Many theories have been proposed to explain how homeopathy works, ranging from misapplied quantum theory to the “doctrine of signatures” and other kinds of alchemical mystique. Many homeopaths feel that “science” may never solve the mystery. So, as a result of information that is incomplete without a generally accepted and unifying theory , the homeopathic practitioner tries to develop and work with a variety of eclectic “rules of thumb”.
Faced with over 200 years of empirical experience, we must continue to try to find a common ground and unifying basis in theory. Modern chemistry and physics sprang from the common ground that was atomic theory. Why should homeopathy be any exception?
My thesis is that “science” has been looking for the answer to homeopathy in the wrong place.
We have been looking either on the quantum scale (sub-atomic or small molecules) or on the statistical-mechanics scale (millions of molecules). But there is a no-man’s land (in between) which contains matter on a scale of 10 to 1000 angstroms … i.e. bigger than a simple molecule but smaller than a living cell.
For example, (Blakeslee, 2001) reports:
“At this level, things do not act according to well-described theories of chemistry and physics. Rather, systems this size seem to obey a unique set of rules that cannot be deduced from studying their individual components…..There are too many atoms in the systems to be described by electromagnetism and quantum theories but too few atoms to handle statistically.” (My italics.)
Research on this ‘nano-scale’ is very pertinent to a working theory of how homeopathic remedies work within the organism. For example, what if we were to look at the ‘nano-scale’ structure of the solvent (water) versus the usual focus on the solute (the dissolved remedy)?
It turns out that recent research supports the idea that the unusual physical chemistry of water may offer a unifying theory for homeopathy not only in terms of the actual nature of the remedy as it is prepared, but in terms of its bioactive interaction with the organism.
The goal of this article is to offer an overview of a new theory that can be tested in the research lab and supported by clinical experience.
Review of Current Theory
To be useful to the practitioner, any theory should try to meet some practical utility criteria as a minimum, besides lending some scientific credibility to the homeopathic paradigm. Here are five suggestions:
1) The theory must offer principles that the homeopath would find useful in daily practice.
There have been many ‘meta-theories’ that seek to explain everything but predict nothing. For example, how can Conte’s quantum ‘white hole’ theory help us choose between one potency over another? If a theory can not predict practical outcomes, then it becomes scientifically untestable and, therefore, unuseable in practice.
2) The theory should be parsimonious.
Truth is elegant. Assumptions should be simple, testable and the number should be held to a minimum. The assumptions should reflect the basic experience that is already generally held to be known.
Parsimony is not simplistic. For instance, those theories that promulgate ‘energy’ or ‘frequency ‘ of a remedy are usually just didactic metaphors and not concrete, operational explanations. An example would be (Sharma 1990). He presented some interesting experimental observations and explained them on the basis of the energy of ‘resonant unpaired electrons’. But I think that most chemists would not agree with his claim that molecules of ‘equal’ energy are equivalent biochemically.
3) The theory should show how the bioactive moiety interacts with the organism to effect change.
This means that a biological mechanism needs to be identified that represents the action-reaction homeostasis of what is called the ‘vital force’. The phenomenon of ‘aggravation’ should be accounted for, as should size of dose and potency effects.
4) The theory needs to be testable through future research.
Given a working theory, there is much more research to be done to improve our understanding of disease and lend wider credence to the homeopathic paradigm. The theory needs to offer predictions that can be repeatedly and conclusively proved or disproved in the laboratory and in the clinic.
5) The theory should facilitate the systemization of ongoing clinical experience.
A problem with the current Materiae Medica in finding the simillimum for a case is that the data for a particular remedy tends to be consolidated without source differentiation. Toxicology, clinical experience and all results for all potencies used during a proving are treated as equivalent. Referring to the original provings can help somewhat but, by this point, the intuition and prejudgement of the clinician are often biasing factors in seeking “confirmation” of the remedy selected.
So it seems that, in the Materiae Medica, idiopathic uniqueness is implicitly denied, which seems contrary to the concept of fitting the remedy to the individual case. Of course, we feel we allow for this by crossing other rubrics but it still comes down to a trial-and-error approach for the remedy and potency selected in the individual case.
The Proposed Model – Development and Discussion
This section will outline some general clinical evidence relating to the nature of potency, the in-vivo ‘measurement’ of potency effects, the puzzle of why ‘diluting’ a remedy increases its power to heal and possible reasons why succussion is an important part of that puzzle.
We shall also examine why alcohol could be more than just a preservative and how ‘dry’ lactose or sucrose pellets could stabilize and be carriers of the remedy.
Finally, we shall take a look the relationship between the Vital Force and the bioactivity of the symptom-remedy and how remedy action within the organism seems to proceed.
What is our case experience in working with different potencies?
Observations on size of dose and number of succussions…
“One of the keys to Hahnemannian homeopathy is the size of dose and the number of succussion given to the medicinal solution.” (Little, 1998)
Further observations on number of succussions…
“Homoeopaths using the 1842 LM methods have recorded many case histories where a certain remedy did not act with a certain number of succussions [but] that immediately showed curative responses after adding more succussions to the same remedy bottle.” (Little, 2001)
And some observations on selecting potency that seem to come from an entirely different perspective…
The Banerji family of physicians in India provide a unique experience and methodology. They make about 2000 prescriptions per day at their clinic in Calcutta, with a staff of 12 doctors. Behind this family’s methods there are about one hundred years of experience. They largely prescribe on an organ ‘syndrome’, or group of symptoms, rather than the ‘totality’ of symptoms. They use one remedy in one potency for one syndrome. Based on hundreds of cases, (Banerji, 1985) shows that a Lycopodium constipation is sensitive to potency as follows:
* 6C and 30C showed no significant percentile response;
* 200C showed 75 percentile response, but
* 1000C (1M) showed no percentile response either!
A corollary of the Banerji family’s experience is that they see each potency having its own unique subset of symptoms. Both observations are in accordance with Hahnemann’s clinical experience, as (Little, 2001) notes:
“Although Hahnemann spoke about raising the potencies from lower to higher in the Organon, the microfiches of the Paris casebooks often show him searching up and down the potencies until he found a harmonic degree. After finding a harmonic degree he would then work up from there. Because everyone is truly an individual it is hard to make clear and fast rules about what potencies are best. Sometimes you have to search for the most harmonic potency.”
These observations illustrate the important role of succussion in determining potency and the efficacy of the remedy which the theory needs to explain.
How is potency measured?
The problem is that potency has not yet been measured directly, only indirectly and subjectively. For example, it’s the interaction of the remedy and the prover that together produce the symptom, not the remedy alone. There’s no way you can remove the prover from the relationship unless the same remedy were to produce the same effect in every prover. We know that not to be true, so the theory needs to offer a way to redefine this problem.
How can a homeopathy remedy have any biological effect when it’s been diluted beyond recognition?
The quick answer lies in this question itself, plus a little more. The high potency remedy has indeed been greatly diluted but it has also been ‘succussed beyond recognition’.
Some theoreticians say that succussion is a way of imparting ‘energy’ to the remedy. This is a truism which really tells us nothing. So perhaps a better suggestion is that the process somehow transfers information to the remedy solution. (Beneviste, 1999) seems to hold this view, but he does not answer the question of ‘how’ in a way that is helpful to the practitioner.
Nonetheless, we shall now explore the idea of ‘potency as information’ as the basis in developing a theoretical model.
Redefining Potency and Dose as “Information”
(Anick , 1998) has proposed a concept of a liquid structure involving zwitterion (charged) water clusters which could carry remedy information. There is some published experimental support for this view, from (Jongma, 1998) who for the first time identified the existence of neutrally charged (‘unprotonated’) water cluster ions.
In searching for possible bioactive species in the remedy using nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) methods, the evidence has been inconclusive. An experimental and critical survey showed that Conte’s results were due to soda glass contamination and could not be reproduced using regular silica glass vials
(Milgrom, 2001). And there was an excellent review of NMR work published as a guest editorial in the British Homeopathic Journal (Demangeat, 2001).
On the other hand, using newly developed infrared analytical methods, there has been considerable study of molecular clusters in a variety of liquids. Some of this research, using FT-ICR spectra (Jongma, 1998) confirms the existence of stable molecule clusters in water using technologies involving surface impact. In other words, they demonstrated creation of water clusters, using sudden adiabatic expansion to create plasma-like conditions. These conditions will be shown later to be akin to the cavitation conditions created by succussion.
(Andersson, 1997 and 1999) has created individual clusters, using sudden evaporative cooling, which average up to 4,000 water molecules in the molecular size spectrum. The cluster size distribution curve goes up to 14,000 molecules/cluster. These clusters were directed at a graphite surface at a velocity of 1,380 metres/second. Large cluster fragments of “several thousand” water molecules were found to survive these high collision velocities, which underscores how extremely stable these water clusters can be.
Figure 1. Icosahedral Water Cluster Isomers
Cluster mixtures can generate many different isomeric forms: for example, a cluster of 21 molecules can exist as one of 18 different geometric isomers or represent 18 unique ‘bits’ of information. To illustrate the subtle ways in which a molecule can exist in different unique identities, Fig.1 (above) shows two isomeric forms for a icosahedral type cluster having 280 water molecules.
If each isomer represents one item of information, and if they turn out to be the bio-active species in homeopathy, then millions of different information ‘bits’ can carried in a mixture of isomeric water clusters.
Interestingly, alcohol forms clusters with water also (Wisniewski, 2001) although one author (Yui, 2000) , using mass spectrometry, claims some mutual destruction of cluster ions (not neutral clusters). Being an associative liquid, i.e. having hydrogen-bonds between molecules, one is not surprised that alcohol can form its very own clusters, but note that alcohol is never entirely anhydrous: 95% v/v ethanol is usually the purest one can get for remedy preparation.
Later, it will be seen that the presence of alcohol actually favorable to the moderation of succussion energy (by increasing vapour pressure), which means that succussion is not inherently destructive but , on balance, creates the water clusters that represent the remedy.
So, if it is given that the water clusters are the moieties that carry remedy information, what is the role of succussion and dilution in their preparation?
The Nature of the Succussion Process
It’s actually quite easy to create cavitation conditions by succussion. If you crack your knuckles, the popping noise you hear is cavitation. Similarly, rapping a remedy vial on the spine of your repertory creates cavitation, demonstrated by the small bubbles you often see.
Figure 2. Cavitation Bubble Collapse
Fig. 2 shows an imploding cavitation water -vapor bubble (Suslick, 1989).
The imploding cavity (about 150 microns in diameter) is captured in a high-speed flash photomicrograph, where the implosion heats the vapor inside the cavity to 5,500 degrees Celsius (plasma conditions). Since this cavity formed near a solid surface, the implosion is asymmetric, expelling a jet of liquid toward the surface of the container at roughly 400 kilometers per hour. Both the heat and the jet’s kinetic energy contribute to a unique chemical environment in the liquid.
Similarly, in industrial applications, mechanical cavitation (succussion) can also generate plasma conditions which usually tend to destroy molecules. A plasma is a gas-like state where molecules can be disrupted to an atomic and/or ionic state. The plasma constituents can also reform into different molecular arrangements, particularly on liquid or solid surfaces.
Using FT-ICR spectroscopy, (Jongma 1998) showed that the cavitation is moderated by dissolved air or alcohol, so that the lower attenuated cavitation energy actually creates quite large stable clusters in water. In Fig. 3, below, a typical water cluster size-concentration distribution spectrum is shown for distilled water.
Figure 3. Typical water cluster size-concentration distribution spectrum
Homeopathy Remedy Preparation – The Creation of Water Clusters
The creation of a potentized remedy finds a parallel in the semiconductor industry where a pure germanium crystal is impregnated or “doped” with a tiny amount of impurity, which entirely changes the germanium crystal properties and makes it a semiconductor.
In similar fashion, each remedy starting-tincture (or triturate) is theorized as “doping” an alcohol/water mix to create a spectrum of different sized and shaped water clusters, such a spectrum being unique to that starting remedy material.
At the same time , the “doped” water cluster mix engages in a series of chemical reactions of its own where each water cluster is exchanging energy and water molecules with its neighbors, until a mix of stable sizes is developed and a characteristic “mass spectrum” of cluster sizes is obtained which, again, is expressive of the fundamental nature of the starting remedy.
Every chemical reaction is “reversible” to a greater or lesser degree.
One can drive many reactions “backwards” given the right
chemical/physical conditions. Having reagent feedstock (fresh dilution water) in
stoichometric excess can accelerate the “forward” formation of new
product (specific water clusters), just as a catalyst might also facilitate this “forward” process. Some reactions could also be autocatalytic, that is, the products (i.e. clusters) themselves speed up the process.
When the cavitation energy of succussion is applied, all the reactions in the cluster mix are accelerated until the entire solution approaches a stable spectrum.
Note that, in order be self-consistent, different methods of preparation use differing “standard” numbers of succussions. According to our cluster theory, however, different degrees of succussion results in different degrees of approach to a final stable state and hence differences in observed efficacy for a given “potency”. (Thus the Jenichen remedies of the nineteenth century may have been “preferred” because a large amount of succussion energy was applied throughout remedy preparation.)
Now let’s look again at the role of dilution when the next stage of potency is being prepared:
As you add fresh water, you are restoring the original stoichometric “excess” of this reagent and “driving forward” all the creative (and competing) reactions that form clusters. This time, however, note that the starting conditions have changed……. now there is much less starting “doping” material and, second, we have starting clusters that were not there in the first preparation stage.
This changes the cluster spectrum and narrows it towards a different preferred configuration. Just like distilling alcohol, this dilution/succussion process is the
typical “fractionation” process of separating and concentrating components in a mixture. Fractionation is well known in other processes, e.g. freeze-drying of coffee.
Figure 4. Concentration(Dose) and Cluster Size Distribution as a Function of Potency.
Now, in the simplest example, suppose that each unique water cluster carries the information corresponding to a unique remedy symptom. (In fact, several isomers/cluster types may be necessary to represent a symptom). Then Fig. 4 (above) shows that the remedy mixture becomes more symptom-specific (narrower range) when the potency is raised and represents a higher concentration in the mix (greater height) of those specific clusters.
This may accord with your own clinical experience of ‘going high’ and why lower potencies and more frequent dosing may be better in acute cases if you are not sure of the exact remedy to prescribe.
A corollary of this model is that, at lower potencies, the symptom ‘picture’ of two (or more) remedies appear to overlap. Figure 5 (below) illustrates how this may be so. Thus either remedy A or B may “cure” symptom 2.
Figure 5. Overlapping Lower Potency Cluster Size Ranges for Remedies A and B.
With further succussion and dilution of each of the remedies, as shown in Fig. 6 (below), Remedy A may be the only one that “cures” Symptom 1 whereas Remedy B may only “cure” Symptom 3. With the narrowing of each remedy spectrum as potency is raised, neither has now much effect on Symptom 2.
Figure 6. Higher potency Cluster Size Ranges for Remedies A and B.
Besides explaining the Banerjis’ experience (above), this model theory explains Borland’s observation that:
“It is sometimes said that certain drugs are effective in high potency and certain drugs only effective in low. I do not think this is so. The reason certain medicines have been found effective more commonly in low potency turns on the point of general similarity. Most of the drugs which are use exclusively in low potencies have not been fully proved; we have no knowledge of their finer differentiating points, we only have a knowledge of their broader effects. So when you use one of the these drugs in a higher potency you cannot accurately match the finer differentiating symptoms of the case. The higher you go, the more accurate the prescribing must be; in low potency a general similarity is enough to give an effect.” (Borland, 1939)
Conclusions on Homeopathic Remedy Preparation and Potency
The Function of Succussion
The succussion process is very much more than a trivial way of mixing up the solution at each stage of dilution. When one looks at what is known today about the physical chemistry of water, and when you factor in what is known about stage-wise separation processes (“fractionation”), succussion (combined with interstage dilution) could play a significant part in the preparation of remedies and is a rational explanation of “higher” remedy potency at “higher” dilutions.
A frequent objection raised from the ‘ultra-dilutionist’ viewpoint is that very few of the original tincture molecules exist in the solution above 12c potency. In this model, none of the original tincture molecules are required to be present, hence the so-called Avogadro limit of the solute (remedy) is completely irrelevant.
How do air dried pillules carry the remedy?
Remedy stability on the lactose surface does need some explaining. And further research. We need to show how the remedy ‘information’ is preserved. One possibility lies, perhaps, in the ever-pervasive thin water film on any cool surface exposed to air.
Since the water solvation process is probably a reversible exchange with the -OH groups on the lactose surface, one might expect some ‘etching’ of the cluster geometries on the lactose (or sucrose) lattice. The clusters are stable, the lactose is stable, so it’s reasonable that the thin film of clusters reversably bonded to the lactose surface (and diffused into it) would be stable also. This could preserve the unique informational characteristics of the remedy for, perhaps, quite a long time. Maybe even for 150 years, as some practitioners have found.
Either by popping a pill into the mouth or by dropping it into water first, the saliva or water will instantly dissolve/resolvate the cluster film and restore the original cluster isomers. “Plussing” a remedy by dropping the pillule in water and succussing between doses effectively raises the potency, ie. concentration of clusters in the mix. Note that alcohol has -OH groups too, just like any sugar such as lactose, so it can act as a stabilizer or preservative for the remedy.
What are the implications for the Homeopathy Materia Medica?
If the above explanation of the potentizing process is thought to be reasonable, then our way of organizing the materia medica probably needs to be changed. The Banerji family (see above) may be pointing the way. Over a 30-year period, they have experimented with groups of up to 100 patients each, using each remedy at a given potency and have concluded that the same remedy got clearly different actions when used in different potencies.
Therefore any new homeopathy provings (or reprovings) should perhaps look at sub-sets of specific potencies for a given remedy, instead of trying to discern a fuzzy master-set of symptoms. Note that the overall remedy “pictures” in the Materiae Medica often include opposite symptoms!
What is the relationship between the ‘Vital Force’ and the symptom-remedy?
Today, we already know that clustered water is bio-active. For example, (Pertsemlidis, 1998) found that the geometry of the water cluster helps amino acids fold themselves in the proper fashion to make functional proteins.
But this is not necessarily the only way that the water clusters can affect the organism if we examine Hahnemann’s concept of the ‘vital force’ (or ‘life force’).
“The totality of these symptoms is the outwardly reflected image of the inner Wesen of the disease, that is, of the suffering of the life force.”
(§ 7 Organon 6th edn)
This is Hahnemann’s homeostatic action-reaction model. The mistunement of the life force is the disease that must be cured.
This Vital Force concept is the biological equivalent of the industrial temperature controller, which is a mechanical or electrical device that compares an actual temperature (input) to an ideal “normal” temperature setting (set-point). Then the controller (via internal tunable response settings) initiates control action (output) to minimize the difference. For example, the controller may open a steam valve (output) to heat up a hot water storage tank if the water gets too cold.
If this temperature controller encounters an abnormally large drop in temperature, the human operator can accelerate the corrective action by momentarily “bumping” the temperature setting up . The controller will exaggerate its correcting output to the system and drive the temperature faster towards its correct setting.
If the “simillimum” remedy provides a similar ‘symptom bump’ to the Vital Force, then the organism will approach the healthy homeostasis much faster too.
Of course, if we bump the controller too much (dose too high) we’ll get an ‘aggravation’ of temperature initially, coupled later (due to controller reaction) with rebound the other way (a secondary action) where temperature drops too low (the opposite symptom).
So if we assume that the behavior of the Vital Force finds its exact analog in the industrial controller model, particularly since we can extend the model to a network of “cascaded” control systems, we find a likely reason why the materia medicae lump together apparently polar or opposite symptoms for the larger remedies, since the provings use differing doses, dosing schedules and potencies.
Now, if the tunable control response settings within the controller itself start to drift, then it may no longer be able to maintain temperature control at the desired homeostatic equilibrium. This results in a bias away from the desired homeostatic state. This kind of mistunement finds its biological equivalent in the miasm. The controller needs to have its internal response settings ‘tweaked’ by the human mechanic so that stable and accurate control of the temperature is regained, whereas in the organism we need to ‘tweak’ the control ‘settings’ by using the appropriate miasmatic remedy.
Of course, this explanation still begs the following question:
What is the biological representation of the ‘vital force’?
Together with the mathematician Roger Penrose of Cambridge, (Hameroff, 2001) has sought a physical-biological explanation of consciousness.
Figure 7. Penrose-Hameroff Model of Microtubule Structure in Neurons
These researchers have proposed that microtubules in our brain are the seat of our conscious mind and consist of quantum microswitches (protein qubits) which contain ‘pure’ ordered water. This ordered water can be in either of two quantum states or in a third transition state (see Figure 7 above).
Microtubules are components of the cytoskeleton that surrounds every cell of the organism. They have even been discovered in animal fossils.
The microtubules (see Fig. 8) interconnect every cell in a multicellular organism, possibly being the means to extend the brain’s consciousness throughout the entire body. It explains why we have mind-body interactions, such as psychosomatic pain.
Fig. 8 The extensive distribution of microtubules can really be appreciated in the light microscope after immunolabeling for tubulin with fluorescein-labeled antibodies. This micrograph shows cells in culture labeled for tubulin. The labeling is so fine, the small microtubules can be delineated.
Figure 8 shows that microtubules permeate the cells and the entire internal milieu of the organism in an interconnected network. This is exactly analagous to an industrial “cascaded” control network where control loops at a low level in the process have their ideal settings controlled by higher loops which, in turn, are controlled by even higher loops in the cascade. In the microtubule network, information flows both up and down the network in similar fashion.
Hameroff and others think that just about every aspect of health and disease is related at some level to consciousness, and in every mammalian system, the microtubules are essential. They suggest that we consider the macrophages and lymphocytes of the immune system- and find that the recognition, amplification, mobility and engulfment of foreign invaders all occur by the direction of the microtubule network.
They also note that there are many papers about the role of the cell cytoskeleton in genome regulation in cancer. Also, there is ample evidence for the fact that the internal microtubules of the cell control mitosis (cell division), regulate the genes, decides which genes to turn on, and so forth, not only in terms of differentiation in development, but also in health and in the steady state. They believe that consciousness, the microtubules and quantum coherence play essential roles in health and disease.
So how do the water cluster model and the microtubule network relate to homeopathy?
First, such a biological network offers all the action/reaction properties that Hahnemann observed in his concept of the homeostatic Vital Force.
Second, we know from experience that we are able to apply a homeopathic remedy containing our bioactive species anywhere on the body to affect and retune the Vital Force. This also is in accord with the concept of a biologically interconnected network.
Third, we know that Mental symptoms are often important in selecting a remedy. The microtubule network seems to explain the mind-body connection.
Fourth, we know that the microtubule network is made up of proteins which require specific configurations with water molecules, i.e. water clusters, in order to create themselves in the proper geometry and make the network function. If there is an error in this function, it will express itself as a disease
symptom and may propagate attunement error to other parts of the microtubule network to express further errors/disease symptoms. As the disease progresses,
we would expect to see the symptom “layers” that one method of homeopathy attempts to treat in reverse order. (Which is also reminiscent of Hering’s Law).
Lastly, Hameroff notes that the quantum state of the microtubule’s elemental building block (the qubit in Fig. 7) can be altered by an “ordered” water structure attached to the external side of the microtubule. If so, then we have an explanation of the effect of the water cluster remedy on the microtubule.
The water cluster (or clusters), that are specific to the problem, simply throws the right switch (or switches) to correct the error in the network.
Unfortunately. the work being done on protein nanochemistry is in its very early stages and seems to be focussed, at present, in directions other than the fundamental role that water plays. In fact, one specialist in the field told me recently that water “was a bit of a nuisance” in delineating theoretical models.
Meanwhile, it will be fascinating to see someone attempt the research to see how homeopathic water cluster preparations specifically affect isolated functions of the microtubule control network, perhaps along the lines of Buehler’s work with centriole clusters of microtubules (Buehler, 2002).
NOTE: Some of the website references below have become outdated but can be retrieved from the www archives at : http://web.archive.org/
Andersson, 1997. P.U Andersson, A. Tomsic, M.B. Andersson, and J.B.C. Pettersson, “Emission of small fragments during water cluster collisions with graphite surface” Chem. Phys. Lett. 279 (1997) 100-106.
(See also Scattering of water from graphite: Simulations and experiments
N. Markovic´, P.U. Andersson, M.B. NÃ¥gÃ¥rd, and J.B.C Pettersson
Chem. Phys. 247 (1999) 413)
Anick, 1998. “Stable Zwitterionic Water Complexes: The Active Ingredient in Homeopathy?” David J. Anick, Ph.D., M.D. Presented in part at the 4th Scientific Symposium of the Homeopathic Research Network, Washington, DC, November 14-15, 1998. Also in the Fall issue of Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy (JAIH), 1999.
Banerji, 1985. Banerji, P. “Principle of Quick Selection of Drugs and Potencies Established by Clinical Trials.” Presented and published in the Proceedings of 40e Congress De La Ligue Medicale Homoeopathique Internationale Lyon – France – 26-30 Mai, 1985.
Beneviste, 1999. J. Benveniste, J. AÃ¯ssa, and D. Guillonnet. “The Molecular Signal is not Functional in the Absence of Informed Water.” Abstract FASEB Journal, 1999, vol. 13, p. A163)
Blakeslee, 2001. Sarah Blakeslee. “Science’s Elusive Realm: Life’s Little Mysteries”, Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company, April 24, 2001.
Buehler, 2002. Guenter Albrecht-Buehler . “Are microtubules the ‘nerves’ of the cell? ” (and other page links).
Borland, 1939. Borland, Douglas M.: Pneumonias . Pamphlet published by the The British Homoeopathic Association, 76 pages, 1939.
Demangeat, 2001. Demangeat J.L. and Poitevin B, “Nuclear Magnetic Resonance:
Let’s consolidate the ground before getting excited!”, British Homeoepathic Journal (2001), 90, 2-4, Nature Publishing Group
Hameroff, 2001. Website of Stuart Hameroff MD, Professor, Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology, Associate Director, Center for Consciousness Studies, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona:
Jongma, 1998. Rienk T. Jongma, Yuhui Huang, Shiming Shi, and Alec M. Wodtke, “Rapid evaporative cooling is a way to suppress fragmentation in mass spectrometry: Synthesis of unprotonated water clusters”, J. Phys. Chem. A102:8847-8854 (1998),
Little, 1997-2001. Private communications between David Little and the author on the “email@example.com” email list. See archives at:
Milgrom, 2001. Milgrom L R, King K R, Lee J, Pinkus A S (2001) “On the investigation of homeopathic potencies using low resolution NMR T2 relaxation times: an experimental and critical survey of the work of Roland Conte et al”, British Homeoepathic Journal 2001 90, 5-13, Nature Publishing Group.
Pertsemlidis, 1998. A. Pertsemlidis, A. M. Saxena, A. K. Soper, T. Head-Gordon, and R. M. Glaeser. “Direct evidence for modified solvent structure within the hydration shell of a hydrophobic amino acid.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 93(20), 1998, p.10769-10774.
Sharma, 1990. Sharma, R.R. “Molecular Basis of Homoeopathy.” Homeopathy International, May 1990, 16-19.
Wisniewski, 2001. E. S. Wisniewski, D. E. Folmer, A. W. Castleman Jr.,
“Spectroscopic studies of cluster species.” Final Program #383, PHYS Fall 2000 Technical Program, 222nd ACS National Meeting, Chicago, ILL, Aug 26-30, 2001.
Yui, 2000. Yui, Hiroharu , Ph.D., “Analysis of Hydrogen Bonding Structure around Hydrophobic Cores in Ethanol Water Solution Using Laser Induced Excess Electron-Stimulated Raman Scattering Technique”, PacifiChem 2000, Honolulu, Hawaii, December 14-19, 2000.
FIG.1 Typical water cluster isomers.
Chaplin, M. F., (2000) A proposal for the structuring of water. Biophys. Chem., 83 (3), 211-221. See Chaplin’s website at:
FIG.2 Photo of a Laser induced cavitation bubble imploding.
Suslick, K.S., “The Chemical Effects of Ultrasound”, Scientific American, Feb 1989, pp. 80 – 86.
FIG. 3 Mass Spectrum of Water cluster size vs deflection frequency
Garching FT-ICR Laboratory
Lehrstuhl II für Physikalische Chemie
der Technischen UniversitÃ¤t München
FIG. 4 Dose Size versus Water Cluster Size Range As a Function of Potency.
Illustration by author.
FIG 5 & 6 also by the author.
FIG. 7 Penrose-Hameroff Model of Microtubule Structure See (Hameroff, 2001).
FIG. 8 This micrograph shows cells in culture labeled for tubulin
1996 Gwen V. Childs, Ph.D.
Born in Scotland, the son of a homeopathic physician,
Brian R. Connelly MS,MBA,LMHC trained as a chemical engineer at Imperial College, London. Several years later in the USA, after selling his industrial control systems company, he went back to college to train for retirement as a psychotherapist. Along the way of self-study, he discovered the late Dr Edward C. Whitmont’s books, attended one of Whitmont’s last weekend seminars in Vermont, and rediscovered an interest in homeopathy. He practises privately as a licensed counselor and therapist in Topsfield, MA and maintains a website at: