Dr. MAS - Please use this thread to explain homeopathy to us

[steenkh]

That much diluting by hand would be mind-numbing.

Maybe that is why homoeopathic remedies are so expensive?

but actually I think you are right. Some of those producers probably just use pure tap water or alchohol or whatever and write a ridiculously high dilution on the label because they know that no one will know the difference. And perhaps they think they are doing something right because the homoeopaths are reporting back that their new dilution just works wonderful

 

[Mojo]

What is confusing at first is that the D, C, M, L look like Roman numerals, but they aren't. While C is 100 and M is 1000, D in Roman numerals is 500, but 10 in homeopathy numerology (*oops*).

Don't they use X for a ten-fold dilution?

 

[Darat]

Maybe that is why homoeopathic remedies are so expensive?

but actually I think you are right. Some of those producers probably just use pure tap water or alchohol or whatever and write a ridiculously high dilution on the label because they know that no one will know the difference. And perhaps they think they are doing something right because the homoeopaths are reporting back that their new dilution just works wonderful

I think this is very cynical: just because no homeopath here has been able to offer a method for checking whether a remedy is "active" other then testing it on a “patient”, you surely can’t believe the multi-million businesses that provide remedies don’t run QA checks on what they are selling... ?


(Edited for a pesky apostrophe.)

 

[geni]

Don't they use X for a ten-fold dilution?

As well. I assume that D comes from dec

 

[Ashles]

Maybe that is why homoeopathic remedies are so expensive?

but actually I think you are right. Some of those producers probably just use pure tap water or alchohol or whatever and write a ridiculously high dilution on the label because they know that no one will know the difference. And perhaps they think they are doing something right because the homoeopaths are reporting back that their new dilution just works wonderful

Well I can guarantee that if you had visited a certain reasonably large holistic healing centre in South England you would certainly have been buying homeopathic remedies made with tap water.

Because I was the one filling them up from the tap in the back room.

 

[Rolfe]

Maybe this is where the new electronic devices come in handy. Write on a piece of paper what remedie and dilution you want, place it in the machine and put a waterbottle on top - press the button and presto...you got what you want automagically.

A must for any serious modern homeopath I'm sure.

They got there already. See the Milgrom paper referenced earlier.

There are also reports (again, anecdotal) of homeopaths 'prescribing' by writing
down the name of a medicine and placing over it a glass of water. The patient drinking the water has been reported to lead to their symptoms improving.

There are three references given for this phenomenon - two from something called Homeopathic Links, dated 2002, and one personal communication.

There is, truly, no end to this lunacy.

Rolfe.

 

[steenkh]

There are three references given for this phenomenon- two from something called Homeopathic Links, dated 2002, and one personal communication.

From a scientific point of view this practice is just as effective as normal homoeopathy! They are just more honest about it. The next stage must clearly be to do it with a blank piece of paper, and the final stage to do away with the piece of paper altogether. Hmm, or to do away with the water!

 

[Rolfe]

May I suggest we keep it simple? Go for sensible ball-park figures, and simply state what figure is used. It will make very little difference anyway.

In the highly unlikely event that anybody challenges the numbers, one can simply ask them to state a better figure, and redo the calculation with that. They will then see that it makes virtually no difference.

OK, good plan.

I think we should take 100g/l as the start. It's likely that some substances may not be soluble at that level, but since it's a hypothetical exercise to show the dilutions it doesn't matter. This is a 10% solution, and it's really ridiculous to suggest anything stronger as a mother tincture. Also, it gives us close to a 1M solution of KCN, which will be a useful example in itself.

Now, I brought my Chemistry Data Book home from work, so if the weather isn't too good for the Bank Holiday weekend, I might even do some sums.

Rolfe.

 

[clarsct]

I think this is very cynical: just because no homeopath here has been able to offer a method for checking whether a remedy is "active" other then testing it on a “patient”, you surely can’t believe the multi-million businesses that provide remedies don’t run QA checks on what they are selling... ?


(Edited for a pesky apostrophe.)

*Nod* Cynical indeed. I was skeptical about 14 threads ago. For some reason, the more I look into Hpathy, the more cynical I become. I have slowly moved from 'cynic' to 'skeptic', but sometimes, when faced with blatant nonsense, I backslide.

(Yes, I realize this reply was to another poster, but he was replying to my cynical post. I'm not sure this counts, but there you go.)

 

[Mojo]

...if the weather isn't too good for the Bank Holiday weekend, I might even do some sums.

Well, you are in Scotland...

 

[Rolfe]

Well, you are in Scotland...

