Facts and figures show homeopathy world’s fastest growing medicine

A reader writes:

John – do you have a citation for homeopathy being the world’s fastest-growing medicine? I’d love to use it but need the source.
 Karen Wehrstein

Dear Karen,

Yes, the Indian Chamber of Commerce estimates that homeopathy is growing at 30% a year.

The Hindustani Times reports that according to the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), the Indian homeopathy treatment market is likely to grow 30% annually and reach a size of Rs. 4,600 crore (46 billion)  as the number of users is growing fast within and outside the country.

The global homeopathy market is estimated at Rs. 26,300 crore with France being the largest contributor, according to the study by ASSOCHAM. Last year, the domestic homeopathy market size was about Rs. 2,758 crore.

A crore is a unit in the Indian numbering system equal to ten million (10,000,000.) They report that the global growth of homeopathy is approximately 25%.

In dollars the world homoeopathy market according to ASSOCHAM is $5.35 billion. It is not known if this includes services, is for the sale of remedies items alone, or includes ancillary products.  But if we multiply $5.35 billion by 1.25% annually, without adjustment for inflation, we get a 1.1 trillion dollar global market by 2035, which means it will have surpassed current allopathic medicine.

According to a US study conducted in 2005 by, $230 million were made in sales of homeopathic products in 2005. Although it is difficult to dig up concrete stats on the universal sales of natural and homeopathic related products, more recent data from the National Center for Homeopathy (U.S.) shows sales also increasing by as much as 20-30% in 2006, as compared to the year before, concordant with Indian figures.


These are only projected monetary figures, and homeopathy is renowned as an inexpensive curative medicine, not for how much money it makes, but for how much it can save through its infinitesimal posology, a cost that is as infinitesimally small compared to allopathy in the treatment of serious diseases, like cancer, malaria and AIDS.

When I first began exploring the literature on pre-clinical testing in 2000 I discovered it to be virtually unknown by homeopaths. After receiving a stack of pre-clinical studies from the Deutches Homeopathic Union and discovering Stephenson’s pre-clincal bibliography of  the 20th century, I assembled a list of 52 of them and was the first to post such data on the Internet in 2000 on, listed as the first entry of The John Benneth Journal as “Proof for Homeopathy.”

Google now reports 5.4 million “results” when “homeopathy” is entered into their search engine. PUBMED, the US government archives online, lists over 4400 articles referencing homeopathy on its website.

The National Center for Homeopathy in March of 2011 started a grass roots movement to encourage  users of homeopathy to make Youtube videos talking about successes in using homeopathy, called “Homeopathy Works for Me.”  As of this writing there were over a hundred videos on Youtube with the “homeopathy works for me” tag that pop up under that search command on the Youtube website. It is only a fraction of the total videos about homeopathy on Youtube. Search results on the keyword “homeopathy” on Youtube brings 5,570 video results.

If Einstein is to be believed when he said “Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds” then the strident, endless opposition to homeopathy alone is enough classify it as a raging success. Over two centuries the opposition comes on strong as the party of science, but it always turns into nothing but the party of empty theory and denial of evidence, that “anything so highly diluted cannot work, so therefore the evidence must not be scientifically based.”

Hahnemann met the same complaints, which began as . . or quickly devolved into . . nothing more than insults and name calling. His suggestion to critics was that if they truly wanted to debunk it, then test it following prescribed use. It was because of this steely challenge that the powder keg was ignited and the homeopathic boom felt around the world, to make it what it is today,  a leader in medicine, threatening to become the primary medical paradigm.


Traditionally it has been the putative belief that there is no plausible mechanism of action for the homeopathic remedy. This changed in 2007 when Professor Rustum Roy, the renowned godfather of the material sciences  at Pennsylvania State University led a team of scientists to review the literature and conduct a series of experiments to examine the plausibility that  water could create specific biological effects.

The landmark paper was titled “The Structure Of Liquid Water; Novel Insights From Materials Research; Potential Relevance To Homeopathy” co-authored by Profs. W.A. Tiller, Iris Bell and M.R. Hoover. The paper introduces a concept little known in general science  called “epitaxy.”

Roy states, “This paper . . does definitively demolish the objection against homeopathy, when such is based on the wholly incorrect claim that since there is no difference in composition between a remedy and the pure water used, there can be no differences at all between them. We show the untenability of this claim against the central paradigm of materials science that it is structure (not composition) that (largely) controls properties, and structures can easily be changed in inorganic phases without any change of composition. 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.”

The strident critics of homeopathy were still unmoved that more of their vaunted ranks were defecting. The idea that water could retain a “memory” like magnetic recording tape still seemed absurd. But the argument against homeopathy shook it to its core from two sources.

Testing by a Nobel laureate (Montagnier) validated the first serious challenge to the notion that water can’t carry the unique signal of solutes that have recently passed through it (Benveniste), as is implicated in highly diluted homeopathic remedies.

The second blow came from the man Prof. Roy referred to as the “guru off water,” Professor Martin Chaplin of London South Bank University.


In a June 201o article about homeopathy and the memory of water, Prof. Chaplin wrote, “Water does store and transmit information, concerning solutes, by means of its hydrogen-bonded network.” Memory of Water (See also Chaplin’s other articles on an relevent to homeopathy, “Water Structure and Science,” and “Homeopathy.”)


The master had spoken. That was all that needed to be said. The argument against the memory of water was dead.

In the words of Nobelist Brian Josephson [quoted in a Feb. lecture] “the idea that water can have a memory can easily be disposed of by a number of easily understood invalid arguments.”

Like magnetic recording tape, water can store and transmit  complex information magnetically, and just like audio recording tape, it can be erased, something that was known by homeopaths but not specifically  determined by the material sciences until nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) experiments by a French team led by Dr. Rolland Conte using nuclear magnetic resonance equipment and advanced statistics showed that, just like recording tape, magnetic fields, UV, heat and cold could alter, damage and erase imprints on water . .  the amnesia of water.


Two hundred and ten years have passed since Hahnemann administered the first doses of of a high dilute of Belladonna during the 1801 Scarlet Fever epidemic in Königslutter and stunned his colleagues when it turned out he appeared to be handing out nothing more than little sugar pills. Since then to the present day homeopathy has repeatedly outperformed standard immunizations 10 to 1 or more in epidemics of Poliomyelitis; Chicken-pox; all types of Hepatitis, Japanese Encephalitis, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib); Measles; Pneumococcal disease; Cholera; Smallpox; Typhoid; Typhus; Whooping cough; Rubella (German measles); Mumps; Diphtheria; Malaria; Yellow Fever; AIDS, Dysentery and has been reported to be effective in curing mysterious and unnamed and incurable diseases such as rabies! (Andre Seine).


Dr. Isaac Golden at Melbourne’s Swinburne University conducted the largest study undertaken anywhere in the world on the long-term health effects of homeopathic protection. It was completed  in 2004. His research analyzed 2,304 responses from 1,159 children. Each response covered one year of a child’s life. The study showed homeopathy equalled standardized, conventional inoculations in preventing epidemic childhood diseases, and were found to be  effective in  90.4% of all cases treated!

For more information about Golden’s work, click here on Homeopathy Plus.

Examples of homeopathy’s effectiveness

In the Iowa smallpox epidemic of 1902, homeopathic prophylaxis was given to 2,806 patients successfully!

In a 1974 epidemic of meningococcal meningitis in Brazil, 18,640 children were given a preventative homeopathic remedy. Only 4 cases of meningitis occurred in these children!

During the 1957 Poliomyelitis epidemic in Buenos Aires, homeopaths and medical doctors distributed homeopathic Lathyrus sativus to over 40,000 people! Defying exposure, not one of them developed Polio during the epidemic!

Homeopathy now addresses diseases such as cancer, diabetes, veterinary, and phytopathological (plant) diseases. There is now a new field of homeopathy called agrohomeopathy, led by Dutch homeopath Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj.

There are now homeopathic veterinarians! In September 2011 it was announced that the European Parliament’s Agriculture Committee (AGRI) would vote on a draft budget of 2 million Euros ($2.7 million dollars or £1.7 million pounds) for research on the use of homeopathy in farm animals!

The World Health Organization at one point listed homeopathy as the second most used medical modality in the world today, but according to Kaviraj, who claims to have seen the report,  it was quickly pulled from the Internet. The WHO report listed homeopathy second only to traditional Chinese medicine in global popularity. Third was herbal medicine, fourth was Western standardized medicine.

Can it truthfully be said that acupuncture, chiropractic or Chinese herbs . . or even standardized, Western allopathic medicine, can be as effective as homeopathic in epidemics, without the numbers casting doubt on the claimant?

There is one final argument I would like to present here for the claim that homeopathy is the fastest growing medicine in the world today (this is my killshot) and that is that compared to other systems of medicine . . allopathy, acupuncture, Yoga, herbal, Qi Gong, manipulation, massage . . at its inception, all these other systems of treatment were thousands of years old. (A case could be made for chiropractic being newer, but I would counter by saying that it was a development of what was already self evident, many chiropractic doctors practice homeopathy, chiropractic has no ancillary pharmacy for consumers, nor revolutionary physics just now being understood)

If this is not explosive growth, then I ask you, how does anyone explain its acceptance by the very same people who were formerly thought to denounce it as delusion? I have lectured at the world’s most renowned laboratory to Nobel laureates on the physico-chemical properties of homeopathy, as reported by top material scientists. Why am I, a mere “enthusiast,” (as they have called me) being entertained at the world’s oldest and most prestigious institution of science, the Cavendish Laboratory,  by Prof. Josephson, if there wasn’t a desire to know more about homeopathy in the top echelons of science?

Josephson admits he has colleagues, one a physicist, who use homeopathy. But what could be more jaw dropping to scientists to learn that the first Nobel prize was unwittingly awarded for homeopathy!?

Emil Adolph von Behring, won the award in 1901 for his development of the diptheria vaccine said “only the road of homeopathy led to my goal

The use of similitude, “like cures like,” to which homeopathy refers, is the basis for all vaccinations. The only difference is in posology, i.e. how to adminster the dose.  This may be difficult to accept for some, but antagonists of the craft must admit it is stifling true. Behring, regarded by some as the father of modern  medicine said,

“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? 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.”

Yet without such validation as it now has in the material sciences, it has been in constant use by medical doctors for 200 years. The FDCA was sponsored by a homeopath. It outperformed allopathy 10 to one during the 1918 Flu pandemic. The Cubans recently administered 4.5 million doses of it to stop a leptospirosis epidemic, [PDF] driving crackpot debunkers crazy with doubt,  resulting in virtual eradication of the disease, saving Cuba millions of dollars!

Some have made careers fighting it, and yet all their effort seem to do is throw gasoline on its fire.

As the physical properties and mechanism of the homeopathic remedies become understood, how can it not supercharge this industry? If 25%-30% annual growth is not explosive growth, then what is?

So not only is it the fastest growing medicine in the world today, it is the most modern, and as will be seen, the most scientific, in that it is, for the most part, discovered and developed through direct observation and personal experience by both laymen and professionals alike.

Most people, including current practicing homeopaths, don’t know how powerful homeopathy can be when properly executed.

In the 20th century it has ironically been relegated to the treatment of self limiting diseases [all disease is self limiting homeopathically]. But there has been a remarkable change in this when it was announced in an international journal of oncology that in-vivo experiments at the nation’s top cancer clinic have revealed that high dilutes, as used in homeopathy, can kill cancer cells, and subsequently was used clinically to cure cancer in-vivo.

From its very inception, homeopathy has had the same abusive, non-sensical opposition by the puppets of allopathy as it has now. In other words, whereas it defies logic and only the evidence advocates it, it has grown by leaps and bounds, while the argument against it remains the same as it was 200 years, amounting to nothing more than hand waving, name calling and curses.

Anyone with any intelligence can see it for what it is. All it takes to propel this great adventure ahead is work of the kind found on websites like

John Benneth, Homeopath

Need help? Tough, incurable cases my specialty. 503 819 7777


THE ELECTRIC ORGANON: Theory for the Structure and Action of the Homeopathic Remedy

A lie will circumnavigate the globe five times before the truth gets out of bed and puts it shoes on.

This has been hanging fire for months now. It is time to release it, lest I suddenly be assassinated by the interests it challenges . .

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Lying in bed this morning I was thinking about the the blogs I am writing, concentrating on the physico-chemical discoveries of Luc Montagnier, what the next blog will be about. When do I stop talking about the skeptics and focus on the physics? When do I discuss the clinical?

I have now written 12,000 words on an essay entitled The Homeopathic Repertorization of Jared Lee Loughner. It took days to write.

I’ve put it aside to focus first on Montagnier and the chemistry and physics of the homeopathic remedy. It is wrong to put theoretical physics before the tried and true treatments of people such as homeopathy has to offer,  but I seriously doubt that over the clash and trash of the media fighting over “who dunnit,” whose politics motivated Loughner to start shooting, anyone but homeopaths, students of homeopathy and enthusiasts are going to take such a piece seriously without first understanding how it works. It is the theoretical physics, then, that is indeed what is interfering with the use of real medicine to treat real problems with.

Although I doubt most allopaths have even a clue how their poisons work,  as an effective application homeopathy is still thought to be only theoretical if not outright quackery (although a cursory examination and common sense would reveal that there is something suspicious in theory) deeply troubled in a charge of quackery. We homeopaths know it works, we’ve seen it work, and we have felt it work, we’ve studied the literature on it, we’ve read about the men and women who support it, we need no more assurances to know it works.  But its not an easy sell. Its pharmacy is a crypto- molecular one and its application is counterintuitive to allopathic strategies.

Physico-chemical explanations for homeopathy do exist, in parts.  Reports of action are cryptic and scattered in lesser known journals and books, and to date, to my knowledge (tmk), no one has fully explained what it is and how it works. The literature, most notably by the Benveniste and Montagnier teams, has to date simply raised more questions:

If liquid aqueous structuring (LAS) is the cause of a biologically effective  electromagnetic signal, then

  1. How is it that the water can structure at liquid temperatures?
  2. How are these structures maintained beyond the time limit of the hydrogen bond?
  3. How does liquid aqueous structuring mimic inserted contamination?
  4. How does LAS produce an EM signal?
  5. How does the EM signal have known specific biological and psychological effects?
  6. How are the electromagnetic features of LAS transferred to the dry vehicle (such as lactose sugar)?

Well, let it be said that we homeopaths are quite familiar with what restraints there are on our businesses. The skeptics serve our purposes for free insurance against malpractice suits. It would probably serve us well to do just as they say and label our substances as placebos that must be administered by a skilled placeboist, such as homeopaths are characterized to be.

When the aggravation sets in, collaborating with allopathic “medicine” spoils and turn into dissolution of the victims internal organs, or when too strong a potency saddles its bearer with a lifelong symptom, it can all be said to be in the patient’s mind.

I know how far I’ve penetrated into this secret subterranean realm where allopathy collaborates with homeopathy. The allopaths produce most of the dramatic income, just as we homeopaths produce most of the dramatic cures, how few of them we are allowed, usually only those dire cases allopathy has backed away from, smiling, hands up, pronated,  palms out, exiting the room after sucking the victim dry.

What technically distinguishes what you have read in my blogs and seen in my videos, and what you are reading now, first and foremost in the homeopathy community, are my popularizations of physico-chemical explanations for the workings of the homeopathic remedy.  What you are about to read is particularly unique in the annals of medical science, for it aggregates and it explains what on a physical level other investigators such as Conte, Montagnier, Benveniste, Demangeat, Sainte Laudy, Poitevin, Ennis, Belon, Jonas, Roy, Tiller, Bell, Schwartz, Baumgartner, Chaplin, Del Guidice, Weingartner, Anagnostatos,  and others (which I apolgize for not listing here) have revealed in various parts in their in vitro, in vivo, physical and theoretical studies.

I thought about the conversation I had with Kaviraj  on Skype the day before. I had wanted to ask him what he thought about the Loughner case, and he had his usual brilliant insights and diagnosis, but when we were through analyzing Loughner, the conversation drifted over to what I consider to be my end of the table, the chemistry and physics of the homeopathic remedy.

At some point while I was talking I thought I heard him say something . . something about having finally understood something after my last lecture . .

“What? What did you say?” I asked

“I think I understand what it is you’re talking about,” he said.

I had to stop blathering for a moment. It was like being in a fog and hearing a voice coming from somewhere.

“The last time we talked,”  he said. “I think I understand what you are trying to say.”

Leave it to Kaviraj to be the first one to get it. I remember that he did say something in the last conversation that told me that he understood. I’ve spoken to many people about it, but I never had the feeling as if anyone really understood what I was saying. It was clear to me, what I knew, but it didn’t seem clear to anyone else.

If the view from classical science on the subject isn’t atheist, it is at least agnostic. To my knowledge, I am the only homeopath who has partially expressed, and for what has been left unexpressed, has a reasonably complete, cohesive theory for the electromagnetic, biological action of the supramolecular polymorphs used in homeopathic medicine called “high dilutes.”

