Trial of the Millenia

On October 18, 2010 at 2:47 am ben goldacre said:
Hi John,
I would never describe my dayjob as boring, it’s the most interesting and exciting part of my life. It’s boring dealing with people like you who casually misrepresent facts, but out of interest I checked, and in the email I wrote to Josephson declining his invitation to your talk, I explained I couldn’t come to Cambridge on account of my “humble” dayjob.
I’d be grateful if you could clarify this in the zillion places that you’ve posted over excitedly about the outrage of my not coming to see you speak about clathrates. I’m relieved to say that I doubt anyone would take anything you say seriously for obvious reasons, but it’s still not correct of you to say that I described my dayjob – about which I’m extremely passionate and committed – as “boring”.
I’ve just taken some unpaid leave to finish a book about bad behaviour in the pharmaceutical industry, and have flown to Canada and the US to do a couple of talks as Bad Science has just come out there, and to interview some people about dodgy behaviour in big pharma. It’s not clear to me why you regard this as an unacceptable activity for me to engage in.
Obviously there are a lot of pressures on everyone’s time, but I’m afraid that like a lot of people I don’t find your ideas very interesting. To be honest, like most people, I also don’t think I’d spend 4 hours travelling to Cambridge and back to see a man who makes videos as unpleasantly homophobic as yours:
For interest – and god knows this I barely interesting – pasted below is my email to Brian Josephson in response to his invitation, which I think makes it fairly clear why I didn’t come. Perhaps in future people should be forewarned that an invitation to a lecture from Brian Josephson will result in indignant fury at your non-attendance, and tedious unpleasantness from his speakers alleging that you think your dayjob is “boring”. If you are looking for explanations as to why people don’t take you seriously, you might look carefully at your behaviour in episodes like this.
> thanks
>
> it’s never particularly interested me, i’m nore interested in EBM and its
> application to homeopathy shows that their pills work no better than
> placebo.
>
> i’ll pass it on to ppl who are interested tho, cheers.
>
> cant make cambridge, humble dayjob!

MY RESPONSE TO GOLDACRE’s WHINING DIATRIBE
Boring yes, humble, no. A lack of humility is Ben Dover Goldacre’s problem here. It’s what prevents him from seeing the naked truth. The point is, he was invited by one of the greatest minds of the 21st century to discuss the undeniable facts regarding biological effects of supramolecular substances and their relevance to one of the most controversial and greatest healing modalities of all time. But he begged off, with contradictory reasons, one being that he doesn’t like my videos. Well, Josepshon found them just as disgusting and homophobic. I pointed out to him, though, myself being a suspected homosexual, that there is nothing prima facie derogatory against homosexuality in any of them. Specifically, the one welcoming Randi out of the closet and into the openly gay community is complimentary of his sudden found insight and honesty with himself, and has been hailed as a masterpiece of satire.

Homosexuality fits him well, as it does Ben Dover Goldacre.
Goldacre’s whining statement fit’s the Upper House review of his testimony before Parliament ass well.
“The written submission by Dr. Goldacre [Ev. 8] was notably short on supporting evidence, but contained unqualified statements on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, forcefully expressed (more and link below-ed.)

It should be pointed out, Ben has commented on the impossibility of detecting liquid aqueous structuring (LAS), being that he believes it to be impossible. When he does try to objectively address the science of homeopathy, like he did before Parliament, he starts rewriting the evidence to fit what he wants it to say, and makes some general denunciations. He does this most notably re: Rao (Roy) as being nothing more than what he claims is a misreading of the ethanol; but what is slippering past Dover is that LAS, as found in clathrates, is prosaic, even more so than his getting up each day to go to his “boring day job,” as has been stated in “a zillion places.”

RAO: The defining role of structure (including epitaxy) in the plausibility of homeopathy
http://www.mri.psu.edu/faculty/rroy/media/Publications/DefiningStructure.pdf

Goldacre commentary on Rao:
http://avilian.co.uk/2010/08/what%E2%80%99s-behind-ben-goldacre/

What Goldacre also misses is yet another FTIR study (Sukul) that addresses the ethanol issue, and tunes for it.

