Please do not bother about effect or no effect in this topic. Simply bother about that substsnces exist in higher potences other than plain water. It is already justified that substsnces exist in higher potencies and memory of water had not traced these. Intentionally or not, I do not know.
Science of Water Memory?
- Thread starter KUMAR5
- Start date
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Who says it's a false claim? All you have is speculation.
But when molecules of sctive snd other substsnce in higher potentized remedies are justified, it does not remained plain water.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Right. So. Things established:
1. When a solution of water and an active substance of interest is repeatedly diluted, it may or may not eliminate every last molecule of the substance of interest. < Self-evident.
2. Human smell and taste are not accurate sensors for determining the existence or absence of a substance in trace amounts. < Fact.
3. If the diluted water contains traces of the SoI, then it's not pure water. < Self-evident.
4. If the diluted water does not contain traces of the SoI, then it is ostensibly only water remaining. < Self-evident.
5. Every active substance has a therapeutic dose; that is the dose defined to be effective. < Definition.
Have I missed any relevant points here?
If there is something dissolved in it, it is not plain water.
If there is nothing dissolved in it, it is plain water.
Very simple. Do you disagree?
Here, some problem. It may not eliminate every molecule of Sol because of this adsorption theory.
If taste and smell resembles to taste and smell of Sol, it can justify its presence.
Right.
Right.
.
Right but every system can have its own justification for it. In few system like accupunture there is no quantity of dose at all. It works only by stimulation of physiological activities.
Have I missed any relevant points here?
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
No.
You agreed with all five of my points.
I agree on it. If something is dissolved or get disolved or exist in water then it is not plain water.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
It took 86 posts to get here?
How I agreed?
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
You literally quoted each of my five points individually, confirming that you agree with each one. It can't be more plain than that.
Are you trolling?
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
I think probably, yes.
Sorry, I am not able to understand your claim. I simply clarified your 5 points in full.
Anyway, coming on to OP. As far as I remember and as far as I can understsnd, main claim from science community was that water come back in its origional structure instantly after active substance is diluted out. But when active snd other substsnce still exist in that water consistently, how it will come back to its origional form of plain water? Here, where memory of water will still exist consistently. Not so?
Why not? All interactions and modificatíons are not dependent on chemical intersctions but can also depend on physical, electrostatic etc forces also. Read it
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Exactly.
To review:
No, you have not missed any relevant points. So yes, we are in full agreement.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
No one claims that.
That is a matter of experiment and verification.
Fer cryin' out loud. We're going around in circles.
If some of the substance remains then the water is not pure.
If none of the substance remains then the waster is pure.
Not so.
Because water does not have a memory.
No, That was part of your post. I haf just left it unanswered. I have not replied or asked it. Misinderstsnding.
Exactly.
To review:
No, you have not missed any relevant points. So yes, we are in full agreement.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
In real sense this impure water in dose of active substance or of Sol?
If water can not have the memory at all, what was the sense of claiming or checking it?