Actually, not at the moment. (I changed my location last time I was in Scotland, then when I returned to England I sort of thought, what's 440 miles, it's still too close to Jambo for comfort!)

Weather was a bit mixed but I spent all Sunday nursing a splitting headache and I'm running real late. Got to go to a meeting tomorrow too. Still, I did plant 15 pelargoniums this afternoon so it isn't all bad. Oh yes, and bought a sun-lounger, all I need now is the sun....

Rolfe.

 

[MRC_Hans]

OK, good plan.

I think we should take 100g/l as the start. It's likely that some substances may not be soluble at that level, but since it's a hypothetical exercise to show the dilutions it doesn't matter. This is a 10% solution, and it's really ridiculous to suggest anything stronger as a mother tincture. Also, it gives us close to a 1M solution of KCN, which will be a useful example in itself.

Now, I brought my Chemistry Data Book home from work, so if the weather isn't too good for the Bank Holiday weekend, I might even do some sums.

Rolfe.

Cool! (not talking about the weather, although ... but I digress..). I'll start over on the spreadsheet and see if I can find a way round the number representation .

Hans

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Cool! (not talking about the weather, although ... but I digress..). I'll start over on the spreadsheet and see if I can find a way round the number representation .

Hans

How about doing the arithmetic directly on the exponents, which means you are effectively working in logarithms, i.e the formulae are just additions of exponents instead of attempting multiplications of numbers that are beyond Excel's ability. This way you don't need to handle the big numbers directly?

I've not thought very hard about this, so tell me if this is a silly suggestion.


If it is not silly, then for display purposes, you can put the 10 in one column and the value of the exponent as superscript in the column to its right so that it appears as the exponent of the 10.

(Edited to expand)

 

[MRC_Hans]

Yes, a logarithmic function is no doubt the solution, but it turns out not to be really necessary. You see, absurdity sets in way below 200C.

Here is a short list of potencies where the volume of water to one drop (0.1 ml) is related to something in the real world:

6C = 4 Olympic class swimming-pools.
13C = 3/4 of all Earth's oceans.
16C = Sphere the size of Earth.
19C= 10 Spheres with same diameter as our Solar System
22C = 1 cubic light-year
26C = 1 Sphere with same diameter as the Milky Way

The very popular 30C equals one drop of mother tincture in nearly a hundred million galaxy-sized balls of water .

I really see no reason to go into the hundreds of C. Anybody who cannot see the absurdity in the above is not likely to see it at all .

Hans

 

[steenkh]

Thanks, Hans!

Now we need some graphic artist to make some nice absurd illustrations, and put it on a web site!

 

[anor277]

MRC_Hans wrote: Yes, a logarithmic function is no doubt the solution, but it turns out not to be really necessary. You see, absurdity sets in way below 200C. Here is a short list of potencies where the volume of water to one drop (0.1 ml) is related to something in the real world:

Actually, I think you've been a bit over generous on the "drop" volume; I think it is more like 0.01-0.02 mL. Anyway, the error is on the side of caution.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Mmm, no a smaller drop also makes for smaller gross volumes, but your factor 5-10 does indeed not make much difference, as each C potency is a factor 100.

Btw, I posted these figures at otherhealth, but so far only Kumar has reacted (and I don't suppose I need to tell you he didn't understand a word ).

Hans

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Actually, I think you've been a bit over generous on the "drop" volume; I think it is more like 0.01-0.02 mL. Anyway, the error is on the side of caution.

An 'official' drop is 0.05ml in my world. It's how we calculate flow rates for I/V drips of aqueous solutions. But I've just had a quick Google and can't the formula that specifies drop volume given surface tension. Does anyone know it?

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Mind you, all credit to the homeopaths, this serial dilution was a good idea. They'd have had real problems finding a bucket as big as the galaxy to stir their drop into. And what would they stir it with? You sceptics just don't realise the practical obstacles these geniuses have overcome to perfect their art.

 

[anor277]

@BSM; the only reason I mentioned it was because I was doing some titrations yesterday with a burette (which of course are normally calibrated to 0.1 mL); it took about 8-9 drops for the burette to fall by one division. Of course the volume is going to be dependent on the diameter of the bore through which the liquid falls so a burette "drop" is going to be different from a Pasteur pipette "drop" is going to be different from a catheter/Eppendorf drop etc. (PS I don't now normally deal with aqueous solutions but I remember from 1st year that the ideal situation in titrimetry was to reach an endpoint with 1 drop of titrant - 0.01 mL)


Edited for the post scriptum