Homeopathy and the Physics of Enchantment: The Supramolecular Vaccine

A great discovery is exposed . .

Electrical Engineering for the Immune System
by John R. Benneth

Here’s correspondence received from a reader of the previous blog, where I make the assertion that the immune trigger in the modern conventional vaccine is the electron, not the currently presumed molecule of the unrefined modern vaccine, and that the current vaccines can be made safer and more effective by dissociation of the morbid vaccine molecule, proven to be superior in their use by homeopathic physicians.

drgsrinivas writess:

“Mr Bennett, there is a hell of difference between vaccines and homeopathic remedies. If pioneers like you argue that homeopathic remedies work similar to vaccines, no wonder why homeopathy looses in scientific discussions.

“And despite all such misconceptions and misunderstanding amongst the homeopathic community about homeopathy, it is still working. So it must be really a wonderful medicine!”

johnbenneth writess:

You’re simply echoing what popular science, driven by the molecular drug industry, wants you to believe, that “homeopathic remedies” are inert, that they have no active ingredients. The fact is lab tests show they can cause dramatic biochemical reactions. Specifically they show that the “immunogen” is the electron, not the molecule.
Keep reading the literature. Define “molecular dissociation.”

When a molecule is dissociated by the process of dilution and succession, it is stripped of its mass and reduced to its constituate electrons, its signal, the immune trigger, increases exponentially, and thus requires no aggravating adjuvants or preservatives, hence a toxin free, pure vaccine.

The operative phase of inoculation, such as found in the modern “vaccine,” is not the molecule, it is the electron. It is possible to peel away the electron from the molecule mass from the common vaccine, stripping away its unnecessary, dangerous elements, leaving nothing but the pure electrical signal of the solute and a safe, more facile prophylaxis (disease prevention).

And please allow me to note once again “vaccine” is not a proper word for disease prevention (prophylaxis) other than the morbid cowpox serum used for the prevention of variola (smallpox). The word vaccine literally means from cattle, so it is misapplied when addressing whooping cough, the measles or cancer. There’s no safe molecular “vaccine” for whooping cough, measles or cancer, but there is now FDA sanctioned supramolecular prophylaxis for whooping cough, measles and ot5her infectious diseases..

Supramolecular here refers to the fourth contiguous phase of matter: Ions, plasma, essentially the electron.
Actinic here refers to biochemical changes produced by spectral energy.

Now get this, this is crazy: This is a question I punted into Google: How do “vaccines” immunize?
Here’s what I take to be the answer from conventional settled science via the US government’s Center for Disease Control:

How do vaccines give immunity?
Vaccines help develop immunity by imitating an infection. This type of infection, however, does not cause illness, but it does cause the immune system to produce T-lymphocytes and antibodies. Sometimes, after getting a vaccine, the imitation infection can cause minor symptoms, such as fever.
Understanding How Vaccines Work

Click to access vacsafe-understand-color-office.pdf

Q: The CDC says “vaccines” help develop immunity by imitating an infection?

It would be what one might call vaccine fallout.  People who receive live-virus vaccines, such as the MMR, can then shed that live virus, for up to many weeks and can infect others.  Other live-virus vaccines include the nasal flu vaccine, shingles vaccine, rotavirus vaccine, chicken pox vaccine, and yellow fever vaccine.”

A: I beg your pardon for exposing more pathological skepticism masquerading as science and rocking the medical Titanic, but the stated recognition that vaccines help develop immunity by imitating an infection stumbles over a contradiction, a huge medical incongruity: it is one of two reasons for rejecting homeopathy, a long practiced medical tradition. Creating immunity from any particular disease by staging an imitation of that disease is the primary strategy of homeopathy, of like cures like in treating not just infectious diseases, but a wide range of human problems, such as those caused by emotional stress, like peptic ulcers, infection and toxicity. The broad application of pathological similitude to treat a wide variety of human, animal and even plant, i.e. biological afflictions is on one count why for over 200 years homeopathy has been banned by standard medical practice.

So this is really an odd conundrum. On one hand, according to the CDC, the use of artificial imitative diseases in countervaling similitude is the only alllopathic strategy for conveying immunity. On the other hand, its use as putative homeopathy is rejected. It would appear that one hand is ignorant of the other.

What is it we’re not seeing here?