Homeopathy - I am ready for open challenge

muntadev2in I was wondering if I could get a hold of any of the raw data from your experiments, I just did a uni project on speaker identification using autocorrelation and believe that if the placebo and remedy have the same spectrum every time I should be able to modify my code that you could use it to help choose which one is homeopathic or placebo. I would be more than happy to release the code back to you or other people if they wanted to double check my work as it would be opensource. And if my results are against you I will happily keep them quite from other people other than yourself if you choose for it to be like that. And if it proves positive I wont even ask for a cut in the million it would be all yours.

Sean
 
Thabiguy said:
In order to apply, you'll need an academic affidavit and a proof of media presence, and these might take some efforts to get, so this is what you should focus on first.
Click to expand...

I personally think that requirement should be waived in this case. Instead of testing obviously silly and unimportant claims, such as the Russian Man in a Box, Randi should welcome the opportunity to test a homeopath with this more useful and important challenge. Perhaps all we should ask from muntadev2in is that he show us that he has tried the test on his own, first. We want this test to proceed, so a barrier that is intended to prevent wasted effort is not necessary here.

Linda
 
Pixel42 said:
Looking back at my first suggestion I don't think I made adequate allowance for your need to gather history, nor for the fact that (if I understand your claim correctly) it's changes in skin temperature rather than absolute skin temperature that you believe shows the effect of the homeopathic remedy.

So here's a second attempt at a suggested protocol:

Day 1

1. At time X (to be specified by you) measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers
2. At time Y (to be specified by you) measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers

Day 2

1. At time X measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers
2. The volunteers then consume your chosen homeopathic remedy
3. At time Y measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers
.
Click to expand...

there is only one time X - which is fixed.

per day two subjects - 1st one for medicine....2nd one for placebo..........there are two sensors connected sn3 and sn4 connected to medicine subject and placebo subject at time X,

Please go through the discussion part
 
Muntad, I don't represent JREF in any way but I think a more acceptable protocol to them must have more subjects and blinding. Would 10 subjects randomly assigned the placebo and remedy do? There would be no garuntee that there would be 5 remedy takers and 5 placebo takers. A simple coin flip by a neutral third party could be used to decide which they take.

p.s. If I opened a thread in the science forum would you discuss the results of your blog with us?
 
muntadev2in said:
there is only one time X - which is fixed.

per day two subjects - 1st one for medicine....2nd one for placebo..........there are two sensors connected sn3 and sn4 connected to medicine subject and placebo subject at time X,

Please go through the discussion part
Click to expand...

You will need to be able to do this test many times (about 10 times) to make sure it is not a lucky guess.

Is it possible for you to test more than two subjects per day?

If you can only do two subjects per day, how long before you can test the same two subjects again (1 hour, 12 hours, 1 day, 2 days...)?

Does it matter if the 1st one is for placebo and the 2nd one for medicine? If it does, why does it matter?

If I show you a reading, can you tell me if that reading came from a subject that took medicine or a subject that took placebo?

Thank you,
Linda
 
Last edited:
muntadev2in said:
Pixel42 said:
Looking back at my first suggestion I don't think I made adequate allowance for your need to gather history, nor for the fact that (if I understand your claim correctly) it's changes in skin temperature rather than absolute skin temperature that you believe shows the effect of the homeopathic remedy.

So here's a second attempt at a suggested protocol:

Day 1

1. At time X (to be specified by you) measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers
2. At time Y (to be specified by you) measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers

Day 2

1. At time X measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers
2. The volunteers then consume your chosen homeopathic remedy
3. At time Y measure and record the skin temperature of the volunteers
Click to expand...
there is only one time X - which is fixed.

per day two subjects - 1st one for medicine....2nd one for placebo..........there are two sensors connected sn3 and sn4 connected to medicine subject and placebo subject at time X,

Please go through the discussion part
Click to expand...


Are you saying that if you were given two bottles, one containing a homoeopathic remedy and one containing an indistinguishable placebo, you would be able to tell which is which by simply administering them to two volunteers and then taking a single temperature reading from each volunteer at a specified time?
 
muntadev2in said:
there is only one time X - which is fixed.

per day two subjects - 1st one for medicine....2nd one for placebo..........there are two sensors connected sn3 and sn4 connected to medicine subject and placebo subject at time X,

Please go through the discussion part
Click to expand...
It sounds like your preferred protocol is as follows:

1. A placebo and a homeopathic remedy are prepared and labelled, and the labels covered.
2. Sensors are connected to the two volunteers
3. At time X (to be specified by you) the two volunteers take the two preparations. Neither they nor you know which has taken the placebo and which the remedy.
4. You monitor the sensor output (for how long?)
5. You state which volunteer you believe took which preparation
6. The labels are uncovered to confirm (or otherwise) your conclusion

This protocol is essentially fine but, as has been pointed out, there is a 50% chance of you getting the right answer by chance. So you would have to repeat the experiment many times (dozens, I would think) in order to demonstrate that you are doing significantly better than chance. I'm not sure that JREF have the resources to commit to such a long trial. This is where we need to get creative, and find ways to speed things up. Answers to Linda's questions would help.
 
