign ‘Homeopathy for a Healthy Mother & a Happy Child’, which was based exclusively on homoeopathy. Also, private homeopathic practitioners are contributing a great deal in public health care through their private or charitable clinics.

Besides clinical research, there are fundamental, drug standardization, drug proving and clinical verification research going on, both at government and private levels. For example, the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy is conducting a lot of such research, either independently or in collaboration with other research institutes or individual researchers, under an extra-mural research scheme at the Dept of AYUSH, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare of the Indian Government. Other than that, almost all homoeopathic organizations and individuals are doing their bit toward research for the further validation of homoeopathy in today’s times of evidence-based medicine. The results have been encouraging, to say the least. In fact, over the years,Indiahas learnt better ways of conducting research from their international counterparts and the recent research has been carried out as per standardized, internationally recognized methods and are therefore more acceptable.

A few exemplary results from clinical studies include work on tubercular lymphadenitis, japanese encephalitis, etc. In addition, some administrative studies have been undertaken, like the ‘assessment of the cost effectiveness of homeopathic clinic in the cafeteria approach’ and ‘public-private partnerships in the provision of homeopathic services in the city of Delhi, where it was tried to analyze both the strengths and weaknesses of medical pluralism in India and have worked out some solutions for implementing medical pluralism more effectively in all parts of India.

These facts and figures are a clear reflection of the belief of the people ofIndiain the homeopathic system of medicine, which, in turn, is a result of the effectiveness of homeopathy in treating a wide range of illnesses, which has convinced the Indian masses over a period of time.

Men of science, who are expected to be more concerned about truth, you would have considered all these facts before publicly declaring ‘homeopathy is based on belief, a fake discipline like astrology’. Community pay much value and reverence to words a scientist speak out, and as such, he is expected to keep up that responsibility when declaring “homeopathy is fake”. He should have experimented himself, and done a little more home work about homeopathy, before echoing the malicious propaganda of ‘anti-homeopathy skeptics’.

I am sure, most scientists have nothing personally against homeopathy or homeopaths as such. They are talking their perceptions as a truthful scientist. As an individual respecting science, scientists and scientific methods, I would not blame them for making such a statements. I know they are not homeopaths- but only scientists. I understand, as a truthful scientists, as things stand now, they cannot say ‘homeopathy is scientific’, after seeing all these nonsense theories propagated by ‘homeopathic ‘masters’ the world over. I understand, nobody could so far even propose a scientifically viable hypothesis about how homeopathy works, a hypothesis that could be presented as a rightful candidate for verification using scientific methods. Actually, those ‘pseudo-scientific’ homeopathic theoreticians are doing the greatest harm to homeopathy than truthful scientists do.

Homeopaths as well as millions of patients visiting them know homeopathy works. That is their personal experience. Scientists should think more than twice before saying it is ‘mere belief’ and ‘fake’. If they had visited a few homeopathic clinics in the city around them, they would realize that all people visiting homeopaths are not much less knowledgeable or more ‘superstitious’ than them. Many respected members of scientific community use homeopathic medicines, knowing well that it is not ‘proven according to scientific methods’, but very much confident from experience that it is not ‘fake’ or ‘mere belief’. They experience it WORKING. If one had ever consulted a homeopath or taken a course of homeopathic medicine yourselves, he would not have made demeaning comment against homeopathy.

But the sad thing is that nobody knows how homeopathy works. To mask this ignorance, ‘intellectuals’ among homeopaths create fanciful theories. All these theories about homeopathy are utter nonsense- pure absurdity. Until homeopaths stop talking nonsense ‘ultra-scientific’ theories about homeopathy, we cannot expect a fair deal from scientific community. At least homeopaths should show the humility to say: “we know homeopathy works- that is our daily experience; but we do not know how it actually works; we need the help of scientific community to resolve this riddle”.

By saying ‘homeopathy is based on belief’, what did you actually mean? Do you mean it is based on ‘beliefs of practitioner’, or it is working on ‘beliefs of patients’?
Do you remember, when you declare homeopathy is a ‘fake discipline’, you are saying that the Act passed by Indian parliament is ‘fake’, Central council of homeopathy is ‘fake’ and those 186 homeopathic colleges in India are ‘fake’? You mean 285000 registered homeopaths, 6000 government dispensaries and hospitals are doing ‘fake’ medical practice that may ‘endanger’ human lives? According to you, BHMS and MD degrees awarded by Indian universities are all about ‘fake’ disciplines? Do you mean those millions of people thronging daily in homeopathic clinics and getting relief for their ailments are idiots attracted to ‘fake practitioners’ due to ‘belief’ only?


If you are a BHMS holder, if you love homeopathy, if you really want to be a good homeopath, if you have no hesitation in accepting advice and guidance from me, if your ego is not concerned about my ‘credentials’ and ‘qualifications’, CONTACT ME. I will teach you how to become a successful homeopath within a very short time. I will help you to master the practical skills and produce results. I will help you in repertorizing your difficult cases and deciding prescriptions, if you want. I am ready to share my 44+years experience with you. We can do it through Facebook, WhatsApp, Phone Calls and various other means. Not for money, be sure. Already there are a lot of young homeopaths utilizing this service from me.


If you have a BHMS degree, you can earn a decent living with homeopathy any where in this country. Be confident in yourself and in homeopathy. Set up a clinic at your home or a rented place nearby. Get a laptop, installed with a good homeopathic software. Learn how to use the software effectively. Learn how to take case effectively.

When the first patient comes, collect his symptoms caerefully, repertorize and prescribe similimum. Use only 30C potency. Do not hesitate to repeat frequently until the cure is complete. Patient will be cured. New patients will follow, even if slowly.

Do not worry about ‘suppression’, ‘medicinal aggravation’, drug relationship, potency selection, ‘single-multiple drug issue’ or such imaginary fears. Success will be yours.

Be careful not to spoil any case. If you find a case difficult for you, either refer it to a senior homeopath or advise the patient to consult a modern physician. Be conscious about your limitations and limitations of homeopathy.

Even if you could attract average TEN acute cases and TWO chronic cases a day, you can make around 25000-30000 per month. You will not have to work as an underpaid RMO or CCU assistant in an allopathy hospital. You will not have to fight for permission to practice allopathy any more.


Even if you got ‘bad quality’ education from your colleges, turning to allopathy is not the solution for that problem. At least, you have got a ‘bhms’ degree from your colleges. It is by itself a very valuable asset in your life. Standing firmly on that foundation, why cant you start learning homeopathy seriously at least NOW? You can learn homeopathy yourselves and become successful homeopaths in a very short period, if you decide to do so. Homeopathy is very simple to learn and practice, if you understand the MIT approach.


I have nothing personally against those homeopaths who practice allopathy or want to practice allopathy. I can understand the ground realities well. I have great sympathies for those young men whose lives have been spoiled by those who ‘rule’ our educational system. But I am worried more about the future of homeopathy. I cannot agree with anything that is ultimately going to ruin homeopathy. I love homeopathy more than any thing else. Sorry, my friends.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: