What is paranormal in Homeopathy

[Dr. MAS]

HA HA HAA

Respected Rolfe said "Yes, but he only claimed to be able to treat such a case. He didn't claim to be able to cure it. In fact, by labelling the disease as "incurable", would that not imply that he can't cure it?"

You know, when I started this discussion, I made complete plan, I am moving with my plan. The main part of the plan is to discuss the matter in logical manner without disheartening or insulting someone. I am running according to my plan.

You pointed out correctly about "INCURABLE" diseases. You are absolutely right in pointing out this "clairvoyant". What I was trying to coach you that you have your own understanding of word “Paranormal” and I have my own. I try to realized you that a disease which is “declared incurable” in your allopathic system or any other system is curable in our system. I don’t think so, there is any confusion?

 

[patchbunny]

Rolfe said " I think we already covered that. There is nothing at all in the remedies, apart from the stock carrier material."

No sir, this is not as simple as you claim. What do you mean by "Nothing"? Still you did not comment on "nothing" meaning. Please tell me, when you say, there is nothing in the potency then what is in your mind about "nothing", so that we could move further and to finish up at the logical conclusion of this discussion.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and suggest that the reason Rolfe didn't bother explaining what he meant by "nothing" is because it's fairly obvious. Especially since it's been explained previously over the last few pages.

Here it is again, in even simpler terms:

Your "remedies" are indistinguishable from the stock carrier material.

If you're mixing your remedies with water, you can't tell your remedy apart from water.

They're the same.

No difference.

Now, can you please answer Vikram's question? It's a bright question. Hard to miss.

--Patch

 

[Vikram]

http://www.pbase.com/8w/8thwonder

Here's how this is done:

1) Take a moderately large glass bottle with a small mouth.
2) Take a framed picture small enough to pass through the mouth.
3) Drop frame into bottle.
4) Fill bottle with water.
5) Succuss diligently.
6) Pour out 90% of the water.
7) Repeat steps 4, 5 & 6 until 30X dilution is reached.
8) If done properly, the potency of the frame will have increased by this time to the point where it will fill the entire bottle.
9) Drain extra water when desired size has been achieved.

Warning: Do not dilute and succuss beyond this point as that will cause expansion of the picture beyond the confines of the bottle, causing murder and mayhem. Dilutions of upto 200X have been used in rare cases when miniature paintings were to be expanded to drape monuments and when Pamela Anderson's wedding gown was to be designed from her beloved satin bikini bottom, but aren't recommended in this case.

 

[Dr. MAS]

Exactly....

 

[patchbunny]

Or heck, even answer this question from Rolfe:

We want you to show that you can tell a 30C "potentised" remedy from the stock sugar pills or solvent. Alternatively, that you can tell a 30C homoeopathic preparation of one substance from a 30C homoeopathic preparation of another. (Actually, the potency isn't important, so long as it is above 12C or 34X.)

So. Can you?

--Patch

 

[Dr. MAS]

Patchbunny said “Your "remedies" are indistinguishable from the stock carrier material.”

Let’s move the discussion one step forward. He made good and serious point.

What I have understood from your remarks is, the dilution does not contain any material? Am I right? Ok. What do you mean by “material”? Which material are you looking for in that dilution? The starting material?????? from which potency was made? i.e. Do you mean, if a dilution bottle is labeled as “Belladonna 6c” then actual material of Belladonna cannot be found in “Belladonna 6c” dilution. Is that mean to you? Please speed up.

 

[flume]

Originally posted by Dr. MAS Do you take responsibility, if we finalized our discussion and decide on a protocol to perform an experiment to prove homeopathy then JREF will accept our experimental results on the basis of terms and condition which we will decide in this forum or we have to again discuss the final protocol with JREF officials again and again? If no, then why you people are behaving like a spokesman of JREF?

Dr. Mas, people in this forum cannot set the terms or protocol for the challenge. If you want to read about the $1M challenge, look at the very top of the page above where it says "James Randi Educational Foiundation" in red. Above those words in the middle, you will see the words "$1 million paranormal challenge" in small letters. Click on those words, and you will see the page of information about the challenge.

If you think people here are acting like spokespeople for the JREF, you are misinterpreting what they say. No one is intending to speak as a spokesperson for the JREF. They are challenging you to back up your opinions on homeopathy in this discussion. The discussion in this forum is a separate thing from the $1 million challenge.
If you want to explain your opinions to this forum here, that's fine. But if you are thinking that your explanation here could have some influence on the $1 million challenge application or test, you would be incorrect. This is just a conversation.

(And I am not a spokesperson either - just another member of the forum, as you now are.)

Originally posted by Dr. MAS I try to realized you that a disease which is “declared incurable” in your allopathic system or any other system is curable in our system.

So then, can you successfully *cure* such a disease using your system in a way such that medical science would agree, using their tests, that the patient was actually cured? Or would your definition of "cure" be different from that of medical science?

 

[Dr. MAS]

Hans said "What does it matter? We are exchanging opinions. The opinions matter, not who writes them."

You have the right to write your opinions, but no right to catch people by generating alias. The admin of this forum has another alias. He should show courage to write with "admin" designation.

 

[Dr. MAS]

Flume said “If you want to explain your opinions to this forum here, that's fine. But if you are thinking that your explanation here could have some influence on the $1 million challenge application or test, you would be incorrect. This is just a conversation.”

I already know that, I am discussing on net for more than 15 years. I am not competing for 1 million dollar prize.

I am just curious to know “In your sense of understanding, what is paranormal in homeopathy” And all are unveiling what does the word “paranormal” stand for according to JREF.

This forum as you say, highlighted the JREF 1 million dollar prize money competition at prominent place what does this mean? This means that this forum has some representation with JREF claim. And member of this board are trying to protect the claim made by Randi. Anyway, forget it because this is not a issue

Come to paranormal discussion. Thanks for your clarification. I will take care in future.

 

[Patricio Elicer]

Patchbunny said “Your "remedies" are indistinguishable from the stock carrier material.”

Let’s move the discussion one step forward. He made good and serious point.

What I have understood from your remarks is, the dilution does not contain any material? Am I right? Ok. What do you mean by “material”? Which material are you looking for in that dilution? The starting material?????? from which potency was made? i.e. Do you mean, if a dilution bottle is labeled as “Belladonna 6c” then actual material of Belladonna cannot be found in “Belladonna 6c” dilution. Is that mean to you? Please speed up.

Dr. MAS, it's a well known fact that in any given amount of a substance, there's a limited (finite) number of molecules that makes it up. So there always exists a dilution beyond which no molecule of the substance will remain. Call it "material" or whatever, the point is that a sufficiently diluted substance will be indistinguishable from water.

Let me propose you a thought experiment. I will present you with 20 identical bottles of water, but only one containing "treated" water. Are you able to recognize, by whatever method you choose, which bottle has the treated water on a double blind experiment?

 

[Dr. MAS]

PMCkeen said “I find it odd that someone with scientific training could dismiss DBT as one means of verifying the results of an experiment.”

You made serious comment on the topic and in return, I have to say,

Yes, you can reject DBT, when you say, just show the material in above 30c potency, if this is “paranormal” to them then there is no need to perform Double Blind Test to prove that 30c does not have any material. We can prove it without going through “DBT” Trial and if the demand is prove homeopathy works then DBT can be utilized but first tell me what is your exact demand to be prove? I think you have followed what I am trying to say.

 

[AOK Tiger]

Geez .. I am the ETERNAL optimist.

I read a promising opening by Dr MAS.

Sounds wooish .. but.. I am sticking to my own self made resolutions .. don’t jump to conclusions.. give it time.. be broadminded !

I read on with baited breath for something .. ANYTHING of substance to materialise.

What do I get.. the usual waffle, babble, prevarication, feigned ignorance.. REAL ignorance ..

I am SOOOO tempted.. in spite of attracting the wrath of the moderates here.. to just rant and rave at the next woo who pops up here.. save myself 4 pages of drivel ( and DESPERATE attempts to get some real answers). I am just gunna save us all the trouble.. cut these things of as SOON as the Woo goes down the obvious prevarication path.

Think… in this very post ONE guy had the courage to call this guy what he was VERY early.. he got howled down.. but he was 100 % RIGHT ! Good for you andycyl !

Sometimes tolerance has its limits !

DR MAS…

Piss off and go and waste some one elses time !

 

[Darat]

Hans said "What does it matter? We are exchanging opinions. The opinions matter, not who writes them."

You have the right to write your opinions, but no right to catch people by generating alias. The admin of this forum has another alias. He should show courage to write with "admin" designation.

As admin:

Your accusation is untrue; I have no other "alias" on this board. On this board I am always "Darat" whether posting in my position as one of the Admins or a Member of the board.

If I am making a decision or making some "procedural" comment I will use the "mod team" only "Mod " box:

This is a an official Admin response.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: darat

If I am discussing a matter as an Admin and if I consider that it might not be immediately apparent I will (as per the Moderator Agreement) add something like "As admin:" to the start of my post. (As I have done in this post.)

If you have any questions about the Forum or how it is run we have a section set aside for such discussions, it can be found here.

(Edited to remove repeated "I will".)

 

[tmackean]

Thanks for your reply, Dr. MAS.

"Yes, you can reject DBT, when you say, just show the material in above 30c potency, if this is “paranormal” to them then there is no need to perform Double Blind Test to prove that 30c does not have any material. We can prove it without going through “DBT” Trial and if the demand is prove homeopathy works then DBT can be utilized but first tell me what is your exact demand to be prove? I think you have followed what I am trying to say."

I have no particular demand. I think it's definitely up to you to propose one regular Homeopathic remedy that you use, and know works, along with a robust protocol for testing the efficacy of the diluted solution.

If you are certain that you can eliminate external factors from a trial of Homeopathic medicine without a double-blind trial, as implied by your answer, please tell us your protocol. You never know - some on this board may be able to point out flaws in the process. I know you'd appreciate that, as good science is always about testing theory, not proving theory.

Let me remind you of Jacques Benveniste - the well known scientist who passed away, recently. Benveniste was absolutely certain and sincere in his belief for the "memory" of water. His results were repeatable - until double blind trials were used....

(taken from summary of BBC Horizon programme, 2002)

In 1988, Jacques Benveniste was studying how allergies affected the body. He focussed on a type of blood cell known as a basophil, which activates when it comes into contact with a substance you're allergic to.

As part of his research, Benveniste experimented with very dilute solutions. To his surprise, his research showed that even when the allergic substance was diluted down to homeopathic quantities, it could still trigger a reaction in the basophils. Was this the scientific proof that homeopathic medicines could have a measurable effect on the body?

Unsurprisingly, the scientific community greeted this idea with scepticism. Benveniste agreed to open his laboratory to a team of independent referees, who would evaluate his techniques - including magician and paranormal investigator James Randi.

Randi and the team watched Benveniste's team repeat the experiment. They went to extraordinary lengths to ensure that none of the scientists involved knew which samples were the homeopathic solutions, and which ones were the controls - even taping the sample codes to the ceiling for the duration of the experiment. This time, Benveniste's results were inconclusive.

 

[geni]

Patchbunny said “Your "remedies" are indistinguishable from the stock carrier material.”

Let’s move the discussion one step forward. He made good and serious point.

What I have understood from your remarks is, the dilution does not contain any material? Am I right? Ok. What do you mean by “material”?

Baryonic matter. I particular baryonic matter not found in the stock solvent (and to avoid you asking here is an explanion of what baryonic matter is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryonic_matter)

Which material are you looking for in that dilution? The starting material??????

Yes

from which potency was made?

Doesn't matter

i.e. Do you mean, if a dilution bottle is labeled as “Belladonna 6c” then actual material of Belladonna cannot be found in “Belladonna 6c” dilution. Is that mean to you? Please speed up.

No, we have made it very clear that this statement only applies to remedies of potencies of 12C and 24X or higher.

 

[MRC_Hans]

My friend hans said "I write about the details I know of the Randi challenge when people ASK me. People like you. Just like I will answer any other sensible question to the best of my knowledge. What is ridiculous about that?."

Do you take responsibility, if we finalized our discussion and decide on a protocol to perform an experiment to prove homeopathy then JREF will accept our experimental results on the basis of terms and condition which we will decide in this forum or we have to again discuss the final protocol with JREF officials again and again? If no, then why you people are behaving like a spokesman of JREF?

Excuse me, but this is getting ridiculous.

YOU asked me about the JREF challenge and I answered. I very clearly stated in my answer that I do NOT represent the JREF.

Of course I cannot take responsibility on behalf of the JREF.

Tell me, Dr. MAS, if you ask somebody about when the bus leaves, and he answers you, do you then assume that he takes responsibility on behalf of the bus company?

If you want to apply for the JREF challenge, you follow the instruction here. Of course, binding negotiations about protocol must be with the JREF.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

Hans said "What does it matter? We are exchanging opinions. The opinions matter, not who writes them."

You have the right to write your opinions, but no right to catch people by generating alias. The admin of this forum has another alias. He should show courage to write with "admin" designation.

I think you need to provide evidence for that claim.

What do you mean by "catch"?

Hans

 

[steenkh]

OK, I might have done Dr. MAS a slight injustice because I misinterpreted his lack of interest in discussing these matters with us. I have looked at his opening post, and this is what he wrote:

My first question would be

“What exactly is the paranormal in homeopathy and why homeopathy is not acceptable as pure scientific medical healing system?”

So Dr. MAS, you are not here to discuss homoeopathy with us, but you want to get answers from us about our attitude towards homoeopathy, possibly so that you can apply for the JREF million dollars.

Fair enough, though you seem to suffer from the delusion that we represent JREF in any way. Which has by now, I think, been made quite clear that we do not. But we have followed the JREF challenge very closely, so to a certain degree, we can predict JREF's responses to some of your queries.

What is paranormal in homoeopathy? Plenty of posters have answered these questions, and for some reason you have chosen to ignore most.

In view of your desire to apply for the million, I think that I can sum up like this:

1. It is regarded as paranormal in the JREF sense that homoeopathy claims that there is any difference between a homoeopathic solution above 12C or 24X and the solvent alone. This is a claim that is easy to test, and JREF has already formulated a test protocol for this claim that has been cited in this thread.

2. It is also regarded as paranormal that homoeopathy claims to be able to heal anything with these homoeopathic solutions, i.e. anything that could not have been healed with water alone under identical circumstances. This will probably be more difficult to test, given the homoeopaths' propensity to constantly switch remedies until the illness has been cured of itself.

3. The entire claim that homoeopathy can heal "alike with alike" is something that would probably merit the million dollar if it were true. This is what we here call "sympathetic magic". If you can devise any protocol that proves this as a general principle, I think JREF would accept it.

4. "Succussion" and "trituration" are just magical formulas used to consecrate the pure water that is supposed to have healing effects. I believe that the JREF would accept a claim that these actions have any effect on a water solution or a powder.

5. The practice of "grafting" is also paranormal, because it is another example of magic thinking. The idea that untreated pills left alone close to treated pills will eventually obtain the same properties as the treated pills, is definitely paranormal. Considering item 1 above, we claim that the pills were in any case identical from the beginning, so you will not get JREF to pay you a million dollar from this, but if you could find another example of this phenomenon, it might be worth investigating.

6. If you subscribe to the theory of "water memory", you might be able devise another protocol that could prove this to the satisfaction of JREF.

You also ask "why homeopathy is not acceptable as pure scientific medical healing system?" Given that homoeopathy is based on purely magic and other paranormal thinking, it should be no wonder to you why it is not treated as science.

 

[Rolfe]

We want you to show that you can tell a 30C "potentised" remedy from the stock sugar pills or solvent. Alternatively, that you can tell a 30C homoeopathic preparation of one substance from a 30C homoeopathic preparation of another. (Actually, the potency isn't important, so long as it is above 12C or 34X.)

Do you mean, if a dilution bottle is labeled as “Belladonna 6c” then actual material of Belladonna cannot be found in “Belladonna 6c” dilution. Is that mean to you? Please speed up.

Is anybody now in any doubt that Dr. Mas is simply here to evade and obfuscate?

We specify exactly which dilution we're talking about, and even take the trouble to specify which dilutions we're not talking about. But Dr. Mas deliberately changes the conditions to refer to a dilution in the latter category.

In the interest of clarity, I repeat. We say that actual material of Belladonna cannot be found in a 30C preparation of Belladonna. This is not disputed by any homoeopath I know of. We go on to say that there is nothing else in the 30C dilution which distinguishes it from the stock material from with the preparations were made.

Dr. Mas, if you can show differently, please do.

I would also be interested in your comments about that rather lame photo-frame-in-a-bottle trick. What do you think you have accomplished that is so clever?

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

I try to realized you that a disease which is “declared incurable” in your allopathic system or any other system is curable in our system. I don’t think so, there is any confusion?

Well, perhaps some.

If you are stating definiely that homoeopathy can cure conditions that cannot be cured by real medicine, then that is a very large and very testable claim.

How do you intend to prove this to us? Please speed up.

Rolfe.