Last edited:
Pixel42 said:
I'm not sure that JREF have the resources to commit to such a long trial.
Click to expand...


See Rule 7:
7. All of the applicant's expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Neither the JREF nor JR will bear any of the costs.
Click to expand...
 
Mojo said:
See Rule 7:
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about the cost, I know that's borne by the applicant, I'm talking about a JREF rep spending weeks observing umpteen identical experiments.

Wasn't there an application recently where the amount of time an adequate trial would take was an issue for JREF?
 
Pixel42 said:
I'm not talking about the cost, I know that's borne by the applicant, I'm talking about a JREF rep spending weeks observing umpteen identical experiments.

Wasn't there an application recently where the amount of time an adequate trial would take was an issue for JREF?
Click to expand...

Quite a few: Edge (Mike Guska), pavel_do (Pavel Ziborov), Homeoproofer (Jürgen) and the Ganzfeld guys in general.
 
fls said:
You will need to be able to do this test many times (about 10 times) to make sure it is not a lucky guess.

Is it possible for you to test more than two subjects per day?

If you can only do two subjects per day, how long before you can test the same two subjects again (1 hour, 12 hours, 1 day, 2 days...)?

Does it matter if the 1st one is for placebo and the 2nd one for medicine? If it does, why does it matter?

If I show you a reading, can you tell me if that reading came from a subject that took medicine or a subject that took placebo?

Thank you,
Linda
Click to expand...

fls said:
You will need to be able to do this test many times (about 10 times) to make sure it is not a lucky guess.

Is it possible for you to test more than two subjects per day?

If you can only do two subjects per day, how long before you can test the same two subjects again (1 hour, 12 hours, 1 day, 2 days...)?

Does it matter if the 1st one is for placebo and the 2nd one for medicine? If it does, why does it matter?

If I show you a reading, can you tell me if that reading came from a subject that took medicine or a subject that took placebo?

Thank you,
Linda
Click to expand...

Open this and keep it minimise first http://homeoresearch.blogspot.com

Then read this,

yes it is possible to test more than 2 subjects a day, but I need more than two sensors, if I have 20 sensors I can test 20 subjects, in just 10 mits.

randomly the subject can take covered bottles, I will record the data for 10mits just, with in half an hour experiment will be completed.

But I have only 2 sesors,

After getting a sensor, we have to test the sensor acuracy and variability. (There will be sensor variability some times)

In case of my gelsemium subjects you see, I have tested sensor variability, I There are 8 subjects, 4 days, two per a day you see,

1st day:
sensor 1 - subject 1 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

2nd day:
Sensor 1 - subject 3 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 4 - placebo - time x

day 3:
Sensor 2 - subject 5 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 1 - subject 6 - placebo - time x

Day 4:
Sensor 2 - subject 7 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 1 - subject 8 - placebo - time x

You see in case of this Exp I have taken 2 sec interaval readings for 10 mits,

In case of gelsemium given subjects - you observe peaks in meduim frequency are at the same level.but amplitude is different in case of sensor 2 gelsemuim subjects.


In case of my in case of Suphur 200 experimet

There are 6 subjects, 4 days, two per a day you see,

1st day:
sensor 1 - subject 1 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

2nd day:
Sensor 1 - subject 3 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 4 - placebo - time x

day 3:
Sensor 1 - subject 5 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

Day 4:
Sensor 1 - subject 6 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

You see in case of this Exp I have taken 1 sec interaval readings for 10 mits,

The medium frequency shows peaks at same level. amplitude also not varying much.

In case of gelsemium exp, placebo subjects given alcohol mixed sugar pills.
In case of suphur exp, placebo subjects given just sugara pills.

You see from the graphs - alcohol also produces the peaks in medium frequency but not at a fixed frequenct as medicine produces.

please give me suggestions on protocol, based on this given experiment details.

Thanks,

Dr.Devendra Kumar
 
If the test only takes 10 minutes, then I'm not sure why you can only use the sensor once per day. Can you tell us more about the sensors themselves?
 
JWideman said:
If the test only takes 10 minutes, then I'm not sure why you can only use the sensor once per day. Can you tell us more about the sensors themselves?
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the effect muntadev2in is looking for only occurs if the subjects take the remedy at one specific time of day.

