No.

As usual, you fail to understand the mechanisms in diabetes.

Hans

__________________
<i>You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.</i>

How? It looks quite clear from the links.

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

If presence of weak stimuli--molecular or otherwise is justified than hormesis from these can also be justified.

Whatever Cause that cure can be opposite consideration. Whatever way you will sense to neurological system it can behave accordingly.

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

Mr Hans,

Just to understand:-

How compounds with color and those that have taste or odor that contain chromogenic groups tend to bind strongly? Will these cover all substances?

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

KV I can't really understand your last couple of posts. Please clarify.

Hans

__________________
<i>You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.</i>

Sorry, those we bit simple.

1.In view of links I quoted, I sustected possibilty of insulin resistance or downregulation as a result of enhanced & continual exposure of insulin esp. long acting.

2. Abut adsorption, it was mentioned in quoted link that substances which have colour, taste & odour and those from chromogenic groups tend t bing strogly to surface due to adsorption. I just wated to know, how these specific groups ten to bing strongly?

3. I tried to express that if stimuli though weak( obiously beyond "all or none" rule) is traced & justified (which i am trying to suspect is by adsorption) than their effect due to understanding of hormesis can be justified. Who invented hormesis, is not a issue.

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

Yes, I know you do. And I and others have tried, literally for years, to explain to you why you are wrong. Apparantly you don't want to listen.

Because they are carefully selected to do so. Dyes are substances that can not only add colour, but can make the colour stick. Otherwise they would not be interesting as dyes.

Same with odours (perfumes): It is easy enough to add scent to something, but the trick is to find a scent that sticks. Scent additives are carefully selected for this property.

It is not a question of invention. We can all agree that if you have a pharmaceutical substance in significant doses, then you may get some effect. The question is which paradigm you are working with: The homeopathic which is about matching symptom profiles, or the modern ('allopathic') where you address causes.

Showing that some remedy contains enough of a substance to have an objective effect is not a support for homeopathy in itself.

Hans

__________________
<i>You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.</i>

It can be due to my mistake in understanding. Will you now briefly tell again?



Is it true in real sense or just because we are able to recognize these better due to our sensing/testing capabilty?



Right. But there are two odds with homeopathy in scientific limit. One presence of information of active substances in higher potencies beyong avogdro constant, 2nd pharmalogical effects from low doses. Let us try to justify former first which I am trying here. It is for science & to convince.

About odds/inconsistent results in strict scientic studies, we should not take everything in one basket. Beacuse of delicate & individual effects with least side/adverse effcts, we should take remedial effects differently. Eg. a teacher teach some lesson to 50 students. 10 remember & can repeat but 40 forget. It does not mean stimuli i.e. lesson was not there. Next day teacher slapped to 40 which they all 40 (even 10 also) remembered. It does not mean lesson is not a stimuli whereas slap is. Minor irritation can result both creations & killing on disturbed conditions or just stay calm in balanced state. It does not mean, iritation is giving inconsitant results. It depends on individuality & delicacy. 2. A person with suppresed chronic anger/hate may react to extreme to kill or give 20 slaps against one abuse whareas other in love & affection may tolerate it or even love it alike friend. So inconsistency in outcomes can not justify no stimuli or effects in all cases though it can be consistent to strong stimuli--toxic or poisonous substances. Normal infectious conditions may not cause infections to all depending upon its delicacy or individual immune status BUT can infect all or most in epidermis conditions. Hope this will clear.

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

No. Enough is enough.

It is true in the real sense.

Before you venture further in the direction of adsorption, think about this:

If the active substance tends to stick to the surface of the vial, it may indeed be better represented in high potencies than a non-adsorbant substance, but it will indeed stick to the sides of the vial, and it will not be in the remedy.


OK.

But that is exactly what homeopaths are doing: They claim that all diseases can be treated with the same methodology (like cures like).

Sure. You can still test and show a result.

Sure. Dose dependent reaction.


Yada, yada. We know all this. It doesn't change the fact that under proper test conditions, a useful medicine must be expected to show a better result than placebo.

Hans

__________________
<i>You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.</i>

Because, enough was never there.



It is true in the real sense.

Before you venture further in the direction of adsorption, think about this:

If the active substance tends to stick to the surface of the vial, it may indeed be better represented in high potencies than a non-adsorbant substance, but it will indeed stick to the sides of the vial, and it will not be in the remedy.[/quote]

I think it is not clear to me. But shaking can be meant to take out few molecules from adsorbed molecules from walls & to remain present homogenously in solution and on walls. Some seprated adsorbed molecules should be present in all potencies due to hard shaking impact. I tried it at home from that syrup bottle. When i filled fresh water & used it immediately, no smell was felt but when I shaken it & used, smell was felt. It is still happening. I also changed bottle cap & filled 1/3rd. Still smell comes.




It is there in hormesis etc. But some limitations can still be there with all systems.

Yes possible. First your thought studies are inconsistent not nil on which you base it as placebo effect. 2nd I mentioned:-So inconsistency in outcomes can not justify no stimuli or effects[or placebo] in all cases though it can be consistent to strong stimuli--toxic or poisonous substances. All can die by taking toxic substance but not on taking healing substance esp. weak stimui. I don't know, whether you will support consistency or inconsistency.

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