PART I : ' Contamination in Remedies ' [ Materialistic Types ]

It is seen that remedies are prepared by using Procelain jar, mortar & pestle, carborundum ball mills, glass bottles and vials,plastic & pet bottles which can shed some of their molecules in remedy substances. Pallets or water may also contain differant molecules. The persons preparing these remedies also shed millions particles from his skin(a continious process). Molecules in polluted or unpolluted air can also enter, *Light & Radiations can also contaminate.
When the smallest molecules even in energy form are said to create effects than how this contamination of above substances didn't create effects? If these create effects than how it is included in durg pictures of Homeopathic remedies??
* P.S.

[ 12. October 2003, 06:05: Message edited by: kayveeh ]

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

There are many things in homeopathy that beg for answers we can not as yet give. Perhaps most notable of these is, ‘how do homeopathic remedies work at all, since there is no material substance left in any of them, over the limit of 12C?’ the answer to this question is beyond the capacity of current scientific knowledge to answer, so we are left to explain it with terms such as ‘vibrations’ or ‘electromagnetic signatures,’ terms that try to keep one foot in the realm of what is known, while reaching out for concepts that might help explain what is not yet known.

Your question regarding contamination, though, seems to me to be easier to answer. While I have not seen this issue dealt with directly – others here might have more to say about that – I think that the question does fall, ultimately, into the realm of the not-yet-knowable. Nevertheless, I think a speculative answer that appears to resolve the problem is easier to come by:

If we look at the C-potencies, we find that we start the series with 1 drop of substance diluted into 100 drops of diluent. If we compare this to the LM scale, we see that we start with 1 drop of substance into 50,000 drops of diluent. One of the advantages to this, a hallmark of the LM potencies, is that the far greater dilution results in a far milder medicinal action. In short, though we can dilute substances to a virtually limitless extent, with each dilution we find the action of the remedy becomes less harsh, as might be expected by common sense.

With your contaminants, however, we are starting, not with 1 drop in 100, but with individual molecules, or vibratory signatures, perhaps thousands of them, or even millions of them, yet all of them taken together remaining, if you look in the mixing bowl, still quite invisible to the naked eye, comprising in total not even a speck compared to the “enormous” droplet of medicinal substance. How many molecules in a drop? Is it 10^24? Or have I got my avogadro’s mixed up with my avocado’s? in any case, if we see such a sharp drop in harshness of action when we move from 1 drop in 100, to 1 drop in 50,000, how much more mild, even unobservable, is the effect of moving from an initial drop of substance to an initial molecule, or two, many thousands? They still fit on the head of a pin, wouldn’t even tip a scale.

Such, at least, is my take on it.

bach

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.

Good, deep & honest awnser.Thanks.
The remedies ultimately stimulate body cells to perform their functions and therefore, it is to be used,consumed or eaten up by them only. If it is a bigger molecules it may be possible it may not fit in the mouth of the cells(common language) and so remain least effective or even ineffective. So if it is effective in higher potencies than it can be more capable to produce effects(being capable for cell's consumption) which also can be more harsh than lower potencies.
Furthur,do you mean to say that some contamination can also be practically allowed or accepted even in remedies as it is accepted in other physical materials eg; grains. But the problem is that we consider even sub-atomic particles as a most effective tool and any minute substance can effect substancially. This contamination can also act as a curative substance(mostly in silica form).

P.S. I read one more possible contamination i.e.cont.by Mars(plannet as come closer) or contamination by the exposure to plannets.

[ 08. September 2003, 11:13: Message edited by: kayveeh ]

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

KV -

One molecule or one subatomic particle or whatever--or one million of them--diluted into 100 drops or even into 50,000 drops of diluent is a far different matter than the homeopathic starting ratio of 1 (drop):100 (drops). Your 1 (subatomic particle): 100 drops is equivalent to what? maybe 1 drop:10^24 drops? or 1 drop in the Caribbean Sea?

if you would like a dramatic demonstration of the different effects one might expect, though it is probably not strictly exact, or quite scientific, you would probably get the idea if you tried a pair of experiments:

first, fill up your bathtub, stand in it, and have a friend drop a plugged in turned on toaster into the water.

second, when you recover (or if you recover, i suppose), go to a beach, say, on the Atlantic Ocean. step into the water, and have your friend drop a plugged in turned on toaster into the water 3 miles out to sea. i think you wouldn't even notice it.

the starting level of dilution bewteen one drop of substance in 100 drops of diluent is like the bathtub, a good size to insure the medicinal substance will have a noticeable effect throughout the medium. place a drop in the ocean, however, and you lose the effect, no matter even if you can fit the entire ocean into a very large remedy jar and succuss it till you're blue in the face. no medicinal value. too much starting diluent to too little starting substance.

regarding your other question, dilution makes for mild; succussion, makes for strength. the higher potencies therefore, paradoxically, are both milder and stronger, just as a 6C dilution of Arsenicum is milder than the raw substance--it won't kill you--yet, medicinally, stronger acting.

bach

[ 09. September 2003, 09:19: Message edited by: bwv11 ]

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.

Thanks for explaining with examples. In common sense,your explaination have meaning but in homeopathic sense it can make a meaningful differance. If I am not wrong the ultimate residue of remedy substance in any higher potency can be just like a drop in bath tub or ocean. When this much quantity can effect than the contaminated substances can also effect. I also give an example; The pickles or other items when kept in differant type of containers(non-reactive types) exibit differant effects of them. If kept in China clay, Clay or Glass jars, there preservation and keeping quality remain much better than if kept in plastic or other jars. The substances in jars are much more than the quantity of remedy with diluent or carriers. Most of medicines were previously kept in glass bottles.

Furthur, the total contamination in any remedy will be in the remedy+diluent and so will be counted & compared in total quantity not with the remedy substance quantity. Some contents in contamination also represent energy carrier with great curitive value.

[ 09. September 2003, 10:00: Message edited by: kayveeh ]

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

"If I am not wrong the ultimate residue of remedy substance in any higher potency can be just like a drop in bath tub or ocean"

KV - this is true, but it is the ending concentration. for this, let's switch analogies to making bread: with a little yeast (substance) in the flour, when the mixture sets in heat for awhile, it expands, fills more space than it occupied at the start. through dilution and succussion, the starting substance is not only diluted, but also successed, so that its "volume" may actually increase during the process - or perhaps even as it is diluted, it "expands" like yeast, perhaps energy waves propagating energy waves at each dilution and with each succussion, so if you divide a volume in half, you end up with 89% of the amount you started with (because of dynamic expansion). but to do this, you need a larger (dropful) of starting substance.

in a loaf of bread, only one molecule of yeast in the starting mising bowl will not raise the dough. you need a whole packet of yeast, a whole drop of substance to supply the potentization process.

again, this is all speculative, but aims to keep one foot in the known, while reaching out, as i say, to ideas to try to explain the unknown. speculative or not, i hope this explains the difference between starting with 1:100 versus starting with 1:10^24, which anyone but one of the clerks at the bbc ought to be able to see - no offence!

bach

[ 09. September 2003, 12:53: Message edited by: bwv11 ]

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.

also, as proving symptoms correspond to treatment responses, there does not seem to be any well demonstrated effect from subatomic contamination, unless you have documented this someplace? otherwise, i'd assume these ve-e-e-e-ery small amounts of contamination amount to background noise at most.

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.

Thanks for intresting posting. If the mechanical energy which is applied during potentization is got stored in subsequent potenties, than it will be differant from raw remady substance in volume.Propagation of yeast is a biological process.Energy have a minimal mass. Contamination can also be from the begining and which will also be potentised in every potency.
We can assume that these contaminations may have minimal/insignificant effects in lower potencies but can have significant effects in higher potencies. We can also assume that this contamination effects might had already be counted in provings provided similar contaminating substances which were existed/used at the time of proving remains the same. But some substances are now changed.
Some person had previously pointed out that 'they felt effect of all remedies looks just similar'??

__________________
Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..S.Kh.

[ 09. September 2003, 22:55: Message edited by: bwv11 ]

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.

kv,

from your very first posts to the HHBB, your questions have raised questions in my mind, which i would like to pose to you, to level the playing field, as it were. i appreciate your compliments regarding my 'good deep honest' answers and so forth. i would appreciate the same in return:

1. are you, as you seem to present yourself, an advocate of the theories and practices of homeopathy? you seem to imply it, but some of your statements, questions, raise doubt.

2. have you ever taken a homeopathic remedy, and if so, what kinds of reactions did you note?

3. Do you believe homeopathic remedies work, or that they are no better than placebo?

4. Do you believe the idea of 'like-cures-like?' has any merit?

5. You state that "Some person had previously pointed out that 'they felt effect of all remedies looks just similar'??" does this statement reflect your opinion?

thank you for your good deep honest responses.

__________________
"The need to perform adjustments for covariates...weakens the findings." BMJ Clinical Evidence: Mental Health, (No. 11), p. 95.... It's that simple, guys: bad numbers make bad science.