Do Not Confuse ‘Molecular Imprints’ With The Pseudo-scientific ‘Energy Medicine’ Concepts of ‘Water Memory’

The scientific concepts of ‘molecular imprints’ as the active principles of potentized drugs promoted by MIT should not be confused with the unscientific concept of ‘water memory’ promoted by ‘energy medicine’ theoreticians.

According to MIT, ‘molecular imprints’ are hydrogen-bonded supramolecular nanostructures of water and ethyl alcohol, carrying the three-dimensional ‘spacial’ or conformational ‘imprints’ of individual drug molecules once dissolved and subsequently removed by serial dilutions and succussions. This process of ‘molecular imprinting’ involves the formation and dissolution of a peculiar kind of ‘host-guest’ complexes of drug molecules and vehicle molecules, a process well explained by supra-molecular chemistry.

First point to be remembered is that the molecular imprints are ‘material’ formations of water and ethyl alcohol molecules- nothing ‘dynamic’ or ‘spiritual’ in it.

Second point to be understood is that drug substance is not imprinted as whole unit. It is the ‘individual’ constituent chemical molecules of drug substance that undergo molecular imprinting.

Third point to be remembered is that the molecular imprints retain only the ‘conformational’ or ‘spacial’ details of drug molecules used for imprinting. These spacial ‘memory’ is retained as three-dimensional nanocavities that are similar to ‘engravings’. Molecular imprints do not retain any chemical properties of drug molecules.

Fourth point to be remembered is that molecular imprints representing each individual chemical molecule exist in potentized drugs as individual units without interacting each other,

Fifth point to be remembered is that molecular imprints act as individual units by selectively binding upon specific pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity when applied as therapeutic agents.

Sixth point to be remembered is that molecular imprints can act only upon pathogenic molecules that have conformations ‘similar’ to those of original drug molecules used for imprinting.

Seventh point to be remembered is that molecular imprints are not ‘mimics’ or ‘mirror images’ of original drug molecules as commonly believed, but their ‘spacial negatives’, exactly similar to thumb impressions formed in a wax matrix.

Eighth point to be remembered is that, in the absence of pathogenic molecules with conformational affinity, potentized drug have no any properties or actions other than those of water and ethyl alcohol.

ACTUALLY, THE ‘DYNAMIC’ CONCEPT OF ‘WATER MEMORY’ EVOLVED FROM PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC INTERPRETATION OF A PECULIAR OBJECTIVE PHENOMENON RELATED WITH WATER, DUE TO THE LACK OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF SUPRA-MOLECULAR CHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR IMPRINTING INVOLVED IN IT.

‘Dynamism’- A Philosophical Approach Totally Unacceptable To Modern Scientific Method

According to ‘classical’ homeopathy, potentization is a process by which some mysterious ‘dynamic energy’ is transferred from drug substance into the vehicle. They believe that due to the ‘dynamic drug energy’ they carry, potentized drugs act upon the ‘vital force’, which is also ‘dynamic’. As per this ‘spiritualistic’ view, it is not possible to explain potentization as well as homeopathic cure in terms of ‘materialistic’ science.

Did you ever try to know what is exactly meant by ‘dynamic’? This word comes from the metaphysical concept of ‘dynamism’. Dynamism is a metaphysical concept conceived by Gottfried Leibniz (1646–1716) and developed into a full system of cosmology, totally unacceptable to modern science and scientific method. Dynamism in metaphysical cosmology explains the material world in terms of active, point-like forces, with no extension but with action at a distance. Dynamism describes that which exists as simple elements, or for Leibniz, monads, and groups of elements which have only the essence of forces.

According to ‘dynamic’ view, interaction between elements takes place without contact, through modes or even harmonics of motion, yielding all phenomena in the Universe.

Various treatments of Dynamism can be found in the works of Baruch Spinoza and Henri Bergson, and also, long before them, Parmenides, the Atomists, and Plotinus. In more contemporary works, elements of Dynamism also developed into process philosophy, via Alfred North Whitehead and others, as well as systems theory via Ludwig von Bertalanffy and William Ross Ashby. Immanuel Kant was another philosopher who helped the development of the theory of dynamism.

Hahnemann’s explanations of homeopathy were obviously influenced by the philosophy of ‘dynamism’. Modern proponents of ‘energy medicine’ theories also explain homeopathy on the basis of concepts of ‘dynamism’.

‘Forces’ existing free from matter, and ‘matter acting at distances without any material contact or interaction’ is an idea very dear to all practitioners of occult healing arts. The idea of a ‘medicinal force’ that can be ‘freed’ from drug substance, and ‘transferred’ to water of sugar of milk, that can act on organism in ‘dynamic way’- all these come from ‘dynamism’.

Without freeing homeopathy from the influence of ‘dynamism’, we cannot hope it to be accepted as a scientific medical system.

The concept of ‘force’ used by dynamic philosophy is entirely different from the concept of ‘force’ used in modern science.

In modern science, ‘force’ exist and act as a function of ‘matter’. There is no ‘force’ without matter. ‘Force’ acts through carrier particle. Actually, force particles are minute forms of matter itself. There are ‘four’ fundamental forces in nature- strong force, weak force, electromagnetic force and gravitational force. All these four fundamental forces exist and interact though carrier particles of specific quantum states. Exactly, all these four fundamental forces are different quantum states of same force, which is the ‘motion’ associated with ‘matter’. There is no ‘matter’ without ‘motion’, or motion without matter. Matter exists in motion, and motion is form of existence of matter. Motion is expressed as ‘space’, and ‘matter’ is expressed as ‘mass’. There is no ‘mass’ without ‘space’, or ‘space’ without ‘mass’.

According to dynamism, ‘force’ exists and interacts free from matter or space. Dynamic drug energy can exist free from drug substance. Drug force can act from a distance, without any ‘material’ involvement.

As per scientific world outlook, any object in this universe represents a dynamic equilibrium of matter particles and force particles in a particular ratio. The term ‘energy’ is used to refer to the quantity of ‘force particles’ contained in an object higher than required to maintain its ‘matter-force’ equilibrium, and hence, could be transferred to other objects, making them to ‘move’ or ‘do work’. Matter particles that carry very high ‘extra’ quantity of ‘force particles’ are known as ‘energy particles’.

‘Dynamic’ approach in homeopathy reflects a state of gross scientific ignorance. A total lack of modern scientific understanding of physiology, pathology and therapeutics. Such an unscientific approach could be propagated in this scientific era, only by our ‘classical homeopaths’ who are groping in the darkness of a 250 year old knowledge environment.

‘Atomic Energy In Homeopathic Drugs’- How Could Some Homeopaths Be That Much Stupid?

Some homeopaths say our potentized drugs contain ‘atomic energy’!

Mechanical energy applied during trituations may break the inter-molecular bonds in the drug substances, and they would be divided maximum up to the level of constituent molecules and ions. Further division to atomic level will not happen, since nobody can generate such a high amount of energy by ‘trituration’ to break the very strong chemical bonds between atoms inside molecules. Imagining about ‘conversion’ of matter into energy by potentization reflects utter ignorance of fundamentals of physics.

More over, medicinal properties of a substance is decided by the structure and chemical properties of constituent molecules of that drug substance. If those molecules were divided further into atoms or subatomic particles as some people imagine, the medicinal properties would have been lost.

For example, the medicinal properties of nux vomica is based on the structure and properties of various chemical molecules contained in it, such as strychnine, brucine etc. Strychnine is C21H22N2O2. Brucine is C23H26N2O4. If these molecules were divided into atomic level during trituration or potentization, there will be only carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen remaining. Both strychnine and brucine contain same atoms. It is the difference in their stuctural level oranaization that give them different chemical and medicinal properties. If substances are divided into atoms during potentization, potentized brucine and strychnine will not differ in medicinal properties, since both of them contain same atoms.

Logically, there is only a single way by which the medicinal properties of complex drug molecules could be transeferred to medium during potentization. It is ‘molecular imprinting. Individual molecules and ions being part of the drug substance are subjected to molecular imprinting during potentization. These ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules are the exact active principles of potentized drugs, which act as therapeutic agents by binding to pathogenic molecules and thereby removing molecular inhibitions.

There is no such a thing called ‘drug energy’ that can be liberated from drug substances and ‘transferred’ to another medium abandoning the drug substances. Medicinal properties of substances come from the ‘structure’ of individual constituent molecules contained in drug substances. In the absence of ‘drug molecules’, there cannot be any ‘drug energy’. During potentization, through the process of molecular imprinting, the supramolecular structure of water is changed, and it is this ‘changed water’ or molecular imprints that act as therapeutic agents. It has nothing to do with ‘liberation’ or ‘transfer’ of drug energy. Only molecular imprinting.

Why Should Homeopaths Fear That Whole Homeopathy Would Collapse If Avogadro Is Not ‘Proved’ Wrong?

A prominent section of homeopaths seem to think that it is their duty to ‘prove’ Avogadro number ‘wrong’, in order to prove that ‘homeopathy is not placebo’! They seem to fear that whole homeopathy would collapse if Avogadro is allowed to exist!

They ask: “Have you got ‘scientific evidence’ of avogadro’s constant?

Jean Perrin got nobel prize in physics in 1926 for his exhaustive work on avogadro constant. It was this French Physicist who in 1909 proposed naming the constant in honor of Avogadro. Perrin won the Nobel Prize for his monumental works in determining the Avogadro constant by several different methods.

The Avogadro constant is named after the early nineteenth-century Italian scientist Amedeo Avogadro, who, in 1811, first proposed that the volume of a gas (at a given pressure and temperature) is proportional to the number of atoms or molecules regardless of the nature of the gas.

In chemistry and physics, the Avogadro constant is defined as the ratio of the number of constituent particles (usually atoms or molecules) in a sample to the amount of substance n (unit mole) . Thus, it is the proportionality factor that relates the molar mass of an entity, i.e., the mass per amount of substance, to the mass of said entity. The Avogadro constant expresses the number of elementary entities per mole of substance and it has the value 6.02214129(27)×10^23 mol. Changes in the SI units are proposed that will change Avogadro’s constant to to exactly 6.02214X×10^23 when it is expressed in the unit mol.

Avogadro number is used to calculate the number of molecules or atoms in a given quantity of any substance. It is defined that 1 gram mol of any substance will contain 6.022×10^23 numbers of its molecules. 1 gram mol is the molecular mass of a substance expressed in grams. Since molecular mass of hydrogen is 2, 2 grams of hydrogen constitutes 1 gram mol of hydrogen, and it will contrain 6.022×10^23 number of hydrogen nolecules. Molecular mass of oxygen is 32, and hence 32 gms of oxygen will contain 6.022×10^23 oxygen molecules. Molecular mass of water is 18, and hence 18 gms of water will contain 6.022×10^23 h2o molecules. Molecular mass of carbon is 12, and hence 12 gms of carbon will contain 6.022×10^23 carbon molecules. In other words, 2 gms of hydrogen, 32 gms of oxygen, 18 gms of water and 12 gams of carbon will contain EQUAL NUMBER of molecules, which is a fixed number 6.022×10^23. It is obvious that number of molecules in equal quantities of different substances will be different depending upon their molecular mass. Larger the molecular mass, the lesser will be the number of molecules in a given quantity.

Whole scientific world utilizes this Avogadro constant in all calculations in physics and chemistry, and it is found correct.

But our ‘classical homeopaths’ will not believe in avogadro constant without ‘scientific evidence’! They think the swedish academy was mistaken by wrongly awarding nobel prize to Jean Perrin without enough ‘scientific evidence’ for his works on avogadro constant! I can only pity for these people calling themselves ‘classical homeopaths’, for their ignorance or closed mindedness, whatever it may be.

Most funny thing is, these people are never bothered about the ‘scientific evidences’ for those aphorisms in organon! They never ask for ‘scientific evidence’ for ‘miasms’ or ‘vital force’ or ‘similia similibus curentur’. They never ask for ‘scientific evidence’ for all those nonsense theories preached as part of homeopathy. They never ask for ‘scientific evidence’ for all those occult practices done by so-called homeopaths in the name of CAM!

But they want ‘scientific evidence’ for Avogadro’s Theory! They want ‘scientific evidence’ only when some body talks about some scientific ideas. They instantly will jump in to prove ‘science is unscientific’, and that ‘homeopathy is ultimate science’! They want ‘scientific evidence’ only to establish the ‘unscientificness of science’!

According to these ‘classical homeopaths’, If something is said in ‘organon’, or uttered by the ‘master’ or ‘stalwarts’, it should be accepted by all homeopaths as ‘ultimate science’- no ‘evidence’ needed! These are the people who represent homeopathy before the world. Most of the influential section of homeopathy try to propagate homeopathy that way. That is the reason why the scientific community perceive homeopathy as quackery and placebo.

It is a sheer waste of time to discuss science with this class of people. Nobody can convince them anything. But the sad thing is, we cannot ignore these intellectual morons, since they represent homeopathy before the general community and making it a subject of unending mockery.

Sign This Petition To Govt Of India: Implement an ‘Entrepreneur Start-up Project For Young Homeopaths’

Implement an ‘Entrepreneur Start-up Project For Young Homeopaths’

Petitioning: Government Of India:  Petitioner: National Campaign Committee for NHESP  started on May 9, 2015
GO TO THIS LINK TO SIGN THE PETITION:

 We, the National Campaign Committee, on behalf of all the registered homeopaths as well as students studying in homeopathic colleges of India, hereby submit before the Honorable Prime Minister Of India as follows:

We humbly request the Government of India to implement a ‘NATIONAL HOMEOPATHIC ENTREPRENEUR START-UP PROJECT (NHESP)’ to utilize the skills of the rising numbers of homeopathic doctors for providing primary healthcare in rural villages, by providing a minimum monthly subsistence allowance for first five years for establishing their own private clinics, ensuring that they will treat a minimum number of poor patients free of cost at their clinics.

Around 15000 young BHMS degree holders come out of 200+ homeopathic colleges every year. Already there are 280000 registered homeopaths in India. With only 7349 govt dispensaries and 216 hospitals, job opportunities and career prospects of these budding homeopaths remain very dark at present. It is very difficult for them to establish in private practice. Even if they start a clinic and try to survive, it will take minimum 5 years to get established and earn for their livelihood, which is very difficult with out an effective support system. Most of them are compelled to work as under-paid RMOs or ‘night doctors’ in allopathy hospitals for subsistence. They are compelled to do allopathic practice. Gradually, most of them convert themselves into full time ‘quack’ allopathic practice, which is the end of their homeopathic career.

Homeopathic professional bodies, Central Council and State Councils of Homeopathy, and Govt of India should take this issue very seriously, if we want homeopathy to exist here.

A financial supporting system has to be established to provide some sort of stipends or subsistence allowances to fresh homeopaths for a period of 5 years after getting their registration, on the conditions that they will practice pure homeopathy, and that he would treat a minimum number of poor patients free of cost. Such an arrangement will be a great boost also to our public healthcare system.

This project need not be limited to freshers only. Any homeopath willing to be part of this project should be incorporated. Govt will not loose any money by this project, since the money given to the homeopaths will be returned in the form of free health care to the poor. Actually, govt is getting a lot of ‘free dispensaries’ all over the country without any establishment investment or administrative burden, by implementing this project.

By ‘NATIONAL HOMEOPATHIC ENTREPRENEUR START-UP PROJECT (NHESP)’ we are not asking for anything free from the government. We are asking for implementing a contract mutually beneficial to the government and homeopathic community: ‘We will help the government in delivering free healthcare to the rural poor, which is the responsibility of the government- Government shall compensate us for our free service’. That is all.

Providing free health care facilities for the needy people is the responsibility of the government, which demands big investments. By implementing ‘NATIONAL HOMEOPATHIC ENTREPRENEUR START-UP PROJECT (NHESP)’, government can save much money that should have been invested for establishing such facilities. Actually, it will be like a ‘part-time’ govt job for the homeopath, as he is getting money from the government for treating a given number of poor patients free of cost at his clinic.

WE PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING PLAN:

‘NATIONAL HOMEOPATHIC ENTREPRENEUR START-UP PROJECT may be called in short as ‘NHESP’, and the private clinics enrolled under this project may be called ‘NHESP CLINICS’.

Government shall authorize any district level officer from AYUSH or HEALTH departments as the Implementation Officer’ of this project, who will be responsible for sanctioning, supervising, monitoring and annual renewal of the NHESP clinics established under this project. He will also be authorized to draw and disburse the allowances due to the doctors under this project.

Any registered homeopath can apply in a prescribed form to this officer for getting sanction for starting a new NHESP clinic, or converting an already existing clinic into a NHESP clinic in any location under the jurisdiction of the implementing officer.

Along with the application, the homeopath should sign an affidavit agreeing that he will abide by the stipulated terms and conditions of the project. It should be strictly stipulated that the doctor working under this scheme should not use or prescribe any medicine that a homeopath is not authorized to practice, such as allopathy. As per terms, external prescriptions to private pharmacies should be prohibited in the case of patients coming for free treatments.

The implementing officer shall immediately accord sanction, once he is satisfied that the applicant is a duly qualified registered homeopath, and that he has signed the affidavit. Sanction will be only for one year, which could be renewed every year consecutively up to five years, if the applicant desires to continue.

NHESP clinic will be purely a private institution conducting private medical practice, where the owner agrees to provide free medical aid (consultations+medicines) to a minimum number of patients duly identified as ‘beneficiaries’ by the doctor himself, or by officers authorized by the government for this purpose, such as members of local bodies or village level officers of revenue department.

To compensate the expenditure incurred by the NHESP doctor for free treatment, as well as to ensure his minimum subsistence, he will be entitled to get a fixed monthly allowance of Rs 6000. Obligatory free consultations per month shall be 300 or average 20 per day. An additional allowance at the rate of Rs 10 will be granted for every consultations above the obligatory 300. Maximum total payments per month shall be limited to Rs 15000.

If monthly average of free cases attained by the NHESP clinic for first year is below 300, the contract will be considered uneconomical, and the contract will not be renewed for the next year.

If a doctor is entitled to get Rs 15000 a month, that means he would have treated minimum 1200 patients free of cost that month. In other words, govt has to spend only Rs 12.5 to provide free health care to a patient by this project. Govt is not spending any money that is required for establishing a health care facility. This is very much cost-effective when compared to any other health care programs so far being implemented by AYUSH or HEALTH department.

By implementing NATIONAL HOMEOPATHIC ENTREPRENEUR START-UP PROJECT as envisaged above, goverment can extend free health care facilities to the millions of poor people living in rural villages, at a very nominal burden on public exchequer.
Same time, this project will provide new life, hopes and career opportunities to the thousands of young homeopaths getting qualified from 200+ homeopathic colleges in India, who find it very very difficult even to earn daily bread and butter. By NHESP, they are getting a government support to initiate private practice and build up a career. Since beneficiaries are identified and sent to NHESP clinics by public personalities having good contact with public, there will be an unceasing regular flow of patients. Private paid customers also will increase, proportionate to the rush created by free patients.

By doing private practice along with free consultations. The doctor will get a lot of exposure and experience, and opportunity to sharpen his practical skills. He can show the world that homeopathy is an effective therapeutic system, and that he is capable of curing patients by practicing PURE HOMEOPATHY.

For the homeopath, this project will ensure a minimum income during initial stages of his practice, which is the toughest time in his career. Since a minimum number of patients will visit him for free treatment, he will get a good exposure and experience, which is the most wanted factor to get a good beginning. By working hard and producing results in the free cases, he can can show the world that homeopathy is effective. A few successful cases, especially chronic ones, will attract more and more patients to him. He will start earning himself. By five years, he will become a successful practitioner. That is the real goal of this project.

How National Homeopathic Entrepreneur Start-up Project (NHESP) is expected to influence the future of homeopathy in India?

1. Since a minimum earning is ensured by this project at least for initial five years of their career, a large number of homeopaths will migrate to rural areas where medical facilities are less, and propagate homeopathic practice there. Such a migration of homeopaths would definitely expand the reach of homeopathy in all parts of this country very fast. Since around 15000 students come out of colleges with degrees each year, adding up to the already existing 280000 registered homeopaths, number of NHESP clinics thus established especially in villages will be lakhs in numbers by five years. It will make homeopathy the primary health care system in rural India, at only a very nominal burden on public exchequer.

2. Since NHESP makes it mandatory that homeopaths should practice PURE homeopathy, and should not prescribe allpoathic medicines, it will have a very positive impact up on future of homeopathy. Homeopaths will not have to practice allopathy for existence, or work as under-paid ‘night doctors’ in allopathy hospitals. During their NHESP phase in their careers, all young homeopaths will learn how to cure patients with pure homeopathy prescriptions.

3. Since young homeopaths get an opportunity for establishing their own independent clinics where one is his own master with ensured minimum earning, they will not have to work as ‘under-paid’ assistants in corporate homeopathic clinics or hospitals. That will end the ‘corporate’ culture that is now emerging in homeopathy.

We hope National Homeopathic Entrepreneur Start-up Project will revolutionize homeopathy in India with in a very short period, and boost the public healthcare system by providing facilities for free medical aid in rural villages of this country.

How ‘Symptom-based’ Approach Of Homeopathy Differs From ‘Diagnosis-based’ Approach Of Modern Medicine?

When a homeopath selects a particular drug or a combination of drugs as ‘similimum’ for a particular patient on the basis of ‘totality’ of subjective and objective symptoms, he is actually making a ‘diagnosis’- a diagnosis that is more comprehensive, more minute, more deep, more subtle and more specific than what is commonly known as ‘diagnosis’ according to the paradigms of modern medicine.

Homeopathic diagnosis of identifying a ‘similimum’ actually goes much deeper level into the identification of exact ‘molecular level’ errors existing in the individual. These molecular level errors could not be accurately identified with any modern sophisticated techniques or bio-chemical studies with such a perfection, other than by the observation of subjective and objective symptoms expressed by the individual. Disease diagnosis of modern medicine is only a very superfluous part of this molecular level ‘total diagnosis’ done by homeopathy. That is why modern medicine find it difficult to treat without proper ‘disease diagnosis’, where as homeopathy can treat any complex case by it ‘symptom diagnosis’ methodology.

Derangement in a particular biochemical pathway resulting from a molecular level inhibition produces a specific train of subjective and objective symptoms in the organism. In other words, each specific group of symptoms exhibited by the organism indicates a particular error occurred in the molecular level.

Homeopathy actually chases these trains of symptoms to their minutest level, from periphery to interior, in order to identify the exact molecular errors underlying any particular state of pathology.Then, those pathological molecular inhibitions are removed by applying appropriate therapeutic agents, selected on the basis of ‘law of similars’ or ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’.

The subjective and objective symptoms presented by the organism are the only reliable indicators to help us correctly understand the minute molecular deviations underlying a state of pathology. Each group or trains of symptoms represent a specific molecular error that had occurred in a particular biochemical pathway. These symptoms invariably indicate the specific type and character of the endogenous or exogenous foreign molecules or ions responsible for the causation of particular molecular inhibition. By studying the train of symptoms carefully and systematically, homeopaths are actually observing these exact molecular inhibitions.

This symptom-based analytical method of diagnosing done in homeopathy is far more exact and superior to the multitude of expensive complex laboratory chemical tests and imaging technologies we consider to be ‘scientific’. Identifying the exact molecular errors in the organism of the patient by observing the expressed symptoms, and identifying the most appropriate therapeutic agents from the similarity of symptoms those drugs could produce in healthy organism- this is the scientific essence of “similia similibus curentur”.

This fundamental strategy underlying the homeopathic system of therapeutics evidently surpasses even the most ‘scientific’ methods of modern molecular medicine. It is high time that the modern medicine realize and recognize this great truth, and incorporate this wonderful tool of homeopathy into their armamentarium. Obviously, “similia similibus curentur” is the most effective technique of identifying and removing the pathological molecular inhibitions in the organism.

Volume XVI- Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy

Any substance use as DRUGS are composed of one or more types of simple or complex molecules having their own individual structures and chemical properties. When the drugs enter the living bodies, it is those INDIVIDUAL chemical molecules that act up on different biological target molecules according to their specific affinities, producing conformational changes in them that affect the biochemical processes they are involved. Different chemical molecules contained in same drug substance act up on different biological molecules and produce different types of biochemical effects that are expressed through different trains and GROUPS OF SYMPTOMS depending up on the biochemical pathways affected.

Once you understand drug substances in terms of individual chemical molecules they contain, and understand symptoms as the expressions of bio-molecular errors produced in individual biochemical pathways by molecular level interactions between drug molecules and biological molecules, you will realize the folly involved in the concept of a ‘holistic’ ‘immaterial’ DRUG ENERGY we profusely talk about. Kindly be reminded, different groups of symptoms produced in different systems of our body by the administration of crude NUX VOMICA are the effects of hundreds of types of individual chemical molecules contained in nux vomica. If any particular type of constituent chemical molecules could be selectively removed from nux vomica before administration, the symptomatology produced during proving will be deficient in some groups of symptoms that are attributed to that particular chemical molecules. That means, there does not exist such a thing called NUX VOMICA DRUG ENERGY that act as a holistic unit, but only the different groups of symptoms arising from the biological effects of individual chemical molecules contained in NUX VOMICA.

—————————————————————————————————

I am not “trying to change fundamental laws of homeopathy”. I am only trying to “explain fundamental observations” of homeopathy in terms of modern science. If you take some time to go through my articles on this topic, you would realize that I have “explained” ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ “as per ‘already proved’ modern science”. I am not proposing any “new theory” or trying to “change fundamental laws”.

Please note, so far there is no any ‘fundamental laws’ in homeopathy which anybody proved “as per modern science”. Not even “explained” as per modern science”. But we teach, learn and practice those “unproved” laws without any hesitation. you never asked anybody to “prove” them before accepting.

One friend even asked me to “show molecular imprints present in potentized drugs”, as if he understands molecular imprints as something that could be picked by a forceps and shown to him! Can anybody ‘show’ him supra-molecular formations of water? It should be ‘understood’, not ‘seen’. Either they did not read what I have written, or failed to follow the concepts due to poor back ground knowledge in the scientific topics I have discussed to ‘prove’ molecular imprints concept. Or, it may be that they do not want to understand on reasons known only to them!

How can I convince you something, if you hesitate to read anything? I regularly post at least one article everyday explaining my concept of ‘molecular imprints’ and their implication in homeopathy. Without reading what I write, you ask me to “prove”! I once again request you to take some time to read at least some of those articles.

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and molecular biology? How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?

My request to those who ask for ‘proof for my concepts’ is, kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you. Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.

I would like to make it clear that I did not produce any ‘theories’ artificially. All my proposals on various aspects homeopathic practice are logical extensions evolved naturally from the fundamental concept of ‘molecular imprinting’ as the process involved in potentization. Once we accept ‘molecular imprints’ as the active principles of potentizaed drugs, and that they act therapeutically upon the organism by selectively binding to the pathogenic molecules, we cannot perceive or resolve these practical issues from another angle.

How can I ‘modify’ or distort logical and obvious scientific truths to satisfy our erstwhile habits, deep-rooted beliefs and long continued comfortable ways of practicing?

I can understand the discomfort brewing among ‘settled’ homeopaths when hearing my concepts that they fear would ‘change their ‘fundamentals’. “Coming out of comfort zones” is not an easy task, especially for ‘seniors’. It is very difficult to get exposed to a new knowledge environment, which would demand a fundamental re-thinking and modifying of many things they ‘believed’, learned, taught and practiced in their whole life. That would be a very uneasy situation, very hard to cope with.

—————————————————————————————————

Normally, a drug is said to be ‘similimum’ to a given case if the symptomatology expressed by the patient is matching to the recorded symptomatology of that drug. In other words, if the drug picture is similar to a disease picture, the drug is said to be ‘similimum’ to that disease. This ‘matching’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms are the basis of homeopathic prescriptions guided by the principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’

Since ‘life’ consist of complex chains of inter-related biochemical pathways involving interactions of diverse biological molecules, pathology also should be understood at molecular level. Every state of pathology has an underlying ‘molecular error’ created by an endogenous or exogenous factor that inhibits the normal functioning of a biological molecule. These molecular errors lead to deviations in related biochemical pathways which amount to a state of pathology. Such molecular errors are expressed in the living organism through subjective and objective ‘symptoms’.

Molecular processes being inter related and inter dependant, a particular ‘molecular error’ happening in a particular biochemical pathway may inevitably lead to cascading of molecular errors and biochemical deviations. This is expressed as ‘trains’ of symptoms called ‘symptom complexes’. Observing the ‘symptom complexes’ carefully, we can infer the type and character of molecular errors underlying them. This is the basis of homeopathic methodology of therapeutics.

When crude drugs are introduced into the healthy organism as part of homeopathic drug proving, the constituent drug molecules binds to various biological molecules resulting in diverse types of ‘molecular errors’ expressed in the form of different groups of subjective and objective symptoms. These symptoms are called ‘drug symptoms’ representing molecular level states of ‘drug pathology’.

If the ‘symptom complexes’ expressed by a particular state of pathology happens to be ‘similar’ to certain ‘symptom complexes’ produced by a particular drug, that means, the ‘molecular errors’ underlying that state of pathology was same as the ‘molecular errors’ that could be created by the constituent molecules of that drug in a healthy organism. Obviously, the drug substance contains some molecules that could bind to the biological molecules in the same way as the particular pathogenic molecules did. It further means that the drug contained some molecules that have molecular configurations exactly similar to the particular pathogenic molecules.

Potentized drugs contains ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules contained in the drug used for potentization. These ‘molecular imprints’ are nothing but ‘supra-molecular’ clusters of water/ethyl alcohol molecules, into which the three dimensional special configuration of individual drug molecules are imprinted in the form of ‘nanocavities’. Due to their complementary configuration, these nanocavities can specifically bind to the drug molecules or pathogenic molecules having similar configuration. This is the molecular mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics explained as the fundamental principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’.

Exactly, a ‘similimum’ is a drug that contains some molecules that can produce ‘molecular errors’ in a living organism similar to the ‘molecular errors’ underlying a given state of pathology, attacking same biological molecules.

Since ‘symptoms’ are the only indicators available to identify the exact molecular errors underlying a state of pathology, homeopaths collects these symptoms and try to find out a drug that could produce similar ‘symptoms’ in a healthy organism.

If we could identify the exact molecular errors involved in a state of pathology by any way other than observation of symptoms, we can select a ‘similimum’ that way also. That means, ‘matching disease symptoms and drugs symptoms’ is not the only way to decide a similimum. If we know the exact pathogenic molecules that caused a given pathologic condition, we can select the molecular imprints of that pathogenic molecule as the homeopathic therapeutic agent without matching the symptomatology.

This is what happens when we prescribe various specifics, nosodes and sarcodeswhich are not selected by ‘matching of symptoms’. Autopathic and tautopathic prescriptions are also not based on similarity of symptoms. When we prescribe PEPSINUM 30 for gastritis, it is not based on ‘similarity of symptoms’, but the knowledge that PEPSIN can cause gastritis. Many wonderful homeopathic prescriptions are made without any ‘matching of disease symptoms and drug symptoms’.

This deliberations show that similimum does not necessarily mean only a drug selected on the basis of similarity of symptoms. ‘Similimum’ exactly means ‘similiarity of drug-induced molecular errors and pathological molecular errors’, or ‘similarity of configurations of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules’.

If I am asked what is similimum, I would say similimum is the drug that contains ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms in healthy organism EXACTLY SIMILAR to the molecular inhibitions and symptoms existing in the patient before us, by binding to same biological target molecules. Potentized forms of the similimum would contain molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance, which can bind to the pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions.

To be a PERFECT SIMILIMUM, our drug should contain ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms, so that in potentized form it would contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required to remove ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions in the patient. If the selected drug does not contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required for the patient, it will be PARTIAL SIMILIMUM. In such cases, we can make a PERFECT SIMILIMUM by combining two or more PARTIAL SIMILIMUMS indicated by the symptoms.

——————————————————————————————————–

If a homeopath is convinced that a particular case seen by him is beyond the scope of homeopathy, he should refer the case immediately to a modern physician. He has no legal or moral right to prescribe allopathic medicines, for which he is not qualified, trained or authorized. A homeopath is only a homeopath.

————————————————————————————————–

Converting symptoms into rubrics and selecting similimum using a repertorization software is very simple if you have collected the right symptoms.

Young homeopaths should understand, a symptom is of no use if it is not qualified with its peculiar accessory details such as causations, presentations, locations, sensations, concomitants, modalities, extensions, alternations etc. Always concentrate in hunting for accessory symptoms associated with each basic symptom, instead of making an elaborate list of unqualified basic symptoms which are useful only for diagnosis- not for making homeopathic prescriptions

——————————————————————————————————-

When a modern physician uses homeopathic drugs, I feel proud and delighted as I see it as a recognition of the efficacy and superiority of homeopathy even by a practitioner of other system. When a homeopath uses allopathic drugs in his practice, I feel shame and indignation, as it is an indication that the homeopath is recognizing his failure to utilize the full potentials of homeopathy.

——————————————————————————————————

There are a lot of people suffering from diseases any where around us. If a homeopath can attract minimum ten patients to him per day, he can earn a decent living without any allopathic quackery. Only thing is, you have to know how to find similimum, and how to give relief to your patients using homeopathic drugs. All these talks about ‘jobs’ arise from lack of knowledge in homeopathy.

—————————————————————————————————

As an old layman without any professional opportunities or ambitions, personally I have nothing to gain or lose whether MIT get recognized or not. But for the young and coming generations of homeopaths, such a recognition and acceptance of MIT will surely open up great avenues of professional status and opportunities, since it will inevitably lead into the recognition of homeopathy as an advanced branch of modern molecular medicine by the scientific community. I am dedicating my remaining life span to make it happen at the earliest

————————————————————————————————–

A young lady homeopath, daughter of a friend of mine, was very energetic, ambitious and a topper in her studies. After getting her degree, she started a clinic in nearby place. Since patients did not turn up in high numbers as she expected by three months, she shifted her clinic to a new place, ignoring my advice to hold on. She was very impatient and in a hurry to become a busy practitioner. After six months, she shifted her clinic again. With in four years, she shifted to seven places, and desperately failed in her practice. She became very despondent, began to curse homeopathy and her fate, and quarrelled with her father for making her a homeopath and decided to stop practicing.

I advised her to set up practice in her house itself, and converted a room into a clinic. Being a village, initial response was very poor. But gradually, number of patients increased. As she concentrated in producing results in whatever cases she got, her popularity increased, and patients began to come from distant places also. By next four years, she became a very successful practitioner. Her energy and confidence returned.

I happened to visit her house a few months later to meet her ailing father . Around fifty patients were waiting outside her consulting room. I felt very happy.

I always use to advice young homeopaths to hold on to same place without shifting clinics frequently, even if number of patients are not satsfactory. It will take time to build up practice. You may suffer a lot initially, and even find it hard to earn your daily bread. But hold on with confidence, and work hard. If you can produce results, patients will gradually come, where ever you are. You will finally succeed.

On the other side of the matter, you are bound to fail ultimately in your practice if you fail to produce results, even if you have set up a posh clinic investing lakhs in the heart of a city or in the ground floor of a popular shopping center. It is the CURES you produce that decide your failure or success- not the PLACES.

——————————————————————————————————

A 2nd year BHMS student asked:

“I know what we are taught in our colleges as homeopathy are unscientific, whereas you are showing us light by teaching us scientific homeopathy through your posts. My present dilemma is, what should I learn as a student, as what you teach and what is taught in our colleges contradict each other”.

ANSWER: “I have addressed this question earlier. As a student, your primary concern at this stage is to earn your degree, for which you have to pass your exams. Learn your lessons as prescribed in your syllabus and taught in your class rooms, even though they are obviously unscientific. I call it ‘official’ learning.

Same time, I would advice you to keep on a stream of ‘parallel’ learning essential to become a scientific medical professional in future. Study modern biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, supra-molecular chemistry, modern pharmacology, molecular imprinting, modern diagnostics, pathology- every knowledge out side the prescribed syllabus, to prepare yourself to become a scientific physician. Of course, learn MIT also, as it provides the most rational and scientific model for biological mechanism of homeopathic cure.

‘Official’ learning for earning degree, and ‘parallel’ learning for acquiring knowledge should go simultaneously. Then only you can differentiate what is unscientific and what is scientific in the lessons you are taught as homeopathy.”

———————————————————————————————————

A BHMS student from Assam asks:

“Sir, I am a student of BHMS 1st year . I am studying in Assam. In Assam there is no good scope for BHMS. Sir, it seems that my future is very dark. Sir should i try for MBBS, or should I continue with this system?”

MY ANSWER: “As far as there are people suffering from diseases, homeopathy has scope in any place where human beings live. Only thing is, you should know HOW to apply homeopathy and give relief from diseases. Scope of homeopathy depends upon the efficiency and dedication of homeopaths who practice it. Learn homeopathy with full involvement and confidence, and try to become a skilled ‘scientific’ homeopath. Be sure, your future will be very bright”.

———————————————————————————————————

Dear homeopaths, hold your heads high with pride and self-confidence and tell the world aloud: “Homeopathy is Molecular Imprints Therapeutics- science of curing diseases using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules; it is an advanced specialized branch of modern molecular medicine”!

——————————————————————————————————-

‘TEMPERAMENTAL SYMPTOMS’ OF INDIVIDUALS PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THEIR ‘TOTALITY OF SYMPTOMS’.

The term TEMPERAMENT indicates the ‘psychological constitution’ of an individual, or the way he responds to various sensory stimuli. From homeopathic point of view, TEMPERAMENT is nothing but the ‘totality of mental symptoms’.

It basically refers to those aspects of an individual’s psychological personality, such as introversion or extroversion. Extroversion tends to be manifested in outgoing, talkative, energetic behavior, whereas introversion is manifested in more reserved and solitary behavior. Every individual has both an extroverted side and an introverted side, with one being more dominant than the other. Karl Jung defined introversion as an “attitude-type characterized by orientation in life through subjective psychic contents or focusing on one’s inner psychic activity”; and extroversion as “an attitude type characterized by concentration of interest on the external object or the outside world”. In any case, people fluctuate in their behavior all the time, and even extreme introverts and extroverts do not always act according to their type. Although many people view being introverted or extroverted as a question with only two possible answers, most contemporary trait theories measure levels of extroversion-introversion as part of a single, continuous dimension of personality, with some scores near one end, and others near the half-way mark.

Temperament has been defined as individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation that manifest in the domains of emotion, activity and attention.

Temperament of an individual is determined through specific behavioral profiles, usually focusing on those that are both easily measurable and testable early in childhood. Commonly tested factors include irritability, activity, frequency of smiling, and an approach or avoidant posture to unfamiliar events. The specific behaviors are: activity level, regularity of sleeping and eating patterns, initial reaction, adaptability, intensity of emotion, mood, distractibility, persistence and attention span, and sensory sensitivity.

Following nine traits have been identified by researchers as the basis of evaluating one’s temperament:

1. Activity: Activity refers to the person’s physical energy. Is he constantly moving, or does the has a relaxing approach? A high-energy person may have difficulty sitting still at work, where as the low-energy type will remain calm.

2. Regularity: Regularity refers to the level of predictability in a person’s biological functions, such as waking, becoming tired, hunger, and bowel movements. Does the he has a routine in eating and sleeping habits, or are these events more random? For example, a person with a high regularity rating may want to eat at 2 p.m. every day, whereas one lower on the regularity scale may eat at sporadic times throughout the day.

3. Initial reaction: Initial reaction is also known as Approach or Withdrawal. This refers to how the person responds (whether positively or negatively) to new people or environments. Does he approach people or things in the environment without hesitation, or does he shy away? A bold person tends to approach things quickly, as if without thinking, whereas a cautious one typically prefers to watch for a while before engaging in new experiences.

4. Adaptability: Adaptability refers to how long it takes the person to adjust to change over time (as opposed to an initial reaction). Does he adjust to the changes in their environment easily, or is he slow to adapt? One who adjusts easily may be quick to settle into a new routine, whereas a resistant person may take a long time to adjust to the situation.

5. Intensity: Intensity refers to the energy level of a positive or negative response. Does the person react intensely to a situation, or does the respond in a calm and quiet manner? A more intense person may burst screaming with excitement, whereas a mild-mannered person may smile or show no emotion.

6. Mood: Mood refers to the person’s general tendency towards a happy or unhappy demeanor. All persons have a variety of emotions and reactions, such as cheerful and stormy, happy and unhappy. Yet each person biologically tends to have a generally positive or negative outlook. A person who frequently smiles could be considered a cheerful one, whereas one who frequently fusses might be considered the opposite.

7. Distractibility: Distractibility refers to the individual’s tendency to be sidetracked by other things going on around them. Does he get easily distracted by what is happening in the environment, or can he concentrate despite the interruptions? An easily distracted person is engaged by external events and has difficulty returning to the task at hand, whereas a rarely distracted person stays focused and completes the task at hand.

8. Persistence and attention span: Persistence and attention span refer to the individual’s length of time on a task and ability to stay with the task through frustrations—whether he stays with an activity for a long period of time or loses interest quickly.

9. Sensitivity: Sensitivity refers to how easily an individual is disturbed by changes in the environment. This is also called sensory threshold or threshold of responsiveness. Is the person bothered by external stimuli like noises, textures, or lights, or does he seem to ignore them? A sensitive person may lose focus when a door slams, whereas one less sensitive to external noises will be able to maintain focus.

Factors determining the temperament of a person also includes anticipation, impulsiveness, increased or decreased levels of activity, desire for sensation seeking, shyness, self-esteem or lack of it, fear, frustration, sadness, discomfort, anger, fearfulness, aggression, attention, sensitivity, pleasure threshold, irritability, alertness, etc etc.

Psychologists have developed a theory of FIVE TEMPERAMENTS, which classifies individuals into five distinct categories. Five temperaments is a theory that expands upon the Four Temperaments proposed in ancient medical theory based on the concept of ‘body humors’. It is a measure of interpersonal relations orientations that calculates a person’s behavior patterns based on the scoring of a questionnaire. This system of analysis graded questionnaires on two scales in three dimensions of interpersonal relations. When paired with temperament theory, a measurement of five temperaments resulted.

These FIVE temperamental categories are SANGUINE (quick, impulsive, and relatively short-lived reactions), PHLEGMATIC (a longer response-delay, but short-lived response), CHOLERIC (short response time-delay, but response sustained for a relatively long time), MELANCHOLIC (long response time-delay, response sustained at length, if not, seemingly, permanently) and SUPINE (more needy for acceptance from people, yet less able to initiate and express this need, frustrated)

TEMPERAMENTS of individuals are identified by their DRIVING NEEDS. For the Melancholic, the motivation is fear of rejection and/or the unknown. They have a low self-esteem and, figuring that others do not like them, they reject others first. The Supine also has low self-esteem, but is driven to try to gain acceptance by liking and serving others. The Sanguine is driven by the need for attention, and tries to sell themselves through their charm, and accepts others before those others can reject them. Their self-esteem crashes if they are nevertheless rejected. Yet, they will regain the confidence to keep trying to impress others. The Choleric is motivated by their goals, in which other people are tools to be used. The Phlegmatic’s lack of a motivation becomes their driving need: to protect their low energy reserve.

TEMPERAMENTS is determined by the complex bio-molecular processes happening in the central nervous system. Most experts agree that temperament has a GENETIC, EPIGENETIC and biological basis, although environmental factors, nutrition and maturation modify the ways an individual’s personality is expressed. For scientific understanding of the bio-molecular processes involved in ‘temperaments’, we need the help of Behavioral genetics, Behavioral epigenetics and Behavioral neuroscience.

The Human Genome Project has allowed scientists to understand the coding sequence of human DNA nucleotides. Once candidate genes for behaviors are discovered, scientists may be able to genetically screen individuals to determine their likelihood of developing certain pathologies.

Behavioral neuroscience, also known as biological psychology, is the application of the principles of biology, in particular neurobiology , to the study of physiological, genetic, and developmental mechanisms of behavior in humans and non-human animals. It typically investigates at the level of neurons, neurotransmitters, brain circuitry and the basic biological processes that underlie normal and abnormal behavior.

Behavioral epigenetics is the field of study examining the role of epigenetics in shaping human behaviour. It is an experimental science that seeks to explain how nurture shapes nature, where nature refers to biological heredity and nurture refers to virtually everything that occurs during the life-span such as social-experience, diet and nutrition, and exposure to toxins). Behavioral epigenetics attempts to provide a framework for understanding how the expression of genes is influenced by experiences and the environment to produce individual differences in behavior, cognition, personality, and mental health. Epigenetic gene regulation involves changes other than to the sequence of DNA and includes changes to histones (proteins around which DNA is wrapped) and DNA methylation. These epigenetic changes can influence the growth of neurons in the developing brain as well as modify activity of the neurons in the adult brain. Together, these epigenetic changes on neuron structure and function can have a marked influence on an organism’s behavior.

Endogenous or exogenous chemical molecules such as bacterial and viral toxins, food articles, antibodies, hormones, metabolic byproducts, drugs, environmental pollutants etc, that can produce modifications in the actions of enzymes involved in histone mythylation and acetylization can thereby epigenetically influence the genetic expression and protein synthesis. When this happens in the cells of central nervous system, it may bring behavioral and temperamental changes.

If a drug substance could produce ‘temperamental’ changes in healthy individuals when applied in crude form as part of drug proving, that means the drug substance contains some chemical molecules that could act upon certain epigenetic factors in the neurons in a way influencing genetic expression of ‘temperamental’ genes. In molecular imprints forms, such drug substances can rectify such molecular errors and cure those ‘temperamental, behavioral or mood-related disorders.

—————————————————————————————————

My advice to young homeopaths is, try to set up your OWN clinics as far as possible, instead of getting lucratively employed in a private institution owned by individuals or corporates, especially if you are not permitted to do at least a part-time private practice there.

Most precious and long-standing ‘property’ of a homeopath is the good will and publicity propagated by his dedicated patients, and the ever-growing chains of new patients gradually forming around every successful cases. It is on this foundation one’s career should grow. When you work in an institution owned by another individual or corporate, you lose that precious property. Once you are compelled to leave the job or thrown out by the management on any reason, you will have to rebuild your career from a big zero!

You may feel it a bit hard or risky to set up a new clinic. You may earn very little initially, when compared to the lucrative salaries the institutions offer. But remember, you are making a long term investment in your life, and returns come gradually.

The difference is between whether you work to ‘cultivate’ in your own farm, or work as a wage laborer in another’s farm. If it is your farm, you will reap the final crops and the happiness- otherwise you get only your wages!

“As long as one is a good prescriber”, why should you have a sense of insecurity in running your own clinic, where you are the master?

There is a always a factor of insecurity and and unpredictability anywhere in life. You may lose your ‘job’ any time, if you fail to attain your targets. Is it not an “unpredictable” factor? No corporate will or can give you salary for long, if you fail in generating income. They will throw you out earlier or later. If you can make results, income in your own clinic is not unpredictable. It may be small initially, but it will grow gradually. It is an issue of skills and confidence, sir. If you can attract minimum 10 patients per day, you can generate an income much more than a corporate will offer you.

Final choice depends upon individual homeopath. His skills, confidence, financial position, location- everything will have to be considered

———————————————————————————————————-

Success in homeopathic practice depends up on physician’s skills to collect ‘complete symptoms’ that would indicate most appropriate similimum.

First of all, we should be capable of differentiating between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ symptoms.

‘Normal’ symptoms are those which represent ‘normal’ physiological processes in organism, which have no role in determining a similimum. Normal thirst, normal perspiration, normal bowel movements, normal appetite, normal sleep, normal emotions, normal body temperature, normal thermal responses etc etc.

Normal thirst represents normal physiology. But, if a person is thirstless in conditions where he should be thirsty, for example, when exposed in hot atmosphere for long time, it shows an abormality. To be extremely thirsty in very cold climate is also abnormal. Feeling extremely hot in chilly climates abnormal, and feeling chilly in very hot climate is also abnormal. Perspiring in hot climate is normal, but in cold climate is abnormal. Soft stool passed with difficulty is abnormal, but hard stool passed with difficulty is normal.

‘Abnormal’ symptoms are those symptoms that represent an ‘abnormal’ state of affairs in the organism- or, a molecular level pathology. It is these ‘abnormal’ symptoms that decide our selection of similimum. Abnormal thermal reactions, abnormal emotions, abnormal body temperature, abnormal appetite, abnormal thirst, abnormal sleep, abnormal perspiration, abnormal behaviors etc etc.

Identifying ‘abnormal’ symptoms is a tough task, if we are not aware of ‘normal physiology’ that are represented by ‘normal symptoms’.

An ‘abnormal basic symptom’, such as headache, joint pain, abdominal pain or any such ‘complaints’ for which a person seeks medical aid, becomes a valuable homeopathic symptom, only when it is made ‘complete’ by adding with their ‘characteristic’ ‘accessory’ symptoms.

——————————————————————————————————-

I would suggest CCH for ‘hair transmission’ experts from ‘sahni institute’ to be appointed as faculty members in all all homeopathic colleges in India. Teaching and learning process will be very simple- teacher will collect strands of hair from every student, and send aphorisms and other homeopathy lessons to their brains ‘dynamically’ by hair transmission mode! LOL!!!

———————————————————————————————————

I am a perennial ‘free’ learner. I learn not by ‘following’ the ‘teachings of masters’, but by observing and experimenting objective reality myself, and by making my own interpretations and evolving my own conclusions. In this learning process, I would rationally ‘utilize’ any available piece of knowledge imparted by anybody. I accept nothing blindly without questioning and analyzing, until it satisfies my rational thinking.

——————————————————————————————————–

Homeopathic mother tinctures act the same way as Herbal medicines, Ayurveda or Allopathy.

They do not work on similia principle, and hence, is not homeopathic.

Can we say all those drugs do not play any role in therapeutics? NO. They act as ‘molecular forms’ of drugs, which act antipathically, due to the molecular level structure and properties of those drugs. Mother tinctures also may be also helpful in providing relief by the action of their ‘molecular’ contents. But that cannot be considered ‘homeopathic’ drug action.

When we give Alfalfa Q to improve appetite, we are using its ‘allopathic’ action. If we read the materia medica of that drug, it is said that alfalfa increases appetite even up to bulimia.

To be genuinely homeopathic, we should use only potentized drugs that do not contain drug molecules, but molecular imprints only- above 12c.

While prescribing crude drugs, low potencies or mother tincture on the basis of our old literature like boericke or clarke, we should remember that knowledge of pharmacology was very limited during their period.

ARS BROMIDE Q is recomended as a drug for diabetes in boericke materia medica. With the knowledge now available about the toxic properties of ARS COMPOUNDS, would anybody dare to use ars bromide Q now? In old literatures, many mercury compounds are recomended to be used as triturations.

In my opinion, without modern scientific studies about pharmacological aspects of our mother tinctures and crude drugs, we should not use them on the reason that it is recmomended in old literatures.

Many homeopaths use URAN NIT 1x and 3X, which is beyond any doubt, dangerous substance in molecular forms. In my opinion, homeopaths should use only above 12c, if our claim ‘homeopathy is SAFE’ is justified.

—————————————————————————————————–

Have you heard the good old proverbial story of five blind ‘scholars’ who ‘saw’ the elephant by touching the different parts of its body? Each of them narrated their ‘experience’ with the elephant in entirely different ways. Even though all of them ‘saw’ the same elephant, their explanations were not at all the same!

Objective truth of homeopathy, involved in the therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, is like that proverbial ‘elephant’, which was ‘seen’ by different ‘blind’ theoreticians through generations, who explained it using entirely different ‘theories’ according to their fancies and fantacies. Nobody so far succeeded in seeing this great ‘elephant’ in its real form, and explained it in a rational, logical and scientific way.

——————————————————————————————————-

World Health Organization has declared an ‘international health emergency’, due to the spread of EBOLA virus disease around the world in pandemic proportions.

In modern medicine, there is no specific treatment for EVD; efforts to help persons who are infected include giving either oral rehydration therapy (slightly sweet and salty water to drink) or intravenous fluids. The disease has high mortality rate: often killing between 50% and 90% of those infected with the virus. Efforts are ongoing to develop a vaccine; however, none yet exists.

Homeopathy can help people to overcome this hazardous situation. Hope WHO, health authorities of various countries, homeopathic professional bodies and the whole homeopathic community will rise to meet this challenge.

Molecular imprints of ‘Ebola Glycoprotein’, a chemical molecule secreted by ebola virus, could be probably used to effectively prevent the dreaded infection without any harmful effects. Molecular imprints could be be prepared by procuring a sample of ‘ebola glycoprotein’ and potentizing it upto 12c or above avogadro limit. Hope somebody in responsible positions may note this suggestion seriously.

Homeopathically, CROTALUS HORRIDUS 30 seems to the ideal similimum for EBOLA VIRUS DISEASE. Use it frequently until cure, even along with other treatments or medications.

—————————————————————————————————–

Molecular imprints of ‘Ebola Glycoprotein’, a chemical molecule secreted by ebola virus, could be probably used to effectively prevent the dreaded infection without any harmful effects. Molecular imprints could be be prepared by procuring a sample of ‘ebola glycoprotein’ and potentizing it upto 12c or above avogadro limit. Hope somebody in responsible positions may note this suggestion seriously.

Homeopathically, CROTALUS HORRIDUS 30 seems to the ideal similimum for EBOLA VIRUS DISEASE. Use it frequently until cure, even along with other treatments or medications.

——————————————————————————————————

An allopath asks: “Say me what is the treatment u give for a myocardial infraction, how u will save the dying patient, say what u can pluck in homeopathy ? Huh ?”

My question to that allopath: “What is your treatment for EBOLA VIRUS infection? How will you treat MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS? How will you treat DOWNS SYNDROME? Can you cure HIV/AIDS? Can you cure PARKINSONISM?”

Actually, no allopathic doctor can save the life of a person “dying with myocardial infarction” with his DRUGS only, better than a homeopath can do it with his drugs.

Allopaths ‘save’ such patients by emergency angioplasty, which is only an interventional surgical procedure. SURGERY is not ALLOPATHY. SURGERY is only MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY, which is the common ‘accessory’ property of all medical systems and professionals. If there were homeopathic hospitals equipped with ANGIOPLASTY facilities and technicians, homeopaths can save cardiac patients using homeopathy drugs, much better than allopathy doctors do.

——————————————————————————————————–

AN ALLOPATH CONVERTING TO HOMEOPATHY INDICATES STRENGTH OF ‘HOMEOPATHY’, WHERE AS A HOMEOPATH WANTING TO PRACTICE ALLOPATHY FOR HIS SURVIVAL INDICATES ‘HIS’ FAILURE.AS A HOMEOPATH.

———————————————————————————————————-

SURGERY is not ‘allopathy’. It is true that allopathy utilizes surgery more frequently and effectively than other medical systems do- that does not make surgery a ‘sole property’ of allopathy.

SURGERY is ‘mechanical intervention’ into the human body using some tools, equipment and other technological gadgets. Actually, surgery belongs to the realm of ‘medical technology’- not ‘medicine’.

ALLOPATHY is the art and science of treating diseases using ‘chemical molecules’ called drugs.

HOMEOPATHY is the art and science of treating diseases using ‘molecular imprints’, instead of drug molecules.

‘Medical Technology’ of SURGERY is the common ‘accessory’ property of all medical systems.

——————————————————————————————————

If the process of dilution is done strictly as per directions given by Samuel Hahnemann, 99 ml alcohol/water mixture has to be thrown away to get 1 ml of 1c potency, which is used as the back potency for 2c stage of potentization. That means, to prepare 1ml of DM potency we will have to throw away 999999.999 litres of water/ alcohol mixture. Do you believe one lac litres of ethyl alcohol is thrown away by the manufactures while preparing 1 ml of homeopathic medicine in DM potency? If you claim that this is not thrown away but kept as various potencies, can you imagine the size of storage facilities required for each drug? Please remember, we have around 1000 drugs in homeopathy, which means 1000000000 litres of wastage of ethyl alcohol-water mixture! And also calculate the time, energy utensils, bottles and labor required for handling all this! Do you believe all this happening?

Every manufacturer claim that they use back potencies, and hence no wastage of alcohol happens. But somebody in the line has to do the job of raising 30c into 199c, 200c into 999c, 1m into 9999c and so on. To raise 10m to 50m, 40000 stages of potentization have to be done in betwee, and all those discarded, except the product obtained at last stage. Better you calculate the wastege in between 50m and cm! If those people do it genuinely as per Hahnemannian method, they will have to bear all these wastage, and the cost of back potencies will be unimaginably high!

In the present atmosphere of profit-oriented pharmaceutical business managed by professional business administrators, we cannot be so naïve to believe that the manufacturers of homeopathic medicines would be so much dedicated to the philosophy of Hahnemann to bear such huge holes in their money bags. Remember, these same people are flooding the market with all sorts of unethical patented mixtures in the name of homeopathy, and bribing the homeopaths to market them, in their greed to amass wealth. How can we expect them to be so much sincere in the service of homeopathy only while preparing potencies? How much pathetic is the situation since there exist no any scientific mechanism to verify the exact identity and potency of a drug other than to trust the labels on the bottles! If somebody make an error knowingly or unknowingly in sticking a label to a stock bottle of back potency, can you imagine the consequences that will continue to haunt generations of homeopaths to come? We have to be consoled that potentized homeo medicines cannot kill human beings.

Believe it or not,if you closely monitor what is happening behind the walls of commercial homeopathic manufacturing units, you will lose all your trust in our ‘very high’ potencies. I had personally discussed with some retired supervisers and managers of certain famous production units, and they confessed some bitter truth. After 30c, most units do not carry on potentization strictly as Hahnemann directed. A few additional shakes is given to 30c and marked as 199c, which is used as the back potency for 200c. Again with few additional shakes, and 200c becomes 999c used as back potency for 1m. Over all, we can see that practically, in most cases, the difference between 30c and DM potency is only a four to ten stage dilution and a few additional shakes!. Finished! And we call it ‘ultra-high’ potencies!. Only consolation is that 30c is enough for optimum molecular imprinting to happen, and our drugs will work if used as similimum, since they contain ‘molecular imprints’, and that is enough. This shows that the difference between 30c and CM or DM is very narrow. Our talk about ‘very high’ dilution is practically meaningless. Most homeopaths and manufacturers will not tolerate my statement, because that may undermine the ‘sand hills’ of fame they have built in the name of ‘high potencies’.

Teachers and seniors make young homeopaths believe that administration of incorrect remedies especially in high potencies would do grave harm to the patients, and may cause even death. It is warned that our drugs should be handled with great care, and many young homeopaths are scared to prescribe, lest it may be a wrong prescription. If potentized drugs were dangerous, homeopaths would have been the greatest criminals in human history, each of us would have so far killed many innocent people! We would have already harmed a big section of human race by the time being through our wrong prescriptions. Even you and me make many many wrong prescriptions everyday, believing that we are making correct prescriptions. Can anybody deny it with a sincere heart? Living proofs of safety of homeopathic medicines are the people we treated with wrong prescriptions and stay undamaged!

——————————————————————————————————

SCIENCE cannot be ‘limited’ to any particular book, author, inventor or time. It grows infinitely through generations, by imbibing new knowledge evolving through human experience and thinking. If you think HOMEOPATHY is some thing limited and confined to ‘organon’ and the ‘master’, that means your perspective of homeopathy is unscientific and dogmatic.

———————————————————————————————————

‘MIT’ IS ONLY AN ATTEMPT TO UPDATE HOMEOPATHY BY PROVIDING RATIONAL AND LOGICAL ANSWERS TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS, IN A WAY EXACTLY FITTING TO MODERN SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE:

1. WHAT IS LIFE?
2. WHAT IS DISEASE?
3. WHAT IS A DRUG AND HOW IT ACTS ON LIVING ORGANISM?
4. WHAT ARE SYMPTOMS?
5. WHAT IS CURE?
6. WHAT IS THE MOLECULAR PROCESS INVOLVED IN POTENTIZATION?
7. WHAT IS THE BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM OF HOMEOPATHIC CURE?
8. WHAT IS MIASM?

MIT EXPLANATIONS ARE EXACTLY FITTING TO MODERN SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE SYSTEM, WHICH MAKES MIT FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM ALL EXISTING EXPLANATIONS OF HOMEOPATHY.

——————————————————————————————————

I ‘believe’ only what I ‘know’, and what could be explained rationally. There are many things and phenomena around me remaining to be explained, about which I am still undecided, and probably in confusion. I am continuing my efforts to understand them using the knowledge and its tools already available to me. There is no meaning in jumping into conclusions about them. I will not ‘believe’ anything blindly.

I do not ‘believe’ in god, due to the simple reason that I do not ‘know’ whether god exists or not. That does not mean I am ‘against’ god. We cannot be ‘against’ something, without knowing about it clearly. As per my present state of knowledge about this universe and the phenomena around me, I could not see any rational justification for ‘believing’ in god. Abscence of knowledge about something cannot be a justification for believing that it exists or does not exist. Obviously, my ‘beliefs’ will undergo changes in course of time, as my knowledge constantly advances to more and more perfection.

I will say “I believe in god” only when my knowledge advances to such a position that I can tell you ‘what is god’, ‘how it exists’ and ‘how it works’.

————————————————————————————————-

Once you fall into a deep sea where land is not seen anywhere within your reach, only thing you can do is to to keep on swimming and swimming, if you want to stay alive without drowning!

I keep on talking about MIT day in and day out, even though I do not see any chance of its recognition within my reach during my life time, hoping at least to keep my ideas alive for the future generation.

—————————————————————————————————

It is a clinically experienced and experimentally verified fact that potentized drugs act upon organism in a way exactly opposite to the parent drugs. Actually, this observation is the basis of the concept of homeopathic ‘drug proving’ as well as ‘similia similibus curentur’.

Why a drug substance in ‘potentized’ form act upon living organism in a reverse direction to its action in crude or ‘molecular’ form? What may be the molecular mechanism involved in this ‘reverse’ action?

Whole riddles of homeopathy will be resolved once we could explain this phenomenon of ‘reverse action’ rationally and scientifically in a way fitting to modern biochemistry and kinetics of biomolecular interactions.

Phenomenon of ‘reverse actions’ of potentized forms and crude forms of same drug substance could be rationally explained only if we perceive potentized drugs in terms of MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules, and understand these molecular imprints as three-dimensional nanocavities’ or ‘depressions ‘engraved’ into a water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrix.

Beyond any doubt, only MIT concepts can answer the fundamental questions of homeopathy, and resolve the riddles haunting this wonderful therapeutic art.

————————————————————————————————-

What is my ‘reccomendation’ regarding vaccinations? My “reccomendation” will depend up on situations- rather practical than theoretical. I will prefer to chose ‘lesser evil’ than ‘bigger evil’. ‘Later evils’ than ‘immediate evils’. Evils that give us time to rectify, than evils that give us no chance to rectify. There is no point in being “against” vaccines when a mad dog bites me.

I am sure vaccination can cause chronic ‘miasms’ in our body, which may result in diverse types of chronic disease dispositions and ‘autoimmune’ diseases. Knowing this evil effects very well, I have to accept vaccinations in situations where life is in serious irreversible danger.

————————————————————————————————-

Vaccines are ‘protein’ substances ‘alien’ to the genetic blueprint of the individual. Alien proteins induce the production of antibodies in a similar way as infectious agents, which remain in the body for long petiods, in many instances for the whole life. Even though we understand antibodies as ‘defense’ molecules, they can play a ‘pathogenic’ role also, since they can bind to off-target biological targets, resulting in chronic disease dispositions. Hahnemann called this chronic residual effects of antibodies as ‘miasms’. Vaccinations, similar to infectious diseases, results in chronic miasms, known as vaccinosis, producing various chronic diseases including those which are so far considered as ‘autoimmune’ diseases.

————————————————————————————————–

In order to explain homeopathic cure in scientific terms, first of all you should explain DISEASE and CURE in scientific terms, in a way fitting to existing scientific knowledge system.

If you keep on talking about ‘deranged vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’, nobody belonging to science-minded community is going to listen what you are talking about, or take homeopathy seriously. Talk science, please!

————————————————————————————————–

Please remember, homeopathy so far lacks something that could at least be legitimately called ‘a scientific working hypothesis’. We are learning, teaching, practicing and boasting about some ‘theories’ that are not even ‘hypotheses’ in the scientific sense of that term.

For the first time in the history of homeopathy, MIT proposes some concepts that could be presented as a legitimate candidate to be called a ‘scientific working hypothesis’ that could be proved according to scientific methods.

There lies the historical relevance of concepts put forward by MOLECULAR IMPRINTS THERAPEUTICS, which proposes for the first time a scientifically TESTABLE model for BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM of homeopathic therapeutics, in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge system.

MIT is not to be “followed” or “practiced” in its present state of evolution- It has to be understood, verified and proved.

—————————————————————————————————-

From scientific point of view of pharmaceutical chemistry, a DRUG is a biologically active unit contained in a substance used as therapeutic agent. IT is the structure and properties of that chemical molecule that decides its medicinal properties and therapeutic actions. If such as substance contains only ONE type of biologically active unit, it is a SINGLE drug. If it contains different types of biologically active units, it is a COMPOUND drug. It is obvious that most of the drugs we use in homeopathy – especially drugs of biological origin and complex minerals- contain diverse types of biologically active units, and hence they cannot be considered SINGLE drugs.

Molecular imprinting happens as individual molecules, and as such, potentized drugs prepared from a SINGLE drug substance will contain diverse types of molecular imprints representing the diverse types of individual constituent molecules contained in the substance. Those molecular imprints also act as individual units when applied in the organism. Hence, potentized drugs prepared by using a complex, seemingly single drug substance is actually a COMPOUND drug, containing diverse types of biologically active units.

IF you still cannot realize the meaninglessness and utter folly involved in talking about SINGLE DRUGS, it is the blindness caused by your dogmatic learning and lack of scientific awareness.

————————————————————————————————–

What is MIT?

MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics refers to a scientific hypothesis that proposes a rational model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and diseaes indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.

—————————————————————————————————

Homeopathy is taught as a closed system of eternally immutable ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ every ‘true’ homeopath is bound to ‘obey’. We hear ‘seven cardinal principles of hahnemann’, ‘hering laws’, ‘kents observations’ and many other ‘theories’ that rule the practice of homeopathy. Anybody violating or thinking beyond these ‘fundamental laws’ are considered to be ‘wrong homeopaths’.

We should remember, no ‘masters’ who made these ‘rules’ so far knew what really happens during potentization. Nobody so far knew what are the exact active principles of potentized drugs. Nobody so far knew the exact molecular level mechanism by which the active principles of potentized drugs interact with the biological organism and produce a therapeutic effect. Only things our masters actually knew was the objective natural phenomena of ‘likes curing likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’.

Everything else were mere speculations. Speculations based on unscientific philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’. All ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘methods’ and ‘doctrines’ we consider as ‘cardinal principles of homeopathy evolved from these speculative theories. All ‘directions’ regarding ‘doses’, repetitions’, ‘single drugs’, ‘follow ups’ and everything else were formulated without clearly knowing the substances we are actually dealing with or how they actually work. They were based on misinterpreted ‘experiences’ of ‘stalwarts’ with historically limited scientific knowledge.

Once we acquire scientific knowledge regarding the exact processes involved in potentization, active principles of potentized drugs and the molecular mechanism of their therapeutic action, all the existing ‘methods’, ‘laws’, ‘rules’ and ‘principles’ are bound to change. New ‘principles’ and ‘methods’will evolve.

What ever I talk about ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ of homeopathic practice such as ‘dose’ and ‘repetitions’ are based on my scientific understanding of potentization as ‘molecular imprinting’, active principles of potentized drugs as ‘molecular imprints’, and homeopathic therapeutics as removal of biochemical inhibitions. Unless you understand the concept ‘molecular imprinting’ of potentization and biochemistry of therapeutics, you are bound to fail to understand everything I say.

Acquiring a scientific understanding of the phenomena involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, and applying that knowledge judiciously for curing the sick- that should be the only ‘fundamental rule’ that guide a homeopath.

‘Likes cures likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’ represent the objective part of homepathy, which are concerned with truthful observations of natural phenomena involved in the process of ‘cure’. This is the strong and rational aspect of homeopathy that have to be preserved, explored and advanced into more and more perfection.

The theoretical explanatory part of homeopathy, which is based on totally unscientific and irrational philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’ of eighteenth century europe, as well as the ‘rules’, ‘laws’ and ‘methods’ formulated accordingly, is the real stumbling block that prevents this wonderful therapeutic art from advancing into a scientific medical system.

We have to preserve and strengthen the rational objective aspect of homeopathy, and explain it in terms of modern scientific knowledge. We should show the audacity to discard its irrational and unscientific theoretical parts. Once we understand the real science involved in the phenomena of ‘likes cure likes’ and ‘potentization’, a whole new set of practical ‘rules’ and ‘laws’ would spontaneously evolve.

In the PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION of ORGANON, Dr Hahnemann made the following statement:

“In this third edition I have not refrained from making any alterations and emendations suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

This statement is a fitting answer to those ‘dogmatic’ homeopaths who argue nothing could be changed or updated in homeopathy.

Hahenemann advises us not to “refrain” from making “alterations and emendations”, if “suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

————————————————————————————————–

How to repertorize cases as ‘Symptom Groups’ using Similimum Ultra Software to generate ‘total cure’ prescriptions:

For making ‘multiple drug prescriptions’, we have to repertorize symptoms as different symptom groups. Logic of method is simple. A patient coming to us may be suffering from entirely different disease entities at the same time, related with entirely different molecular errors. If you believe the ‘constitutional similimum’ will correct all molecular errors and cure the patient ‘holistically’, you may go that way. But practically, we may need entirely different drugs for his different complaints, where ‘multiple drug’ approach may give the patient immediate relief for his complaints, as well as ‘total cure’. Whether you call it multiple drugs, polypharmacy, layer method, complementary drugs, intercurrent or any thing, you are actually doing the same. Only difference is, some people ‘mix’ drugs inside the body by giving one drug at a time, where as others ‘mix’ them outside the body. Multiple drugs are multiple drugs- whatever name you call it, or whatever way you use it.

Apart from constitutional and miasmatic drugs, a particular patient may need different drugs for his different ailments such as headache, hypertension, haemorrhoids, gastric ulcer, joint pains, ringworm etc, disturbing him at the same time. Each ailment will have different locations, expressions, sensations, modalities, concomitants- which are collectively called ‘qualifications’- requiring different similimum. Hoping a ‘single’ ‘constitution drug’ to ‘cure’ all these complaints by a ‘single’ dose may be the ‘classical’ approach, but I am not so much optimistic about such a hope in all cases. Different co entirely different complaints will have totally unrelated molecular inhibitions underlying them, caused by entirely different pathogenic molecules, which would require entirely different ‘molecular imprints’ to remove those inhibitions.

Each molecular error, caused by a particular molecular inhibition due to a specific pathogenic molecular factor, will be expressed through a specific group of symptoms and their ‘qualifications’. Hence, we have to select ‘molecular imprints’ on the basis of those ‘symptom groups’. Since the individual’s constitutional background also plays a role in disease process, his ‘constitutional remedy’ also will have to be used over and above the ‘particular remedies’.

Diseases in a person at a given point of time are never ‘single’ at molecular level, but comprising of ‘multiple’ molecular inhibitions and molecular errors arising from diverse types of genetic and acquired factors.

Even those drug substance we call ‘single’ are not really ‘single’, but contains diverse types of chemical molecules molecules having entirely different chemical and medicinal properties.

Potentized drugs, which we consider ‘single’, are actually combinations of diverse types of independent ‘molecular imprints’ representing different types of constituent molecules of drug substance used for potentization.

When used as therapeutic agents, all those potentized drugs we consider ‘single’, really act as ‘combinations’ of independent ‘molecular imprints’ they contain, each individual ‘molecular imprint’ acting upon specific pathogenic molecules having complementary configurational affinity, thereby removing the ‘molecular inhibitions created by them.

Once you understand these fundamental scientific factors, you can realize the futility of worrying about ‘single’ disease, ‘single’ drug and ‘single’ dose!!

Constitutional remedy of the patient could be determined using physical generals and mentals. To decide the ‘particular remedies’ for different complaints, we have repertorize each ‘symptom group’ separately. Each ‘symptom group’ will consist of the ‘basic symptom’ of particular complaint, along with its ‘qualifications’ such as ‘locations, expressions, sensations, modalities, alternations, concomittants and extensions’.

Repertorizing in ‘symptom groups’ is very simple using ‘Similimum Ultra Software. Select all basic symptoms and their qualifications first. Then collect all physical generals and mentals. Add all these symptoms to ‘worksheet’ of software, and grade them using ‘grade rubric’ tool. Then, go to ‘repertorize’. Select ‘totality method’, with ‘selected symptoms’ protocol’.

Repertorization window appears, with all rubrics listed, with check boxes. Select check boxes of physical generals and mentals only, and repertorize. Result will appear in chart for. Click ‘add to reference tray’. Save reference tray, marking the result as ‘constitution’. Then remove all selected check boxes, and select all check boxes of rubrics related with a particular complaint. Add the result to reference tray, mark it. In this way, select rubrics of all ‘symptom groups’ separately and repertorize. Results of repertorizations done for each group will be saved separately in ‘reference tray’, from where we can select the final prescription. In some cases, we may get same drug for different ‘symptoms groups’, which is most welcome from a homeopathic perspective. Since ‘antimiasmatic’ drugs such as nosodes are not well represented in our repertories, we will have to consider them separately, after repertorization is completed. If necessary, they should be included in our prescription.

This method of ‘total cure prescriptions’ is a deviation from what is taught in classical homeopathy. I would not advise any body to follow this method. This is my method- that is all.

Anybody can think about the logic behind this method, and reach their own conclusions. I do not want to ‘misguide’ anybody.

‘MULTIPLE DRUG’ PRESCRIPTION CASE- I:

A 75 year old man, with complaints of asthma, haemorrhoids, constipation, fistula and itching all over. Symptoms were collected in detail, and following rubrics selected using Similimum Ultra Software:

1. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
2. [Kent]Expectoration : TASTE : Salty
3. [Kent]Expectoration : GRAYISH
4. [Kent]Expectoration : VISCID
5. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
6. [Kent]Respiration : WHISTLING
7. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC : Eating : amel
8. [Kent]Rectum : URGING, desire : Eating, after
9. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION
10. [Kent]Rectum : MOISTURE
11. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : External
12. [Kent]Rectum : LUMP, sensation of
13. [Kent]Rectum : ITCHING
14. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION : Old people
15. [Kent]Rectum : FISTULA
16. [Kent]Rectum : FLATUS : Loud
17. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : Cold amel.
18. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
19. [Kent]Generalities : LEAN people
21. [Kent]Mind : ANGER, irascibility
22. [Kent]Mind : CENSORIOUS, critical
23. [Kent]Mind : HURRY
24. [Kent]Mind : IMPATIENCE
25. [Kent]Mind : SUSPICIOUS
26. [Kent]Mind : QUARRELSOME
27. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Night
28. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Eruption, without
29. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Scratching : Agg
30. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Warm : In bed, on becoming

When repertorized by classical totality method, outcome was as follows: Sulph.(61/26), Ars.(45/19), Lyc.(44/20), Lach.(41/22), Sep.(41/19), Caust.(39/18), Phos.(39/20), Nux-v.(38/19), Puls.(36/16),

Then I decided to go for ‘Group Repertorization’ method. Symptoms were grouped into CONSTITUTION, RESPIRATORY, RECTUM and SKIN, and repertorized separately using Similimum Ultra

A. CONSTITUTION:
1. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
2. [Kent]Generalities : LEAN people
3. [Kent]Mind : ANGER, irascibility
4. [Kent]Mind : CENSORIOUS, critical
5. [Kent]Mind : HURRY
6. [Kent]Mind : IMPATIENCE
7. [Kent]Mind : SUSPICIOUS
8. [Kent]Mind : QUARRELSOME

Sulph.(24/9), Lyc.(20/9), Ars.(17/7), Nux-v.(17/7), Bry. (16/8), Nat-m.(16/7), Lach.(15/8), Acon.(14/7), Aur.(14/7),

B.RESPIRATORY:
1. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
2. [Kent]Expectoration : TASTE : Salty
3. [Kent]Expectoration : GRAYISH
4. [Kent]Expectoration : VISCID
5. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC
6. [Kent]Respiration : WHISTLING
7. [Kent]Respiration : ASTHMATIC : Eating : Amel

Ambr.(15/7), Ars.(15/6), Lyc.(11/5), Phos.(11/5), Stann. (11/5), Carb-v.(10/5), Calc.(9/5), Chin.(9/5), Puls.(9/3),

C. RECTUM:
1. [Kent]Rectum : URGING, desire : Eating, after
2. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION
3. [Kent]Rectum : MOISTURE
4. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : External
5. [Kent]Rectum : LUMP, sensation of
6. [Kent]Rectum : ITCHING
7. [Kent]Rectum : CONSTIPATION : Old people
8. [Kent]Rectum : FISTULA
9. [Kent]Rectum : FLATUS : Loud
10. [Kent]Rectum : HAEMORRHOIDS : Cold amel.

Aloe.(21/10), Caust.(19/7), Lach.(18/8), Sulph.(18/8), Phos.(16/8), Sep.(15/6), Sil.(15/6), Nit-ac.(14/5), Calc. (13/5),

D. SKIN:
1. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Night
2. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Eruption, without
3. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Scratching : Agg
4. [Kent]Skin : ITCHING : Warm : In bed, on becoming

Sulph.(11/4), Mez.(9/4), Alum.(7/3), Ars.(6/2), Dol.(6/3), Led.(6/3), Merc.(6/4), Puls.(6/3), Anac.(5/2).

SULPH, ALOES and AMBRA were prescribed. In 30 potency, one dose each daily for three months.
Occasional doses of ARS 30 also was used during aggravated states of asthmatic attacks. Cure was total.

‘MULTIPLE-DRUG PRESCRIPTION’ CASE- II:

A 48 yr old obese woman with chronic headache, pain in joints, and warts on various parts. Symptoms were collected and following rubrics selected using Similimum Ultra Software:1.

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses : During
2. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : After : Amel.
3. [Kent]Stomach : NAUSEA : Headache, during:
4. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Cold applications amel.
5. [Kent]Mind : IRRITABILITY : Headache, during
6. [Kent]Genitalia – Female : MENOPAUSE
7. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
8. [Kent]Mind : ANXIETY
9. [Kent]Generalities : OBESITY
10. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN : Joints
11. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN : Cold : Applied amel.
12. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN : Joints : Walking : After
13. [Kent]Skin : WARTS
14. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Smooth
15. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Soft
16. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general
17. [Kent]Extremities-II(PAIN) : PAIN

I decided to use multiple repertorization method in this case. Rubrics were divided into four groups: CONSTITUTION, HEADACHE, JOINT PAINS and WARTS, and repertorized separately:

A. Constitution:
1. [Kent]Genitalia – Female : MENOPAUSE
2. [Kent]Generalities : HOT REMEDIES (Gibson Miller’s)
3. [Kent]Mind : ANXIETY
4. [Kent]Generalities : OBESITY
5. Stomach : DESIRES : Salt things

Arg-n.(10/4), Sulph.(12/5), Puls.(9/4), Calc.(9/4), Verat. (9/4), Con.(8/4), Graph.(8/3), Lach.(8/4), Nat-m.(8/3),

B. Headache:
1. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses : During
2. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : After : Amel.
3. [Kent]Stomach : NAUSEA : Headache, during:
4. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Cold applications amel.
5. [Kent]Mind : IRRITABILITY : Headache, during
6. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general

Phos.(14/6), Glon.(12/5), Nat-m.(11/5), Ars.(10/5), Bell. (10/5), Bry.(10/5), Lach.(10/5), Puls.(10/5), Sep.(10/4)

C. Joint pains:
1. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN
2.. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN : Joints
3.. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN : Cold : Applied amel.
4.. [Kent]Extremities : PAIN : Joints : Walking : After

Led.(10/4), Bry.(9/3), Puls.(9/3), Colch.(8/3), Guai.(8/4), Arn.(7/3), Kalm.(7/3), Nux-v.(7/3), Phyt.(7/3),

D. Warts:
1. [Kent]Skin : WARTS
2. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Smooth
3. [Kent]Skin : WARTS : Soft

Dulc.(9/3), Ant-c.(5/2), Calc.(5/2), Caust.(5/2), Thuj.(5/2), Sep.(4/2), Bar-c.(3/1), Bell.(3/1), Calc-s.(3/1).

SULPHUR, PHOS, LEDUM and DULCAMERA were given in 30c potencies. one dose each daily. Headache cured first, then joint pains relieved, and warts disappeared by three months. Cure was complete.

—————————————————————————————————

Homeopathy cannot advance further as a medical science without accepting MIT concepts as an integral part of its theoretical and practical framework, because it is the most perfect, rational and scientific explanation for homeopathy.

MIT is not ‘just another’ brand or school, competing for appropriating a share in the homeopathic market, already saturated with and spoiled by various commercial brands and schools. MIT is only a scientific explanation of homeopathy. An advanced phase in the historical evolution of homeopathy. A new approach. A new perspective. Nothing else.

Vested interests and prejudices of influential people may create hurdles and delay its universal acceptance for some time, but it is inevitable that it should be accepted. MIT will decide the future course of homeopathy. Wait and see.

————————————————————————————————-

CASE TAKING and PRESCRIBING become very simple, fast and perfect if you are doing it by ‘Simultaneous Case taking and Repertorization’ (SCR METHOD), using Similimum Ultra- Homeopathic Software:

CASE TAKING is the most important step that decides the final outcome of a homeopath’s clinical work. It is said: “a well taken case is half way to cure”. Classical methods of case taking are much time consuming, and involves much writing or typing. Similimum Ultra Software introduces novel tools and methods of case taking, over and above classical methods.

‘Search-and-add Rubric While You Talk’ is a very simple and efficient way of case recording, especially for busy practitioners, who have no time and inclination to type down complete case history, but desires a full case taking. Typing work is very nominal in this method. Symptoms are recorded not in patients own words, but as exact repertorial rubrics. Much time and labor is saved, without compromising quality and accuracy of outcome.

To record cases using this method, open ‘Search Repertory’ tool from ‘Case Record’ window. Select the preferred Repertory from drop-down list. Simultaneous with interrogation of the patient, type down one or more key words that are expected to be part of the repertorial rubric appropriate for the symptom the patient is elaborating. Click ‘Go’ or press ‘Enter’. A list of all rubrics from all chapters of the selected repertory, containing the selected key words will be displayed instantly. Scrolling through this rubric list, select the appropriate rubric for your symptom and click ‘Add to Basket’. Repeat this process for all the important symptoms described by the patient. After case taking is over, click “Rubric Basket’ icon above the ‘symptoms’ field to open the ‘Rubric Basket’. A complete list of rubrics already added, along with their drug lists are displayed in the ‘rubric basket’. You can ‘delete’ unwanted rubrics from here. Then click “ Add to Case record’ . All the rubrics are instantly transferred to ‘symptoms’ panel of Case Record.

Case Taking is now complete! You have not even bothered about opening your Repertories, and looking for chapters and Rubrics!

Now you can open the RUBRIC BASKET, and find a remedy using QUICKPICK tool provided there.

QUICK PICK is a very innovative expert tool to find similimum instantly by elimination method, during busy clinical practice

After selecting and adding all the relevant rubrics from the REPERTORY into the RUBRIC BASKET simultaneous with talking to the patient, click ‘QUICKPICK’ button from ‘rubric basket’ or ‘case record’ window. A small QUICK PICK window pops-up.

All the rubrics we had added to the rubric basket are appear listed in the upper panel with of the new window, with a check box against each rubric. Tick the most important or ELIMINATING rubric first. List of drugs covered by that particular rubric is now seen displayed in the lower panel of the QUICK PICK window. Then select the second eliminating symptom. Now, only the drugs covered by both SELECTED rubrics are displayed. In this way, eliminate systematically, until we reach a single drug , covered by all the rubrics used for ELIMINATION. This drug will be the similimum for the case. Utmost care should be employed in the selection of eliminating rubrics and their sequences, to ensure correct output. Never do it mechanically.

When elimination has given a satisfactory output, click ‘add to reference tray’ button. The result of quick pick method will be saved into the reference tray attached to the CASE RECORD of the particular patient.

Once you master this QUICK PICK technique of repertorization, you will realize what a nice experience it is to work up on cases using SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE

———————————————————————————————–

‘Simultaneous Case Taking and Repertorizing’- A Simple Method Of Finding Perfect Similimum (SCR METHOD):

By performing CASE TAKING and REPERTORIZATION simultaneously, we can save much time, same time aking very accurate prescriptions. Innovative tools and
platforms provided in my SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE is very helpful in this regard.

I am reporting a case of pre-menstrual headache in a 35 yr old lady, cured by a drug selected using only ‘particular modalities’. I worked out the case and
reached similimum with in 5 minutes using Similimum Ultra Software.

The lady first told me she is having violent headache before ever menses. Using key-words ‘headache’, ‘menses’ and ‘before’, I instantly located following rubric
and added to the RUBRIC BASKET of my software:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses :Before: – Acon., Agn., Alum., Am-c., Arg-n., Ars., Asar., Bell., Bor., Bov., Brom., Bry., Bufo., Calc., Calc-p., Calc-s., Carb-an., Carb-v., Caust., Cimic., Cinnb., Cupr., Ferr., rr-ar., Ferr-i., Gels., Glon., Graph., Hep., Hyper., Iod., Kali-p., Kreos., Lac-c., Lac-d., Lach., Laur., Lil-t., Lyc., Manc., Meli., Merc., Nat-a., Nat-c., Nat-m., Nit-ac., Nux-m., Nux-v., Ol-an., Petr., Phos., Plat., Puls., Sep., Sil., Stann., Sulph., Thuj., Verat., Vib., Xan., Zinc.

Next, she said she had vomiting along with this menstrual headache. Using key words ‘headache’, and ‘vomit’, I located and added this rubric:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting: – Ars., Asar., Bar-m., Con., Eug., Ferr-p., Glon., Iris., Lach., Lyc., Mez., Nux-v., Phyt., Sec., Sep., Verat.

Then I asked her, are there any factors that gave any relief to this headache. She told, she would get some relief if she lie in a dark room and get some sleep. I used
key words ‘headache’ ‘sleep’ and ‘amel’, and got this rubric, and added it:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : Amel.: – Acon., Bad., Glon., Hell., Ign., Pall., Sep., Sil.

Then I used ‘head ache’ and ‘dark’ as key words, and located this rubric, added it to the RUBRIC BASKET:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Lying : In a dark room : Amel.:- Acon., Bell., Brom., Bry., Lac-d., Podo., Sang., Sep., Sil.

At this stage, I used QUICK PICK tool in my software to see which are the drugs that cover these FOUR particular symptoms. Only SEPIA was there!

Case taking, repertorization and prescribing were over by FIVE MINUTES!

Her facial expressions, body structure, way of talking, everything reminded me she is SEPIA. I decided to try SEPIA without further workout. SEPIA 30 was given TDS
during headache, followed by BDS until next menstrual period. Headache never recurred. This case taught me how simple it is to make a homeopathic prescription and get a nice cure.

————————————————————————————————-

Most simple and perfect method of case taking is ‘Simultaneous Case taking and Repertorization’ (SCR METHOD) proposed by SImilimum Ultra Software. It saves much time, and produces best results. By the time case taking is over, your prescription will be ready. You can work out even a very complex case within a few minutes by this method.

—————————————————————————————

Homeopathic CASE FOLLOW UP consists of watching for RESIDUAL SYMPTOMS and EMERGING SYMPTOMS, and re-adjusting prescriptions as indicated by them.

After making a homeopathic prescription, whether it be ‘single’ or ‘multiple’, and ensuring that the doses are repeated in optimum frequencies, the physician should see the patient at reasonable intervals and carefully watch how the case is progressing.

Periodically watch for ‘residual’ symptoms that do not subside, as well as newly ’emerging’ symptoms.

If a particular ‘group of symptoms’ remain in spite of frequent repetitions of doses for a reasonable period, that means our prescription failed to provide the particular ‘molecular imprints’ required to remove the molecular inhibitions underlying that particular ‘group of symptoms’. Repertorise using those ‘residual’ symptoms, find a similimum for them, and add it to the original prescription.

If new symptoms ’emerge’, and they are not subsiding within a reasonable period, that means some ‘hidden’ molecular inhibitions not covered by the original prescription has come to the forefront during the removal of some other molecular errors. Find a new similimum for these newly emerged symptoms and add it to the original prescription.

We will have to continue this constant watch for ‘residual’ symptoms and ’emerging’ symptoms and adjust prescriptions all through the whole course of treatment, in order to ensure a TOTAL CURE.

—————————————————————————————

Why our homeopathic ‘theoreticians’ do not realize how irrational and ridiculous it is to claim that homeopathic medicines contain a ‘spirit-like force’, independent of any material existence and properties?

An ‘immaterial dynamic force’ that could be ‘carried’ in glass vials, transferred from bottles to bottles, dissolved in water and alcohol, adsorbed on to sugar pills, and acting ‘dynamically’ upon the ‘vital force’ when applied on tongue? If it is ‘immaterial’ and ‘spirit-like’, how it is preserved in glass vials, without escaping through the ‘material’ glass walls of the bottles?

Do you think we can engage a science-conscious elite community of 21st century by talking these nonsense theories and pretending to be ‘ultra-scientific’?

Do you think you can convince these foolish ‘theories’ to anybody who knows at least some high school level science lessons?

——————————————————————————–

Not a single day passes for me without posting at least one article explaining my concept of ‘Molecular Imprints Therapeutics (MIT)’ and exploring its implications upon homeopathy.

Without even reading what I have laboriously written about homeopathy, or trying to understand anything about the ideas I am talking about, some friends jump in and challenge me to “prove” MIT, and attack me as if I had done something very bad to homeopathy!

While asking me to prove MIT, at least you have to ensure that you have understood what is MIT, so that you can know what are the exact points to be ‘proved’ in it.

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and bio-molecular mechanism of disease and cure?

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?

My request to those who ask for ‘proof for MIT concepts’ is, kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you.

Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.

————————————————————————————

In ‘Chronic Diseases : Para 139′ Hahnemann says:

“Sucklings never receive medicine; the mother or wet-nurse receives the remedy instead, and through their milk it acts on the child very quickly, mildly and beneficially”.

There are many homeopaths who use this method for treating infants, and they say it works.

If similimum selected for a patient (infant) could be administerd to another healthy individual (nurse), and if the drug will act on the patient through the breast milk fed by the nurse, it raises many questions regarding basic assumptins of homeopathy.

I wonder will it act if we collect the breast milk of the nurse after administering the drug, and then bottle feeding it to the infant. Will it produce a therapeutic effect?

If potentized drugs could be delivered through breast milk of a nurse, that means the ‘active principles’ of potentized drugs consist of SOMETHING ‘material’, that could travel to the milk through blood circulation of the nurse. It disproves our belief that potentized drugs act through ‘nerves’, as there are no nerve cells present in blood or breast milk.

What if we collect the blood of the nurse after medication and transfuse it into the infant? It should work, as the active principles of medicines will be present in blood, if it has to be transferred to the breast milk.

In fact, hahnemann’s advice to administer similimum to the infant through breast milk of nurse seems to undermine some of our beliefs which are considered to be BASIC principles of homeopathy.

THIS OBSERVATION OF HAHNEMANN THAT DRUGS GIVEN TO THE NURSE WILL TRAVEL TO THE INFANT THROUGH BREAST MILK OBVIOUSLY DISPROVES THE ‘DYNAMIC DRUG ENERGY’ THEORY!

Kindly think over the points I raised, and comment on it…

———————————————————————————

Kindly read carefully what hahnemann said in Organon : Aphorism 204(Sixth Edition):

“If we deduct all chronic affections, ailments and diseases that depend on a persistent unhealthy mode of living, as also those innumerable medicinal maladies caused by …the irrational,… persistent, harassing and pernicious treatment of diseases often only of trivial character by physicians of the old school, most the remainder of chronic diseases result from the development of these three chronic miasms, internal syphilis, internal sycosis, but chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”.

What does this statement of hahnemann show?

This statement shows beyond any doubt that hahneman did not consider ALL chronic diseases as ‘miasmatic’, as our respected ‘interpreters’ of the master have been teaching us all through these years.

According to the above statement, master says that ‘all chronic affections, ailments and diseases’ ‘that depend on persistent unhealthy mode of living’ are NOT MIASMATIC!

He also says that “those innumerable medicinal maladies caused by …the irrational,… persistent, harassing and pernicious treatment of diseases often only of trivial character by physicians of the old school” are NOT MIASMATIC!

He asks to “deduct” all the diseases belonging to above categories, and says that “most the remainder of chronic diseases result from the development of these three chronic miasms, internal syphilis, internal sycosis, but chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”. Only “most of the remainder” of diseases- please note.

Even among these “remainder of diseases”, “chiefly and in infinitely greater proportion, internal psora”. PSORA underlies “infinitely greater proportion” of even this “remainder” of chronic diseases- means, syphilis and sycosis plays a role in “infinitely smaller proportion” of the miasmatic diseases.

As per this definition of master, most of the ‘chronic affections’ originating from occupational, environmental, nutritional, drug-induced, faulty life styles and such others that belong to the class of ‘persistent unhealthy mode of living’ and ‘innumerable medicinal maladies” are outside the purview of MIASMATIC ANALYSIS.

Our respected ‘experts’ of ‘miasmatic analysis’ who confuse our homeopaths by theorizing that all ‘constitutions’ and CHRONIC DISEASES are MIASMATIC, and even all acute diseases are ‘acute exacerbation’ of chronic miasms, may kindly note this aphorism.

Miasm of PSORA will be present only in persons who had a history o INFECTION OF ITCH in his life. Miasm of SYPHILIS will be present only in persons who had a history of INFECTION OF SYPHILIS in his life. Miasm of SYCOSIS will be present only in persons who had a history of INFECTION OF GONORROEA or HPV in his life. According to hahnemann, there is no miasm unrelated with an infectious disease.

———————————————————————————

Homeopathy has been consistently attacked for last 250 years since its inception, but in spite of all these malicious attacks, homeopathy is thriving in India as a major recognized branch of public health care system.

Hope you would know India is home to around 285,000 registered homeopaths, 186 prestigious homeopathic colleges imparting UG and PG courses, over 6000 government homeopathic dispensaries and about 250 government hospitals. More than 15000 student come out of these colleges every year with BHMS degree, after completing a rigorous five and half year course of study and internship, for which they got admission by scoring top rankings in entrance examinations after 12 years of schooling in science streams. Curriculum of BHMS course constitutes Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Practice of Medicine and all subjects of modern health care knowledge. There is a Central Council of Homeopathy under Government of India, constituted as per a n Central Act passed by Indian parliament, overseeing everything in the field of homeopathic education, research and practice in India.

Homeopathy is a very important wing of public health care system in inIndia. Homoeopathic wings are working in many allopathic hospitals and dispensaries, both government and private. Homoeopathic doctors provide treatment to millions of patients for different day to day illnesses in the public health care system. Even during sporadic and epidemic conditions, people tend to use homoeopathic drugs for prevention. Recently, the Indian Government successfully ran a national health campaign ‘Homeopathy for a Healthy Mother & a Happy Child’, which was based exclusively on homoeopathy. Also, private homeopathic practitioners are contributing a great deal in public health care through their private or charitable clinics.

Besides clinical research, there are fundamental, drug standardization, drug proving and clinical verification research going on, both at government and private levels. For example, the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy is conducting a lot of such research, either independently or in collaboration with other research institutes or individual researchers, under an extra-mural research scheme at the Dept of AYUSH, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare of the Indian Government. Other than that, almost all homoeopathic organizations and individuals are doing their bit toward research for the further validation of homoeopathy in today’s times of evidence-based medicine. The results have been encouraging, to say the least. In fact, over the years,Indiahas learnt better ways of conducting research from their international counterparts and the recent research has been carried out as per standardized, internationally recognized methods and are therefore more acceptable.

A few exemplary results from clinical studies include work on tubercular lymphadenitis, japanese encephalitis, etc. In addition, some administrative studies have been undertaken, like the ‘assessment of the cost effectiveness of homeopathic clinic in the cafeteria approach’ and ‘public-private partnerships in the provision of homeopathic services in the city of Delhi, where it was tried to analyze both the strengths and weaknesses of medical pluralism in India and have worked out some solutions for implementing medical pluralism more effectively in all parts of India.

These facts and figures are a clear reflection of the belief of the people ofIndiain the homeopathic system of medicine, which, in turn, is a result of the effectiveness of homeopathy in treating a wide range of illnesses, which has convinced the Indian masses over a period of time.

Men of science, who are expected to be more concerned about truth, you would have considered all these facts before publicly declaring ‘homeopathy is based on belief, a fake discipline like astrology’. Community pay much value and reverence to words a scientist speak out, and as such, he is expected to keep up that responsibility when declaring “homeopathy is fake”. He should have experimented himself, and done a little more home work about homeopathy, before echoing the malicious propaganda of ‘anti-homeopathy skeptics’.

I am sure, most scientists have nothing personally against homeopathy or homeopaths as such. They are talking their perceptions as a truthful scientist. As an individual respecting science, scientists and scientific methods, I would not blame them for making such a statements. I know they are not homeopaths- but only scientists. I understand, as a truthful scientists, as things stand now, they cannot say ‘homeopathy is scientific’, after seeing all these nonsense theories propagated by ‘homeopathic ‘masters’ the world over. I understand, nobody could so far even propose a scientifically viable hypothesis about how homeopathy works, a hypothesis that could be presented as a rightful candidate for verification using scientific methods. Actually, those ‘pseudo-scientific’ homeopathic theoreticians are doing the greatest harm to homeopathy than truthful scientists do.

Homeopaths as well as millions of patients visiting them know homeopathy works. That is their personal experience. Scientists should think more than twice before saying it is ‘mere belief’ and ‘fake’. If they had visited a few homeopathic clinics in the city around them, they would realize that all people visiting homeopaths are not much less knowledgeable or more ‘superstitious’ than them. Many respected members of scientific community use homeopathic medicines, knowing well that it is not ‘proven according to scientific methods’, but very much confident from experience that it is not ‘fake’ or ‘mere belief’. They experience it WORKING. If one had ever consulted a homeopath or taken a course of homeopathic medicine yourselves, he would not have made demeaning comment against homeopathy.

But the sad thing is that nobody knows how homeopathy works. To mask this ignorance, ‘intellectuals’ among homeopaths create fanciful theories. All these theories about homeopathy are utter nonsense- pure absurdity. Until homeopaths stop talking nonsense ‘ultra-scientific’ theories about homeopathy, we cannot expect a fair deal from scientific community. At least homeopaths should show the humility to say: “we know homeopathy works- that is our daily experience; but we do not know how it actually works; we need the help of scientific community to resolve this riddle”.

By saying ‘homeopathy is based on belief’, what did you actually mean? Do you mean it is based on ‘beliefs of practitioner’, or it is working on ‘beliefs of patients’?
Do you remember, when you declare homeopathy is a ‘fake discipline’, you are saying that the Act passed by Indian parliament is ‘fake’, Central council of homeopathy is ‘fake’ and those 186 homeopathic colleges in India are ‘fake’? You mean 285000 registered homeopaths, 6000 government dispensaries and hospitals are doing ‘fake’ medical practice that may ‘endanger’ human lives? According to you, BHMS and MD degrees awarded by Indian universities are all about ‘fake’ disciplines? Do you mean those millions of people thronging daily in homeopathic clinics and getting relief for their ailments are idiots attracted to ‘fake practitioners’ due to ‘belief’ only?

———————————————————————————–

If you are a BHMS holder, if you love homeopathy, if you really want to be a good homeopath, if you have no hesitation in accepting advice and guidance from me, if your ego is not concerned about my ‘credentials’ and ‘qualifications’, CONTACT ME. I will teach you how to become a successful homeopath within a very short time. I will help you to master the practical skills and produce results. I will help you in repertorizing your difficult cases and deciding prescriptions, if you want. I am ready to share my 44+years experience with you. We can do it through Facebook, WhatsApp, Phone Calls and various other means. Not for money, be sure. Already there are a lot of young homeopaths utilizing this service from me.

———————————————————————————-

If you have a BHMS degree, you can earn a decent living with homeopathy any where in this country. Be confident in yourself and in homeopathy. Set up a clinic at your home or a rented place nearby. Get a laptop, installed with a good homeopathic software. Learn how to use the software effectively. Learn how to take case effectively.

When the first patient comes, collect his symptoms caerefully, repertorize and prescribe similimum. Use only 30C potency. Do not hesitate to repeat frequently until the cure is complete. Patient will be cured. New patients will follow, even if slowly.

Do not worry about ‘suppression’, ‘medicinal aggravation’, drug relationship, potency selection, ‘single-multiple drug issue’ or such imaginary fears. Success will be yours.

Be careful not to spoil any case. If you find a case difficult for you, either refer it to a senior homeopath or advise the patient to consult a modern physician. Be conscious about your limitations and limitations of homeopathy.

Even if you could attract average TEN acute cases and TWO chronic cases a day, you can make around 25000-30000 per month. You will not have to work as an underpaid RMO or CCU assistant in an allopathy hospital. You will not have to fight for permission to practice allopathy any more.

———————————————————————————

Even if you got ‘bad quality’ education from your colleges, turning to allopathy is not the solution for that problem. At least, you have got a ‘bhms’ degree from your colleges. It is by itself a very valuable asset in your life. Standing firmly on that foundation, why cant you start learning homeopathy seriously at least NOW? You can learn homeopathy yourselves and become successful homeopaths in a very short period, if you decide to do so. Homeopathy is very simple to learn and practice, if you understand the MIT approach.

———————————————————————————

I have nothing personally against those homeopaths who practice allopathy or want to practice allopathy. I can understand the ground realities well. I have great sympathies for those young men whose lives have been spoiled by those who ‘rule’ our educational system. But I am worried more about the future of homeopathy. I cannot agree with anything that is ultimately going to ruin homeopathy. I love homeopathy more than any thing else. Sorry, my friends.

Volume XVII- Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy

What you call ‘spiritual experience’ are actually a certain class of phenomena related with the functions of central nervous system, which is a highly complex organized form of matter. All those phenomena are associated with the complex biochemical interactions of chemical molecules in the brain. There is no ‘spirit’ or ‘spiritual experience’ existing without a ‘material’ brain and the complex chemical processes happening there. All these are the subjects to be studied by SCIENCE, which is beyond any doubt ‘materialistic’.

————————————————————-

SCIENCE is all about the study of matter and material phenomena of this universe. I do not agree with the concept of ‘spiritual science’. If your idea is ‘spiritual’, it is not ‘science’.

If you think homeopathy is ‘spiritual science’, kindly discuss it some where else- not on my pages. I want to discuss homeopathy as a ‘materialistic science’, subject to the methods and paradigms of modern scientific knowledge system- as MEDICAL SCIENCE.

————————————————————————————-

To understand the MIT explanations regarding the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure, you should acquire a minimum knowledge of biochemistry, including the kinetics of protein chemistry, protein inhibitions and reactivation. Without this basic knowledge, everything I talk about MIT will fly over your head!

———————————————————————————-

‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTS’ is the keyword in the scientific understanding of homeopathy. Any ‘theory’ of homeopathy that is not based on the concept of ‘molecular imprints’ cannot be considered scientific, and cannot explain the ‘biological mechanism’ of homeopathic cure in a way fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system.

———————————————————————————

To be realistic in their approach to homeopathy, scientists, homeopaths as well as general public should accept the following points:

1. Homeopathy really works.

2. Nobody so far knows how homeopathy works.

3. All existing ‘theories’ about homeopathy so far propagated by homeopaths are unscientific and irrational.

4. Scientists should rationally deal with the questions ‘does homeopathy work’ and ‘how homeopathy works’ as two separate issues, and search for scientific answers without any prejudice.

———————————————————————————

Any talk about “scientific homeopathy” is futile, if it does not answer the following fundamental questions:

A. ‘What are the active principles of potentized drugs’?

B. ‘What is the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure involved in similia similibus curentur’?

To be scientifically acceptable, the answers provided should be fitting to the existing scientific knowledge system regarding the kinetics of bio-molecular interactions as envisaged by modern biochemistry and pharmacodynamics.

———————————————————————————-

Homeopathy transforms the DISEASE-PRODUCING properties of substances into DISEASE-CURING properties through an innovative process known as POTENTIZATION.

Substances produce diseases when their constituent chemical molecules bind to the biological molecules in the living organism and produce molecular inhibitions that results in pathological changes in the bio-molecular vital processes.

During potentization, disease-producing substances are converted into disease-curing substances through a process of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING. Molecular imprints act by a molecular mechanism just reverse to that of their original molecules, and can thus remove the molecular inhibitions caused by pathological molecules that are similar to the original substance used for molecular imprinting.

This MIT explanation fits well to the existing scientific knowledge regarding molecular kinetics of pathology and pharmacodynamics.

———————————————————————————–

Many homeopaths seem to believe that stories of CURED CASES reported by physicians or patients are enough for scientific validation of homeopathy. They should understand, scientific method never accept anecdotes as scientific proof.

Any occult practitioner, any astrologer, any voodoo practitioner, any faith healer, any charlatan will have a lot of anecdotes and ‘live witnesses’ to support his claims. That will not make those claims scientifically valid.

HOMEOPATHY SHOULD BE PROVED BY SCIENTIFIC METHOD- NOT ANECDOTES.

———————————————————————————

Most unscientific and absurd concepts and notions still dominate the mindset of many who ‘represent’ homeopathy on international platforms, and are known to be “great advocates” of homeopathy.

They raise questions about the ‘scientificness’ of modern science, and engage in ‘scholarly’ discourses regarding the futility of science and scientific method!

All sorts of ‘pseudoscientific’, ‘spiritualistic’, ‘energy medicine’ theories are propagated, which undermine all the scientific credentials of homeopathy.

They mix up homeopathy with all those nonsense ‘treatments’ practiced under CAM umbrella. DISTANCE HEALING, HAIR TRANSMISSION, PC RESONANCE REMEDIES, DREAM PROVING, MEDITATION PROVING, REFLEXOLOGY, DOWSING, RADIONICS…. list of occult practiced and propagated in the label of homeopathy is really mind blogging.

And our friends declare that all these people belong to ‘homeopathic community’, as they are “institutionally qualified homeopaths”!!

———————————————————————————

There are a lot of controversial topics in homeopathy. We cannot avoid discussing them. Anybody thinking these “controversial talks” are unnecessay, can conveniently leave my page. I will never tag you, or post my views on your page.

———————————————————————————

Molecular explanation of the phenomenon known as ‘water memory’:

Search into the mysteries of homeopathic potentization inevitably leads us to the study of the wonderful physical and chemical properties of water and alcohol, which constitute the medium used to prepare the ultra dilute preparations. Water is the the most common and abundant mineral on earth. We may begin our discussion by looking into the wealth of information already collected by modern material sciences on this subject.

‘Molecular memory of water’ is a rarely understood phenomenon, and is a subject of much controversies and speculations in the world of science. Even now, scientists differ much in their opinion regarding this phenomenon. Final outcome of these controversies will have great concern and significance in the realm of homoeopathy. Let us examine some details of the nature and essence of this controversial phenomenon.

Until recently, we knew precious little about various miraculous properties of water, though we find it in plenty around us, and utilize freely in our everyday life. Even the highly equipped scientific community has begun to turn its serious attention to the minute level study of water only in recent times. The secrets being revealed in these studies are really amazing, and may help us in solving the mysteries haunting homeopathic potentization.

Around seventy percent of the surface of earth is covered with water. 45-70% of human body mass consist of water. This ratio slightly changes with age, and it may be said that human body becomes more and more dry with aging. 30-40 % of water contained in our body is seen in the intra-cellular fluid,12-16% as extra-cellular , and 5 % in blood plasma. 2% of water is in lymph, and 1-3% in different body cavities. This wide spread presence of water in the living body indicates the paramount importance of its role in various biological processes. About 2 litters of water enters our body from outside, along with food every day. A small quantity of water is produced in the body itself as a by-product of metabolism.

As far as we know, life cannot exist without water. It is considered that the phenomenon of life originated on this earth only because of the presence of water. All the biochemical processes in the organism take place with the involvement of water. In the absence of water, essential biological molecules such as proteins and DNA undergo structural changes, and become inactivated. Water is the essential condition of existence of life. Liquid water has importance as a solvent, a solute, a reactant and a biomolecule, structuring proteins, nucleic acids and cells and controlling our consciousness. The complex three dimensional formations of protein molecules, which are much important in their biological functioning, is due to the hydration properties of water.

Why this simple hydrogen oxide(H2O), which is formed by the union of two hydrogen atoms and a single oxygen atom happen to play such a crucial role in the origin and existence of life? What are the factors that make water distinct from other similar chemical compounds such as hydrogen sulphide?

The answers to this question lies in the wonderful physico–chemical properties of water, arising from its peculiar super-molecular structure. Water is a solvent with higher polarity than similar liquids. H–O–H have bond angle of 105 degrees. That means, water molecule is a dipole. Because of this peculiarity, water molecules can exist like a super-molecular network by forming hydrogen bonds between themselves. A minimum number of five water molecules will be contained in this network. Such five-molecule formations are called ‘pentamers’. Most of the wonderful properties of water arise from this capacity of peculiar hydrogen bonding and supra-molecular formations.

Water molecules are normally considered to be in a state of random movement in their liquid form. But recent studies have shown that water molecules move not as individual molecules, but as supramolecular clusters. We all know that water exists as ice crystals in its solid form. But it has been recently observed that in its short range structure, water exist as nanocrystals even in its liquid form. We know, water formed by melting of ice behaves exactly as if in a state of liquid crystals. The lattice structure which is formed through hydration bonds is responsible for this phenomenon.

A lot of research work is recently undertaken all over the world regarding the phenomenon of peculiar supra-molecular formations of water. The uncommon physico– chemical properties of water are the result of this poly-molecular structure at supra-molecular level. Water becomes an essential material for the existence of life on earth, by its strange properties such as high polarity, anomalous expansion, anomalous boiling and melting points, high viscosity, surface tension, thermal storage capacity, high specific heat, hydration properties etc.

Water molecules(H2O) are symmetric (point group C2ν), with two mirror planes of symmetry and a 2-fold rotation axis. The hydrogen atoms in this molecule may possess parallel or anti-parallel nuclear spin. The water molecule consists of two light hydrogen atoms(H) and a relatively heavy oxygen atom(O). The approximately 16-fold difference in mass between hydrogen and oxygen gives ease of rotation, and the significant relative movements of the hydrogen nuclei, which are in constant and significant relative movement.

Although not often perceived as such, water is a very reactive molecule at a high concentration. This reactivity of water molecules, however, is greatly moderated at ambient temperatures due to the extensive hydrogen bonding between them. Water molecule possess a strongly nucleophilic oxygen atom that enables it for many of its biological functions, as well as ionizing to produce reactive hydrogen and hydroxide ions. Reduction of the hydrogen bonding at high temperatures, or due to electromagnetic fields, results in greater reactivity of the water molecules. ‘Magnetized’ water will be more reactive, with strange properties. Much experienced phenomenon of loss of medicinal properties of homeopathic potencies, when subjected to influence of magnetic fields and electrical fields could be well explained now. This also gives an indication to the role of hydrogen bonding in potentization.

As liquid water is so common-place in our everyday lives, it is often regarded as a ‘normal’ liquid. In reality, water is most ‘abnormal’ as a liquid, behaving as a quite different material at low temperatures compared to that when it is hot. It has often been stated that life depends on these anomalous properties of water. In particular, the high cohesion between molecules gives it a high freezing and melting point, such that we and our planet exist bathed in liquid water even at high ambient temperatures. In the absence of hydrogen bonding, all water on earth would have vaporized even at very low temperatures. The large heat capacity, high thermal conductivity and high water content in organisms contribute to thermal regulation and prevent local temperature fluctuations, thus allowing us to more easily control our body temperature. The high latent heat of evaporation gives resistance to dehydration and considerable evaporative cooling. Water is an excellent solvent due to its polarity, high dielectric constant and small size, particularly for polar and ionic compounds and salts. It has unique hydration properties towards biological macromolecules (particularly proteins and nucleic acids) that determine their three-dimensional structures, and hence their functions, in solution. This hydration forms gels that can reversibly undergo the gel-sol phase transitions that underlie many cellular mechanisms. Water ionize and allows easy proton exchange between molecules, so contributing to the richness of the ionic interactions in biology.

Essentially, ‘hydrogen bonding’ is a special type of dipole force. It is a force of attraction formed between partially charged atoms being part of different molecules. The reason for this bonding is the partial positive charge attained by hydrogen. Hydrogen is capable of establishing similar bonds with the atoms of nitrogen, fluorine and oxygen. That is to say that the basis of hydrogen bonding is the attraction between one hydrogen atom which is part of a molecule which is attached to oxygen or nitrogen and oxygen or nitrogen which remains part of another molecule. This force is less powerful than the covalent bonds which keeps the atoms inside molecule bound together. But it may be strange that these less powerful bonds are responsible for the wonderful physico–chemical properties and biological relevance of water.

In the ordinary liquid state, in spite of 80% of the electrons being engaged in bonding, the three atoms in water do not stay together, as the hydrogen atoms are constantly exchanged between water molecules due to protonation/deprotonation processes. Both acids and bases catalyze this exchange and even when at its slowest(at pH 7), the average time for the atoms in an H2O molecule to stay together is only about a millisecond. As this brief period is, however, much longer than the timescales encountered during investigations into water’s hydrogen bonding or hydration properties, water is usually treated as a permanent structure. But when water exist in its crystalline form, hydrogen atoms become more stable.

The presence of ethyl alcohol in water is considered as a factor reducing the rate of protonation/deprotonation processes, thereby enhancing the stability of hydration shells. Importance of using water-ethanol mixture for homeopathic potentization is self-explained here.

It has been already stated that hydrogen bond strength can also be affected by electromagnetic and magnetic effects.

Any factors, such as polarization, that reduces the hydrogen bond length, is expected to increase its covalency. There is still some dispute over the size of this co-valency, however any co-valency will increase the network stability relative to purely electrostatic effects. As hydrogen bond strength depends almost linearly on its length (shorter length giving stronger hydrogen bonding), it also depends almost linearly (outside extreme values) on the temperature and pressure .

It has to be verified whether the violent succussion and rotatory motion done during potentization procedure any how plays a role in polarization of molecules, thereby reducing the hydrogen bond lengths, and increasing the stability of hydration shells formed.

Hydrogen bonded chains (that is, O-H····O-H····O) are cooperative; the breakage of the first bond is the hardest, then the next one is weakened, and so on (see the cyclic water pentamer). Thus unzipping may occur with complex macromolecules held together by hydrogen bonding, for example, nucleic acids. Such co-operativity is a fundamental property of liquid water where hydrogen bonds are up to 250% stronger than the single hydrogen bond in the dimer . A strong base at the end of a chain may strengthen the bonding further.

At this stage we have to understand a few facts about Ethyl Alcohol(CH3- CH2 – OH ). The molecules of alcohol also have the dipole structure as water molecules. It is possible for them to establish mutual connection through hydrogen bonding. The molecular weight of alcohol molecule is 46. The molecular weight of water(H2O) is 18. That means that the number of water molecules contained in 18 gram of water and the number of alcohol molecules contained in 46 gram of ethyl alcohol are equal. When alcohol and water are thoroughly mixed alcohol molecules forms a network with water molecules through hydrogen bonds, The mobility of water molecules is restricted by the bonds established with alcohol molecules. Hence, hydration shells formed in alcohol–water mixture are comparatively more stable. The count of alcohol molecules and the count of water molecules contained in their mixture in 73:27 ratio will be equal. (73% w/w. alcohol and 27% w/w water) This mixture is known as (40 power spirit).

Medium used for homoeopathic potentization is a mixture containing 87% w/w of alcohol and 13% w/w of water. In this ratio, the number of alcohol molecules will be about more than that of of water molecules. Rectified spirit is an azeotrope containing 95% alcohol and 5%water. Such a ratio will be very suitable for the production of stable hydration shells. More over, the presence of ethyl alcohol in water is considered as a factor reducing the rate of protonation/deprotonation processes, thereby enhancing the stability of hydration shells. This may further explain the importance of water-ethyl alcohol mixture being used as the medium of homoeopathic potentization.

We know that water is a good solvent. Let us see what happens when foreign molecules are made to dissolve in water. If a foreign molecule, ion, or colloidal particle happens to enter the matrix of 3-dimensional dynamic network of water molecules, they are entrapped inside this network. Water molecules arrange themselves around the intruder or ‘guest’ in a peculiar way by the formation hydrogen bonds. These formations of water molecules around the ‘guest’ molecules are known as hydration shells.

These hydration shells exist in a dynamic state, and are more or less unstable. The foreign molecules dissolved in water exist in a state of being entrapped inside these hydration shells as ‘guests’. This phenomenon can be seen both in ionic solutions and colloidal solutions. Obviously, hydration shells assume an internal spacial arrangement exactly fitting to the 3-dimensional spacial configuration of the foreign molecule entrapped in them.

If we could devise some technique to remove the entrapped ‘guest’ molecules from these hydration shells, without disturbing the hydrogen bonds between the constituent water molecules, these hydration shells can still retain the molecular memory of the molecular configurations of the removed ‘guest’ molecules. This rarely studied phenomenon is known as ‘molecular memory of water’.

Actual mechanism and forces underlying this phenomenon has to be investigated minutely by physical scientists. Minute changes occurring in the electron clouds of atoms of water molecules during the formation of hydration shells may be one factor responsible for this phenomenon. It has been well proven that these hydration shells later show a peculiar capability to differentially recognize the original ‘guest’ molecules which were responsible for their formation. This may be due to the existence of some imprinted memory of those ‘guest’ molecules retained in the hydration shells.

This imprinting of memory may be compared to formation of finger prints. As in the case of finger prints, configuration of these molecular imprints also will be a complementary negative of ‘guest’ molecules. These empty hydration shells, or supra-molecular formations of water subjected to molecular imprinting, may be called ‘hydrosomes’, which means, minute ‘nano-cavities of water’. Homeopathic process of potentization is essentially a crude method of preparing hydrosomes, prepared by using various drug molecules as ‘guests’.

It should be specifically noted that the medium used for homeopathic potentisation is not pure water, but it is mixed with ethyl alcohol in a particular ratio. It may be inferred that the presence of comparatively heavy ethyl alcohol molecules in this mixture may be contributing to stabilization of ‘hydrosomes’, preventing their easy dissociation. The convergent forces of rotational movements to which the mixture is subjected as part of potentization, may also be a contributing factor in stabilizing the empty hydration shells by polarization and subsequent reduction of hydrogen bond lengths..

This peculiar configuration of hydrosomes are destroyed only when their energy level of water molecules are disturbed by the effect of heat, electricity, magnetism and other electro magnetic radiations. As stated earlier the hydration shells formed in pure water are comparatively unstable. Here lies the importance of the fact that homeopathic potencies are made using alcohol- water mixture.

————————————————————————————

Molecular Imprinting is not my original idea or invention. My contribution in this concept is actually very limited, by way of trying to explain homeopathic potentization as a bio-friendly version of already existing Molecular Imprinting In Polymers

The technique of molecular imprinting in polymers allows for the preparation of synthetic polymers with specific binding sites for a target molecule. This can be achieved if the target is present during the polymerization process,thus acting as a molecular template. Monomers carrying certain functional groups are arranged around the template through either non-covalent or covalent interactions. Following polymerization with a high degree of cross-linking, the functional groups become fixed in defined positions by the polymer network. Subsequent removal of the template by solvent extraction or chemical cleavage leaves cavities that are complementary to the template in terms of size, shape and arrangement of the functional groups. These highly specific receptor sites are capable of rebinding the target molecule with high specificity, sometimes comparable to that of antibodies. Molecular imprinted polymers have therefore been named “antibody mimics”. It has been shown that they can be substituted for biological receptors in certain formats of immunoassays and biosensors. They are characterized by high stability.

Target molecules for which we want to prepare ‘artificial binding sites’ or ‘molecular imprints’, which are normally large complex protein molecules, are identified and selected as ‘template molecules. These template molecules are added to a mixture of ‘monomers’ and ‘activators’ and thoroughly mixed. This mixture is allowed to undergo a process of ‘self assembling’ and ‘polymerization’, which is actually a ‘guest-host’ molecular complex, in which the template molecules are trapped in a hardened polymer matrix which act as ‘host’. This ‘host-guest’ complex is pulverized, and subjected to a process of ‘solvent extraction’, by which soluble template molecules are remove from insoluble polymer matrix. The resultant preparation consists of polymer matrix carrying empty spaces or ‘cavities’ where the template molecules were originally trapped. These cavities are called ‘molecular imprints’, which actually mimic the spacial configuration of template molecules. Due to this complementary configuration, these ‘molecular imprints’ exhibit a special affinity towards original template molecules, and act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for them.

Since ‘molecular imprinted polymers’ prepared by this process are synthetic polymers, they cannot be used as drugs. Homeopathy uses water-ethyl alcohol mixture as ‘host’ in place of polymers, and drug molecules as ‘templates’ or ‘guests’ for preparing molecular imprints that could be used as drugs. Since molecular imprints prepared by this process consist of only water and ethyl alcohol molecules, they could be safely used as therapeutic agents.

———————————————————————————

The word ‘drug potency’ and ‘drug potentization’ is associated with the concept of ‘dynamic drug energy’. As per this view, every drug substance has its ‘inherent qualities’, which exist as specific ‘energy’ of dynamic in form, and act up on the ‘vital force’ of organism by a dynamic way. This dynamic drug energy can exist free from ‘material drug, substance and transferred into rectified spirit or sugar of milk through a process called ‘potentization’. By this process, the ‘dynamic drug energy’ gettin freed from the drug substance moves to the potentizing medium and ‘energizes’ it. By the process of serial dilution and succussion, this dynamic energy could be ‘raised’ to new energy levels, and as such, it is believed that ‘higher’ dilutions are more ‘potentized’ and more powerful. This ‘dynamic drug energy’ carried by the ‘potentized drugs’ act upon the vital force and induces a ‘healing process’.

According to the MIT concept I propose, I am explaining the process involved in potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting’. It is not the ‘dynamic drug energy’ that is transferred into the medium during so-called process of potentization, but the three dimensional configuration of constituent drug molecules getting imprinted into the supra-molecular matrix of potentizing medium in the form of nanocavities, through a process of forming hydration shells. These nanocavities act as artificial binding sites or artificial ‘key holes’ for pathogenic molecules having morphological similarity to imprinted molecules. This concept scientifically explains the molecular dynamics of homeopathic therapeutics involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ in a way fitting to the concepts of modern biochemistry, molecular pathology and therapeutics.

Obviously, the term ‘potentization’ reflects the vitalistic philosophy behind it. It would be ideal to use the term ‘molecular imprinting’ to explain the exact process in scientific terms.

Once you understand and accept ‘molecular imprinting’ as the real process involved in potentization, and perceive ‘potentized’ drugs in terms of constituent molecular imprints, all confusions regarding selection of potencies will be scientifically resolved.

———————————————————————————–

A lot of confusions, controversies and phobias exist regarding the selection of potencies to be administered, after selecting the similimum. Everything is controversial in this area of applied homeopathy. Each homeopath has his own ways, and believes that only he is right.Young homeopaths get confused due to totally contradicting advice they get from their different teachers.

Once similimum is selected for a case through a process of exhaustive case taking, repertorization and material medica study, the next issue that bothers a young homeopath the most is the selection of potency, dosage and repetitions.

There are many ‘laws, principles, theories and guidelines’, given by different masters, most of them contradicting and conflicting with one another, which makes everything complex for a new comer.

Through hard experience, most homeopaths finally settle into a stage where they make their own ‘private’ ‘laws’ regarding potency, dose and repetition, which they will never expose to the homeopathic community, for fear of being ridiculed as deviation from principles. Everybody wants to appear to be belonging to that respectable class of ‘classical homeopaths’, pretending to be strictly following all the ‘immutable’ ‘cardinal principles’ of ‘pure’ homeopathy.

Please remember, all these ‘laws’ are made and practiced without even knowing what are the active principles of medicines we are using. Everything is pure speculation. Please remember, nobody actually knows what exactly happens during potentization. Nobody knows what are exactly the active principles of potentized drugs. Nobody exactly knows the molecular mechanism by which potentized drugs interacts with biological organism and creates a therapeutic effect. Nobody knows how low potencies are different from high potencies. Everything is based on speculations. Dynamism, vibrational theory, Vitalism- everything explained as phenomena happening ‘beyond science’.

Through MIT, I am trying to resolve the issue of potencies in the light of scientifically viable working hypothesis regarding homeopathic therapeutics and potentization.

———————————————————————————

Homeopathy is not witchcraft. Whether you are aware of it or not, homeopathic drugs can act upon the body only according to the kinetics of biomolecular interactions already known to modern science. If anybody claim he can cure diseases arising from chromosome abnormalities, that only means he is pathetically ignorant about basics of genetics.

———————————————————————————–

We often hear the cliche: “Homeopathy never fails- it is homeopaths that fail”.

I disagree. There are many instances where homeopathy itself fails. Homeopathy has a particular therapeutic range. If applied in cases that are beyond that range, homeopathy will definitely fail. One example is genetic disorders or diseases arising from chromosome abnormalities. Homeopathy cannot cure them.

———————————————————————————–

I am 100% convinced that homeopathy cannot move further forward and advance into a scientific medical system without understanding and accepting the explanations and concepts proposed by MIT. Earlier the homeopaths realize this truth, the better it will be for homeopathy.

What is MIT?

MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics refers to a scientific hypothesis that proposes a rational model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and diseaes indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.

———————————————————————————–

If you do not agree with my views, kindly tell me on what specific points you disagree with me. I can review myself once again, make my points more clear, and you can explain your disagreements further. We can differ and discuss as gentlemen. Kindly do not abuse me, humiliate me, or use words that wound my self esteem.

————————————————————————————–

Before MIT was introduced, it is an undeniable fact that nobody knew how homeopathy works.

To mask this ignorance, ‘intellectuals’ among homeopaths create fanciful theories. All these theories about homeopathy are utter nonsense- pure absurdity.

Until homeopaths stop talking nonsense ‘ultra-scientific’ theories about homeopathy, we cannot expect a fair deal from scientific community. At least homeopaths should show the humility to say: “we know homeopathy works- that is our daily experience; but we do not know how it actually works; we need the help of scientific community to resolve this riddle”.

Before MIT was introduced, nobody could so far even propose a scientifically viable hypothesis about how homeopathy works, a hypothesis that could be presented as a rightful candidate for verification using scientific methods. Actually, our ‘pseudo-scientific’ homeopathic theoreticians are doing the greatest harm to homeopathy than anti-homeopathic skeptics.

———————————————————————————–

Dear skeptic, by saying ‘homeopathy is fake’, and ‘it is based on belief’, what do you actually mean? Do you mean homeopathy is based on ‘beliefs of PRACTITIONER’, or it is working on ‘beliefs of PATIENTS’?

Do you remember, when you declare homeopathy is a ‘fake discipline’, you are saying that the Act passed by Indian parliament is ‘fake’, Central council of homeopathy is ‘fake’ and those 186 homeopathic colleges in India are ‘fake’? You mean 285000 registered homeopaths, 6000 government dispensaries and hospitals are doing ‘fake’ medical practice that may ‘endanger’ human lives? According to you, BHMS and MD degrees awarded by Indian universities are all about ‘fake’ disciplines? Do you mean those millions of people thronging daily in homeopathic clinics and getting relief for their ailments are idiots attracted to ‘fake practitioners’ due to ‘belief’ only?

Hope you would know India is home to around 285,000 registered homeopaths, 186 prestigious homeopathic colleges imparting UG and PG courses, over 6000 government homeopathic dispensaries and about 250 government hospitals. More than 15000 student come out of these colleges every year with BHMS degree, after completing a rigorous five and half year course of study and internship, for which they got admission by scoring top rankings in entrance examinations after 12 years of schooling in science streams. Curriculum of BHMS course constitutes Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Practice of Medicine and all subjects of modern health care knowledge. There is a Central Council of Homeopathy under Government of India, constituted as per a n Central Act passed by Indian parliament, overseeing everything in the field of homeopathic education, research and practice in India.

Homeopathy is a very important wing of public health care system in in India. Homeopathic wings are working in many allopathic hospitals and dispensaries, both government and private. Homeopathic doctors provide treatment to millions of patients for different day to day illnesses in the public health care system. Even during sporadic and epidemic conditions, people tend to use homeopathic drugs for prevention. Recently, the Indian Government successfully ran a national health campaign ‘Homeopathy for a Healthy Mother & a Happy Child’, which was based exclusively on homeopathy. Also, private homeopathic practitioners are contributing a great deal in public health care through their private or charitable clinics.

Besides clinical research, there are fundamental, drug standardization, drug proving and clinical verification research going on, both at government and private levels. For example, the Central Council for Research in Homeopathy is conducting a lot of such research, either independently or in collaboration with other research institutes or individual researchers, under an extra-mural research scheme at the Dept of AYUSH, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare of the Indian Government. Other than that, almost all homeopathic organizations and individuals are doing their bit toward research for the further validation of homeopathy in today’s times of evidence-based medicine. The results have been encouraging, to say the least. In fact, over the years,India has learnt better ways of conducting research from their international counterparts and the recent research has been carried out as per standardized, internationally recognized methods and are therefore more acceptable.

A few exemplary results from clinical studies include work on tubercular lymphadenitis, japanese encephalitis, etc. In addition, some administrative studies have been undertaken, like the ‘assessment of the cost effectiveness of homeopathic clinic in the cafeteria approach’ and ‘public-private partnerships in the provision of homeopathic services in the city of Delhi, where it was tried to analyze both the strengths and weaknesses of medical pluralism in India and have worked out some solutions for implementing medical pluralism more effectively in all parts of India.

These facts and figures are a clear reflection of the belief of the people of India in the homeopathic system of medicine, which, in turn, is a result of the effectiveness of homeopathy in treating a wide range of illnesses, which has convinced the Indian masses over a period of time.

Kindly think twice before declaring “homeopathy is fake”.

———————————————————————————-

Life is like a relay race. Handing over the baton to the next runner smoothly and IN TIME is very important for winning the race. Most of us run our part very fast, but fail or even hesitate to hand over the baton. Next runner does not get a good start, and the race ultimately fails.

———————————————————————————-

Being adorned as an ‘expert’ in a particular subject does not mean he knows everything about that subject. Most of our very reputed and respected ‘experts’ and ‘masters’ of homeopathy are actually very poor in the knowledge of real science of homeopathy. If you observe them very close, you will have to wonder how much foolish notions those ‘experts’ have about the various phenomena and principles working behind this therapeutic method!

———————————————————————————

No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.

———————————————————————————

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

—————————————————————————————

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

———————————————————————————–

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

———————————————————————————

Organon : Aphorism 16 : Sixth Edition:

“Our vital force, as a spirit-like dynamis, cannot be attacked and affected by injurious influences on the healthy organism caused by the external inimical forces that disturb the harmonious play of life, otherwise than in a spirit-like (dynamic) way, and in like manner, all such morbid derangements (diseases) cannot be removed from it by the physician in any other way than by the spirit-like (dynamic1, virtual) alterative powers of the serviceable medicines acting upon our spirit-like vital force, which perceives them through the medium of the sentient faculty of the nerves everywhere present in the organism, so that it is only by their dynamic action on the vital force that remedies are able to re-establish and do actually re-establish health and vital harmony, after the changes in the health of the patient cognizable by our senses (the totality of the symptoms) have revealed the disease to the carefully observing and investigating physician as fully as was requisite in order to enable him to cure it.

Foot notes:- Most severe disease may be produced by sufficient disturbance of the vital force through the imagination and also cured by the same means.”

My Comments:

Hahnemann says: “alterative powers of the serviceable medicines acting upon our spirit-like vital force, which perceives them through the medium of the sentient faculty of the nerves everywhere present in the organism”. According to this view, homeopathic potentized drugs act through “sentient nerves”. But research works proved otherwise. Researchers have proved that potentized drugs act even up on in vitro biological samples which do not contain any ‘sentient nerves’ or nerve cells. There are enough scientific evidences now to prove that potentized drugs act up on biological molecules- not merely ‘sentient nerves’.

Hahnemann’s statement “disease may be produced by sufficient disturbance of the vital force through the imagination and also cured by the same means” actually explains the phenomena of so-called psychosomatic diseases, which are well explained by biochemistry, without any involvement of vital force theory. According to scientific view, “imaginations’ and “emotoions” are not “non-material” What we call ‘emotions’ and ‘sensations’ are actually very complex biochemical processes happening in our brain. There is nothing ‘immaterial’ in ‘emotions’ and other mental processes. During those biochemical processes, different types of chemical molecules are synthesized and utilized by the central nervous system, such as hormones, cytokines, neuro-mediators and neurotransmitters etc. What we call ‘bad effects’ of emotions are actually the delayed, off-target or rebound chemical actions of these biochemical molecules. Biochemistry can explain such phenomena without any involvement of any ‘immaterial’ or ‘dynamic’ vital force.

———————————————————————————–

Organon : Aphorism 15 : Sixth Edition:

“The affection of the morbidly deranged, spirit-like dynamis (vital force) that animates our body in the invisible interior, and the totality of the outwardly cognizable symptoms produced by it in the organism and representing the existing malady, constitute a whole; they are one and the same. The organism is indeed the material instrument of the life, but it is not conceivable without the animation imparted to it by the instinctively perceiving and regulating dynamis, just as the vital force is not conceivable without the organism, consequently the two together constitute a unity, although in thought our mind separates this unity into two distinct conceptions for the sake of easy comprehension.”

My comments:

I would suggest to modify this aphorism as follows: “”The affection of the morbidly deranged molecular level vital processes, and the totality of the outwardly cognizable symptoms produced by it in the organism and representing the existing malady, constitute a whole; they are one and the same. The molecular processes in the organism are indeed the material basis of the phenomenon life.

———————————————————————————

Organon : Aphorism 14 : Sixth Edition:

“There is, in the interior of man, nothing morbid that is curable and no invisible morbid alteration that is curable which does not make itself known to the accurately observing physicians by means of morbid signs and symptoms – an arrangement in perfect conformity with the infinite goodness of the all-wise Preserver of human life.”

My comments:

“”There is, in the interior of man, nothing morbid that is curable and no invisible morbid alteration that is curable which does not make itself known to the accurately observing physicians by means of morbid signs and symptoms”- It is a correct statement even valid from modern scientific point of view, even if we discard the vitalistic interpretations of Hahnemann.

———————————————————————————-

Organon : Aphorism 13:

“Therefore disease (that does not come within the province of manual surgery) considered, as it is by the allopathists, as a thing separate from the living whole, from the organism and its animating vital force, and hidden in the interior, be it ever so subtle a character, is an absurdity, that could only be imagined by minds of a materialistic stamp, and has for thousands of years given to the prevailing system of medicine all those pernicious impulses that have made it a truly mischievous (non-healing) art.”

My comments:

Hahnemann considers asking questions about the inner processes of disease is an “absurdity” “imagined by minds of a materialistic stamp”, and it is this “materialistic mind” that made “the prevailing system of medicine” “a truly mischievous (non-healing) art.”

———————————————————————————

Organon : Aphorism 12 : Sixth Edition:

“It is the morbidly affected vital energy alone that produces disease, so that the morbid phenomena perceptible to our senses express at the same time all the internal change, that is to say, the whole morbid derangement of the internal dynamis; in a word, they reveal the whole disease; consequently, also, the disappearance under treatment of all the morbid phenomena and of all the morbid alterations that differ from the healthy vital operations, certainly affects and necessarily implies the restoration of the integrity of the vital force and, therefore, the recovered health of the whole organism.

Foot notes:- How the vital force causes the organism to display morbid phenomena, that is, how it produces disease, it would be of no practical utility to the physician to know, and will forever remain concealed from him; only what it is necessary for him to know of the disease and what is fully sufficient for enabling him to cure it, has the Lord of life revealed to his senses”

My Comments:

Regarding the question “how vital force causes disease”, Hahnemann declares “it would be of no practical utility to the physician to know, and will forever remain concealed”. Up on god, he says the physician should try to know only “what it is necessary for him to know of the disease and what is fully sufficient for enabling him to cure it”! Lazy and dogmatic homeopaths love to quote this statement frequently to cover up their inability to answer “how homeopathy works”. According to them, our master has eternally forbidden us from asking such questions!

———————————————————————————

Organon : Aphorism 11 : Sixth Edition:

“When a person falls ill, it is only this spiritual, self acting (automatic) vital force, everywhere present in his organism, that is primarily deranged by the dynamic1 influence upon it of a morbific agent inimical to life; it is only the vital force, deranged to such an abnormal state, that can furnish the organism with its disagreeable sensations, and incline it to the irregular processes which we call disease; for, as a power invisible in itself, and only cognizable by its effects on the organism, its morbid derangement only makes itself known by the manifestation of disease in the sensations and functions of those parts of the organism exposed to the senses of the observer and physician, that is, by morbid symptoms, and in no other way can it make itself known.

Foot notes:- What is dynamic influence, – dynamic power? Our earth, by virtue of a hidden invisible energy, carries the moon around her in twenty-eight days and several hours, and the moon alternately, in definite fixed hours (deducting certain differences which occur with the full and new moon) raises our northern seas to flood tide and again correspondingly lowers them to ebb. Apparently this takes place not through material agencies, not through mechanical contrivances, as are used for products of human labor; and so we see numerous other events about us as results of the action of one substance on another substance without being able to recognize a sensible connection between cause and effect. Only the cultured, practised in comparison and deduction, can form for himself a kind of supra-sensual idea sufficient to keep all that is material or mechanical in his thoughts from such concepts. He calls such effects dynamic, virtual, that is, such as result from absolute, specific, pure energy and action of the one substance upon the other substance.

For instance, the dynamic effect of the sick-making influences upon healthy man, as well as the dynamic energy of the medicines upon the principle of life in the restoration of health is nothing else than infection and so not in any way material, not in any way mechanical. Just as the energy of a magnet attracting a piece of iron or steel is not material, not mechanical. One sees that the piece of iron is attracted by one pole of the magnet, but how it is done is not seen. This invisible energy of the magnet does not require mechanical (material) auxiliary means,
hook or lever, to attract the iron. The magnet draws to itself and this acts upon the piece of iron or upon a steel needle by means of a purely immaterial invisible, conceptual, inherent energy, that is, dynamically, and communicates to the steel needle the magnetic energy equally invisibly (dynamically). The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles, that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic property.

In a similar way, the effect of medicines upon living man is to be judged. Substances, which are used as medicines, are medicines only in so far as they possess each its own specific energy to alter the well-being of man through dynamic, conceptual influence, by means of the living sensory fibre, upon the conceptual controlling principle of life. The medicinal property of those material substances which we call medicines proper, relates only to their energy to call out alterations in the well-being of animal life. Only upon this conceptual principle of life, depends their medicinal health-altering, conceptual (dynamic) influence. Just as the nearness of a magnetic pole can communicate only magnetic energy to the steel (namely, by a kind of infection) but cannot commu nicate other properties (for instance, more hardness or ductility, etc.). And thus every special medicinal substance alters through a kind of infection, that well-being of man in a peculiar manner exclusively its own and not in a manner peculiar to another medicine, as certainly as the nearness of the child ill with small-pox will communicate to a healthy child only small-pox and not measles.

These medicines act upon our well-being wholly without communication of material parts of the medicinal substances, thus dynamically, as if through infection. Far more healing energy is expressed in a case in point by the smallest dose of the best dynamized medicines, in which there can be, according to calculation, only so little of material substance that its minuteness cannot be thought and conceived by the best arithmetical mind, than by large doses of the same medicine in substance.

That smallest dose can therefore contain almost entirely only the pure, freely-developed, conceptual medicinal energy, and bring about only dynamically such great effects as can never be reached by the crude medicinal substances itself taken in large doses.

It is not in the corporal atoms of these highly dynamized medicines, nor their physical or mathematical surfaces (with which the higher energies of the dynamized medicines are being interpreted but vainly as still sufficiently material) that the medicinal energy is found. More likely, there lies invisible in the moistened globule or in its solution, an unveiled, liberated, specific, medicinal force contained in the medicinal substance which acts dynamically by contact with the living animal fibre upon the whole organism (without communicating to it anything material however highly attenuated) and acts more strongly the more free and more immaterial the energy has become through the dynamization.

Is it then so utterly impossible for our age celebrated for its wealth in clear thinkers to think of dynamic energy as something non-corporeal, since we see daily phenomena which cannot be explained in any other manner?

If one looks upon something nauseous and becomes inclined to vomit, did a material emetic come into his stomach which compels him to this anti-peristaltic movement? Was it not solely the dynamic effect of the nauseating aspect upon his imagination? And if one raises his arm, does it occur through a material visible instrument? a lever? Is it not solely the conceptual dynamic energy of his will which raises it?”

My Comments:

Listen to this statement, which amounts to a confession by Hahnemann: “think of dynamic energy as something non-corporeal, since we see daily phenomena which cannot be explained in any other manner”. That clearly explains how Hahnemann happened to “think of dynamic energy as something non-corporeal” It was only “since we see daily phenomena which cannot be explained in any other manner”! He was compelled to explain homeopathy using concepts of “dynamic energy” and “vital force”, only because he could not explain the phenomena of cure he observed, using “any other manner”! This statement constitutes a great historical truth.

In my opinion, foot note of aphorism 11 is a severe self-insult Hahnemann inflicted upon his own credibility, as it contains a lot of most irrational and unscientific statements that reflects the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him.

Please read carefully the following statements I quoted from this most unscientific and most unwanted foot-note:

“Our earth, by virtue of a hidden invisible energy, carries the moon around her”
“moon raises our northern seas to flood tide and again correspondingly lowers them to ebb by a hidden invisible energy”

“we see numerous other events about us as results of the action of one substance on another substance without being able to recognize a sensible connection between cause and effect.”

“calls such effects dynamic, virtual, that is, such as result from absolute, specific, pure energy and action of the one substance upon the other substance.”

“For instance, the dynamic effect of the sick-making influences upon healthy man, as well as the dynamic energy of the medicines upon the principle of life in the restoration of health is nothing else than infection and so not in any way material, not in any way mechanical. “

“the energy of a magnet attracting a piece of iron or steel is not material, not mechanical.”

“the piece of iron is attracted by one pole of the magnet, but how it is done is not seen.”

“The magnet draws to itself and this acts upon the piece of iron or upon a steel needle by means of a purely immaterial invisible, conceptual, inherent energy, that is, dynamically, and communicates to the steel needle the magnetic energy equally invisibly (dynamically).”

“a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles, that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic property.”

“Substances, which are used as medicines, are medicines only in so far as they possess each its own specific energy to alter the well-being of man through dynamic, conceptual influence, by means of the living sensory fibre, upon the conceptual controlling principle of life “

“The medicinal property of those material substances which we call medicines proper, relates only to their energy to call out alterations in the well-being of animal life.”

“Only upon this conceptual principle of life, depends their medicinal health-altering, conceptual (dynamic) influence, just as the nearness of a magnetic pole can communicate only magnetic energy to the steel, namely, by a kind of infection.”

“every special medicinal substance alters through a kind of infection, that well-being of man in a peculiar manner exclusively its own and not in a manner peculiar to another medicine, as certainly as the nearness of the child ill with small-pox will communicate to a healthy child only small-pox and not measles. “

“These medicines act upon our well-being wholly without communication of material parts of the medicinal substances, thus dynamically, as if through infection”

“That smallest dose can therefore contain almost entirely only the pure, freely-developed, conceptual medicinal energy, and bring about only dynamically such great effects as can never be reached by the crude medicinal substances itself taken in large doses”

“It is not in the corporal atoms of these highly dynamized medicines, nor their physical or mathematical surfaces that the medicinal energy is found. “

“there lies invisible in the moistened globule or in its solution, an unveiled, liberated, specific, medicinal force contained in the medicinal substance which acts dynamically by contact with the living animal fibre upon the whole organism (without communicating to it anything material however highly attenuated) and acts more strongly the more free and more immaterial the energy has become through the dynamization.”

“If one looks upon something nauseous and becomes inclined to vomit, did a material emetic come into his stomach which compels him to this anti-peristaltic movement? Was it not solely the dynamic effect of the nauseating aspect upon his imagination?”

“And if one raises his arm, does it occur through a material visible instrument? a lever? Is it not solely the conceptual dynamic energy of his will which raises it?”

IF YOU READ ALL THESE SENTENCES I QUOTED FROM ABOVE FOOT NOTE, YOU WILL REALIZE WHY I CONSIDER THIS FOOT NOTE AS A SELF-INFLICTED INSULT UP ON CREDENTIALS OF OUR MASTER.

———————————————————————————–

Organon : Aphorism 10 : Sixth Edition:

“The material organism, without the vital force, is capable of no sensation, no function, no self-preservation1, it derives all sensation and performs all the functions of life solely by means of the immaterial being (the vital principle) which animates the material organism in health and in disease.

Foot notes:- It is dead, and only subject to the power of the external physical world; it decays, and is again resolved into its chemical constituents.”

My comments:

The most relevant question is, can this “immaterial” vital force ‘animate’ a metal body, a stone or a piece of wood and convert them into LIVING organisms, and give them ‘sensations’? Why vital force is capable of “animating” ONLY “material bodies” having a peculiar molecular structure and organization?

No ‘vital force’ can ‘animate’ a dead organism and bring it back to life, once the biochemical processes essential for normal vital functions are stopped and biological molecules are disorganized. All the functions you consider as vital force are seen only in highly organized organism constituted by complex biological molecules. It is the molecular level structure and organization of biological molecules and their interactions that impart properties of life to a ‘material body’. Vital force cannot animate a ‘material object’ in the absence of biological chemical molecules.

———————————————————————————-

READ Organon : Aphorism 9:

“In the healthy condition of man, the spiritual vital force (autocracy), the dynamis that animates the material body (organism), rules with unbounded sway, and retains all the parts of the organism in admirable, harmonious, vital operation, as regards both sensations and functions, so that our indwelling, reason-gifted mind can freely employ this living, healthy instrument for the higher purpose of our existence.”

My comments:

According to hahnemann, vital force is a ‘dynamis’ that ‘animates’ and ‘rules’ the ‘material body’. It is this vital force that “retains all the parts of the organism in admirable, harmonious, vital operation, as regards both sensations and functions”. As per this view, “material body” is only an “instrument” of “indwelling, reason-gifted mind”.

Hahnemann seems to think that the role of “material body” is limited to obeying the “rule” of vital force and act as an “instrument” of mind. He do not consider the molecular level structure, organization and chemical properties of the complex biological molecules constituting the ‘material body’ to play a role in the evolution of the phenomena he call ‘vital force’. He failed to understand that a ‘vital force’ cannot ‘animate’ a NON-LIVING ‘material body’ irrespective of its molecular level structure, organization and chemical properties? Actually, it is the STRUCTURE, ORGANIZATION and CHEMICAL PROPERTIES of complex biological molecules in the organism that initiate the MOLECULAR INTERACTIONS of ‘vital processes’ hahnemann call “vital force”. It is obvious that VITAL FORCE theory perceives biological processes upside down! At least, hahnemann should have noticed that this “all powerful” VITAL FORCE cannot “animate” MATERIAL BODIES if they have no a molecular level structure appropriate for the complex biological interactions constituting the vital processes.

——————————————————————————–

In Aphorisms 9 to 16 hahnemann explains his VITAL FORCE THEORY, which is actually a reassertion of unscientific philosophy of DYNAMISM that was a strong intellectual presence during his period. This part of ORGANON contributes much in making homeopathy incompatible with modern scientific knowledge, and it seems to be the greatest stumbling block in our efforts of making homeopathy a MEDICAL SCIENCE. This part of organon reflects the most primitive state of scientific knowledge that existed during hahnemann’s period. There is no doubt, if master had lived a few years later, he would have completely avoided this part from organon. In my opinion, these most unscientific aphorisms should be bracketed from new editions of organon being taught in our colleges, classifying it as only of historical interest. They should be replaced and updated with NEW scientific understanding of life, disease and cure, based on modern biochemistry and advanced life sciences.

For a scientific-minded person, there nothing to be seriously debated or argued in the ‘vital force theory’ in ORGANON, other than noting its historical premises and moved away into the archives.

Homeopathy can exist even without vital force theory. Actually, it becomes more rational and scientific by replacing the concept of ‘vital force’ with modern scientific understanding of ‘molecular level biochemical vital processes’.

———————————————————————————

Dear friends, did anybody among you conduct any experiment to verify whether SYMPTOMS OF MALARIA could be produced in a healthy individual by administering CHINA either in CRUDE or POTENTIZED form? What was the outcome of your experiment?

I THINK THE FIRST RESEARCH WE SHOULD CONDUCT IN HOMEOPATHY IS TO VERIFY THIS POINT.

If we cannot experimentally produce symptoms of malaria by administering CHINA, how can we believe that the symptoms hahnemann happened to produce on himself by drinking a potion of CINCHONA bark were actually produced by that drug? How can we rule out the chance that the master was having a REAL malarial infection at that time, which he wrongly attributed to his taking of CINCHONA by mere coincidence?

———————————————————————————–

Is It Mandatory To Follow ‘Seven Cardinal Principles’ To Be A ‘True’ Homeopath, As We Believe?:

Many homeopaths talk about ‘seven cardinal principles of hahnemann’, and believe that without following these ‘cardinal’ principles one cannot be a ‘true’ homeopath.

Did hahnemann ever say there are ‘seven’ cardinal principles in homeopathy? Kindly verify for references from hahnemann’s original works. When we say homeopaths should ‘follow’ certain ‘cardinal principles of hahnemann’, we should inquire about the original reference where hahnemann said these are the cardinal principles.

Actually hahnemann did not make a ‘list’ of principles. He made some objective observations regarding the phenomenon of ‘cure’, and inferred that an objective ‘law’ is working under this phenomenon. He called it ‘similia similibus curentur’.

While experimenting with smaller and smaller doses of drug substances to avoid the bad effects of crude drugging prevalent in conventional medicine during that period, he noticed that even highly diluted drugs have medicinal effects, even though there existed least chance for medicinal substance to be present in them

Then he took up the task of explaining these two phenomena ( similia similibus curentur and high dilution effects) using the existing scientific knowledge available to him, thereby trying to build up a simple, safe and effective therapeutic system.

Since the scientific knowledge system was in its primitive stage of evolution during that time, it was difficult to explain these observed phenomena using existing tool-kit of science. In the absence of necessary scientific knowledge available for accomplishing this task, he was compelled to speculate using philosophical concepts such as ‘dynamism’ or ‘vitalism’. Actually, ORGANON represents his highly intellectual attempts to explain his fundamental observations regarding phenomena of cure.

In organon, he discussed many things, from ‘vital force theory’ to ‘mesmerism’. That does not mean everything he discussed are ‘cardinal’ principles of homeopathy. If you want to identify such ‘cardinal’ or ‘basic’ things of homeopathy, they are ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’. They are the ‘fundamental objective observations’ of natural phenomena. Everything else is philosophical speculations, which are bound to change as our scientific knowledge advances.

Actually, the ‘seven cardinal principles’ were the invention of some later interpreters- not of hahnemann. Somebody understood homeopathy that way- that is all. You can ‘filter’ any number of ‘cardinal’ principles from hahnemann’s works, according to your perspectives and understandings. If you want to see ‘vital force’ as cardinal principle of homeopathy, somebody else could say ‘mesmerism’ is also a cardinal principle of homeopathy. You can list ‘seven’ or ‘seventy’.

Somebody involved in the making of homeopathic curriculum for Indian universities happened to be influenced by this ‘seven cardinal principles’ and included it in the syllabus. Indian students were taught that to be a ‘true’ homeopath, they should ‘follow’ these ‘seven’ principles. If it was part of your syllabus, somebody should have asked the teachers for original references from hahnemann and verify whether hahnemann did say these ‘seven’ are ‘cardinal principles’ of homeopathy. That is the way inquisitive minds should work and learn more and more deep.

According to my analysis, the only ‘cardinal’ or ‘basic’ things in homeopathy are ‘two’ fundamental observations hahnemann made regarding the objective phenomena of ‘cure’. They are ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’. Everything else is totally unscientific speculations and theorizations made in an attempt to explain these ‘basic’ observations. There is nothing ‘cardinal’ in those observations. It is our duty to explain hahnemann’s ‘fundamental observations’ in terms of modern scientific knowledge system.

I would like to call ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ and ‘Potentization’ as FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS OF HOMEOPATHY, rather than using the term ‘fundamental principles’. That would be more close to truth.

Hahnemann made two important observations regarding therapeutics 250 years ago:

1. Diseases with specific symptoms can be cured by drugs that can produce similar symptoms in healthy individuals. He called it ‘similia similibus curentur’.

2. When used according to ‘similia similibus curentur’, dug substances can act as powerful therapeutic agents even in high dilutions through a process of serial ‘dilution and succussion’. He called this process as ‘potentization’.

These TWO are the main OBSERVATIONS made by Hahnemann, which are known as fundamental principles of Homeopathy.

Hahnemann tried to explain these OBSERVATIONS in terms of scientific and philosophical knowledge available to him in that POINT OF TIME. Organon consists of these theoretical explanations and speculations. Since scientific knowledge was in its primitive stage at that time, Hahnemann’s explanations were bound to bear that limitations. ORGANON contains a lot of theorizations and speculations that do not agree with, or go against modern scientific understanding.

Equipped with modern scientific knowledge and its tools, we are now in a far better position than Samuel Hahnemann to explain the phenomena he observed 250 years ago. Now we can explain ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ more scientifically, rationally and logically. With full respect the great genius of our master, we should be truthful and bold enough to discard those evidently unscientific theoretical speculations of ORGANON.

These two FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS were based on experiences, experiments and logical evaluations of OBJECTIVE PHENOMENA OF NATURE done by a great intellectual person. But the ‘principles’ he used to explain these objective phenomena were unscientific, obviously due to the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him at that time. We should accept his OBSERVATIONS, but judiciously discard or modify his unscientific PRINCIPLES.

Some people consider each and every word uttered by our ‘master’ as ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy. Some others would even include the words of other ‘stalwarts’ like Kent, Herring and the like also in the category of ‘fundamental’ principles.

All these ‘theories’ are only philosophical explanations, conjectures, interpretations, opinions and empirical conclusion based on personal experiences of ‘stalwarts’ and ‘masters’. They are not ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy.

If you understand the scientific meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, and judiciously apply them for curing the patients, you are a ‘true homeopath’, even if you do not ‘follow’ the ‘seven cardinal principles’ invented by unscientific interpreters of hahnemann.

A ‘true’ homeopath is one who understands and applies homeopathy ‘scientifically- not one who learns homeopathy dogmatically and applies it blindly.

The main point I raise in this article is whether the concept of “seven cardinal principles” originally belongs to hahnemann or his later interpreters. Hahnemann said many things in his books, from ‘similia’ to ‘mesmerism’. Who decided only these ‘seven’ are ‘cardinal’ and others are not? What is the logic behind such a selection? Who did it?

——————————————————————————–

When you start perceiving potentized drugs in terms of diverse types of hydrosomes or ‘molecular imprints’ as the ‘active principles’ they contain, you will realize that all controversies over ‘monopharmacy/polypharmacy’ issue become totally irrelevant.

SIMILIMUM essentially means a drug substance that can provide the specific molecular imprints required to remove the particular molecular errors that caused the particular disease condition in the particular patient.

Since ‘multiple’ molecular errors exist in any patient in a particular point of time, expressed through ‘multiple’ groups of symptoms, he will inevitably need ‘multiple’ molecular imprints to remove them. If potentized form of a ‘single’ medicinal substance can provide all those ‘multiple’ molecular imprints, that ‘single’ drug substance will be enough. If we could not find a ‘single’ drug substance that contain ‘all’ the ‘multiple’ molecular imprints required by the patient as indicated by the ‘symptom groups’, we will have to include ‘multiple’ drug substances in our prescription. It is the constituent molecular imprints contained in our particular prescription that matter.

Important point is, we have to ensure that our prescription supplies ALL the diverse types of molecular imprints required to deactivate all the diverse types of pathogenic molecules working in the patient, as indicated by the diverse groups of subjective and objective symptoms expressed by him. If we could find a SINGLE drug preparation that could supply all the molecular imprints required by the patient I am dealing with, we can use that SINGLE drug preparation only. If we do not find such a single drug, we have to include as many number of drug preparations as required, in order to provide all the molecular imprints needed to remove all the molecular errors in the patient.

SINGLE/MULTIPLE drug controversy never bothers if we understand this scientific approach proposed by MIT, as we start thinking in terms of molecular imprints- not drug names. Actually, a drug become ‘single’, if it contains ‘single’ type of molecular imprints only. IF a drug contains more than one type of molecular imprints, it is a COMPOUND DRUG, even if it is known by a ‘single’ drug name, prepared from a ‘single’ SOURCE material, kept in a ‘single’ bottle, consumed as a ‘single’ unit for ‘drug proving’, or considered by ‘masters’ as ‘single’ drug.

When we consume NUX VOMICA Q, it is absorbed into the blood as various individual chemical molecules contained in it. It is these individual chemical molecules that interact with various biological molecules. Different molecules act up on different biological targets according to the molecular affinities of their functional groups. Biological molecules are inhibited, resulting in errors in the biochemical pathways mediated by those biological molecules. Such molecular level errors in biological processes cascades into a series of molecular errors, which are expressed through various groups of subjective and objective symptoms.

It is obvious that what we consider as the SYMPTOMS OF NUX VOMICA are actually the sum total of different SYMPTOM GROUPS, representing entirely different molecular errors produced in entirely different biological molecules, by the actions of entirely different chemical molecules contained in NUX VOMICA TINCTURE.

We have to remember, there is no such a thing called nux vomica molecule- only individual chemical molecules contained in nux vomica tincture. Each constituent molecule has its own specific chemical structure and properties. They act on different biological targets by this chemical properties.

Each individual chemical molecule contained in nux vomica acts as an individual drug. That means, NUX VOMICA is not a SINGLE drug, but a COMPOUND drug.

Homeopaths may find it difficult to accept this fact, as it contradicts with their beliefs as well as the lessons they are taught. But it is the scientific fact.

From scientific point of view of pharmaceutical chemistry, a DRUG is a biologically active unit contained in a substance used as therapeutic agent.

IT is the structure and properties of that chemical molecule that decides its medicinal properties and therapeutic actions. If such as substance contains only ONE type of biologically active unit, it is a SINGLE drug. If it contains different types of biologically active units, it is a COMPOUND drug.

It is obvious that most of the drugs we use in homeopathy – especially drugs of biological origin and complex minerals- contain diverse types of biologically active units, and hence they cannot be considered SINGLE drugs.

Molecular imprinting happens as individual molecules, and as such, potentized drugs prepared from a SINGLE drug substance will contain diverse types of molecular imprints representing the diverse types of individual constituent molecules contained in the substance. Those molecular imprints also act as individual units when applied in the organism. Hence, potentized drugs prepared by using a complex, seemingly single drug substance is actually a COMPOUND drug, containing diverse types of biologically active units, or ‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTS’.

IF you still cannot realize the meaninglessness and utter folly involved in talking about SINGLE DRUGS, it is the blindness caused by your dogmatic learning and lack of scientific awareness. I cannot help you for that!

———————————————————————————-

A MESSAGE I RECEIVED TODAY FROM Dagný Helgadottir Moore:

“Hi Chandran, I hope this little letter finds you well. I always find your explanations fascinating and want to introduce your research to the society of Icelandic homeopaths, of which I am president. Would you approve of a distribution of one of your articles amongst that group and if so – which article do you think explains it all? With warm regards. Dagný Helgadóttir.”

Thanks a lot, madam. My articles are open to all. Anybody can share any of my articles any where as they like. No permission required.

———————————————————————————

Many homeopaths believe that drug substances are converted to ‘energy’ during potentization. ‘Matter’ getting ‘converted’ to ‘energy’ during potentization is a concept widely propagated by people who argue that homeopathy is ‘energy medicine’.

I would request those friends to seriously think over the point I try to make out here.

No doubt, “matter is nothing but a packages of ENERGY” as you say. But do you think matter can be ‘unpacked’ into energy by the simple mechanical process of ‘succussion and dilution’ involved in potentization?

Do you know how much energy you need to break even the chemical bonds that holds atoms together in a molecule? ‘Converting matter into energy’ means not only breaking of chemical bonds, but breaking atoms into subatomic particles, and subatomic particles into ‘energy’. How can anybody imagine we can make atomic division happening through our simple process of potentization?

Even if you make it happen, how can this ‘atomic energy’ you expect to preserve the ‘medicinal properties’ of drug substances? Do you know ‘medicinal properties’ of drug substances are related with the structure and properties at molecular level?

When matter is converted to energy, that energy will be same, whether you make it from sulphur, nux vomica or calcarea. Once you break the inter-atomic bonds within molecules, the atoms cannto preserve the properties of molecules from where they came from. An oxygen atom will have the properties of oxygen atom only, whether it come from nux, water or any other molecule. When you divide the atoms further into subatomic particles, protons and electrons will be same, irrespective of atoms they came from. If you further divide atoms to ‘release’ energy, the energy so produced will not differ according to the atoms it originated. With this primary scientific knowledge, how could yo imagine the ‘drug energy’ of complex substance to be preserved in the ‘energy’ produced by ‘unpacking’ of matter? Please remember, the medicinal property is decided by the molecular structure and chemical properties of drug substances, not by the universal ‘atomic energy’.

You know, water contains hydrogen and oxygen atoms. But the properties of water is not exhibited by hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen coming from water or any other source will have same properties. If hydrogen is divided into protons and electrons, they will not show any property of hydrogen. Protons coming from division of any atom will be similar in properties. If we further split these subatomic particles into ‘energy’, how can you expect that energy to show the properties of water?

Medicinal properties of substances are decided by their molecular level structure an chemical properties. That cannot be preserved in the ‘energy’ generated by division of that matter into subatomic level. This is primary scientific knowledge, even any high school student knows. But homeopaths prefer to forget all science they learned, in their eagerness to justify the unscientific theories they learned in the name of homeopathy. This is a very disappointing situation

For example, Atropine is a chemical compound with formula C17H23NO3 . It acts upon biological molecules and produce various molecular errors, expressed through certain groups of symptoms. But, if we divide that atropine into carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen, they will have properties entirely different from atropine. That is why i say, medicinal properties of drugs are determined by the structure and properties of molecules, not the ‘energy’ packed in them.

———————————————————————————–

I strongly disagree with the concept that “molecule get converted to atoms by each successive dilution”. Simple mechanical energy of ‘shaking’ the bottle a few times involved in potentization will not be enough to break the very strong chemical bonds between individual atoms contained in a molecule, and “convert molecules into atoms”. More over, individual “atoms” cannot retain the chemical or biological properties of a complex chemical molecule that constitute a drug. Water will lose its biological properties once it is “converted” into hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms. BRUCINE will lose all its peculiar biological properties once it is divided into carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen. Kindly think over.

DRUG MOLECULES cannot be divided into ATOMS during potentization.

———————————————————————————-

DRUG MOLECULES cannot “remain” in a dilution beyond AVOGADRO NUMBER. Chemical molecules cannot multiply by dilution. Their numbers will decrease by each dilution in a given sample, and will finally disappear when dilution crosses avogadro limit. No need of arguments over this point.

Then what is “remaining”? Is it “dynamic drug energy”? Is it “memory of water”? Is it “octave energy level”? Is it “nanoparticles”? Is it “molecular imprints”? What gives “medicinal power” to high dilution homeopathic drugs? What are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of those potentized drugs? What is the exact process happening during potentization? What is the molecular level BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM of homeopathic cure?

These are the fundamental question of homeopathy which homeopaths can no more evade from in a science-conscious community. Science has to be specific.

———————————————————————————

One respected homeopath friend asks:

“Dear Chandran, as i have been introducing MIT to our homeopath group .they ask me about your idea about. the use of homeo remedies and that realy it works by smelling.what is your MIT STAND ON THE EFFECT OF SMELLING HOMEOPATHY REMEDIES?”

MY ANSWER:

“Sir, SMELLING or olfaction happens when the molecules of a substance interacts with the receptors in the nasal membranes. Inhaled substance enter blood stream through blood capillaries distributed in the membranes of respiratory tract. Molecular imprints also act the same way. They will be absorbed into blood stream. We know many toxic chemicals causes POISONING when inhaled. Potentized drugs act by same molecular mechanism even if they are absorbed from mouth, nasal passages or any other routes.”

———————————————————————————-

Some friends ask me to discuss my scientific ideas about homeopathy without criticizing ‘old beliefs’, ‘existing theories’ and ‘other personalities’. Do you think it is possible to promote scientific approach in homeopathy without criticizing and exposing all those totally unscientific and superstitious ‘existing theories’ and the ‘personalities’ who propagate such things?

————————————————————————————

Hahnemann says in ORGANON: PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION:

“ACCORDING to the testimony of all ages, no occupation is more unanimously declared to be a conjectural art than medicine; consequently none has less right to refuse a searching enquiry as to whether it is well founded than it, on which man’s health, his most precious possession on earth, depends. I consider that it redounds to my honour that I am the only one in recent times who has subjected it to a serious honest investigation, and has communicated to the world the results of his convictions in writings published, some with, some without my name. In this investigation I found the way to the truth, but I had to tread it alone, very far from the common highway of medical routine. The farther I advanced from truth to truth, the more my conclusions (none of which I accepted unless confirmed by experience) led me away from the old edifice, which, being built up of opinions, was only maintained by opinions. The results of my convictions are set forth in this book. It remains to be seen whether physicians, who mean to act honestly by their conscience and by their fellow-creatures, will continue to stick to the pernicious tissue of conjectures and caprice, or can open their eyes to the salutary truth. I must warn the reader that indolence, love of ease and obstinacy preclude effective service at the altar of truth, and only freedom from prejudice and untiring zeal qualify for the most sacred of all human occupations, the practice of the true system of medicine.”

I FEEL THESE WORDS OF OUR MASTER ARE ESPECIALLY RELEVANT IN MY CASE:

“I consider that it redounds to my honor that I am the only one in recent times who has subjected it (homeopathy) to a serious honest investigation”.

“It remains to be seen whether physicians, who mean to act honestly by their conscience and by their fellow-creatures, will continue to stick to the pernicious tissue of conjectures and caprice, or can open their eyes to the salutary truth.”

“I must warn the reader that indolence, love of ease and obstinacy preclude effective service at the altar of truth, and only freedom from prejudice and untiring zeal qualify for the most sacred of all human occupations, the practice of the true system of medicine.”

———————————————————————————–

Scientifically, the term ‘hypothesis’ means a ‘proposed explanation’ or “educated guess” for a phenomenon that we observe around us. Every ‘proposed explanation’ cannot be considered a ‘scientific hypothesis’. To be a ‘scientific hypothesis’, the scientific method requires that one can test the hypothesis using available scientific tools and methodology. Every new scientific hypotheses are generally based on previous observations that could not be satisfactorily be explained with the existing scientific theories. The words “hypothesis” and “theory” are often used synonymous in common and informal usage, even though a ‘scientific hypothesis’ is not exactly the same as ‘a scientific theory’. A hypothesis should be proved ‘using scientific tools’ in order to become a scientific theory.

A ‘working hypothesis’ is a provisionally accepted hypothesis that is ready to be proved. Experimenters will have to test and reject several hypotheses before solving the given problem ultimately. Testability (using existing scientific tools), Simplicity (avoiding excessive numbers of entities), Scope (apparent application of the hypothesis to multiple cases of phenomena), Fruitfulness (hypothesis may help to explain further phenomena in the future), and Conservatism (fitting with existing recognized knowledge-systems) are considered to be the essential qualities of a good scientific ‘working’ hypothesis.

Homeopaths pausing as ‘masters’, ‘gurus’ ‘einsteins’ and ‘newtons’ falsely claim all their fanciful ideas and explanations to be ‘theories’ and ‘hypotheses’. Viewing on the basis of the scientific parameters described above, it is very much clear that most of the presently existing most celebrated ‘theories’ regarding homeopathy cannot be even considered as ‘scientific hypotheses’ since they contain concepts and conclusions that ‘could not be tested by any scientist using currently available scientific tools and methodology’ or do not ‘fit with existing recognized knowledge-systems’.

———————————————————————————-

If I am asked what is similimum, I would say similimum is the drug that contains the chemical molecules that could produce molecular inhibitions and symptoms in healthy organism EXACTLY SIMILAR to the molecular inhibitions and symptoms existing in the patient before us, by binding to same biological target molecules. Potentized forms of the similimum would contain molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance, which can bind to the pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions.

To be a PERFECT SIMILIMUM, our drug should contain ALL the diverse molecules that could produce ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions and symptoms, so that in potentized form it would contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required to remove ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions in the patient. If the selected drug does not contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required for the patient, it will be PARTIAL SIMILIMUM. In such cases, we can make a PERFECT SIMILIMUM by combining two or more PARTIAL SIMILIMUMS indicated by the symptoms.

———————————————————————————-

According to MIT HYPOTHESIS, active principles of post-avogadro potentized drugs are MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of individual chemical molecules contained in the drug substances used for potentization.

As per this hypothesis, ‘molecular imprints’ are hydrogen-bonded supramolecular formations of water-ethyl alcohol molecules, into which the three-dimensional spacial conformations of drug molecules are imprinted or engraved as nanocavities, through a process of host-guest interactions or MOLECULAR IMPRINTING involved in the process of potentization.

These ‘molecular imprints’ can act as artificial binding sites or key holes for binding to the original drug molecules as well as any pathogenic molecule conformationally similar to the drug molecules.

When applied as therapeutic agent, these molecular imprints specifically bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity, thereby deactivating them and relieving the biological molecules from pathological molecular inhibitions.

This is the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure as proposed by MIT HYPOTHESIS.

Actually, the biological mechanism of cure proposed in this model is not a new idea. It is well accepted in modern molecular medicine and pharmacology, and is the basis of target-specific drug designing techniques currently very popular in pharmaceutical researches. There remains nothing to be proved on this idea.

Molecular imprinting in polymers (MIP) also is recently a very popular research area, a technique used in developing artificial binding sites in polymer matrices through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprinted polymers’ are currently utilized in various laboratory procedures as molecular binding and filtering agents.

What I have been trying to do by MIT hypothesis is to adapt these well-accepted scientific concepts into the theoretical frame work of homeopathy, so that a scientific model could be developed to explain the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure. MIT hypothesis explains homeopathic potentization in terms of ‘molecular imprinting in water’, and homeopathic cure in terms of removal of molecular inhibitions.

Only thing remaining to be scientifically proved is that potentized homeopathic drugs contain ‘molecular imprints’. It raises the question whether water-ethyl alcohol mixture can act as a medium for molecular imprinting, similar to polymers. Various studies regarding supra molecular properties of water indicate some ‘polymer-like’ properties of water and formations of hydrogen-bonded nanoclusters in a micro-environment, which obviously opens up possibilities of molecular imprinting in water-ethyl alcohol matrix.

IF WE EXPERIMENTALLY PROVE THE FOLLOWING POINTS BY SCIENTIFIC METHODS,MIT HYPOTHESIS COULD BE CONSIDERED SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIED AND RATIFIED:

a) high dilution drugs really work as curative agents when applied according to indications,

b) high dilution drugs works not only in living bodies, but also up on ‘in vitro’ biological samples,

c) high dilution drugs cannot interfere or prevent the normal interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands,

d) high dilution drugs can antidote the biological effects of same drugs used in crude or molecular forms,

e) biological properties of high dilution drugs are different or reverse to those of same drugs in molecular forms,

f) high dilution drugs do not contain original drug molecules,

g) high dilution drugs and unpotentized water-alcohol mixture are similar in their chemical structure and properties,

h) high dilution drugs differ from unpotentized water-alcohol mixture regarding physical properties and various physical parameters,

i) high dilution drugs differ from unpotentized water-alcohol mixture regarding supra-molecular arrangements by formation of nano-clusters as could be observed by difference in spectroscopic studies,

j) Medicinal properties of high dilution drugs could be destroyed by applying strong heat, electric currents or other forms of electromagnetic energy, which will also change the characteristic physical properties of those potentized drugs,

——————————————————————————–

Hahnemann no where mentioned about miasms unrelated with INFECTIOUS AGENTS. He explained psora as miasm caused by ITCH infection, syphilis as miasm caused by syphilis infection, and sycosis as miasm caused by ‘figwart’ disease, or combined infection of HPV and gonorrhoea. No need of any confusion on that.

Only thing we have to research is, HOW an infectious disease can cause life long residual effects that can cause chronic ‘disease dispositions’. According to my view, it could happen only through ANTIBODIES generated against infectious agents. Antibodies can cause life long residual effects through OFF-TARGET inhibitions of biological molecules.

——————————————————————————-

If we browse through various leading homeopathic websites, we come across hundreds of ‘research articles’ propagating diverse types of imaginative ‘theories’ and ‘hypotheses’ written in highly scholastic and ‘scientific’ language, claiming to unravel the riddles of homeopathy once and for all. The authors will be ‘scientists’ or ‘academicians’ so much revered by the homeopathic community for their high academic ‘authority’, ‘professional credentials’ and ‘institutional background’ that no average person would dare to question their wisdom. Most of them are ‘prominent faces’ and ‘representatives’ of international homeopathy.

Most funny part about these ‘knowledge explosions on internet’ is that most of us never read those article, or fail to understand even if we dare to read them. Nobody is interested in what is actually said in them. Nobody makes even a simple comment. Nobody verifies the claims made in those articles. Nobody tries to differentiate grains from pebbles. We simply wonder at this ‘great’ piece of knowledge, and go on broadcasting this ‘wonderful knowledge’ by keeping on posting these ‘links’ wherever we have access, in a desperate endeavor to ‘educate’ the whole community!

No wonder, in spite of all these ‘ground-breaking’ researches, theories and hypotheses being regularly broadcast, homeopathy still remains where samuel hahnemann left it 200 hundred years ago. Nobody could so far provide even a scientifically convincing answer to the basic question “how homeopathy works”. All these great authors only contribute their best in enhancing confusions among homeopathic community through their writings and seminars- that is all.

To safeguard ourselves from confusions being created by these ever-new flooding of ‘researches’ ‘theories’ and ‘hypotheses’, I would suggest to use following questions as touch stones for their primary evaluation whenever you are introduced to a ‘new theory’:

1. Does this theory scientifically and logically explain the exact processes involved in homeopathic potentization?

2. Does this theory scientifically and logically answer the question ‘what are the exact active principles contained in potentized medicines”?

3. Does this theory scientifically and logically explain the exact molecular mechanisms by which these active principles act up on the organism to produce a therapeutic effect?

4. Does this theory scientifically and logically explain ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge on one side, and to our homeopathic experiences on the other side?

If the answers for these FOUR FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS are found to be negative, simply dismiss those ‘theories’. They are nothing but hollow ‘scientific’ verbosity.

———————————————————————————

If anybody ‘detected’ nanoparticles of ‘starting material’ in samples of 30c and 200c, it only proves the samples were not genuine high potencies as they are deemed to be. Otherwise, ‘molecules’ will have to ‘multiply’ indefinitely during potentization! I fear proponents of nanoparticle theory may come with such a ‘molecular multiplication’ theory to prove that ‘avogadro law is not applicable’ to homeopathic dilutions!

More over ‘nanoparticle theory’ has to be examined from another angle. When we claim homeopathy is nanomedicine, we are actually putting homeopathy under a great risk. Nanoparticles are a subject of much concern for scientific community, since it raises serious questions of nanotoxicity. If we say our drugs contain nanoparticles, it would be easy for our antagonists to attack us from the angle of nanotoxicity. If homeopathy is admitted to be nanomedicine, we can no longer claim it is ‘safe medicine’. In such a context, our drugs will have to be subjected to rigorous nanotoxicity studies and licensing system.

Let me quote from Wikipedia on Nanotoxicity:

“Nanomaterials, even when made of inert elements like gold, become highly active at nanometer dimensions. Nanotoxicological studies are intended to determine whether and to what extent these properties may pose a threat to the environment and to human beings. For instance, Diesel nanoparticles have been found to damage the cardiovascular system in a mouse model.
Calls for tighter regulation of nanotechnology have arisen alongside a growing debate related to the human health and safety risks associated with nanotechnology.

The smaller a particle is, the greater its surface area to volume ratio and the higher its chemical reactivity and biological activity. The greater chemical reactivity of nanomaterials results in increased production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), including free radicals. ROS production has been found in a diverse range of nanomaterials including carbon fullerenes, carbon nanotubes and nanoparticle metal oxides. ROS and free radical production is one of the primary mechanisms of nanoparticle toxicity; it may result in oxidative stress, inflammation, and consequent damage to proteins, membranes and DNA

The extremely small size of nanomaterials also means that they much more readily gain entry into the human body than largersized particles. How these nanoparticles behave inside the body is still a major question that needs to be resolved. The behavior of nanoparticles is a function of their size, shape and surface reactivity with the surrounding tissue. In principle, a large number of particles could overload the body’s phagocytes, cells that ingest and destroy foreign matter, thereby triggering stress reactions that lead to inflammation and weaken the body’s defense against other pathogens. In addition to questions about what happens if non-degradable or slowly degradable nanoparticles accumulate in bodily organs, another concern is their potential interaction or interference with biological processes inside the body. Because of their large surface area, nanoparticles will, on exposure to tissue and fluids, immediately adsorb onto their surface some of the macromolecules they encounter. This may, for instance, affect the regulatory mechanisms of enzymes and other proteins.

Nanomaterials are able to cross biological membranes and access cells, tissues and organs that larger-sized particles normally cannot. Nanomaterials can gain access to the blood stream via inhalation or ingestion. At least some nanomaterials can penetrate the skin; even larger microparticles may penetrate skin when it is flexed. Broken skin is an ineffective particle barrier, suggesting that acne, eczema, shaving wounds or severe sunburn may accelerate skin uptake of nanomaterials. Then, once in the blood stream, nanomaterials can be transported around the body and be taken up by organs and tissues, including the brain, heart, liver, kidneys, spleen,bone marrow and nervous system. Nanomaterials have proved toxic to human tissueand cell cultures, resulting in increased oxidative stress, inflammatory cytokine production and cell death. Unlike larger particles, nanomaterials maybe taken up by cell mitochondria and the cell nucleus. Studies demonstrate the potential for nanomaterials to cause DNA mutation and induce major structural damage to mitochondria, even resulting in cell death. Size is therefore a key factor in determining the potential toxicity of a particle. However it is not the only important factor.”

If we accept ‘nanoparticles’ as the active principles of potentized homeopathicmedicines, ongoing nanotoxicology studies will have to be made applicable to homeopathic medicines also.

If the present apprehensions in the scientificworld regarding nanotoxicity finally turns out into a strict legislative processes globally, and homeopathic medicines are included in the group of ’nanoparticle’ materials, homeopathy will have a very tough time to come.

My request homeopaths to refrain from creating unnecessary problems for homeopathy by claiming it is nanomedicine, even if due to ignoance regarding what the word actually implies.

——————————————————————————–

Persons holding ‘high positions’, considered to be very ‘big’ and ‘knowledgeable’ by the common man should apply extreme care when commenting on topics they are not sure about or unknown to them. Even their casual comments will be taken as pieces of great truth, and community will get misguided at least for some time.

——————————————————————————

In its scientific meaning, Nanomedicine is the medical application of nanotechnology. Nanomedicine ranges from the medical applications of nanomaterials, to nanoelectronic biosensors, and even possible future applications of molecular nanotechnology. Current problems for nanomedicine involve understanding the issues related to toxicity and environmental impact of nanoscale materials. One nanometer is one-millionth of a millimeter.

While claiming potentized medicine is nanomedicine, we have to consider certain fundamental facts related with number of molecules, avogadro number and dilutions, and examine whether there is any chance for presence of even a single molecule of drug substance in high potency drugs.

Avogadro constant is a fixed number that helps us to calculate the number of atoms or molecules contained in a given amount of substance.

In chemistry and physics, the Avogadro constant is defined as the ratio of the number of constituent particles (usually atoms or molecules) in a sample to the amount of substance (unit mole). Thus, it is the proportionality factor that relates the molar mass of an entity, i.e., the mass per amount of substance, to the mass of said entity. The Avogadro constant expresses the number of elementary entities per mole of substance and it has the value 6.022141×10*23

Molar mass constant is a fixed number- 1.

The molar mass of atoms of an element is given by the atomic weight of the element multiplied by the molar mass constant

H = 1.007 97(7) × 1 g/mol = 1.007 97(7) g/mol

S = 32.065(5) × 1 g/mol = 32.065(5) g/mol

Cl = 35.453(2) × 1 g/mol = 35.453(2) g/mol

Fe = 55.845(2) × 1 g/mol = 55.845(2) g/mol.

Some elements are usually encountered as molecules, e.g. hydrogen (H2), sulfur (S8), chlorine (Cl2). The molar mass of molecules of these elements is the molar mass of the atoms multiplied by the number of atoms in each molecule:

H2 = 2 × 1.007 97(7) × 1 g/mol = 2.015 88(14) g/mol

S8 = 8 × 32.065(5) × 1 g/mol = 256.52(4) g/mol

Cl2 = 2 × 35.453(2) × 1 g/mol = 70.906(4) g/mol.

The molar mass of a compound is given by the sum of the standard atomic weights of the atoms which form the compound multiplied by the molar mass constant:

NaCl = [22.989 769 28(2) + 35.453(2)] × 1 g/mol = 58.443(2) g/mol

Approximately, Atomic weight of hydrogen is 1, and a molecule of hydrogen contains 2 atoms. Molar mass of hydrogen is 2 gm/mol. As such, 2 grams of hydrogen will contain 602214000000000000000000 molecules of hydrogen.

Atomic weight of oxygen is 16. A molecules contains 2 atoms. Molar mass of oxygen is 32 gm/mol. That means, 32 grams of oxygen will contain 602214000000000000000000 molecules of oxygen.

Atomic weight of sulphur is 32, and a molecule is formed by 8 atoms. Molar mass of sulphur is 256 gm/mol. 256 gms of sulphur contains 602214000000000000000000 mlecules of sulphur

Molar mass of water is 18 gm/mol. That means, 18 grams of water contains 602214000000000000000000 H2O molecules.

Let us consider what happens during serial dilution of SULPHUR.

If SULPHUR Q is prepared by adding 1 gm f sulphur to 100 ml of solvent, it will contain 1/256 gm mol of sulphur. That means, 1oo ml of tincture contains 602214000000000000000000/256 molecules of sulphur. It will be 23523984375000 molecules.

Since 1 ml of tincture is added to 99 ml solvent to prepare first potency, it contains 23523984375000/100 or 235239843750molecules.

Since each stage of dilution is at the rate of 1:100,

100 ml of 2c contains 2352398437.5
100 ml f 3c contains 23523984.38
100 ml of 3c contains 235239.84
100 ml of 4c contains 2352.4
100 ml of 5c contains 23.52
100ml f 6c contains 2.4
100 ml of 7c contains 0.02

Since molecules cannot exist as fractions, there is no chance for 100 ml of 7c dilution to contain even a single molecule of SULPHUR.

Remember, to prepare 30 c, we have to dilute this 7c preparation 23 more stages in 1:100 ratio. That means, it is a 1:10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 dilution of 7c.

How can anybody with sane mind can imagine ‘nanoparticles’ of sulphur to be present in a 30c potency? Actually, nanoparticles are not molecules, but larger aggregations of molecules.

We were considering 100 ml. Homeopaths use doses much below 1 drop or fractions of a drop. Even if there was a few nanoparticles in 100ml, how can it be distributed evenly in each drop and fractions of drop? What is the magic you imagine to happen?

When declaring ‘nanoparticles are the active principles of potentized drugs,’ why not these people realize they are talking utter nonsense?

———————————————————————————–

Homeopaths should understand, homeopathy will not become more scientific, or acceptable to scientific community, merely by sprinkling some high-sounding terms such as ‘nano-particles’. When saying homeopathy is nanomedicine, one is bound to logically explain how potentized drugs could retain ‘nano’ particles even in dilutions much above avogadro lmit. They should also explain the biological mechanism by which those nanoparticles act as therapeutic agents according to similia similibus curentur. We should remember, all homeopathic medicines are not prepared from simple “metallic elements” alone, but are made from vegetable, mineral and animal substances containing highly complex molecules. Proponents of nanoparticle theory will have to explain how “nano-particles” of ‘metal elements’ claimed to be detected in highly diluted drugs can mimic the medicinal properties arising from the molecular level properties of our vegetable and animal drugs containing diverse types of very large and complex chemical molecules.

——————————————————————————–

Some short-sighted homeopaths who pretend to represent the whole homeopathic community try to appear ‘scientific’, by echoing the claim that homeopathy is nanomedicie. They are bringing some ‘big’ personalities with ‘high credentials’ as their advocates in support of their claims. This trend has become somewhat like a fashion after the publication of certain project report by IIT -B students which claims detection of ‘nanoparticles’ in potentized drugs. A lot of new imaginative theories are being proposed, which try to present wonderful ‘models’ for mechanism of action of potentized drugs on the basis of nanoparticle theory. I would request homeopathic community to carefully examine the IIT team’s work and interpretations with a rational and logical mindset, before getting carried away by ‘models’ based on that ‘invention’.

———————————————————————————–

Whatever ‘theories’ people talk -be it nanoparticle or anything else- regarding ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of potentized drugs, ask them to explain the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM of their therapeutic action in a way fitting to modern scientific understanding of ‘ligand-target’ interactions as well as bio-molecular ‘inhibition and activation’ involved in disease and cure. Ask them to explain their theories in a way fitting to ‘similia similibus curentur’ also. If they cannot give scientifically viable explanations concerning these two aspects, discard their ‘theories outright, even if they are ‘people with big names and credentials’.

———————————————————————————-

We have to answer a few fundamental questions regarding homeopathy and prove them according to scientific methods, so that this noble therapeutic system can claim for its rightful status as an advanced branch of modern molecular medicine. I am here trying to sum up these basic questions:

1. What is the real scientific explanation for ‘similia similibus curentur’?

2. What really happens at ‘material’ level during the process of potentisation?

3. What are the active principles of potentized medicines?

4. What is the biological mechanism by which potentized medicines remove the pathological molecular inhibitions to produce cure?

Unless these questions are answered according to scientific method, we cannot claim homeopathy to be a scientific medical system.

MY ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS:

Question 1: What is the real scientific explanation for ‘similia similibus curentur’?

In scientific terms, ‘similia similibus curentur’ means, “pathological molecular inhibitions underlying a disease and expressed through specific groups of subjective and objective symptoms can be removed by applying ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances, which in crude form could produce similar molecular inhibitions in healthy individuals, expressed through similar groups of symptoms”.

Question 2: What really happens at ‘material’ level during the process of potentisation?

During initial stages of drug potentization, crude drug substances undergoes division and ionization, therby individual constituent molecules getting freed from intermolecular bonds. During progressive dilution and succussion, these constituent drug molecules undergo a process of ‘molecular imprinting’. During this process, three dimensional ‘molecular imprints’ or hydrosomes of drug molecules are formed in the supra-molecular clusters of water/alcohol medium through stabilization of hydration shells. Due to serial dilution, drug molecules gradually get removed from medium, and by 12c it becomes free of drug molecules and only ‘molecular imprints’ remain.

Question 3: What are the active principles of potentized medicines?

‘Molecular imprints’ of constituent drug molecules are the active principles of potentized homeopathic drugs.

Question 4: What is the biological mechanism by which potentized medicines remove the pathological molecular inhibitions to produce cure?

‘Diseases’ are errors in vital processes due to derangement of biochemical pathways in the organism, caused by inhibitions of biological molecules by binding of exogenous or endogenous pathogenic molecules. ‘Molecular imprints’ contained in potentized drugs selectively binds to the pathogenic molecules having complementary affinity due to the configurational similarity of pathogenic molecules and original drug molecules used for potentization. This configurational similarity is decided by ‘similarity of symptoms’. Pathogenic molecules are thus entrapped by the ‘molecular imprints’, thereby relieving the biological molecules from inhibitions. Disease is cured at molecular level itself.

———————————————————————————-

Let us examine what actually happens during homeopathic potentization.

During trituration of crude drugs, and during early stages of dilution and succussion, individual molecules contained in the drug substance are liberated by breakage of inter-molecular bonds that held them together. By this process,drug molecules get ionized and more reactive, and even insoluble substances thereby become soluble in the water-alcohol medium. Triturations and lower dilutions are biologically more active than crude drugs and mother tinctures, due to these free molecules and and ions they contain.

Drug molecules are subjected to a process of ‘hydration’ when they are dissolved in water-alcohol mixture. Hydration takes place by the water-alcohol molecules arranging themselves around independent drug molecules, and forming a supra-molecular network around them through hydrogen bonding. These supra-molecular networks are called ‘hydration shells’. Hydrogen bonds of water molecules are normally weak, but presence of comparatively heavy ethyl alcohol molecules attached to them make the hydration shells more stable. A clathrate-like supra-molecular ‘host-guest’ complexes are formed, where drug molecules act as ‘guests’ and water-ethyl alcohol molecules as ‘hosts’. This is what happen during early stages of potentization.

During serial process of diluting and violent shaking, ‘guest’ molecules happen to escape from ‘guest-host’ complexes, and empty ‘hydration shells’ remains. Formation of new ‘guest-host’ complexes and generation of empty ‘hydration shells’ continues. Due to serial dilutions, the concentration of drug molecules is reduced by each stage, same time increasing the concentration of empty ‘hydration shells’. By the time potentization crosses 12c or Avogadro’s limit, the medium become totally devoid of all drug molecules, and will be concentrated by only empty ‘hydration shells’ representing diverse types of constituent drug molecules.

It has been reported to have observed that supra-molecular formations of water, being part of ‘clathrate’ complexes can maintain their network structures even after the ‘guest’ molecules are removed from them. More over, ‘clathrates’ are found to have behaving some what like crystals, and existing ‘clathrates’ can induce the formation of similar networks even in the absence of ‘guest’ molecules’. All these complex factors have to be taken into account when studying the molecular processes involved in potentization.

As such, homeopathic potencies above 12c contains only empty ‘hydration’ shells remaining after the removal of drug molecules from the ‘guest-host’ complexes formed during earlier stages of dilutions. These empty ‘hydration shells’ are actually supra-molecular clusters of water-ethyl alcohol molecules, carrying 3-dimensional nanocavities remaining after removal of ‘guest’ drug molecules. Actually, these nanocavities are ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules, which can act as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules similar to the drug molecules in their molecular configurations. This ‘configurational affinity of ‘molecular imprints’ towards specific pathogenic molecules make them powerful therapeutic agents. Similia Similibus Curentur is logically explained in terms of these molecular imprints.

Since I consider molecular imprints as the active principles of potentized drugs, I do not subscribe to the idea that ‘higher’ potencies are more ‘powerful’, and I see no special benefit by using ‘higher’ potencies.

I think 12c is enough for completing molecular imprinting and removal of all drug molecules from the medium. What happens at molecular level during further potentization is still an open question for me. In supra-molecular chemistry, there is research going on regarding a phenomenon known as ‘induced molecular assembly’. That means, supra-molecular clusters acting as templates and inducing other molecules to form similar clusters. We know, ‘induced molecular assembly’ is involved in crystallization, clathrate formation etc. Even ‘prions’, which are misfolded proteins, multiply by ‘induced misfolding’. Antibodies, which are ‘molecular imprinted proteins’, also multiply by ‘inducing’ other globulin proteins to change configuration. Molecular imprints, which are supra-molecular clusters of water, may also multiply by the process of ‘induced molecular assembly’, where existing ‘molecular imprints’ may act as templates and induce formation of similar molecular imprints. It is only a possibility, which need in-depth study, which may provide us a rational way of resolving the riddle of high potencies. For the time being, I leave it as an open question.

Even though ‘molecular imprints’ may be formed in higher potencies through the process of ‘induced molecular assembling’, by no way that makes higher potencies more ‘powerful’ or ‘potent’. By 12c, all drug molecules will be removed from the medium, and medium gets saturated with ‘molecular imprints’. 12c will be ideal homeopathic. therapeutic agent. I see no special benefits by going ‘higher’. But, diluting medicines while administering by mixing with water may be beneficial, by increase the number of molecular imprints.

Triturations and low potencies containing original drug molecules act as ‘competitive’ factors towards pathogenic molecules in binding to biological molecules. But, ‘molecular imprints’ contained in potencies above 12c act as ‘complementary’ factors, binding directly to specific pathogenic molecules due to their configurational affinity. Obviously, low potencies and high potencies act therapeutically by different molecular mechanisms.

———————————————————————————–

According to hahnemann, miasm of PSORA is the ‘chronic susceptibility to disease’ caused by the residual effects of ITCH INFECTION. He never talks about PSORA unrelated with ‘infectious agents of itch’. It was based on the keen observation of a genius.

With the very limited scientific knowledge available during his time, it was impossible for hahnemann to explain HOW an ‘infection of itch’ can cause ‘chronic susceptibility to diseases’. His limitations are understandable.

With the advanced scientific knowledge available NOW, we are in a position to answer the questions our master left unanswered. It is well known now that ANTIBODIES are generated by our innate defense system when infectious agents or any ‘proteins’ ALIEN to our genetic substance enter our body. It is also known that these antibodies will remain long time or even for the whole life in our body even after the concerned infections are subsided. These ANTIBODIES can attack various OFF-TARGET biological molecules in the body, and cause pathological molecular errors in long course. This type of ‘residual effects’ of infectious diseases results in ‘chronic susceptibility to diseases’. Antibodies are transferred from mother to infant through fetal circulation, and also from mother to child through breast milk. Antibodies could also be transferred from one person to another through blood transfusions.

It is now well clear HOW ‘infections of itch’ causes chronic ‘miasm’ of PSORA as hahnemann rightly observed.

Now we can scientifically define miasm of PSORA as the “chronic susceptibility to diseases arising from off-target bio-molecular inhibitions caused by antibodies generated in the body against infectious agents of itch disease”.

This definition fits well to hahnemann’s observations on one side, and modern scientific knowledge on the other side.

———————————————————————————-

In PHILOSOPHICAL LECTURES ( p.135), Dr J T Kent says:

“Psora is a state of susceptibility to disease from willing evils”.

Kindly read CHRONIC DISEASES carefully. Hahnemann has very lucidly explained how miasm of psora develops from ‘infections of itch disease’. No where the master says psora is a miasm caused by ‘willing evils’.

This is a classical example of ‘evils’ done by Dr Kent to homeopathy.

——————————————————————————-

Dr J T KENT says in LESSER WRITINGS (p.654]:

“Thinking, willing and doing are the 3 things in life from which finally proceed the chronic miasms”.

Dr Hahnemann said miasms originates from ‘infectious agents”. He explains PSORA as miasm resulting from infection of itch, SYPHILIS as miasm originating from ‘syphilis’ infection, and SYCOSIS as miasm originaing from infection of ‘gonorrhoea’ and ‘figwart’ disease.

Which MASTER we should ‘follow’ for learning miasms? Dr Kent, or Dr Hahnemann?

——————————————————————————–

According to your understanding, what actually happens during homeopathic potentization? What are the ‘active principles’ of our drugs potentized above avogadro limit or 12 c? What is the exact biological mechanism by which our potentized drugs produce cure according to the principle ‘similia similibus curentur’? Those who believe in ‘dynamic drug energy’, kindly keep away. We need an answer that is rational, and fits to modern scientific understanding.

———————————————————————————

Dr. J T Kent says: “A man who cannot believe in God cannot become a homeopath.” [Lesser Writings- p.671], and ‘You cannot divorce medicine and theology.” [Lesser Writings, p.641]

Does these statements reflect a scientific approach towards medical science? Do you agree Dr Kent is right?

Volume XVIII- Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy

To be a PERFECT SIMILIMUM, our selected drug should contain ALL the diverse types of chemical molecules that could produce ALL the diverse types of molecular inhibitions and symptoms in the particular patient, so that in potentized form it would contain ALL the diverse molecular imprints required to remove ALL the diverse molecular inhibitions in him. If the selected drug does not contain ALL the diverse types of molecular imprints required for the patient, it will be PARTIAL SIMILIMUM only. In such cases, we can make a PERFECT SIMILIMUM by combining two or more PARTIAL SIMILIMUMS indicated by the symptoms.

————————————————————-

If I am asked what is ‘similimum’, I would say ‘similimum’ is the drug that contains ALL the diverse types of chemical molecules that could produce ALL the diverse types of molecular inhibitions and symptoms in healthy organism EXACTLY SIMILAR to the pathological molecular inhibitions and symptoms existing in the patient before us, by binding to same biological target molecules that were affected by the pathogenic molecules.

Potentized forms of the perfect similimum would contain all the diverse types of molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance, which can bind to the diverse types of pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity and remove the pathological molecular inhibitions caused by them in the living body.

———————————————————————————

MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics refers to a scientific hypothesis that proposes a rational model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics. This hypothesis was first proposed by myself.

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and diseaes indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.

———————————————————————————

The old therapeutic system Hahnemann called as ALLOPATHY does not exist any more. It evolved into MODERN MEDICINE, parallel to the advancements of scientific knowledge. Modern Medicine is now gradually evolving into MOLECULAR MEDICINE.

MOLECUAR MEDICINE studies vital processes and diseases at molecular level, and deals therapeutics as an art and science of molecular level repairing.

MOLECULAR MEDICINE is the most advanced, most scientific and most recently originated discipline in modern medical science. It is a broad field, where physical, chemical, biological and medical techniques are used to describe molecular structures and mechanisms, identify fundamental molecular and genetic errors of pathology, and to develop molecular interventions to correct those errors.

MOLECULAR MEDICINE emphasizes disease and cure in terms of cellular and molecular phenomena and interventions rather than the conceptual and observational focus on patients and their organs common to conventional medicine.

MOLECULAR MEDICINE studies drug substances in terms of their molecular level structure and organization, and is more and more relying upon target-specific Designer Drugs synthesized by drug designing technology, supported by computer aided designing protocols.

Once the DRUG DESIGNING TECHNOLOGY realizes the scope of developing MOLECULAR IMPRINTS that could be used as therapeutic agents, MOLECULAR MEDICINE will ultimately evolve into MOLECULAR IMPRINTS THERAPEUTICS.

At that point, HOMEOPATHY will be recognized as an advanced branch of modern molecular medicine. as homeopathy is actually using molecular imprinted ‘water-alcohol’ supramolecular structures as therapeutic agents, even though it is not presently understood as such.

———————————————————————————–

Molecular Imprinted Drugs Will Provide A Converging Point For Homeopathy And Modern Molecular Medicine:

In a far distant historical perspective, I foresee the possibility of converging of modern medicine and homeopathy into a universal molecular medical science of ‘drug-less therapy’, where only molecular imprints will be used as therapeutic agents.

Modern Medicine is gradually evolving into ‘Molecular Medicine’. Molecular Medicine studies vital processes and diseases at molecular level, and deals therapeutics as an art and science of molecular level repairing.

Molecular medicine is the most advanced, most scientific and most recently originated discipline in modern medical science. It is a broad field, where physical, chemical, biological and medical techniques are used to describe molecular structures and mechanisms, identify fundamental molecular and genetic errors of pathology, and to develop molecular interventions to correct those errors.

‘Molecular Medicine’ emphasizes disease and cure in terms of cellular and molecular phenomena and interventions rather than the conceptual and observational focus on patients and their organs common to conventional medicine.

Molecular Medicine studies drug substances in terms of their molecular level structure and organization, and is more and more relying upon target-specific Designer Drugs synthesized by drug designing technology, supported by computer aided designing protocols.

Drug Designing Technology has recently started exploring the possibilities of Molecular Imprinting in the development of target-specific designer drugs. They are now experimenting for developing bio-friendly imprinting matrices and imprinting protocols, so as to prepare artificial binding surfaces for pathogenic molecules that could be utilized as therapeutic agents.

Even though not yet recognized as such, homeopathic potentization is a process of molecular imprinting, where artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules are produced by imprinting drug molecules into water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrices. Homeopathy identifies pathological molecular errors and selects the appropriate molecular imprints through a peculiar technique of ‘comparing symptoms’, which is expressed as the therapeutic principle, ‘simila similibus curentur’

Most probably, modern molecular medicine and drug designing technology is in the new future going to explore the possibilities of water as a molecular imprinting medium as part of their search for novel substances to be utilized as imprinting matrix.

It means, Modern Molecular Medicine is slowly advancing towards the realization of a drug designing technology that homeopathy invented as ‘potentization’ and utilized for preparing therapeutic agents 250 years ago. It is based on this understanding that I try to propagate the concept that ‘Homeopathy is Molecular Imprinting Therapeutics- An Advanced Branch of Molecular Medicine.

In a far distant historical perspective, I foresee the possibility of converging of modern medicine and homeopathy into a universal molecular medical science of ‘drug-less therapy’, where only molecular imprints will be used as therapeutic agents. Instead of our present ‘potentization’, modern science may develop more sophisticated ways of molecular imprinting, that would enable us to produce therapeutic agents more specific and perfect than our present day ‘potentized drugs’.

May be be distant dream. But it is a dream based on scientific knowledge.

————————————————————————————

SEE HOW HAHNEMANN DEFINES THE QUALITIES OF A GOOD ‘PHYSICIAN’:

The physician’s high and only mission is to restore the sick to health, to cure, as it is termed. The highest ideal of cure is rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of the health, or removal and annihilation of the disease in its whole extent, in the shortest, most reliable, and most harmless way, on easily comprehensible principles.

To be “a true practitioner of the healing art.”, a physician should know “how to treat judiciously and rationally”. He should have “knowledge of disease”. He should have “knowledge of medical powers”. He should have knowledge of “choice of the medicine indicated”. He should have knowledge of “proper dose and the proper repeating the dose”. He should have knowledge of “obstacles to recovery in each case”. He should have knowledge of “how to remove” those obstacles. He should also know about the “things that derange health and cause disease, and how to remove them from persons in health”.

Each word in this definition is important. Every homeopath should honestly look into himself and examine whether he is at least earnestly trying to fit himself to this wonderful definition.

In modern knowledge context, definition of “knowledge of diseases” hahnemann proposed as a basic qualification of “good physician” inevitably should mean the understanding of biochemical processes involved in the ‘molecular level pathology’ of diseases.

“Knowledge of medicinal powers” should include the knowledge regarding the exact ‘active principles’ of potentized drugs, and the biological mechanism by which they produce cure.

“Proper dose and repetition” could be scientifically decided only if you know ‘what is the exact active principles’ of potenteized drugs we are using, and ‘how they actually work’.

“Knowledge of things deranging health” actually means scientific understanding of modern hygiene and nutrition.

Our practice will become “judicious and rational” as hahnemann defined, only if modern homeopaths attain at least that much of scientific awareness . Do you say “most of homeopaths” are equipped with these essential scientific knowledge to be qualified as ‘good physicians’?

———————————————————————————–

I think, terms CHRONIC and ACUTE do not denote any special character of a disease, but it denotes physician’s subjective APPROACH towards a case he is dealing with. A physician can approach and deal with any case with a CHRONIC or ACUTE approach.

When physician tries to resolve only the most troublesome and immediate PARTICULAR complaints of a case, disregarding its CONSTITUTIONAL aspects, it is an ACUTE approach.

When he tries to resolve the same case with full regard to its CONSTITUTIONAL as well as PARTICULAR aspects, it is a CHRONIC approach. Way of case taking, collection of symptoms, heirachy of symptoms, weightage of symptoms, way of selecting drugs, dosage, mode of administration- every thing changes depending up on whether physician approaches the case as CHRONIC or ACUTE.

If you decide to you target only the most distressing PARTICULAR COMPLAINTS that represent some ABNORMAL conditions, you can work out a case by ACUTE approach. In this approach, you have to collect all the most prominent ABNORMAL BASIC SYMPTOMS you want to relieve, along with their accessories such as LOCATION, SENSATIONS, CAUSATIONS, PRESENTATION, MODALITIES, CONCOMITANTS etc. Add each BASIC symptom with its characteristic ACCESSORIES, to make a COMPLETE HOMEOPATHIC SYMPTOM, and find a similimum for it. If you get more than one COMPLETE SYMPTOM, you may get different similimum for each. Prescribe them.

If you decide to work out the case for a TOTAL CURE by CHRONIC approach, over and above the above mentioned BASIC SYMPTOMS and their ACCESSORY symptoms, collect all ABNORMAL symptoms related with the WHOLE PERSON, such as Physical generals, Mentals, Miasms, Family History, Chronology of complaints, Vaccinations, Previous diseases, Miasms, Allergies, Food habits, Addictions, Thermals, Dreams, Facial expressions, Gestures, Emotional background, Occupation, Working environment, Family relations, Personal relationships, Living environment- everything have to be collected if you are going to work out a case by CHRONIC approach. Repertorize by any of the conventional repertorization methods and find appropriate similimum.

When working with CHRONIC approach, I prefer to arrange symptoms into different SYMPTOM GROUPS such as PHYSICAL GENERALS, MENTALS, and different categories of PARTICULARS. Then I would find similimum for each group separately. If all groups cover same similimum, I would prescribe it. If different symptom groups indicate different similimum, I go for MULTIPLE drug prescriptions to ensure a TOTAL CURE of the PATIENT.

In ACUTE approach, ‘previous history’ is more or less ignored. Diseases are dealt with a similimum selected on on CAUSATION- LOCATION- PRESENTATION- SENSATIONS- MODALITIES- CONCOMITANTS.

In CHRONIC approach, ‘previous history’ of disease evolution is very important. If an acute complaint has a long PREVIOUS HISTORY, CHRONIC approach will be more suitable. To deal with CHRONIC approach, we will have to consider PHYSICAL GENERALS, MENTALS and HISTORY over and above CAUSATION- LOCATION-PRESENTATION- SENSATIONS- MODALITIES- CONCOMITANTS while making prescriptions. HISTORY includes genetics, previous infections, family history, vaccinations, emotional history, occupational history, environmental history etc etc.

MIASMS or ‘persistent off target actions of antibodies generated against infectious agents and alien proteins’ are the MAJOR factor to be considered in CHRONIC approach. Auto-immune diseases, prion diseases, proteinopathies or deformed protein diseases, vaccination diseases, immune-related diseases, ontological diseases – all these diseases belonging to this class of MIASMATIC diseases warrants a CHRONIC approach

———————————————————————————-

Selecting Similimum Becomes Very Simple If You Look For Peculiar ‘Concomitant Symptoms’

CONCOMITANT symptoms are very important in deciding a similimum, since they will be always very peculiar to the PATIENT. Never ignore concomitants if they are peculiar. In most cases, concomitants will lead us to a right remedy or group of probable remedies. During case taking, we should be very careful for not to miss these valuable indicators of SIMILIMUM.

CONCOMITANTS mean potentially independant symptoms that appear as ADDITIONAL symptoms, along with or accompanying with a BASIC symptom. ALTERNATING SYMPTOMS as well as EXTENSIONS also may be considered as concomitants, as they also are ADDITIONAL symptoms appearing DURING, ALONG WITH or RELATED WITH the main BASIC symptoms. Concomitants are most helpful indicators for individualizing the patient by identifying the exact molecular errors working behind a particular symptom group, and for identifying the exact molecular imprints required to remove those molecular errors.

Concomitants are always explained by the patients as well as in repertories using terms such as ‘accompanied with’ ‘along with’, ‘during’, ‘alternating’, ‘extending to’, or ‘concomitant with’ itself.

For example, VOMITING during HEADACHE- here vomiting is a concomitant of headache. If it is HEADACHE during VOMITING, headache is the concomitant of vomiting. NAUSEA during headache, YAWNING during headache, BACKACHE along with piles, DIARRHOEA with COLIC, ABDOMINAL pain extending to back, ASTHMA with URTICARIA, ASTHMA alternating with URTICARIA, CORYZA during EATING, CHEST PAIN extending to FINGERS, HEADACHE with SLEEPINESS- we can cite thousands of examples for CONCOMITANTS from our repertories. Study them with special care, to be a successful prescriber.

MODALITIES are different from CONCOMITANTS. Modalities are not additional symptoms like concomitants. They are only factors such as CONDITIONS or TIME that ameliorate or aggravate certain symptoms. In some cases, CONCOMITANT symptoms may also MODIFY the basic symptoms by aggravating or ameliorating it. Such MODIFYING CONCOMITANTS are far more helpful in selecting a similimum even more than pure concomitants or modalities.

Some homeopaths claim that they can prescribe “without all these things”, on the basis of “behavior, temperament & personality” only. Can anybody decide the “behavior, temperament & personality” of a patient without observing and studying his SUBJECTIVE and OBJECTIVE symptoms? ‘Concomitants’ need not be always ‘physical’ or particular’. It may be ‘behavioral’, ‘temperamental’ or abnormalities in ‘personality’. If patient shows some ‘change of mood such as violent outbursts, weeping or anger during headache’, the mood changes are CONCOMITANTS of headache. If a patient ‘desires to sit in solitude’ during headache, ‘desire solitude’ is a CONCOMITANT of headache. If it is ‘weeping’ during ‘dysmenorrhoea’, ‘weeping’ is a CONCOMITANT of ‘dysmenorrhoea’. There is no scope for any confusion in this regard.

Any ABNORMAL objective and subjective symptom, that reflects any ABNORMAL molecular processes happening in the body that have to be corrected by using a medicinal agent, are to be considered by the homeopath in deciding an appropriate remedy for that patient. If anything ABNORMAL is there in his ‘behavior, temperament or personality’, it will of course provide a strong indication to an appropriate remedy. But remember, it should be an ABNORMAL one, or DEVIATION from normal, to be of worth consideration. NORMAL ‘behavior, temperament or personality’ indicates NORMAL physiological processes, where as we are looking for what is going ABNORMAL in him.

When I use the terms SUBJECTIVE and OBJECTIVE symptoms, that no way disregards ‘behavior, temperament or personality’. Every general, particular, mental, or physical symptom, including those of ‘behavior, temperament or personality’ come under the purview of ‘subjective and objective’ symptoms.

Some people accuse BOENNINGHAUSSEN has ignored mentals, generals as well as ‘behavior, temperament or personality’ aspects while defining TOTALITY in terms of ‘causations, locations, sensations, modalities and concomitants’. This accusation arises from incorrect understanding of boenninghaussen’s approach. CAUSATION may be physical or mental. LOCATION includes generals and particulars. SENSATIONS comprises of all SUBJECTIVE symptoms, including general or particular sensations as well as mentals. MODALITIES also include mental and general aspects of aggravations and ameliorations. CONCOMITANTS may be general, mental, physical, or particular. Boenninghaussen’s method no way disregards or ignores ‘behavior, temperament or personality’, but explains and classifies them with a different approach, more systematic, specific and scientific.

I have felt that boenninghaussen ignored or did not give due consideration to the PRESENTATION or APPEARANCE aspects of symptoms, such as general and particular physical appearance, type of discharges, type of eruptions, lesions, skin changes, hair, gestures, gaits, facial expressions etc etc. That is why I include a new category PRESENTATIONS along with CAUSATION, SENSATION, LOCATION, MODALITIES and CONCOMITANTS schema of boenninghaussen. I also want to stress the importance of ALTERNATING SYMPTOMS and EXTENSIONS under the category of CONCOMITANTS. By this way, I think I have updated boenninghaussen’s schema into more perfection.

————————————————————————————

Many young homeopaths ask me: “How to convert SYMPTOMS into RUBRICS?”

We get only ‘symptoms’ from the patients- that too in ‘their language’, and in very nontechnical ways. Converting those symptoms into the ‘technical language’ of materia medica and repertories is a very important work physician has to undertake before starting the successful search for similimum. In other words, we have to convert SYMPTOM into RUBRIC.

This job becomes very simple if you have a software that provides search options using MULTIPLE KEY WORDS.

Type one or more words that you expect to be part of rubric you are searching for. A few key terms of the symptom is enough. Type those words in search tool, and click SEARCH. All rubrics, belonging to any chapter of your repertory, that contain the KEY WORDS you used will be instantly displayed. Scroll down through the list and select a rubric that seems to be most appropriate to your symptom. Finished. Work is done. You need not worry how to convert a symptom into a rubric, or to which part of repertory it belongs!

For example, see how I am finding an appropriate RUBRIC for the SYMPTOM ‘headache relieved by vomiting’ into its rubric, I typed the key words HEAD, PAIN, VOMIT in the search tool of SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE and then searched. Following rubrics were displayed:

1. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Violent pains : With red face, vomiting and diarrhoea
2. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting
3. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting : Amel.
4. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting : After
5. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Burning : Vomiting, after
6. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Pressing : Vomiting amel.
7. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Tearing, rending : Vomiting, after
8. [Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Tearing, rending : Occiput : Vomiting

It is very easy for me to select the most appropriate rubric from this list. I selected the RUBRIC “[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting : Amel.”

We can reduce the number of rubrics displayed by using more key words, so that the list will be more specific.

This is how a good software helps us to convert a SYMPTOM into a RUBRIC, and locate it in the REPERTORY with in split-seconds.

———————————————————————————-

When you start perceiving potentized drugs in terms of diverse types of hydrosomes or ‘molecular imprints’ as the ‘active principles’ they contain, you will realize that all controversies over ‘monopharmacy/polypharmacy’ issue become totally irrelevant.

SIMILIMUM essentially means a drug substance that can provide the specific molecular imprints required to remove the particular molecular errors that caused the particular disease condition in the particular patient.

Since ‘multiple’ molecular errors exist in any patient in a particular point of time, expressed through ‘multiple’ groups of symptoms, he will inevitably need ‘multiple’ molecular imprints to remove them. If potentized form of a ‘single’ medicinal substance can provide all those ‘multiple’ molecular imprints, that ‘single’ drug substance will be enough. If we could not find a ‘single’ drug substance that contain ‘all’ the ‘multiple’ molecular imprints required by the patient as indicated by the ‘symptom groups’, we will have to include ‘multiple’ drug substances in our prescription. It is the constituent molecular imprints contained in our particular prescription that matter.

Important point is, we have to ensure that our prescription supplies ALL the diverse types of molecular imprints required to deactivate all the diverse types of pathogenic molecules working in the patient, as indicated by the diverse groups of subjective and objective symptoms expressed by him. If we could find a SINGLE drug preparation that could supply all the molecular imprints required by the patient I am dealing with, we can use that SINGLE drug preparation only. If we do not find such a single drug, we have to include as many number of drug preparations as required, in order to provide all the molecular imprints needed to remove all the molecular errors in the patient.

SINGLE/MULTIPLE drug controversy never bothers if we understand this scientific approach proposed by MIT, as we start thinking in terms of molecular imprints- not drug names. Actually, a drug become ‘single’, if it contains ‘single’ type of molecular imprints only. IF a drug contains more than one type of molecular imprints, it is a COMPOUND DRUG, even if it is known by a ‘single’ drug name, prepared from a ‘single’ SOURCE material, kept in a ‘single’ bottle, consumed as a ‘single’ unit for ‘drug proving’, or considered by ‘masters’ as ‘single’ drug.

When we consume NUX VOMICA Q, it is absorbed into the blood as various individual chemical molecules contained in it. It is these individual chemical molecules that interact with various biological molecules. Different molecules act up on different biological targets according to the molecular affinities of their functional groups. Biological molecules are inhibited, resulting in errors in the biochemical pathways mediated by those biological molecules. Such molecular level errors in biological processes cascades into a series of molecular errors, which are expressed through various groups of subjective and objective symptoms.

It is obvious that what we consider as the SYMPTOMS OF NUX VOMICA are actually the sum total of different SYMPTOM GROUPS, representing entirely different molecular errors produced in entirely different biological molecules, by the actions of entirely different chemical molecules contained in NUX VOMICA TINCTURE.

We have to remember, there is no such a thing called nux vomica molecule- only individual chemical molecules contained in nux vomica tincture. Each constituent molecule has its own specific chemical structure and properties. They act on different biological targets by this chemical properties.

Each individual chemical molecule contained in nux vomica acts as an individual drug. That means, NUX VOMICA is not a SINGLE drug, but a COMPOUND drug.

Homeopaths may find it difficult to accept this fact, as it contradicts with their beliefs as well as the lessons they are taught. But it is the scientific fact.

From scientific point of view of pharmaceutical chemistry, a DRUG is a biologically active unit contained in a substance used as therapeutic agent.

IT is the structure and properties of that chemical molecule that decides its medicinal properties and therapeutic actions. If such as substance contains only ONE type of biologically active unit, it is a SINGLE drug. If it contains different types of biologically active units, it is a COMPOUND drug.

It is obvious that most of the drugs we use in homeopathy – especially drugs of biological origin and complex minerals- contain diverse types of biologically active units, and hence they cannot be considered SINGLE drugs.

Molecular imprinting happens as individual molecules, and as such, potentized drugs prepared from a SINGLE drug substance will contain diverse types of molecular imprints representing the diverse types of individual constituent molecules contained in the substance. Those molecular imprints also act as individual units when applied in the organism. Hence, potentized drugs prepared by using a complex, seemingly single drug substance is actually a COMPOUND drug, containing diverse types of biologically active units, or ‘MOLECULAR IMPRINTS’.

IF you still cannot realize the meaninglessness and utter folly involved in talking about SINGLE DRUGS, it is the blindness caused by your dogmatic learning and lack of scientific awareness. I cannot help you for that!

———————————————————————————

By detecting the presence of ‘nanoparticles’ in the samples of homeopathic drugs, what did the IIT-B team actually prove”? They only proved that the ‘market samples’ of 6c, 30c and 200c are not much different from each other, and the manufacturers are fooling the profession by selling very low potencies (below Avogadro limit) with labels of ‘ultra-high’ dilutions! The research team also got fooled by conducting this research using these fake ‘ultra-high’ potencies.

———————————————————————————–

I was most generously invited by the respected organizers to present a paper on Molecular Imprints Therapeutics at Global Homeopathy Summit in Mumbai to be conducted on 11th and 12th of April 2015.

Even though I have been looking for such an opportunity for MIT since long time, I finally. decided to turn down the invitation. Reason for my decision is very simple- the published list of speakers contain TWENTY EIGHT prominent personalities hailing from different parts of the globe, and belonging to various premier research institutions. TWENTY EIGHT speakers for TWO DAYS means FOURTEEN speakers per day.. Time slot scheduled for these speakers is 9 am to 6 pm on both days- means total 9 hours per day. FOURTEEN papers have be ‘presented’ and ‘discussed’ by NINE HOURS. One topic will get maximum THIRTY EIGHT MINUTES for presentation and discussion!

I do not expect the innovative idea of MIT could be presented and discussed by ‘thirty eight minutes’ in front of an audience tired of that much number of ‘speakers’ and ‘personalities’. I need minimum one hour to present the MIT ideas, one hour for discussions, and minimum 30 minutes to sum up the discussions, for my effort to be fruitful. Otherwise my travel from kerala to mumbai will be a waste of money, time and energy. That is why I decided to stay away from GHF summit, with all my gratitude to Dr Rajesh Sha. .

——————————————————————————–

Dr J T KENT gives following very important advice in “What The Doctor Needs To Know”. I am sharing it here, as I think all young aspiring homeopaths have a lot to learn from this advice:

“The homoeopathic physician has no remedy for the name of a disease.

Homoeopathy is an exact science. It is based upon a natural law, and the true physician must prescribe in accordance with this law of nature.

Homoeopathy has no specific for any disease by name, but it has a true specific for each individual case of disease.

That is, Homoeopathy does not treat fever, or any other disease, in the abstract, but applies medicine to the individual personality in that condition which produces or causes fever.

To apply the homoeopathic remedy properly that condition of the individual patient must be known by the voice of nature speaking through symptoms.

The beneficent Creator has ordained that every diseased condition shall be made known by certain symptoms, and whenever that same condition is present that same set of symptoms will also be present.

Certain symptoms are always present in any given disease ; these point alone to the name of the disease.

In every given disease there is another class of symptoms peculiar to the individual and differing in some way from those of other cases of the same disease ; these symptoms show the individual characteristics of the patient and point unerringly to the curative homoeopathic remedy.

When these symptoms peculiar to the individual patient are known the homoeopathic remedy can be selected that will surely cure every curable disease, whether the disease be tumors, morbid growths, cancer or other skin diseases, or any form of chronic or acute disease peculiar to man, woman or child.

To accomplish this desirable result every case must be individualized, every symptoms from head to feet, must be given, every variation from positive health must be known.

Whatever is not as it should be is a symptom and must be recorded.”

——————————————————————————-

What is a SYMPTOM?

Dr J T Kent says in LESSER WRITINGS- What The Doctor Needs To Know:

“Whatever is not as it should be is a symptom and must be recorded.”

It gives a perfect definition of ‘symptom’. WHATEVER IS NOTICED IN THE PATIENT THAT IS ‘NOT AS IT SHOULD BE.’. Means, anything that is not NORMAL is a symptom.

——————————————————————————–

Haffkine institute, who is creating an aggressive media hype about their claim to have developed an “anti-TB homeopathic formula’ is expected to provide direct answers to the following simple questions:

1. What are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of this “anti-TB” drug, as you claim it to be prepared by a “molecular technique”?

2. What is the exact BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which this drug act upon living organism and produce a curative or “complementary”effect as you claim?

3. What is the ‘molecular process’ involved in potentization? As you claim to have developed a ‘new molecular techmique’ for potentization, you will be aware of it also, as a new ‘molecular technique’ cannot be developed without knowing the ‘molecular process’.

4. Is this a ‘single drug’ or a ‘combination formula’?

———————————————————————————-

Take one or more existing TB nosodes, add them with some other ‘micro-organisms’ claimed to be potentized using some mysterious NEW ‘molecular techniques’, make a compound formulation and introduce it as a ‘standardized anti-TB drug’; then create an aggressive media hype as if a great ‘fundamental research’ has been done in homeopathy! That is being done by Haffkine Institute in recent days.

No explanations given regarding the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES contained in this ‘ANTI-TB DRUG’! No explanations given regarding the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which this “drug” produce an anti-TB effect. Yet they claim it is a ‘fundamental research’ and a ‘historical invention’!

No explanations given regarding the NEW “molecular techniques” they used for potentization. Please remember, any “molecular techniques’ of potentization could be devised only if the exact ‘molecular processes’ involved in potentization is thoroughly understood. If Haffkine Institute has finally understood it, it will be the greatest fundamental research ever happening in homeopathy. But they do not make such a claim about such an achievement, or share such an information. Instead, they are creating media hype about an anti-TB “standardized formula” aimed for MARKETING in a big scale!

Kindly notice, they do not claim this NEW FORMULA will cure TB. They only “hope” that it will “complement” allopathic treatment! They are conducting “animal trials” to verify their “hope”! Is it not a joke?

———————————————————————————–

Homeopathy will not be scientifically explained, only because some ‘reputed scientists’ belonging to some ‘premier institutions’ make a key note address in a ‘homeopathy seminar’ and gloss over homeopathy by interspersing with some off-hand remarks about terms such as ‘molecular theory’ or ‘nanoparticles’ that may attract some enthralled claps from the dedicated homeopathic audiences sitting before the dais.

Homeopathy will not be scientifically explained, only because some nobel laureates “support” or utter some ‘good words’ about homeopathy.

Homeopathy will not be scientifically explained only because ‘great personalities’ such as mahathma gandhi, nelson mandela, mother theresa or ‘royal family of britain’ used or recommended homeopathy prescriptions.

To be scientifically explained and recognized as a ‘medical science’, following questions should be answered and proved by SCIENTIFIC METHODS.

1. What is the actual process that happens during drug potentization, by which the medicinal properties of drug substances are retained in a medium diluted very much above avogadro limit?

2. What are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of homeopathic drugs potentized above avogadro limit?

3. What is the exact BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which the ‘active principles’ contained in the potentized drugs interact with the living organism and produce a curative effect as envisaged by the axiom ‘similia similibus curentur’?

——————————————————————————–

Accepting the REALITIES and submitting to the LIMITATIONS of objective circumstances that are beyond our control will reduce the inner struggles and mental tension to a great extent. That is my experience.

———————————————————————————-

One learned friend belonging to Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy,Mumbai. has asked me “do not distort the basics of homeopathy.”

He accuses me of “irresponsible comments” without any “peer reviewed papers published”, that “divert the inexperienced homeopaths or students into a wrong path”.

I hope somebody would tell me what are the “basics of homeopathy” that should not be “distorted”? Which are the “basics of homeopathy” that are proved by “peer-reviewed” researches?

According to the “basics of homeopathy” that should not be “distorted”, what happens during potentization? What are the active principles of potentized drugs? What is the exact biological mechanism of homeopathic cure? Kindly tell me, sir.

Sir, as per your profile info, you belong to Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy,Mumbai.

I would like to get some references from you regarding “peer-reviewed” articles based on which you are talking about potencies, drug relationships and repetitions.

Why you are so much particular about “peer reviewed papers” only for my ideas, where as you are following, teaching and practicing all sorts of unscientific ‘laws’, ‘principles’ and ‘theories’ without any scientific proof or ‘peer reviewed’ researches?

Did anybody ever ‘prove’ any one of the aphorisms of organon by any scientific method?

As a person belonging to ” Regional Research Institute of Homoeopathy,Mumbai “, I would like to know what are your answers to the following fundamental questions of homeopathy:

1. What happens during potentization?

2. What are the active principles of potentized drugs?

3. What is the exact molecular level biological mechanism of homeopathic cure?

Any rational talk about drug relationship, repetitions, potencies etc could be done only on the basis of answers to these questions.

If you have no “scientifically proven” answers to the above questions, you are not ‘qualified’ to argue with me, which ever ‘research’ institute you belong to.

———————————————————————————

What Is The Key To The Successful Homeopathic Practice?

Practice homeopathy with minimum THEORY, with minimum ‘DON’TS’. Practice it with confidence- without any fear or foreboding.

COLLECT ALL ‘ABNORMAL BASIC SYMPTOMS’

CONVERT THEM THEM INTO ‘COMPLETE SYMPTOMS’ BY ADDING WITH THEIR ‘ACCESSORIES’ SUCH AS ‘CAUSATION-LOCATION-SENSATION-PRESENTATION-MODALITY-CONCOMITANTS’.

THEN SELECT ONE OR MORE SIMILIMUMS AS REQUIRED, USING ‘ANY’ OF THE VARIOUS METHODS APPROPRIATE FOR YOUR CASE.

THIS IS THE PRIMARY SKILL YOU SHOULD MASTER.

Remember following points also:

– Use only 30C.

– Do not hesitate to repeat frequently.

– Do not hesitate to change remedies as indicated by symptoms .

– Do not worry about ‘single-multiple’ drugs.

– Do not worry about ‘drug relationships’- ‘inimicals’ or ‘antidotes’.

– Do not worry about ‘miasmatic analysis’.

– Do not worry about ‘suppression’.

– Do not worry about ‘aggravations’ and ‘bad effects’ of potentized drugs.

YOU WILL DEFINITELY SUCCEED IN YOUR PRACTICE!

———————————————————————————

Ultimately, your LIFE becomes meaningful and a success when your CONTRIBUTIONS to the society over-weigh your APPROPRIATIONS from the society.

——————————————————————————–

DEMOCRACY is the measure of QUANTITY- not of QUALITY.

——————————————————————————–

If anybody expect me to be a ‘faithful follower’ of any master, any idea, any system or any organization, I am sorry, they are going to be disappointed. I follow only my ideas, my visions, my convictions and my decisions. I will be with you only as far as I am convinced you are on the right path. The very moment you prove otherwise, I will say goodbye!

——————————————————————————–

Ideas do not come from the blues. Any new IDEA is the ‘effect’ or continuation of existing ideas inherited from the previous generations. An IDEA becomes successful only if it serves as the ’cause’ of new ideas of future generations.

——————————————————————————

You need not pay any money or go for any ‘seminar’ to learn the real SCIENTIFIC HOMEOPATHY. Find some time to read the 250 plus articles published on www.dialecticalhomeopathy.com. It will be an experience more valuable and productive than hundreds of seminars. If you read all those articles carefully and try to clearly understand what are said in them, you will come out as a new man- a new homeopath empowered with a new vision regarding the theory and practice of homeopathy. You will become more confident, you will make better results, you will attract more patients, and your career will start blooming!

——————————————————————————–

Some homeopaths seem to be afraid that homeopathy cannot exist without the support of concepts such as ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’. They seem to fear that the whole ‘belief’ system of homeopathy will collapse if those ideas are discarded or proved wrong. That is why they fight tooth and nail to defend those concepts by virulently attacking anybody who say that those concepts are unscientific and unnecessary.

Once you understand the concepts of ‘molecular imprints’ as well as the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure as explained by MIT, you will realize that homeopathy can not only exist, but will become much stronger and acceptable even without ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’.

——————————————————————————-

Advancement of science during the last two hundred years since hahnemann left the scene has unraveled the molecular processes of life and diseases to such a level that we can now logically explain the fundamental principles of homeopathy on a new scientific basis that our master was unable to do due to the historical limitations of knowledge available to him.

We will be doing gross injustice to the great genius of Hahnemann, if we still continue to stick on to his historically obsolete unscientific explanations.

We should exhibit the intellectual courage to mercilessly discard the evidently irrational and unscientific parts of Hahnemannian homeopathy such as ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic energy’.

Same time, we should safeguard its inner kernel of the great natural therapeutic law of ‘similia similibus curentur’ and the therapeutic application of ‘molecular imprints’, which our master called ‘potentized’ drugs.

We should bravely replace the concept ‘vital force’ with scientific understanding of ‘vital process’ as explained by modern life sciences.

——————————————————————————-

Homeopaths should understand, claiming homeopathy to be a ‘science beyond science’, ‘science of hidden dimensions’ or ‘spiritual science’ may help some persons to appear fashionable and ‘scholarly’, but all these futile ‘intellectual’ exercises contribute much in alienating this great therapeutic system from current main stream science.

———————————————————————————

MEDICAL PRACTICE involves the study and application of MEDICINES, substances that are ‘material’. Medicinal substances work by their ‘material’ structure and physico-chemical properties. There is nothing ‘immaterial’ or ‘spiritualistic’ in it.

Potentized drugs contain MOLECULAR IMPRINTS, which are supramolecular formations of water-alcohol molecules, and are ‘material’ structures. They act by their ‘conformational’ properties, binding to the pathogenic molecules and deactivating them. There is nothing ‘immaterial’ or ‘spiritualistic’ in it also.

———————————————————————————

A lot of “scientific seminars” on homeopathy are happening every year around the world. A lot of ‘reputed’ ‘experts’ and ‘researchers’ participate in these seminars and give scholarly enlightening lectures. At the end of the day, ‘science’ of homeopathy remains where hahnemann left it 250 years ago!! (If not taken a little more backward).

Only thing generated in these ‘scientific seminars’ are MONEY for the people behind- nothing else!

Volume XIX- Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy

Skeptics always ask for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) for proving the ‘efficacy’ of homeopathy.

According to their viewpoint, homeopathy is ‘ineffective’ and ‘fake’ if there are no enough RCTs to support it. Some enthusiastic homeopaths having no understanding of ‘molecular imprints’ and their biological mechanism, often fall in this trap and try to do RCTS, which inevitably result in ‘failures’.

Those friends should be made to understand, RCTs are useful only in proving the efficacy of ‘molecular forms’ of drugs. They are not applicable in verifying the efficacy of ‘molecular imprints forms’ of drugs used as ultra-dilutions of homeopathy.

Molecular imprints contained in ultra-dilutions act by a biological mechanism that is entirely different from the actions of ‘molecular’ drugs. Molecular imprints cannot exhibit any biological action in the absence of pathogenic molecules having conformational affinities.to the particular molecular imprints contained in the selected drug, that could be determined only by ‘similarity of symptoms’. That is why RCTs cannot be used to validate homeopathy.

Issue of proving the efficacy of homeopathy could be satisfactorily addressed only when scientists recognize this difference in biological mechanism of molecular imprints and molecular drugs, and agree to evolve newer methods of validation that are more perfect and more compatible with the peculiar biological mechanism of homeopathic cure.

—————————————————————————————————

WHAT OUR WORLD HOMEOPATHIC COMMUNITY DID TO EFFECTIVELY COUNTER THESE ARGUMENTS AGAINST HOMEOPATHY?

In early 2010, the UK’s Parliamentary Science and Technology Select Committee published a report into homeopathy and whether it should be funded by the government as part of the National Health Service.

I AM QUOTING FROM THE REPORT:

—Select Committee report, p. 47:

“”Overall conclusion- By providing homeopathy on the NHS and allowing MHRA licensing of products which subsequently appear on pharmacy shelves, the Government runs the risk of endorsing homeopathy as an efficacious system of medicine. To maintain patient trust, choice and safety, the Government should not endorse the use of placebo treatments, including homeopathy. Homeopathy should not be funded on the NHS and the MHRA should stop licensing homeopathic products.”

—Select Committee report, p. 9:

“”What is homeopathy? 9. Homeopathy is a 200-year old system of medicine that seeks to treat patients with highly diluted substances that are administered orally. Homeopathy is based on two principles: “like-cures-like” whereby a substance that causes a symptom is used in diluted form to treat the same symptom in illness and “ultra-dilution” whereby the more dilute a substance the more potent it is (this is aided by a specific method of shaking the solutions, termed “succussion”). It is claimed that homeopathy works by stimulating the body’s self-healing mechanisms.

10. Homeopathic products should not be confused with herbal remedies. Some homeopathic products are derived from herbal active ingredients, but the important distinction is that homeopathic products are extremely diluted and administered according to specific principles.”

—Select Committee report, p. 10:

“”14. In June 2009 the Guardian reported that the NHS had spent £12 million on homeopathy in the period 2005–08.16 According to the Society of Homeopaths, the NHS spends £4 million on homeopathy annually. It appears that these figures do not include maintenance and running costs of the homeopathic hospitals or the £20 million spent on refurbishing the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital between 2002 and 2005″.

—Select Committee report, p. 18:

“”47. Our expectations of the evidence base relevant to government policies on the provision of homeopathy are straightforward. We would expect the Government to have a view on the efficacy of homeopathy so as to inform its policy on the NHS funding and provision of homeopathy. Such a view should be based on the best available evidence, that is, rigorous randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses and systematic reviews of RCTs. If the effects of homeopathy can be primarily attributed to the placebo effect, we would expect the Government to have a view on the ethics of prescribing placebos.”

—Select Committee report, p. 18:

“”49. There appear to be two main concerns. The first is the principle of like-cures-like and the second is about how ultra-dilutions could retain characteristics of the active ingredient”.

—Select Committee report, p. 20:

“”54. We conclude that the principle of like-cures-like is theoretically weak. It fails to provide a credible physiological mode of action for homeopathic products. We note that this is the settled view of medical science”

—Select Committee report, p. 23:

“”70. In our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebos.”

—Select Committee report, p. 23:

“”77. There has been enough testing of homeopathy and plenty of evidence showing that it is not efficacious.

MY COMMENTS UPON THE SELECT COMMITTEE REPORT:

A. Select Committee report, p. 18:

“”49. There appear to be two main concerns. The first is the principle of like-cures-like and the second is about how ultra-dilutions could retain characteristics of the active ingredient”.

MIT has taken up the task of addressing these two “main concerns” in most scientific terms

B. Select Committee report, p. 20:

“”54. We conclude that the principle of like-cures-like is theoretically weak. It fails to provide a credible physiological mode of action for homeopathic products. We note that this is the settled view of medical science”

POINT 1. MIT provides a scientifically “credible physiological mode of action for homeopathic products”.

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

POINT 2. MIT has shown that the homeopathic principle ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ Is not at all “weak” as the select committee report has observed.

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and diseaes indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

THE PROBLEM IS, HOMEOPATHIC COMMUNITY FAILED TO PRESENT THIS MIT CONCEPTS BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE. HAD ANYBODY DONE IT, THE OUTCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.

—————————————————————————————————

As everything else in this universe, there cannot exist ‘immutable’ laws, principles , theories, or ‘methods’ in homeopathy also.

Once we acquire better scientific knowledge regarding the exact processes involved in potentization, exact active principles of potentized drugs and the exact molecular mechanism of their therapeutic action, all the existing ‘methods’, ‘laws’, ‘rules’ and ‘principles’ are bound to change. New ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ will evolve.

That means, we will have to discard, change or modify many things so far considered as ‘fundamentals’ of homeopathy.

————————————————————————————————

According to some ‘leaders of kerala homeopathy’, Chandran K C is only an ITCH on the body of homeopathy, and they advise their ‘followers’ to ignore that itch, as it will subside gradually. No treatment is required for this ‘minor’ ailment- they can continue their slumber without any worry!

They are asking their followers to avoid discussing MIT. If anybody mentions MIT on their groups, they are instantly removed.

As Dr Hahnemann said, ITCH is not that much simple. It is the MOTHER of all diseases! Creating ITCH using right prescriptions is essential for an ever lasting cure of chronic ailments. I am bringing the ‘long-suppressed’ itches of homeopathy out through MIT ‘prescriptions’. They are right!

The real problem with them is, they are more concerned about ‘defeating’ the person behind MIT, than even scientifically explaining homeopathy itself.

For ‘defeating’ MIT, they conducted some ‘nanoparticle research’, and started making ‘half-cooked’ bizarre theories about ‘quantum dots’ and their biological mechanism of action, hoping nobody knows what is this ‘quantum dots’! When hard questions started coming, they feign deaf and dumb!

It is for this purpose of ‘defeating MIT’ that they brought famous scientists such as G Madhavan Nair and Dr Rajashekaharan Pillai with big propaganda, hoping they would give some ‘scientific theories’ about homeopathy that would enable them to ‘counter’ MIT. To their utter despair, G Madhavan Pillai spoke nothing about homeopathy. Dr Rajashekaran Pillai made some casual comments such as “each homeopathic potency is a new molecule”. It was enough. Our leaders started propagating the NEW theory of homeopathy proposed by Dr Pillai. Very soon, they realized it will not hold for long!

This is a pathetic situation. I feel sympathy for these ‘leaders’.

————————————————————————————————-

What might have been the intention of Dr Hahnemann , when he first started working on ‘potentization’ of drugs? Was it for ‘enhancing’ the power, or, ‘reducing’ the side effects? ANY IDEA?

During hahnemann’s time, allopaths were using large quantities of mercury, arsenic, toxic chemicals, strong purgatives, blood letting etc as part of their treatments.

Actually, hahnemann wanted to quit medical practice practice due to his disagreements with this crude drugging, and started translating of medical books to earn his living.

When he accidentally invented the theory of similimum, he started using very small quantities of drugs to avoid bad effects of crude drugging he hated so much. First he used teaspoon fulls of tinctures. Then switched over to drop doses of tinctures, then half or quarter of drops, for fear of bad effects. Then he started diluting the tinctures. Observing that even very diluted tinctures have desired medicinal effects, he gradually increased the scale of dilutions.

Since he could not explain the medicinal properties of very diluted drugs any other way, he believed that some kind of ‘dynamic energy’ is released during the process of dilution. In earlier stages, ‘shaking’ was done only to mix the solutions thoroughly. Later, he started believing that it was this ‘shaking’ that released the medicinal energy, and he started working upon ‘potentization’ seriously.

———————————————————————————————–

Genius of Hahnemann made two important observations regarding a peculiar type of relationship between drug substances and diseases. 250 years ago:

1. Diseases with specific symptoms can be cured by using preparations made from drugs that can produce similar symptoms in healthy individuals. He called this phenomenon as ‘similia similibus curentur’.

2. When used according to ‘similia similibus curentur’, extremely diluted forms of drug substances can act as powerful therapeutic agents. He called this process of preparing ‘extreme dilutions’ as ‘potentization’.

These TWO are the main OBSERVATIONS made by Hahnemann, which are known as fundamental principles of Homeopathy.

Hahnemann tried to explain these OBSERVATIONS in terms of scientific and philosophical knowledge available to him in that POINT OF TIME. Organon consists of these theoretical explanations and speculations. Since scientific knowledge was in its primitive stage at that time, Hahnemann’s explanations were bound to bear that limitations. ORGANON contains a lot of theorizations and speculations that do not agree with, or go against modern scientific understanding.

These two FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS were based on experiences, experiments and logical evaluations of OBJECTIVE PHENOMENA OF NATURE done by a great intellectual person. But the ‘principles’ he used to explain these objective phenomena were unscientific, obviously due to the limitations of scientific knowledge available to him at that time.

All other ideas that form the ‘theoretical system’ of homeopathy are only philosophical explanations, conjectures, interpretations, opinions and empirical conclusion based on personal experiences of ‘stalwarts’ and ‘masters’. They are not ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy.

Equipped with modern scientific knowledge and its tools, we are now in a far better position than Samuel Hahnemann to explain the phenomena he observed 250 years ago. Now we can explain ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’ more scientifically, rationally and logically. With full respect the great genius of our master, we should be truthful and bold enough to discard those evidently unscientific theoretical speculations of ORGANON.

We should accept his OBSERVATIONS, but judiciously discard or modify his unscientific PRINCIPLES.

—————————————————————————————————–

‘Antidoting’ And ‘Deactivating’ Of Potentized Homeopathic Drugs- A Scientific Explanation:

In Chronic Diseases : Para 142, Hahnemann describes the articles to be avoided during homeopathic treatment:

“For many easily perceived reasons, but especially in order that this delicate doses of medicine may not be interfered with in their action, the homoeopathic physician cannot in his antipsoric treatment allow the intermediate use of any hitherto customary domestic remedy, no perfumery of any kind, no fragrant extracts, no smelling-salts, no Baldwin tea, or any other herb teas, no peppermint confection, no spiced confections or anise-sugar or stomach drops, or liqueurs, no Iceland-moss, or spiced chocolate, no spice-drops, tooth-tinctures or tooth-powders of the ordinary kinds, nor any of the other articles of luxury.”

According to this statement of hahnemann, , the ‘delicate doses of medicine’ used in homeopathy may be ‘interfered with in their actions’ by “customary domestic remedy”, “perfumery”, “fragrant” “smelling-salts”, “Baldwin tea”, “herb teas”, “peppermint confection”, “spiced confections”, “anise-sugar” , “liqueurs”, “Iceland-moss”, “spiced chocolate”, “spice-drops”, “tooth-tinctures” “tooth-powders” etc. Kindly notice, most of the articles Hahnemann listed here are those which may contain VOLATILE OILS. That indicates a very important observation.

I have been wondering for long whether there exist any scientific basis for this advice made by Hahnemann. After studying the molecular structure of various volatile organic compounds including CAMPHOR, and understanding the mechanism of their interactions, now I think there could be some amount of truth in it, though it was somewhat distorted and far-stretched by hahnemann. Certain chemical molecules contained in these aromatic organic compounds may be capable of antidoting certain MOLECULAR IMPRINTS contained in a wide class of potentized homeopathic drugs- especially drugs of vegetable origin-, by deactivating their constituent molecular imprints by binding to them due to their conformational affinity.

Most aromatic organic compounds have a C=O moiety in its functional group. Such compounds are called carbonyl compounds, which also include aldehydes, ketones, carboxylic acid, esters, amides, enones, acyl halides, acid unhydrides etc. Most of these substances are aroma compounds, which are responsible for the property known as fragrance and flavors.

Compounds that contain C-O bonds possess differing reactivity based upon the location and hybridization of the C-O bond, owing to the electron-withdrawing effect of hybridized oxygen. Certain medicinal properties of various vegetable substances and some animal products are mostly due to the presence of molecules having highly reactive C=O moiety in their functional groups.

In organic chemistry, functional groups are specific groups of atoms within molecules that are responsible for the characteristic chemical reactions of those molecules. The same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reactions regardless of the size of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified by nearby functional groups.

The word moiety is often used synonymously to “functional group,” but to be more specific, a moiety is a part of a molecule that may include either whole functional groups or a parts of functional groups as substructures. The atoms of functional groups are linked to each other and to the rest of the molecule by covalent bonds. When the group of covalently bound atoms bears a net charge, the group is referred to more properly as a polyatomic ion or a complex ion. Any subgroup of atoms of a compound also may be called a radical, and if a covalent bond is broken homolytically, the resulting fragment radicals are referred as free radicals.

Camphor is a volatile organic aroma compound with chemical formula C10H16O, belonging to the class known as terpenoids. When kept open, its molecules would easily diffuse into the atmosphere.

Camphor is a cyclic terpene, having a C=O moeity in its functional group. Such compounds are called carbonyl compounds, which also include aldehydes, ketones, carboxylic acid, esters, amides, enones, acyl halides, acid unhydrides etc. Most of these substances are aroma compounds, which are responsible for the property known as fragrance and flavors. Compounds that contain C-O bonds each possess differing reactivity based upon the location and hybridization of the C-O bond, owing to the electron-withdrawing effect of sp hybridized oxygen.Medicinal properties of various vegetable substances and some animal products are mostly due to the presence of molecules having highly reactive C=O moiety in their functional groups.

Drug molecules act upon the biological molecules in the organism by binding their functional groups to specific active groups on the complex biological molecules. Here, the functional groups of drug molecules called ligands, and the biological molecules are called targets. Ligand-target intercation is always determined by a ‘key-lock’ relationship due to complementary configurational affinities.

It is to be specifically noted that same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reactions regardless of the size or configuration of of the molecule it is a part of. However, its relative reactivity can be modified by nearby functional groups known as facilitating groups. That means, different types of drug molecules or pathogenic molecules having same functional groups and facilitating groups can bind to same biological molecules, and produce similar molecular inhibitions and symptoms.

Homeopathic principle of ‘similimum’ is well explained by this understanding. If a drug molecule can produce symptoms similar to symptoms of a particular disease, it means that the drug molecule and disease causing molecule has same functional groups on them. Obviously, similarity of symptoms means similarity of functional groups of pathogenic molecules and drug molecules. To be similimum, the whole molecules need not be similar, but similarity of functional groups is enough.

Potentized drugs would contain the molecular imprints of drug molecules, along with molecular imprints of their functional groups. These molecular imprints will have specific configurational affinity towards any molecule having same functional groups, and can bind and deactivate them.

As said above, most of the vegetable and animal drugs contains diverse types of aromatic drug molecules and esters having C=O functional groups, which are also present on camphor molecules. Potentized homeopathic drugs would contain molecular imprints of this functional groups, which can be easily deactivated by crude camphor molecules as well as other aromatic molecules. Molecules of Volatile substances such as camphor would easily diffuse into atmosphere and nearby potentized drugs, and bind to molecular imprints of C=O functional groups they contain. It would result in deactivation of molecular imprints, which we call antidoting.

I hope, I have scientifically explained the molecular mechanism of the phenomenon of antidoting of potentized drugs by perfumes and strong smelling substances. Most perfumes contains esters, which have C=O functional groups.

Now it is obvious that CAMPHOR IS NOT A UNIVERSAL ANTIDOTE AS WE BELIEVE. Only MOLECULAR or crude forms and low potencies of CAMPHOR can ‘selectively’ antidote particular ‘molecular imprints’ contained in potentized drugs.

MOLECULAR IMPRINTS or or potencies above 12c of camphor cannot antidote any other potentized drugs. More over, even MOLECULAR forms of camphor cannot antidote ALL molecular imprints of potentized drugs, but only those individual molecular imprints which have conformational affinity due to the presence of C=O functional groups.

Drug relationship is a subject about which most homeo practitioners are very much worried and confused. Some practitioners very much rely upon ‘drug relationships’ even in deciding their treatment protocols. Concepts such as ‘complementary’, ‘inimical’, ‘antidotal’ etc. are frequently utilized in everyday practice. Some doctors even deviate from the theory of similimum, due to their over indulgence with ‘drug relationship’ protocols. When prescribing a drug based on its so-called complementary relationship to the earlier prescriptions, we forget to consider whether it is a similimum by totality of symptoms. Yet, we call it ‘classical’ homeopathy. When searching through the literature and authorities regarding drug relationships, it will be seen that no serious scientific studies have been done on this subject. Most of the drug relationships are proposed by empirical clinical observations of practitioners, and not corroborated by scientific studies or evidences. More over, practitioners who are not much bothered over this relationships between drugs swear that their experiences prove otherwise. Some homeopaths prescribe so-called inimical drugs even simultaneously or alternatingly, and get expected clinical results.

We have already seen during our previous deliberations that in homoeopathic potencies above 12C, there is no chance of drug molecules to exist. These preparations contain only hydrosomes or molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance subjected to potentization. Molecular imprints are only nanocavities formed by supra-molecular clustering of water and ethyl alcohol. Chemically, they contain only water and ethyl alcohol molecules. Even a given sample of homeopathic potency contains hundreds of types of individual imprints, representing the diverse types of molecules contained in the original drug substance. It is clear that they co-exist without disturbing or influencing each other in anyway, same time preserving their individual properties as molecular imprints of specific drug molecules.

1. This clearly indicates that highly potentized homoeopathic preparations cannot chemically interact with each other, since they contain no drug molecules. Obviously, they are not likely to engage in any mutual interaction within or outside the organism. They can never antidote or destroy each other.

2. Same time, the case of mother tinctures and preparations below 12c potencies may be totally different. They contain crude drug molecules, which can interact with each other due to their chemical properties. The concept of ‘drug relationships’ may be valid in the case of these low potencies. Low potencies may be more active than crude drugs, since they contain free molecules and ions.

3. Low potencies and mother tincture of a drug may antidote higher potencies of same drug, due to the interaction with the hydrosomes which act as counteractive complementary factors to each other.

4. Same way, low potencies and mother tinctures of a drug may antidote higher potencies of another drug that may contain similar constituent molecules, due to the interaction with the hydrosomes having counteractive complementary factors relationship. Obviously, drugs containing similar molecules may have more or less similar symptomatology during drug proving.

5. Higher potencies of a drug may antidote the physiological effects of low potencies and mother tinctures of same drug, due to the interaction with the hydrosomes acting as counteractive complementary factors.

6. Same way, higher potencies of a drug may antidote low potencies and mother tincture of another drug, that may contain similar constituent molecules, due to the interaction with the counteractive complementary factors contained in the higher potencies.

If there is similarity only between certain types of constituent molecules of two drugs, partial antodoting is possible. That means, molecules having configurational similarity only are subjected to antidoting by this way. Such drugs will have partially similar symptomatologies.

We should be aware of the possibility of dangerous chemical interactions that might result between the constituent drug molecules of different drugs, when we mix or administer two or more mother tinctures and low potency preparations together.

Since ‘molecular imprints, the active principles of potentized drugs, are nothing but hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular formations of water-ethyl alcohol molecules into which the three-dimensional spacial forms are engraved as nanocavities, any physical or chemical influence that may destroy these formations will be capable of ‘deactivating’ potentized drugs. This include heat, strong radiations, chemical agents etc.

—————————————————————————————————-

Avogadro number is used to calculate the number of molecules or atoms in a given quantity of any substance. It is defined that 1 gram mol of any substance will contain 6.022×10^23 numbers of its molecules. 1 gram mol is the molecular mass of a substance expressed in grams. Since molecular mass of hydrogen is 2, 2 grams of hydrogen constitutes 1 gram mol of hydrogen, and it will contrain 6.022×10^23 number of hydrogen nolecules. Molecular mass of oxygen is 32, and hence 32 gms of oxygen will contain 6.022×10^23 oxygen molecules. Molecular mass of water is 18, and hence 18 gms of water will contain 6.022×10^23 h2o molecules. Molecular mass of carbon is 12, and hence 12 gms of carbon will contain 6.022×10^23 carbon molecules. In other words, 2 gms of hydrogen, 32 gms of oxygen, 18 gms of water and 12 gams of carbon will contain EQUAL NUMBER of molecules, which is a fixed number 6.022×10^23. It is obvious that number of molecules in equal quantities of different substances will be different depending upon their molecular mass. Larger the molecular mass, the lesser will be the number of molecules in a given quantity.

————————————————————————————————-

Unless you can answer the question where from the unending supply of “drug particles” come to be distributed in each and every drops of ‘ultra’ dilutions that are millions of times above Avogadro limit, all your ‘theories’ of ‘nanoparticles’ and ‘drug molecules entrapped in vehicle molecules” are simply absurd.

————————————————————————————————-

One homeopath from kerala messaged me: “Stop this nonsense. You are not qualified to discuss homeopathy. Do you think you are a new hahnemann?”

What is the “qualification” to “discuss” homeopathy?

If everything you read or hear simply fly over your head, or if you are ignorant about the topics being discussed, you are not “qualified” to discuss any topic!

I do not think there is any chance for a “new hahnemann” or “new einstein” here. I am proud to be Chandran K C, and will remain here as Chandran K C and continue not only to ‘discuss’, but REDEFINE HOMEOPATHY, even without any “qualification” or support from any ‘leader’.

————————————————————————————————-

If you believe NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH has “proved” homeopathy, kindly answer this question:

Molecular mass of CARBON is 12. According to AVOGADRO, 12 grams of CARBON will contain 6.022 x 10^23 molecules of carbon. Since one molecule of carbon contains 2 atoms, the number of total atoms in 12 gms will be double this number. Means, 12 gms will contain 2 x 6.022 x 10^23 atoms of carbon. (1204400000000000000000000)

If we are starting potentization by triturating 1 gm of carbon with 99 gms of sugar of milk, first potency will contain 100360000000000000000000 carbon atoms in 100 gms of CARBON 1C potency.

100 gms 2C potency will contain 103600000000000000000 atoms.
100 gms 3c potency wil contain 1036000000000000000 atoms
100gms 4c potency 10360000000000000

100 ml of 12C potency of CARBON will contain 1.04 carbon atoms.
100 ml of 13C potency will not contain even a single atom of carbon.

You may calculate 30C, 200C, 1M and CM if you want to know.

If you say ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of ‘ultra dilutions’ are NANOPARTICLES or ‘drug molecules entrapped in vehicle molecules’, you will have to explain where from these ‘drug molecules’ or NANOPARTICLES come in these ‘ultra dilutions’.

Remember, we are using not 100 ml, but fractions of drops as a homeopathic dose!

100ml of 12C will contain ONE atom of CARBON. Approximately, 100ml contains 1500 drops. Any ONE of these 1500 drops may carry this ONE ATOM. Remaining 1499 drops will not have carbon atoms in them. How can this ONE ATOM be present in EACH DROP used as homeopathic dose? Got it, sir?

Remember, NANOPARTICLES are supra-atomic formations, much larger than individual atoms.

If you believe in the “1% top layer” theory of our ‘nanoparticle researchers’, kindly explain what you think about the 99% that remains after the “transferring of 1% top layer to next level of potentization”.

Do you still think your theory of NANOPARTICLES or “drug molecules entrapped in vehicles” is right?

————————————————————————————————–

I know very well that I am a ‘pebble’, where as George Vithoulkas is a mighty ‘mountain’. But to be intellectually truthful, I cannot conceal my disagreements with his views about homeopathy. I cannot follow anybody blindly- even master Hahnemann.

I wanted to know, whether Vithoulkas ever express his views regarding what happens during potentization, by which medicinal properties of drug substances are transferred to potentizing medium?

I wanted to know, whether Vithoulkas ever try to answer the question what are the active principles of potentized drugs?

I wanted to know, whether Vithoulkas ever tried answer the question what is the biological mechanism of action of potentized drugs?

I think nobody serious about homeopathy can evade these three fundamental questions, answers of which will ultimately define his approach to homeopathy.

According to the NEW MODEL of Vithoulkas:

“1. Unless we understand the functioning of the human organism in its subtle levels we cannot hope to unravel the laws and principles governing human intelligence, human emotionality and the human physical body as well as their interconnection and interdependence.

2. Such universal laws should be searched for in an area far beyond the physico-chemical structure of the human body – this area, this realm that can be called a substratum of subtle formulative energies.”

He is trying to explain the ” human intelligence, human emotionality and the human physical body as well as their interconnection and interdependence” using a concept of “subtle formulative energies”! He has all rights to do that, if he stop claiming he is talking SCIENCE! There is nothing scientific in his “subtle energy”. We have been hearing about this “subtle energy” from all sorts of occult practitioners and spiritual healers. Nobody can make homeopathy ‘scientific’, by talking theories of “subtle energy”.

The specific statement “Epigrammatically I could say that the time for an Energy Medicine has arrived”, very clearly shows that George Vithoulkas is least interested in making homeopathy a SCIENTIFIC MEDICINE.

See how the NEW MODEL of Vithoulkas defines DISEASE:

“A disease (process of degeneration) will only take place if the vibrational frequencies of the stimulus (disease producing agent) and the organism (predispositions) coincide. Diseases are nothing else but the activation of the existing predispositions.”

Did you notice? Disease happens only when “vibrational frequency” of “disease producing agent” COINCIDES with the “vibrational frequency” of “predispositions of organism”. For him, DISEASE is all about COINCIDING of “vibrational frequencies”!

In his NEW MODEL, there is no role for biochemistry, molecular biology, immunology, genetics or any such knowledge- only “subtle energy” that is “communicated principally through the smallest particle-energy bodies that have not been defined yet”!

His views about the active principles of potentized drugs as ‘subtle energy’, and his ‘new model’ for disease and cure based on ‘resonance’ are basically contradicting all the modern scientific knowledge system.

It is very frustrating to see that he drags “prana, bioplasma, orgon, etc., etc.” into his NEW MODEL as a “substratum” for the activities of “subtle energy”, thereby alienating homeopathy completely away from the framework and paradigms of modern scientific knowledge system.

Due to his obsession with the ‘resonace model’, he is totally incapable of even thinking about a scientific model for the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure. Biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, molecular pathology and such modern scientific knowledge have no place in his ‘energy medicine’ theories.

Whatever sophisticated scientific vocabulary he uses, George Vithoulkas, the ‘living legend of homeopathy’, is basically a staunch proponent of the most unscientific ‘energy medicine’ theories about homeopathy, as demonstrated by his writings.

I strongly disagree with his ‘energy medicine’ approach to homeopathy, even though personally I have great respects for his comparatively rational approach towards most of the nonsense concepts and methods propagated by modern day ‘gurus’.

————————————————————————————————–

WITHOUT A SCIENTIFICALLY VIABLE WORKING HYPOTHESIS AS A SPRINGBOARD OF FURTHER ACTIONS, YOU CANNOT CONDUCT A GENUINE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. OUR ‘NANO-PARTICLE RESEARCHERS’ OF HOMEOPATHY TRIED TO DO IT WITHOUT SUCH A HYPOTHESIS, WHICH INEVITABLY LED THEM TO POORLY CONCEIVED EXPERIMENTS, INACCURATE OBSERVATIONS, WRONG INTERPRETATIONS, FOOLISH CONCLUSIONS AND TOTALLY ABSURD THEORIES.

SCIENTIFIC METHOD is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. It is ‘a method or procedure consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of a proposed HYPOTHESIS.

The chief characteristic which distinguishes a scientific method of inquiry from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself. Hypothesis is raised to the status of THEORY when the predictions based on hypothesis are confirmed. Hypothesis is discarded or modified when its predictions prove false.

Scientific researchers proposes a HYPOTHESIS as explanations for an unexplained but known phenomenon, and design experimental studies to test this hypothesis via PREDICTIONS which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter. Certain researches may encompass wider domains of inquiry that may bind many independently derived hypotheses together in a coherent, supportive structure.

A hypothesis is derived as a tentative answer to a naturally arising question regarding a known phenomenon. It is a conjecture based on the knowledge obtained while formulating the question.

To be considered scientifically viable, a hypothesis must be FALSIFIABLE, meaning that one can identify a possible outcome of an experiment that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis through a NULL HYPOTHESIS; otherwise, it cannot be meaningfully tested.

According to scientific method, PREDICTIONS, TESTING and ANALYSIS are the essential steps in the validation of a scientific hypothesis.

MIT proposes the following HYPOTHESIS as an answer to the question HOW HOMEOPATHY WORKS. We have to PROVE it or DISPROVE it.

“Homeopathy is a therapeutic method of curing diseases by using ‘molecular imprints’ of drug substances, which in ‘molecular forms’ could produce ‘symptoms’ similar to those presented by the patient. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms indicate that the drug molecules and pathogenic molecules have ‘similar’ functional groups, by which they could bind to ‘similar’ biological molecules, produce ‘similar’ molecular inhibitions that caused ‘similar’ molecular pathology which are expressed through ‘similar’ subjective and objective ‘symptoms’. Molecular imprints of ‘similar’ drug molecules can act as artificial binding sites for ‘similar’ pathogenic molecules due to complementary configurational affinity, thereby deactivating them and relieving the biological molecules from pathological inhibitions, which amounts to ‘cure’. This the scientific meaning of Similia Similibus Curentur.”

Essential part of this HYPOTHESIS that has to be proved or disproved first is that homeopathic potentization is a process of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING, and the active principles of potentized drugs are MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules. This has to be proved or disproved according to scientific methods, to make homeopathy a legitimate medical science.

PREDICTIONS formulated for proving MIT HYPOTHESIS are:

1. If ‘molecular imprinting’ concept is right, there will not any single ‘molecule’ of original drug substance remaining in potencies above avogadro limit, if they are genuinely potentized.

2. If ‘molecular imprinting’ concept is right, chemical analysis of high potency drugs and plain water-alcohol mixture will prove they have same chemical constitution.

3. If ‘molecular imprinting’ concept is right, potentized drugs have therapeutic effects if used as per indications, but plain water-alcohol mixture will not exhibit any therapeutic effect.

4. If ‘molecular imprinting’ concept is right, spectrometric studies will show that high potency drugs and plain water-alcohol mixtures are entirely different in their supra-molecular organizations.

5. If ‘molecular imprinting’ concept is right, in vitro and in vivo studies will prove that high potency drugs have biological properties that are reverse to those of their molecular forms (below 12c)

6. If ‘molecular imprinting’ concept is right, high potency drugs should be capable of antidoting or neutralizing the biological effects of molecular forms of same drugs.

THESE PREDICTIONS HAVE TO BE PROVED OR DISPROVED THROUGH SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTS.

————————————————————————————————–

How can I convince you something, if you persistently hesitate to read anything I write? I regularly post at least one article everyday explaining my concepts of ‘molecular imprints’ and their implication in homeopathy. Without reading what I write, you are asking me to “prove”! I once again request you to take some time to read at least some of those articles.

How can I prove my scientific concepts of homeopathy to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn supra-molecular properties of water?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the subject matter of molecular imprinting technology?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn the modern biochemistry and molecular biology?

How can I prove my concepts to somebody who does not know or is not willing to learn advanced concepts of enzyme kinetics and molecular level pathology?

My request to those who ask for ‘proof for my concepts’ is, kindly update your basic knowledge in the topics I discuss. Then only you can follow these concepts. Then only I can ‘prove’ molecular imprints concepts to you.

Once you acquire the background knowledge and then read my articles, you will see that everything I say is simple ‘proved’ science, and only very little remains to be ‘proved’.

————————————————————————————————-

Let us examine what actually happens during potentization.

During trituration of crude drugs, and during early stages of dilution and succussion, individual molecules contained in the drug substance are liberated by breakage of inter-molecular bonds that held them together. By this process,drug molecules get ionized and more reactive, and even insoluble substances thereby become soluble in the water-alcohol medium. Triturations and lower dilutions are biologically more active than crude drugs and mother tinctures, due to these free molecules and and ions they contain.

Drug molecules are subjected to a process of ‘hydration’ when they are dissolved in water-alcohol mixture. Hydration takes place by the water-alcohol molecules arranging themselves around independent drug molecules, and forming a supra-molecular network around them through hydrogen bonding. These supra-molecular networks are called ‘hydration shells’. Hydrogen bonds of water molecules are normally weak, but presence of comparatively heavy ethyl alcohol molecules attached to them make the hydration shells more stable. A clathrate-like supra-molecular ‘host-guest’ complexes are formed, where drug molecules act as ‘guests’ and water-ethyl alcohol molecules as ‘hosts’. This is what happen during early stages of potentization.

During serial process of diluting and violent shaking, ‘guest’ molecules happen to escape from ‘guest-host’ complexes, and empty ‘hydration shells’ remains. Formation of new ‘guest-host’ complexes and generation of empty ‘hydration shells’ continues. Due to serial dilutions, the concentration of drug molecules is reduced by each stage, same time increasing the concentration of empty ‘hydration shells’. By the time potentization crosses 12c or Avogadro’s limit, the medium become totally devoid of all drug molecules, and will be concentrated by only empty ‘hydration shells’ representing diverse types of constituent drug molecules.

It has been reported to have observed that supra-molecular formations of water, being part of ‘clathrate’ complexes can maintain their network structures even after the ‘guest’ molecules are removed from them. More over, ‘clathrates’ are found to have behaving some what like crystals, and existing ‘clathrates’ can induce the formation of similar networks even in the absence of ‘guest’ molecules’. All these complex factors have to be taken into account when studying the molecular processes involved in potentization.

As such, homeopathic potencies above 12c contains only empty ‘hydration’ shells remaining after the removal of drug molecules from the ‘guest-host’ complexes formed during earlier stages of dilutions. These empty ‘hydration shells’ are actually supra-molecular clusters of water-ethyl alcohol molecules, carrying 3-dimensional nanocavities remaining after removal of ‘guest’ drug molecules. Actually, these nanocavities are ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules, which can act as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules similar to the drug molecules in their molecular configurations. This ‘configurational affinity of ‘molecular imprints’ towards specific pathogenic molecules make them powerful therapeutic agents. Similia Similibus Curentur is logically explained in terms of these molecular imprints.

Since I consider molecular imprints as the active principles of potentized drugs, I do not subscribe to the idea that ‘higher’ potencies are more ‘powerful’, and I see no special benefit by using ‘higher’ potencies.

I think 12c is enough for completing molecular imprinting and removal of all drug molecules from the medium. What happens at molecular level during further potentization is still an open question for me. In supra-molecular chemistry, there is research going on regarding a phenomenon known as ‘induced molecular assembly’. That means, supra-molecular clusters acting as templates and inducing other molecules to form similar clusters. We know, ‘induced molecular assembly’ is involved in crystallization, clathrate formation etc. Even ‘prions’, which are misfolded proteins, multiply by ‘induced misfolding’. Antibodies, which are ‘molecular imprinted proteins’, also multiply by ‘inducing’ other globulin proteins to change configuration. Molecular imprints, which are supra-molecular clusters of water, may also multiply by the process of ‘induced molecular assembly’, where existing ‘molecular imprints’ may act as templates and induce formation of similar molecular imprints. It is only a possibility, which need in-depth study, which may provide us a rational way of resolving the riddle of high potencies. For the time being, I leave it as an open question.

Even though ‘molecular imprints’ may be formed in higher potencies through the process of ‘induced molecular assembling’, by no way that makes higher potencies more ‘powerful’ or ‘potent’. By 12c, all drug molecules will be removed from the medium, and medium gets saturated with ‘molecular imprints’. 12c will be ideal homeopathic. therapeutic agent. I see no special benefits by going ‘higher’. But, diluting medicines while administering by mixing with water may be beneficial, by increase the number of molecular imprints.

Triturations and low potencies containing original drug molecules act as ‘competitive’ factors towards pathogenic molecules in binding to biological molecules. But, ‘molecular imprints’ contained in potencies above 12c act as ‘complementary’ factors, binding directly to specific pathogenic molecules due to their configurational affinity. Obviously, low potencies and high potencies act therapeutically by different molecular mechanisms.

———————————————————————————————–

Only ‘molecular imprints’ can rationally explain following phenomena:

1. There is no chance for any single ‘molecule’ of original drug substance remaining in potencies above avogadro limit, if they are genuinely potentized.

2. Chemical analysis of high potency drugs and plain water-alcohol mixture proves they have same chemical constitution.

3. Potentized drugs have therapeutic effects if used as per indications, but plain water-alcohol mixturebdoes not exhibit any therapeutic effect.

4. Many spectrometric and thermoluminance studies have proved that high potency drugs and plain water-alcohol mixtures are entirely different in their supra-molecular organizations.

5. In vitro and in vivo studies have proved that high potency drugs have biological properties that are reverse to those of their molecular forms (below 12c)

6. Studies have proved that high potency drugs can antidote or neutralize the bilological effects of molecular forms of same drugs

———————————————————————————-

When ‘scientific research’ is done by those who have no any idea of basics of science and scientific methods, it will end up only as a funny joke! That is what now happens to our ‘nanoparticle researchers’ of homeopathy!

———————————————————————————–

Anybody have the right to do any ‘research’ they like, and make any theory they could ‘derive’. But they should not expect everybody to blindly believe everything they say, but be prepared to face hard questions from those who think rationally, and answer them to establish the theories. That is an inevitable part of scientific method. Our ‘nanoparticle researchers’ of homeopathy have pathetically failed in this regard. They conveniently ignore all inconvenient questions! According to our fiery GHF head Dr. Sreevals menon, asking questions is “destructive” to scientific research, and will not be “permitted”!

———————————————————————————-

Our respected ‘nanoparticle researchers’ say they detected QUANTUM DOTS in potentized drugs, and make BIG theories about their action on genetic substance. Why they fail to realize that these QUANTUM DOTS are nothing but simple SILICA particles leaching into our medicine from glass and ceramic utensils?

——————————————————————————–

Before making ‘nanoparticle theories about homeopathy’, at least try to get an answer to the question “where from this unending supply of nanoparticles comes in ultra dilutions”.

If it is by “carry over the whole nanoparticles from one step of dilution into next step” as IIT-B team say, what about the remaining part from which the “1% top layer” is carried to next level of dilution? Is it discarded?

We have to get an answer from some body!

———————————————————————————

This is a sentence from Business Standard, which quotes a prominent mumbai-based ‘GHF leader’ who conducted recent ‘global summit’ saying as follows:

“For years, homeopathy is stated to have been using the process of converting snake venom and poison from scorpions, spiders and wild bees into medicinal substances by transforming them into nano-particles that have proved safe and effective for patients.”

Can anybody “transform snake venom and poison from scorpions, spiders and wild bees” into NANO-PARTICLES? Did any ‘researcher’ ever detect ‘nanoparticles of snake venom’ in potentized homeopathic drugs?

If you do not know the answer, ask somebody who knows what really are ‘snake venom”, ‘nano-particle’ and ‘nanotechnology’.

————————————————————————————

I wonder why majority of our homeopathic community are behaving this much irrational.

When somebody say they could detect some ‘quantum dots’ in potentized medicines while observed with nanoscience equipment, and ‘explain’ homeopathy with this ‘quantum dots model’, nobody asks a single question about it.

What exactly are these things called ‘quantum dots’?

Why it is present in potentized drugs?

Where from these quantum dots come in homeopathic drugs?

What is the difference between molecules, nanoparticles and quantum dots?

How these quantum dots are expected to retain the biological and medicinal properties of complex drug substances prepared from plant or animal sources, consisting of diverse types of chemical molecules?

Nobody asks such rational, natural and basic questions. Instead, everybody is delighted about this ‘detection of quantum dots’, and start theorizing about its ‘dynamic’ properties, ‘vibrations’, resonance’ and ‘quantum effects’! They start sharing this ‘wonderful’ research with their friends!

Please discuss with a person of science to know what really is these ‘quantum dots’, which our ‘homeopathic researchers’ are trying to mystify.

Scientists will tell you, ‘quantum dots’ are very tiny nanoparticles (2-10 nm in size) of elements or compounds displaying ‘semiconductor’ properties, especially those belonging to ‘metalloid’ class of elements in periodic table, such as silica, germanium etc.

Presence of ‘quantum dots’ in potentized drugs only indicates the presence of some particles of SILICA or other semiconductor elements.

Where from this SILICA comes in potentized drugs? From the glass and ceramic utensils used for potentization and trituration.

It is a very simple knowledge. Nothing to be researched.

——————————————————————————–

The ‘nanoparticle researchers’ of homeopathy say they detected “QUANTUM DOTS” in potentized drugs, and try to theorize that homeopathic drugs act by the power of these ‘quantum dots’. I would suggest they should consult with some real scientists about this ‘quantum dots’ before publishing this type of ‘theories’.

‘Quantum dots’ are tiny particles or nanocrystals of a semiconducting material with diameters in the range of 2-10 nanometers (10-50 atoms). That means, quantum dots are nothing but ‘very small’ nanoparticles. (size of nanoparticles is 10-100 nanometers, and that of quantum dots is 2-10 nanometers). Quantum dots were discovered by Alexey Ekimov at first in 1981 in a glass matrix.

Although some pure elements and many compounds display semiconductor properties, silicon, germanium, and compounds of gallium are the most widely used in electronic devices. Elements near the so-called “metalloid staircase”, where the metalloids are located on the periodic table, are usually used as semiconductors.

What our ‘researchers’ detected in ultra-dilutions as QUANTUM DOTS are actually the SILICON particles detaching from mortars during trituretion, and from glass vials during dilution and succussion . They will be most probably present in all homeopathic drugs. It is absurd to theorize that these SILICA particles or QUANTUM DOTS are the active principles of potentized drugs.

Homeopaths should understand, by saying homeopathic potencies contain “quantum dots” that can “influence genetic material”, our respected ‘savior of homeopathy’ is doing a great disservice to homeopathy. By saying homeopathic potentized drugs can directly “influence genetic material”, they are opening doors for our enemies to attack homeopathy by labeling it as a dangerous thing. Any drug that can “influence genetic material” will be looked upon by people as unsafe things to be used as medicines.

————————————————————————————–

It is true that mother tinctures and crude drugs also can act as ‘similimum’ in certain conditions. But the molecular mechanisms of their therapeutic actions and ultimate outcome are fundamentally different from that of high potency drugs.

Drug molecules contained in mother tinctures and crude drugs may ‘compete’ with pathogenic molecules having similar molecular configuration in binding to biological molecules and displace them, thereby relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. By this ‘competitive’ relationship to pathogenic molecules, mother tinctures and crude drugs can act as similimum and produce therapeutic results.

‘Molecular imprints’ contained in potentized drugs act by an entirely different molecular mechanism. Molecular imprints binds directly to the pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. This is the molecular mechanism involved in the therapeutic action of potentized drugs.

Most notable difference is, drug molecules act as similimum by ‘competitive’ relationship toward pathogenic molecules, whereas ‘molecular imprints’ act by ‘complementary’ relationship.

Since crude drugs and mother tinctures contain drug molecules that can act upon biological molecules, they can also bind to various biological targets in the organism. Obviously, there is always chance for creation of new molecular inhibitions and drug-induced pathologies when we use crude drugs and mother tinctures. That is the draw back of using mother tinctures even if they are similimum.

Advantage of potentized drugs is that they do not contain any drug molecules, but only molecular imprints, which are only supra-molecular clusters of water and alcohol molecules. They can act upon pathogenic molecules only, not upon biological molecules. As such, potentized drugs cannot do any further harm to organism.

What will happen when SIMILIMUM is used in CRUDE forms or MOLECULAR forms? How their action will be different from that of potentized forms?

A drug is said to be similimum to a case when the SYMPTOMS produced by the disease in the patient is similar to the symptoms that drug could produce in a person without any disease. That means, the drug and the ‘disease-causing agents’ contain some ‘chemical molecules’ or ‘functional groups’ that are SIMILAR in conformations so that they could bind to SIMILAR molecular targets in the organism and produce SIMILAR molecular inhibitions that are expressed through SIMILAR subjective and objective symptoms.

When we apply MOLECULAR FORMS of similimum in the patient, drug molecules COMPETE with pathogenic molecules for binding to the SAME biological target molecules. According to the dynamics of biochemistry, such a competitive relationship of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules may result in the removal of inhibitions, if the affinity of drug molecules toward biological targets is higher than the affinity of pathogenic molecules. That means, CRUDE forms of SIMILIMUM may in certain instances CURE the disease by COMPETITIVE molecular mechanism.

It should be noted that the DRUG molecules cannot remove the molecular inhibitions if the they are overpowered by pathogenic molecules regarding their AFFINITY towards biological targets so that the COMPETITION is not effective. This fact explains why CRUDE forms of SIMILIMUM fail in curing the disease in most occasions.

Another point to be noted that the CRUDE drug substance contain diverse types of chemical molecules that can bind to various unexpected molecular targets in the organism and produce new molecular inhibitions in them. This fact explains the phenomena known as SIDE EFFECTS and BAD EFFECTS of drugs commonly experienced when using MOLECULAR FORMS of drug substances. That is why I keep on saying that using of mother tinctures and low potencies are undesirable and dangerous.

SIMILIMUM potentized above 12c contain no drug molecules, but only MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules. When used as similimum, these molecular imprints act as ARTIFICIAL BINDING SITES or ARTIFICIAL LOCKS for the pathogenic molecules having similar functional groups. Due to this CONFORMATIONAL AFFINITY, they can selectively bind to the specific pathogenic molecules, and relieve the biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. This is the molecular mechanism involved in the therapeutic action of SIMILIMUM in potentized forms. Since they do not contain any chemical molecules other than water and ethyl alcohol, they cannot produce any unwanted molecular inhibitions or SIDE EFFECTS. That is why potentized drugs are said to be SAFE.

That is why we say only potentized drugs are GENUINE HOMEOPATHY, and safer than mother tinctures and other molecular forms of drugs.

———————————————————————————

April 15th issue of malayalam journal HOMEO SHASTHRAM has reported that Dr Rajashekharan pillai, the great scientist and former ugc chairman, said in a homeopathy seminar in kerala that “each higher potency is a NEW MOLECULE, and hence it is wrong to say homeopathic potencies do not contain any drug molecule”. I would request anybody who witnessed that speech may kindly post the details of the new ideas he presented about homeopathy.

If he has actually said so, it is totally against the ‘nanoparticle theory’! Nanopartcles are not MOLECULES!

Now, our respected ‘leaders’ will have a hard choice between ‘nanoparticles’ of IIT-B scientists and ‘new molecules’ of Dr Rajashekharan pillai!

———————————————————————————–

Scientific advancement of homeopathy is impossible unless we could free homeopathy from the malignant influences of unscientific and superstitious concepts such as ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’. We should also relentlessly struggle to free homeopathy from pseudo-scientific theories such as ‘nanoparticle theory or ‘energy medicine theory.

———————————————————————————–

Our ‘homeopathic researchers’ always use ‘elemental’ or ‘mineral’ drugs such as ferrum, zincum, cuprum, carbon etc for their ‘nanoparticle studies’. They never use complex vegetable drugs, animal drugs or nosodes for their ‘nanoparticle’ research..

You know why? The answer will expose the hollowness of ‘nanoparticle theory of homeopathy’.

————————————————————————————

Our new ‘nanoparticle researchers’ say they detected nanoparticles of ‘vegetable charcoal’ in all samples of ‘vegetable and organic’ drugs they tested in ultra-dilutions.’ ‘Vegetable charcoal’ means CARBON.

And they came to the queer conclusion that these nanoparticles are the active principles of potentized drugs.

If all ‘vegetable and organic’ drugs act by CARBON NANOPARTICLES, why should we use different drugs? Is it not enough to use potentized carbon or CARBO VEG only?

Is it not absurd to say NUX VOMICA and PULSATILLA are similar, since both contain CARBON?

What is going on here, in the name of ‘homeopathic research’? Do you realize, you are making homeopathy a piece of mockery by this act?

————————————————————————————

Study the supra-molecular re-arrangement happening in water and ethyl alcohol mixture during potentization. Key to the scientific understanding of homeopathy lies there. Your search for ‘nanoparticles’ of original drug substances in ultra-dilutions is actually leading you to a wrong direction. You may detect some particles of ‘metallic elements’ remaining either due to contamination or improper potentization, but you can never explain the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure on that basis. Earlier you realize this truth, the better it will be for the future advancement of homeopathy.

———————————————————————————-

I fear those homeopaths who are over- enthused over the ‘nanoparticle discovery’ in homeopathic potencies, and sincerely believe that the ‘discovery’ has finally settled all questions of ‘scientific proof’ for homeopathy, have not carefully read the paper published by IIT-B team.

READ THIS PARAGRAPH FROM IIT-B PAPER:

“Another question that arises from our observations is how in spite of such huge dilutions the particles of the starting materials are retained even at 200c potency?

The answer to this question could lie in the manufacturing process itself. We perceive that during the succussion process, the pounding of solutions against a rubber stop generates numerous nanobubbles as a result of entrapment of air and cavitation due to generation of ultra-sound waves.

The particles of the starting material instantaneously get adsorbed on the surface of these bubbles and cavitations. This phenomenon could be similar to the mechanism of formation of Pickering emulsions, wherein the emulsified phase viz. air bubbles or liquid droplets are stabilized by a layer of particles.

This nanoparticle-nanobubble complex rises to the surface and can be within a monolayer once the total metal concentrations are well below 1 ppm. It is this 1% of the top layer of the solution which is collected and added to the next vessel, into 99 parts of fresh solvent and the succussion process is repeated. This transfer of the top 1% layer in each step will ensure that once we reach below a certain concentration i.e. well within a monolayer, the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next, resulting in an asymptote beyond 6c.”

BEING SCIENTISTS, THEY CANNOT SHY AWAY FROM THE QUESTION “how in spite of such huge dilutions the particles of the starting materials are retained even at 200c potency”. Being scientists, they cannot say Avogadro number is not applicable to homeopathic dilutions, as our ‘homeopathic scientists’ conveniently do.

If ‘nanoparticles of starting materials’ are detected in a sample of material diluted to 200C which is much above avogadro limit, the first question naturally arising in the mind of a ‘scientist’ or a even a science-conscious person is “how in spite of such huge dilutions the particles of the starting materials are retained”. Being scientists, IIT-B team were bound to answer that question. They did it in the statement quoted above:

According to their view, during succussion, “the pounding of solutions against a rubber stop generates numerous nanobubbles as a result of entrapment of air and cavitation due to generation of ultra-sound waves”, and the “particles of the starting material instantaneously get adsorbed on the surface of these bubbles and cavitations”.

Then what happens? “This nanoparticle-nanobubble complex rises to the surface and can be within a monolayer”. “It is this 1% of the top layer of the solution which is collected and added to the next vessel, into 99 parts of fresh solvent and the succussion process is repeated.” “This transfer of the top 1% layer in each step will ensure that once we reach below a certain concentration i.e. well within a monolayer, the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next,”

DID YOU UNDERSTAND THE EXPLANATION PROVIDED BY THE SCIENTISTS?

They said, nanoparticles of starting materials will be present only in the “1% of the top layer of the solution”.

They said, it is this top layer that is used for preparing the next higher dilution.

They said, “the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next” during each stage of potentization.

Dear homeopaths, as per your knowledge are the IIT-B scientists right in saying only the “top mono-layer of the solution” is used to prepare higher dilution?

Dear homeopaths, Do you think the IIT-B scientists are right in saying “entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next”?

If they are right, the 99% solution remaining after transfer of “1% top layer” will not contain any nanoparticles.

Do you think the 99% solution remaining after transfer of “1% top layer” are discarded by the manufacturers?

——————————————————————————–

IGNORING DIFFICULT QUESTIONS BY FEIGNING DEAF AND DUMB IS THE MOST CONVENIENT STRATEGY TO COVER UP YOUR IGNORANCE AND PRETEND TO KNOW EVERYTHING!

MOST OF OUR ‘LEADERS’ OF HOMEOPATHIC COMMUNITY ARE MASTERS OF THIS ‘FIRE ESCAPE’ ART! EXCUSE ME, BUT I CANNOT AVOID TELLING THIS PAINFUL TRUTH!

———————————————————————————-

Following paragraph is quoted from the concluding part of original IIT-B study that detected ‘nanoparticles’ in homeopathic ultra-dilutions.

If you are not a person blinded by the euphoria of the nanoparticle ‘discovery, kindly read it carefully:

“Another question that arises from our observations is how in spite of such huge dilutions the particles of the starting materials are retained even at 200c potency?

The answer to this question could lie in the manufacturing process itself. We perceive that during the succussion process, the pounding of solutions against a rubber stop generates numerous nanobubbles as a result of entrapment of air and cavitation due to generation of ultra-sound waves.

The particles of the starting material instantaneously get adsorbed on the surface of these bubbles and cavitations. This phenomenon could be similar to the mechanism of formation of Pickering emulsions, wherein the emulsified phase viz. air bubbles or liquid droplets are stabilized by a layer of particles.

This nanoparticle-nanobubble complex rises to the surface and can be within a monolayer once the total metal concentrations are well below 1 ppm. It is this 1% of the top layer of the solution which is collected and added to the next vessel, into 99 parts of fresh solvent and the succussion process is repeated. This transfer of the top 1% layer in each step will ensure that once we reach below a certain concentration i.e. well within a monolayer, the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next, resulting in an asymptote beyond 6c.”

Did you read it carefully? Could you understand what is said in it clearly?

it is obvious that the ‘scientists’ have a very perverted idea about the actual process of potentization and potentized drugs.

See what they said:

“nanoparticle-nanobubble complex rises to the surface and can be within a monolayer once the total metal concentrations are well below 1 ppm.”

“It is this 1% of the top layer of the solution which is collected and added to the next vessel, into 99 parts of fresh solvent and the succussion process is repeated.”

“This transfer of the top 1% layer in each step will ensure that once we reach below a certain concentration i.e. well within a monolayer, the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next”.

If nanoparticles are present only in the 1% top layer of the solution, and if “the entire starting material continues to go from one dilution to the next”, how can they say these ultra dilutions act by nanoparticles?

If they are right, the homeopathic drug samples remaining after “transfer” of “1% top layer” to the next bottle will be therapeutically ineffective!

WHY NOT OUR LEARNED FRIENDS WHO ‘LEAD’ HOMEOPATHIC COMMUNITY FAIL TO ASK THIS QUESTION TO THE SCIENTISTS?

———————————————————————————-

One needs a reasonable level of knowledge in basics of modern biochemistry and pharmacodynamics to understand the scientific explanations of homeopathy provided by MIT. That is why the number of homeopaths who do not understand MIT is so high. Only very few people, especially if they hold high ‘qualifications’ and decorate some ‘leadership’ titles, will have the humility and magnanimity to admit their inability to understand something. Such people blindly oppose MIT and personally abuse its author only to satisfy their own inflated ego. I can understand.

———————————————————————————-

BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM INVOLVED IN ‘SIMILIA SIMILIBUS CURENTUR’, AS ENVISAGED BY THE CONCEPTS OF MOLECULAR IMPRINTS THERAPEUTICS COULD BE SCHEMATICALLY EXPLAINED AS FOLLOWS:

Let BIOLOGICAL MOLECULES be represented by ‘M’, and PATHOGENIC MOLECULES by D.

Pathogenic molecule D bind to biological molecule M to form a pathological molecular complex MD. MD represents a pathological molecular error or DISEASE.

Therapeutic process involves with relieving of M from the inhibitions caused by D.

Let crude drug molecules be represented by D1. If D1 can produce symptoms in healthy organism similar to pathological symptoms produced by D, that means D and D1 has similar molecular conformation, so that they could bind to same biological molecules and create similar molecular errors in the organism.

We say D1 is similimum to D, which caused the disease MD.

Molecular imprints of D1 may be represented by ‘d’, with a 3D configuration complementary to D1.

If D1 is siimilimum to D, molecular imprints ‘d’ will be having strong complementary towards D also. That means, ‘d’ can act as ‘artificial binding site’ for D, and selectively bind to it.

When applied as a therapeutic agent, ‘d’ can specifically bind to D of the MD (pathological complex) due to comparatively stronger affinity to form Dd (pathogenic molecule-molecular imprint complex) , thereby relieving M from pathological molecular blocks.

TO SUM UP:

M (biological molecule) +D (pathogenic molecule) > MD (Pathology).

If D1 (drug molecule) is similimum to D (pathogenic molecule), and ‘d’ is ‘molecular imprint’ of D1 (drug molecule),

‘d’ (molecular imprint) will be complementary to D1 (drug molecule) as well as to D (pathogenic molecule).

When ‘d'(molecular imprint) is applied as therapeutic agent,

MD (pathological molecular complex) +d (molecular imprint)> M (free biological molecule) +Dd(pathogenic molecule-molecular imprint complex).

M (biological molecule) is free now (CURE)

Dd ((pathogenic molecule-molecular imprint complex) is now bio-degraded or eliminated from the system

This is the proposed molecular mechanism involved in homeopathic therapeutics.

———————————————————————————–

What is MIT?

MIT or Molecular Imprints Therapeutics refers to a scientific hypothesis that proposes a rational model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics.

According to MIT hypothesis, potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, where in the conformational details of individual drug molecules are ‘imprinted’ or engraved as hydrogen-bonded three dimensional nano-cavities into a supra-molecular matrix of water and ethyl alcohol, through a process of molecular level ‘host-guest’ interactions. These ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’ are the active principles of post-avogadro dilutions used as homeopathic drugs.

Due to ‘conformational affinity’, molecular imprints can act as ‘artificial key holes’ or ‘ligand binds’ for the specific drug molecules used for imprinting, and for all pathogenic molecules having functional groups ‘similar’ to those drug molecules. When used as therapeutic agents, molecular imprints selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity and deactivate them, thereby relieving the biological molecules from the inhibitions or blocks caused by pathogenic molecules. According to MIT hypothesis, this is the biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics involved in homeopathic cure.

According to MIT hypothesis, ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’ means, diseases expressed through a particular group of symptoms could be cured by ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drug substances, which in ‘molecular’ or crude forms could produce ‘similar’ groups of symptoms in healthy individuals. ‘Similarity’ of drug symptoms and disease symptoms indicates ‘similarity’ of pathological molecular inhibitions caused by drug molecules and pathogenic molecules, which in turn indicates conformational ‘similarity’ of functional groups of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules. Since molecular imprints of ‘similar’ molecules can bind to ‘similar’ ligand molecules by conformational affinity, they can act as therapeutic agents when applied as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’.

No body in the whole history could so far propose a hypothesis about homeopathy as scientific, rational and perfect as MIT, explaining the molecular process involed in potentization, and the biological mechanism involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’, in a way fitting well to modern scientific knowledge system.

—————————————————————————————

I seriously suspect a skeptic-big pharma conspiracy and ulterior game plan working behind the recent flare up of interest in ‘nanoparticle research’ in homeopathy. and the media hype around it.

Enemies of homeopathy know better than anybody else that ‘proving’ the presence of ‘nanoparticles’ of ‘metallic elements’ in potentized homeopathic drugs is the best way to ‘finish’ homeopathy for ever, since it will automatically raise the issue of ‘nanotoxicity’ and prove homeopathy is not safe, on the basis of which stringent regulations could be initiated.

If ‘starting materials’ are proved to be present even in ultra-dilutions, it will unquestionably prove that the fundamental theory of homeopathic ‘potentization’ is a lie.

If this detection of nanoparticles in homeopathic drugs was done directly by modern scientists or nanotechnology labs, homeopaths would have easily recognized the anti-homeopathic big pharma conspiracy involved in it. Since it is made to be done by fame-seeking homeopaths themselves by providing funds, lab facilities and publicity, homeopathic community fail to recognize the conspiracy involved in it.

Time will prove the truth, but homeopathy will have no time to defend or repair the damages.

If this ‘research’ is true, homeopathy has lost all its credibility and right of existence. I am sure, this ‘nanoparticle research’ is utter nonsense. Only thing to know is, who is behind this farce. Time will prove.

I suspect this conspiracy since doors of all ‘nanotechnology labs’ are recently widely open to homeopaths for nominal fees. Scientists so far attacking homeopathy have turned facilitators of this ‘homeopathic research’. Media, who where so far apathetic to homeopathy have suddenly turned ‘promoters’ of nanoparticle research in homeopathy. A new ‘homeopathic foundation’ suddenly comes into existence under the leadership of most money-minded and tainted persons of homeopathic community , and conducts a big global event to propagate this nanoparticle theory.

Homeopathic drugs will not actually cause any nanotoxicity. But enemies of homeopathy can now enhance their antihomeopathic propaganda raising nanotoxicity issue. They can accuse, homeopathy medicine contains very dangerous particles of lead, ars, mercury etc. They can prove homeopathic potentization is only a fraud. They can ask governments to initiate stringent regulations. They can ask homeopathic drugs should be tested and certified to ensure their ‘nanoparticle’ levels are in safety range.

I SMELL SOMETHING FISHY. TIME WILL PROVE THE TRUTH. BUT HOMEOPATHY WILL HAVE TO UNDERGO GRAVE DAMAGE BY THAT TIME.

———————————————————————————-

Here I am posting two slides presented at GHF summit regarding ‘nanoparticles study’ of AURUM METALLICUM.

Watch both slides carefully. It is said that potentized aurum met contains ‘nanoparticles’ containing Aurum, Aluminium, Silica, Pottassium, Ferrum, Cuprum, Indium, Hafnium, Sodium, Chlorine, Boron, Cobalt and Carbon, along with ‘Quantum Dots’.

Nanoparticles detected in Aurum Met contains Aurum in following ratios:

6C contains 2.82%, 30C contains 89.06%, 200C contains 12.14%, 1M contains 1.24%, 10M contains 24%, 50M contains 9.73 %, CM contains 6.58% of elemental aurum.

15.63% of ALUMINIUM is present in nanoparticles detected in Aurum Met 1M. But other potencies of Aurum met does not contain any ALUMINIUM.

Where from this aluminium came in aurum met 1m only, which was not present in 6c, 30c, 200c, 10m or cm?

See the fun.Nanoparticles detected in Aur met 1m contains only 1.24% aurum, where it contains 15.63% aluminium.

If ‘nanoparticles are active principles of AURUM MET 1M, does it act by 15.63% aluminium or 1.24% aurum?

If AUR MET 6C contains AUR 2.82% and CUPRUM 75.82%, which will be the active principles? CUPRUM or AURUM?

If AUR 200 contains AURUM 12.14%, POTTASSIUM 29.36%, CUPRUM 25.8%, and SODIUM 20.08%, how can you say AURUM NANOPARTICLES are the active principles of Aur Met 200?

If AUR MET 50M contains AURUM 9.73% , CUPRUM 53.27%, and COBALT 23%, how can you say it is AURUM MET? Rather callit and use it as CUPRUM MET?

If AURUM MET CM contains AURUM 6.58%. CUPRUM 35.36, and HAFNIUM 36.56%, is it appropriate to use it as AURUM?

Hope some ‘nanoparticles specialists’ would explain.

If you look into these two slides carefully, you will get a lot of things to laugh at!!

————————————————————————————

Most of those who support ‘nanoparticle theory of homeopathy’ think nanoparticles are formed by division of atoms during potentization.

Nanoparticles are particles between 1 and 100 nanometers in size. Although the size of most molecules would fit into the above outline, individual molecules are usually not referred to as nanoparticles. Nanoparticles are a bridge between bulk materials and atomic or molecular structures. Peculiar properties of nanoparticles arise from the fact that most of the atoms or molecules lie ‘exposed’ with free bonds.

‘NANO-PARTICLES ARE NOT SUB-ATOMIC PARTICLES. THEY ARE NOT FORMED BY DIVISION OF ATOMS AS SOME HOMEOPATHS THINK, BUT BY A PECULIAR UNION AND ARRANGEMENT OF LARGE NUMBER OF SIMILAR ATOMS OR MOLECULES. NANOPARTICLES ARE ‘POLY-ATOMIC’ or ‘POLY-MOLECULAR’ STRUCTURES.

———————————————————————————

IIT-B scientists said they detected ‘traces of nanoparticles floating in the top layers’ of ultra-high dilutions. Present IISc study says the ultra dilutions are “filled with nanoparticles”.

Two questions have to be answered here:

If nanoparticles are present only in the ‘top layers’ only, how would you explain the fact that homeopaths use not the “top layers” only, but even the last fractions of drops, and they get curative effect? If nanoparticles floating the ‘top layers’ are the active principles, the bottom layers have to be ineffective!

If nanoparticles are “filled” in the whole volume of ultradilutions as IISc study claims, you will have to explain wherefrom this unending supply of nanoparticles come, even after million-fold dilutions. According to avogadro theory, number of molecules contained in one gram mol of any substance is limited to 6.022×10^23. That means, when dilution crosses that limit, there cannot be any particle of original substance remaining. Either avogadro theory has to be proved wrong, or potentization process should be capable of generating new material particles from nothingness.

HOPE SOMEBODY WOULD ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.

———————————————————————————

If you cannot explain the molecular level biological mechanism by which the ‘nanoparticles’ act as the therapeutic factors of homeopathic medicines, your claims regarding detection of nanoparticles does not contribute anything positive in the scientific understanding of homeopathy.

———————————————————————————-

If you cannot explain the molecular level biological mechanism by which the ‘nanoparticles’ act as the therapeutic factors of homeopathic medicines, your claims regarding detection of nanoparticles does not contribute anything positive in the scientific understanding of homeopathy.

———————————————————————————

If anybody had discussed my points threadbare, and convinced me MIT is wrong, I would have accepted their views. This is not an issue of ego. I have been trying to evolve a scientific explanation for homeopathy. Whether it comes through myself or anybody else is not a serious question. Truth should be our first concern. The moment anybody convince me MIT is not correct, I am ready to leave it. Why should I stick on to a wrong idea? Please tell me, what is wrong about MIT, and why you are so much apathetic towards it.

———————————————————————————-

Those who have been reading my articles and posts regularly, and trying sincerely to understand the scientific explanation of homeopathy proposed by MIT, are very much convinced this is the right approach. Of course, their number is increasing day by day. But majority of homeopaths, especially the leaders of professional bodies, academicians and ‘spokespersons’ are persistently ignoring it, or showing a conscious apathy towards it. They prefer to write off me as an ‘alien’ and an irrelevant person. WHY SO?

———————————————————————————-

Supporters of homeopathy deny or fail to see the truth that the theortical system of homeopathy is mostly irrational and unscientific. Opponents of homeopathy deny or fail to see the real and objective truth involved in the phenomenon of homeopathic cure. According to my view, both approaches are wrong. We need a comprehensive and dialectical approach to this issue.

Homeopathic cure is a real and objective phenomenon, which has been so far explained by most unscientific theories.

———————————————————————————-

If a drug substance can produce in healthy individuals certain group of symptoms similar to that of a particular disease, that means, the drug substance as well as the disease-causing substance contain some chemical molecules having similar functional groups or moieties, so that they could bind to similar biological targets and produce similar biomolecular inhibitions. In homeopathy, such a relationship between drug and disease is called ‘similimum’.

In potentized form, such a ‘similimum’ drug will contain only ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules. Molecular imprints can act as artifical binding sites for disease-causing molecules having conformational affinity. They selectively bind to the pathogenic molecules, thereby relieving the biological molecules from pathological inhibitions. This is the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure.

———————————————————————————–

‘Similia similibus curentur’ is an expression hahnemann framed to describe a real, objctive phenomenon of nature he observed regarding disease-drug relationship.

‘Similia similibus curentur’ means, potentized forms of a drug can cure a disease, if it can produce symptoms similar to the disease in healthy individuals when applied in crude forms.

In modern scientific terms, ‘Similia similibus curentur’ means, ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules can bind to pathogenic molecules and remove the bio-molecular inhibitions caused by them, if the original drug molecules used for preparing those molecular imprints have functional groups or moeities similar to those of the particular pathogenic molecules.

This scientific truth was so far not explained properly, and homeopathic theoreticians did a lot of damages to this wonderful healing art by talking all sorts of nonsense absurd theories about homeopathy.

Once you understand what is explained above, your theoretical and practical approach to homeopathy will become rational and scientific.

——————————————————————————–

According to my view, homeopathy is a very much real, objective phenomenon so far not properly explained in scientific terms, and which has been gravely damaged by diverse types of unscientific theories. This concept is the basis of my approach to homeopathy.

————————————————————————————

Purchase some samples of ‘ultra dilutions’from the market, pay Rs 5000 to a ‘nanotechmology lab’, get the samples tested for presence of ‘nanoparticles’! Go to the press and declare that you have proved ‘homeopathy is scientific’! Then go to a ‘global seminar’ and present a paper on your ‘research’.

Nothing done to ensure the samples you purchased were genuine ultra dilutions.

Nothing done to rule out contaminations.

No control samples tested.

Nothing done to prove these nanoparticles are the real active principles of potentized drugs.

Nothing done to prove that the samples from which nanoparticles are removed are therapeutically ineffective.

No questions asked about the various possibilities of ‘nanoparticles’ getting detected in the samples.

Nothing discussed how these nanoparticles can represent the medicinal properties of complex drug molecules.

Nothing discussed about the biological mechanism by which these nanoparticles act as therapeutic agents.

Nothing explained how this nanoparticles fit into the theory of similia similibus curentur.

HOW CAN YOU CLAIM THIS IS A SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, NOT A CHILD’S PLAY?

——————————————————————————–

One of the most quoted and most violated ‘cardinal principles’ of homeopathy is ‘single drug-single dose’.

Most homeopaths use multiple drugs in private, and publicly pose as ‘single drug’ prescribers, cleverly masking their ‘multiple prescriptions’ using phrases such as ‘intercurrent’, ‘complementary’, ‘antidote’, ‘anti-miasmatic’, or ‘layer prescriptions’.

Some ‘single drug’ prescribers would give a ‘single’ dose of say sulphur cm, and give plenty of biochemic salts or even biochemic combinations, and claim in public that they ‘cured’ the patient with ‘single’ dose of sulphur.

Some people would give large doses of mother tinctures along with ‘a single dose of single drug’.

Certain others would give a ‘single’ dose of selected similimum, and then frequent doses of ‘complementary’ drugs, for ‘relieving acute complaints’.

Prescribing ‘anti-miasmatics’ are also not considered as a violation of ‘single’ drug principles.

According to MIT view, even so called ‘single’ drugs are not really ‘single’, but contains diverse types of ‘molecular imprints’ that represent diverse types of chemical molecules contained in that drug.

————————————————————————————

I think many excellent homeopathic prescriptions are spoiled only due to our ‘theoretical’ hesitation to repeat the doses in adequate intervals, and these failures are wrongly attributed to ‘wrong similimum’ or ‘wrong potency’ selection.

We could have avoided such failures by repeating the doses frequently so as to maintain the drug action at optimum levels to effect a complete cure.

Molecular Imprints are the active principles of potentized drugs. These ‘molecular imprints’ bind to the pathological molecules having ‘complementary’ configuration, there by relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions and effect Cure.

Same time,these ‘molecular imprints’ could get antidoted or deactivated by by molecules or ions having complementary configurations. That means, ‘molecular imprints’ we introduced into the body get deactivated by pathological molecules or other molecules having congigurational affinity.

Molecules and ions of vegetable alkaloids, enzymes, food additives, environmental toxins, infectious agents, bacterial-viral toxins and a host of other agents may antidote these ‘molecular imprints’.

Hence, it is necessary to replenish the supply of ‘molecular imprints’ at frequent intervals to ensure a complete cure. That is my point.

———————————————————————————–

Some science-starved homeopaths believe potentized drugs act by ‘atomic power’. Even a high school level science student can realize the folly involved in this argument.

Atomic power is the energy released by the division of atoms into subatomic particles. You mean atomic division happens during potentization?

Do you know how much energy is required for atomic division? Do you think grinding with a mortar and pestle, or shaking a bottle will induce atomic division?

We know medicinal properties of drug substances arise from the molecular structure and chemical properties of constituent molecules.

In order to divide atoms and release atomic energy, first you have to divide complex molecules into constituent atoms. Do you think it is possible by grinding and shaking?

Do you know the chemical properties of molecules are lost when they are divided into atoms, and properties of atoms are lost when they are divided into subatomic particles?

Do you know, atomic enery released by the division of any atom coming from any molecule will be the same?

Do you know atomic energy cannot be stored in alcohol or sugar of milk for future use? Do you know energy will instantly dissipate into the environment the moment they are generated?

———————————————————————————-

I seriously suspect a skeptic-big pharma conspiracy and ulterior game plan working behind the recent flare up of interest in ‘nanoparticle research’ in homeopathy. and the media hype around it.

Enemies of homeopathy know better than anybody else that ‘proving’ the presence of ‘nanoparticles’ of ‘metallic elements’ in potentized homeopathic drugs is the best way to ‘finish’ homeopathy for ever, since it will automatically raise the issue of ‘nanotoxicity’ and prove homeopathy is not safe, on the basis of which stringent regulations could be initiated.

If ‘starting materials’ are proved to be present even in ultra-dilutions, it will unquestionably prove that the fundamental theory of homeopathic ‘potentization’ is a lie.

If this detection of nanoparticles in homeopathic drugs was done directly by modern scientists or nanotechnology labs, homeopaths would have easily recognized the anti-homeopathic big pharma conspiracy involved in it. Since it is made to be done by fame-seeking homeopaths themselves by providing funds, lab facilities and publicity, homeopathic community fail to recognize the conspiracy involved in it.

Time will prove the truth, but homeopathy will have no time to defend or repair the damages.

———————————————————————————–

Before declaring that homeopathic ‘ultra-dilutions’ are ‘filled with’ NANO-PARTICLES of starting materials, first you have to scientifically disprove Avogadro law regarding the number of molecules contained in one gram mol of any substance.

You will have to explain where from this unending supply of these nanoparticles come even after diluting millions of times! Can potentization duplicate particles, or generate new ones?

To a rationally thinking person, it is obvious that the starting material will exhaust once the dilution crosses avogadro limit, and if ‘nanoparticles’ are still ‘filled’ in higher dilutions, either the dilutions were not genuine, or it has nothing to do with ‘starting materials’.

————————————————————————————

I am inviting your attention to an article published in Times Of India regarding a recent ‘nanotechnology study’ of homeopathic ultra-dilutions.

See how the study was done as explained in the article:

“The medicines prepared by plant sources and organic substances were studied in the lab, and nano particles of vegetable charcoal were found in the tested homeopathy medicines.”

“The highly diluted form of homeopathy medicine used as pain relief was put on silicon vapour and left for drying for a day”.

“nano particles of vegetable charcoal were found in the medicines we tested,”

When ethyl alcohol (as potentized drugs) is put on silicone vapor and left in the open air, ethyl alcohol molecules get adsorbed into the silicone matrix. When this silicone vapor is subjected to spectrometric studies, we can detect the presence of carbon atoms being part of alcohol meolecules entrapped in it. Observation of presence of ‘carbon particles’ or ‘vegetable charcoal’ is a natural outcome of this process. It has nothing to do with any ‘scientific proving’ of homeopathy.

The carbon particles our ‘researchers’ detected by this experiment actually belong to the ethyl alcohol, not the ‘starting materials’ of potentized drugs.

This ‘study’ is a classical example of what happens when people ignorant in basics of scientific processes and methods engage in ‘researches’, which lead to strange interpretations and conclusions.

SEE THE TIMES OF INDIA REPORT:

“BENGALURU: For all those who think homeopathy is just placebo, here is new research that debunks that and upholds the effectiveness of the branch of medicine. The study reveals that homeopathy medicine contains nano particles of the resource medicine even in its highest diluted form. The two-year research was done by homeopathy practitioner Dr ES Rajendran, director of Vinayaka Mission Homoeopathic Medical College at the nanotechnology lab in IISc, Bengaluru. The medicines prepared by plant sources and organic substances were studied in the lab, and nano particles of vegetable charcoal were found in the tested homeopathy medicines. “This is a breakthrough and may open up vistas for advanced research in homeopathy. The study will be presented at the upcoming world homeopathy summit in Mumbai,” said Rajendran at an event organized by the Global Homoeopathy Foundation on Thursday.

How was the study done?

The highly diluted form of homeopathy medicine used as pain relief was put on silicon vapour and left for drying for a day. “I began the study in 2013. It has been a thrilling journey, especially when nano particles of vegetable charcoal were found in the medicines we tested,” Rajendran said. QUOTE It’s nanomedicine

Though homeopathy has cured innumerable patients around the world, the mode of action of the drug and the question about the content in high dilutions sealed its growth and development all along. This was one of the most difficult questions that homeopaths around the world faced. This study will settle controversies about the nature of drug material used in homeopathy drugs. Homeopathy may as well be considered a nanomedicine.

(Dr Sreevals G Menon, managing trustee of Global Homeopathy Foundation.)”

————————————————————————————

Detection of nanoparticles in homeopathic drugs is of any value as a ‘scientific proof’ for homeopathy, only if you could explain the biological mechanism by which those ‘nanoparticles’ act as therapeutic agents, and such an explanation should be fitting to the existing modern scientific concepts as well as ‘similia similibus curentur’.

————————————————————————————-

Detection of nanoparticles in homeopathic drugs is of any value as a ‘scientific proof’ for homeopathy, only if you could filter out and remove those ‘nanoparticles’ from your samples and prove that the remaining ’empty’ liquid is devoid of therapeutic properties when used as similimum.

———————————————————————————–

You take some plain water and ethyl alcohol (similar to the vehicles used for preparing potentized drugs) and repeat the same ‘nanotechnology’ experiments. You can detect some ‘nanoparticles’ in those samples also.

————————————————————————————

Detection of nanoparticles in homeopathic drugs is of any value for scientific interpretation, only if you could scientifically first disprove avogadro law regarding the number of molecules contained in one gram mol of any substance, since you claim that the ultra dilutions are ‘filled with’ nanoparticles of starting materials. You will have to explain where from this unending supply of these nanoparticles come even after diluting millions of times! To a rationally thinking person, starting material will exhaust once the dilution crosses avogadro limit, and if ‘nanoparticles’ are still ‘filled’ in higher dilutions, it will be due to contamination of the solvents, or due to the claimed dilutions not being done genuinely.

———————————————————————————–

Yes, I am “frustrated”. I am frustrated to see the homeopathic community getting fooled by fame-seeking and business-motivated ‘researchers’ who claim to have detected ‘nanoparticles’ of silica, carbon and metallic elements in samples of potentized homeopathic drugs. I am frustrated because, this ‘detection of nanoparticles’ is going to be utilized for framing an undefendable ‘nanotoxicity case’ against homeopathy in very near future, and enemies of homeopathy are going to celebrate it. I am frustrated with the dangerous inertia, shortsightedness and lack of scientific outlook of a major section of homeopathic community, especially its ‘leaders’ and ‘spokespersons’.

————————————————————————————

Some homeopaths say my ‘criticisms’ about ‘nanoparticle research’ arises from my ‘jealousy’ and ‘frustration’. They never address the real points and hard questions I raise, but conveniently ignore them.

I am ‘criticizing’ any ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ that I think are unscientific and irrational. I do it by logically discussing the specific points involved the subjects. I cannot avoid doing it, as I am involved in evolving a scientific understanding of homeopathy. I consider it as my duty. Whether it be ‘nanoparticle’, ‘hair transmission’, ‘dynamic energy’, ‘vital force’, ‘digital biology’, ‘radionics’, ‘reflexology’ or any other pseudoscientific theory, I will consistently expose them by raising rational questions from a scientific angle. If anybody think I am wrong, answer the QUESTIONS I raise and discuss the specific POINTS. If you cannot do it, kindly keep away from me, without researching about my ‘miasms’, ‘frustrations’, ‘jealousy’ and ‘psychology’.

———————————————————————————–

One ‘homeopathic researcher’ claims “medicines prepared by plant sources and organic substances were studied in the lab, and nanoparticles of vegetable charcoal were found in the tested homeopathy medicines.”

According to him, his research has proved the ‘scientific basis of homeopathy”! We have to believe “nanoparticles of vegetable charcoal” are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of “Medicines prepared by plant sources and organic substances “. Does detection of some “particles” in a drug sample prove it is the active principle of that drug? Can anybody say, a few traces of ‘nanoparticles of vegetable charcoal’ can represent the medicinal properties of ‘vegetable and organic drugs’, which are actually due to the structural and chemical properties of highly complex molecules contained in those drugs? What does it mean? Does they mean, all ‘vegetable and organic drugs’ are equivalent to CARBO VEG?

————————————————————————————–

A post by Dr Shanthakumar on my page:

The following words on MIT are from a allopath who is interestingly studying Homoeopathy from eastern Europe there are many more with this view.

‘Well, Shantha, I think all, that you have sent me is quite deep, reasonable and is accompanied by a good base of medical data. It is all about the shift of Homeopathy – it needs to be transformed into a Medical Evidence-based science, which deserves its place among the other branches of Medicine. Certainly, all the prominent and clever classical homeopaths around the world are going to stick to gather and give all, that they can afford for this transformation.”

————————————————————————————

I would like to invite the attention of homeopathic community to following two separate reports now being widely circulated on various homeopathic groups. Both reports are about a research conducted by Dr E S Rajendran, in which he could detect “nanoparticles” in ‘ultra high’ homeopathic dilutions. According to both reports, he is going to present his invention in Global Homeopathic Summit to be conducted in Mumbai on April 10.

Kindly watch both reports carefully. In first report, it is claimed that the study was done by Dr Rajendran at IISC lab in Bangaluru. In the second report in malayalam, it is claimed that Dr Rajendran conducted the study at NanoScience Lab of MG University in Kerala. Both press conferences were presided over by Dr Sreevals Menon of GHF.

Why this contradiction regarding the name of lab? Hope Dr Rajendran or Dr Sreevals will come forward to resolve confusions. Where was the study actually conducted? At IISC lab, bangaluru or NanoScience Lab of MG University in Kerala? If the study was conducted at both labs, why they chose not to mention about the other study in both press conferences? Which study is going to be presented at GHF summit- Bangaluru study or Kerala study?

A similar study was conducted by IIT-B scientists in 2010 itself, and they ‘detected nanoparticles of metallic elements’. Ho could Dr Rajendran claim that his study is the first of this kind, without making any mention about IIT-B study, where as his work is only a replication of it?

Read the first report of Dr Rajendran’s study:

“Medicines prepared by plant sources and organic substances were studied in the lab, and nanoparticles of vegetable charcoal were found in the tested homeopathy medicines.”

According to this study, “nanoparticles of vegetable charcoal” are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of “Medicines prepared by plant sources and organic substances “. ‘Detecting something in a drug sample’ does not prove it is the active principle of that drug. Can anybody say, ‘nanoparticles of vegetable charcoal’ can represent the medicinal properties of ‘vegetable and organic drugs’, which are actually due to the structural and chemical properties of complex molecules contained in those drugs?

Wonderful funny research!

————————————————————————————

The question whether potentized drugs interact with biological molecules in a way different from their parent drugs is very important in the scientific understanding of molecular processes involved in homeopathic potentization and therapeutics.

There are many homeopaths who believe that during potentization, the medicinal properties of drugs are some way or other transferred to the potentizing medium, and hence potentized medicines can interact with human organism in the SAME way as the original drugs.

On the contrary, MIT proposes that potentization involves a process of ‘molecular imprinting’, in which the spacial configuration of drug molecules are imprinted into the medium as 3-D nano cavities, which can act as recognition sites towards original drug molecules or other molecules similar in configuration.

As per this view, potentized medicines contain only ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules, which are complementary in configuration to the drug molecules. When applied for therapeutic purpose, these molecular imprints bind to the pathogenic molecules, and not to the biological targets.

In order to prove this concept, we have to experimentally prove that potentized medicines can not interact with biological molecules in the same way as original drug molecules used for potentization.

Here I am reproducing a previously published report regarding such an experiment already conducted by a team of eminent scientists in Germany five years back. It is published in “The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. May 2006, 12(4): 359-365. doi:10.1089/acm.2006.12.359”

http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/acm.2006.12.359

The team conducted this experiment to verify whether potentized HgCl2 (Mercurius corrosivus) affect the activity of Diastase and α-Amylase in a way similar to crude form of HgCl2.

Research team consisted of: 1. Claudia M. Witt, M.D. Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin, Germany. 2. Michael Bluth, M.D. Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin, Germany. 3. Stephan Hinderlich, Ph.D. Institute for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin, Germany. 4. Henning Albrecht, Ph.D. Karl and Veronica Carstens-Foundation, Essen, Germany. 5. Rainer Lüdtke, M.Sc. Karl and Veronica Carstens-Foundation, Essen, Germany. 6. Thorolf E.R. Weisshuhn Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin, Germany. 7. Stefan N. Willich, M.D., M.P.H. Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin, Germany.

Their objective was to test for a stimulating or inhibiting effect of high potencies of the homeopathic remedy HgCl2 (Mercurius corrosivus) on two sugar hydrolases- (α-amylase from hog pancreas and diastase extract from winter barley)

High potencies of HgCl2 were produced using stepwise dilution plus shaking. Controls included potentized solvent (aqua bidestillata), equimolar dilutions without shaking, and enzyme-free references. Tested were potencies with dilution factors 1:200 (CC) on diastase extract from winter barley, and 1:100 (C) on α-amylase from hog pancreas. Enzyme activity was colorimetrically determined by Lugol’s iodine-starch reaction.

An inhibiting effect of HgCl2 on enzyme activities was observed only in low potencies and dilutions (which contained molecules of HgCl2). Statistically significant differences between potencies and controls were not found in randomized and blinded experiments.

This experimental design provided independent reproducible results of cell-free in vitro assays.However, it did not indicate an effect of potentized HgCl2 on hydrolases. The researchers conclusion was that demonstrating potency effects may require additional experimental features.

MY INTERPRETATIONS:

Reported experiments and the results they obtained may help us in designing and conducting further in vitro experiments to prove the hypothesis put forward by MIT regarding potentization.

HgCl2 is known in homeopathy as Merc Cor.

Crude HgCl2 is a known inhibitor of glucose hydrolases such as diastase and α-amylase.

Reported experiments show that similar to crude forms, lower dilutions of this compound also inhibits the hydrolyzing activity of those sugar hydrolase enzymes. Obviously, these lower dilutions contain molecules of HgCl2, and hence the inhibitory action on enzymes.

Same time, these experiments clearly showed that higher potencies of HgCl2 have no inhibitory action on those enzymes. That means, highly potentized HgCl2 cannot ‘mimic’ the original compound as expected by some theoreticians.

This finding, though considered by the researchers as a set back to their expectations, has serious implications in proving the concepts of MIT regarding potentization.

This experiment proves that through the potentization process, the properties of original drugs are not transferred to the potenizing medium in such a way so as to enable it to ‘mimic’ the original drugs.

We homeopaths know beyond any doubt that potentized HgCl2 or Merc Cor produces expected therapeutic effects when administered on the basis of principle of ‘similia similibus curentur’. That means, potentized HgCl2 contains some active principles having specific biochemical properties. Since the present experiments have shown that potentized HgCl2 cannot ‘mimic’ the biochemical properties of original compound, a logical and scientific explanation regarding the real molecular mechanism involved in potentization as well as therapeutic action becomes very much necessary.

Only possibility is ‘molecular imprinting’, as proposed by MIT. Only ‘molecular imprints’ can act in accordance with ‘similia similibus curentur’, which means, potentized forms of drugs can cure diseases which are similar to the conditions produced by their crude forms.

Now, we have to repeat these in vitro experiment to verify whether higher potencies of HgCl2 can reactivate the enzymes already inhibited by lower potencies or crude forms of the same compound.

————————————————————————————-

Explanations of potentization in terms of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING as proposed by MIT implies a supramolecular rearrangement of potentizing medium, resulting in the formation of nanostrutures called as molecular imprints. Obviously, any study that indicates such a supramolecular rearrangement of potentizing medium could be considered as a strong evidence to endorse MIT concepts.

Tanmoy Maity (Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, Jharkhand 826004, India), D. Ghosh & C.R. Mahata (Department of Electrical Engineering, Bengal Engineering and Science University, Shibpur, Howrah 711103, West Bengal, India) has published a research paper regarding Effect of dielectric dispersion on potentised homeopathic medicines, which I think is of immense implications in our understanding of active principles of our drugs as ‘molecular imprints’ or ‘hydrosomes’.

This report is available on http://www.sciencedirect.com/…/article/pii/S1475491609001258

This paper reports dielectric dispersion occurring in potentised homeopathic medicines subjected to variable frequency electric field using an instrumentation method developed by the authors. Oscillations occur in the direction of electric field, and are usually termed longitudinal/acoustic-mode vibrations.

The test material was lactose soaked with homeopathic medicine. Multiple resonance frequencies, forming a frequency-set, were observed repeatedly for each medicine.

The team reports experimental results for three potencies of Cuprum metallicum (Cuprum met) in the frequency range of 100 kHz–1 MHz. Each exhibits a set of resonance frequencies, which may be termed as its characteristic set. As the frequency-set of each medicine is different from those of others, each medicine may, therefore, be identified by its characteristic frequency-set. This suggests that potentised homeopathic medicines, which are chemically identical with the vehicle, differ from one another in the arrangement of vehicle molecules.

According to them, these “experiments show that potentised homeopathic medicines, which are chemically identical with the vehicle, differ from one another in the arrangement of vehicle molecules”.

“Difference in arrangement of vehicle molecules” strongly indicates the presence of “supra-molecular clusters of water and ethyl alcohol, into which the three-dimensional configuration of drug molecules are imprinted as nanocavities” as proposed by the hypotheses proposed by MIT.

The observation that “the resonance frequencies frequency-set of each medicine is different from those of others” strongly indicates clusters of water-ethyl alcohol molecules specifically rearranged in accordance with the shapes of constituent molecules of drug substance used for potentization.

Such a re-arrangement of vehicle molecules strongly indicates the process of ‘molecular imprinting’ happening during homeopathic potentization. Present work discussed above is a decisive step in the scientific understanding of homeopathy.

———————————————————————————–

One of the questions listed to be proved as part of scientific validation of MIT concepts was, whether potentized drugs, devoid of any original drug molecules, differ from untreated diluent medium in its molecular level structure. If MIT is right, they should differ, since ‘molecular imprinting’ is envisaged as formation of hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular nano-structures of water-ethyl alcohol molecules.

An elaborate study conducted by a research group, even though without any idea of molecular imprinting involved in potentization, rightly observes that the homeopathic potencies and their original diluent medium differ from each other with respect to the number of H-bonded water species and their H-bonding strengths. I think this study contributes much in proving MIT concepts right.

Even though the authors could not understand the real process of “MOLECULAR IMPRINTING” involved in the phenomenon, their observation amply proves that the supra-molecular structure of potentized medicines differs from ethyl alcohol/water mixture, even though their chemical composition remained the same. That means, through the process of potentization, supra-molecular structure of ethyl alcohol/water mixture has undergone fundamental changes. Obviously, it is through these structural changes that the medicinal properties of drug molecules are transferred to the diluent medium.

This difference in the structure of potentized medicines from their original medium, the specificity of medicinal properties exhibited by potentized medicines, and the fact that potentized medicines exhibit medicinal properties just opposite to that of parent drugs can be satisfactorily explained only on the basis of “molecular imprinting’ as proposed by MIT.

This remarkable study regarding the variation in Fourier Transform Infrared Spectra of some homeopathic potencies and their diluent media, conducted by N.C.SUKUL, Ph.D., SUDESHNA GHOSH, M.Sc., A. SUKUL, Ph.D., and S.P. SINHABABU, Ph.D. It is published in THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE, Volume 11, Number 5, 2005, pp. 807–812. The report is available at this link:http://www.homeopathy.org/research/basic/acm-2005-11_11.pdf

Published report reads as follows: “The aim of this study was to determine whether potentized homeopathic drugs and their diluent media differ from each other with respect to their Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectra. FTIR spectra of Nux vomica 30C, Lycopodium 30C, Santonin 30C, Cina 30C, Cina 206C, Cina 1006C, and their diluent media (90% ethanol and Ethanol) 30C were obtained in the wave number range of 2000–1000 cm_1 at 20°C. Potassium bromide powder soaked with the potencies, pressed into pellets, and air dried were used to measure the spectra. Because water structures in homeopathic potencies are thought to carry specific information on drug molecules and because O-H bending vibrational band (v2) exclusively belongs to water, the study was restricted to the bands in that wave number region. Alcohol has no absorption in the O-H bending region.

The potencies were found to differ from each other and their diluent media in the number of v2 bands, their wave number (cm_1), shape, and half-width (cm_1) of the bands.

The number and other characteristics of the v2 band represent the number of hydrogen-bonded water species and their hydrogen-bonding strength, respectively. The potencies and their diluent media therefore differ from each other in the number of hydrogen-bonded water species and their hydrogen-bonding strength. The observation that KBr pellets soaked with a potentized drug retains its specific spectral absorption properties simply confirms that medicated sucrose globules, used in homeopathic dispensing, are capable of retaining the therapeutic properties of the drug.

Drugs are prepared and stored in aqueous ethanol. Sucrose globules soaked with liquid potencies retain therapeutic properties of the drugs for a long time. Water also serves as a good medium but it does not keep the properties of a potency for long. It has been suggested that water structures in a potentized drug are responsible for carrying the information of drug molecules or particles present in the mother tincture. Ethanol molecules are thought to promote or to preserve water structures characteristic of a potentized drug.1A basic quality of a hydrogen-bonded solvent such as water is the hydrogen bond strength.

Physicochemical properties of the water in aqueous alcohol mixtures have been studied widely by such techniques as X-ray or light scattering, dielectric relaxation, nuclear magnetic resonance imaging et cetera. Among these methods, infrared (IR) spectroscopy is one of the most promising for the study of the distribution of hydrogen- bonding strengths of the water molecules in the mixtures because of the short time scale of measurements. There are two kinds of fundamental vibrations for molecules: (1) stretching, in which the distance between two atoms increase or decrease but the atom remains in the same bond axis; and (2) bending, in which the position of the atom changes relative to the original bond axis. Infrared radiation causes vibrational excitation of the molecular framework of a compound. In aqueous alcohol O-H stretching vibrational bands of water (v1 and v3) overlap the alcoholic O-H band. For this the IR spectra in the stretching region are of no use for studying hydrogen bonds of the water molecules in water/alcohol mixtures. In the region of bending vibrational band of water (v2), alcohols have no absorption bands. The purpose of the present work is to study v2 bands through Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy in 90% ethanol, Ethanol 30C, and some potentized drugs such as Nux vomica 30C, Lycopodium 30C, Santonin 30C, Cina 30C, Cina 206C, and Cina 1006C prepared in 90% ethanol. Conventionally vibrations are labeled in decreasing frequency within their symmetry type. The symmetric vibrations of H2O are labeled v1 for the highest fully symmetric frequency (3651.7 cm_1) and v2 for the next highest (1595.0 cm_1).7 FTIR spectroscopy provides simultaneous and almost instantaneous recording of the whole spectrum in the infrared region while minimizing background noise.

Nux vomica 30C, Lycopodium 30C, Santonin 30C, and Cina 30C were prepared by successive dilution (1:100 v/v) with 90% ethanol followed by succussion in 30 steps from the respective mother tinctures in this laboratory.8 Cina 200C and Cina 1000C, purchased from M. Bhattacharyya and Co. (Calcutta, India), were further diluted (1:100) and succussed with 90% ethanol in 6 more steps to prepare Cina206C and Cina 1006C. All of these potencies have the same absorbance (3.135) at 255 nm, showing similar concentrations of ethanol (90%). The purpose was to replace the manufacturer’s aqueous ethanol in Cina 200C and Cina 1000C with the ethanol in this laboratory so that the diluent medium (90% ethanol) of all the test potencies would be of the same quality. Ethanol was obtained from Bengal Chemical and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (Calcutta, India). Sterile deionized and double-distilled water was added to absolute ethanol to prepare 90% ethanol, which served as the diluent medium of all potenties as well as the control.

FTIR spectra were measured at 20°C by a Jasco FTIR spectrometer (Jasco, model 420, Japan). The wave number resolution was 4 cm_1. Spectra were obtained in the wave number range of 2000–1000 cm_1. Potassium bromide powder (_150 mg) was soaked with 90% ethanol (_0.15 mL) or any of the six potencies tested. The drug-soaked powder was mixed thoroughly with a mortar and pestle, spread in thin film (1 mm deep) in a petri dish, and allowed to dry at 30°C (50% humidity). The powder was then pressed into small equal-sized pellets. The KBr pellets, which simulate sucrose globules soaked with a potency, were exposed to IR radiation in the spectrometer. Five pellets were prepared for each drug or the diluent medium, and the IR spectra measured.

Data were analyzed by one way analysis of variance. Different potencies and their diluent media (90% ethanol, Ethanol 30C) differ significantly (p _ 0.01) from each other with respect to the positions of bands in the wave number regions, their half-widths, and their absorption intensities except the wave numbers. ……..

Because all KBr pellets were prepared under similar conditions, it is quite unlikely that they have different amounts of water in them. In earlier work the present authors observed a marked variation in O-H bending vibration among 90% ethanol, Nux vom 30C (unsuccussed), and Nux vom 30C succussed.5 The results of the present study show that potentized drugs differ from each other and also from their diluent medium, 90% ethanol, in the number of v2 bands. The number of observed v2 bands should provide the number of water species with different hydrogen-bonding strengths.6 There may be a few more water species than those actually observed by v2 bands in the spectra. According to Mizuno (personal communication, June 2003), IR spectroscopy has superior power in that different water species are distinctive from each other, but it is very difficult to resolve the curve into components. Mizuno further observed that there was no linearity in the absorption intensities of different bands. Thus different potentized drugs have different water species with different hydrogen-bonding strengths. The v2 bands have different half-widths in different potencies. The broadening of v2 bands has been attributed to the distribution of hydrogen-bonding strengths and vibrational coupling.6 The v2 band of pure water has an unusually broad width of 82 cm_1 at half-maximum. The v2 band is found to be narrower with an increase in the alcohol concentration. The narrowing of the v2 band is considered to be caused by the weakening of the vibrational coupling as a result of dilution by the alcohol. The concentration of ethanol was the same (90%) in all the potencies tested. The variation in the half-width of the v2 band may thus be caused by influence of original molecules at the start of the dilution process and also by succussion. Previously the present authors observed that succussion caused blue shift of the v2 in Nux vomica 30C.In each column of Table 1 the band of different drugs showed either a blue or red shift. Blue shifts represent the formation of stronger hydrogen bonds among water molecules. This has also been confirmed by 1H-NMR studies. It has long been known in clinical practice that sucrose globules soaked with a liquid potentized drug retain all the therapeutic properties of the drugs. FTIR spectra of KBr pellets soaked with potentized drugs simply confirm the long-standing clinical observation.

Cowan et al. demonstrated that the three-dimensional structure of liquid water loses its memory of molecular arrangement through the H-bond network in about 50 fs. The work was based on O-H stretching vibrations of pure H2O. Pure water is not comparable to a homeopathic potency that is prepared by successive dilution and succession from a mother tincture and preserved in 90% ethanol. Ethanol molecules with large nonpolar parts can preserve or promote water structures specific to a homeopathic potency. The efficacy of a homeopathic potency prepared in pure water is very short-lived. An electrostatic component is usually the dominant force contributing to H-bonding. Succussion or any mechanical agitation would therefore make the H-bonding stronger in a homeopathic potency. In ethanol solution the sequential H-bond dissociation and reassociation occur between the same OH groups. In water the broken bonds probably reform to give the same H-bond. Dissociation is a rare event occurring only twice a day, that is, once for every 1016 times the H-bond breaks. Thus clusters can persist for much longer times. The relative proportions of different polymers of water preserved by ethanol are at dynamic equilibria of specific geometric configurations. It is assumed that this dynamic geometric configuration of water clusters in a collective way confers specificity on a potentized homeopathic drug. The homeopathic potencies used in the present study were prepared in 90% ethanol and soaked in KBr pellets. Here water structures were preserved by ethanol and their random.

Based on the study findings several conclusions can be drawn. First, in the FTIR spectra of aqueous alcohol mixtures O-H bending vibrational bands (v2) exclusively belong to water. Nux vomica 30C, Lycopodium 30C, Santonin 30C, Cina 30C, Cina 206C, and Cina 1006C differ from each other and also from their diluent medium, 90% ethanol, in the number of v2 bands, their wave-number (cm_1), their shape, and half-width (cm_1) in the FTIR spectra. Second, the number of v2 bands and other parameters of the same represent, respectively, the number of hydrogen-bonded species of water and their hydrogen bonding strengths. Thus the potencies and their diluent medium differ from each other with respect to the number of H-bonded water species and their H-bonding strengths. Third, KBr pellets soaked with potentized drug, such as medicated sucrose globules used in homeopathic dispensing, retain specific spectral properties of the drugs concerned. Finally, homeopathic potencies can be differentiated from each other by FTIR spectra with respect to the O-H bending vibrational band.”

————————————————————————————

Actually, the essence of Similia Similibus Curentur is all about the peculiar OPPOSITE relationship between crude drugs and their potentized forms- former ‘produces’ disease, and latter ‘cures’ the disease.

Only MIT has scientifically explained this OPPOSITE actions of crude drugs and their potentized forms.

Most of the current ‘theories’ homeopaths maintain that medicinal properties of crude drugs are just ‘transferred’ to the medium during potentization. What ever they call it, – ‘vibrations’, ‘electromagnetic signals’, ‘medicinal memory’, ‘dynamic power’, NANOPARTICLES’ or anything else, the basic idea is that potentized drugs can MIMIC the properties of original drugs. Everybody- from Benveniste and Montaigner to IIT-B scientists were trying to explain homeopathy with this “mimic” theory. Only MIT says potentized drugs act not as ‘mimics’, but as ‘antidotes’ or ‘artificial binding sites’ for original drugs as well as pathogenic molecules SIMILAR to them.

If potentized medicines were really ‘mimicking’ the medicinal properties of parent drugs, they should be able to produce biological effects exactly similar to original drugs. On the other hand, if potentized drugs are experimentally proved to be ANTIDOTES to original drugs, it will strongly vindicate MIT concept of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING involved in homeopathic potentization. If the concept of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING is right, potentized drug should act not as MIMICS of original drugs, but as OPPOSITES of original drugs.

It is obvious that the question whether potentized medicines can antidote the biological effects of parent drugs is of paramount importance in validating MOLECULAR IMPRINTS concept. According to the hypothesis put forward by MIT, potentized medicines contains ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules of parent drugs. As such, these molecular imprints can act as artificial recognition sites for parent molecules, and bind to them, thereby preventing them from interacting with biological targets.

If this concept of ‘molecular imprint’ is correct, potentized medicines should be capable of antidoting or reversing of biological effects of their parent molecules. If we prove this point, it would be a big step in favor of ‘molecular imprinting’ concept put forward by MIT. I have two important research works here:

STUDY I:

Here I am reproducing research report regarding such a successful experiment published in 2001.

This historic experiment was conducted by a team consisting of Swapna S Datta, Palash P Mallick and Anisur AR Rahman Khuda-Bukhsh of Cytogenetics Laboratory, Department of Zoology, University of Kalyani, Kalyani-741 235, West Bengal, India and published online on 23 November 2001. Report may be read at this link:http://www.springerlink.com/content/b2t71744t426j5n4/

They proved through strictly controlled experiments that potentized homeopathic drug, Cadmium Sulphoricum, could reduce the genotoxic effects produced by cadmium chloride in mice. They used potentized Cadmium Sulph because they could not get homeopathic potencies of Cadmium Chloride. Since Cadium Sulph and Cadmium Chlor contains Cadmium, and Cadmium is the real genotoxic factor, such an experimental protocol is acceptable.

Through these experiments, the team could prove that both Cad Sulph-30 and 200 were able to combat cadmium induced genotoxic effects in mice. From the results of the reported investigation it is revealed that both Cad Sulph-30 and Cad Sulph-200 showed remarkable potential to reduce genotoxic effects produced by CdCl2. In the study the homeopathic drug apparently enhanced/activated the process of maintaining the structural integrity of chromosomes and sperm either protecting them from the destructive ability of CdCl2 in causing DNA damage or else, by enhancing the process of repair of DNA already damaged by activating specific enzyme systems to repair the damage. Even in the absence of a single original drug molecule both Cad Sulph-30 and 200 elicited spectacular ability of protection/repair to damaged chromosomes and sperm, a fact which would lead one to speculate that the drugs must have acted through the genetic regulatory mechanisms.

STUDY II:

We have another relevant study conducted by a team consisting of Philippe Belon, Pathikrit Banerjee, Sandipan Chaki Choudhury, Antara Banerjee,Surjyo Jyoti Biswas, Susanta Roy Karmakar, Surajit Pathak, Bibhas Guha, Sagar Chatterjee, Nandini Bhattacharjee, Jayanta Kumar Das, and Anisur Rahman Khuda-Bukhsh of Boiron Lab, 20 rue de la Libėration, Sainte-Foy-Lės-Lyon, France, and Department of Zoology, University of Kalyani, Kalyani-741235, West Bengal, India , published on December 26, 2005. Complete report is available at this link:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1375236/

This team undertook a study to find out whether administration of potentized homeopathic remedy,Arsenicum Album, alter Antinuclear Antibody (ANA) Titer in people living in high-risk arsenic ontaminated areas.

To examine whether elevated antinuclear antibody (ANA) titers reported in random human population of arsenic contaminated villages can be reverted to the normal range by administration of a potentized homeopathic drug, Arsenicum album, randomly selected volunteers in two arsenic contaminated villages and one arsenic-free village in West Bengal (India) were periodically tested for their ANA titer as well as various blood parameters in two types of experiments: ‘placebo-controlled double blind’ experiment for shorter duration and ‘uncontrolled verum fed experiment’ for longer duration. Positive modulation of ANA titer was observed along with changes in certain relevant hematological parameters, namely total count of red blood cells and white blood cells, packed cell volume, hemoglobin content, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and blood sugar level, mostly within 2 months of drug administration.

Thus, potentized Arsenicum album was proved to have great potential for ameliorating arsenic induced elevated ANA titer and other hematological toxicities.

Both these controlled scientific studies have proved beyond doubt that potentized homeopathic medicines can antidote or reverse the biological effects of parent drugs.

In the absence of original drug molecules, how could the homeopathic potencies exhibit such an action? The theory that potentized medicines ‘mimic’ the parent drugs is obviously disproved through these experiments. Only logical explanation we can provide for this phenomenon is the ‘molecular imprints’ of parent drug molecules being the active principles of potentized medicines. ‘Molecular imprints’ can specifically bind to the parent molecules, and thereby antidote or reverse the biological properties of parent molecules.

INDIRECTLY, THESE STUDIES STRONGLY SUPPORT IN PROVING THE “MOLECULAR IMPRINTING” HYPOTHESIS PROPOSED BY MIT REGARDING MOLECULAR MECHANISM OF POTENTIZATION AND HOMEOPATHIC THERAPEUTICS.

—————————————————————————————

One homeopath posted on my wall:

“I support “NANO particle theory”…..i cant understand your “molecular imprint theory”….

I liked that statement, as it is a genuine and humble admission of his failure in understanding MIT. He represents a major section of homeopaths who earnestly try to update their knowledge. I am sure, he will surely change his “support” once he understands “molecular imprint theory”.

———————————————————————————

If any body could detect nanoparticles of metallic elements in samples of high potency homeopathic drugs, it only proves either the samples used for experiments were not genuine ‘ultra dilutions’ as mentioned on the labels, or, the water and alcohol used for potentization were contaminated. NOTHING ELSE.

————————————————————————————-

Some friends believe “homeopathy has become scientific” by the “detection of traces of nanoparticles of metallic elements” in the upper layers of ultra dilutions”.

In order to prove homeopathy is scientific, we have to prove what are the ‘active principles’ of potentized drugs. If anybody ‘detected’ nanoparticles, they have to PROVE those nanoparticles are the active principles. That could be done by filtering out and removing the nanoparticles from homeopathic drugs, and experimentally proving that the remaining liquid ‘devoid’ of nanoparticles are therapeutically ineffective. Further more, they have to prove that these nanoparticles are present not only in “upper layers”, but in each and every minute fraction of our drugs, as we use not only the “upper layers”, but even the last drop as medicines.

You will have to explain why ‘nanoparticles of metallic elements’ are present not only in potentized drugs but in even plain water and alcohol. You have to explain why ALL homeopathic drugs contain ‘nanoparticles of metallic elements’, and you will also have to prove that those nanoparticles actually come from ‘original drug substances’, and not from contamination.

If you believe these nanoparticles are the the active principles of potentized drugs, you have to explain the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which these ‘nanoparticles act upon our body and produce therapeutic effect. Any explanation we provide should be fitting to the existing methods and paradigms of modern scientific knowledge system.

————————————————————————————

We were using ARS ALB 30 in high dilutions even in infants, with the conviction that dilutions above avogadro limit will not contain any remains of original drug substance. That is why homeopathy was accepted as a SAFE medicine. Now, in their eagerness to become famous as ‘scientists’, our ‘homeopathic researchers’ are making theories to prove that potentized ARS ALB will contain ARSENIC NANOPARTICLES! And our ‘science-starved’ homeopath friends are celebrating these ‘researches’ as great achievements for homeopathy, saying that ‘detection of nanoparticles’ has ‘debunked’ the ‘placebo’ allegations against homeopathy! Actually, the ‘nanoparticle theory’ is debunking our claims about the ‘safety’ of homeopathy.

Are they working FOR homeopathy, or AGAINST homeopathy?

If potentized ARS ALB contains nanoparticles in quantities sufficient to produce a curative biological action, how can you say it will not initiate harmful processes also?

SEE HOW EVEN TRACES OF ARSENIC DAMAGES LIVING ORGANISM:

“Arsenic interferes with cellular longevity by allosteric inhibition of an essential metabolic enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH) complex, which catalyzes the oxidation of pyruvate to acetyl-CoA by NAD+. With the enzyme inhibited, the energy system of the cell is disrupted resulting in a cellular apoptosis episode. Biochemically, arsenic prevents use of thiamine resulting in a clinical picture resembling thiamine deficiency. Poisoning with arsenic can raise lactate levels and lead to lactic acidosis. Low potassium levels in the cells increases the risk of experiencing a life-threatening heart rhythm problem from arsenic trioxide.[citation needed] Arsenic in cells clearly stimulates the production of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). When the H2O2 reacts with certain metals such as iron or manganese it produces a highly reactive hydroxyl radical. Inorganic arsenic trioxide found in ground water particularly affects voltage-gated potassium channels, disrupting cellular electrolytic function resulting in neurological disturbances, cardiovascular episodes such as prolonged QT interval, neutropenia, high blood pressure, central nervous system dysfunction, anemia, and death.

Arsenic exposure plays a key role in the pathogenesis of vascular endothelial dysfunction as it inactivates endothelial nitric oxide synthase, leading to reduction in the generation and bioavailability of nitric oxide. In addition, the chronic arsenic exposure induces high oxidative stress, which may affect the structure and function of cardiovascular system. Further, the arsenic exposure has been noted to induce atherosclerosis by increasing the platelet aggregation and reducing fibrinolysis. Moreover, arsenic exposure may cause arrhythmia by increasing the QT interval and accelerating the cellular calcium overload. The chronic exposure to arsenic upregulates the expression of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1, vascular cell adhesion molecule and vascular endothelial growth factor to induce cardiovascular pathogenesis.

Tissue culture studies have shown that arsenic compounds block both IKr and Iks channels and, at the same time, activates IK-ATP channels. Arsenic compounds also disrupt ATP production through several mechanisms. At the level of the citric acid cycle, arsenic inhibits pyruvate dehydrogenase and by competing with phosphate it uncouples oxidative phosphorylation, thus inhibiting energy-linked reduction of NAD+, mitochondrial respiration, and ATP synthesis. Hydrogen peroxide production is also increased, which might form reactive oxygen species and oxidative stress. These metabolic interferences lead to death from multi-system organ failure, probably from necrotic cell death, not apoptosis.”

I mean to say potencies above 12c will not contain any particles of original substance. I mean to say, active principles of drugs potentized above avogadro limit are ‘molecular imprints’, which act as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules. Molecular Imprints cannot interfere in the interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands, and hence they cannot produce any harmful effect in our body. Homeopathic drugs above 12c are hundred percent safe, if potentization is genuinely done.

Dear homeopaths, are you aware, by arguing that you have ‘proved’ that potentized drugs contain nanoparticles of starting materials, you are actually framing a case against homeopathy, since it raises the serious questions of nanotoxicity?
If potentized ars alb contains nanoparticles of arsenic, potentized plumbum met contains nanoparticles of lead, or potentized uranium and radium contains nanoparticles of uranium and radium, it becomes a defenseless case against homeopathy, which will obviously prompt law makers to initiate stringent regulations.
Do you remember, we were so far vouching about the ‘safety’ of potentized drugs, arguing that they do not contain even a single particle of starting material?

I mean to say ‘nanoparticle theory’ is wrong. I mean to say ‘nanoparticle theory’ is harmful for homeopathy. It will give new weapons to the enemies to attack homeopathy.

————————————————————————————-

Dear homeopaths, are you aware, by arguing that you have ‘proved’ that potentized drugs contain nanoparticles of starting materials, you are actually framing a case against homeopathy, since it raises the serious questions of nanotoxicity?

If potentized ars alb contains nanoparticles of arsenic, potentized plumbum met contains nanoparticles of lead, or potentized uranium and radium contains nanoparticles of uranium and radium, it becomes a defenseless case against homeopathy, which will obviously prompt law makers to initiate stringent regulations.

Do you remember, we were so far vouching about the ‘safety’ of potentized drugs, arguing that they do not contain even a single particle of starting material?

————————————————————————————-

Even if you could detect some ‘traces of nanoparticles’ in the samples of ‘homeopathic ultra dilutions’, you have to answer the following questions before declaring that you have ‘proved homeopathy’ and ‘debunked the allegations against homeopathy’:

1. Did you prepare the ‘ultra-dilutions’ under your direct personal supervision, in order to ensure that the samples you used were genuinely ‘ultra’?

2. Are you aware of the fact that the ‘market samples’ of ‘high potencies’ are not reliable for research purposes, as most manufacturers sell very low potencies with the label of ‘ultra high’ potencies due to their profit motives?

3. Did you use plain mixtures of water ethyl alcohol as controls, as it is common knowledge that any sample of water and alcohol may contain ‘nanoparticles’ of elements and other natural contaminants? Are you aware, you can detect some ‘traces’ of nanoparticles in any sample of alcohol or water when examined under ‘Field Emission Scanning Microscope’ or ‘Energy Dispersive Spectrometry’, even without any potentization?

4. Did you filter out and remove the detected nanoparticles from the samples after your experiments, and verify whether the remaining ’empty’ water-alcohol mixtures have no any therapeutic properties when applied as similimum?

5. Did you filter out the detected ‘nanoparticles’ from your samples after experiments, and use those ‘nanoparticles’ as similimum in the patients to ensure that those ‘nanoparticles’ are the real active principles of ‘ultra high dilutions’? It is very important to prove that those ‘nanoparticles’ are the real active principles of potentized drugs.

6. Did you think about the molecular level biological mechanism by which these nanoparticles said to be present actually act up on the human organism and produce a therapeutic effect? Did you explain anything regarding the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which the ‘nanoparticles’ produce the therapeutic effects according to ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’?

7. Are you aware of the fact that ‘nanoparticles’ of ‘metallic elements’ cannot represent the biological and therapeutic properties of complex drug substances used as drugs, as such properties arise from the complex structures and chemical properties of constituent drug molecules?

8. Did you ever think how the ‘traces of nanoparticles floating in upper layers’ of ultra dilutions could be present in each and drops of our drugs, as we know from experiences that not only the ‘upper layers’ but even the last drop is therapeutically effective?

9. Are you aware, by arguing that you have ‘proved’ potentized drugs contain nanoparticles of starting materials, you are actually framing a case against homeopathy, since it raises the serious questions of nanotoxicity? If potentized ars alb contains nanoparticles of arsenic, potentized plumbum met contains nanoparticles of lead, or potentized uranium and radium contains nanoparticles of uranium and radium, it becomes a case against homeopathy. Do you remember, we were so far vouching about the ‘safety’ of potentized drugs, arguing that they do not contain even a single particle of starting material?

Kindly consider these questions with a rational and scientific mindset. Please understand, if you cannot provide a scientifically viable explanation for the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM of homeopathic cure in a way fitting to the concept of Similia Similibus Curentur, your ‘detection’ of some ‘traces of nanoparticles’ in the ‘market samples’ of homeopathic drugs does not contribute anything in the scientific validation or ‘prooving’ of homeopathy.

————————————————————————————–

Once you understand and accept the scientific approach towards homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, instantly you start experiencing the self-confidence it provides, the great empowerment and transformation it brings to your over-all outlook and practice as a homeopath.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, and practice it accordingly, you will realize that your whole erstwhile perceptions of homeopathy is undergoing a wonderful change- your methods, targets and approaches changing radically. You will realize that you are no more a ‘healer’ practicing a ‘belief healing system’, but a proud scientific medical professional, capable of understanding and scientifically explaining your tools and principles to anybody. Your language becomes scientific, your thoughts become rational and your explanations becomes logical and convincing. You will no more have to talk about miracles, wonders, riddles and mysteries of homeopathy. Experience this change yourselves!

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you would realize that any individual patient coming to you will have diverse types of molecular errors in him, caused by diverse types of endogenous or exogenous pathogenic molecules, and as such, diverse types of molecular imprints will be required to remove all these multitudes of molecular inhibitions to effect a complete cure. In most cases, all these diverse molecular imprints required for the patient will not be available in a ‘single’ drug, and hence, we will have to select more than one drug according to similarity of symptom groups, and apply them simultaneously, alternatingly or serially as decided by the physician. In my opinion, there is no harm even if they are applied together.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, all your confusions over ‘miasms’ could be resolved by perceiving miasms as chronic disease dispositions caused by the off-target actions of antibodies generated against exogenous or endogenous proteins including infectious agents. It would help you in scientifically understanding and treating various types of chronic diseases including auto immune diseases

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that concepts such as ‘internal essence of drug substance’, ‘dynamic drug energy’, ‘drug personality’ etc are all scientifically baseless, and that the medicinal property of drug substance is decided by the structure and properties of constituent molecules, where as the medicinal properties of potentized drugs are decided by the 3-d configuration of molecular imprints they contain.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that when applied as similimum, potentized drug does not act as a ‘whole’ unit, but it is the individual constituent ‘molecular imprints’ that independently bind to the pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity, remove pathological molecular inhibitions and cure the disease. You will realize that you need not worry over single/multiple drugs issue any more.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that during ‘drug proving’, drug substance does not act as a ‘whole’ unit, but it is the individual constituent drug molecules that independently act up on the biological molecules, cause molecular inhibitions and produce symptoms.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that since molecular imprints do not interact each other, and since they act as individual units when applied as therapeutic agents, there cannot by any harm even if we mix two or more potentized drugs together, or prescribe them simultaneously- they will work.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that even so-called ‘single drugs’ are not really single, but combinations of diverse types of independent ‘molecular imprints’, representing diverse types of drug molecules, acting as independent units upon pathogenic molecules having configurational affinity and removing molecular inhibitions

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drugs cannot interact each other, and as such, one cannot antidote another, or act inimical to each other.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you will realize that there is no chance of so-called aggravations, suppressions, provings or any other harm even if ‘wrong’ drug, ‘wrong’ potency or ‘untimely repetitions are used, if you are using only ‘molecular imprints’ forms of drugs.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics, you realize that selecting drug, potency, dose and follow up and getting cure are not a so much complex thing as we are made to believe.

Once you understand and accept homeopathy as Molecular Imprints Therapeutics,you realize no more ‘riddles and mysteries’ remain in homeopathy that could not be explained.

Only Molecular Imprints Therapeutics provides a sound explanation of homeopathy, fitting well to modern science and our every day experiences.

———————————————————————————-

Responding to one of my facebook posts, one senior homeopath says that I am an “arrogant” and “haughty” person with “little knowledge”.

I am aware of the “littleness” of my knowledge. I am not a ‘learned’ person. I am not an academician, scientist or scholar. Not even a professional homeopath. I am only a lay man with very “little knowledge”.

I am of course proud of what ever ‘little’ knowledge I have, since I am very much sure that my knowledge is in the right direction.. I am proud that I have a rational and scientific world outlook that enables me to approach any subject with a scientific perspective. I am proud that I am persistently trying to update and enhance my knowledge. I never compromise with ‘theories’ and ‘practices’ that are obviously unscientific and superstitious, and hence some people will think that I am ‘arrogant’ and ‘haughty’.

————————————————————————————

I know homeopaths “are giving relief/curing to numerous sick souls with this science called homeopathy”. I have no any doubt on that. I have been witnessing thousands of such cures for the last 40+ years. But I do not think such cures are ‘proofs’ for the correctness of the unscientific theories of vital force and dynamic energy I call “garbage” and ask to discard. Such cures are the proofs for only the correctness of the concept of potentization and similia similibus curentur, which I call the “kernel” of homeopathy, and try to explain scientifically using MIT concepts..

————————————————————————————

Now it is an easy job for any fame-seeking homeopath to come into the limelight as a ‘scientist’ or ‘researcher’, and ‘publish a paper’ for ‘debunking the allegations against homeopathy’, by merely spending Rs 5000! IIT-Bombay and IISc Bangalore is leasing out their research facilities to anybody who want to use their ‘nanotechnology’ research lab.

Do as follows: Go to IISC with some samples of homeopathic ‘ultra dilution’ purchased from the ‘market’. Pay Rs 5000 to the lab. The scientists and technicians in the lab will do the rest for you. They will find out the presence of some ‘traces of nanoparticles’ in the samples of ‘ultra dilutions’ you provided. They will explain you how it was done using modern technologies such as ‘Field Emission Scanning Microscope’ or ‘Energy Dispersive Spectrometry’. Finished!

You can now issue press release about the ‘fundamental research in homeopathy’ you have done. You can now tell your homeopath friends that you have proved ‘homeopathy is scientific’. You can now declare that you have ‘debunked the allegations against homeopathy’.

Your homeopath friends will then take over. They will start posting on every facebook pages about your ‘fundamental research’ that proves homeopathy is not ‘placebo’. They will invite you to present ‘papers’ in their ‘scientific seminars’. You have become a ‘homeopathic scientist’!!

Are you aware, you can detect some ‘traces’ of nanoparticles in any sample of alcohol or water when examined under ‘Field Emission Scanning Microscope’ or ‘Energy Dispersive Spectrometry’, even without any potentization?

Did you ensure that the ‘samples’ of ultra dilutions you used for the experiments were genuinely potentized to ‘ulltra level’, as most manufactures market very low potencies in the label of ultra high potencies?

Did you verify whether the ‘samples’ lose their medicinal properties after the ‘nanoparticles’ were completely filtered out and removed from them? It is very important to prove that those ‘nanoparticles’ are the real active principles of potentized drugs.

Did you prove that the ‘traces of nanoparticles’ you ‘detected in your samples are the real ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of homeopathic drugs?

Did you explain anything regarding the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which the ‘nanoparticles’ produce the therapeutic effects according to ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’?

———————————————————————————-

Almost 90% of all the homeopathic ‘philosophical’ literature available to us is ridiculously unscientific and irrational.

Only things that are scientifically valid and worthy of serious consideration in homeopathy are ‘molecular imprinting’ involved in potentization, and ‘biological mechanism of cure’ involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’. These two ‘principles’ constitute the most valuable inner kernel of homeopathy.

Everything else are relevant only as mere historical pieces.

————————————————————————————-

Through MIT, I am actually trying to retrieve the ‘scientific essence’ of homeopathy lying hidden in its voluminous unscientific theoretical ‘system’. It is a very difficult and tiresome task, exactly similar to retrieving a GOLD COIN lying hidden under a large heap of nasty garbage that is furiously ‘protected’ by battalions of poisonous flies roaming around!

————————————————————————————-

Some homeopaths use the term “unprejudiced’ as a convenient way of defending their unscientific theories and practices they believe to be homeopathy..

Whenever anybody questions any of the the unscientific things taught as homeopathy, they will say, our master has advised us to be “unprejudiced”, and hence there is nothing wrong in “investigating” and “experimenting” with hair transmission, radionics machines, reflexology, phototransmission, mp3 remedies and all such nonsenses.

“BE UNPREJUDICED” is the greatest self-defense of all occult practitioners.

DID HAHNEMANN ACTUALLY ADVICE HOMEOPATHS TO BE ‘UNPREJUDICED’ TO EVERY NONSENSE?

See Organon : Aphorism 6 : Sixth Edition, in which he uses the term “unprejudiced observer”:

“The unprejudiced observer – well aware of the futility of transcendental speculations which can receive no confirmation from experience – be his powers of penetration ever so great, takes note of nothing in every individual disease, except the changes in the health of the body and of the mind (morbid phenomena, accidents, symptoms) which can be perceived externally by means of the senses; that is to say, he notices only the deviations from the former healthy state of the now diseased individual, which are felt by the patient himself, remarked by those around him and observed by the physician. All these perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease”.

What does it mean? Does it mean a homeopath should be unprejudiced about allopathy? Does it mean he should be unprejudiced about similia principle? Does it mean he should be unprjudiced about proven principles of science? Does it mean he should unprejudiced about each and every nonsense ideas? Does it mean homeopaths should be OPEN-MINDED to every unscientific ideas people propagate?

If you read that aphorism carefully, you will realize that hahnemann was actually advising the homeopaths “not to make speculations about diseases” based on previous experiences of similar cases, but to “notice only the deviations from the former healthy state of the now diseased individual, which are felt by the patient himself, remarked by those around him and observed by the physician”, that “these perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease”. By this advice, hahnemann oonly wanted to say, homeopaths should not make prescriptions on the basis of conclusions drawn from “previous experience of similar cases”, but only by selecting a similimum using the “totality of symptoms” presented by each individual patient.

Hahnemann actually asks homeopaths to be UNPREJUDICED in their approach to diseases. He ONLY means, symptoms or “perceptible signs that represent the disease in its whole extent” should be used as the sole guide in selecting the similimum.

HOW CAN YOU USE THE TERM ‘UNPREJUDICED’ ALIENATED FROM THE ACTUAL CONTEXT IN WHICH HAHNEMANN USED IT? YOU ARE MISINTERPRETING AND MISREPRESENTING OUR MASTER’S ADVICE FOR YOUR ULTERIOR MOTIVES.

——————————————————————————–

I do not think all ‘prejudices’ are wrong, if they are arising from knowledge of a well-informed person. Only an empty-headed idiot can be 100% “unprejudiced”.

We observe and interpret anything new in the light of our previously acquired knowledge and life experience, and hence, all of us are bound to be more or less “prejudiced”.

We have to differentiate between rational prejudices and irrational prejudices- scientific prejudices and superstitious prejudices.

Off course, I have my own prejudices. They are RATIONAL prejudices arising from the scientific knowledge about this universe and its phenomena I have acquired so far, and based on my logical analysis of my objective experiences in life.

————————————————————————————–

Biopolymer-based drugs (also known as biologics) produced through biological processes are becoming increasingly more common in modern drug designing. But the revolutionary concept of ‘molecular imprinting in proteins’ is only in its emerging stage, which may have implications in drug designing techniques.

It has already been acknowledged that the biological molecules presently classified as antibodies are nothing but native globulin proteins subjected to natural molecular imprinting process with alien pathogenic proteins acting as ‘guest’ molecules.

Scientists have already realized the fact that the much discussed pathogenic molecules known as ‘prions’ are nothing but disfigured protein molecules subjected to molecular imprinting.

Proteins, being polymers with complex and flexible tertiary structures, are expected to be a very good medium for molecular imprinting. Different types of protein based substances, subjected to artificial molecular imprinting, may evolve in the future as effective therapeutic agents and laboratory reagents.

Apart from protein molecules, different types of biopolymers such as polysaccharides and nucleic acids also may be experimented as medium for molecular imprinting.

Native proteins extracted from the patients could be subjected to molecular imprinting with appropriate ligands or other pathogenic molecules acting as ‘guest’ molecules and used as target oriented therapeutic agents. But the problem remains that such imprinted proteins can be used only in the individual whose proteins are used for imprinting. Otherwise it may result in grave anaphylactic reactions.

Moreover these imprinted proteins may remain in the organism for very long periods, without undergoing degradation, and cause ever new pathological molecular blocks. Such issues have to be addressed properly.

———————————————————————————–

I don’t think anybody can explain “every aspect” of homeopathy without “distorting” its “fundamentals.” We should not expect that ‘every’ aspect of homeopathic theory and practice could be ‘explained’ in terms of modern science.

Fear of ‘distorting fundamental laws’ arises from the fact that homeopathy is taught as a closed system of eternally immutable ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ every ‘true’ homeopath is bound to ‘obey’. We hear ‘seven cardinal principles of hahnemann’, ‘hering laws’, ‘kents observations’ and many other ‘theories’ that rule the practice of homeopathy. Anybody violating or thinking beyond these ‘fundamental laws’ are considered to be ‘wrong homeopaths’. And they ask science to explain “every aspect” of homeopathy without “distorting” its “fundamentals”!

We should remember, no ‘masters’ so far knew what really happens during potentization. Nobody so far knew what are the exact active principles of potentized drugs. Nobody so far knew the exact molecular level mechanism by which the active principles of potentized drugs interact with the biological organism and produce a therapeutic effect. Only things our masters actually knew was the objective natural phenomena of ‘likes curing likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’.

Everything else were mere speculations. Speculations based on unscientific philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’. All ‘laws’, ‘rules’, ‘methods’ and ‘doctrines’ we consider as ‘cardinal principles of homeopathy evolved from these speculative theories. All ‘directions’ regarding ‘doses’, repetitions’, ‘single drugs’, ‘follow ups’ and everything else were formulated without clearly knowing the substances we are actually dealing with or how they actually work. They were based on misinterpreted ‘experiences’ of ‘stalwarts’ with historically limited scientific knowledge.

Once we acquire scientific knowledge regarding the exact processes involved in potentization, active principles of potentized drugs and the molecular mechanism of their therapeutic action, all the existing ‘methods’, ‘laws’, ‘rules’ and ‘principles’ are bound to change. New ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ will evolve. That means, we will have to discard, change or ‘distort’ many things so far considered as ‘fundamentals’ of homeopathy.

I am talking about ‘principles’ and ‘methods’ of homeopathic practice such as ‘dose’ and ‘repetitions’ on the basis of my scientific understanding of potentization as ‘molecular imprinting’, active principles of potentized drugs as ‘molecular imprints’, and homeopathic therapeutics as removal of biochemical inhibitions. My explanations cannot be expected to be strictly in accordance with what you consider inevitable ‘laws’ of homeopathy.

Acquiring a scientific understanding of the phenomena involved in ‘similia similibus curentur’ and ‘potentization’, and applying that knowledge judiciously for curing the sick- that should be the only ‘fundamental rule’ that guide a homeopath.

‘Likes cures likes’ and ‘high dilution effects’ represent the objective part of homepathy, which are concerned with truthful observations of natural phenomena involved in the process of ‘cure’. This is the strong and rational aspect of homeopathy that have to be preserved, explored and advanced into more and more perfection.

The theoretical explanatory part of homeopathy, which is based on totally unscientific and irrational philosophy of ‘dynamism’ and ‘vitalism’ of eighteenth century europe, as well as the ‘rules’, ‘laws’ and ‘methods’ formulated accordingly, is the real stumbling block that prevents this wonderful therapeutic art from advancing into a scientific medical system.

We have to preserve and strengthen the rational objective aspect of homeopathy, and explain it in terms of modern scientific knowledge. We should show the audacity to discard its irrational and unscientific theoretical parts. Once we understand the real science involved in the phenomena of ‘likes cure likes’ and ‘potentization’, a whole new set of practical ‘rules’ and ‘laws’ would spontaneously evolve.

In the PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION of ORGANON, Dr Hahnemann made the following statement:

“In this third edition I have not refrained from making any alterations and emendations suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

This statement is a fitting answer to those ‘dogmatic’ homeopaths who argue nothing could be changed or updated in homeopathy.

Hahenemann advises us not to “refrain” from making “alterations and emendations”, if “suggested by increased knowledge and necessitated by further experience.”

Can anybody explain vital force’ in scientific terms? Can anybody explain ‘dynamic force’ and ‘drug energy’ in terms of modern science? NO. Because they have no SCIENCE in it! They are totally unscientific concepts being part of philosophy of DYNAMISM