UPDATED June 18th, 2019

All vaccines are homeopathic. The small pox vaccine was the greatest medical achievement of all time. In the midst of modern commercialized medicine’s atrocities, it is highly significant, if not profound, to find a beacon, that Jenner’s discovery was Hahnemann’s proof, and that the greatest medical achievement of all time is homeopathy.

All curative medicine and effective disease prophylaxis is homeopathic. Homeopathy employs the magnetic principle of like repels like and the chemical principle of solvents, like dissolves like.

All vaccinations are homeopathic, and by that it is meant they are prima facie homeopathic, anyone can see it, on its face value, as well as scientifically. The misperception of what homeopathy is has prohibited the further use of it as effective medicine. Homeopathy is effective in more than just its crude use in vaccines and anti-venoms.

This is not just another piece of information, this is a profound revelation, perhaps the most profound of our age, because it foretells the end of disease. The small pox vaccine is regarded as the greatest medical achievement of our age, and so to say that it is homeopathic is a stunning piece of news.


To understand that all vaccinations are homeopathic is of critical importance to world health. In Australia, opponents of homeopathy are attempting to restrict the public’s access to it and their right to know. This is a threat to freedom of choice, the right to choose what kind of medical treatment a person will have, and freedom of information . . access to medical studies.

Opponents will say that homeopathy is not evidence based medicine, but this is a lie. The evidence for homeopathy was developed by clinicians observing the reactions of countless patients and “provers” to the materials used in homeopathic medicine. There are numerous tests and assays that show the physical structure, chemical properties and biochemical action of homeopathic pharmaceuticals.

Homeopathy is the most evidence based medicine on the planet.

How can anyone make an educated choice if information is being withheld from them? In this case, it’s about the use of homeopathy in disease prophylaxis, for the prevention and treatment of things like whooping cough.

The irony of it is, is that the same people who are telling the public to avoid homeopathy and to get vaccinated are in essence doing nothing more than promoting a crude form of the very thing they’re opposing. Technically, they’re practicing homeopathy. The people who are opposing it are practicing it.

Look at how vaccines are made for proof.

Here is Wikipedia’s definition of vaccine: “A vaccine typically contains an agent that resembles a disease-causing microorganism, and is often made from weakened or killed forms of the microbe, its toxins or one of its surface proteins.”

You could say exactly the same thing about homeopathy, and no one, not the people who promote homeopathy nor the people who oppose it could reasonably say you’re wrong. You can simply switch the word “homeopathic remedy” for “vaccine” in the Wikipedia definition and technically you’d still be right in both definitions, because the word homeopathy refers to its first principle, the use of similars to treat, prevent and cure disease.


Read the Wikipedia article on homeopathy again and switch the words “homeopathic remedy” for “vaccine” and see how it reads: “A homeopathic remedy typically contains an agent that resembles a disease-causing microorganism, and is often made from weakened or killed forms of the microbe, its toxins or one of its surface proteins.”

There you have it, homeopathic remedies contain an agent that RESEMBLES a disease causing microorganism. That’s the principle of similitude, the study of which is the science of homeopathy.

But it goes further to show that modern vaccines also make use of the second principle of homeopathy, which is attenuation. It says, “it is often made from WEAKENED or KILLED forms of the microbe, its toxins or one of its surface proteins.”

A vaccine is doing exactly the same thing a homeopathic remedy does, eliciting a response from the immune system. That’s what cures you. Not the chemical, but the reaction to one dose of it, which is the third principle of homeopathy, the minimum dose, the highly restrained posology.


The problem here with vaccination is that people are using homeopathic procedures and treatment without any understanding of what they are! In 2012 they still haven’t learned the principles and intricacies of similitude and they still haven’t learned how to properly cut the dose, and they still haven‘t learned to apply what they already know is effective in epidemiology to clinical use in idiopathic diseases.

What’s happening in Australia is happening in other parts of the Anglo-American world where they’re trying to prevent whooping cough and other diseases by crude vaccination. They’re attacking a better understanding of the very thing they’re using.

But in other parts of the world, such as in India, Cuba and Brazil, where the public isn’t being duped by advertising for patent drugs, homeopathy is booming.

If physicians are going to administer vaccines, then they will be using a dangerously crude, harmful if not deadly form of homeopathy.

How do they think immunization is conferred? They appear to think it can only be done molecularly, at the condensed phase level, when in fact it is done in the energetic phase, even over the impediment of condensed matter, with or without the seminal molecule, but exponentially more effective in the energetic plasma phase as an ionized pharmaceutical, processed in the homeopathic method of hydrolytically stripping it of its molecular cloak and anchor.

This is the true pharmacology of verum, real medicine.

To do their jobs physicians must  study it, learn it and know it. They have to practice it clinically under teachers who are experienced in its use. They must go to school and learn it. They must learn it at medical schools that teach it.

Follow the John Benneth Journal on Twitter:

 Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter



  1. […] effect … but in a less efficient and more dangerous manner. Discover why and how this is so. Read more | […]


  2. Hi, i think that i saw you visited my site
    so i came to “return the favor”.I am trying to find things
    to enhance my site!I suppose its ok to use a few of your ideas!!


  3. My spouse and I stumbled over here from a different web page and thought I should check things out.

    I like what I see so now i’m following you. Look forward to looking
    at your web page repeatedly.


  4. I’m not certain the place you are getting your info, but great topic. I must spend a while studying much more or understanding more. Thanks for magnificent information I was looking for this information for my mission.


  5. Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

    Dear John:
    “Dr. Danuta Skowronski from the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently observed as part of a comprehensive analysis that individuals who received an annual flu shot during the 2008-09 winter season had a disproportionately higher risk of developing H1N1 infection than individuals who were not vaccinated.

    Learn more:
    So; vacccinations are homeopathic?


  6. Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

    Flu vaccines revealed as the greatest quackery ever pushed in the history of medicine
    Learn more:


  7. What happened to Ilijas’ comment? Has it disappeared? I was about to read it fully and reply.

    If I remember your comment correctly, Ilijas, it was not about symptoms but a list of disease names behind which, syndromes of symptoms sit.

    Of importance for homeoprophylaxis, is the common symptoms of each of the infectious diseases listed (the symptoms all sufferers will experience) as these are the symptoms to be matched by the remedy for prophylaxis.

    Treatment of infectious diseases is a different matter. The common symptoms are of secondary importance in selecting the remedy needed for treatment. The idiosyncratic symptoms of that sufferer (those symptoms that are unique to them alone) determine the best treatment remedy.

    But I think we have had this discussion once before in another forum?


    • I had two comments on here. One was short, but the other was quite lengthy with lists of symptoms that can easily be confused with various illnesses, and gave a link at the end to my source.

      The thrust of the question that I posed was why you would base treatment around symptoms when so many different conditions can create very similar symptoms, as opposed to an actual verifiable diagnosis of a confirmed condition.

      Whilst there is a degree of variation in symptoms there generally speaking a set cluster of symptoms that will always appear with a given condition. Take the chickenpox rash, for example. You’d be hard pressed to find anyone who’s had it who didn’t get the rash. But some might have had fevers, some not so bad, some very sickly, some not so.


      • From the homeopathic perspective there are two broad symptom classifications – common and idiosyncratic, and you point to both of them in your comment.

        (For the record, there are plenty of smaller sub-classifications but they are not relevant at the moment)

        The first classification is the common symptom, as you identify with the chickenpox rash. Everyone experiences the common symptoms of a disease.

        The second classification is the idiosyncratic symptom – the symptom/s one sufferer will have but another won’t. You have particularly pointed out this type of symptom when you mention the different intensities of fever the chickpox sufferer may have – one may have a high and prolonged fever while another will have none.

        Homeopathy works best when remedies are prescribed mainly for the idiosyncratic symptoms as these symptoms show how that individual’s body is trying to overcome its disease. If we support its efforts, it is able to heal much more quickly.

        So yes, while everyone will have a rash, not all will have a headache, or be itchy, or suffer constipation, or be unable to sleep along with that rash. If the homeopath does not prescribe a remedy that matches these idiosyncratic symptoms PLUS the symptom of the rash, the remedy will not assist that person’s body to heal.

        It is a very different concept to that of conventional medicine and sounds strange when first heard. I hope I have explained it well enough to answer your question.


      • johnbenneth says:

        I’ve replaced them here at the request of Fran. Apparently she has more patience than I do. Franky, I would prefer that you stop being a crank, and stop pretending to be so stupid.


  8. Andrés Amado Z. Arce says:

    A very good friend of my, Dr. Eduardo A. Yahbes, researcher awarded by the Buenos Aires University, co author of 2 homeopathy books, founder of the Federation of Homeopathy Associations, Director of post grade in the Medical Argentinean Association, vaccines expert, kindly gives me this info: “Wrongly, the similar principle is used in a disease which is similar only in its external manifestation of the smallpox. This similarity is only superficial and does not include general statements and symptoms.
    “Moreover, in the vaccine there are many elements that have nothing to do with the causative virus. Even more a difference: vaccines are initially inoculated from person to person. This meant that also are inoculated biological elements of the carrier person (such as syphilis, for example).
    “In terms of effectiveness John need to know that always suffered more smallpox who was vaccinated. Not having been used this monstrosity had smallpox disappeared by the late nineteenth century. The following year had mass vaccination produced in Britain 45,000 deaths were produced from this disease. The city of Leicester (not vaccinated) had only 10% of mortality compared with cities that vaccinated”.


  9. Andrés Amado Z. Arce says:

    Homeopathy is the greatest medical achievement of all time, thanks to Master Hahnemann. Vaccines are not homeoremedies, and are poisonous. Dear John: you are wrong.


    • Hi Andres, I agree about homeopathy being a great medical achievement … and I agree that vaccines are poisonous. But the principle behind their application NOT being a crude form of homeopathy? No, I can’t agree with that as the principle of similitude is in effect.


    • johnbenneth says:

      Andrés- No proper word such as “homeoremedy” exists, and I have not used this term. You’re simply trying to invent something of your own. Don’t do that, there is no need for invention here, everything you need for now is already before you.
      Now, why would you call Hahnemann “master” if you are not wiling to abide by his terms and understand his philosophy? Unlike yours, his terms are technically correct. For instance, there is a difference between “homo-” and “homoeo,” which apparently you do not understand or perceive. And the Latin does not properly combine with the Greek, as each language has enough of its own suffixes to convey the proper meaning behind the prefix.
      The main point to understand here is that homeopathy operates in material doses as well as electromagnetic . . more commonly regarded as dilute. Many of the older homeopaths administered remedies in material doses.
      Once again, Hahnemann’s first observations of “homoeopathy” were of the reactions to crude material doses of quinine, not dilutes of it.
      best wishes,


      • Andrés Amado Z. Arce says:

        A very good friend of my, Dr. Eduardo A. Yahbes, researcher awarded by the Buenos Aires University, co author of 2 homeopathy books, founder of the Federation of Homeopathy Associations, Director of post grade in the Medical Argentinean Association, vaccines expert, kindly gives me this info: “Wrongly, the similar principle is used in a disease which is similar only in its external manifestation of the smallpox. This similarity is only superficial and does not include general statements and symptoms.
        “Moreover, in the vaccine there are many elements that have nothing to do with the causative virus. Even more a difference: vaccines are initially inoculated from person to person. This meant that also are inoculated biological elements of the carrier person (such as syphilis, for example).
        “In terms of effectiveness John need to know that always suffered more smallpox who was vaccinated. Not having been used this monstrosity had smallpox disappeared by the late nineteenth century. The following year had mass vaccination produced in Britain 45,000 deaths were produced from this disease. The city of Leicester (not vaccinated) had only 10% of mortality compared with cities that vaccinated.
        And yes, there is not a one only word for homeopathic remedy so I use homeoremedy and homeoremedies; and yes, is my invention. We need one. And I am an inventor. “No harm, no one alarm” and I do not need the permiton from anybody to use a new one. It always happen. So do not tell me what to do. (You say: “Don’t do that, there is no need for invention here, everything you need for now is already before you” and you are wrong. There is no a only and one word for our marvlous medications)
        Best wishes to you, also, dear and respected John.


        • johnbenneth says:

          My good friend Amado, please pass on my respects to Eduardo, and on my behalf, beg him to reconsider the evience laid out for us by Hahnemann, who said that the vaccine was proof for homeopathy. Jenner’s discovery was Hahnemann’s proof. It is no coincidence that the vaccine were first made known to scinece in the same year of 1796.

          First, allow me to present my terms and criteria. I will leave it to you to judge their value.

          The electromagnetic signature found in homeoapthic remedies is aso present in the intene molecule, the material substance from which the remedy wass made.

          Material substances do not need to be attenuated for their action to be homeopathic; there is nothing in the word “homeopathy” to suggest it, except it is a natural progression of similitude in physics that leads to analogs of the intended molecule or radiation. There is no patent here because there is no invention. This is a process of molecular self-assembly.

          Hahnemann was complete with his Masonic vows, that he took with Brukenthal and worked with Hufeland, that no fabrication or invention was necessary here, but only the uncovering a basic spiritual principle in all material substances. It is the magnetic principle of epitaxy, present in matter, that is the signal mechanism of homeopathy. It is not confined to organic reactions. In high diutes, where the intended molecule has been removed by dilution, the creation of the analog is merely a refinement.

          Homeopathy is not the place for invention, it is the place for discovery of a sublime underlying principle. One thi priniple is comprehended, like the mechanism ithin the remey, it assmebles itself in your mind andopen the door for further discoveries. If you wnat to be an inventor, go work for the allopaths, the patent poison pill pushers who must invent everything they peddle out of petro chemical synthesis, hydrocarbons. We work in hydroxels with which take no more than a push in the right direction to assemble themselves, in vivo, just a they do in vitro (direcction of cure).

          You can of course asay it isn’t so, but look who you’re arguing with. Emil von Behring, the father of immunology, the man who won the first Nobel prize for medicine said, “Jenner’s discovery remained a relatively isolated episode in medicine until Louis Pasteur connected its origin with a principle that cannot be better characterized than by Samuel Hahnemann‘s word: homeopathic.”

          Now, I did not know of Behring or Pasteur’s contribution until I opene my mind to the conept and Dr. Nancy Malik poure the inomation in a short time ago. Anybody can understand similitude prima facie, i they want to. All it takes is a slight nudge from the master (Hahnemann), whih we have been given, and the knowldge will assemble itself in our minds.

          The small pox vaccine (vaccine=”in cattle”) is made from the serum of cowpox, a disease in cattle SIMILAR to a disease in Man. It is a profound example of the action of similia.

          There’s much more to say, other voices to be heard, but that’s all from me for now.

          Thank you very much good and noble Amado for your kind words, your patience and your wisdom in this dialectic.

          John Benneth


          • Andrés Amado Z. Arce says:

            Dear John: Eduardo Yahbes is one of the most important vaccines researches in the world. He says: vaccines do not work. He, as many others has proofs of this. He owns and mange a web page where the information is available. Here is more info:
            Now; I was wrong the first time I published my document. Why I say this? In my books I say that vaccines, if really work it would be because the information they have. And homeoremedies are alike in the information-signature influence.
            So I agree with you about the signature-information idea. (I said so in my first book’s legal registration in 1991 and latter in the first and the second editions. The name of the book is “Homeopatía e informática.” (One can get it in Spanish in Homeopathy and informatics. In my new book “Acupuntura y homeopatía. ¿Hermanas? Sí” I say the same, but in this I do not write about vaccine. In my books I say that the information of the homeoremedy acts on the brain-computer , makes de CNS to react and because that we can see that homeopathy is a kind of informatics, bioinformatics, because we handle information in a computer (Master Hahnemann knew it. I can proof you this in other document) A number of serious researches agree with my point of view: Paolo Bellavite, Marcelo Candegabe, Eduardo Yahbes and tenths more others investigators. (Master Hahnemann knew it. I can proof you this fact in other document)
            Here one can read what I think about information in homeoremedies:
            The transmission of information is a constant phenomenon in nature. More: it is unavoidable. When we hit and shake an element we transfer some from their characteristics to what surrounds it (Structure of Liquid Water excerpt from Homeopathy: Science or Myth? by Bill Gray, M.D. Clathrate: By this act the molecules of the solute, Lycopodium, as an example, are impacted, they collide with those of the solvent, water-alcohol and they transfer information to these. They are recorded more or less the way the dactylographic impressions happen to be. In the homeopathic medication, these impressions, recordings, imprints, information, are those that cause a reaction in the C.N.S. trough nerve endings. They are the equivalent ones to the informatics computer science’s “commands” based on the electronic informatics means. In the moment that the characteristics of the remedies are identified, the nervous endings send a certain sign and this is the one that unchains the rector activity of the C. N. S.
            Only if we think that the homeopathic medication contains information that has the virtue to produce certain encephalic activities we can understand why while we dilute and successive dilute an element the effect that it produces to organic systems are stronger. In the dilution after dilution process the information of the solute that is stronger is sustained, lasts, and what is weak transforms and it “gets lost”. (“Nothing is Lost, all Transforms.”) The information becomes purified, it decants. In this way, the elements of the imprint become clearer and in that way the deepest biological action is facilitated because the brain reacts more easily. If we think of the preparation of Lycopodium we will realize that in the dilution after dilution process, the weakest element in Lycopodium will transform, while the strongest information will resist, it will stay. And that will be the most characteristic in Lycopodium in its higher powers.
            Perhaps the lower powers influence in more cerebral areas and in more programs, software, in their case, and that in that way the results are dark, less clear and durable, because their elements are more numerous. Certain confusion could be created in the body’s cybernetic control systems -brain- when at a moment are being activated cerebral bodies that have nothing to do in that moment and therefore instead of collaborating to organize, they disorganize.
            Also, we may think that when we shake and hit, the quantity of the information is increased by virtue of the fact that more and more molecules or clusters of the vehicle are printed with the preponderant characteristics of the solute. This could be one of the reasons why the higher potencies –“powers”- have more biological effect in the human organism; they make the CNS to react more strongly.
            More about information and homeopathy: what are we looking for when we prescribe a homeoremedy?; information. We look for Nux. Vomica…or Lycopodium. Or any other remedy. We do not look for energy, not a 30C or a 200C but a certain remedy because the information it has is the one that fits with all the other information we gather. Later on when we choose a 30C or a 200C we do it based in information. The “potency” itself depends on information.


            • Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

              Now a series of observations are made to show that the informatics-cybernetic interpretation is Hahnemannian.
              Organon [ ] Paragraph § 16 Fifth Edition [ ]
              “Our vital force, as a spirit-like dynamis, cannot be attacked and affected by injurious influences on the healthy organism caused by the external inimical forces that disturb the harmonious play of life, otherwise than in a spirit-like (dynamic) way, and in like manner, all such morbid derangements (diseases) cannot be removed from it by the physician in any other way than by the spirit-like (dynamic, virtual) alterative powers of the serviceable medicines acting upon our spirit-like vital force, which perceives them through the medium of the sentient faculty of the nerves everywhere present in the organism…”
              Hahnemann’s book “The Chronic Disease” [ ] Page #45: “When the smallpox or the cowpox catches, thus happens in the moment when in vaccination the morbid fluid in the body scratch of the skin comes in contact with the exposed nerve, which then, irrevocably, dynamically communicates the disease to the vital force (to the whole nervous system) in the same moment” Page #49 of the same book:“As soon as the miasma of Itch, e. g. touches the hand, in the moment when it has taken effect, it no more remains local…The nerve which was first affected by the miasma has already communicated it in an invisible manner to the nerves of the rest of the body…”Master Hahnemann understands even that the vital force is in the nerves: “which then, irrevocably, dynamically communicates the disease to the vital force (to the whole nervous system) in the same moment” Obviously he did not said “the central nervous system” because it is included since the moment in which he says “the whole nervous system” It is sure, I have no doubt, that he did understand that the influence more important is done on the CNS , but saying this in that so religious time would cause him to be…“burned at the stake”! Well, not that much, but he would have being seeing with not “good eyes” and because of that strongly fought. He realized that he had to say it “between the lines” It is curious that nobody ever have commented this mater about the homeopathy medicines acting on the nervous system, “the whole” as Hahnemann say it and that it is fundamental in the understanding of his concept of how does the homeoremedies operates, because without that neuronal influence, said by him often, they do not operate. That’s it: here he explains how they operate in the body; trough the nerves. It is important to look that this is a transcendental and fundamental mater in the Hahnemannian homeopathic basic conception, not just any “thing”. In the deep it is about a different interpretation of the theories of the possible direct influence of the homeoremedies in the misbalanced vital energy or the cells. It is understood that the obtained energy equilibrium with the homeopathic medicines is not directly reached. It’s a neuronal registration produce. And taking in account the no doubt Hahnemann genius intelligence we cannot think that he have missed the leadership role of the CNS and the leading role of the CNS and therefore influence of the homeopathic medicine. Then we induce that to infer in the nervous system is what really makes the energetic equilibrium.


              • fransheffield says:

                Hi John, this may have been Hahnemann’s understanding but was it right? How do you think it relates to plants that, without a nervous system, still respond to homeopathic stimuli? Is the nervous system still too “physical” for understanding the seat of homeopathic action?


                • Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

                  It is not denied, it cannot be done before the irrefutable evidences that exists, the fact that the homeopathic medicine acts on beings with no CNS, plants, microbes, and cells. But there are profound differences between them and if the CNS is badly functioning, those cellular actions are useless and have not a deep effect. Let’s image arthritis in a hand finger joint. We may apply in the joint an injection of cortisone and the cells of the area will end to be swelled. But at the time the cortisone effect pass on, the swelling will come back because it does not change the improperly way the control centre, the CNS, is working. The cells don’t handle what it takes for them to swell or not to swell. This is a CNS job. Acupuncture and homeopathy do make a deep action, a true curing one, not only in the cell because their action is on the brain.
                  Healing only cells is not enough if the CNS is improperly working. The improvement is not deep; it is in the surface. It is important to remember that if cells get from their environment what it takes to be sane their health is good, but if something fails, they get sick, and that medium does not depend on them but from the homeostatic mechanisms (Walter B. Cannon) from the organism which are directly handled by the CNS.
                  Nevertheless, the proves of the cellular action of the homeopathic medicines explain the influence they do in the neurons of the nerve endings that finally send signals to de control centre which then produces its curing reaction. If there is not cellular influence no central nervous reaction could be done.
                  Another cellular homeopathic possible influence is a support to the Central Nervous System one. It is obvious that there are occasions in which that system needs an extra exterior help and it is in those cases that the chemical drugs designed to act only on cells may be useful, and it is also in those occasions that the homeopathic medicines help the CNS to fulfill its goals.

                  Dr. Devendra Kumar MD from India has conducted an essay [ in which was found evidence that homeopathic medicines produce some change in the physiological variability, which means that the homeoremedy acts on the brain, the hypothalamus, directly.
                  “Homeopathic medicines of 200c potency are applied orally to human subjects. ‘Physiological variability in temperature’ from skin of forearm is measured with the help of temperature data logger and water/soil temperature sensor. Temperature readings are taken at an interval of 1 second for 5 minutes. Time series spectral analysis is performed by using Statistical processing software. The statistical procedures like Auto Regressive Spectrum (ARS) and Parametric prediction and reconstruction (PPR) are used to study the change in temperature variability. There is marked change in temperature variability after applied homeopathic medicine.
                  The hypothalamus is responsible for certain metabolic processes and other activities of the Autonomic Nervous System. It synthesizes and secretes neurohormones, often called hypothalamic-releasing hormones, and these in turn stimulate or inhibit the secretion of pituitary hormones. The hypothalamus controls body temperature, hunger, thirst, fatigue, and circadian cycles. So, one of the regulatory fuctions of Hypothalus, ‘Thermoregulation in human subjects’ is taken as primary subject to understand the action of Homeopathic medicine. The parameter “Physiological variability in human body temperature” (Vital Heat) is selected for the study.”


                • johnbenneth says:

                  You and Andres have brought up some very interesting questions. I regret it took so long to answer. In part it’s because i wanted to think about it a while . .
                  The way I see it, if I may be so bold, is that there are actualy two nervous systems. The central nerous system (CNS) it would seem is the manifestation of discreet action. The CNS then, in my mind, is actually a secondary system. The primary system is the dynamis, which is comparitively less localized than the CNS, and is more global . . global in that it extends as a connecting electromagnetic field out from the individual.
                  The CNS in plants coul actually be electrial signals operating through their hydraulics, their discreetly organized hydrogen bonds in liquid water working through their channels.
                  I think it is obvious that the individual EM field is like other EM fields in that it is sinusoidal . . the strength of it ower bandwidth decreaes geometrially outward from the individual, and then resonates . . it picks up again at a greater distance.
                  EM remedies, as use in homeoapthy, act upon this primary netral nervous system, which is atualy an extension of the true Central nervous system (Cns). THe pathing of the Cns, as closely as I can surmise, is through hydrogen bonding. This explains how plants can not only message within themselves, but also between themselves (Clive Barker, Secret Life of Plants). Hydro0gen bonding is the only explanation I have found for the drop in punctrure voltage due to succussion, dilution and radiolysis, as in imponderabilia.
                  In other words, the theory here is that there must be some kind of pathing, field, ether, strings or channels by which the electrons, photons, ions, etc. flow. I could be their is a static medium that is already conneted and responding to pushes and pulls, like a tsunami that travels 600 MPH through water.
                  It could be that when we look at the stars, here is no real distance, we look upon them in “real time.”


                  • Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

                    Dear John and Fran: What I say in my books and in my publications is this: The informatics-cybernetic conceptualization applied to medicine, synthesized in this document, is a simplification of the understanding of what are health, disease, and cure from a purely physiologic point of view, of beings with Central Nervous System. In this context, for example, “disease is Central Nervous System dysfunction” is a synthesis and is so established here. Now, what do I say about cells and plants?
                    Information, program, “software” is what produces a flower, a chair, anything. Energy flowing in a way becomes a flower, and in other one a chair will show up. Anything in the universe comes to what it is because there is a way the energy flows. Let’s see the importance of it in life: Let’s think in a redwood’s (Sequoia sempervirens) seed: what makes it to become the largest tree in the world? The information we find in the seed. We only need water and certain amounts of heat for that info become a tree. (And nutrients, of course) There is in Argentina a frog that dies because the cold weather in the winter frozen it, but comes alive again when enough heat reaches it. Tardigrades are more astonishing creatures. They die hundreds of years and come to life again under such and such circumstances. The information in their bodies (Seeds, frogs and tardigrades, for instance) has the power to become what they become; living beings and life itself.
                    Now let’s see the plants problem: they get sick because the program accordingly with the one they live their process of life is distorted. And the information in the cell gets the information of the homeoremedy’s energy (Electromagnetic) and makes it to react and fix up whatever is functioning wrongly in “the software” of the plant. In this way the energy flow gets “balanced” and health is achieved.
                    Again; yes, our beloved homeoremedies do have a cell effect, but this is not enough to get a curing effect in a complex organism. I am not a cell. You are not a cell and if the brain is not handing what it takes for the entire organism to be healthy we will see disease to appear. If there is a CNS we cannot avoid and consider his role and its importance as director of the orchestra and being the responsible for the homeostasis.
                    The allopathic “medicines” act beautifully in the cell but since the brain is not taken into account in the healing process plan the dysfunction appears as soon as the chemical effect passes.
                    Now, let’s go again with organisms with a CNS:
                    Acupuncture and homeopathy influence the Central Nervous System and make it to react. Homeopathy does it by the use of the homeopathic medicines information and acupuncture does it by means of tactile media like insertion, pressure, energies influences (Photonic, Laser, and Fire) –like “pressing the keys”, “touching the screen” or “clicking in the mouse”- as one does in computers. Those are some reasons of the “informatics-cybernetic” neuromodulation denomination I employ.
                    The neuromodulation action is definitely proved in acupuncture trough tenths of researches made with state of the art imaging technology such as PET, Positron Emission Tomography, fMRI, functional Magnetic Resonance Image, and SPECT, “Single Photon Emission Tomography”. Studies like those have not being done in homeopathy but no doubt will be made.
                    There is one that highlights: Kathleen Hui et al, professor at the Harvard Medical Scholl, and Martinos Institute, MIT, in a document [] shows that “Brain processing of acupuncture stimuli in chronic neuropathic pain patients may underlie its beneficial effects…”
                    Homeopathic neuromodulation verifications have been published her for me.


            • Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

              Dear John: you said; “Material substances do not need to be attenuated for their action to be homeopathic;” But vaccine do not cure and/or immunize. So vaccines are not homeoremedies because do not act accordingly with the law of cure -do not cure- of similars.


              • Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

                More: What do you think about the fact that Ethilicum doesn’t become homeopathic medicine during the succussion-dilution process? Why I say that? Because it doesn´t produce the known symptoms of Ethilicum in each one dilution, even though it is used as the base in each and every one of those dilutions. The reason is that the Ethilicum information-signature gets contaminated in each dilution with its original information and; it does not become homeoremedy! What I say is that Lycopodium; Arsenicum whatever the remedy we are talking about produces the symptoms of the solute, not those of the “Ethilicum” homeoremedy. This is another proof (Indirect) that crude elements are not homeoremedies, like you say. Best wishes, dear and respected John. (I know that this observation will take you by surprise because nobody made it. Be ready for more revolutions)


    • Sue says:

      Posters here seem to lack a basic understanding of vaccine science. Vaccines are not “therapy”- they are ways of stimulating the body to produce immunity to specific infectious agents without actually contracting the disease. And ONLY infectious agents.

      Vaccination has no “law of similars”, “proofing”, infinite dilution or banging bottles on hard surfaces – it’s about exposing the immune system to measurable quantities of known infectious agents (in part or inactivated), and producing a (measurable) antibody response.

      Homeopathy is about giving people undetectable amounts of an alleged therapeutic agent, and producing no measurable response.


      • johnbenneth says:

        No Sue, you’re wrong and the only reason you’re being cranky and pretending to be stupid here is you’ve got an axe to grind. You’re not reading anything but your own statements based on nothing more than proclamations from those who can’t deal with the pre-clinical evidence for potencies. What part of the word “homeopathy” refers to dilution or “undetectable amounts” of anything?
        The first experiments or tests of “homoeopathy” were done using crude material doses of quinine, which at the time were what were used to quell fevers. The experiments showed that quinine would produce fever in someone who didn’t have it. At the same time it was discovered that people could be inoculated against small pox using the serum from a SIMILAR disease in cattle, hence the word “vaccine,” which means “in cattle.”
        Hahnemann, the developer of homeopathy, responded to the announcement of the vaccine by saying that it was another demonstration of an old but little known principle of similitude.
        Since then, countless doctors, including Nobel laureates, have acknowledged this principle in various applications. There are even current examples of it in pharmaceutical drugs, such as Ritalin and Adderall, which contain methamphetamine, for the treatment of hyperactivity; methamphetamine, when ingested in non hyperactive people, causes SIMILAR symptoms.
        There are other examples, one being the use of nitroglycerin in heart patients. However, when misapplied, especially in heavy, unrefined, material doses, other unrelated and often severe and dangerous symptoms occur, hence the word “allopathy,” which means “other symptoms,” which defines common internal medical practice. Allopathic symptoms by law must now be stated in advertisements for non-homeopathic or “allopathic” drugs.
        This is not an idiopathic concept, but one that is ubiquitous. Giants such as Jenner, Behring, Pasteur, Salk and Montagnier, have already traversed the field between opposing factions, like batting armies, each of which in part, claims or can claim them for their own. Although it is not commonly recognized or admitted, it cannot be reasonably refuted that every vaccine, anti-toxin and anti-venom employs homeopathy. If you get bit by a poisonous snake, conventional medical doctors will treat you homeopathically and give you an attenuated dose of that same snake venom. The polio vaccine is another technical use example of homeopathy that makes use of the attenuated, killed polio virus to immunize against polio.
        Now, unlike you, I don’t have to invent anything here nor have I had to make anything up in order to get my point across. Giants of conventional medicine, employed homeopathic features in their works, but like Tycho, walked between two battling disciplines of medicine, if allopathy can be called that.


        • Hi John,

          The quinine story – it is one of the first things explained to homeopathic students at the beginning of their education and we all learnt it … but it all seemed so long ago.

          So when an acquaintance, who knew nothing about homeopathy, came for an evening meal and told the story of how some years earlier she was to visit New Guinea and had commenced taking quinine tablets only to be admitted to hospital with raging fevers, rigors, sweats, and pain. The treating doctors, puzzled, said it was if she had malaria but this was obviously impossible as she had not yet left the country.

          It was only after a week or so of these symptoms that they discovered she (like Hahnemann) was sensitive to quinine. On stopping it, all symptoms resolved and on restarting, they returned.

          She eventually travelled to New Guinea on a dose much smaller than normal and tolerated it without any problems.

          I am easily pleased so as you can imagine, I was chuffed to hear this story of Hahnemann’s experience, and those of the provers, reproduced by someone completely ignorant of homeopathy and at my very own dining table.


    • Andrés Amado Zuno Arce says:

      A massive outbreak of whooping cough proves that vaccines don’t work: (So vaccines are not homeremedies)


  10. Hi 4tis, you have tried to understand homeopathy but have got it all wrong. John is right.

    Homeopathy is about the relationship between similars and this relationship can be exploited in either crude OR potentised form to treat AND prevent disease.

    The homeopathic materia medica was initially developed from symptoms that arose with poisonings by crude substances. When potentisation was discovered and tested, it was found that those same substances produced an even greater range of symptoms. These were also added to the materia medica, an unchanging database of information (a sign of a true science) from which every homeopath still works.

    Even today, substances can be used in crude form depending on the symptoms being treated and the goal of treatment. The biggest effect of potentisation is that a greater range of symptoms can be treated (and prevented) in complete safety.

    Homeopaths would still consider vaccines to be crude doses though the material dose has been made as small as possible. Because these doses are too small to stimulate an immune response, adjuvants have been added to trigger that response – and whether they are a good or a bad thing I will leave to another discussion.

    What is continually ignored is that with potentisaion, the same infecting agent could be SAFELY used to produce immunity – which is exactly what homeopaths working in this area do. There is no need to inject substances directly into the body, no skewing of the immune system, and no poisoning effects. The process is safe – something vaccines are not.


    • 4tis says:

      My point was that sub-unit vaccines only contain a few, at most, of the proteins from the virus. They are incapable of causing the disease symptoms.


      • And those same disease agents, in potentised form, contain no proteins but still provide a protective effect. Interesting, hey?


        • 4tis says:

          Perhaps, if it was true, but that is not my point. By no stretch of the imagination could sub-unit vaccines be described as obeying the “Law of Similars”.


          • Why not?

            As a point made in another comment, the effect of small doses in your preferred method has to be augmented by an adjuvant or two before a response is triggered.

            The effect of homeopathy’s even smaller doses is augmented AND transferred through the process of succussion so that even when no material dose remains, a response is still triggered.

            As an aside, and drawing from the evidence we have, the addition of adjuvants is the reason why, potentised vaccines do not protect as well as the potentised agent of that disease; too many components are involved which create a different remedy that carries a reduced degree of similarity.

            And as touched on in John’s quinine example, homeopathy doesn’t even need the disease agent from which to produce a prophylactic.

            All that is needed is a substance which, in material or potentised doses, produces symptoms similar to those to be prevented – and we have a number of remedies for each disease that will do that.

            Even more exciting, hey?

            And best of all, once the simple potentisation process is taught, these remedies can be easily and quickly produced in large amounts by any affected community, even at a small village level.

            It just gets better and better.


            • 4tis says:

              By their very nature sub-unit vaccines are incapable of causing the disease. So how is the use of sub-unit vaccines consistent with the “law of similars”?


              • Remember, from the homeopathic perspective, we are not looking to produce the disease but symptoms similar to those of the disease – big difference.

                Now, back to the sub-units. I have two questions.

                1. Can you show that they produce immunity? If not, it may all be a moot point.

                2. Are you certain that, when given in overdose for individual sensitivity (the homeopathic requirement), they do NOT produce the symptoms similar to those of the disease? If this isn’t known, once again it may be a moot point.

                Assumptions are not a good foundation for an argument.


                • I’m curious why homeopathy is so focussed on something so potentially vague and misleading as symptom sets.

                  Just for your erudition, here is a list of conditions that have similar symptoms to Lupus. Now, just working off the symptoms, looking at a Lupus patient one could reach the erroneous conclusion that he/she has:

                  [long list of copied repetitive symptoms edited out]

                  Read more:


                  • It’s a long list!

                    They are all disease names, though, not symptoms.

                    Disease names are fantastic for guiding conventional treatment. Tell a doctor a disease name and s/he instantly knows what to treat and how. It is an efficient system that treats the group but fails the individual, so long-term results are not the best.

                    Homeopathy is less interested in the disease name than how the individual is responding to that disease.

                    Going back to the chickenpox example, homeopathy needs to know the nature and distribution of the rash, the degree of itchiness, emotional or behavioural changes that have taken place, changes in appetite and food cravings or aversion, and so much more.

                    These changes are not just random phenomena but symptoms that show the individual’s response to a disease called chickenpox. Use a remedy that supports that response and the person recovers rapidly – much, much more rapidly than if the disease was allowed to take its natural course.

                    This approach is not as efficient as the conventional one but the individual results are so much better..

                    An analogy would be mechanics fixing cars.

                    The mechanic who always recognises spark plug problems but applies the same treatment to all cars will not be as successful as the one who considers each car with a spark plug problem, separately.

                    For example, s/he will want to know: is the right plug being used? Does the plug have the correct gap? Does the plug only need cleaning or is a complete change in order? Is the carbon build-up on the plug excessive and if so why? Is it from worn rings or maybe the problem lies in the spark plug cable and not the plug at all?

                    This approach will truly fix the problem. Just throwing the same brand and number of plugs, into all cars, as our first mechanic would, won’t as any short-term gain that is achieved is likely to offset by subsequent strain and damage to the car.

                    I hope the analogy is not too trite but understanding the difference between the conventional and homeopathic approach can be challenging as I haven’t come across a skeptic with a clear grasp of it yet.

                    But to keep this comment relevant to the blog post, I will pose a question? Is the individualised approach the best approach for homeopathic prophylaxis, and why or why not?


                • 4tis says:

                  Accordingto WHO, Hep B vaccine is 95% effective, so that’s pretty good, yes?

                  Asto your secondquestion, there is absolutelynoevidence that it can cause the symptomsof hepatitis B.

                  Tothink that a proteinfrom the coat of the virus couldcause the disease symptomsis like thinkingthat your car might have the performance of a Ferrari if you paint it Ferrari red.


        • Give us one bit of scientific proof supporting your statement, Ms Sheffield.


          • I will let you look for and consider some RCTs, Ilijas – there are lots of them about. As you know, a google or subscription to some journals will find them.

            What I can tell you is that I test the hypothesis of similia day in and day out in my clinic and find the results remarkably consistent.


  11. 4tis says:

    No. If they were homeopathic then the substances used must cause the appropriate symptoms of disease in a healthy person. In the case of sub-unit vaccines, which use only a few proteins from the virus this is clearly not the case unless you can show that these proteins actually cause the disease symptoms.


    • johnbenneth says:

      No, 4tis, YOU’RE wrong, these ARE the droids everyone’s looking for. And what a laugh, now you’re quoting Hahnemann. Make up you’re so called mind, either you think this is all bunk or you’re now seeing something in it. And if you really believed what you’re saying you’d give your statement some credibiity by putting your real name on it and quoting somebody other than yourself. Unlike you, I don’t slobber over and parrot magicians with a million dollars to lose, I listen to what real scientists have to say about the evidence I myself have experienced. Hahnemann didn’t have to invent anything. inventions are for fools like you. Hahnemann simply discovered the principles that already existed and were at work.
      But you, like every other cowardly “skeptic,” you’re grasping for straws now, trying anything and everything to maintain your belief that nothing’s happening here and trying to convince everybody else of the same.
      Just look at your stupid argument. You yourself say “the substances used must cause the appropriate symptoms of disease, not the disease itself.” What an idiot. People bear lifelong scars from vaccination and variolation in the crude, but nothing like those who contracted the disease without immunization.
      You might want to take your arguing up with a Nobelist or two. The world’s most notable immunologists all had to confess homeopathy despite the bullying of non scientists like yourself.
      Let me give you an example. The first Nobel prize winner for Medicine, regarded by some as the father of immunology, Emil Adoph von Behring, endorsed homeopathy. Behring won the prize for his work in the development of the diptheria anti-toxin. Behring said that it was because of homeopathy he won the Nobel. He said, “only the road of homeopathy led to my goal”
      In 1892 he was experimenting with serial (homeopathic) dilutions and found that they paradoxically enhanced immunogenic activity. However, he was advised to suppress his experiments due to “the aid and comfort it would provide to homeopaths.” Only after he won the Nobel Prize did he come out of the closet and go public about homeopathy.
      He asserted that vaccination is, in part, derived from the homeopathic principle of similars. “In spite of all scientific speculations and experiments regarding smallpox vaccination, Jenner’s discovery remained an erratic blocking medicine, till the biochemically thinking Pasteur, devoid of all medical classroom knowledge, traced the origin of this therapeutic block to a principle which cannot better be characterized than by Hahnemann’s word: homeopathic. Indeed, what else causes the epidemiological immunity in sheep, vaccinated against anthrax than the influence previously exerted by a virus, similar in character to that of the fatal anthrax virus?”

      “Jenner’s discovery remained a relatively isolated episode in medicine until Louis Pasteur connected its origin with a principle that cannot be better characterized than by Samuel Hahnemann‘s word: homeopathic.”

      He contrasted Hahnemann’s ideals with those of Pasteur’s and said “homeopathy carries all before it.” He conciously made his immunizing doses homeopathic. He insisted that Louis Pasteur‘s methods were “purely homeopathic” and said, “what technical term could we more appropriately speak of this influence (epidemiological immunity), exerted by a similar virus, than by Samuel Hahnemann‘s word ‘homeopathy?’ I am touching here upon a subject anathematized till very recently by medical penalty: but if I am to present these problems in historical illumination, dogmatic imprecations must not deter me.”

      What pisses you and everyone else off who is in it for the money is that you can’t get your greedy little hooks into it like you can with the patent poisons you push. This is the only reason why, from the shadows, cowards like you attacked Hahnemann and those who followed him, like Behring and Benveniste, no matter what their credentials were, or the biohemical action they reported, and it is why I am attacked and why you attack and try to defame geniuses like Montagnier. You fear it, you fear it for what in the end it will do to you.


      • Don’t hold back there, John. 🙂


      • 4tis says:

        Thank you for your reply. I read it. I’m not sure that you read mine.

        I specifically referred to sub-unit vaccines. I do this for a reason. They do not contain the disease causing virus in either live, attenuated or killed form. Or even in a form related to it. Things have moved on since the development of the smallpox vaccine.

        Perhaps you might look at “sub-unit vaccine” here?

        So, how are sub-unit vaccines consistent with the “law of Similars?”


        • Hello 4tis, replying again in case what has been said in other responses is unclear.

          Sub units reduce the material amount of the infecting agent to miniscule sizes within a vaccine but still have to have something that triggers an immune response to them, this being adjuvants (which cause many of the problems associated with vaccines).

          Homeopathy cuts the dose even smaller until it is highly unlikely that even one part is to be found but it has no need for adjuvants as, seemingly, the electomagnetic effect introduced by succussion more than does the job … and with total safety.

          That is why those serious about preventing epidemic diseases have take their fingers out of their ears and start listening.


          • 4tis says:

            Surely, for it to be down to the “Law of Similars”, the sub-unit vaccine would cause the same symptoms as the disease if given to a healthy individual. The excising of the relevant proteins, typically from the viral coat, is not akin to a dilution or potentising process.


            • Exactly so.

              All that is needed is that the substance being used WILL produce symptoms similar to the disease according to the sensitivity and susceptibility of that organism IF given in OVERDOSE .

              Now, I’m not sure if sub-unit vaccines will do that but then again I am nowhere near convinced they actually protect either. And, as explained elsewhere, potentised vaccines produce a poor prophylactic by homeopathic standards.

              To clarify again, overdose effects can be produced by crude material doses (very dangerous) or by potentised doses (extremely safe).

              Most of homeopathy’s pathogenetic trials these days are done with potentised substances where there is NO material dose. That doesn’t mean we are no longer interested in clear cases of poisoning as these symptoms are still useful even when no potentisation has taken place.

              In fact, the side-effects of all conventional medicines clearly show the symptoms for which they could be used curatively but once again, without potentisation, this would still be dangerous.


              • 4tis says:

                Info from WHO on effectiveness of Hep B vaccine.


                This is a sub-unit vaccine incapable of causing the disease.


                • As per my other comment, can you show it doesn’t produce symptoms SIMILAR to the disease if given in overdose? If not, the point is moot.

                  I wouldn’t suggest overdosing with the raw vaccine though – too risky. Put it into potency (the homeopaths way of doing things) and repeatedly dose until symptoms start to appear. If concerned at this point, don’t be. Just stop dosing and symptoms rapidly disappear but please note, are the symptoms similar or dissimilar to those of the disease? Homeopaths would be very interested to know.


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: Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s