Was it something I said?

What is the chief end of man?–to get rich. In what way?–dishonestly if we can; honestly if we must. Who is God, the one only and true? Money is God. God and Greenbacks and Stock–father, son, and the ghost of same–three persons in one; these are the true and only God, mighty and supreme… Mark Twain,
– “The Revised Catechism” 9/27/1871

There are few inventions, that is, there are few real inventions that aren’t prevarications. What we take as being a stroke of genius in reality, most times I think, is nothing more than habitual discovery. .  long experimentation, hard work and the study of the recursion of others doing trial after experiment after assay after trial all over again. Rey discovers thermoluminescence  in supramolecular dilutions of theoretically pure water, complaints by pseudoscientists that

They say Heaven conspires for those who know what they want. Sometimes there are inspirations that seem to dart from Heaven, come out of nowhere. They are coincidences with impossible denominators, as if to lead us on this dark and misty road and keep trudging on past the warm and lighted inn.

This last evening I experienced one.

An amazing coincidence. Something to spur me on. Whether or not it’s relevant to my efforts is hard to know.
You see, I’ve been getting criticisms over my approach to the subject of homeopathy. Some people have suggested that I’ve been unprofessional, in a somewhat mean and derogatory way, in response to my critics.
And sometimes, in reflection, I feel compelled to agree. I should be kinder. I should be nicer. It’s not like me to tell a man he’s so stupid he must think a fire engine is something that automatically starts fires, tiptoes in the drugstore so as to not wake up the sleeping pills. I’m the type of man who pets cats, drives around squirrels and is nice to telephone solicitors.
I try to be friendly and smile. But in the case of homeopathy, I feel I am faced with sinister forces. Evil. The bane of humanity.

Allopathy.

Now this may seem a little paranoid to those unwilling to take the time to verify it, but it’s true.
Well, the ground work for this miracle started out earlier today when one of the people in our online homeopathy discussion group posted a list of salaries of the major drug company chief executive officers (CEOs). I took an immediate interest in it because of late I’ve been wondering who the CEO of Pfizer is, the world’s largest manufacturer of allopathic drugs.
Allopathy is the form of medicine that produces effects different from or opposite of those produced by the disease. Allo means variation, departure from the normal, or reversal, exactly what you experience when you go to an allopath.

I live my life to be with you.
No one can do the things you do.
Anything you want, you got it.
Anything you need, you got it.
Anything at all, you got it.

Roy Orbison, You Got It Writers: Jeff Lynne, Roy Orbison and Tom Petty.

Hahnemann, who was first trained as an allopathic physician, developed homeopathy as a response to the compulsive abuse and failure of allopathy.
I wonder, how many people does allopathy murder a year? Look at their drugs, their failures, their lawsuits. Poisons happily advertised on TV that produce symptoms worse than the disease. TV ads one year that recommend you ask your doctor (he’s been bribed) and the subject of massive lawsuits and fines the next. Then it happens all over again.

Ladies and gentlemen, this has been going on centuries. And they call homeopaths quacks? Time to get up on your hindlegs and stop these criminals!

The term iatrogenesis means brought forth by a healer, from the Greekἰατρός (iatros, “healer”) and γένεσις (genesis, “origin”); as such, in its earlier forms, it could refer to good or bad effects.

Since at least the time of Hippocrates, people have recognized the potentially damaging effects of medical intervention. “First do no harm” (primum non nocere) is a primary Hippocratic mandate in modern medical ethics. Iatrogenic illness or death caused purposefully or by avoidable error or negligence on the healer’s part became a punishable offense in many civilizations.[29]  iatrogenesisWikipedia

Addictive drugs, killer drugs. First one’s always free.

Statini drugs, Vioxx, Avandia, anti-diabetic drugs, Yaz, Yasmin birth control, thalidomide babies, bloodletting, unnecessary surgery, overdoses, mercury poisoning, crippling vaccines, oxycontin, opium, intellectual property rights, patent medicine, molecular synthesis, opiates, Fetanyl, the list goes on and on. Recently Pfizer was fined billions of dollars for racketeering. RICO. GlaxoSmithKline was fined hundreds of millions for violations. It’s amazing. But the public puts up with it, because  black propaganda campaigns have convinced them that there is no alternative.

“Homeopathy?” they say,  “Come now, it’s just plain water, placebos, ineffective” . .  the literature of course proves all of that false. Homeopathy poses a greater threat to the allopathic drug industry than do government fines and regulation, not just because it works, but because it works better. Government simply runs a catch and release program for allopaths, on the basis that that’s all we got for a desperately ill clientele.
It’s what I’ve characterized in my columns of the past week as the “Evil Empire,”
It’s what I write about. The charges may sound excessive, but they’re true. And, as you will see, how quickly they fruit. So I pick out a few targets to expose. Looming on the list was the CEO of Pfizer, the world’s sickest, deadliest corporation. There are few that would outrank it in the evil index. I just hadn’t gotten around to finding out who he is . . or was,  as the case may be.

According to the list, the CEO of Pfizer is an attorney by the name of Jeff Kindler.
I eventually got off my mental hind end and looked him up.
According to Wikipedia, “Jeffrey Kindler graduated summa cum laude from Tufts University and magna cum laude from Harvard in 1980. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr. and worked at the law firm Williams & Connolly in Washington, D.C. He was Vice President and Senior Counselor for General Electric Co. Executive Vice President of Corporate Relations and General Counsel for McDonald’s, President of Partner Brands which owns Boston Market and    Chipotle Mexican Grill, a sandwich lawyer until 2002, when he moved to Pfizer to serve as General Counsel. Wikipedia says, Kindler’s role at Pfizer quickly took on critical importance as the company faced a vast array of generic assaults on its patents, most notably on the $12 billion drug Lipitor, and the rising threat of counterfeit drugs.”

“The selection of a lawyer to the top post at the world’s largest and most venerable pharmaceutical company highlighted the growing dominance of legal issues in the pharmaceutical industry.”

His salary is . .  or was . . $12.6 million dollars. This may seem like a lot, but it is only a third of the $33.4 million Miles White, CEO of Abbott made, and Abbott isn’t being sued for a billion.

I guess you get what you’re paid for.

Here’s the list of the top 14 drug company CEO salaries from which Jeff‘s salary is taken. It appears to be outdated. Sidney Taurel (9) for instance, has been replaced by John Leichleiter with a salary of only a paltry $1.48 million, although I might have missed a digit:

  1. Miles White – Abbott – $33.4M
    2. Fred Hassan – Schering-Plough – $30.1M
    3. Bill Weldon – Johnson & Johnson – $25.1M
    4. Bob Essner – Wyeth – $24.1M
    5. Robert Parkinson – Baxter – $17.6M
    6. Daniel Vasella – Novartis – $15.5M
    7. Richard Clark – Merck – $14.5M
    8. Frank Baldino – Cephalon – $13.5M
    9. Sidney Taurel – Eli Lilly – $13M
    10. Jeff Kindler – Pfizer – $12.6M
    11. Jim Cornelius – Bristol-Myers Squibb – $11.3
    12. Franz Humer – Roche – $11.1M
    13. Robert Coury – Mylan – $8.5M
    14. Jean-Pierre Garnier – GlaxoSmithKline – $6M

Tonight, lying in bed, I dwelled on this. Allopathy is the form of medicine that homeopathy opposes. The word was coined by Hahnemann, a fluent wordsmith in 10 languages, to describe mainstream medicine.
And these men who oppose us are the extraordinarily wealthy cream of the allopathic crop of drug manufacturers.
An awesome array.
However, there is a huge difference that I see between them and me. I don‘t make money. I‘m just a homeless guy who got lucky, through another wild coincidence . .

. . okay okay, I‘ll get to the one that prompted this piece in a moment.

So, I’m lying in bed, thinking about all of this, and about Jeff Kindler in particular. Unlocked, Golum might wander, “Whereas I may be poor as a church mouse, I have a couple of things he doesn’t have, and that is what sets us miles apart. I possess something that I have a real passion for. I have been let in on the inner circle of a great discovery. The kind of thing they hand out Nobels like door prizes for.”

Yes, if Golum lived, dealt the same hand, he might say,

“I am hated by the people who would be expected to hate me. I for being right, they for being wrong. I am probably one of only a handful of people who understands the mechanical, molecular basis for the action of the homeopathic remedy. I possess a knowledge of a chemistry that is far more advanced than Kindler’s. So in that way I am far more wealthy than he is. What he claims in riches time and thieves will take away, where mine is in Heaven’s store. I am in a Kingdom far above his Evil Empire. For his own sake and everyone else’s who is in his wake, I wish he’d quit, I wish he’d quit defending the indefensible.”

He relieved me of saying it, so I presumptuously turned the radio on and continued to think as the news man called out his rip ‘n’ read for the day’s end. And I thought, this man Kindler, how many lives might be laid at his feet? A civil war’s worth?  How much suffering and death is he responsible for? Could we measure it in holocausts? Or will we have to pay for it in Apocalypses and get change back in Cataclysms?  Would I want that in trade of a wealth that can be taken away in a moment?
What kind of reputation is that?
What would it take to stop this man, to get him to step down?
As I am thinking this the newsman announces that Jeffery Kindler has resigned as CEO of Pfizer. The CEO of the world’s largest drug company has stepped down to “recharge his batteries.”

Jeff Kindler . . quit? Just as I , for the sake of his Soul, was hoping he would?
Now what are the chances of that? That I would be thinking of someone so distant from the common thrall, thinking of his demise, that at that following instant, hear about it on the radio? Is that telepathy, or . .

Was it something I said?

BLAME IT ON GOLUM!

Really. Stupid. People.

Sometimes I wonder about how stupid people can be. I mean there are stupid people, there’s a lot of them, I don‘t suppose they‘d be stupid if they weren‘t people.
I wonder if that choice is made in Heaven. Guy says, “God, I want to live this next reincarnation as a really stupid person. I mean anot just dumb, but a real idiot. The kind of person that acts like he knows something, but doesn‘t really. Arrogant, full of assertions, the kind of jerk who makes up his mind not to see the evidence. The kind of guy who takes a job as a night watchman in a day camp. He’s so stupid he’ll ask what wine goes best with Alpo. If I do that I’ll bring joy into the world by making other people laugh at me.”

Here’s a statement I got from someone calling himself ISayISaw. Now I’m not saying that he’s dumb or drunk necessarily, but something tells me that if he had a brain concussion it would probably classify as a minor injury. He starts out by quoting me. (Boy, is that ever a dumb thing to do):

“Kaviraj and I have given them more than enough time to respond to our challenge. All we have asked of the critics of homeopathy, like Edzard Ernst, John Beddington, Ben Goldacre, Andy Lewis and their dopey proxies, is to please show us the evidence that homeopathic remedies are “placebos.”

Show us just one scientific study that proves it.

Please.

Just one.

That’s all.

It’s not too much to ask . .

Here we are, empty handed. After all this complaining from self-made, tall-talking, wide-walking homeopathy bashers about how homeopathic remedies are nothing more than “placebos” as if they know what a placebo really is, we ask for little evidence of that and they all go quiet on us.

These are the kind of people who fail to check to see if the guns are loaded before putting them to their heads and pulling the trigger.

And then he does. Show us a “study,” that is.

And then he surly says: “You’re not empty-handed but you don’t only seem to pay attention of the poorest quality evidence and the unsupported claims of homeopathy’s fanboys.”

Okay, the nasty remarks aside, this is good. I SayISaw actually coughed up what purports to be a real “scientific” trial here , even if it is just one, and out of hundreds of trials of homeopathy the only one, it’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen, written by the kind of people who are so dim they’d light a match to read a sundial. But look, it’s a hundred times better than the bluff and bluster we get from everybody else.

And published nowhere.
This particular study by Sarah Brien, Laurie Lachance, Phil Prescott, Clare McDermott and George Lewith implies in its title that the effect of homeopathy is a placebo that come from the homeopathic consultation. And I bet they used to save their burned out light bulbs for their darkroom, too. A dark room is the place where these people used to go to retrieve the contents of their photographic memories, but they gave it up because nothing ever developed.
Well, ISayISaw should be congratulated nonetheless for bringing this up. So let’s give a good hand for ISayISaw on the computer keyboard. Let’s give him another good. Actually he needs more than two good hands on the computer keyboard. Maybe he could take his foot out of his mouth and use that.

Title of the study that presumably “proves” homeopathy is a “placebo” is: “Homeopathy has clinical benefits in rheumatoid arthritis patients that are attributable to the consultation process but not the homeopathic remedy: a randomized controlled clinical trial”

Click to access rheumatology.keq234.full.pdf

You can read it yourself, but make sure you’re not operating any heavy equipment if you do because there’s a chance that you might fall over laughing, or start beating your head against the steering wheel.
The objective of this mess was, “To assess whether any benefits from adjunctive homeopathic intervention in patients with RA are due to the homeopathic consultation, homeopathic remedies or both.”
Okay, stop right there. Note the word adjunctive. Adjunct means “something added to another thing but not an essential part of it.”
So now we have to ask an essential part of what? What else is going on in this study they aren’t mentioning here?
The report says this was an exploratory double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted from January 2008 to July 2008, in patients with active stable rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving conventional therapy.
So in other words, these people were being treated for rheumatoid arthritis using “conventional drugs.”
Just what drugs might those be?
Celebrex? (Pfizer) Yeah, Celebrex. That’s the one advertised on TV showing a smiling young woman flying a kite on the beach, supposedly having a good time.
Here’s the side effects from Celebrex when she gets back from the beach:
“Increased risk of cardiovascular incidents including blood clotting, heart attack and stroke, kidney problems, fluid retention, liver damage, potentially lethal stomach bleeding.”
There’s that young woman again, on her knees in front of the toilet, spitting up blood from lethal stomach bleeding.
Lawsuit!
Or maybe it was Vioxx.
VIOXX BREAKING NEWS:
“Merck & Co., Inc. has agreed to pay $4.85 billion to resolve Vioxx-related claims in which a claimant has suffered a heart attack, sudden cardiac death, or stroke.”
http://www.levinlaw.com/practice-areas/vioxx-information

They’d be better off with a bottle of whiskey and a couple of tickets to a good cage fight. Get ’em on their feet to go somewhere other than the doctor’s office. Maybe what this study was all about was to look for something else to blame it on.

The people who wrote this study are the kind of people who would hand a drowning man a glass of water. I think their last study was to see if people swallowed firecrackers their hair would grow out in bangs.

I mean, do I need to explain this to anybody except for the really, really stupid? I’m surprised this guy ISayISaw can read. He probably has a kid read it to him.
And who did the authors explain this to in order to get it all typed up so nicely? That person deserves the Nobel prize for patience.

This isn’t a test for placebo. I’m not sure what it’s a test for.  Maybe its a secret IQ test. They sure as hell don’t say. Here’s what they did:

Patients were randomized into five groups. Of the five groups, three received a homeopathic consultation (Groups 1 – 3) and two (Groups 4 and 5) did not. The consultation groups were further randomized to individualized treatment (Group 1), a homeopathic complex for RA (Group 2) or placebo (Group 3).
Non-consultation participants were allocated complex (Group 4) or placebo (Group 5); individualized homeopathy can only be prescribed through a consultation.
This study has not disclosed the homeopathic remedies given to Group 1 patients. it says nothing about (group 6) the pill pushers who organized this debacle.

Or (Group 7) the homeoapths. So here comes the homeopath who’s been asked to participate in a study on the effectiveness of homeopathy, and he finds that every one of these people are on racketeceuticals, and they’re having problems with blood clotting, they’re having heart attacks and strokes, kidney problems, they’re puffy from fluid retention, liver damage, and some are having potentially lethal stomach bleeding.

Did the individual consultations focus on totality of symptoms as presented by the patient or the clinical diagnosis as presented by Group 1, or the clinical daignosis as presented by Group 6? Just what was Group 1 given as a result of consulation? A bottle of whiskey and a couple of tickets to a good cage fight. Or how about a carefully folded note that says, “Run for your life.”

Statistically tt appears that Group 6 had a regression to the mean . . mean spirited that is.
So the challenge to Ernst and the Evil Empire still remains after all this time. Provide one trial that proves homeopathy is a “placebo.”
In the meantime, next time you get rheumatoid arthritis, go to a homeopath before the Vioxx pushers get their hands on you, or you might end up in a study like the one ISayISaw regurgitated here. Unless of course you want your heirs to collect on the settlement.

It might save yo a lot of money, time, pain and an early grave.

You know, I bet the people who wrote the Brien “human science experiment” take rulers to bed with them to see how long they sleep. I bet the real facts in this report could have been written on a piece of confetti. I bet they’re so stupid that if we gave them a goldmedal for it they’d have it bronzed.

They’re so stupid that if . . your thoughts go here:__.

Who wants to smear homeopathy?

I think its a smear campaign.

Kaviraj and I have given them more than enough time to respond to our challenge. All we have asked of the critics of homeopathy, like Edzard Ernst, John Beddington, Ben Goldacre, Andy Lewis and their dopey proxies, is to please show us the evidence that homeopathic remedies are “placebos.”

Show us just one scientific  study that proves it. Please. Just one. That’s all. It’s not too much to ask.

But here we are, empty handed.

Boo hoo.
All we got in here is nothing more than blandishments, rhetorical questions, empty assertions, vague references to something seen on TV, ridicule, rants and accusations, but not one published study. Not one! Nothing to prove the claim that homeopathy is a placebo, nothing to lead us to the truth, not from them!

Instead, we have public figures, people who should be taken as authorities on the subject, such as Edzard Ernst, professor of complementary medicine at Excreter Univeristy in England, and Professor Sir John Beddington, Chief Science Advisor to the British government, presenting to the public a conclusion that has dual, contradictory meanings: One, because it is a placebo, homeopathy does not work; and two, the placebo effect can be a powerful one, and so if there is a cure from homeopathy that doesn’t seem like to be a coincidence, it is likely to be because of that.

So why would Beddington, Ernst or anyone with half a mind make a statement like that, that homeopathic medicine is a placebo, when the action of two and a half million (2,500,000) doses of homeopathic medicine was reportedly seen in Cuba to stop epidemic of chronic swamp fever?
Is Beddington going to call that the effects of placebo, or is he going to call the Cubans liars?
You don’t need to be partial to homeopathy to see that the criticisms of it aren’t adding up until, perhaps, I point out that Cuba is one of the few places in the world where drug companies like Pfizer can’t so easily get to.

“Homeopathy is very difficult to write about for a contemporary medical audience. In an ideal informational world, in which science is unbiased information and scientists and academics are unbiased consumers of such information, it would not be so difficult. Unfortunately, it is painfully obvious that science is biased, consumers of scientific information are biased, and science is routinely used to advance personal political and economic agendas that have nothing to do with increasing the store of generalizable knowledge.” (Dean review)

Intelligent people, people in positions of authority, are making stupid statements, that homeopathy is a placebo. Beddington said it in the Guardian just the other day, and that it is scientifically unsupported.

Conversely, one researcher, in making an exhaustive review of the clinical literature, found 205 prospective controlled clinical trials performed in the contemporary research environment from 1940 to 1998. He found evidence of homeopathy’s safety and efficacy in trials of high internal validity. He also found usefulness for homeopathy in areas that are problematic for orthodox medicine. On the basis of trials reviewed, he concluded that homeopathy is clinically relevant and that there are certain conditions in which pragmatic trials of homeopathy versus standard treatment would be useful, for example, in unexplained female infertility, postviral fatigue syndrome, influenza, and atopy. (Dean)
The review of his book then says something very interesting: “Sociologic data show the use of data for this purpose is ineffective. That is, scientists are not convinced by data. That a significant body of data shows homeopathy is more than placebo is now indisputable. Since homeopathy is a school of medicine, and not an ad hoc therapeutic modality or technique, one can conclude that data showing homeopathy is not explainable by placebo are data that go toward confirming the entire school of homeopathy and its claims, not simply that this or that remedy works for this or that disease entity.” (Dean review http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/mednat/research_on_homeopathy_state_of_the_art_(3).pdf)

Well, this is just wild, like Oscar, and it gets wilder, even more than Thornton.

As you can see, first revealed in my previous blog, a review of the literature by the most respected reviewers provided no real evidence for the placebo effect. Researcher Michael Emmons Dean isn’t alone in that assessment. There is no published, scientific support for the placebo charge against homeopathy, yet that’s the claim that the Chief Scientist to the UK government is making, along with the holder of the only chair for complementary medicine, and there appear to be hordes cheering them on, when in fact, in view of the data, the opposite should be happening.
I have never seen anyone, who has taken a vituperative stand against homeopathy, ever recant in the face of the evidence for it. They just slink away or keep yarping the same old bark over and over again, as if they don’t even look at it.
I’ve seen it happen up close and personal. I was friends with Jerry Andrus, a world renowned magician who was on the advisory board of the National Council Against Heath fraud. (NCAHF). Jerry was convinced there was no evidence in support of homeopathy. When I finally put a stack of studies in front of him that showed there was, he literally pushed it away and replaced it with a small pad of paper he was carrying and a pencil, and asked me to list some other stupid things I believed in, like witches, fairy tales and of course, astrology. When he saw the look in my eyes, he quickly withdrew it, confessing that he guessed that wasn’t fair.
It never is. Although they claim science, and demand it from you, when you present it to them, they ignore it at first, or try to pick it apart based on poor statistics.
When challenged to respond with facts over assertions, they simply ignore it. It’s not the behavior of scientists pursuing a concordant truth, its the behavior of people who are legislating. They won’t and can’t face the evidence. If they did, they’d have to stand down. Read the commentary in response. They aren’;t responding to the science with the science they first demanded. They have none. It’s all on the side of homeopathy.

Who is Sir John Beddington? When we look at some of his statged beliefs, an even stranger picture emerges as to why he is denouncing homeopathy. 

DEAN, Review of Michael Emmons Dean, “The Trials of Homeopathy: Origins, Structure, and Development” http://www.homeopathy.org/research/research_reviews/acm-2005-11_15.pdf
Jonas W, Kaptchuk T, Linde K. A critical overview of homeopathy.
Ann Int Med 2003;138:393–399.
Fisher P. Homeopathy: A multifaceted scientific renaissance.
J Altern Complement Med 2001;7:123–125.

Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter

A Fight to the Death

Should Homeopaths be called Doctors?

It is of critical importance that homeopaths fight for the right to legally call themselves doctors. Homeopathic treatment is of vital importance to the public. The historical record and modern day epidemiological reports, in vitro, in vivo, in silico tests and clinical trials show homeopathy is an astoundingly superior medicine.
Take the recent swamp fever epidemic in Cuba as a stunning example. In 2007 the results of a very large-scale homeoprophylaxis intervention against swamp fever (Leptospirosis) in a dangerous epidemic situation was reported by Cubans in three provinces of that country.

2,300,000 homeopathic doses stop epidemic 

The Cubans prepared a homeoprophylactic formulation from dilutions of four strains of Leptospirosis and administered it orally to 2.3 million persons at high risk during a swamp fever epidemic in an affected region. Intervention was then compared with non-intervention.
Homeoprophylactic intervention showed a significant decrease of swamp fever, while there was no decrease in non-intervention regions.
This is conformation that I have seen little response by the corporate controlled anti-homeopathy campaign.  The Cubans are not controlled in their use of coroporatized medicine.

Such a trial would be unheard of of in corporatized countries.
Bracho, “Large-scale application of highly-diluted bacteria for Leptospirosis epidemic control.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20674839
This is not the first time that reports of the outstanding success of the use of homeopathics in massive disease control have been met with silence, ignored or thrown back in our faces by the racketeer controlled campaign against us.

Effective in epidemics

Homeopathy is effective in epidemics of scarlet fever, cholera, yellow fever, typhus, pneumonia and influenza.
Statistically then the number of lives saved by homeopathy are estimable. It may rank in the millions. (See my blog here on WordPress,  “The Logic of Epidemics,” and my article “The Truth about Homeopathy and the Swine Flu” http://scienceofhomeopathy.com/swineflu1.htm)
And now we are facing a huge epidemic of soft tissue cancer.
Homeopathy stands ready to treat those who bear the most serious diseases.
Homeopaths must insist on the need for accredited schools and their services and abilities, and that they be recognized as such with the right titles. Homeopaths have historically proven themselves master physicians, and continue to do so.
Make no doubt about it, there is, literally, a fight to the death struggle by an organized campaign against homeopathy, to malign it, to suppress its use and even to outlaw it. It may not be a life and death struggle for homeopathy, for homeopathy as a doctrine will most likely continue. Rather it is a life and death struggle for the millions who potentially saved by it from cancer and other epidemics.
Homeopaths must become acutely aware of the competing interests that seek to dissuade the public from using it. Homeoapths must warn the public of the dangers of the criminally convicted allopathic pharmacy threatened by the statistically noted superiority of homeopathy in treating suffering from wide spread disease, that criminal interests seek to tortiously interfere with the practice of homeopathy and protect their monopoly.
The public needs to be informed. Doctor means teacher,and homeopaths must be the ones to lead the fight against the indiscriminate use of “pharmacides” by picketing their use,  media and on the sidewalk.
We need more homeopaths.
This is an opportunity for the a to demonstrate the superiority of his craft.
We need more homeopaths. Calling htem doctors will attract more interested students.

Try homeopathy. It works.

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

The Threat of Homeopathy

The war over homeopathy is getting hotter. In the last 60 days there have been three devastating revelations about toxic pharmaceutical drug scams of megalithic proportions, which in turn have forced the drug cartels, through their shills, to issue warnings against what will overtake them for it by mere default. Continue reading

Trial of the Millenia

On October 18, 2010 at 2:47 am ben goldacre said:
Hi John,
I would never describe my dayjob as boring, it’s the most interesting and exciting part of my life. It’s boring dealing with people like you who casually misrepresent facts, but out of interest I checked, and in the email I wrote to Josephson declining his invitation to your talk, I explained I couldn’t come to Cambridge on account of my “humble” dayjob.
I’d be grateful if you could clarify this in the zillion places that you’ve posted over excitedly about the outrage of my not coming to see you speak about clathrates. I’m relieved to say that I doubt anyone would take anything you say seriously for obvious reasons, but it’s still not correct of you to say that I described my dayjob – about which I’m extremely passionate and committed – as “boring”.
I’ve just taken some unpaid leave to finish a book about bad behaviour in the pharmaceutical industry, and have flown to Canada and the US to do a couple of talks as Bad Science has just come out there, and to interview some people about dodgy behaviour in big pharma. It’s not clear to me why you regard this as an unacceptable activity for me to engage in.
Obviously there are a lot of pressures on everyone’s time, but I’m afraid that like a lot of people I don’t find your ideas very interesting. To be honest, like most people, I also don’t think I’d spend 4 hours travelling to Cambridge and back to see a man who makes videos as unpleasantly homophobic as yours:
For interest – and god knows this I barely interesting – pasted below is my email to Brian Josephson in response to his invitation, which I think makes it fairly clear why I didn’t come. Perhaps in future people should be forewarned that an invitation to a lecture from Brian Josephson will result in indignant fury at your non-attendance, and tedious unpleasantness from his speakers alleging that you think your dayjob is “boring”. If you are looking for explanations as to why people don’t take you seriously, you might look carefully at your behaviour in episodes like this.
> thanks
>
> it’s never particularly interested me, i’m nore interested in EBM and its
> application to homeopathy shows that their pills work no better than
> placebo.
>
> i’ll pass it on to ppl who are interested tho, cheers.
>
> cant make cambridge, humble dayjob!

MY RESPONSE TO GOLDACRE’s WHINING DIATRIBE
Boring yes, humble, no. A lack of humility is Ben Dover Goldacre’s problem here. It’s what prevents him from seeing the naked truth. The point is, he was invited by one of the greatest minds of the 21st century to discuss the undeniable facts regarding biological effects of supramolecular substances and their relevance to one of the most controversial and greatest healing modalities of all time. But he begged off, with contradictory reasons, one being that he doesn’t like my videos. Well, Josepshon found them just as disgusting and homophobic. I pointed out to him, though, myself being a suspected homosexual, that there is nothing prima facie derogatory against homosexuality in any of them. Specifically, the one welcoming Randi out of the closet and into the openly gay community is complimentary of his sudden found insight and honesty with himself, and has been hailed as a masterpiece of satire.

Homosexuality fits him well, as it does Ben Dover Goldacre.
Goldacre’s whining statement fit’s the Upper House review of his testimony before Parliament ass well.
“The written submission by Dr. Goldacre [Ev. 8] was notably short on supporting evidence, but contained unqualified statements on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, forcefully expressed (more and link below-ed.)

It should be pointed out, Ben has commented on the impossibility of detecting liquid aqueous structuring (LAS), being that he believes it to be impossible. When he does try to objectively address the science of homeopathy, like he did before Parliament, he starts rewriting the evidence to fit what he wants it to say, and makes some general denunciations. He does this most notably re: Rao (Roy) as being nothing more than what he claims is a misreading of the ethanol; but what is slippering past Dover is that LAS, as found in clathrates, is prosaic, even more so than his getting up each day to go to his “boring day job,” as has been stated in “a zillion places.”

RAO: The defining role of structure (including epitaxy) in the plausibility of homeopathy

Click to access DefiningStructure.pdf

Goldacre commentary on Rao:
http://avilian.co.uk/2010/08/what%E2%80%99s-behind-ben-goldacre/

What Goldacre also misses is yet another FTIR study (Sukul) that addresses the ethanol issue, and tunes for it.

SUKUL: Variation in Fourier Transform Infrared Spectra of Some Homeopathic Potencies and Their Diluent Media

Click to access acm-2005-11_11.pdf

Goldacre also handily ignores nine other indices for physical distinctions in the homeopathic remedy. But no matter. He’ll just wave them away anyway, just like he did with the biggest revelation of his life, his own opportunity to come out for homeopathy, so let’s work our way up to a real challenge, and see if he can handle that.

Allow me to preface by saying that the dog the Journalist Doctor thought was following him all these years, the hydrogen bond, has left him to follow a new master. Of course Ben will try to slip out of it and rewrite history like he did regarding his boring day job, noted in a zillion places. He and these other shills for Avandia and the criminal organizations that make it for 83,000 heart attacks, have just been pinned down by a lowbrow amateur, a clown who makes deeply offensive videos, Goldacre’s excuse, forcefully expressed, for not talking about the science, which he can’t address, because science isn’t his destination; defamation is. Defamation is all Ben Goldacre can respond to because that’s all Ben Goldacre knows. As Bewdley describes him, he’s a “journalist doctor,” a doctor of words, not science. Otherwise he’d pick out the salient point and go in for the killshot.
Tsk tsk.

He should of come to the lecture. It was his big chance to tear apart my stupid (if that’s what it is) theory with a proper dialectic. Isn’t that what he’d have us believe he and his science compadres want us to think they’re all about? Ah yes, an objective, logical approach, instead of all of this wankering. Just ad rems, ferreted out like diamonds among the slag of ad hominem . . and concentrate on those alone, like a jeweler, loupe in eye: We see him bend over the precious stone.
Well, as the Master once said, Ben Dover, reach out to the publicans, its a boring day job to preach to the choir, such as the bobbleheads at McGill University, Toronto, where Goldacre, Shermer and Randi have been waggling their tongues. It brings the world nothing. Convert the unwashed, teach me. No? Then come to me to learn, I am your new master. I will lead the discussion.
BTW,  just what IS the job placement rate for grads coming out of McGill? Can’t be too good if they’re listening to the misinformed like Goldacre and yawn and sawn-in half illusionists like Linking Rings Randi. Who wants to hire a dupe? Wait, maybe there are a lot of jobs for the grads at McGill . .
But look. If their argument against homeopathy is not due to ignorance, or deception, then they should prove me wrong ad rem about LAS. They say it can’t exist, but now all of a sudden, alakazam, it does! Note that Ben had his chance to address this subject, as did Colquhoun, as did Ian Brooks, as have all of them, yet none of them did, none dare come near it, for it is the hot burning truth, when poured overr them in their hiding places, is what will bring them boiling out of their stinkholes.

And Ben thinks animals are affected by the placebo.
Well, there’s an easy way to prove it. Before he passed away last month, Professor Rustum Roy of Penn Stae, the lead author for “Structure of Liquid Water, Novel Insights from the Material Sciences and Relevance to Homeopathy,” suggested to me in an email, that I use their methods (Rao) to take Randi apart.
Fair enough. I am the major contender, Randi has been dodging my application for 10 years now with a variety of excuses. After accepting my application, the way he and I left the protocol 10 years ago, was that in order to win Richaard Adam’s money/Randi’s/JREF’s prize, the Million Dollar Challenge, was to identify homeopathic remedies from their liquid aqueous/ethanol vehicles.
Randi’s Team Skeptic has identified the fundamental issue in this debate as being that the only way for water to retain a memory is through LAS, but that LAS is impossible because of the intransigence of the hydrogen bond, that such bonds last only a few femto, nano or pico seconds, depending on which pseudoscientist you’re following today. What cuckholds these pseudo scientists, though, is direct observation of the bond in surface tension and bubbles, you can see the srength of the hydrogen bond with your own eyes, and clathrates have been noted by spectroscopy. Google it. See the many refernces and images of these curiosities noted by observers for 200 years now.
So the question is an easy one: Set up a series of double blind tests at various universities, using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, to determine whether or not they can determine the identity between the inert vehicle and verum.
I propose that Richard Adams, the treasurer of the James Randi Educational Foundation, assure the prize with a legal contract bearing his signature.
So what will it be? Will Ben Goldacre continue to skip classes at the Cavendish, or will he join with me, hand in hand, in this simple determination, skipping merrily down the halls of science?  This is not about someone’s boring day job. This is about the future of human health. It is the Trial of the Millenia, the usher of supramolecular medicine into the corpus mundi of science.

If homeopathic substances are real, then we should be able to identify them in objective analysis.in multi centered trials.
I suggest, that in the interests of science and medicine, Adams put up the expenses for such an endeavor. THat is, unless they’d becontent to accept the science. After all, what could be more convincing than the existing reports? Certainly not a trial in which poor Randi stands to lose his million dollars.
But if they won’t accept science as science, I suggest that the following institutions and people participate in a replication of detecting homeopathic verum.

Cavendish Laboratories, Cambridge (Josephson)
Queens College, Belfast (Ennis)
Pennsylvania State University, USA (Hoover)
University of Arizona, Tucson (Bell)
Stanford University, Palo Alto, California (Tiller)
University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy (Betti)
Chieti-Pescara University, Italy (Borghini)
Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin (Witt).
University of Berne, Switzerland (Baumgartner)
1Laboratório de Controle de Qualidade, Departamento de Medicamentos, Faculdade de Farmácia, UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (Garcia)
Nuclear Medicine Department, General Hospital, Haguenau, France (Demangeat)
Institut André Lwoff , Villejuif Cedex, France (Thomas)
Vironix LLC, New York, USA (Montagnier)

Now, one last observation. If this seems too ad hominem, allow me to remind you that ad hominem is all there is and has been against homeoapthy, and mine is nothing more than  is the action of a poor homeopath working his craft and applying a bit of similia to his deeply offending patients.
After the evidence of action on biochemical subjects, plants and animals has been taken into account, along with the extensive case notes of MDs and clinical trials, and now theory for supramolecular action, the only response left to the detractor is to continue to malign those who are concutingthe realscience, inevitably the competence of those making the reports of homeopathic action.
That’s what this argument has been all along. The allopathic medical profession wants the world to believe that the medicine of opposition is all that is available to it, that its vaccines and toxic chemicals that serve as pharmaceuticals are all you got.
Well let me tell you something, and a profound thing it is, that there is a second, very effective form of internal medcine that has been used successfully, clinically and in epidemics, for two centuries. It is the medcine of similia. Its effects are profound. It is called homeopathy, and there will come a time, if it has not already arrived, when you will need it.
Your friend, your best friend, your only friend,
John BENNETH, PG Hom (Hon)

Further reading Google:
2008 July 26 Journal of Molecular Liquids 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

Click to access Demangeat_JML_2009.pdf

Effects of pulsed low frequency electromagnetic fields on water using photoluminescence spectroscopy: role of bubble/water interface
Philippe Valléea) and Jacques Lafait Laboratoire d’Optique des Solides (UMR CNRS 7601) Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France; Pascale Mentré, Paris, France Marie-Odile Monod Aubière Cedex, France; Yolène Thomas Institut André Lwoff , Villejuif Cedex, France
Ebook http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0502/0502076.pdf

Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures
Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences
Luc MONTAGNIER1,2*, Jamal A¨ISSA1, St´ephane FERRIS1,
Jean-Luc MONTAGNIER1, Claude LAVALL´EE1
1(Nanectis Biotechnologies, S.A. 98 rue Albert Calmette, F78350 Jouy en Josas, France)
2(Vironix LLC, L. Montagnier 40 Central Park South, New York, NY 10019, USA)

https://commerce.metapress.com/content/0557v31188m3766x/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=byqfa245i3bq5t554jwzsd45&sh=www.springerlink.com

GOLDACRE SLAPPED DOWN BY UPPER HOUSE
Observations on the report Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, February 2010
“5.1. The Committee in two sessions called twelve witnesses to give oral evidence, all but one with relevant affiliations. Selection of witnesses can affect outcomes in the same way as selection of written evidence. It is therefore legitimate to examine the choices made.
5.2. It is not easy to see why a journalist doctor was invited to appear in preference to some other non-representative contributors to the inquiry. The written submission by Dr. Goldacre [Ev. 8] was notably short on supporting evidence, but contained unqualified statements on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, forcefully expressed (“extreme quackery” was mentioned). By contrast, the submission by the Complementary Medicine Research Group from the Department of Health Sciences at the University of York presented a well argued summary with 68 references [Ev. 143]. In this appears the statement “To date there are eight systematic reviews that provide evidence that the effects of homeopathy are beyond placebo when used as a treatment for [five childhood conditions]”. This claim from a mainstream academic centre, rated joint first nationally for health services research in the latest Research Assessment Exercise, stands in stark contradiction to Prof. Ernst’s referenced claims, noted above, and to Dr. Goldacre’s unreferenced statements. It would have been illuminating if the Committee had probed the Group about this, face to face as a witness, and attempted some resolution before agreeing in unequivocal terms with the two witnesses who were invited to appear and were quoted favourably. The Committee criticised the supporters of homeopathy for their “selective approaches” to  evidence [73]. They could fairly be accused of the same.
Unfortunately they did not (presumably) have the scope to solicit the views of  Dr. Linde from Germany, which would have differed from those of Prof. Ernst with regard to the evidence.”
http://www.homeopathyheals.me.uk/site/component/content/article/42-featured-/398-earl-baldwin-critique-house-of-commons-science-and-technology-committee-february-2010