Do homeopathic remedies contain measurable quantities of the "medicine"?

[KUMAR5]

Its purpose is to cure disease, I presume.

Your link states that homeopathy works by triggering the body's own defences. That's not homeostasis.
/QUOTE]
Why not? A disease ususlly show abnirmalities in bio chemestryvof body. When own defence cure umit, such abnirmal bio chemestry will also be normalized or bring back to homeostasis. Look at counter regulatory defence mechanisms which mm ormakize blood sugar level when it is low.

 

[Sarkus]

I have no clue, except that apparently any 12C or 30 C is measurable in homeopathic solutions. That answers the OP question.

No it's not measurable, and it thus doesn't answer the OP question. That's the point. Even most supporters of homeopath accept that there is no active ingredient in the remedy, and they instead claim the remedy works through "water memory" etc.
So, let's take a 30C remedy. This means, if mixed correctly, that there is 1 molecule per 10^60 molecules of water.
There are roughly 10^24 water molecules in 30ml of water. So that means there would be 10^60 molecules in 0.03 litres * 10^60 / 10^24, which (if my maths is correct) works out at c. 3*10^34 litres of water.
There's something like 1,260,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water on earth. This is 1.26*10^21. This means you're going to need something like 10^13 of our earths to find one molecule of water.
Still think that "apparently any 12C or 30 C is measurable in homeopathic solutions"?
Sure, a 12C solution means roughly 1 molecule of active ingredient in 30ml of water. So maybe... just maybe... there is a single molecule in there. But you may well get far more than that from simple tap water. Or just breathing.

As to effectiveness, I am not a chemist but I know that even very small amounts of chemicals can have powerful effects.

There's small, and then there's homeopathic-small (or should I say "more potent").

From what I have read it is clear that homeostatic pills and potions are suspect as to effectiveness.

And have you ever wondered why that might be? Maybe my response above will give you an idea.

One thing I did not know is that the founder advocated these extreme diluted measurements. However if he had been correct in his assumption of bacterial infection, he would have been incorrect in reducing dosages of a chemical autoinducer. Quorum sensing requires an increased presence of autoinducers to trigger a response in bacteria (perhaps even in viruses).

Irrelevant. Stick to the topic, please. This is about homeopathy, not what people may or may not think about quorum sensing.

In that case altering the autoinducer signature prevents the bacteria from acquiring virulence. This is what Bonnie Bassler is workig on.

Irrelevant.

As to Oscillococcinum, the French chemist working with this stuff thought it was effective against Flu bacteria, which is a category error. Flu is a viral infection, although there is some evidence that even viruses communicate via quorum sensing (release of auto-inducers).

Irrelevant. Homeopathy has nothing to do with quorum sensing.

 

[Write4U]

This is what you get when you subcontract the working of your mind to the internet.

And where did you get your knowledge from? Does it matter where you get it from, as long as it comes from reliable sources?
Please explain the difference.

 

[Sarkus]

In yoúr own odd perceottion, you seem to be just looking one point out of six points. Just read all six points again and be aware that few of those also cover active substsnces.

Let's go over them again, shall we:

1. Adsorbed molecules of active substance to glass walls of bottles which keep on desorbing by and during remedy preparation process. I also gave an personal observation of some syrup whose smell did not gone even after more than 100 washings.

Already responded to: either the molecules cling to the glass in the same proportion as the overall dilution, or you are advocating that the "active ingredient" clings more than water, but then somehow separates when it's time to be ingested/used. The latter is nonsense. As for your smell continuing from washing, as repeatedly said, this is because you are not sterilising, and thus is a red-herring.

2. Shredded particles of glass walls along with adsorbed molecules of active substance.

We're talking about quantity of active ingredient, not glass.

3. Shredded particles of glass from glass bottle walls.

This seems to be the same as 2, but again, we're talking about the quantity of active ingredient, not glass.
As for your nonsense wandering into "oh, but silica is also an ingredient", this pushes your defense into the realm of mis-selling even the remedies that are claimed - i.e. if a 30C Arnica solution, it's not actually arnica in the remedy but silica! Scam upon scam.

4. Molecules of normal pollutions in water.

Again, we're talking about active ingredient, not merely non-H2O molecules.

5. Physical presence of active substances in lower dilutions than 12C or 24X.

And here you start to dismiss pretty much all "potent" homepathic remedies, even those the founder of homeopathy advocated for (30C or higher). Are you now admitting that above 12C there is unlikely to be any active ingredient?? If you are, then we're making progress, it would seem. If not, then we can dismiss point 5 as a red-herring.
For the record, yes, below 12C you are mathematically likely to get at least 1 molecule within a 30ml solution.

You'll have to remind me what the 6th point you made was, but as can be seen from the above, all 5 have been addressed, not just 1, but all 5 of those above. I also suspect I have responded to your 6th as well.
And none of your points, other than perhaps implications of point-5, actually address the issue: the quantity of active ingredient.

Moreover you are also not understsnding ehat I meant from this discussion. One major point was also to justify that homeooathic remedies are not just water but also contain other molecules. Do healthy discussions with positive attitude towards homeooathy, you will start understanding.

On the contrary, I am understanding you, but you're not understanding that it's not simply the non-H2O molecules that are under discussion, but the quantity of active ingredient. If there are more non-H2O molecules that are NOT the active ingredient than there are of the active ingredient, why does the "remedy" focus on just the smaller amount of active ingredient, and not the other non-H2O molecules.

What you are doing is trying to dismiss points one by one but in a manner that no longer paints a coherent whole. Every effort you make to counter one point just raises more and more issues with the case you're making.

 

[billvon]

Things made for their own convinience to discredit others. Therefore I say such studies are not valid for homeooathy.

Nope. That was a clinical double blind study, which is the gold standard for studies. The fact that it reveals things you don't like does not make it invalid.

Practical observation is best test to justify their working.

That's the worst possible test.

Consider the following. You run a hair salon. A doctor* in town is a friend of yours. When his patients either start losing their hair or it starts growing back a different way he refers them to you. You are appreciative of his efforts and do your best to help his patients.

You notice that most of those referrals, when you first see them, have cancer. You give them a special hair rinse that you believe cures cancer. By the time you've been seeing them for a year, most of them are cured of their cancer.

From your practical observation, therefore, that hair rinse cures cancer. Is that a valid conclusion?

(* - the doctor is the best oncologist in the state.)

 

[billvon]

What Is Homeopathy?
Homeopathy is a medical system based on the belief that the body can cure itself. Those who practice it use tiny amounts of natural substances, like plants and minerals. They believe these stimulate the healing process.

What is Homeostasis?

Homeostasis Definition

. . .​

Ability to heal ?

This is #4 on the list of things that people do when they are losing an argument rather badly.

"4) Webster Rescue. Often when a crank is losing an argument he will resort to redefining words to try to ameliorate a previous error. For example: "The results you have presented show greater than 100% efficiency, which is thermodynamically impossible." "Well, really, what's the definition of efficiency? Can't it mean that . . . " He will then search out various online dictionaries until he finds a definition that is at least not entirely clear, at which point he will claim that that's the definition that is in common use."

So no, you can't redefine homeostasis just because you are losing an argument.

Bio-chemistry? Pharmacy?


Pharmacy
Description
Wikipedia

I'll let this speak for itself.

Microbial Activities and Intestinal Homeostasis: A Delicate Balance Between Health and Disease
Christina L. Ohland1 and Christian Jobin1,2,∗
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.​

This is # 10 - the Googleblast. From that same list:

"10) The Googleblast. Some cranks, facing skepticism, will make a somewhat late attempt to justify woo by searching the Internet for support. They cannot, of course, do any serious research, since that would tend to disprove their woo. However since anything is available on the Internet, they can always find something to at least marginally support them. Their cycle goes like this: Read (forum) Search (google) Pick (something that says something close to what they are claiming) Post (link to related information.) This read-search-pick-post cycle can go on for dozens of posts. They feel that by posting enough marginally related links they have found independent proof of their claim."

 

[Write4U]

No it's not measurable, and it thus doesn't answer the OP question. That's the point. Even most supporters of homeopath accept that there is no active ingredient in the remedy, and they instead claim the remedy works through "water memory" etc.
So, let's take a 30C remedy. This means, if mixed correctly, that there is 1 molecule per 10^60 molecules of water.
There are roughly 10^24 water molecules in 30ml of water. So that means there would be 10^60 molecules in 0.03 litres * 10^60 / 10^24, which (if my maths is correct) works out at c. 3*10^34 litres of water.
There's something like 1,260,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water on earth. This is 1.26*10^21. This means you're going to need something like 10^13 of our earths to find one molecule of water.
Still think that "apparently any 12C or 30 C is measurable in homeopathic solutions"?

NO, I take your word on that.

Sure, a 12C solution means roughly 1 molecule of active ingredient in 30ml of water. So maybe... just maybe... there is a single molecule in there. But you may well get far more than that from simple tap water. Or just breathing.
There's small, and then there's homeopathic-small (or should I say "more potent").

OK you've convinced me about the dilution.

And have you ever wondered why that might be? Maybe my response above will give you an idea.
Irrelevant. Stick to the topic, please. This is about homeopathy, not what people may or may not think about quorum sensing.

I disagree with that. It is, or should be about quorum sensing. But that requires "sufficient autoinducers" not fewer and fewer. That defeats the whole purpose of quorum sensing triggering an autoresponse in the system.

Irrelevant. Homeopathy has nothing to do with quorum sensing.

Yes it does by definition, see post #154. It is just being applied incorrectly.

 

[Write4U]

They feel that by posting enough marginally related links they have found independent proof of their claim."

Interesting that you should use quotes from the internet to discredit quotes from the internet. For once try to look at it from a wider perspective. You are fracturing science into small unrelated niches, where in reality even small seemingly unrelated niches are connected by common denominators.

 

[Sarkus]

I disagree with that. It is, or should be about quorum sensing. But that requires "sufficient autoinducers" not fewer and fewer. That defeats the whole purpose of quorum sensing triggering an autoresponse in the system.

So nothing to do with homeopathy, then.

Yes it does by definition, see post #154. It is just being applied incorrectly.

No it doesn't. Your post #154 does not link the two. Homeostasis is not homeopathy. It may involve an approach focusing on homeostasis, and even use natural remedies, but it is the methods used to do that that define homeopathy. And the 2 fundamentals are as previously given: like cures like, and the more dilute the more potent a remedy is.
So please deal with homeopathy: not with what you think it should be, but what it is.

 

[exchemist]

This is #4 on the list of things that people do when they are losing an argument rather badly.

"4) Webster Rescue. Often when a crank is losing an argument he will resort to redefining words to try to ameliorate a previous error. For example: "The results you have presented show greater than 100% efficiency, which is thermodynamically impossible." "Well, really, what's the definition of efficiency? Can't it mean that . . . " He will then search out various online dictionaries until he finds a definition that is at least not entirely clear, at which point he will claim that that's the definition that is in common use."

So no, you can't redefine homeostasis just because you are losing an argument.

This is # 10 - the Googleblast. From that same list:

"10) The Googleblast. Some cranks, facing skepticism, will make a somewhat late attempt to justify woo by searching the Internet for support. They cannot, of course, do any serious research, since that would tend to disprove their woo. However since anything is available on the Internet, they can always find something to at least marginally support them. Their cycle goes like this: Read (forum) Search (google) Pick (something that says something close to what they are claiming) Post (link to related information.) This read-search-pick-post cycle can go on for dozens of posts. They feel that by posting enough marginally related links they have found independent proof of their claim."

This is rather good. Have you posted the complete list anywhere? It might be amusing and instructive.

 

[billvon]

This is rather good. Have you posted the complete list anywhere? It might be amusing and instructive.

It is here:

http://www.thescienceforum.com/general-discussion/40906-top-signs-you-reading-woo.html

 

[billvon]

Interesting that you should use quotes from the internet to discredit quotes from the internet.

It is a quote from a post that I wrote.

You are fracturing science into small unrelated niches, where in reality even small seemingly unrelated niches are connected by common denominators.

Nope, I am doing nothing of the sort. I am saying that your claims are baseless since they are based on:

1) an attempt to redefine the word "homeostasis" and
2) an attempt to post unrelated research to prop up your claims.

Neither is a valid approach to science. I mean, I could claim that homeostasis is actually me rather than homeopathy, since I feed and clothe my children and thus allow their bodies to maintain homeostasis. But that would be a similarly silly argument.

 

[origin]

Why not. Practical observation is best test to justify their working. Many modern meds are also in oractice just on observation basis.

I guess we are done, since I might as well be talking to a bag of rocks.

 

[Write4U]

So please deal with homeopathy: not with what you think it should be, but what it is

From the link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-professions/homeopathy

Homeopathic treatment aims to stimulate and direct the body’s self-healing capacity by triggering a reaction. The body reacts to stimuli which have physiological effects (drugs or toxins) by attempting to maintain homeostasis (a stable internal environment). Homeopathy makes therapeutic use of this effect

That is chemical communication. If the communication is for purposes of triggering an auto-inductive response it is called "quorum sensing"

 

[KUMAR5]

I guess we are done, since I might as well be talking to a bag of rocks.

Yes, might "as well be
". Means, you include in it However yes, it has been done long back, when I gave six
justifications to other molecular oresence and based practical observation and experisnces to justify their warking Nothing more to aúrge or discuss except just you and me this and that which shall be never ending. So will just be waste if energy Bye and thanks.

 

[Write4U]

1) an attempt to redefine the word "homeostasis" and
2) an attempt to post unrelated research to prop up your claims.

1) Homeopathic treatment aims to stimulate and direct the body’s self-healing capacity by triggering a reaction. The body reacts to stimuli which have physiological effects (drugs or toxins) by attempting to maintain homeostasis (a stable internal environment). Homeopathy makes therapeutic use of this effect
2) The research I post about is related to chemical communication, which is the interoceptive function of homeostasis in regulating temperature and chemical balance in the body and its organs. Quorum sensing is one of those tools .

 

[KUMAR5]

Nope. That was a clinical double blind study, which is the gold standard for studies. The fact that it reveals things you don't like does not make it invalid.

That's the worst possible test.

Consider the following. You run a hair salon. A doctor* in town is a friend of yours. When his patients either start losing their hair or it starts growing back a different way he refers them to you. You are appreciative of his efforts and do your best to help his patients.

You notice that most of those referrals, when you first see them, have cancer. You give them a special hair rinse that you believe cures cancer. By the time you've been seeing them for a year, most of them are cured of their cancer.

From your practical observation, therefore, that hair rinse cures cancer. Is that a valid conclusion?

(* - the doctor is the best oncologist in the state.)

Who and how routine DBPC studies made a gold standard? Homeooathy or science? If science then it is not so for homeooathy but if by homeooaths, it is okay. ?
If that Doctor was Oncologist, it is his mistske to refer that patient to a sloon runner. However, cancer cured just be rinse will not be observed or exoerienced by this oractical experisnce so will be taken as invalid treatment in practical experisnce. So whatever that exist for long and shown positive outcones in practical experisnces are only made vakid. Those not, are just gone. Longevity of existsnce us also a critetia for creditibility. Homeooathy has much larger longevity in existsnce.

 

[Write4U]

So nothing to do with homeopathy, then.

I would say that it is the wrong way of applying homeopathy. It seems to be the exact opposite of what we now know and have named quorum sensing (unknown at the time of the founder). I am sure that if he had current knowledge of how bacteria and chemical sensing organelles function he would have advocated for a gradual "increase" (not decrease) in catalysts to find the proper level that triggers the auto-immune system to respond.

Whereas you want to scrap the field of homeopathy altogether, what I am proposing here may be of future use to the practitioners of homeopathy.

 

[billvon]

1) Homeopathic treatment aims to stimulate and direct the body’s self-healing capacity by triggering a reaction. The body reacts to stimuli which have physiological effects (drugs or toxins) by attempting to maintain homeostasis (a stable internal environment). Homeopathy makes therapeutic use of this effect

I feed and clothe my children. Their bodies react to this by maintaining homeostasis (a stable internal environment.) Therefore I am the same as homeostasis.

 

[Write4U]

Therefore I am the same as homeostasis.

No, if you do it just right you are homeopathic.
But I think you will agree that communication is a large part of child-rearing. They probably know how far they can venture before you apply the brakes. Quorum sensing!