SUKUL: Variation in Fourier Transform Infrared Spectra of Some Homeopathic Potencies and Their Diluent Media
http://www.homeopathy.org/research/basic/acm-2005-11_11.pdf

Goldacre also handily ignores nine other indices for physical distinctions in the homeopathic remedy. But no matter. He’ll just wave them away anyway, just like he did with the biggest revelation of his life, his own opportunity to come out for homeopathy, so let’s work our way up to a real challenge, and see if he can handle that.

Allow me to preface by saying that the dog the Journalist Doctor thought was following him all these years, the hydrogen bond, has left him to follow a new master. Of course Ben will try to slip out of it and rewrite history like he did regarding his boring day job, noted in a zillion places. He and these other shills for Avandia and the criminal organizations that make it for 83,000 heart attacks, have just been pinned down by a lowbrow amateur, a clown who makes deeply offensive videos, Goldacre’s excuse, forcefully expressed, for not talking about the science, which he can’t address, because science isn’t his destination; defamation is. Defamation is all Ben Goldacre can respond to because that’s all Ben Goldacre knows. As Bewdley describes him, he’s a “journalist doctor,” a doctor of words, not science. Otherwise he’d pick out the salient point and go in for the killshot.
Tsk tsk.

He should of come to the lecture. It was his big chance to tear apart my stupid (if that’s what it is) theory with a proper dialectic. Isn’t that what he’d have us believe he and his science compadres want us to think they’re all about? Ah yes, an objective, logical approach, instead of all of this wankering. Just ad rems, ferreted out like diamonds among the slag of ad hominem . . and concentrate on those alone, like a jeweler, loupe in eye: We see him bend over the precious stone.
Well, as the Master once said, Ben Dover, reach out to the publicans, its a boring day job to preach to the choir, such as the bobbleheads at McGill University, Toronto, where Goldacre, Shermer and Randi have been waggling their tongues. It brings the world nothing. Convert the unwashed, teach me. No? Then come to me to learn, I am your new master. I will lead the discussion.
BTW,  just what IS the job placement rate for grads coming out of McGill? Can’t be too good if they’re listening to the misinformed like Goldacre and yawn and sawn-in half illusionists like Linking Rings Randi. Who wants to hire a dupe? Wait, maybe there are a lot of jobs for the grads at McGill . .
But look. If their argument against homeopathy is not due to ignorance, or deception, then they should prove me wrong ad rem about LAS. They say it can’t exist, but now all of a sudden, alakazam, it does! Note that Ben had his chance to address this subject, as did Colquhoun, as did Ian Brooks, as have all of them, yet none of them did, none dare come near it, for it is the hot burning truth, when poured overr them in their hiding places, is what will bring them boiling out of their stinkholes.

And Ben thinks animals are affected by the placebo.
Well, there’s an easy way to prove it. Before he passed away last month, Professor Rustum Roy of Penn Stae, the lead author for “Structure of Liquid Water, Novel Insights from the Material Sciences and Relevance to Homeopathy,” suggested to me in an email, that I use their methods (Rao) to take Randi apart.
Fair enough. I am the major contender, Randi has been dodging my application for 10 years now with a variety of excuses. After accepting my application, the way he and I left the protocol 10 years ago, was that in order to win Richaard Adam’s money/Randi’s/JREF’s prize, the Million Dollar Challenge, was to identify homeopathic remedies from their liquid aqueous/ethanol vehicles.
Randi’s Team Skeptic has identified the fundamental issue in this debate as being that the only way for water to retain a memory is through LAS, but that LAS is impossible because of the intransigence of the hydrogen bond, that such bonds last only a few femto, nano or pico seconds, depending on which pseudoscientist you’re following today. What cuckholds these pseudo scientists, though, is direct observation of the bond in surface tension and bubbles, you can see the srength of the hydrogen bond with your own eyes, and clathrates have been noted by spectroscopy. Google it. See the many refernces and images of these curiosities noted by observers for 200 years now.
So the question is an easy one: Set up a series of double blind tests at various universities, using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, to determine whether or not they can determine the identity between the inert vehicle and verum.
I propose that Richard Adams, the treasurer of the James Randi Educational Foundation, assure the prize with a legal contract bearing his signature.
So what will it be? Will Ben Goldacre continue to skip classes at the Cavendish, or will he join with me, hand in hand, in this simple determination, skipping merrily down the halls of science?  This is not about someone’s boring day job. This is about the future of human health. It is the Trial of the Millenia, the usher of supramolecular medicine into the corpus mundi of science.

If homeopathic substances are real, then we should be able to identify them in objective analysis.in multi centered trials.
I suggest, that in the interests of science and medicine, Adams put up the expenses for such an endeavor. THat is, unless they’d becontent to accept the science. After all, what could be more convincing than the existing reports? Certainly not a trial in which poor Randi stands to lose his million dollars.
But if they won’t accept science as science, I suggest that the following institutions and people participate in a replication of detecting homeopathic verum.

Cavendish Laboratories, Cambridge (Josephson)
Queens College, Belfast (Ennis)
Pennsylvania State University, USA (Hoover)
University of Arizona, Tucson (Bell)
Stanford University, Palo Alto, California (Tiller)
University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy (Betti)
Chieti-Pescara University, Italy (Borghini)
Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin (Witt).
University of Berne, Switzerland (Baumgartner)
1Laboratório de Controle de Qualidade, Departamento de Medicamentos, Faculdade de Farmácia, UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (Garcia)
Nuclear Medicine Department, General Hospital, Haguenau, France (Demangeat)
Institut André Lwoff , Villejuif Cedex, France (Thomas)
Vironix LLC, New York, USA (Montagnier)

Now, one last observation. If this seems too ad hominem, allow me to remind you that ad hominem is all there is and has been against homeoapthy, and mine is nothing more than  is the action of a poor homeopath working his craft and applying a bit of similia to his deeply offending patients.
After the evidence of action on biochemical subjects, plants and animals has been taken into account, along with the extensive case notes of MDs and clinical trials, and now theory for supramolecular action, the only response left to the detractor is to continue to malign those who are concutingthe realscience, inevitably the competence of those making the reports of homeopathic action.
That’s what this argument has been all along. The allopathic medical profession wants the world to believe that the medicine of opposition is all that is available to it, that its vaccines and toxic chemicals that serve as pharmaceuticals are all you got.
Well let me tell you something, and a profound thing it is, that there is a second, very effective form of internal medcine that has been used successfully, clinically and in epidemics, for two centuries. It is the medcine of similia. Its effects are profound. It is called homeopathy, and there will come a time, if it has not already arrived, when you will need it.
Your friend, your best friend, your only friend,
John BENNETH, PG Hom (Hon)

Further reading Google:
2008 July 26 Journal of Molecular Liquids NMR water proton relaxation in unheated and heated ultrahigh aqueous dilutions of histamine: Evidence for an air-dependent supramolecular organization of water
Jean-Louis Demangeat !
Nuclear Medicine Department, General Hospital, Haguenau, France
http://www.homeopathyeurope.org/downloads/Demangeat_JML_2009.pdf

Effects of pulsed low frequency electromagnetic fields on water using photoluminescence spectroscopy: role of bubble/water interface
Philippe Valléea) and Jacques Lafait Laboratoire d’Optique des Solides (UMR CNRS 7601) Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France; Pascale Mentré, Paris, France Marie-Odile Monod Aubière Cedex, France; Yolène Thomas Institut André Lwoff , Villejuif Cedex, France
Ebook http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0502/0502076.pdf

Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures
Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences
Luc MONTAGNIER1,2*, Jamal A¨ISSA1, St´ephane FERRIS1,
Jean-Luc MONTAGNIER1, Claude LAVALL´EE1
1(Nanectis Biotechnologies, S.A. 98 rue Albert Calmette, F78350 Jouy en Josas, France)
2(Vironix LLC, L. Montagnier 40 Central Park South, New York, NY 10019, USA)

https://commerce.metapress.com/content/0557v31188m3766x/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=byqfa245i3bq5t554jwzsd45&sh=www.springerlink.com

GOLDACRE SLAPPED DOWN BY UPPER HOUSE
Observations on the report Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, February 2010
“5.1. The Committee in two sessions called twelve witnesses to give oral evidence, all but one with relevant affiliations. Selection of witnesses can affect outcomes in the same way as selection of written evidence. It is therefore legitimate to examine the choices made.
5.2. It is not easy to see why a journalist doctor was invited to appear in preference to some other non-representative contributors to the inquiry. The written submission by Dr. Goldacre [Ev. 8] was notably short on supporting evidence, but contained unqualified statements on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, forcefully expressed (“extreme quackery” was mentioned). By contrast, the submission by the Complementary Medicine Research Group from the Department of Health Sciences at the University of York presented a well argued summary with 68 references [Ev. 143]. In this appears the statement “To date there are eight systematic reviews that provide evidence that the effects of homeopathy are beyond placebo when used as a treatment for [five childhood conditions]”. This claim from a mainstream academic centre, rated joint first nationally for health services research in the latest Research Assessment Exercise, stands in stark contradiction to Prof. Ernst’s referenced claims, noted above, and to Dr. Goldacre’s unreferenced statements. It would have been illuminating if the Committee had probed the Group about this, face to face as a witness, and attempted some resolution before agreeing in unequivocal terms with the two witnesses who were invited to appear and were quoted favourably. The Committee criticised the supporters of homeopathy for their “selective approaches” to  evidence [73]. They could fairly be accused of the same.
Unfortunately they did not (presumably) have the scope to solicit the views of  Dr. Linde from Germany, which would have differed from those of Prof. Ernst with regard to the evidence.”
http://www.homeopathyheals.me.uk/site/component/content/article/42-featured-/398-earl-baldwin-critique-house-of-commons-science-and-technology-committee-february-2010

Advertisements

15 comments on “Trial of the Millenia

  1. ISayISaw says:

    Um, Mr Benneth, I only just found this blog, linked to it from one of the more recent one, but you have made a rather bizarre error.

    You claim “GOLDACRE SLAPPED DOWN BY UPPER HOUSE”. But what you then have tediously copied and pasted is not a document published by Parliament, but by the British Homeopathic Association whingeing about the process.

    Your erroneous attribution is typical of homeopaths’ tendency to blurt out what seems convenient and helpful to them rather than what is true.

    Homeopathy: never letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

    Like

  2. Dear Blanche,

    Well said, very simple solution. But, it depends when some one will get hurt and take Arnica 200c. There are other remedies to prove like Cantharis for burns or Apis Mel for bee sting.

    Homeopathy is capable of treating any sickness, where one complete symptom or totality of such symptoms are noted very carefully and taken in to consideration as the basis of selection of a homeopathic remedy. The remedy must be of slightly higher potency, compared to the disease’s intensity. The administration of this prescribed remedy will arouse primary action in the matter of a few minutes or hours, depending on the chronicity of the ailment, which follows the complete recovery or cure in secondary action, which is caused by the vital force or the life force in response of the primary action resulting to cure.

    Chronic diseases take longer time depending on the nature of illness, such as arthritis and ulcerative colitis etc, but acute conditions such as migraine and gastric upsets etc. respond to homeopathic treatment in the matter of hours, and even with no side effects.
    There are certain important rules to obtain this natural cure, which are, selection of right homeopathic remedy, high quality of preparation and potency, administration of dose, and lastly precautions and restriction in diet during treatment. I guarantee that one, who follow these instructions, will achieve the success without fail. I am surprise and sad to these so called great scientists arguing only on the first step or basic knowledge of homeopathic remedy and placebo.

    Why don;t they put me on trial, which I offer at any place, any time without any obligation. I do not boast my abilities of homeopathic knowledge, but I am proud of my 5 years full time homeopathic training (Bachelor of Medicine & surgery 1967-1972)and 38 years of practice experience and capable of confirming the truth about this natural healing science. Many ignorant people including these scientists do not know, that hundreds of qualified allopaths MD (doctor of medicine)were converted to homeopathy, after they found the truth about homeopathy, even Dr Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy was himself MD. All these found and followed the truth. British Royal family, including Her Majesty the Queen believes in Homeopathy, which is an evident example of homeopathic efficacy, or do you think, that our head of the state is just propagating a false system of treatment. Wake up now, brothers. I am not against any system or Modern Medicine, but at the same time I will not expect and tolerate, that anyone is talking rubbish against our scientific, effective and proven system of treatment. I think that these scientist has some underground support from those, who fears the superiority of homeopathy.

    Sooner or later, truth will be revealed to the non-believers.

    With best wishes.

    Your’s homeopathic friend

    Like

  3. Blanche says:

    I get very bored with all this. Why don’t the skeptics just try Arnica 200c next time they have an injury and then they will believe in homeopathy for sure. Let’s keep things simple instead of long debates,the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

    Like

  4. warhelmet says:

    If ancient languages such as Hebrew and Sanskrit, once spoken, can create a vibrational frequency that can move matter into sacred geometrical patterns then Homeopathy frequencies can move the World soul anima mundi into a state of greater self healing. Whatever the mind of man can conceive it can achieve, thy shall be done!

    And Star Trek is real.

    Like

  5. Julian Savage says:

    Mr Benneth,

    It depresses me that anyone has to waste the precious resource of time in order to provide a response to the utter garbage you write.

    Having read the transcript of your Cambridge talk and tried to derive any sort of coherence from the ridiculous barrage of nonsense presented within your slides, I cannot derive any conclusion other than that you are a hopelessly deluded crank. Other inferences are available, however these are even less flattering.

    Please spare us from any more of your “wisdom”.

    Like

  6. Bryan Tookey says:

    Dear Mr Benneth,

    I found this blog as I researched homeopathy. I found it odd that you would post a pro-homeopathy article in such a way that Ben Goldacre’s anti-homeopathy arguments come out more strongly. I believe this because Ben Goldacre’s letter was better structured (and not necessarily because of the content of either his letter or your response – I will leave others to judge that).

    By contrast, I found your comments rather unclear. I found it difficult to follow your train of thought mainly because of poor structure. Including:
    – no summary of your thinking at the start (nor at the end)
    – a very long post, probably twice as long as you had content for
    – Paragraphs that don’t seem to have a unifying theme and that don’t follow an obvious sequence
    – Lengthy sentences that aren’t always clear
    There are plenty of good books on the subject of structuring arguments, but my favourite is Barbara Minto’s the pyramid structure. Sorry to sound all schoolmaster-y about this, but if you want to win over neutrals you need to make your arguments cleaner and crisper.

    Like

  7. Dear Goldacre,

    Good to see your response, at least it aroused some interest in this matter. Why don’t you reprogramme your thinking faculty and test the truth, which will definitely be a good experience.

    We, the true scientific homeopaths do not hate anyone, but feel sad to see sceptics like you as unsocial, because they are obstructing sick community seeking the help of most natural and scientific system of treatment, thus playing a villainous role in stopping and regaining the health. Whereas, I expect good wise people must know their duty to help and support the truth. Truth need no test, if denied shall remain the truth. The one who denies the truth, fools himself.

    I see these pseudo-scientist as social criminal.I pray almighty God to bless them with extra wisdom, so that they do something good and support the suffering humanity, otherwise all their knowledge and energy will be wasted. It will be no good crying and repenting in the end.

    So, dear big brother, be wise now. I am not begging, but suggesting you as we have the mission to accomplish “Treat the sick and not the sickness”.

    With love & regards from your homeopathic friend.

    I await and welcome your wise response.

    Like

  8. ben goldacre says:

    i think the bizarre tirade above demonstrates very effectively what poor judgement Josephson exhibited in this episode.

    Like

  9. Only ignorant and stubborn and so called pseudo-scientists will refute the truth and evidence of homeopathy.

    Mr John Benneth is one of the dedicated and pioneer scientist confirming the difference between true homeopathic dynamic energy and placebo and to my knowledge,and these idiots dare not learn the truth. Maybe, they are not wise and strong enough to understand and accept the truth about the most natural science.

    I invite all wise scientists to give a try of homeopathy with open mind and prove me wrong. With my 38 years of homeopathic practice and treating more than many thousands cases successfully, I have a strong conviction and courage to welcome any scientist or sceptical mind to prove me wrong. I am sure that once tested homeopathy, soon one will be a true follower. I think, they need a good homeopathic remedy to break their obstinacy and opening the third eye, which make them believe the truth.

    I strongly advise my stupid friends to either learn the truth and be wise or shut up, as nothing can make be achieved denying the facts about divine and scientific based homeopathy.

    What are you waiting for? My doors are open to all at all times.

    Like

  10. skepticat says:

    You seem to be obsessed with Ben Goldacre.

    You can’t have him. Get over it.

    Like

    • Kaviraj says:

      That is all you have, skepticat?

      What a lame response! Nothing to refute the evidence and only more of the denial. Homoeophobes I call you.

      Just as a reply to Ben Goldacre, who loves his EBM so much. Benny-boy, in the latest JAMA issue is a nice article for you. It goes through the “evidence” of 1000 trials for your pharmaceutical crap. 67 of them were “high quality” and the rest was abysmal.

      And to all of you “skeptics” – if only you were – you have forgotten your basic science class from your high school days. You must have been too busy socialising, cheer-leading or trying to be the best at sport, because those science classes taught you that matter is indestructible. Newton already proved that. Matter cannot be destroyed, it can at best turn into something else.

      So the notion there is “nothing” in a homoeopathic medicine is nullified by this fact alone. Yet you pseudo-scientists want the public and the scientific community to believe you are right with your baseless assumption.

      Another fact you overlook, but which obviously must be beyond your comprehension is Einstein’s E=mc2. Matter can easily turn to energy and thus a homoeopathic dilution MUST have something in it, as evidenced by Rao, Demangeat, Montagnier and other eminent Nobel Prize winning REAL scientists.

      You “skeptical” amateurs have no arguments at all, except denial. None so blind as those that refuse to see. Your ignorance of science is such that if anyone mentioned copper nitrate you think he was talking about policemen’s overtime.

      You seem to forget that science is inclusive, but you want to turn it into an exclusive club, with membership reserved for ignoramuses such as yourselves. You do not practise any science, since all you do is enumerate, classify and quantify, which is the occupation of bookkeepers and 13th Century monks. Your typification of homoeopathy as witchcraft is testimony to your 13th Century thinking. You can only believe in that which you can see with the eye and hold between the fingers.

      Nincompoops is about the most flattering epithet one can come up with for you bunch of narrow-minded ignoramuses.

      Like

      • Dale Williams says:

        “You must have been too busy socialising, cheer-leading or trying to be the best at sport, because those science classes taught you that matter is indestructible. Newton already proved that. Matter cannot be destroyed, it can at best turn into something else.

        So the notion there is “nothing” in a homoeopathic medicine is nullified by this fact alone. Yet you pseudo-scientists want the public and the scientific community to believe you are right with your baseless assumption.”

        I think you are confusing “destruction” with “dilution”. Nothing is destroyed in homeopathy just diluted OUT of the solution. But then again your rambling hate filled diatribe above suggests you are confused about many things.

        “Another fact you overlook, but which obviously must be beyond your comprehension is Einstein’s E=mc2. Matter can easily turn to energy and thus a homoeopathic dilution MUST have something in it, as evidenced by Rao, Demangeat, Montagnier and other eminent Nobel Prize winning REAL scientists.”

        Homeopaths are not turning matter into energy, they are diluting out substances. The sugar pill sold as a homeopathic remedy does have energy, as does all matter. So what? When homeopathic remedies are said to have nothing in them that means ‘no active substance’. That has nothing to do with ‘energy’.

        If these are the types of argument you put forth for homeopathy then it is no wonder Dr Goldacre refused to come and speak for you. You asked him if he could come and speak at Cambridge, he refused. Get over it.

        Like

What do you think? Question? Answer? Please comment. Your thoughful reply will be appreciated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s