As I lie in bed it runs over and over again in my mind. In order for hydrogen to bind with oxygen, energy has to be dissipated. In order for the same elements to separate, it has to be gained.  The atoms in H2O molecules suck in energy when they split and send it out again when they combine to form water again. Most likely the major operative element is hydrogen.

I became fascinataed with it as a boy when I learned that by passing an electric current through it I could produce hydrogen gas. I studied electrolysis and thought I had found a way to produce free energy from water. No, my teachers told me, it would take more energy to produce hydrogen from  water than the energy found in hydrogen.

However, it was all theoretical and I didn’t want to believe it. Water holds too many mysteries to be summarily dismissed.  Water is a very peculiar substance. It seems almost magical. It is conventionally recognized as the only common element that exists regularly on Earth in the three common, classical phases of matter, solid, liquid and gaseous, plus one of its own, supercritical, where it is under great heat and pressure, such as at the bottom of the ocean around volcanic vents, where it is superheated and under great pressure.

But there is yet one more, unrecognized form of water . . ionized . . and this is a novel key to understanding the H2O mechanics of homeopathy . . the plasma, electromagnetic phase of water. The Conventional focus of H2O physics for the most part has been on the structure of liquid water . .  a focus that  has bypassed ionization of the solute by hydrolysis.

This is the part that has heretofore been left out the water mechanics: the hydrolysis of the solute into an expanding electron. More on hydrolytic ionization later at which time the other shoe will drop.

The elements of structure are not so mundane and stereotyped as one might think. In an average glass of water one molecule in every 3200 is supposed to be HDO, heavy water, the D standing for deuterium, hydrogen that has a neutron as well as the standard issue single proton. The average human body contains a few grams of heavy water.

It will be seen that the elements of radioactive transception (the ability to transmit and receive electromagnetic energy) by the water molecule are keys to understanding the mechanism of homeopathic chemistry.

Allotropy, or allotropism, is the property of some chemical elements to exist in two or more different forms. Allotropes are different structural changes in an element, where the atoms of the element are bonded together as in a different manner. Oxygen is an excellent example of an allotropic element, with four forms that are additional to that of plain oxygen, dioxygen, (O2), ozone (O3), tetraraoxygen, (O4), and octaoxygen (O8).

Water is an allotrope, made so by its ability to transceive electromagnetism.

Tritium is the great corollary of the electric organon. It is an even rarer form of hydrogen with three nuclei, one proton and two neutrons. In combination with oxygen tritum is super heavy water. The detection of tritium is used to determine the age of vintage wines, the implication being that with age, water changes at its most elemental phase.

So as you can see, the element of water is highly polymorphic. In fact, polymorphism defines a quality of some substances,  like water, to imitate other substances.

French physicist Rolland Conte and his co-authors, doctor of science Yves Lasne, mathematician Henri Berliocchi and software engineer Gabrielle Vernot, the authors of Theory of High Dilutes, report that homeopathic remedies emit beta radiation that is associated with tritium reactions.

When you squeeze the elements of water together, energy pops out, like lightning before the rain hits. To pry them apart, you have to put energy in, like in electrolysis, or in the warmth of the Sun.

My mind drifted from topic to topic, how the opposition is understandable but not excusable, whose ass I was going to kick, what I was going to write next.

I reached over and turned on the radio. Literally the first word out of it was “homeopathic,” spoken by a woman caller on the Dr. Dean Edell talk radio program. Edell’s is a program where people call in to have Edell, a 70 year old retiree who went into entertainment when he couldn’t make it as an opthomologist, answer their questions about their lumbago, their tetanus, their chancres and malarial ague, their iatrogenic fevers disguised as Krones, Alzheimers, coronaries, neuroses, hypochondria  and a host, a myriad of other weird problems.

It is a creep show of medical oddities. To give him his due, Edell, always has an answer and commentary for just about every problem and is a nice bedside Jekyll until homeopathy, alternative medicine, or iatrogenesis (mostly death by vaccine) is mentioned. During a lifelong career on the radio he has become a walking talking medical archive of useless facts, fantastical fictions, wild medical superstitions and 19th century prejudices worthy of only the most sophisticated abattoirs.

His is a Promethean genius rivalled by only by that  of Dr. Victor Frankenstein, MD.

Edell’s favorite punching bags are homeopaths. He hates them. He wants to get his long claw like fingers around the neck of one and choke the life out of him. He wants to burn another at the stake, submit others to vivisection and donate their organs to dog food companies. My cerbreal processes reeled. This woman had just as well of lit a fire under a pan of nitro glycerin.

She was asking for his advice as to whether or not she should forego regular chemo therapy treatment in favor of homeopathy.

OMG. Predictably Edell went nuclear, yelling that lymphoma could be cured by regular medicine . . and homeopathy, homeopathy, could do nothing.

He told an anecdote about how he had heard about someone who abandoned, who eschewed the orthodoxy of allopathy for the heresy of homeopathy . . and died. He said homeopathy is the ultimate quackery, and then he said with a quiver, “its so illogical.”

I rolled my eyes, turned off the radio and got out of bed.   The show was a re-run. Edell, you see, was finally kicked off the air on January 3, 2011.

Apparently the higher ups have been reading the John Benneth Journal.

I put my shoes on.

John Benneth Journal reader SCOTT DEVLIN asks the following questions about Luc Montagnier’s ground breaking study of high dilutes

SCOTT DEVLIN: “An aliquot of the unfiltered supernatant did not show any signals above background up to the 10−38 dilution, indicating again the critical importance of the filtration step for the generation of specific signals.”
Can you clarify for me the filtration v dilution? how would one get a sufficiently dilute sample from a non dilute sample with a method other than filtration? Could this indicate that in fact the filtration technique is causing or contributing to the effect?

JOHN BENNETH: You’ve focused on one of the most absolutely fascinating aspects of the Montagnier study. Diluting the solution was not enough to produce a signal generating solvent. The gross, larger material had to be filtered out first.

What Montagnier did by filtration, homeopaths do by triturating with mortar and pestle, grinding the starter material down to the finest powder possible. It would appear that Montagnier has discovered that filtration creates the same effect. This is what Kaviraj calls the nanophase, explained by the Law of Kosmotropy: the smaller the nucleator the greater the potential for order within its surrounding aqueous domain, theoretically limited to the smallest sized particle or bubble H2O molecules can enclose.

A kosmotrope is an order inducing particle.

H2O is a small polar protic molecule magnetically attracted to contamination (guest particles) and will configure around them according to the guest charge. This is how water structurally and dynamically imitates other substances. If the particle is too big for water molecules to uniformly assemble around it, the chunk then acts as a chaotrope, a disorder inducing particle.

By filtration Montagnier is creating kosmotropes, a kosmotropic solvent. The order created by these kosmotropes extends ubiquitously throughout the solution via the hydrogen bond network.

MONTAGNIER: “In the course of investigating the nature of such filtering infectious forms, we found another property of the filtrates, which may or may not be related to the former: their capacity to produce some electromagnetic waves of low frequency in a reproducible manner after appropriate dilutions in water. The emission of such waves is likely to represent a resonance phenomenon depending on excitation by the ambient electromagnetic noise. It is associated with the presence in the aqueous dilutions of polymeric nanostructures of defined sizes. The supernatant of uninfected eukaryotic cells used as controls did not exhibit this property.
“In this paper we provide a first characterization of the electromagnetic signals (EMS) and of their underlying nanostructures produced by some purified bacteria.”

SCOTT DEVLIN: “In addition, please clarify for me any distinction, if any between the documented dilution levels here and those in some of your proposals.”

JOHN BENNETH: There are none that I can see. The dilutions used by M., although low, are within the range used in some applications of homeopathy, mostly acute. Constantine Hering introduced the use of remedies in the dilution range used by Montagnier. What M. refers to as a 10^18 dilution would be called an 18X dilution in homeopathy. According to Montagnier, there can virtually be no original particles left in dilution.

SCOTT DEVLIN: It is my understanding that you claim that a sample diluted to such a state that not a single molecule of the original substance is likely to exist in the sample can still have an effect, and as related to this particular study, likely to be resultant from said EMS. Is there a difference between the dilution levels you propose and those documented in this study?

JOHN BENNETH: No. By my calculations this would equal one million molecules within 10^23, or one quintillionth of a drop of water. These are still considered below the molecular limit, but they are regarded as homeopathic levels of dilution according to FDA regulations.

SCOTT DEVLIN: Given that Montagnier does not mention Clathrates, is this where your proposition of Clathrates comes into effect, that specific Clathrates are formed by specific DNA molecules and it is from these Clathrates that the EMS are emitted?

JOHN BENNETH: Yes. It should be noted though that “aqueous nanostructure” define clathrates, and that clathrates may not be the only form of liquid aqueous structuring (LAS). I focus on clathrates because they are known and accepted within classical science, and the formation of LAS can be explained classically through the analogy of clathrates, and it also fits the aerogeneous requirement for homeopathic solutions. It is an interesting distinction to note that homeopathics lose their biological action when they are made without enough air in the succussion chamber.
This is a striking distinction to make for homeopathics in the face of charges that they theoretically can have no specific biological action. It shows we’ve cracked the code. Clathrate means “cage” and clathrates have been referred to as cage molecules, analagous to the mantle that surrounds a light on a lamp post, hexagonal or polyhedral structures surrounding the utlimate kosmotope . . gas.
My theory is that an unique hydrogen bonded network is first established by particulate matter. Dilution removes the particulate matter and the network then nucleates around atmosphere that comes into dilution from agitation of solvent surfaces, forming aerogeneous clathrates.

SCOTT DEVLIN: “We have studied the decay with time of the capacity of dilutions for emitting EMS, after they have been removed (in mumetal boxes) from exposure to the excitation by the background. This capacity lasts at least several hours, some time up to 48 hours, indicating the relative stability of the nanostructures.”
Has the apparent lifespan of this effect or propert ever been tested as the cause of other studies inability to show such effects?”

JOHN BENNETH: Yes, we know from trial and error what works and what doesn’t. Without the introduction of ethanol, homeopathic solvents lose their biological capabilities within 24 hours. Ethanol is another solvent and appears to act as stabilizer for LAS. I believe that the internal tension from hydrogen bonding forces aerogeneous LAS to fall apart and the nanobubbles to aggregate, float upward and move to the surface. If you watch a glass of freshly poured water you can see it happening within a couple of hours, depending on how much atmosphere has been dissolved in it.
Rolland Conte et al, authors of “Theory of High Dilutions” have used NMR to study the effects of temperature, magnetism, photons on homeopathic solutions.

DEMANGEAT: “Nanosized bubbles have been identified in liquid water [26–29], which are stabilized by traces of ions and tend to associate in fractal clusters, that scatter light. Removal of gases suppresses the small-angle laser-light scattering by water [30]. Radiofrequency(rf)-treatment has been shown to induce formation of arrays of stable (hours) nanobubbles in water and aqueous solutions; degassing of the treated water erases all the effects, and rf-treatment has no effect on degassed water (see [31] for review). The gas–water interface of the nanobubbles is hydrophobic, and therefore the water molecules may form clathrate shells with an “icelike” structure around the nanobubbles [32]. These ordered shells can induce long range structure up to the micrometer level [31]. Let us propose here that nanobubbles are generated during agitation, mostly through cavitation, and induce supramolecular organization of the water molecules in their vicinity, through hydrophobic forces and hydrogen bonding, responsible for the observed heterogeneity of R2.
. . .
Large-scale long-lived supramolecular structures of water around low molar mass compounds have been shown by laser-light scattering [45,46]. With the same technique, Jin et al. [47] showed that rather stable nanobubbles are implied within the supramolecular structures formed around small organic molecules.
According to these authors, bubbles stabilized by small organic molecules could even be a universal phenomenon.
NMR water proton relaxation in unheated and heated ultrahigh aqueous dilutions of histamine Evidence for an air-dependent supramolecular organization of water Jean-Louis Demangeat Nuclear Medicine Department, General Hospital, Haguenau, France.

I went downstairs to the kitchen, poured myself a cup of black coffee in a black Harley Davidson mug. The heat from the coffee caused a color changing pigment in the shape of flames painted on the mug to change color from black to orange.  I climbed onto a high stool in front of my black laptop on the black granite counter top, and opened my email.

An email notification said I had a message on Facebook. I opened the website. It was a message from a friend of Rolland Conte’s who wanted to contact Montagnier to inform him about Conte’s work, and wanted to know if I had any contact information for  Montagnier.

Conte is a French physicist and statistician, collaborating with doctor of science Yves Lasne, computer programmer Gabrielle Vernot and mathematician  Henri Bertilocchi, who have done what may be the most comprehensive analysis of high dilutes, using nuclear magnetic resonance and beta scintllation, corroborating studies done by Lilli Kolisko. Their findings were reported in a book entitled “Theory of High Dilutions and experimental aspects.”

Conte claims homeopathy saved his life, and claims that spectral analysis can be used to identify the correct remedy for the treatment of cancer and other diseases.

I sent what I had, adding a pessimistic note.

Montagnier has been unable to obtain funding for further research. Montagnier says that other labs have not published their research on high dilutes for fear of losing their funding sources, which is what happened to Benveniste.

Like Conte, like Benveniste, Montagnier is finding that no one wants to touch his work with a ten foot pole. As much as Montagnier has avoided the label of homeopathy, like Conte, it has been close enough to brand him. He has committed heresy.

And so Montagnier is moving his laboratory to Beijing, where the Chinese, unrestrained by capital interests,  are awaiting for him with open arms and a brand new eponymous institute.

For those who have forgotten what eponymous means, it means named after him.

There are several major developments here that in relation to homeopathy are confirmations of old theory and  new considerations:

  1. Liquid aqueous structuring (LAS) is the distinguishing and motive featured force within the remedy.
  2. The size of the relevant LAS is between 20 and 100 nMs.
  3. LAS lasts for hours, apparently without non aqueous-host stabilization (such as ethanol and lactose sugar)
  4. LAS emits biologically significant electromagnetic (EM) signals.
  5. The biological signal from LAS can be replicated by transmission of the signal from one container to another.

This leaves basically two other details.

  1. How is it that LAS can produce the signal?
  2. The answer lies in the same dynamics of the piezo electric effect.

Piezoelectricity is a charge that accumulates in crystals and other materials, including  organic matter such as DNA bone,  DNA and proteins in response to pressure applied mechanically. Piezo means “to squeeze or press.” Piezoelectricity is the direct result of mechanical stress on crystalline substances. For those who are skeptical that water has any crystalline features, I will be so bold as to point out that the word “crystal” comes from a Greek word meaning “ice,” and all homeopathic remedies are  crystalliferous.

At this particular moment, please note your place in time and date, for at this point the key to one of the world’s greatest mysteries has opened a black strongbox previously sealed and now revealed . . the Electric Organon. 

This crystalline aqueous piezoelectric effect demonstrates, scientifically, the basis for the electrodynamic  effects of the homeopathic remedy.

It is a reversible process. Materials that have this ability to internally generate a direct piezoelectric effect, an electrical charge resulting from mechanical pressure,  also have the reverse ability to store it, as is known by observing structural changes in matter resulting from an applied electrical field.

Crystals will generate measurable electricity when their structure is changed by pressure, and also will deform when  subjected to an electric charge, or field.

It should be noted that the molecular structure of H2O is very similar to that of silica, the major elemental constituent of the most common crystalline material in the Earth'[s crust. Silica, water and other crystalline materials have tetrahedral components within their structure.

In water the dynamic is extremely facile. The crystalline structures that originate the motive force for homeopathic remedies act as reciprocal pumps, taking in energy and sending it out again in unique electromagnetic signatures. This is what accounts for the oscillating sine wave  found in the results of every successful record of action of a homeopathic remedy. It is why homeopathic remedies have varying effects at different potencies.

According to Rolland Conte in his Theory of HIgh Dilutions, the radio transmission from the homeopathic remedy is received by an antenna like array in the cell, and the array turns in accordance to the signal. It could very well regenerate the signal throughout the immune system as to the nature of the disorder and even an illusory location of it.

Water is classically known to be a diamagnetic material. It is sensitive to and easily overpowered by paramagnetic forces;it responds to an induced magnetic field. This explains Montagnier’s cross talk experiments which show the ability of water to assemble specific aqueous structures that imitate structures in the sending unit. It shows that molecular self assembly can be initiated in water with a magnetic field.

This is in complete concordance with theory postulated by Hahnemann 200 years ago, for even then, during the infancy of electrical technology, he knew that the only plausible reason for the action of the homeopathic remedy was magnetic.

A homeopath (left) is assisted by the author (right) with the homeopath’s usual daily case load.

Bones contain ferromagnetic crystals. The greatest concentration of them are in the ethmoid bone, which is at the base of the nose under the eye sockets, attesting to the direction “follow your nose.” This is the center for what might be thought to be intuition and probably is engaged in the detection of scent; it also explains why homeopathics have been found to be effective when sprayed in the nose.

So there it is. I could be wrong, but in the last ten years of studying this subject I have yet to find any real contradiction to it. It all fits in . . for me.

I know I’ll get the usual ton of crap about it from the usual poseurs, I’m sure there are refinements that will be made, all the incomplete sentences and typos I make will have to be corrected,  maybe redactions, retractions and complimentary action made, but for the most part, I think I’ve nailed it.

The material sciences have buckled under the weight of the facts, homeopathy is explainable. Professor Martin Chaplin of London South Bank University has come down from the mountain top and proclaimed that water can indeed store and transmit information through its hydrogen bonded network.

Case closed.

Now I can go blind and spend the rest of my days in bed, listening to talk radio.

Au revoir.

NEXT: The Homeopathic Repertorization of Jared Lee Loughner

Science begins to tumble to homeopathy

The previous blog reported on amazing discoveries revealed by Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier.

This blog reports on attempts to debunk them.

Jeff Reimers is a theoretical chemist at the University of Sydney, Australia. Regarding the Montagnier experiments he says, “If the results are correct, these would be the most significant experiments performed in the past 90 years, demanding re-evaluation of the whole conceptual framework of modern chemistry.”

It was the bomb that threatened to destroy conventional “medicine” 200 years ago and so it remains, and as the audience sleeps, the young ingenue of homeopathy, the understudy quietly terrorizes the old diva of allopathic medicine quietly from the wings. She waits to go on.

Time is on her side.

Attempts to defuse the quantum bomb by medical and biological hacks, such as America’s first woman flight surgeon (now retired), Harriet Hall, MD, auguring in, and blustering University of Minnesota Morris biology professor PZ Myers, blowing up in his face, have failed, miserably.

It threatens to breed countless bomblets, grow a million legs walking into every biology and chemistry class, hospital and clinic throughout the world, demanding from them what they cannot provide: Homeopathy.

WARNING: If you are a pseudo scientist, drug company shill, medical hack, RUN, run for your life. Find a new profession. Your old one is headed for the scrap pile.

Opponents like Hall continue to desperately insist that the Montagnier study has nothing to do with homeopathy. Hall is a habitual homeopathy basher for Michael Shermer’s Skeptic Magazine.

She writes, “A recent study is being cited as support for homeopathy. For instance, the Homeopathy World Community website says the ‘Luc Montagnier Foundation Proves Homeopathy Works.’ Hall denies it.

“Nope,” she says, succussing her head side to side. “Sorry, guys, It doesn’t. In fact, its findings are inconsistent with homeopathic theory.”

Nope, sorry Harriet. Denying it doesn’t make it go away. It must be troubling to know anti-homeopathy buffs like Hall to know that homeopathy is now FDA regulated. It sends them into strict denial.

Who wants to break that news to the homeopathy denialists? And the way Montagnier processes his materials is in accord with the FDA regulated manufacture of homeopathic remedies. Aqueous structuring from dilutes is the stated title of the Montagnier study. He states that the filtrates were serially diluted 1 in 10 in medical grade sterile water.

 Aqueous structuring from serial agitated dilutions reported by numerous scientific studies now confirms claims for what constitutes FDA regulated homeopathic medicines and how they are made. So let’s take a closer look at what the denialists are saying:

Hall writes, “Homeopathy postulates effects at most dilutions, with increasing effects as the dilutions become greater. In this study, there were no effects at low dilutions.”

That’s partially right. The lowest dilution did not, but neither did many of the higher ones.

Hall is confused!

She has already stated that Montagnier’s work has nothing to do with homeopathy. If this is true then why is she compelled to point out that because EM emissions at the lowest dilutions were not detected by Montagnier, that this is significant in the case AGAINST homeopathy?

If EM can be detected at any dilution, an this is suspected to be the mechanism for biological action, then why deny it, unless it opens the door wider to the argument? Homeopathic remedies are not used in every dilution strength. Hall admits two things in her criticism of Montagnier: One, high dilutes are structured and two, these structures, at some dilutions, can produce EM signals.

Case closed Harriet, we win again. But Hall desperately continues on:

She writes, “They talk about water structures and polymer formations, but acknowledge that these associations appear to be very short-lived. In this study they found that the effects lasted for several hours, sometimes up to 48 hours – but not longer.

Wow! If Hall were up on her homeopathy hating talking points, she’d be arguing that because of the short duration of the hydrogen bond, liquid aqueous structuring cannot theoretically last any longer than 50 femto seconds. Montagnier blows this all to hell by saying that he was getting a signal from liquid aqueous structuring that lasted as long as two days!

Now here’s a killshot. Hall writes, “Homeopathic remedies are not administered within hours of their preparation. They supposedly remain effective for long periods. Most homeopaths say that homeopathic remedies do not require expiration dates and will remain effective indefinitely as long as they are properly stored.”

That’s right, Harriet. Homeopathic remedies are not administered within hours or days of manufacture, they are kept sometimes for years. In fact, it is said that some of the first homeopathic medicines ever made, those by Hahnemann in his old kit, still work just fine. And there is a reason fo this, why homeopathic remedies last indefinitely. If Hall were up on homeopathic pharmaceutical preparation procedures, she’d know that homeopathic remedies are prepared with ethanol. Ethanol is what keeps liquid aqueous structuring, exemplified in clathrates, from dissipating. If Hall finds this hard to believe, then she should take a look at an international study done by Moscow State University and the University of Cincinnati that confirms ethanol preserves clathrates.

Structurability: A Collective Measure of the Structural Differences in Vodkas

The international team observed differences in hydrogen-bonding strength among vodkas using H NMR, FT-IR, and Raman spectroscopy. Component analysis of the FT-IR and Raman data revealed a water-rich hydrate of composition E·(5.3 ± 0.1) H2O prevalent in both vodka and water-ethanol solutions. They reported that the composition was close to that of a clathrate-hydrate observed at low temperature, implying a cage-like morphology

The team went so far as to suggest that you can taste the difference in clathrate structure. One researcher claims that double Nobel prize winner Linus Pauling believed that clathrates are what give alcohol it narcotic effect.

Poor Harriet Hall. Now she has to add some more names to her blacklist of people to bash for being “unscientific,” including yet another Nobel prize winner, this time a chemist, Linus Pauling, who was the only laureate to win 100% of a Nobel TWICE.

Without preservation by ethanol, internal tension from hydrogen bonding aggregates the clathrate hydrates (the aerogeneous nucleators found in homeopathic solutions) and dissipates their structures. Polar water molecules are self assembling and will order themselves around the guest substance. If self-assembly isn‘t stopped by fixing it with a second medium, such as ethanol, structuring dissipates.

Note the persistence of methanol clathrates in the BP Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. Ethanol separates the aerogeneous aqueous structuring into fixed domains, stopping interference with one another. Montagnier produced biologically active “aqueous nanostructures” through the time honored process of homeopathic medicine, the serial agitated dilution in water, the same process used to create homeopathic remedies. Look at what Montagnier has done: His research on detection of electromagnetic signals in the plasma from patients with Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis verifies what we homeopaths have been telling the deaf world of science for years.

What Montagnier found was that the stimulation of the dilute by an electromagnetic background of very low frequency was essential. The background was either produced from natural sources (the Schumann resonances [4] which start at 7.83 Hz) or from artificial sources. Homeopaths such as myself have seized on this study as further proof, from highly credible sources, that homeopathic remedies have distinct supramolecular structural features that emit electromagnetic signals that can affect biological entities. It is also providing further insight into the physics of homeopathy.

Now read how Hall finally caves in on the argument as she contradicts her previous denials, admitting more evidence for homeopathy.

“There were a series of positive effects at high dilutions but the effect size did not increase progressively as the dilution increased. At the highest dilutions, the effect vanished.” That’s right too. In the first part of her critique Hall said the Montagnier study had nothing to do with homeopathy. Now here’s she’s puzzled because “high dilutions,” used both in homeopathic medicine and Montagnier’s experiments, are emitting EM at some frequencies, but not at others. This is concordant from what I’ve seen in other experiments of this kind. The sinusoidal wave is a common graph for results in almost all homeopathic studies, be they physical, in vivo or in vitro. At some dilutions they don’t seem to work, or they produce opposite effects. The wave also seems to be rising as if there is actually a longer secondary wave. Allow me to make a suggestion. As dilutions rise there could be changes in amplitude and frequency.

Note that the most commonly used dilutions in homeopathic remedies sold OTC are 6C (100^6), 12C (100^12) and 30C (100^30). A keen mathematical eye might spot what the relationship is between those three numbers: They fall upon an advanced Fibonacci scale, which mathematically defines the spiral.

John Benneth, self portrait

I’m sure this will be as much a cause of interest for homeopaths as it will be ridicule for people like Hall, Shermer, Myers and Randi, but I’m used to that, and I know that eventually they’re going to suffer either the embarrassment of the same kind of obloquoy they’ve been dishing out, ridicule and ignominy that has caught up with similar critics. For every man who was made famous for his practice of homeopathy a hundred years ago, what man was made famous for his criticism of it? I couldn’t tell you a one.

Likewise I’ll wager that the name of the great homeopath George Vithoulkas, for instance, will outlive that of Harriet Hall. 

THE CLATHRATE, homeopathy's missing link. RNA with solvation shell.

Certainly we can admit that Montagnier is not directly testing the biological effects of these remedies on anything but themselves (the crosstalk experiments), but he is proving the major point of contention in favor of homeopathy, the memory of water, and its biologically specific effects, which Hall has found herself inadvertently accepting. In the next blog, further discussing and complimenting this new insights, I will answer some questions posed by a JBJ reader, raised by the Montagnier experiments.

John Benneth, PG Hom. – London (Hons.)

Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter


The French virologist who stunned the world with his discovery of the HIV virus has done it again with what may be the medical discovery of the ages. But because of what he calls “intellectual terrorism” the Nobel laureate is leaving his home country to set up shop in China.

His name is Luc Antoine Montagnier. He is a French virologist and joint recipient with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Now he has something new. The discovery of proof for a new medical paradigm, complete with in vitro and in vivo evidence . . and supportive texts on how to use it.

Montagnier’s published research reported detecting electromagnetic signals that were produced by “aqueous nanostructures” from biologically active bacterial DNA sequences.

It is perhaps the most controversial scientific study to date. It sets the scientific world ablaze with controversy.

It is not just a shot across the bow of the old worn out bump and grind biological paradigm for medicine failures exposed by the current raging cancer epidemic.

It is a bomb about to go off.

In a recent interview by SCIENCE MAGAZINE, Montagnier defended renowned immunologist Jacques Benveniste, who became the target of ridicule and obloquy when he also declared that the high dilutes used in homeopathy have biologoical effects.

SCIENCE MAGAZINE: You have called Benveniste a modern Galileo. Why?

Luc Montagnier

LUC MONTAGNIER: Benveniste was rejected by everybody, because he was too far ahead. He lost everything, his lab, his money. … I think he was mostly right, but the problem was that his results weren’t 100% reproducible.

SCIENCE MAGAZINE: Do you think there’s something to homeopathy as well?

LUC MONTAGNIER: I can’t say that homeopathy is right in everything. What I can say now is that the high dilutions are right. High dilutions of something are not nothing. They are water structures which mimic the original molecules. I have applied for funding from other sources, but I have been turned down. There is a kind of fear around this topic in Europe. I am told that some people have reproduced Benveniste’s results, but they are afraid to publish it because of the intellectual terror from people who don’t understand it.

NEXT: Pseudoscientist Harriet Hall of Skeptic Magazine attempts to debunk Montagnier.

John Benneth, PG Hom. – London (Hons.)

 Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter