Homeopathy: Rustum Roy drops the bomb

[steenkh]

why don't you somehow support basic research into things such as this. Or, hell, just basic research that isn't prejudiced.

This has been done over and over again. Even by homoeopaths who are prejudiced the other way: there is nothing there.

How long should should anybody continue doing experiments to show what has been shown lots of times already? As it has been pointed out, homoeopathy has a 200-year history of achieving nothing. When will people stop?

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Rolfe is making assumptions, here. Doesn't take much to punch his buttons, aye? Not that I'm trying. I mean, I'm not into activism...but, since it seems many of you are, why don't you somehow support basic research into things such as this. Or, hell, just basic research that isn't prejudiced. The people in any field are human (or maybe not...but that's a different discussion), and so their egos are just as likely to be involved in what they do. I don't support either clan.

I think you'll find this thread is largely about spectrophotometry. Do you have something to contribute to the issue at hand. What is your view on the mysterious absorption peak at 320nm that Roy seems to have found in his control samples?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

It's too bad I didn't see this a week or two ago, or I could have tried replicating it. I'd love to see how many times these assays were repeated. I've been working with spectrophotometers every week this summer, and if there's one thing I've learned, it's that there is a lot of wiggle room. Just for my little university experiments I often need to repeat assays 4 or 5 times before I can get reliable data. Since we're unfortunately graded on the numbers we get rather our honesty, we usually keep repeating stuff until we get the results we're looking for (which I will not, of course, do when I finish these damn labs). We've gotten good at controlling our results in creative ways. I could probably get whatever spectrometer readings I wanted just based on how well I clean my cuvettes. It's entirely possible that Roy's results are accurate, but he shouldn't even be talking about it until it's replicated.

 

[wollery]

Rolfe is making assumptions, here. Doesn't take much to punch his buttons, aye?

That would be "she", and don't worry, it takes a hell of a lot more than you've got to push her buttons.

Not that I'm trying. I mean, I'm not into activism...but, since it seems many of you are, why don't you somehow support basic research into things such as this. Or, hell, just basic research that isn't prejudiced.

Unprejudiced basic research would be wonderful. It's exactly what everyone here would like to see. Sadly there seem to be no homeopaths capable of doing any such thing, and when non-homeopaths try it the homeopaths claim that it's invalid because it wasn't done by a homeopath! And then we're criticized for pointing out the glaring flaws in the research done by homeopaths, because we don't support unbiased basic research. It's a lose-lose situation in that respect.

The people in any field are human (or maybe not...but that's a different discussion), and so their egos are just as likely to be involved in what they do. I don't support either clan.

The whole point of good science is to produce reproducible results, so that the ego of the experimenter is no longer an issue. If the results can be reproduced then the experimenter was right, even if they have a huge ego. If they can't be reproduced then the experimenter was wrong. They can complain about it all they like, claim they're still right if they want, but they'll have been proved wrong. In good science ego is irrelevant. And that's the problem the homeopaths have, their results are hardly ever positive, and on the rare occasions that they are, the result can't be reproduced, or their procedure can be shown to have holes that an elephant could waltz through without noticing the sides.

 

[Zep]

Just a Spectrography 101 question, arising from the notion that the homeopathic vendor would probably not be spiking the samples: Does the wavelength of the spectra absorbtion transition points equate in any way to the approximate size of the molecules involved? That is, longer wavelengths equate to larger molecules?

If so...detergent traces? Human skin oils? Such substances have chain molecules of reasonable size...

 

[Rolfe]

Does the wavelength of the spectra absorbtion transition points equate in any way to the approximate size of the molecules involved? That is, longer wavelengths equate to larger molecules?

Uh, no.

Rolfe.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Just a Spectrography 101 question, arising from the notion that the homeopathic vendor would probably not be spiking the samples: Does the wavelength of the spectra absorbtion transition points equate in any way to the approximate size of the molecules involved? That is, longer wavelengths equate to larger molecules?

If so...detergent traces? Human skin oils? Such substances have chain molecules of reasonable size...

The absorption spectra of a substance is to do with the energy required to move electrons in it to higher energy levels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_spectrum

 

[shpalman]

Although it is true that molecules with long conjugated chains (which feature extended "delocalized" electronic states) tend to absorb in the visible, and the longer the chain the redder the absorption. But UV absorption is more to do with electronic transitions within ordinary well-localized molecular bonds, right?

Something which may or may not be useful here. Could it be acetone which is causing that 320 nm absorption?

 

[Rolfe]

Although it is true that molecules with long conjugated chains (which feature extended "delocalized" electronic states) tend to absorb in the visible, and the longer the chain the redder the absorption. But UV absorption is more to do with electronic transitions within ordinary well-localized molecular bonds, right?

Something which may or may not be useful here. Could it be acetone which is causing that 320 nm absorption?

Not sure. That table seems to be reporting the minimum wavelength at which a solvent can usefully be used for UV work, it doesn't necessarily mean the solvent has an actual (dammit, give me my html codes back!) lambda-max peak at that wavelength.

Rolfe.

 

[malbui]

The whole point of good science is to produce reproducible results, so that the ego of the experimenter is no longer an issue. If the results can be reproduced then the experimenter was right, even if they have a huge ego. If they can't be reproduced then the experimenter was wrong. They can complain about it all they like, claim they're still right if they want, but they'll have been proved wrong. In good science ego is irrelevant.

This is one of the points I keep trying to make in my own very small war (well, it's more like an occasional skirmish) against bad science and we can't emphasise it enough. I tend to use the cases of electricity and radioactivity, both of which have had a major impact on the world in general as well as on scientific circles. Whether people liked the idea of electricity or not, or had the slightest clue what was going on, it wasn't remotely difficult for anybody to run some current through a wire and see what happened. Let the effect be visible and reproducible anywhere and then we can argue about how and why.

 

[Mojo]

The O-H bond would be polar, I guess. I think there would be a certain amount of hydrogen bonding going on - not as much as in water, obviously.

Yeah, I couldn't really be bothered working out how much of an effect that would introduce.

And really, if we're talking about the sort of permanent changes in structure Roy is claiming to have observed, hydrogen bonds aren't going to cut it.

Just thinking about the thermodynamics of the situation, the "information" allegedly held by the water and/or ethanol is going to increase the amount of order in the solution. Unless the water/ethanol molecules are held in some sort of rigid structure, the way they move around in a liquid is going to make it revert back to a less ordered state, unless energy is somehow being put into the system, and there is some sort of mechanism for that energy maintaining the structure.

 

[Cuddles]

The O-H bond would be polar, I guess. I think there would be a certain amount of hydrogen bonding going on - not as much as in water, obviously.

Yeah, I coudn't really be bothered working out how much of an effect that would introduce. I haven't yet got to the bit in the paper where Roy explains how the water model and the ethanol experiments actually relate to each other. If he ever does!

Rolfe.

I was under the impression that ethanol is highly polar with significant amounts of hydrogen bonding. That's why it's such a common solvent, it's very similar to water in what will disolve in it but has other properties that make it more approprtiate in some situations. It's also the main reason it has essentially infinite solubility in water.

Of course, since it is a completely different shape and size from water I can't imagine any arguments about the structure being relevant to the structure of water, but it's properties as a polar solvent definately exist.

 

[pgwenthold]

Not sure. That table seems to be reporting the minimum wavelength at which a solvent can usefully be used for UV work, it doesn't necessarily mean the solvent has an actual (dammit, give me my html codes back!) lambda-max peak at that wavelength.

Rolfe.

Acetone and acetaldehyde have broad absorptions (darn n to pi* transitions!) that max around 280.

 

[Rolfe]

He's got a peak with a lambda-max at about 320. I do a lot of work at 340, because that's where the NAD <-> NADH reaction shows up, and that's the one utilised by most biochemical assays - you just link the reaction that measures your analyte to one which does the NAD <-> NADH conversion, and follow it at 340. However, I seriously doubt that it's NAD he's seeing.

W need something with an actual lambda-max at close to 320.

Rolfe.

 

[Zep]

Uh, no.

Rolfe.

The absorption spectra of a substance is to do with the energy required to move electrons in it to higher energy levels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_spectrum

Although it is true that molecules with long conjugated chains (which feature extended "delocalized" electronic states) tend to absorb in the visible, and the longer the chain the redder the absorption. But UV absorption is more to do with electronic transitions within ordinary well-localized molecular bonds, right?

Something which may or may not be useful here. Could it be acetone which is causing that 320 nm absorption?

I try to learn something new every day.

Today, this is it.

 

[pgwenthold]

He's got a peak with a lambda-max at about 320. I do a lot of work at 340, because that's where the NAD <-> NADH reaction shows up, and that's the one utilised by most biochemical assays - you just link the reaction that measures your analyte to one which does the NAD <-> NADH conversion, and follow it at 340. However, I seriously doubt that it's NAD he's seeing.

W need something with an actual lambda-max at close to 320.

Rolfe.

Simple molecules that absorb out there tend to be aromatic amines, like aniline or even pyridine. Aniline is an interestng thought

http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?Spec=C62533&Index=0&Type=UVVis&Large=on

although that begs the question of how the ethanol is contaminated with aniline (assuming they did any purification, it shouldn't be a problem)

 

[JJM]

I had not considered that Roy would use non-potable alcohol for his standard spectrum. Some posters have suggested as much. Acetone is a standard denaturant, and it has a peak at 330 (how certain are we of the 320 nm assignment?). http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/search/ProductDetail/ALDRICH/650501
You can look up many solvents at this site- be sure to look for high-purity grades. That's the thing about solvents- they dissolve stuff and become dirty.

As I pointed-out in the other thread, the same source tells us that high quality alcohol does not absorb in that region, neither does the usual contaminant (water). I can think of no reason for making a homeopathetic remedy with anhydrous alcohol (however, I am not a homeopath, nor do I play one on TV.)

I believe the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine is funding research into homeopathy. Unlike other sources of support, NCCAM does not need any evidence that something could work before spending money on it. They don't even care if previous work has discredited a method! So, CAM proponents have to stop whining and just apply to feed at the NCCAM trough.

 

[Rolfe]

The wavelength is only a guess, from eyeballing Roy's rather poorly drawn graph. 330 is certainly possible.

Rolfe.

 

[geni]

The wavelength is only a guess, from eyeballing Roy's rather poorly drawn graph. 330 is certainly possible.

Rolfe.

Hmm if we accept the dotted line as correct I'd go for about 324

 

[pgwenthold]

I just went and looked at the spectra in the presentation. That's really messed up.

I would like to see a difference spectrum between "pure" solvent and the solutions.