The clinical and pre-clinical proofs for homeopathy 2012


I wonder sometimes what would happen, and what the world would be like, if homeopathy was the medicine of first choice. It certainly wouldn’t flourish under the current requirements that it monetarily support a huge health care industry. Some of these billionaires would have to go out and get jobs!

The focus of homeopathy is cure, not cash.

As you may already know, ad nauseam, homeopathy works on the minimum dose, and presumably, following that doctrine, if this information here alone was viewed by only 5% of the public, the results would be profound.

The following was inspired by a skeptic’s WordPress blog on homeopathy called “Skepticmind.”  It has the usual misconceptions about homeopathy, and being that it’s been years now since the seminal article for this  blog “Proof for Homeopathy,” I felt compelled to add to it here tonight.

The major objection, or claim, by lamestream medicine, is that homeopathy is simply a “placebo,” that it’s vehicles of water, sugar and alcohol are biologically inert and any clinical effects are imaginary, or due to false or erroneous reporting. Tests that show the action of homeopathics 0n both human and non human subjects are dismissed by these skepti as being poorly conducted and of low quality.

However, a closer look at the literature that reports on the action on the materials in question, tells a different story that can be disappointing, if not disturbing, to see how reactionary, if not vicious, the medical establishment can be when faced with a challenge to it.


It is often said that no test has ever shown homeopathy to work or be effective. But the fact is that there is more truth in an opposite assertion. No major meta-analysis or review of the literature has ever been able to conclude that homeopathy is a placebo.

Cucherat, which the author of “Skeptic Mind” links to here, is no exception. The only meta that came close to being an exception was Shang, which stated that there was “a weak effect,” but that it was still equivalent to a placebo. Subsequent analysis however revealed that Shang had doctored the results . For a while the researchers refused to even reveal what studies they were reviewing. A closer look showed something completely different.  Statistical analysis of Shang’s data by Ludtke and Rutten revealed a significant effect!

And yet Shang remains the cornerstone for the case against homeopathy!

Here are a list of the reviews and meta analyses of studies, tests and trials of homeopathy. And it does not include all of them, there is more, there’s a lot more studies, tests and trials that prove homeopathy works. And once again, from the data these reviews analyze, none of them conclude or are able to prove (Shang) that  homeopathy is a “placebo.”

BORNHOFT: Homeopathy in Healthcare 
FISHER: Homeopathy: the Evidence from Basic Research “hi quality experiments yield positive results”.
JOHNSON: ‘meta-analyses conclude homeopathic treatment significantly better than placebo
SHANG>Ludtke Rutten: ‘find significant effect beyond placebo
LINDE: “results incompatible with placebo hypothesis
CUCHERAT homeopathy more effective than placebo
KLEIJNEN clinical trial evidence positive
WITT The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies—–A systematic review of the literature
(in vitro review)

It should be noted about Witt, that it reviews, with explicit criteria and weighted value, 50 years of in vitro research showing the biochemical action of homeopathics.

These metas and reviews represent only a part of the growing research database for homeopathy. The medical materials reference base alone is a rich source of clinical studies that spans observations by medical doctors over 200 years to present, as can be seen in the following materia medica


I estimate that there are now over 400 of these “materia medica.”

Homeopathy is now being used in the nation’s top cancer hospital.

HOSPITAL USE of homeopathy at the MD Anderson Cancer Clinic

International Journal of Oncology  Feb 2010  V.36, 2
Cytotoxic effects of ultra-diluted remedies on breast cancer cells

 Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells but proliferation in normal peripheral blood lymphocytes: A novel treatment for human brain cancer

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124:879-885.
Homeopathic vs Conventional Treatment of Vertigo
A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Clinical Study

Integr Cancer Ther. 2006 Dec;5(4):343-9.
 Can homeopathic treatment slow prostate cancer growth? Homeopathic remedies for the present study have no direct cellular anticancer effects but appear to significantly slow the progression of cancer and reduce cancer incidence and mortality in Copenhagen rats

It’s been said there are no physical differences between potentized homeopathic remedies and their vehicles of water, sugar and alcohol. There are, however, a growing number of studies that contradict that notion.


ROY Structure of Liquid Water
 RAO Epitaxy
 ELIA Thermodynamics
 JOSEPHSON Molecular Memories
TILLER thermodynamics

And this is merely a sampling of the online data base.  PubMed now lists over 4500 references to homeopathy.

I wonder how many people know there’s now a medical college devoted to training MD’s to use homeopathy in their pratices?

American Medical College of Homeopathy in Phoenix

Homeopathy is now a licensed practice in Arizona.


Summary of Cuban Experiences on Leptospirosis Prevention

BMC Public Health.

WITT: Homeopathic medical practice: long-term results of a cohort study with 3981 patients. Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, D-10098 Berlin, Germany

BMC Public Health. 2008 Dec 17;8:413

How healthy are chronically ill patients after eight years of homeopathic treatment?–Results from a long term observational study.$=citedinpmcarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

Eur J Pediatr. 2007 May;166(5):509.

PEDIATRICS: Homeopathic treatment of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover trial.

The anti-homeopathy crowd may crow how they win all the battles. They may go around telling all their friends it doesn’t work, and it’s just a placebo, but I think it’s safe to say they’ll’ never win the war. They’ve had two hundred year to do it, and their stupid arguments haven’t changed since then.

Mark Twain wrote about homeopathy in 1867. He said you can choose allopathy and die of an overdose, or you can choose homeopathy and die of an under.

Twain chose homeopathy and made exclusive use of medical doctors trained in the use of homeopathics, just like John D. Rockefeller, Mahatma Gandhi , the Queen, the British Royal family, and countless others have done. No doubt they will continue to do for many years to come. No matter how much ridicule, abuse and cyberbullying can be heaped on it, homeopathy will remain the wise woman’s and intelligent man’s curative medicine of choice.

John Benneth,PG Hom – London (Hons)

Follow the John Benneth Journal on Twitter:

 Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter

Please report dysfunctinal inks in the commentary section

People’s vs. Corporate Medicine

My videos have not always been considered completely politcally correct, socially acceptable or even in good taste.

In order to give my lecture, “The Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy” at the Cavendish laboratory at Cambridge, England,  I had to change the title of this video from “Homeopathy, the Jew of Modern Medicine” to what it is now.

Lately I’ve come to think that maybe I’m not as smart as I used to think. But gee whiz, these people who try to pass off skepticism for intelligence are really stupid.

It seems to me like the same kind of mentality of people who used to burn witches at the stake.

It’s not just the blatant hypocrisy that amazes me, its the unwillingness or inability  to challenge it.

It makes me wonder, ‘”what is it I don’t see about myself?” It’s not that I don’t have a lot of objectors, critics and bashers who follow me around, but usually they don’t have anything really constructive to say. It’s mostly just nasty name calling.

Now I got all the LGBT’s hating me.

I’m starting to run out of people to piss off.

Gotta be a reason for it . .

John Benneth, Homeopath
503 819 7777

Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter


LONDON- A song about vaccination was performed at a meeting of homeopaths, gathered together to discuss the proper marketing of homeopathy.

The Vaccination Song was videotaped during a dinner of the Homeopathic Action Trust (HAT)on September 17th at  the Refectory at the School of Pharmacy, Brunswick Square,, and just this last week put up on Youtube  . . and then almost immediately withdrawn, reportedly because of opposition to it.

This is why homeopathy is treated as it is. It is because of organizations like HAT


Instead of presenting homeopathic medicine for what it is, curative medicine, superior to allopathic, their puerile stupidity, cowardice and self-serving antics are rubbing off on the rest of us and preventing the progress of real medicine.

Maybe HAT didn’t hear, maybe they aren’t aware of it, but a great number of very vocal people have been calling them frauds for YEARS now, and HAT doesn’t seem to even know.

They certainly haven’t done anything about it.

They claim they fund projects. When I went to their webpage to see what the projects were, all it was, was a blank map of Britain, with red push pins in it !!

And one in what looks like Tanganyika . .

When I went to their research section, they simply linked to the Malik bibliography, and linked to another website with that same damn picture from Clues of the Murdered Homeopath mystery, a spilled bottle of no. 35 pellets strewn amongst cut daisies.

Every phony website on homeopathy has the same damn picture in it. It just shows how careless some people are, knocking things over!

The website in turn was asking for £5000 each for several projects, one which promised to look into the physico chemical processes of high dilutes. At this point what can they say that hasn’t already been said?

Top material scientists have concluded that, like magnetic tape, water stores its “memory” though its hydrogen bonded network (Chaplin).

And wait a minute, isn’t this the same topic I was talking about at the Cavendish?

Yes, and I . . I invited HAT!

And they want £5000  to THINK about what I was offering to explain to them a year ago, just a few miles down the road on the same day they were camped out in Cambridge?

By the way, the hydrogen bond theory for homeopathy has been around since the sixties (Barnard)

Hell, I gave everybody the answer FOR FREE!

Meanwhile, you have angry comedians off on a jihad against homeopathy. Funnyman Dara O’Briain’s fatwah against homeopaths says they should be hunted down by mobs, put in sacks,, and beaten with sticks . .  like they used to do with witches.

Can you imagine the doing that to Peter Fisher?

“What the heck, throw in Luc Montagnier, too! Anif we push, I think we can stuff Josepshon in there too!”

Everyone laughs! “OMG that’s funny. Please please, turn of the laughing gas, I’m suffocating here!”

“It’s only water,” he says, and everybody screams. “Stop stop, call 911! I’m having an OBE!”

Standing before large audiences in a navy blue jacket,  James “the Amazing” Randi struts back and forth on a high stage in front of a large audience. He is very serious. He profoundly  says homeopaths are criminals, frauds, their practice a scam.

Name one homeopath beside George Vithoulkas and me who has stood up to this prevaricating  bully.

Does anyone see what I’m saying? Instead of producing videos that they immediately yank from Youtube, why haven’t these homeopathy organizations throughout the world orchestrated a solicitation of malice law suit against his organition, the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF?)

Why hasn’t an organization like HAT organized a  defamation law suit against JREF?

What hasn’t HAT  filed a tortious interference law suit against JREF, and similar organizations and their supporters long ago?

If you let them say things like that without publicly challenging them, then it looks like you accept it to be true.

It’s time to stop rolling over an go after these people who are trying to ruin us. Make them stop, shut them up.

Richard Adams, the wealthy founder of the Internet backbone, UUNET, and for years the treasurer of JREF, according to Randi put up one million dollars to taunt homeopaths with a challenge to prove homeopathy to Randi.

It is a phony offer. There is no million to prove homeopathy. It doesn’t matter if there is a million dollars in Guatemalan negotiable bonds hidden somewhere in a mayonaise jar, there no intent to give it to anyone to prove homeopathy. yet thi phony offer is what they use to actively defame us with.

It is more like a jelly bean guessing contest, managed only by Randi himself, in which he, like Boris Karloff in some medical horror epic,  is the sole arbiter.

Now why isn’t HAT going after something so transparent as that?  Why aren’t they shutting down an shutting up Adams, Randi, JREF and their chin-chuntering supporters with charges of malicious interference of trade?

WHy aren’t they asking the obvious questions, such as what connections does JREF have with the pharmaceutical industry?

How much have the pharmaceutical racketeers, who have been convicted in US court, put directly or indirectly into Adams and Randi’s pants?

The answer? In homeopathic jargon, “Mind, delusion, raptio, Stockholm syndrome, believes his captors.”

Homeopaths have come to sie with their accusers. At the first whiff of an indictment, their necks go stiff as their eyes glaze over.  In their heads, the curse of Hanuman, the Indian legend of the monkey who was hypnotized into forgetting his powers, is at work. It turns in their brains like a worm in its husk.

What a weird coincidence. Hanuman, the monkey who forgot how capable he was, had practically the same odd name as Hahnemann, the man who founded homeopathy eons later.

And how apropos.

Homeopaths, the world’s best physicians, the best workers of internal medicine and quantum psychiatry, these practitioners . . not of other- symptom-producing-allopathy, but real medicine,  curative medicine, quantum medicine designed not to extract money from its victims, but medicine designed to heal.

At every turn, at every allowance, homeopaths, individually and collectively, should at least be demanding why, from every skeptic who opens his mouth about it, why, if it’s so obviously criminal, why haven’t settlements been made in court?


Randi says “so sue me.” A better question is why hasn’t he sued us? If homeopathy is as flawed in the way he describes it, in his numerous lectures, jack-in-the-box epiphanies and videos made throughout the last decade, then where is the mass class action suit against homeopathy?

Why is he, the Skeptic’s Christ, and all the truth seekers at the James Randi Educational Foundation not leading the charge?

Why instead is he holding out his mendicant hand to the piddling, niggling crowd, bilking them of .50 worth of courage for 100 times the cost, and a subscription to his toilet paper, when he could be reaping millions in a lawsuit against the Evil Placeboists and their rattling panaceas?

Am I asking a question I can’t answer? Am I? Or is it obvious?

Can you find the key, hidden in the picture?

And me too. When I was in England last year they were meeting in Cambridge the same day I was lecturing there on the Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy at the Cavendish Laboratory, answering the questions of science with science before the crowned heads of physics at the world’s most prestigious science facility, where were they?

Was one of them there? No, of course not! They were outside the lecture hall with the skeptics picketing my lecture for having destroyed the placebo hypothesis!

I not only humbly invited them in, to attend the Cavendish, at my expense, with full security to protect them from hurled garbage, but I volunteered to go to them and give my lecture there . .

But “nope, sorry, we hate you Benneth.”

“How dare you,” one screamed at me. “Are you trying to make us go to work everyday and like the wogs, make our patients wait for treatment in long lines, without being able to blame our mistakes on figments of the imagination? If you manage to prove that these substances are real medicines with biological action, we’ll have to buy malpractice insurance and go to school to learn CPR!”

“If Benneth proves homeopathy is real, I may have to run that malaria clinic down in Uganda,” said another. “What will the Royal Family do?”

They were too busy dancing on the lawn, rwwing pictures on white boards on whiteboards and making videos with the sound muted . .

“Mind, delusion, thinks whiteboards are better than Power Point presentations.”

HAT has been taking their orders from the enemies of mankind because it suits them just fine.

well, tt’s time for them to go to work for humanity or stop and get out of the business.

HAT should be getting multi million dollar research grants instead of the chicken or fish at the banquet.

HAT should be supporting with hard cold cash the efforts of homeopath Carol Boyce’s videos of malaria clinics in Africa and leptospirosis epidemics in Cuba.

HAT should be laying out hard cold cash for the Homeopathy Works for Me video series, probably the greatest campaign ever mounted for homeopathy.

HAT should be on the front lines in the General Assemblies of the Occupation Movement, chiming in with chants of



And to the homeopathic community they should be saying:

Help us:




Mr. Treddinick, tear down this Homeopathic Action Trust!

Blessings, good health to the craft, and so mote it be,

John Benneth, Homeopath

For better health call 503 819 7777

Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter


Amidst vicious attacks on its credibility, the world’s smartest woman has denied it was her who wrote a letter in response to an article about Swedish authorities accepting homeopathy.


Apparently not, at least NOT YET. 

After it has been called to my attention, by one of our faithful readers, that the Marilyn vos Savant of “world’s smartest woman” fame has denied writing the letter that appeared under the same name in a comment responding to an online article, I am amending my assertions, equivocally.

Well, certainly it should come as no surprise that those of the highest echelons of intelligence have validated, used, supported or endorsed homeopathy. But really, what constitutes such a claim as the world’s most intelligent anybody? What about some of these evil geniuses? How smart, really, are they? Shouldn’t intgelligence include indices for how well you get along with others? Does some abstract figure of I.Q. warrant such a nomer?

And if we can say some woman by dint of this quanta is the world’s most intelligent, what does achievement, wealth, approbation and . . wealth (again) rate for it?

I’d like to know.

Is a mere paper and pencil test, which can be cheated or lied about, not common to a rat in a maze? What is the best criteria for intelligence? How would we rate our own if we accepted a quotient of intelligence for the ability to rate intelligence? Cannot intelligence be appraised solely in spiritual terms of happiness? Why not a misery index?  Couldn’t it be said the dumbest people on the planet are in reality the most miserable no matter what fiscal appendages, achievements and academic commendations  they may bear? How smart is a man who throws him self into a fire?

Have you ever thrown a cup at someone’s head?

Does she use Splenda? What is her daily consumption of aspartame? Did she vote for Romney? Does she know who Victor Neuman is?

Shouldn’t warning signs such as the above be consodered benchmarks of intelligence? And how does intelligence farfe beside wisdom?

No, I submit to you, my friends, these are too arbitrary and give inapprpriate indications of intelligence, and how much greater is wisdom? A better index, I think, is indeed homeopathy! Allow me to illustrate my assertions to you in full Technicolor in the plush 3-D cinema of your mind.

Is Marilyn vos Savant really the world’s most intelligernt woman. She never responded to my inquiry, how intelligent is that?

Who was the world’s most intelligent man?

Mark Twain remains the world’s most quoted man. Defintely a candidate for the world’s smartest man. Who but a man of such incomparable intelligence as this Clemens would stave off his last work for publication, Letters from the Earth, to 50 years after his death, just to give the world a chance to catch up? Not only is it an ontology, it brings up the progenitor of the Judaeo Christian faith before a celestial court by his ears for his report in Numbers 31, without reference to ice cream flavors, but rather to the rapine genocide of the Midianites and the modern karma of the Jew.

Twain is the Godfather of American literature, he wrote her first great novel (The Adverentures of Huckleberry Finn) he is the Lincoln of her literature, the cynosure of her jungle . . and he used homeopaths almost exclusively.

That’s right. Mark Twain was an ardent user of homeopathy!

He wrote, “. . the introduction of homeopathy . . forced the old-school doctor to stir around and learn something of a rational nature about his business; you may honestly feel grateful that homoeopathy survived the attempts of the allopathists [conventional physicians] to destroy it, even though you may never employ any physician but an allopathist while you live.”

John D. Rockerfeller, in today’s dollars, was the richest man to have ever lived. He was also a homeopathy enthusiast. He lived to the age of 97 with his personal homeopath by his side.

Emil Adolph von Behring, a physicist, the father of immunology, winner of the first Nobel prize for medicine due to his work in developing the diptheria antitoxin. He credited homeopathy for his success. He wrote, “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? And by what technical term could we more appropriately speak of this influence, exerted by a similar virus than by 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 . . only the road of homeopathy led to my goal!

Mohandas “Mahatma” Ghandi was the exemplary sanyasin of his time, the GOdfather of India, exponent non pareil of the power of non violent civil disobedience. He was also one of the world’s greatest proponents of homeopathy, and from the impact of his words on such a huge number of people, second only to Hahnemann himself as homeopathy’s chief proselyte.

Ghandi wrote, “Hahneman’s memory wakes us again and you are to follow him, but the opponents hate the existence of the principles and practice of homeopathy, which in reality cures a larger percentage of cases than any other method of treatment, and it is beyond all doubt safer and more economical and the most complete medical science.”);

Abraham Lincoln (greatest U.S. President, surrounded himself with homeopaths and sent them to cure McClellan of typhoid fever );

Bill Clinton (President of U.S. during the world’s greatest economic boom, reportedly received homeopathic treament);

Queen Elizabeth II (current Queen of England)  and the Royal Family have made long use of homeopathy r

Professor William Tiller, (former head of the Stanford physics department, co-authored The Structure Of Liquid Water; Novel Insights From Materials Research; Potential Relevance To Homeopathy. He and others write, “The burden of proof on critics of homeopathy is to establish that the structure of the processed remedy is not different from the original solvent. The principal conclusions of this paper concern only the plausibility of the biological action of ultradiluted water remedies, they are based on some very old (e.g. homeopathy) and some very new (e.g. metallic and nanobubble colloids) observations which have been rejected on invalid grounds or due to ignorance of the materials research literature and its theoretical basis. This constitutes an excellent example of the common error in rejecting new scientific discoveries by using the absence of evidence as evidence for absence.”

Luc Montagnier (immunologist, Nobel prize winner for discovery of the HIV virus, He says in an interview that Jacques Benveniste, whose controversial homeopathic work had been attacked, was “a modern Galileo”. When asked if he wasn’t “worried that your colleagues will think you have drifted into pseudo-science?”, Montagnier replied “No, because it’s not pseudo-science. It’s not quackery. These are real phenomena which deserve further study.”

Professor Brian Josephson, British physicist, Nobel prize winner for discovery of the Josephson Effect, sponsored seminal lectures by French immunologist Jacques Benveniste on the new biological paradigm of homeopathy,  and American homeopath John Benneth’s Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy at the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge University.

These are but a few of the geniuses who have supported homeoapthy. It got me to wondering: If Marilyn vos Savant, the world’s smartest woman, can endorse it, what about the world’s smartest man, Emanuel Swedenborg?  What did he think about it? Well, unfortunately, he died before Hahnemann could get to him, but it has been stated that Hahnemann was a devotee’ of Swedenborg’s. Philosophically, Swedenborg and Hahneamnn reportedly drank from the same well.

“Swedenborg had attempted to philosophically redefine Paracelsus and Kircher´s theory of signatures, renaming it as “theory of correspondences” – scientia correspondetiarum.[5] This constituted the ground of later parallels with Hahnemann´s similitude.

“Yet, Swedenborg´s theories had no empirical support. As they derived from deductions, revelations, intuitions and spiritual insights, the Swedish was considered a dreamer, the founder of a religious-philosophic sect rather than of a system of rational thought.

“Homeopaths were always perplexed by the fact that many of the most original homeopathic minds were attracted by Swedenborg´s ideas. Especially, it was very difficult to explain how they could have confounded a therapeutic system – grounded on experience and elaborated through the strictest rational criteria, a kind of offshoot of 18th century Enlightenment – with such dark hermetic speculations.

“In fact, some of his theories seemed to correspond to homeopathic notions: besides correspondences theory, the idea of the representation of the maximum through the minimum (consequently, of minimal doses), the refusal of aggressive medical intervention, the stress upon body-mind relationship, the postulate of matter-energy unity, the octaves scale (employed by Kent as a guide to the sequence of dynamizations). However, these affinities do not suffice as an explanation. It would seem that Swedenborg´s ideas provided an “existential solution” that surpassed the frame of homeopathic doctrine.” Dr. Paulo Rosenbaum, Kent: Homeopathic Criticism and Knowledge

Senator Royal Copeland, MD chief sponsor of the FDA’s Federal Drug and Cosmeitc’s Act, prior to his tenure as a U.S. Senator in 1922, served as President of the New York Board of Health.  He became popular with New Yorkers while training as a homeopathic physician to protect them from the greatest epidemic to ever hit Mankind.

Pardon me for that errand . . I get carried away [sometimes], especially when someone mentions Swedenborg, but it’s nothing a dose of Lycopodium can’t cure.

It may sound cheeky, but to my own devoted followers I would say the point is this, that if vos Savant of brain teaser fame did endorse homeopathy, she would be in good company, as indices in the remarkable book by the great Dana Ullman have illumined for us, The Homeopathic Revolution. [I’m still waiting for him to send me a fresh copy, as the binding has given way due to pressing it down too hard on the copy machine, and if you don’t know what I’m talking about, you’re an honest person who needs question your utility]

Now, as you may note, all of these savants have been male with the exception of the woman who bears the word as her surname, which makes me susicpicious, and who to date has not yet, apparently, admitted to having a Come to Hahnemann moment. Too bad, as we have seen those who pursue approbation before the fact shy away from homeopathy.

Mary Baker Eddy was a trained Mesmerist, spiritual healer and founder of the Christian Science religion, best selling author and, according to Twain, the most powerful and wealthiest woman of her time, who with a wave of her hand could command millions. But above all to her credit she was a professional homeopath. Whatever you may think of her, saviour or scam artist, using a more liberal measure, you may very well conclude that she may actually have been . . and still remains . . the most intelligent woman to have ever lived, and if not not, at least [perhaps] commanding a solid second to Hillary Clinton.  Mrs. Eddy wrote

“Homoeopathy furnishes the evidence to the senses, that symptoms, which might be produced by a certain drug, are removed by using the same drug which might cause the symptoms.”

Mrs. Eddy was married to a homeopath. she was herself a practicing homeopath and her adopted son, Dr. Ebenezer Foster Eddy, who as drummer boy during the Civil War was known as “Little Nell,” at the age of 15 being small, fair and delicate, bore the sobriquet “daughter of the regiment,” at 40 was a homeopathic physician and for a time second only to his mother in power and command of the Church.

 A jack of diamonds,  skinned with hides from writhing creatures, Dr. Ebenezer Foster Eddy was immaculately dressed with his magnificent fur-lined coat, fur cap. These gifts to “Bennie” were from Mother Eddy. A stunning diamond stickpin spangling from his shirt front was the climax of his couture.

No ordinary musician, he would play, sit for hours on the massive pipe organ in the austere cathedral inspired by homeopathy and play for Mother, the woman sitting alone midst the Greek revival architecture, playhing canonical hymns to which she had appended poetic lyrics,

“Shepherd, show me how to go O’er the hillside steep, How to gather, how to sow, How to feed Thy sheep. I will listen for Thy voice, Lest my footsteps stray; I will follow and rejoice, All the rugged way.

“Thou wilt bind the stubborn will, Wound the callous breast, Make self righteousness be still, Break earth’s stupid rest. Strangers on a barren shore, Laboring long and lone, We would enter by the door, And Thou knowest Thine own.

“So, when day grows dark and cold, Tear or triumph harms, Lead Thy lambkins to the fold, Take them in Thine arms. Feed the hungry, heal the heart, Till the morning’s beam; White as wool, ’ere they depart, Shepherd, wash them clean.

She writes of herself,

“The author’s medical researches and experiments had prepared herthought for the metaphysics of Christian Science. Every material dependence had failed her in her search for truth; and she can now understand why, and can see the means by which mortals are divinely driven to a spiritual source for health and happiness.

This was the Church Homeopathy inspired. It’s growth in the early 1900’s, according to Twain, who was Mrs. Eddy’s most ardent critic, if its phenomenal growth continued as its 1904 rate, by the 1930’s it would overtake Congress.

If nay the inheritance but the creation of money and power in today’s dollars are it’s indices, Mary Baker Eddy, a homeopath,  may still well be the world’s most intelligent woman. In her seminal test, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures she writes,

Christian Science’s homoeopathic attenuations

“Her experiments in homoeopathy had made her skeptical as to material curative methods. Jahr, from Aconitum to Zincum, enumerates the general symptoms, the characteristic signs, which demand different remedies; but the drug is frequently attenuated to such a degree that not a vestige of it remains. Thus we learn that it is not the drug which expels the disease or changes one of the symptoms of disease.

Only salt and water

“The author has attenuated Natrum Muriaticum (common table salt) until there was not a single saline property left. The salt had “lost his savour;” and yet, with one drop of that attenuation in a goblet of water, and a teaspoonful of the water administered at intervals of three hours, she has cured a patient sinking in the last stage of typhoid fever. The highest attenuation of homoeopathy and the most potent rises above matter into mind. This discovery leads to more light. From it may be learned that either human faith or the divine Mind is the healer and that there is no efficacy in a drug.”

Now, returning to the letter in question, be it hoax or fact haven,  it reported Swedish authorities have accepted homeopathy as a valid referral by non homeopathic medical doctors!

Much to my discredit, I simply assumed, out of hope, that this was the same Marilyn vos Savant I thought it was.

Immediately after being informed of the fact check oversight error, I sent her a note through Twitter stating that I was amending the post, hoping she would share her true thoughts on homeopathy.

Fair enough so far? 

Hopefully the real Marilyn vos Savant will be amenable to reviewing the evidence for homeopathy, and rendering an opinion. Yes, that would be nice, but it didn’t happen and I doubt it ever will. Marilyn vos Savant appears to limit the use of her great intelligence to solving crossword puzzles.

[SUBSCRIBE to be notified of further updates]


The country of  Sweden has joined Nobel laureates, top material scientists, the heads of state, royalty, countless medical doctors over two centuries, the state of Arizona, Cuba and millions of common people in accepting homeopathy, the world’s fastest growing medicine.

Hopefully, the world’s smartest woman, after reviewing the evidence for homeopathy, will join these luminaries in supporting further research into curative medicine.

Meanwhile, a ruling by Sweden’s Supreme Administrative court has struck down the Swedish Medical Association’s prohibition of homeopathy.

Swedish doctors may now recommend it.

The ruling has drawn the usual spears from its competitor of allopathy (common modern medicine that evokes symptoms other than those being treated). But in a comment following an article on the Swedish ruling, the defense of the embattled curative doctrine appeared  to have been joined by Marilyn vos Savant, the woman the Guiness Book of World Records claimed has the world’s greatest IQ for a woman,  rated to be as high as 230.

One of the points of the letter signed by “Marilyn vos Savant” pointed out is a noted fact that made it sound like this was indeed a letter from someone who was looking at the argument from an unusally objective point of view, what one would expect from the world’s smartest woman: Criticisms of homeopathy bear little or no references.

Exactly what I’ve been saying for years now.

At 12:59 on September 24, 2011 the letter signed by Marilyn vos Savant was posted as a reply to the announcement that Swedish courts are recognizing homeopathy.

This is actually nothing new. Courts all over the world recognize homeopathy. Homeopathic high dilutes are FDA regulated and approved LEGAL drugs. They are used by numerous medical doctors, as well as licensed homeopaths.

The letter in question endorses homeopathy and asks intelligent questions, just as one would expedct from the world’s smartest woman. She writes:

“Personally, I believe in homeopathy. But that is me. The system, developed by a GERMAN doctor named Samuel Hahnemann, is a system based on the principle that a much diluted preparation of a substance that causes symptoms in healthy individuals can cure disease that causes the same symptoms in a sick person. As I said, it has worked for me, but I might be the exception of the rule.

“What is “top thinking” is the statement made by Marie Wedin, chairwoman of the Swedish Medical Association, about the stance of the organism on the matter:

“We believe treatment should be evidence-based, and evidence has shown that the absolute majority of homeopathic cures have not been proven effective.”

“Why doesn’t she provide numbers and/or who made a research about it?


“Marie Wedin is just another bureaucrat, that is, an administrator concerned with procedural correctness at the  expense of people’s needs. They usually open their mouths, long before they start their brain’s ignition system.

“With due respect

“Marilyn vos Savant”


The writer is indeed perceptive in calling for references. Every statement against homeopathy turns out to be false, and there really aren’t any exceptions. Critics say homeopathy’s rule of  “like cures like” has no correlatives in science. This isn’t true. In magnetic fields, like repels like. In chemistry, like dissolves like. In alcoholism, hair of the dog that bit you.

“Bartender, methamphetamine for all my ADHD friends. And the smallpox vaccine for the Apaches!”

“If water has a memory,” they quibble, “then why doesn’t it remember everything that passes through it?” Well, why doesn’t magnetic recording tape remember everything that’s been recorded on it, it’s not a Victrola, or why don’t the memories in atheist computers remember all the porn they’ve watched?

Because it gets erased!

Homeopathy is often indicted as not being evidence based, when in fact it has built its protocols on evidence alone by directly observing the action of its curative substances on human subjects in double and even triple blind trials. In fact, it has been asserted that homeopaths invented the double blind trial. All classical homeopathic remedies are subjected to “provings,” tests on volunteers to see what symptoms they elicit.

Homeopathy has borne the burden of epidemics, outperforming its allopathic counterpart 10 to one. Recently Cuba administered 4.5 million doses to stop an annual epidemic and saved lives and hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Even more compelling evidence for the science minded is seen in the action of high dilutes on plants, animals and in vitro biochemical experiments.

Critics say homeopathic remedies have no plausible mechanism of action, that because they shouldn’t work they don’t work. This “implausiblity argument” has been struck down by a team of American material scientists led by Prof. Rustum Roy of Penn State University, who have unequivocally stated that the highly diluted aqueous solutions used in homeopathy do indeed have identifiable physical differences from their inert vehicles.

Recently Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier, the French virologist who co-discovered the AIDS virus, used equipment developed by the renowned French immunologist Jacques Benveniste to detect the homeopathic signal, an electromagnetic frequency beginning at one kH, detectable at other higher frequencies throughout the spectrum.

Montagnier speculated that the signal is triggered by the Schumann resonance, the Earth’s background radiation.


It can now be said that the EM operative mechanism is most likely to include radioactivity, similar to tritium, a natural trace element isotope found in small quantities in the human body.

The experiments by Nobel laureate Montagnier reveal a homeopathic signal at 1kH. Beta scintillation measures observed by Dr. Rolland Conte  and his team show that homeopathic high dilutes emit high beta frequencies between ultra violet and gamma (Theory of High Dilutons).

Opponents of homeopathy have complained that water cannot have a memory as required by homeopathy. But in June 2010, chemistry Prof. Emeritus Martin Chaplin of London Southbank University, who Roy calls “the guru of water,” wrote “Water does store and transmit information, concerning solutes, by means of its hydrogen-bonded network.” [Chaplin, Memory of Water]

Others have said that all good studies of homeopathy have concluded that homeopathy is merely a placebo. But this isn’t true. Placebo is not an accurately definitive term of anything other than what we want it to be, no major metanalysis has ever concluded that homeopathy is a placebo.

Of the five major metanalyses done on homeopathy, only one, Shang, has come close to stating that homeopathy is a placebo, but that study has been soundly dismissed as seriously flawed, and the reviewers of Shang  stated conclusively in their results that the data showed that collective trials showed  “Homeopathy had a significant effect beyond placebo” (Ludtke & Rutten).

As one explores the research and testimony of homeopathy and personally experiences it, a second paradigm arises in stark contrast with allopathy:  The statements made against homeopathy are always based on assumption, presumption and fallacy.

There’s something in the water . .

As implausible as it may be ,due to the dilution of its remedies, it is impossible for this crypto molecular pharmacy  of homeopathy to be dependent on the ‘”placebo effect.” What is implausible is that its effects are purely psychogenic.

A recent question in commentary asked “why is there this opposition to homeopathy?”

I think it is because of several reasons.  Homeopathy is difficult to understand yet it is accessible to lay people for very little cost. Its pharmacy can be created by anyone from anything. It escapes the grasp of intellectual property rights. It competes with the profit incentive of allopathy, is more effective than allopathy and infuriates the elitism of science.

It puts real medicine back into health care.

John Benneth, Homeopath

503- 819 – 7777

Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter

Homeopathy, the Religion

Science and Health with Key to the Materia Medica,
by John Robert Benneth

Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, saw the connection between Mesmerism, spiritual healing and homeopathy.

This may come as a surprise to many.  It may be troubling to some, revelatory to others, but in the United States, homeopathy is regarded, in at least one state, as a religious practice exempt from laws normal regulatory laws.

This is a difficult subject to write about, hard to articulate . It isn’t to destroy Christian Science, it’s here to enlighten it as there are some conundrums which need unravelling.

I don’t know about other states, but in  Oregon, homeopathy is defined as a spiritual practice and therefore has an exemption from regulation or restriction by rules that would normally restrict the use of homeopathic drugs to naturopaths and other physicians.

Here is the wording:

ORS 685.010 Definitions. As used in this chapter: “Drugs” includes: (a) Substances recognized as drugs in the official Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States

ORS 685.030 Application of Chapter 685 — Naturopaths 2009 EDITION

(2) “Drugs” includes:

(a) Substances recognized as drugs in the official United States Pharmacopoeia, official National Formulary, official Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, other drug compendium or any supplement to any of them;
(1) This chapter does not apply to any Christian Scientist or other person who by religious or spiritual means endeavors to prevent or cure disease or suffering in accord with the tenets of any church.

It could be argued that homeopathy cannot be construed as religious or spiritual healing. The response to that  is that it certainly can be regarded as such, as the official Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States is only a compendium of labelled intentionsnot a chemical or physical identification of such. Allopathic pharmacopoeia are catalogs of patent medicines, they can be identified chemically, wehreas homeopathic, or perjhaps more technically, supramolecular medicines to date have no such convention.

The Oregon statute specifically names it and Christian Science in its seminal religiouis text “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures specifically describes the use of homeopathy as spiritual. The religion of homeopathy is Christian Science, a late 19th century religion known for its spiritual healing,  inspired and founded by Mary Baker Eddy, a practicing homeopath who was married to a homeopath, Dr. Daniel Patterson, and had an adopted son who was also a homeopath, Dr. Ebenezer Foster Eddy.

At one time, Foster-Eddy, who was adopted by Mrs. Eddy at the age of 41, the same age at which Mrs. Eddy had her transformative healing, became the second most powerful figure in the church.

She studied under the renowned American Mesrmerist and spiritual healer, Phineas Quimby.

She discusses homeopathy in the Christian Science text book, describing it as a form of spiritually curative medicine that demonstrates the principles of spiritual healing.

Mary Baker Eddy establishes homeopathy as a spiritual practice.

In Science and Health she describes how homeopathy demonstrates spiritual healing. In the church manual  cases of serious diseases treated with homeopathy are discussed. The homeopathic remedies used to successfully treat them with are named. Procedures and processes particular to homoeopathy, such as homeopathic aggravation, the use of placebos, the use of mental symptoms in diagnosis of disease, the absence of the intended orthomolecular matter in homeopathic remedies, how potency increases with dilution are taught. The homeoapthic materia medica used as a reference book is named.

The use of similars in homeopathy, the effects of homeopathic remedies on the mind and how homeopathy provides for an understanding of spiritual healing is explained in Christian Science.

Homeopathy is the inspiration of Christian Science.

The religion is explicitly free from Oregon laws regulating the practice of homeopathy.

The founder was was well steeped in it. Mrs. Eddy’s first husband, Dr. Daniel Patterson, was a homeopath. The church manual, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy, gives examples of cases cured by her and the remedies she used to cure them with.

Collecting the references from her book of revelations, one can see that homoeopathy is what she took to be evidence of the power of mind over matter, that healing is essentially spiritual.

Science and Health says of Mrs. Eddy,

“Her experiments in homoeopathy had made her skeptical as to material curative methods. Jahr, from Aconitum to Zincum oxydatum, enumerates the general symptoms, the characteristic signs, which demand different remedies; but the drug is frequently attenuated to such a degree that not a vestige of it remains. Thus we learn that it is not the drug which expels the disease or changes one of the symptoms of disease.”

Eddy explicitly credits homoeopathy for making her skeptical of allopathy in the use of material methods to heal. She mentions one of Hahnemann’s closest disciples, Georg Jahr, as her reference work in homoeopathy, and states that not a vestige of a drug remains in a homeopathic remedy.

This can be taken to mean that none of the original intended matter is left in the homeopathic solution.

She writes,

“The author has attenuated Natrum muriaticum (common table-salt) until there was not a single saline property left. The salt had “lost his savour;” and yet, with one drop of that attenuation in a goblet of water, and a teaspoonful of the water administered at intervals of three hours, she has cured a patient sinking in the last stage of typhoid fever. The highest attenuation of homoeopathy and the most potent rises above matter into mind.

“This discovery leads to more light. From it may be learned that either human faith or the divine Mind is the healer and that there is no efficacy in a drug.

“You say a boil is painful; but that is impossible, for matter without mind is not painful.
The boil simply manifests, through inflammation and swelling, a belief in pain, and this belief is called a boil. Now administer mentally to your patient a high attenuation of truth, and it will soon cure the boil. The fact that pain cannot exist where there is no mortal mind to feel it is a proof that this so-called mind makes its own pain — that is, its own belief in pain.”

“Homoeopathy diminishes the drug, but the potency of the medicine increases as the drug disappears.”

She then presents rhetorical questions, questions not easily answered.

“Vegetarianism, homoeopathy, and hydropathy have diminished drugging; but if drugs are an antidote to disease, why lessen the antidote? If drugs are good things, is it safe to say that the less in quantity you have of them the better? If drugs possess intrinsic virtues or intelligent curative qualities, these qualities must be mental. Who named drugs, and what made them good or bad for mortals, beneficial or injurious?

A Terrible Case

“A case of dropsy, given up by the faculty, fell into my hands. It was a terrible case. Tapping had been employed, and yet, as she lay in her bed, the patient looked like a barrel. I prescribed the fourth attenuation of Argentum nitratum with occasional doses of a high attenuation of Sulphuris. She improved perceptibly. Believing then somewhat in the ordinary theories of medical practice, and learning that her former physician had prescribed these remedies, I began to fear an aggravation of symptoms from their prolonged use, and told the patient so; but she was unwilling to give up the medicine while she was recovering. It then occurred to me to give her unmedicated pellets and watch the result. I did so, and she continued to gain. Finally she said that she would give up her medicine for one day, and risk the effects. After trying this, she informed me that she could get along two days without globules; but on the third day she again suffered, and was relieved by taking them. She went on in this way, taking the unmedicated pellets, — and receiving occasional visits from me, — but employing no other means, and she was cured.

Chapter Six, Science, Theology and Medicine, S&H, p. 156

In the next paragraph, Mrs. Eddy presents homeopathy as the preceding step to metaphysics.

“Metaphysics, as taught in Christian Science, is the next stately step beyond homoeopathy. In metaphysics, matter disappears from the remedy entirely, and Mind takes its rightful and supreme place. Homoeopathy takes mental symptoms largely into consideration in its diagnosis of disease. Christian Science deals wholly with the mental cause in judging and destroying disease. It succeeds where homoeopathy fails, solely because its one recognized Principle of healing is Mind, and the whole force of the mental element is employed through the Science of Mind, which never shares its rights with inanimate matter.

Mrs. Eddy is presenting the argument here that homeopathy is the learned progression of metaphysics. Modern science is now discovering the physical mechanisms of homeopathy and are describing them in scientific terms similar to metaphysical terms.

Amongst other meanings meta means “beyond. ” Recently the description of the operative mechanism of homeopathy has been identified as “supramolecular” (Demangeat, Montagnier, Roy). Supra also means beyond, referring to intermolecular forces.

Professor Rustum Roy, the late professor emeritus of the material sciences at Pennsylvania State University, and one of the world’s most decorated and highly respected scientists, has made a particular point of addressing the role structure plays in giving matter its particular qualities: The same material element can have entirely different properties due to the arrangement of its molecules. His prime example is a diamond, one of the hardest elements, and graphite, one of the softest; yet both substances are made of pure Carbon.

Roy uses this example to illustrate the polymorphic qualities of homeoapthic remedies, which are made with water.

He talks about how a mere refrigerator magnet can change the pH of water.

ROY: “What got me interested in this field,” says Roy, referring to a Power Point slide of Raman spectroscopy, showing the psychokinetic effects of Dr. Yan Xin, a physician of the Chinese Traditional Medicine Research Institute of Chongqing, China on the pH of water at a distance (, “was this particular figure. This is the Qi Gong master Yan Xin, who I know rather well. He was a personal physician to Deng Tsao Peng, the Prime Minister of China for many, many years, he was changing the water from seven kilometers, or even 2,000 kilometers, 6,000 kilometers away, San Fransisco to Beijing. And so look at the difference now between the left and the top and the bottom left. Is that a change or what in the Raman signal . . I should, Holy Cow, either this guy is drawing them in and making them up, but the person doing this was the head of the physics dept at Singh Hwa.”

CALLER: “He is changing the water by sending qi energy?”

ROY: He is sending qi energy from a distance. He first did it at seven kilometers away, and never in the same room, and then he did it cross town, San Fran to Beijing, and so on, so it is really . . I want to go into more detail, so is water that changeable, intention, these are relatively weak vectors, if you could do that, now I don’t know, I just assume that nobody’s cheating here, and I said that is certainly very interesting.”
How Homeopathy Works, video, 43:30,

“What is very fascinating with Dr. Yan Xin’s work, is that he is using modern scientific methods and tools to prove (to the Western mind) that the focusing of chi onto substance such as DNA can be measured. Besides conducting studies, he has given Chi-Emitting Lectures to millions of people. In these lectures, he sends out healing energy to the audience, in which people may be healed of an affliction, and he teaches them a form of meditation in which they can learn to heal themselves.”

Marry Baker Eddy writes,

“Homoeopathy mentalizes a drug with such repetition of thought-attenuations, that the drug becomes more like the human mind than the substratum of this so-called mind, which we call matter; and the drug’s power of action is proportionately increased.”

In 1896, psychologist Frank H. Randall, in his book “Mesmerism, Hypnotism and Thought Reading,” writes on how to magnetize water. It is strangely resonant with what Roy observes of Yan Xin’s ability to restructure water psychokinetically:

“How to magnetise water: Procure a tumbler fresh water, hold it in the palm of the left hand that the fingers extend round and in contact with the vessel, concentrate the fingers of the right hand to a focus inside the the tumbler, either below the surface of the water, or just above it. Gather from your patient and seat of his disease, that you may dispensator magnetism into the water accordingly, strongly will your patient’s relief, using the utmost energy of your mind to force the magnetic fluid through the finger tips. Continue this concentration for a few minutes; breathe and make a few passes over the glass, then hand it to your patient; request him to drink as much as he can without discomforting himself.”

Mrs. Eddy writes,

“Evidences of progress and of spiritualization greet us on every hand. Drug-systems are quitting their hold on matter and so letting in matter’s higher stratum, mortal mind. Homoeopathy, a step in advance of allopathy, is doing this. Matter is going out of medicine; and mortal mind, of a higher attenuation than the drug, is governing the pellet.”

“Homoeopathy furnishes the evidence to the senses, that symptoms, which might be produced by a certain drug, are removed by using the same drug which might cause the symptoms. This confirms my theory that faith in the drug is the sole factor in the cure. The effect, which mortal mind produces through one belief, it removes through an opposite belief, but it uses the same medicine in both cases.

All o these people quoted here are speaking of a biomagnetic force that an be manipulate directly by human operators, or indirectly, in homeopathy, through the process of dilution and succussion.

Mesmerism, contrary to much popular opinion that it is synonymous with hypnotism and is induced merely by suggestion. But this is not the case. Mesmerism is the manipulation of silent forces to induce altered states, both physical and mental.

Homeopathy shares with Mesmerism this same quality, and it is interesting to see that investigators seem to be brushing against the same biomagnetic connection.

The founder of homeopathy, Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, MD, is no exception:

“I find it yet necessary to allude here to ANIMAL MAGNETISM, as it is termed, or rather MESMERISM (as it should be called in deference to Mesmer, its first founder) which differs so much in its nature from all other therapeutic agents

“This curative force, often so stupidly denied and disdained for a century, acts in different ways

“It is a marvelous, priceless gift of God to mankind by means of which the strong will of a well intentioned person upon a sick one by contact and even without this and even at some distance, can bring the vital energy of the healthy mesmeriser endowed with this power into another person dynamically (just as one of the poles of a powerful magnetic rod upon a bar of steel)

“It acts in part by replacing in the sick whose vital force within the organism is deficient here and there, in part also in other parts where the vital force has accumulated too much and keeps up irritating nervous disorders it turns it aside, diminishes and distributes it equally and in general extinguishes the morbid condition of the life principle of the patient and substitutes in its place the normal of the mesmerist acting powerfully upon him, for instance, old ulcers, amaurosis, paralysis of single organs and so forth

“Many rapid apparent cures performed in all ages, by mesmerizers endowed with great natural power, belong to this class

“The effect of communicated human power upon the whole human organism was most brilliantly shown, in the resuscitation of persons who had lain some time apparently dead, by the most powerful sympathetic will of a man in full vigor of vital energy,(166) and of this kind of resurrection history records many undeniable examples

“If the mesmerizing person of either sex capable at the same time of a good-natured enthusiasm (even its degeneration into bigotry, fanaticism, mysticism or philanthropic dreaming) will be empowered all the more with this philanthropic self-sacrificing performance to direct exclusively the power of his commanding good will to the recipient requiring his help and at the same time to concentrate these, he may at times perform apparent miracles

“Notes related to the aphorism – [166] Especially of one of such persons, of whom there are not many, who, along with great kindness of disposition and perfect bodily powers, possesses but A VERY MODERATE DESIRE FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE, which it would give him very little trouble wholly to suppress, in whom, consequently, all the fine vital spirits that would otherwise be employed in the preparation of the semen, are ready to be communicated to others, by touching them and powerfully exerting the will

“Some powerful mesmerisers, with whom I have become acquainted, had ALL this peculiar character.” Hahnemann, The Organon of Medicine, aphorism 288

Hahnemann, a professional translator who spoke a ozen languages, was one of the most educated chemists of his day. He had little time for mummery or mysticism, as his critics would love to portray him.

Such was also the case with Anton Mesmer, also an MD. These people, like Roy are presenting their world view because of what they experienced, and although it doesn’t fit the putative paradigm, in the face of ridicule, defamation andattack, they report it fearlessly.

In the past, science has fled in the face of this evidence. And so, as in the case of Christian Science, it has retreated into religion, as a spiritual practice. Mrs. Eddy did not have the benefit of modern supramolecular chemistry that studies intermolecular forces and tries to explain them.

Homeopathy is staying abreast of sceince inthi regard. The material sciences have cave in on the memory o water argument and are now admitting that water, in regard to its solutes, can indeed retain a memory.

A new day is dawning . . .

Passionflower of the Skeptic

John Benneth, Homeopath vs. James Randi, Pseudoscientist

“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”

Herbert Spencer

It’s been said John Benneth carries a grudge against James “the Amazing” Randi because 12 years ago Benneth took Randi’s Challenge to prove homeopathy . . and Randi backed out.

But it could also be said the Benneth carries the torch for Randi, because Randi has been regarded as the King of the Skeptics, a man with a kind of laser like x-ray vision who can see through any kind of deception, detect any kind of fraud, and I, John “the Prosaic” Benneth just keep plodding along in search of the facts.

Take this video for instance. Note the differences in Randi between his stage appearance at TED in 2007 and the video recording done in the JREF library in  2011.  Notice especially his eyes.  It is my suggestion here that Randi’s continued abuse of Calms Forte, which essentially is not homeopathic, but slips past FDA regulations by claiming to be homeopathic, has created irreversible effects, both seen and unseen . . the unseen being intestinal cancer.

Make your own investigation here. Watch the video and then read my commentary below. decide for yourself what is real, what is illusion . .

What follows the commentary is a transcript of the video for your analysis and search engine indexing.

This gets even more mysterious when we examine the item Randi slam dunks . . Calms Forte . . more closely. It isn’t  homeopathic. It may say it’s homeopathic, and by US government standards of the HPUS it may technically may be homeopathic (although I doubt it), but neither are the ingredients of Calms Forte being used homeopathically, nor are they of a truly homeopathic potency! 

That’s right. It only says it is. Because it says it is, the majority of users assume it is.  Homeopathic “drugs” are not subject to the same testing requirements of commercial patent medicines, and so this allows the manufacturer to bring an actual  drug, in it original molecular form, to market without question.

I’ll prove it to you, slowly, inexorably, but with a dogged appetite for reason..

“Why John, why?” you may ask, and the answer is simply this. This is inextricably woven into how we think about what is medicine, healing and cure. This is about a racket, probably the world’s greatest operating sub silentio, protected by illusion, supported by the likes of a confessed charlatan.

Zicam did exactly the same thing, calling a crude molecular concentration of zinc “homeopathic” for its cold remedy, and then got in trouble with the Feds when people began reporting that after using it they were losing their sense of smell . . permanently!

Now how could people lose their sense of smell from something that James “the man with the x-ray eyes” Randi  insists has nothing in it? Because if you read the ingredients, you’ll find that the ingredients are well below Avogadro’s limit, which is the point of dilution where none of the original substance remains, the point where the energetic powers of the solution take over completely, reversing the effect of the diluent, the substance that left its elctromagnetic imprint in hydrogen bonding on the solution used to “medicate” the tablets or pilules, the “little sugar pills” as skeptics love to call them.

Here’ the catch: A substance does not have to be devoid of a molecular substance to be homeopathy. The word homeopathy does not necessarily mean diluted past recognition, as Randi is inferring Calms Forte to be. It is not. Calms Forte has a lot of an herbal sedative in it!

If it seems I’m beating this thing to death, in this case hopefully appearances aren’t deceiving.  I want to make this perfectly clear that Randi is fooling his audience at TED, and anyone else who cares to be duped by this rascal, that he is ingesting an inert susbtance that has no detectable substance of what is listed on the box! And the question that follows should be why?

Why is he gulping something that has a measurable quantity of sedative in it (Passionflower, the main ingredient in Calms Forte), traditionally known for its ability to influence sleep without narcotic effects, when he could just as easily do his demonstration with a homeopathic remedy, indicated for sleeplessness, that is truly without any detectable active substance in it?

“I am satisfied it (Passiflora, Passionflower) is no narcotic. It never stupefies or overpowers the senses. A patient under its full influence may be wakened up and he will talk to you as rationally as ever he did ; leave him for a moment and he will soon be off to the Elysian Fields again. I have tried it, my friend, in all sorts of neuralgic affections, and have usually astonished my more enlightened patients with it. Many times I have them to ask me what in the world it was that had such a sweet influence over them.” Dr. L. Phares, of Newtonia, Miss., States.) from the chapter on “Passiflora” in New, Old and Forgotten Remedies by Edward Pollock Anshutz.

So here is my question to you: Could it be that Randi has found, that repeatedly doing this demonstration  with an actual high dilute as used in homeopathic remedies, has caused long term adverse effects?

It could be possible. The old school medical doctors, who saw the effects of homeopathics on thousands of subjects, reported that too many applications of a remedy of too high a potency could actually graft  symptoms permanently onto the patient!

Perhaps Randi knows this and has found himself to be in too deep, to deep to return tothe Styxxian shore.

Look at his eyes!

The clip of Randi on stage is from TED talks. TED is an acronym for “Technology Entertainment and Design.”  It is a series of conferences, presented globally, produced  by a private non-profit organization . . the Sapling Foundation, which was formed to disseminate “ideas worth spreading.”

The lecture featuring Randi was recorded in February of 2007. The “idea” he presents isn’t worth spreading. It’s a confusion, a menace to the public health. It should either be continued or put into it proper context as it has been done here.

It as worthless as what he claims homeopathy to be.

Two piece of prima facie forensics to note here. One is that Randi explicitly tells his audience to ignore the instructions for use . . the warnings . .  for what are labelled as sleeping pills.

The TED audience seems to think this is funny.

I don’t.

“I’m going to take some medication,” he says, “a full bottle of Calm’s Forte . . ignore the instructions, that’s what the government has put in there to confuse you, I’m sure.”

He then appears to dump the whole bottle of what he just said is medication, a substance used for medical treatment, in his mouth.

Is this a scientific experiment? Entertainment? A publicity stunt? Mass delusion, at $4,000 a throne?

After telling us we need to think critically, he asks us to join him in his assumptions. And the TED audience gullibly swallows it as quickly as he dumps the contents of the container into his mouth.

Randi is a proponent of critical thinking?

What hypocrisy!

“But Pee Wee, what does it mean?”

The word critical is a borderline one-word oxymoron, for it has meanings that are comparatively contradictory . . it can mean expressing or involving an analysis of the merits and faults of something . . or it can mean simply expressing adverse or disapproving comments.

So where’s the science?

What if someone, a young person for instance, who is confused about what is “homeopathic,” repeats this stunt to impress his friends, and in doing so takes something that isn’t as inert as he thinks it is, whether it’s homeopathic or not?

Does he end up with intestinal cancer, like Randi did, two years after this stunt? Or might he  end up dead with little or no idea what caused his final illness?

What Randi is saying, “don’t bother to look more closely at this thing I’m  doing, I’ve got it covered.” In this way it may seem to be a very coherent act, to the impressionable . . which is what magicians want you to be. And Randi is a lifelong magician. And one thing I’ve noticed about magicians, is that they can’t help but eventually reveal the mechanism of their deceptions . . because they’re essentially show oafs, and like most criminals, they actually want to be caught . .

“Nay, indeed, if you had your eyes, you might fail of
the knowing me: it is a wise father that knows his
own child. Well, old man, I will tell you news of
your son: give me your blessing: truth will come
to light; murder cannot be hid long; a man’s son
may, but at the length truth will out.”

Launcelot, The Merchant of Venice

Magicians want you to keep your seat. They can’t have you wandering up on stage to look behind and deeply into things, spoiling their act.

And so Randi doesn’t want you Googling the ingredients of Calms Forte, even after it seems he’s have impllied TED should use critical thinking, but not invetigation, to do just that, for these people will see only what he wants them to see, when he wants them to see it.

He’s living off your assumptions.

If you attempt closer analysis, without his invitation or approval, he will metaphorically, or by simile, hang an “Out of Order” sign around your neck . . or call security.

“No no no!  Stay away from that! Don’t go there! Don’t look behind the JREF curtain!”

In Randi’s World, you’re not supposed to read the instructions . . THE GOVERNMENT PUT THEM THERE TO CONFUSE YOU!

You MIGHT actually stumble upon the actual ingredients!

Now, all of what has transpired here  is implied by presentation and performance, and here Randi is demanding critical thinking  about things outside of his venue . . but . . not within. Only things other than what are in his own hands are to enjoy the chimera of scrutiny, at a distance, by dint of the moderator.

But time has caught up and passed Randi. Now we have the Internet. We don’t have to pay $4,000 a seat to watch some high school drop out try to pull the wool over our eyes. We can just sit here for free . . and then watch him pull the wool over our eyes . . or we can  let our fingers do the walking and rip off the hoodwink!

Google the ingredients for Calms Forte.

See for yourself what it is made of. 1x means one part in ten! And here they say it is triple strength!  Does that mean that a third of it is the sedative Passiflora?

There is a heavy, measurable crude dose of Passiflora incarnata in Calms Forte . Here is what is listed as the actual ingredient of what Randi is over-ingesting.

Passiflora (Passion Flower) 1X triple strength HPUS
Avena Sativa (Oat) 1X double strength HPUS
Humulus Lupulus (Hops) 1X double strength HPUS
Chamomilla (Chamomile) 2X HPUS
Calcarea Phosphorica (Calcium Phosphate) 3X HPUS
Ferrum Phosphorica (Iron Phosphate) 3X HPUS
Kali Phosphoricum (Potassium Phosphate) 3X HPUS
Natrum Phosphoricum (Sodium Phosphate) 3X HPUS
Magnesia Phosphoricum (Magnesium Phosphate) 3X HPUS

Here Randi can’t demand passivity from his audience given the authority of the stage, the license he’s using to control what he has made out to be an investigation of homeopathy. . but which in fact is a hoax that has more than one layer of illusion.

Follow the John Benneth Journal on Twitter: <a href=””><img src=”; alt=”Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter”/></a>

Transcript of video:

JOHN BENNETH: My name is John Benneth, honorary post graduate of Hahnemann College of Homeopathy, London,

JAMES RANDI: Hello, I’m James Randi, founder of the James Randi Educational Foundation

JOHN BENNETH: And we’re about to have a little discussion about homeopathy.

JAMES RANDI: I’ve used demonstrations to show audiences the importance of thinking skeptically about pseudoscience.

JOHN BENNETH: Good idea. Let’s take a skeptical look at what Randi is claiming, which you will see is in itself a prima facie example of pseudoscience, beliefs and practices that claim to be science without employing the METHOD of science, So in this case instead of an objective experiment, scientific test, or ranom controlled trial, Randi is using a dangerous stunt to try to prove what he wants to be true.

JAMES RANDI: One demonstration I’ve done many times is downing an entire package of 32 homeopathic sleeping pills. (cut to TED lecture) I have to do something uh now which seems a little bit strange, for a magician . . but I’m going to take some medication . . this is uh . . a full bottle of Calm’s Forte . . I’ll explain that in just a moment . . ignore the instructions, that’s what the government has put in there to confuse you, I’m sure.  I will take enough of these  (appears to empty bottle into mouth)  mmh . . indeed the whole cantainer. (Drinks water. Loud swallowing sound) Thirty two talets of Calms Forte.

JOHN BENNETH: Which is an example of pseudoscience. Randi is asking us to think skeptically about pseudoscience and then uses himself as an example to show exactly what it is that he’s talking about.

JAMES RANDI: The recommended dosage by the way is two to three pills. just to show that these scam medications have no effect.

JOHN BENNETH: Oh yeah? Well, look at his eyes, he can barely keep them open. Don’t do what this man is doing until you’ve heard the whole story, or . . you may saddle yourself with lifelong symptoms. I agree with Randi that you’re being scammed, but the scam here is Randi’s. And in this and other videos I prove it to you. Because homeopathic remedies make use of such highly diluted substances, it is understandable that some people may be doubtful as to whether or not these substances can have any biological action whatsoever, but that isn’t any reason to substitute a pseudoscientific stunt of the type Randi is performing here for the scientific method. Plants, for instance, make much better subjects for testing the action of homeopathic remedies, and likewise extensive testing has been done on plants using homeopathic remedies, objectively showing their biological action. There are simple tests you can do yourself. Homeopathic remedies can either accelerate or stunt plant growth, and they can be used phytopathologically , which means they can be used to control plant pests and diseases. If they work on plants, then it stands to reason tht they can also work on other living subjects, such as biochemical subjects. But Randi, who purports to be a proponent of the scientific method, is not talking about the extensive biochemical testing done on homeopathic remedies. This is a powerful form of medicine that is challenging what is thought to be the only treatments for human illnesses.

JAMES RANDI: There’s a warning on the box to call the poison control center .

JOHN BENNETH: There should also be one of the box made especially for him to call a psychiatrist. This man is publically encouraging people to intentionally overdose on substances he knows little if anything about in order to further a dangerous racket. However, the manufacturer of those homeoapthic sleeping pills would probably sell twice as many if they put a picture of him on the box.

JAMES RANDI: But that’s a joke.

JOHN BENNETH: So is James Randi’s Million Dollar Challenge, and I will prove that to you too in alater video.

JAMES RANDI: But that’s a joke . .

JOHN BENNETH: Tune in and turn on to homeopathy, real medicine that really works and watch as Randi and I continue go head to head on homeopathy. Two men go in, one man comes out. Listen very carefully to what Randi says. Its been carefully scripted, and I will reveal to you his lies. Subscribe to the Bandershot channel here on Youtube for more about the Million Dollar Challenge to homeopathy, and homoepathy’s trillion dollar challenge to the patent medicine racket.

JAMES RANDI: I’ve overdosed on homeopathic medicine many times and my eyes are still open.

JOHN BENNETH: Toothpicks.


(April 2011)

Extraordinary Medicine

There’s a new website up on homeopathy,
Somebody put a lot of skilful hard work into it and deserves special commendations. It’s really well done. This is the kind of stuff we need, especially the list of the “Ten Most Amazing and Convincing Research Studies”.

The descriptions, like the rest of the site has a rare upbeat tone to it.
I also like the “Frequent False Statements About Homeopathy… and the Truth” section
It’s about time somebody did this one. 
Although they’re found elsewhere on the site, to the “most amazing” list, I would like to submit the following for your consideration:
1. An explanation of who Penn State/University of Arizona Emeritus Professor Rustum Roy is, perhaps the best friend homeopathy has ever had in the material sciences.
2. “The Structure Of Liquid Water; Novel Insights From Materials Research; Potential Relevance To Homeopathy” by Professors Rustum Roy, W.A. Tiller, Iris Bell, M. R. Hoover, pub’d in Materials Research Innovations 9:4, 577-608, (2005). This is the first comprehensive review of the physico-chemical literature relevant to homeopathy by top scientists who are notable academics.   It’s a hard read, deadly if you’re you’re looking at it lying down, but its notable enough that even though you may have tourblecomprehending it, you ought to take a gander so as to at least not be a totalstranger to it. Don ‘;thesitate to use to use the define command in google forsuch words like “clathrate” and “zwitterion.” Hang inthere with it, it’s a milestone. Here’s a link to the pdf: 
3. The Chaplin Killshot. Hailed by Roy as the leading authority on the chemistry of water, the “most amazing” list should include London South Bank University Prof. Martin Chaplin for his milestone article on the physics of homeopathy entitled “Memory of Water” . . on his “Water Structure and Science” web site. In this article is the most significant scientific statement made in support of homeopathy as to whether or not the remedies store and transmit information: According to Chaplin “Water does store and transmit information, concerning solutes, by means of its hydrogen-bonded network.” Given Chaplin’s reputation and the prima facie, exhaustive research revealed on his website, this simple statement, in the context in which it appears, is a killshot on the argument against homeopathy. It is a key to one of the greatest the controversies facing Mankind. It is further validation of the work by Benveniste and Montagnier. 
4. Chaplin’s article “Homeopathy.” This is a must read by this respected scientist from a material science perspective in direct and well referenced terms. Much easier to read than Roy, itdoes have somehills toclimb, isconservative and even questionable in some parts and even somewhat chicken in other parts, but it is far from the incontinent denials of the usual poseurs who litter the discussion with their detritus. In other words, you gotta read it, so what if it doesn’t equal Hahnemann, it isn’t Hahnemann.  
5. Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier’s report, “Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences.” This is the science experiment of the century. Well, it isn’tmuch of a centruy yet, so make it the science report of the previous millennia as well, although it is built on the back of Beneveniste, (St. Jacques). WHat amkes it so jaw dropping is that it is a dfetion to homeoapthy of the highest order. It leaves the Evil Empire of Pharmacide led by fakir James Randi peeing their pants.  You see, this study reports on the most significant testing done to date on the observable electrodynamic action and phsyics of homeopathic remedies by a scientist of the highest credentials. These tests reproduce findings by Jacques Benveniste that reveal a detectable signal from the structuring of homeopathic dilutes. They also reveal the Schumann Resonance to be the most plausible origin of the signal, and the ability of the nano crystalloids in water alcohol solvents to transmit unique liquid aqueous structuring electromagnetically to a separate container without material contact, supporting the claim of homeopaths for the reality of “imponderabilia,” remedies made by exposure to radiation and electromagnetic fields, such as Sol, Rainbow and X-ray.  The case for homeopathy is not complete without this study.

6. Experiments by Stanford professor William Tiller that show that light shown through a solution of silver colloids has antiseptic qualities.  Tiller is another udnerecognized  foundation in the science ofhomeopathy. He is now an honaroary board member ofthe American Medical College of Homeopathy, which is training medical doctors to be homeopaths.  (Good luck, you can also train dogs to talk) TILLER: On Chemical Medicine, Thermodynamics, and Homeopathy ; 


7. The 2007 Witt review of biochemical studies. “The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies–a systematic review of the literature.” While the Members of Parliament are doing their ridiculous evidence on homeoapthy and asking paid hacks for he allopathic pharmacetuical industry to pony up evidence for homeopathy with meta-jokes like Shang, the Witt review is quietly dozing in the corner.   Unlike meta analyses which extract conclusive opinions for the clinical efficacy of homeopathy from cherry picked studies, the Witt review provides an exhaustive report on all biochemical testing of homeopathic high dilutes between 1933 and 2007. It uses a clear preset method of evaluating a scientific study. Did it have controls, how did it use them, did it clearly state its objectives, how did it handle the contamination issue? Andso forth. Each test is tranked by established criteria and values. In doing so the Witt review debunks several putative myths about homeopathy, the piggest putative myth being that Benveniste conducted the only biochemical testing of homeopathics. Wrong. According to Witt, it can be easily seen that Benveniste’s controversial basophil degranulation test (Davenas, pub’d in Nature) was the third replication of that test, and that since then has been successfully done over two dozen times,  most notably a multi centered trial (Belon). Witt also shows that there are biochemical tests other than the basophil degranulation, and contrary to popular belief, there are biochemical tests that have been replicated that are of the highest quality, most notably Glasgow’s William E. Boyd. And look at Hirst and laugh. Hirst was rated by Witt a perfect score, but Hirst couldn’t believe what he saw, so he attributed the effect to some unknown cause. We win again. Witt CM, Bluth M, Albrecht H, Weisshuhn TF, Baumgartner S, Willich SN 
8. Agrohomeopathy. Perhaps this is the most amazing of all. In one swell foop agrohomeoapthy quicckly and most exhaustively provides the most conclusive evidence that high dilutes have biological effects. Plants make excellent test subjects an definitely prove that homeopathics are not placebos. There have been a growing number of tests that prove it, such as work done at the University of Bologna, and a review of the literature:  Use of homeopathic preparations in phytopathological models and in field trials: a critical review. then there is the amazing and exhaustive work done by Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj, exemplified in the first widely published volume on agrohomeopathy “Homeopathy for Farm and Garden”  
I do have one serious criticism of I would hesitate to tell people that homeopathic remedies are safe in role of “complementary medicine,” as the website does: “Homeopathy is not exclusive and can be used along with conventional and other complementary medical treatments.  There is no need for a patient to choose one over the other.” Oh yeah? There is no evidence that I am aware that this is completely true.  maybe in some cases with some kinds of treatments, but the authors of etraordinary meicine don’tseemto realize something, and that is that allopathy can be dangerously conflicting modlaities. One can dynamize the ill effects of the other, and Kaviraj backs me up on this, so I have to insist that allopapthy and homeopathy don’t mix, andI call upon our colleagues, if I can be so bold to call them that, to strenuously support us in this statement.  I believe that high potencies can attenuate the system to the action of allopathic drugs and make those drugs even more deadly than they are.

Look . .  homeopathics elicit the same symptoms, right? And this is why if a potnecy is too high or given too often, it will cause an aggravation, the symptoms will get worse.  Okay, and what do allpathics do? They evoke other symptoms. Hahnemann coinded th word “allopathy,” and that’s what he meant, and he really meantwhat he said, forit is the egregious nature of allpathy that spawnedhomeopathy. You see? Allo means other, and the suffering caused by overdosing with dangerous drugs byallpathy is a direct and open contradiction to the ancient Hippocratic Oath, to give no known dangerous drug, anthat’s eactly what allopaths were doing then and that’s exactly what allopaths are doing now. They are neither curingnor treating disease, they are creating disease. Thedonger of homeoapthy is that to add it to chemo therapy could very well superchage the action ofthe allopathic drug, such asused in chemotherapy if by chance it so happens to be working in concert.
Mammals and birds have complex, electromagnetic homeostatic systems that must maintain a constant body temperature and pH, as well as other indices, some of which are probably not even known. To address a symptom the body has to allocate enegetic resources in order to meet the challenge and bring the body back into homeostasis. The system can be aeasily confused as to what that homeostasis should be.

Experienced homeopaths are well aware of aggravations. So how bad can an aggravation be? According to Kent, the use of the wrong remedy can graft symptoms onto the patient for life! (Thuja) Repeated high potency doses of Belladonna, I believe, may have the ability to put a person in a mental hospital.  Ultra high potencies should not be used on the elderly, infants or people with compromised immune systems. Remedies should be chosen with the utmost care. Twice I have had unnerving reactions to Silica. The literature provides examples of animals being debilitated by repeated doses of high dilutes. And what are provings? The literature contains reports of people who have experienced symptoms from provings up to a year after taking one 30c pellet.
Hahnemann developed the LM series because of aggravations from potencies anyone can now buy OTC.
We are told to stop administering the remedy as soon as there is a reaction to it, yet I see repeated examples of overdosing in subjects I talk to who have been under the care of homeopaths. Our opponents are not true skeptics. They are fools, careless pseudoscientists, and Idon’t mean that to simply be derogatory, I mean that to be insightful. They don’t know what they’re doing. They’re ignorant.   
To tell people that these remedies are completely safe is irresponsible and shows inexperience and ignorance of the literature that supports their use.

(If you’renot confused yet, also note carefully here that biochemical studies  of homeopathics challenge the underlying assumption of homeopaths that they are treating the patient’s dynamis, not the disease. )

Stunts such as those done by James Randi and the 10^23 organization engender a high disregard for the serious and cautious use of high potencies. If they can cure, then they can logically also kill. I know of potentially two deaths caused by homeopathic remedies, one from the careless mixing of allopathy and homeopathy, and the other from injudicial use. I would especially suggest that anyone who is dealing with tumors not receive homeopathic treatment in conjunction with palliative allpathic chemical systemics.
I suggest that the safety and complemenatry clauses be struck. Otherwise, congratulations for a brilliant piece of work. 





John Benneth, PG Hom. – London (Hons.)
blog: http://www.johnbenneth/
503- 819 – 7777


  Follow the John Benneth Journal on Twitter:

 Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter