Complication is also a sign of ignorance. In homoeopathy all these complicated explanations are not necessary, due to the smallness of the dose. In homoeopathy we do not follow the allopathic model as described by you. “Nowadays drug-loaded liposomes, coated with specific antibodies or ligands are being used for delivering drugs to different target organs.”

In homoeopathy we have no “target organs” since homoeopathy is systemic in nature. Homoeopathy needs no biochemistry to isolate “several drugs including anti tumor, anticancer and antibacterial agents,” because it does not work like that. While you may know a lot more about biochemistry that I do, it is irrelevant to the action of the remedy, since we have no concepts of “anti” this, that or the other. We work with the law of similars, based on sympto totality, which entirely fails in the biochemic model and thus is inadequate to explain the mechanisms of action of a homoeopathic remedy.

In other words, your wordy explanation hits neither the walls nor the ceiling of the conundrum regarding the action of homoeopathic remedies and is superfluous to its understanding. Differently said, you can neither dazzle me with the “scientism” nor baffle me with allopathic bullshit.

Therefore, you have not revealed any truth, as far as homoeopathy is concerned.

Just like Galileo was not believed, I will not be believed and you are the prime example of those who do not believe. We better end the discussion here, because you do not even try to understand what I say and think that your title and endorsement by yaysayers is sufficient to give you authority. To me it is not and no matter how much you claim to have opinion on your side, it still remains opinion, which does not count in scientific work.

You complain in your last sentence that you could not generate significant polemic, but when I give you polemic, you do not address it, but become dismissive. No wonder there is a delay in acceptance. You simply have failed to address my objections. Thanks anyway for the discussion and i hope the readers will make up their own minds.

Learn also to read what I write. Where did I say “Hahnemann has never said to triturate a drug above 30th or 200th potency by milk of sugar alone, so far I know.”

I said that Hahnemann wanted us to triturate even the tinctures – I also gave you chapter and verse, but you just like to criticise and not have a fruitful discussion, it seems. You do not read the aphorisms and so you come up with a completely nonsensical proposition, presenting it as I was the originator. If this its the level you want to debate on, then we better stop right here.

I expect you to conduct this debate factually – just as I have done with you. I expect you to return that courtesy. If you want to ascribe all sorts of nonsense to me, the debate is over. It is both dishonest and unscientific.

3. You have not read what I wrote and keep going on about molecules, which are not even present. Even the dielectric constant will be influenced by electromagnetic waves coming off SUBMOLECULAR PARTICLES. So the rest of the comment is for that reason irrelevant.

4. Milgrom et al also do not consider anything but the dilution. All dilutions, when properly made, are preceded by at least 3 triturations – Hahnemann instructs to triturate up to 3C before making ANY dilutions. Thus their idea was that it must be the silica glass. You see, without any trituration, nobody can explain the dilutions properly and have to attribute NMR results to something else.

5. “Therefore, it is paramount to consider the triturations first.. dilution and succussion.
Ans: No, we must consider dilution first.”

Not at all. Read again the Organon Aph 269 -278. We must NOT consider dilution first. You have a preconception and it does not follow Organon. Like all investigators, you forget the triturations, from which all dilutions are made. Neglecting that, you will always have the wrong conclusions.
Everything starts at the beginning. The beginning for ALL AND EVERY DILUTION IS TRITURATION. If you ignore that, the conclusions drawn are neither scientific, nor correct.

6. Antidotes can nullify the remedy in any state. What does that mean? That antidotes are DYNAMIC as Hahnemann says and also that the EFFECT of the remedy is antidoted and EFFECTS are never molecular. So the whole idea you present is neither scientific, nor correct.

7.Trituration is not intrinsic to biochemic system alone. You have obviously not read the Organon Aph 269-278. It is also clear that even if you had, you do not understand it, nor do you understand my explanations. You already think you have it all figured out, without the Organon. I will now close the discussion, because It is also clear you do not want to understand what I am saying, being prejudiced towards your own interpretation.

I do not interpret – I take the Organon for what it is and explain everything from that viewpoint only. You have an idea and want to twist it all, into fitting it, and as I have shown you, it does not fit – that’s all.

8. You should also know that no scientific experiment is ever 100% reproducible so you will always find something to criticise. The conclusions of those 26 experiments – basophil granulation test – are all identical – homoeopathy works.

Trituration is making a nano-structured mixture of lactose and substance. It is electromagnetically charged. Dilution passes that charge on to the water, through the lone pair hydrogen bonds. Succussion is amplification of the standing electromagnetic wave and this accounts for increase in amplitude, as seen in Conte’s NMR graphs. It also accounts for increased strength of the medicinal potency, as noted by all homoeopaths. As the potency increases, so does its power.

Ethanol is not hydrophobic and there are no drug loaded liposomes in any dilution. You bring in all sorts of things that have nothing to do with dilutions to make a point which is not even clear.

1. The Contonian remanent wave is .. of his contentions doubtful.
Ans: The proposed theory was also based on dilution in liquid medium. Hahnemann has never said to triturate a drug above 30th or 200th potency by milk of sugar alone, so far I know. Hering, the favorite disciple of Hahnemann actually emphasized on trituration in preparing the medicine without liquid medium.
2. I never mentioned the white holes and they are also irrelevant to the discussion.
Ans: No comment
3. Regardless the purity .. due to contaminants.
Ans: This is never ‘contamination’. I wonder why I have failed to make you understand. We know that water has a high dielectric constant, so it widely separates charges of any solute, antigen, electrolytes or drug molecule in a solution. Water molecules remain sparsely associated with the surface of positive and negative charges of the drug molecules by hydrogen bonds or ion dipole interaction. Centesimal dilution gradually increases number of solvent molecules per solute molecule. Succussion is done by repeated manual stroke at the bottom of the container and it is comparable to sonication, which is able to rearrange the solvent molecules. Centesimal dilution initially cannot affect homogeneity of a solution and the solute is diluted away with the increase of potency. After several repetition of the process water molecules rearrange themselves more closely covering the surface of charges of the solute, so that van der Waals force between adjacent water molecules increases enormously. Van der Waals forces is a very weak force in low dilution and is significant only in ultra high dilution, when two dipoles (water molecules) are very near to one another. Enormous increase of van der Waals force in ultra high dilution, creates a “screening effect” on the opposite charges of the solute, they come into more and more close proximity, and the drug molecule become more strongly encapsulated by water molecules. Homogeneity of the solution is lost and a definite density gradient becomes established. Gradually, after repetition of this process, the encapsulated solute molecules become very negligible in number, but more strongly protected by water capsule in the form of a smooth hydration sheath. Here the drug molecules can no longer be separated from the hydration sheath by any physical process, but they can hardly occupy the total volume (suppose, 100 ml) of the solution, and become more and more restricted at the bottom of the container, where they move very fast like gaseous molecules. When the volume becomes restricted within 1 ml, one would be able to lift it by a dropper and add it to 99 ml fresh distilled water to prepare the next centesimal dilution; the concentration of the second solution would remain unchanged. Then we shall call it as critical concentration. When alcohol is added to the medium critical concentration is reached much earlier and more efficiently. When the solute molecules are infinitely diluted they gain much higher speed than the solvent molecules, so that they rush to the next serial dilution (not ‘contaminate’), but they do not return to the original container due to attainment of non-homogeneity. Hence, the number of solute molecules in infinitesimal solution does not decrease proportionally with dilution when succussions are made between each step.

4. I wonder wherefrom comes the idea .. in silica glass vials.
Ans: The experiment was actually performed by Milgrom et al in 2001.
Milgrom, L.R., King, K.R., Lee, J., and Pinkus A.S. 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; 90: 5-13, Nature Publishing Group. 2001

5. Therefore, it is paramount to consider the triturations first.. dilution and succussion.
Ans: No, we must consider dilution first. If the drug is insoluble in water or alcohol trituration might be opted. Moreover, trituration is a process, in which the drug molecules are inseparably mixed with milk of sugar, the latter gets absorbed in tissues and the drug molecule (or Biochemic “tissue salts”) gets an opportunity to enter there, otherwise, they might have washed away through urine and fecal matters.
6. The antidotes .. dynamic or non-molecular.
Ans: Antidodes, either molecular, or so-called non-molecular can nullify a homeopathic remedy with equal efficiency. What does it mean? The medicine is hardly to be non-molecular. Can you resist DNA damage by beta radiation by any allopathic medicine? No! because the stress is non-molecular.
7. Agreed, .. opinion of Conte.
Ans: No comment
8. Benveniste’s experiment .. the literature.
Ans: I‘ve gone through the literature. 2 dozen success does not mean 100% reproducible. There are some well known incidents of failure also.
My comment refers ONLY to the triturations.. molecules only.
Ans: I meant to say that the process of trituration is a more indispensable part of Biochemic system of medicine, which developed much later than homeopathy. Although, Hering used trituration process in making decimal dilution much before the death of Hahnemann.
Regardless whether .. tictures be triturated.
Ans: In aqueous solution water forms hydration sheath around drug molecule. Hydrophilic heads of alcohol attaches hydration sheath to form inverted micelle, like that of ‘water in oil’. Succussion is comparable t sonication, which helps the surrounded ethanol molecules to rearrange themselves in such a manner that their hydrophobic tails remain close together like drug loaded liposomes, widely used in mainstream medicine. With the increase of potency the ethanol capsules become more compact like your ‘nano-particle’ and get an easy access inside cell due to their high velocity.

1. The Contonian remanent wave is as Conte himself has stated, his idea – hence “Contonian” or in plain english, according to Conte. However, since also he took only the dilution into account and because he had never thought about the triturations, he had to admit that this neglect renders some of his contentions doubtful.

2. I never mentioned the white holes and they are also irrelevant to the discussion.

3. Regardless the purity or impurity of the water, such “contamination” has no bearing at all on the process of potentisation, since if it did, no potentisation would at all be possible, due to contaminants.

4. I wonder wherefrom comes the idea that the information in and of an electron or nano-particle would be very transitory. It cannot be so, since then all nano-materials would equally be transitory, whereas they are rather permanent.
The NMR wave has also been seen in silica glass vials.

5. Therefore, it is paramount to consider the triturations first, after which the Whole conundrum is explainable in terms used in the Organon 269-278. I also do not believe that time can change by dilution and succussion.

6. The antidotes are about effects of the medicine as you so rightly state. Hence they are not concerned with the non-molecular nature of the remedy, but only with physical effects, which are equally grossly material. No need for any antidote to be also dynamic or non-molecular.

7. Agreed, but then again, this is Contonian and thus the opinion of Conte.

8. Benveniste’s experiment has been replicated over 2 dozen times, both before and after him. I think you need to read up on the literature.

My comment refers ONLY to the triturations, since Hahnemann tells us in 269-278 that even liquid tinctures must first be triturated. So how is trituration beyond avogadro a later development? Every trituration to the 3rd centisemal is by necessity falling within the scope of nano-particles, which are smaller than a molecule and so Avogadro does not even apply – that is for molecules only.

Regardless whether Hahnemann recommended the use of alcohol, several vegetable substances do not release their active principles in alcohol or water for the full 100%, hence his recommendation to make tinctures using a mixture of water and alcohol, borne out by the information in the homoeopathic pharmacopoeia. And he demanded that even tictures be triturated.

Trituration by crossing Avogadro’s limit was actually a later development. Gallons of medicines could be prepared from single drop of mother tincture by the apothecaries, but all would not be equally effective. Therefore, Hahnemann has preferred the single line potentization technique by the physician himself to limit the use from a single vial. The method for precipitation of proteins from their aqueous solution by the gradual addition of cold ethanol, as derived by Cohn in 1941 was due to fall of dielectric constant of the medium, is a good example of secondary attainment of non-homogeneity. Hahnemann has rightly said in Organon (aphorism 123) that he has preferred to use alcohol to prepare mother tincture, as well as for potentization purpose; his own logic was that- ‘it would prevent spoilage and decomposition’. Actually it was a better potentizing medium than water, forming micelle and liposome around hydrated drug molecule.

Like all people studying dilutes, you forget to take into account the trituration that came before the dilute. Aph 269 to 278 explain the entire conundrum – trituration produces the nano-phase, with smaller than molecular particles. Feynman explained it when he said that if we get control of the size, substances will have many different properties. During trituration, the properties change from the normal to the medicinal. Electrons are peeled off and give Conte’s -Beta scintillation. No molecules are present, since their size has been reduced by trituration.

The dilutions therefore are not subject to Avogadro’s number. The electrons charge the water and thus one drop is sufficient to charge the next batch. No background radiation, no silica flakes from the glass, nothing but pure electromagnetic energy, measurable with NMR and showing Fibonacci number peaks in potency. I am working on an article that includes all findings by materials science, since starting at the trituration, all conundrums are explainable.