Explaining in classical terms how the solute’s electron does not dilute out .
Here is Randi’s ignorant TED talk on homeopathy
Explaining in classical terms how the solute’s electron does not dilute out .
Here is Randi’s ignorant TED talk on homeopathy
TAKE IT UP WITH GOD
It’s really nothing more than harassment of the traditionally superior medical doctrine of homeopathy by predatory practices (cloaked as medicine) to say to devotees that there’s no “science” supporting it.
How long have we been hearing this whining lie from patent pill pushers and the pseudoscientists that follow them, that there’s no “science” to homeopathy? How much longer do we have to listen to them misinterpreting Avogadro, claiming that it’s inert because there’s not one molecule in a homeopathic diluent? Why haven’t these fools been taught ionic theory and molecular dissociation? They should know by now, sticking a finger in a lit light socket elucidates the molecule to not be the only thing that can affect the human economy, nor is it the only active component of a pharmaceutical; when a molecule de-ionizes, its component electrons expand into the diluent and will continue to do so through countless serial dilutions, endlessly reproducing the effects of the solute: This is the soul of homeopathy’s physics. It may indeed be a true anomaly, but this isn’t a mere theory or novel invention, it’s been a known fact demonstrable by a NIST protocol of molar conductance for over a hundred years, that (as far as we know) the properties of the solute will perpetuate in the diluent throughout infinite dilution.
This should raise eyebrows, not hackles, but like any seemingly self-perpetuating phenomenon, in the name of cut and measure science it drives some people crazy, unless it’s a shut up effect, like the Methuselah half life of a radioactive element, and this is exactly what beta scintillation tests and actinic experiments on plants and animal subjects reveal homeopathic pharmaceuticals to be: Radioactive.
Perhaps there’s a better word for it. If there is I’d like to know what it is.
It’s not my CV to be solely prosaic without novelty, but none of this so far here is my invention. If you have a problem with accepting the physics of infinite dilution, don’t bark at me about it, it’s a fact, forget “science” and take it up with God.
A lot’s happened in the last year, and it’s been a particularly wild ride for me and homeopathy. 2010 was actually a big year for me and homeopathy. And well it should’ve been, for 2010 was the 200th anniversary of the publication
of Organon der rationellen Heilkunde, The Organon of the Healing Art, Samuel Hahnemann’s first treatise on homeopathy, a science that he alone begat.
It is a book that continues to rock the medical world.
I think it should be noted here, that as an orthodox physician, Hahnemann had been cutting his doses for 14 years prior to publication of the Organon. He was compelled to do so because of the harm that “heroic medicine,” then as now, was doing to the withering public.
Bloodletting by barbers and toxic chemicals administered by the totally unschooled to treat disease in 1810 graduated to more sophisticated methods of bloodletting by unnecessary surgery — and more toxic, patented petro chemical synthesis and “chemotherapy,” to treat disease.
“Heroic medicine” was not called that because of what the physician did, it was called that because of what the patient endured. But with homeopathy came hope, and that hope is alive today.
Hahnemann didn’t just spring out of the gate with this thing, as an idea untested all on its own, it had to first stand trial to his own incredulity and testing. The 14 year trial was that of a well-trained, travelled and read government medical doctor who, for his time, was also a first rate published chemist.
Anyone who can be fair and objective about it, who still harbors any doubts about homeopathy, should keep that in mind when banking on Avogadro’s Constant, the famous hypothesis concerning the molecular limit of gasses in combination with one another, for with all theory aside, Hahnemann, as countless others have done in following him, had to accept, without supporting theory or logic, the evidence for the biological action of high dilutes, for seeing is believing, and practitioners for 200 years have seen that homeopathy oddly works . . as if by magic.
But homeopathy is not magic, as a growing number of material scientists have come to realize. There are now 10 different physical tests for homeopathic high dilutes, and six different types of in vitro tests, in which some published tests which have perfect ratings.
Coincidentally, 2011 marks the 200th year anniversary of publication of that theory by Avogadro, “Essay on Determining the Relative Masses of the Elementary Molecules of Bodies and the Proportions by Which They Enter
These Combinations.” As if we didn’t know. Since the beginning theory by the numbers have dogged homeopathy as impossible,when in fact a heterogeneous molecule was never suspect. Like the skeptics’ Elvis, Avogadro has left the building.
2010 was also anniversary for something else quite notable in this affair, really the key item that distinguishes a homeopathic solution from its solvent vehicle. 200 years ago two famous English chemists, Sir Humphrey Davy, and Michael Farraday, in their study of chlorine, made note of liquid aqueous structuring, what they called hydrates, curious clatcheses of water molecules that twinkled like ice, which later came to be known as clathrates. Hold on to that last word, it is the final key to unlocking the mystery of homeopathy. 2010 was the year of the clathrate when it was indicted for causing the BP Gulf of Mexico oil well disaster and became the subject of wild speculation at the Cavendish Laboratory when it was announced it was the operative mechanism of the homeopathic remedy, the same place where a decade ago a notorious French immunologist proclaimed a new biological paradigm.
It is the year when I began my lecture before the crowned heads of Europe by showing a power point picture of the suspect, saying, “Ladies and gentlemen, the clathrate hydrate. This concludes my lecture, other than where is
Josephson’s Scotch, are there any questions?” and was mobbed by silence, forced to
go on for an hour to explain it all, and getting nothing for it but some weak orange juice, stingily poured by Josephson.
Thanks to Dr. Shashi Sharma, president of Hahnemann College of Homeopathy in London, my efforts came to fruition in 2010 with an invitation to be the key note speaker at his conference there, where I was treated like a king, and at the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge where, by invitation of Nobel laureate, Professor Brian Josephson, I was given an opportunity to present my theory for the molecular pecularities of the homeopathic remedy.
Now you know. Until my London lectures in September and October of 2010, the polar protic water molecule eluded a popular explanation as to how it forms liquid aqueous structuring (LAS), and how LAS is relevant to a classical science explanation of the homeopathic remedy’s inner workings.
2010 marked the 100th year anniversary of Johannes Diedrik van der Waals’s award of the Nobel prize for his contributions to understanding the intermolecular forces which now bear his name, critical to understanding liquid aqueous structuring, confirming what the genius of Hahnemann presented 100 years prior,
that the biological effects of the homeopathic remedy are magnetic.
2010 marks the year we declared that the homeopathic remedy could be explained in the terms of supramolecular chemistry.
And I did it without the Scotch.
HOW IT BEGAN
It really began in earnest for me 10 years ago when James Randi offered me his million dollar prize to prove that the action of homeopathic remedies was something more than a psychogenic effect.
I took his challenge naively believing the offer was genuine.
Much to the disbelief and fury of the big pharma stooges, the literature, much of it through PUBMED, provided numerous ways to show the action of homeopathic remedies outside of the human domain. I found that they not only had physical distinctions, they had action on plants and animals, too, that could be shown by a wide variety of methods. But their most prounounced action was in the most infinitesimal doses, remotely applied, on our greatest opponents, precipitating violent contractions of the jaw and vocal mechanism, and highly agitated contractions of the fingers on keyboards. One detractor called me a murderer. Another said I was an idiot. Another said I was homeopathetic.
But it was not enough to dissuade me from clinging to my chains. Randi ran like a rabbit.
I sent my samples to Kirlian phtographer Chris Wodtke, who made some amazing pictures of them, showing the crackling feathers coming out of the gas discharge from the thousands of electrocuting volts coursing through the drop. When it began looking like I actually had methods by which to win the million, such as by Kirlian photography, or by plants, Randi said I was a nobody and had bigger fish to fry.
He claimed that French immunologist Jacques Benveniste and Professor Brian
Josephson of Cambridge had agreed to accept his challenge, and that he would test them first. What? I coldn’t belive it. If elt like a jilted lover. But always the hero, Josephson wrote to say that they were not interested in being “tested” by Amazing Randi, understandable after what Randi had done to Benveniste years earlier. It was a circus with clowns with rats riding on the backs of dogs, jumping through hoops of fire. The Challenge, Jacques and Josephson said, was mine, and they sent Randi careening back to me.
Randi kept stalling. He refused to set a test date. He found some university stooge to fence with me for a while until the stooge ran off and hid under his pillow. It was doubly, triply (I’d say quadruply if it wasn’t so corny) evident that Randi wasn’t going to make good on his offer to conduct a test, so I took my case to Naomi Shapiro, Randi’s account manager at Goldman Sachs, where the loot was supposed to be hid. She wouldn’t verify anything. All Randi had as proof of the prize — reportedly put up by Richard Adams of UUNET — was an old fax with Shapiro’s name on it. It was evident that at one time the account may have held a million dollars in what may have been nothing more than junk bonds, but what was in there now could have been nothing more than stack of Rnadi'[s old Blue Boy magazines.
When I sprung the news that Goldman Sachs was refusing to verify the account, Randi sprung into action. He accused me of “damaging the James Randi Educational Foundation,” had a heart attack and like a street corner bum started selling pens dipped in “homeopathic gold,” to pay for it.
What Randi didn’t want anyone to know was that “aurum,” homeopathic gold, is the
first remedy indicated by heart troubles and depression. Obviously he was taking it because he couldn’t afford the doubt.
Exposed in his ruse, Randi then claimed he wouldn’t test me because I was insane.
The only way, he said, he would continue negotiations with me for a test of homeopathy, would be for me to get a signed affidavit attesting to my mental condition from a clinical psychologist.
November 2nd, 2000 I found myself wandering the eerily quiet streets of a suburb of Tucson, close to the
University. Down to my last few bucks, I had hitched a ride from Portland, Oregon to meet with Dr. Gary Schwartz, a professor of clinical psychology and psychiatry, who had expressed an interest in my research and was looking for a physical distinction in the homeopathic remedy.
I said I could provide it.
Schwartz’ lab was called the Human Energy Systems Laboratory (HESL). It was located in a little bungalow in the university neighborhood. The garage had been converted into a workshop. Schwartz was using electronic equipment to test subtle energy effects and especially how they applied to what is thought of as the paranormal.
When I arrived on foot I saw a young man in the garage through the open door. I heard zapping sounds coming from within. I think he was electrocuting mice. The ones without intuition. Having arrived early, rather than bother the man’s animal genocide, I decided I would kill time by taking a stroll.
I was walking down the street minding my own business when suddenly a black high-rise pickup pulled up. A man with a beard and sunglasses rolled down the driver side window and, pointing up into the sky behind me, said in a nasally voice, “Look at the Sun.”
I turned around, and saw one of the oddest and most spectacular sights of my life. In a cloudless sky the Sun appeared to have split into three parts. I had never seen anything like it. It created what looked like a huge eye
peering down at me.
I turnedback around. The pickup was gone.
I then embarked on my own mission of evangelism. I asked passerby at the University what it was. Not one person had noticed it until I pointed it out, as had been done for me, and all but one stared increduously. Most everyone, likeme, had walking around without looking up, and no one knew. Finally a young woman said it was the Ojo del Diablo, the Eye of the Devil.
The Eye of the Devil?
I thought that sounded a bit harse. I called for damage control. And then I htought. If it could be the eye of the devil, it could also be el ojo de Dios, the Eye of God.
In any case we were being stared at from above by what looked like a huge shining eye. I went back to the HESL. I called to the young man in the garage and asked him to come outside. He did, and asked what the matter was.
I pointed up. “Have you ever seen that before?” I asked.
“No, I haven’t he said,” shading his eyes. “What is it?”
“El Ojo de Dios.” I nodded my head knowingly, as if I knew. “God is watching us.”
As it turned out, it was what is called parhelia, commonlhy known as sun dogs. The effect is caused by ice crystals in the upper atmosphere. The actual science bore out the myth. Ice crytals, as it turned out 10 years later, were indeed the key.
After our meeting, Schwartz visited Randi in his Ft. Lauderdale office. According to Schwartz, Randi was still insisting I was crazy, slapping the desk with his hand — and John Edward, the past life medium Schwartz had been testing, a liar.
He said all of this with his pants ablaze.
Three years later, in collaboration with Professor Iris Bell, MD, Schwartz followed my suggestion to use Kirlian
photography to produce the Gas Discharge Visualization test for homeopathy, and reported, as I had found, that homeopathic remedies can indeed be distinguished from their liquid vehicles by this method.
They published their results: “The procedure generated measurable images at the two highest voltage levels. At 17 kV, the remedies exhibited overall lower image parameter values compared with solvents (significant for Pulsatilla and Lachesis), as well as differences from solvents in fluctuations over repeated images (exposures to the same voltage). At 24 kV, other patterns emerged, with individual remedies showing higher or lower image parameters compared with other remedies and the solvent controls.” (Bell)
Like every other test I had found for homeopathy, Randi had to brush this one off too. Losing his million would not only be a loss of property and face, it would threaten the entire pharmaceutical paradigm that was supporting him.
Ten years ago there was practically no references at all to homeopathy on the Web, nothing regarding pre-clinical or clinical evidence when I posted my collection of pre–clinical tests for “Proof for Homeopathy.”
The world wide web was a novelty then and very few people noticed “Proof for homeopathy,” but after I reposted that same collection as the first post of this blog, it was reposted and went viral. It became notorious and still stands
as the most viewed entry in the John Benneth Journal.
It seems like homeopathy took off like rocket after that. Prior to assembling Proof for Homeopathy the homeopaths I was in contact with had very little knowledge of the clinical tests for homeopathy, and none for the pre-clinical.
The homeopaths I corresponded with didn’t seem to even have asked the question as to whether or not high dilutes could affect non human subjects, such as plants and animals. The only in vitro test popularly known for homeopathy was the one done by the brilliant immunologist Jacques Benveniste, the basophil degranulation test, but it was generally thought of as being idiopathic and the man contagious with quackery.
The fact of the matter is that the basophil degranulation test was not of Benveniste’s origin. It was first attempted in 1985 by Murrieta et al and first accomplished by Poitevin in the same year. I have now found more than two dozen replications of the basophil degranulation test for homeopathy, most notably the work by Sainte Laudy and Belon (Sainte-Laudy)
I don’t think homeopaths’ ignorance of the pre-clinical and clinical tests for homeopathy is excusable, but I think its understandable. Despite what may be said of it, the homeopathic materia medica, the reference work built on case notes that homeopath’s rely on for finding the right remedy, provides the most relevant information/evidence for the use/action of high dilutes. Compare the terms, one set for the practitioner, one for the doubter. The pre-clinical and clinical trials of homeopathy serve mostly to respond to the yet unproven accusations that homeopathy is merely a placebo. The average practitioner finds the pre-clinicals and clinical tests to be merely vituperative of homeopathy and useless in the clinical practice of homeopathy. Either way they are merely pebbles thrown against a tank. No information/evidence will ever suffice to convince the unconvincible, nor will it ever.
The most remarkable finding was something I just came across, and inevitably I think that in concordance with theory and evidence, will help to break the back of the pharma stooge‘s opposition.. That more was not made of it, to me illustrates the point of resistance, but it is profound that it appeared in this red letter year. What makes it so important I think is not what is said (it is 40 years old and prosaic) but who is saying it.
It is a statement made by Emeritus Professor Martin Chaplin, one of the world’s leading authorities on the physics of water. It really deserves an entry all of its own here on the Journal, for it marks a turning point in the recognition
of homeopathy as being based on real scientific principles. Yes, I know, reading it you will see that Chaplin covers his bet, so no one can say he drank the dilute Kool Aid. But even though it is true, for a man of lesser credentials it would mean professional suicide to make such a statement.
In an article entitled The Memory of Water, posted on the London South Bank University website, (probably the best website for information about the physics and chemistry of water) Professor Chaplin says, “Water does store and transmit information, concerning solutes, by means of its hydrogen-bonded network.” (Chaplin)
The word “does” invokes the controversy that should have ended in the mid 20th century when clathrates became an issue for the oil companies, clogging up oil pipelines, and in the fifties when double Nobel laureate Linus Pauling nominated them as being the cause of inebriation, or in the sixties when Barnard frist linked them to the homeopathic solution, or in the nineties, when Anagnostatos described their formation in the host/guest process, and then finally in 2010, when a study between US and Russian universities, clathrates were revelaed to affect the taste of vodka (Schaffer)
Note that all of these examples of clathrates are in solution with hydrocarbons such as ethanol or methane, which are capable of hydrogen bonding, a point always missed by the disbeliever.
What have we been saying for years now? Next thing you know Chaplin will cave and admit that the biological effects are due to the crystalline piezo electric effect.
The article is prefaced with an epitaph to the late Benveniste: “Maybe I should have thrown the data away” followed by a comment by Chaplin, “but being a scientist and believing in his data he could not.”
I for one am glad that he didn’t, and I am sorry for the all the misery Maddox, Stewart and Randi put him through.
I would add something to the memorial that Benveniste wrote to me, if I could:
“Homeopathy is the devil’s piss pot.”
Bell IR, Lewis DA 2nd, Brooks AJ, Lewis SE, Schwartz GE. “Gas discharge visualization evaluation of ultramolecular doses of homeopathic medicines under blinded, controlled conditions.”
Chaplin M “Memory of Water” lsbu(dot)ac(dot)uk/water/memory(dot)html
Murrieta M, Leynadier F, Dry J. “Degranulation of human basophils and so-called homeopathic substances” Bull Acad Natl Med. 1985 May;169(5):619-22.
Poitevin, B., Aubin, M., Benveniste, J. (1985) Effect d’Apis Mellifica sur la degranulation des basophiles humains in vitro. Homeopathie Francaise 73: 193.
Sainte-Laudy J, Belon P. Inhibition of basophil activation by histamine: a sensitive and reproducible model for the study of the biological activity of high dilutions. Homeopathy. 2009 Oct;98(4):186-97.
The Dreadful Facts about Homoeopathy
How many lives have been lost due to ignorance about homoeopathy? How many people have died because they didn’t know better? How many people, with a serious condition, could have lived if they had made a better decision about using homoeopathy?
If you were coughing blood and felt like you were going to die, would you go to a homoeopath? Let’s say not knowing any better, on the advice of a friend, you did . . and miraculously got better. Would that be a recommendation for homoeopathy? Fractionally, of course it would. But how do you know you didn’t just get lucky, you were getting well anyway? What if there was a thousand people coughing blood and feeling like they were going to die who went to the same homeopath and did die, and you were the lucky one . . ?
Well, there’s no belief in a quack medicine that a good epidemic can’t cure. Right? Well, maybe not . .
Epidemics and pandemics are the ultimate large cohort studies for the effectiveness of any particular medicine. Therefore, if homoeopathy is the quackery it’s esteemed and credentialed critics say it is, then its performance in epidemics will surely determine whether or not it’s evertything its quacked up to be. It should also reveal, by comparison, if there is a performance to be seen in the accuse’. IF there was such a thing then there should be a record of it and just how it got there, how well it did perform?
Well actuallythere is such a thing.
And the Logic of Epidemics
A Review of It
Ladies and gentlemen: The problem facing us today is not that a quiet, little, mysterious and misunderstood system of medicine called homeopathy, or more correctly homoeopathy, doesn’t work. No, the problem is that homoeopathy does work, as The Logic of Figures by Thomas Bradford painfully reveals. If it didn’t work, its critics (who I suspect make more money bashing it than some homoeopaths do practicing it) wouldn’t have jobs. They’d be taking their penmanship out on cardboard signs to hoist on street corners, not rubbing the keys on their keyboards blank over “homeopathy,” as they do now.
In my last journal entry, The Threat of Homeopathy , it was convincingly shown that allopathy (medicine that isn’t homoeopathic) is conducting mass murder on the premise that there’s nowhere else to turn, and so when they land in the jackpot and are criminally indicted and literally fined billions, they take it out on the orphan (homoeopathy) . . sort of like the man who has had a hard day’s work, comes home and beats up his wife.
NOW WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT?
It is because the big drug companies are afraid. They’re afraid that people might go sniffing around a homoeopath’s door when they get cancer, or a diagnosis of diabetes, or any particular complaint, from autism to zoonosis.
The masterpiece was ended by implying that one good epidemic leads to another, unless you stop them with something that works. And what most people in the murder-by-drug business are afraid to hear, is that (believe it or not) homoeopathy works, and epidemics prove it on a mass scale.
The punchline here is that by the technical definition of the word, “homoeopathic” is what the small pox vaccine actually is.
Allow me to reiterate this disturbing fact: What modern medicine complains about as a cockeyed theory and dangerous in one hand is being used in a clumsy way in the other.
You can download the PDF, print it out and hold it close to your face. Or just skim through it online. Either way I think you will be in for a disturbing surprise.
Take Yellow Fever for example. Here’s Bradford’s comparisons of treatments for it, homoeopathic and that other thing, the one most people go for, what Hahnemann called allopathic . . heroic medicine?
Let us now review these figures . . let’s put it this way: Is Bradford saying that the mortality rate for non homoeopathic medical treatments for Yellow Fever in over half a century of reporting (1803-1864) is approx. 44%, and that the mortality rate from the same disease, when treated by homoeopathy, is lower than 6%?
Is that not a huge difference?
I trust that the anomaly of this is clear to you. I hope that it is overwhelmingly clear to you: A doctrine which in 2010 was being threatened with defunding by the NHS in the UK has reportedly had a staggering success rate in comparison to its medical cousin, which is oft most practiced today in treating all diseases. But using homoeopathy, which the Chief Scientist of the UK, John Beddington, says has no scientific validity, by Dr. Bradford’s reckoning, could have saved almost 90% of those who died of Yellow Fever.
DO THEY WANT TO MAKE YOU THEIR HEALTH SLAVE?
I hope you get it. There’s something drastically, dramatically wrong here. Bradford’s accounting is not an isolated one, as will be demonstrated to anyone who makes a deeper inquiry and more thorough investigation, part of which follows.
Prof. Edzard Ernst of Exeter University, who will predictably be terminated for academic misconduct [and, as an update, was] has also been particularly vociferous about denouncing homeopathy, especially in its use in preventing disease. Ernst is the professor of Complimentary Medicine at the University of Exeter in the UK. His complaint, like that of all others of his ilk, is that the physic of homeopathy is impossible and therefore a placebo. However, to the contrary, there are biochemical tests that destroy the hypothesis, tests that Ernst avoids discussing [and as of July 17, 2019, still avoids discussing].
There is another interesting validation. If Bradford was doing a whitewash, you would not suspect him of plugging a dead horse. But he is fair, so when homoeopathy fails, he says so. Homeopathy did not come out superior to allopathic medicine is ALL regards. In some it came out about the same. And in treating dropsy of the brain, it was a washout (a dead horse) as one might expect in diseases of deposition and deficiency, and not as effective as surgery in removing neoplasms.. But in all others, infectious diseases, epidemiologically it did more than remarkably well. It’s results in some situations, especially epidemics, were stunning.
Publication of Bradford’s book was too early to include the performance of homoeopathics in the 1918 Influenza pandemic, accused of being the Spanish Flu, although there is some evidence it couldn’t be blamed on the Spanish because it may have come from a hog farm in Kansas, or Hot Springs, Arkansas.
The 1918 epidemic was a compelling spectacle, It reached into just about every far corner of the Earth and its morbid effects were dazzling, incredible . . (I’m running out of unused superlatives for this entry). It left entire aboriginal villages dead. In the cities, people were dying in pools of blood as their immune systems went berserk, dissolving the lungs, spewing fountains of purple blood at the horrified staff of hospitals. It was swift and it was deadly. Influenza could drop you in a day. Some targets, standing alive one moment and would be lying dead the next. One day you’d be whistling Dixie, the next, ready for planting.
Here then is an exquisite example for the ultimate test within the ultimate trial. How well did homeopathy perform during the Influenza Pandemic of 1918?
You can read the more grisly details yourself in my article on the treatment of the influenza in 1918, when homoeopaths lost approximately 3% of their patients, while the non-homoeopathic physicians lost about 30% of theirs.
Homoeopathy performed TEN TIMES BETTER than allopathy in the worst disease outbreak known to man.
According to the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (Stern), Leptospirosis is “the most widespread bacterial zoonosis worldwide.”
On August 3, 2010, the Cuban government reported “the largest study of homeopathy ever undertaken, based on data from over 11 million people (the entire population of Cuba), is published today in the journal Homeopathy. It provides fascinating evidence that a highly dilute substance, prepared according to homeopathic principles, may contribute to the prevention of Leptospirosis.”
During the Leptospirosis season of 2007, the Cubans had enough Leptospirosis vaccine to treat 15,000 high-risk people. That was when the government decided to treat everyone in the region at risk with homeopathy, except for babies under one year. This would be a population of 2.3 million, the world’s largest homeopathic study group to date.
“Within a few weeks the number of cases had fallen from 38 to 4 cases per 100,000 per week,” says the Faculty, “significantly fewer than the historically-based forecast for those weeks of the year. The 8.8 million population of the other provinces did not receive homeopathic treatment and the incidence was as forecast. The effect appeared to be sustained: there was an 84% reduction in infection in the treated region in the following year (2008) when, for the first time, incidence did not correlate with rainfall. In the same period, incidence in the untreated region increased by 22%.”
Allow me to highlight those last few words: Leptospirosis infection in the untreated region increased by 22%.
Homeopathic prophylaxis of leptospirosis in Cuba reduced infection by 84% !
That is HUGE.
The Faculty report followed publication of the Cuban’s report in their July issue of Homeopathy. The abstract is available on PUBMED. Bracho, “Large-scale application of highly-diluted bacteria for Leptospirosis epidemic control.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20674839
Here’s a video interview with the report’s eponym, Dr. Gustavo Bracho, http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=61C0884F69B56C3C70D20A52E526B6B2
What will you do? What will you say? This is about a huge number of human lives at risk.
Without homeopathic treatment, they are sure to die.
There’s a cholera epidemic in Haiti right now. Will the Haitians have the benefit of homeopathy . . for that?
And speaking of insanity . .
And here is what is even more interesting. Go back and read Bradford’s report on Yellow fever. The percentage of people saved in the Cuban leptospirosis is nearly as high as those saved in Bradford’s entire 19th century record of Yellow Fever . .
This is dumbfounding.
Yes, there’s nothing a good epidemic can’t cure, such as mass stupidity. Perhaps homoeopathy has been suppressed such as it has as a measure of population control. You have to forgive me, for my mind is grasping at signals, for a scrap of logic as to why you have allowed this continue as it has. Well, maybe not you in particular, I don’t want to embarrass you in front of your own eyes, but it certainly is working itself around to you, coming to an immune system near you, soon enough. There are all kinds of epidemics, chronic and acute. It’s the chronic ones that sneak up on you, or that are already well in place. Like cancer. That’s an epidemic. And anyone who doesn’t die of a heart attack first will probably die of cancer, sooner or later.
Homoeopathy, the practice of medical similitude, is informational medicine. That’s how it works, by informing the immune system of the nature of the disease. So really, the biggest epidemic of all is stupidity.
Now you know.
Some seeds fall on barren ground, some are eaten by birds. Some are ground under foot. Some pop, take root, spring up, then die from lack of water. But every now and then the planted becomes the planter.
One mind can make all the difference in the world. I hope it’s yours.
Thanks for reading, thanks for writing. And thanks most of all for taking action.
John Benneth, PG Hom (Hons.)
Hahnemann College, London
“In spite of all scientific speculations and experiments regarding smallpox vaccination, Jenner’s discovery remained an erratic blocking medicine, till the biochemically [emphasis J.B.] 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: homoeopathic.
“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 ‘homoeopathy’? 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.” – Emil von Behring, the first man to win the Nobel prize for Physics and Medicine
Now let us have your witness!