So the obvious solution is to obtain more sensors. Perhaps he can get some of his fellow homeopaths to chip in to buy some more, or a local hospitial/university can be persuaded to lend him some.
 
muntadev2in said:
In case of my gelsemium subjects you see, I have tested sensor variability, I There are 8 subjects, 4 days, two per a day you see,

1st day:
sensor 1 - subject 1 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

2nd day:
Sensor 1 - subject 3 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 4 - placebo - time x

day 3:
Sensor 2 - subject 5 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 1 - subject 6 - placebo - time x

Day 4:
Sensor 2 - subject 7 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 1 - subject 8 - placebo - time x

You see in case of this Exp I have taken 2 sec interaval readings for 10 mits,

In case of gelsemium given subjects - you observe peaks in meduim frequency are at the same level.but amplitude is different in case of sensor 2 gelsemuim subjects.


In case of my in case of Suphur 200 experimet

There are 6 subjects, 4 days, two per a day you see,

1st day:
sensor 1 - subject 1 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

2nd day:
Sensor 1 - subject 3 - gelsemium 200 - time x
sensor 2 - subject 4 - placebo - time x

day 3:
Sensor 1 - subject 5 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

Day 4:
Sensor 1 - subject 6 - gelsemium 200 - time x
Sensor 2 - subject 2 - placebo - time x

You see in case of this Exp I have taken 1 sec interaval readings for 10 mits,

The medium frequency shows peaks at same level. amplitude also not varying much.

In case of gelsemium exp, placebo subjects given alcohol mixed sugar pills.
In case of suphur exp, placebo subjects given just sugara pills.

You see from the graphs - alcohol also produces the peaks in medium frequency but not at a fixed frequenct as medicine produces.

please give me suggestions on protocol, based on this given experiment details.
Click to expand...


I am assuming that these experiments were not blinded (i.e. you knew at all times which subjects had been given remedy and which had been given placebo).

If you were to use basically the same method, but blind it so that neither the subjects nor you knew who had been given the remedy, and then attempt to identify which was which from the results, then this could form the basis for an acceptable protocol.

You will need to specify what remedy you propose to use, and at what potency.
 
Mojo said:
You will need to specify what remedy you propose to use, and at what potency.
Click to expand...


Sounds like he'll need to specify exactly what the placebo will be, too:

In case of gelsemium exp, placebo subjects given alcohol mixed sugar pills.
Click to expand...


It might be a bit too easy to distinguish between someone given nothing and someone given alcohol?
 
JWideman said:
If the test only takes 10 minutes, then I'm not sure why you can only use the sensor once per day. Can you tell us more about the sensors themselves?
Click to expand...

The pattern of wave the remedy produces changes from time to time.

I know the wave patern only at a particular time of day. if u we obtain wave patern of a medicine that it can produce all along 24 hours, we can conduct exp at any time, but is very difficult.

This all depends on my proposed natural laws:

“The physical and physiological parameters of natural regulatory mechanisms are variable in the universe.”

“The variability in physical and physiological parameters of the natural regulatory mechanisms in the universe is similar at a given time.”

“Individuals differ due to space or time effect.”

Have a look at my "theory of variability" from discussion part in my blog.
http://homeoresearch.blogspot.com

Thanks,

Dr.Devendra Kumar
 
Hello Dr Kumar,

It sounds like you've run your experiment at different times of day, and only produced good results at one particular time of day. If so, would you be able to distinguish readings taken at the right time of day from readings taken at the wrong time of day?
 
Crispy Duck said:
Hello Dr Kumar,

It sounds like you've run your experiment at different times of day, and only produced good results at one particular time of day. If so, would you be able to distinguish readings taken at the right time of day from readings taken at the wrong time of day?
Click to expand...

yes I conducted at various times, fixed convenient time for me and subjects,

It is also possible to fix some other time.

Thats why I pasted a link to my discussion part, please try to understand the natural priniciples.
 
muntadev2in said:
Thats why I pasted a link to my discussion part, please try to understand the natural priniciples.
Click to expand...


As far as the challenge is concerned, the principles are irrelevant: see Rule 3, and the comment immediately following Rule 16.
We have no interest in theories nor explanations of how the claimed powers might work; if an applicant provides us with such material, it will be ignored and discarded.
Click to expand...
PLEASE: Do not burden us with theories, philosophical observations, previous examples, anecdotal evidence or other comments! We are only interested in an actual demonstration.
Click to expand...


All that matters is that you clearly state what you intend to do, how you intend to do it, and what will constitute success. Note that the results must be of a self evident "yes/no" type; nothing involving judgment would be allowed.

From what you have posted here and on your website it appears that you claim that there are characteristic differences in graphs of skin temperature between subjects that have been given homoeopathic remedies and subjects that have been given placebo. Is that correct?

If so, all you would need to do to claim the million is to demonstrate that you can reliably identify which is which from the data without knowing in advance who had been given the remedy. Can you do this?

Have you already carried out a test of this type yourself? Merely pointing out alleged differences between graphs would not be acceptable, as this would involve judgment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom