Just How Smart is Your Body?

Posted February 10, 2008 | 11:35 PM (EST)



stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

We all know that ah-ha! moment when a new insight or experience changes everything. But ah-ha's are the province of the mind, aren't they? Like a backward beast, the body merely drags around our higher mental functions and our opposable thumbs. Despite its amazing capacity to self-heal, it's regarded as a mere mechanical marvel, like the Tin Man in the Wizard of Oz -- to be oiled, excised, and/or flooded with exogenous chemicals, an ingenious contraption incapable of learning, progressing, or manifesting.

But what if the body is smarter than we think? Or understands things we don't? Perhaps it's time for a dialogue.

For two centuries, homeopaths have engaged in an intimate conversation with the body -- regarding it as not just alive, but also capable of learning, acting upon subtle information, and taking hints from nature about how to expel infections, self-regulate, and restore balance.

Homeopathic remedies begin with a given natural substance, progressively diluted (and shaken in a process known as "succussion") until no measurable amount of the material remains. The chosen remedy induces the entire range of symptoms the person suffers and paradoxically prompts the body's capacity to heal them. According to Dana Ullman, a homeopathic educator and author of The Homeopathic Revolution, homeopaths see symptoms as expressions of the body's innate healing response. A homeopathic remedy, like aikido, "goes with" the symptoms, subtly amplifying the healing message so that the body "gets it." Once the body goes "ah-ha," the symptoms express, lessen, and then pass.

Obviously, this method and view sharply contrast with approaches that suppress symptoms, or "fight" disease, the typical "us against them" stance of mainstream western medicine.

In his book, Ullman (recently on radio on Oprah and friends) recounts homeopathy's long history of successful use by a host of monarchs, (the British royal family), world leaders, (including Gandhi, and eleven U.S. Presidents ranging from Lincoln to Clinton), artists (Beethoven, Renoir, and Pollock), and celebrities, (Marlene Dietrich, Tina Turner, and David Beckham). Countless powerful and smart people -- with ample health care options -- have found homeopathy valuable.

One was Charles Darwin, whose persistent health problems (untreatable by the medicine of his day) debilitated him, making work impossible, Ullman learned. Skeptically, Darwin went to a homeopath, received treatment, and recovered, going on to do his most important research and writing (while living for three more decades.) He never publicly mentioning his homeopathic treatment for fear of his scientific colleagues' derision.

Conventional biological scientists (then and now) resist healing mechanisms outside their paradigm. Like the man who lost his contact lens down a dark alley, but searched for it under a bright street lamp because that's where he could see, they deny even the possibility that homeopathy could convey healing information via mechanisms they can't measure. Since only material substances (rather than information) have agency, surely homeopathy must be either a fraud or a placebo.

Late last year, in a debate on homeopathy at the University of Connecticut, naturopath Andre Saine revealed his investigated outcomes for homeopathic treatments of typhus, meningitis, tetanus, anthrax, septicemia, malaria, and other infectious diseases -- including a dozen cases of fully developed rabies with recoveries solely via homeopathic treatment.

"Despite well-documented and official reports," Saine argued, "the results obtained by homeopathy have been almost completely ignored... as if they had occurred in a void of time and space."

"When scientists ignore or reject healing successes outside of their paradigm, the spirit of scientific inquiry is undermined," claims a leader in the Connecticut debate, Professor Rustum Roy, who among his credentials is Professor of the Solid State Emeritus at the Pennsylvania State University as well as Visiting Professor of Medicine at the University of Arizona.

Professor Roy's current research could lead to a sea change. While homeopaths assert that a plant "signature," imprinted in water, carries information to the body, conventional scientists consider that impossible since homeopathic dilutions are biochemically identical to "pure water."

Roy, however, points out that due to water's unique properties, even weak forces can cause powerful structural changes. His lab is currently investigating a recent discovery that common radio waves can cause water to burst into flame and burn, which has immense implications for energy production. In Roy's view, it's not water's biochemical content but its structure that's ripe for exploration. Water's structure can readily be changed by the very actions commonly used in homeopathic preparations, he says. In their research, Roy and his colleagues have found that even when remedies are biochemically indistinguishable from pure water, changes in structure differentiate them. This altered structure persists over time. Since the human body is composed of over 60% water, Roy's research supports the working hypothesis that the water structure in homeopathic remedies can potentially carry healing information to the body. As more scientists follow the thread initiated by Roy, perhaps we'll discover the secrets of the healing power of information.

For more on Proactive Health and links referenced in this article, please go to www.health-journalist.com


Comments for this post are now closed


 
 

Comments
11
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

I just realized that the link does not work from any computer outside my university. I am sorry.

The citation (for interested people) is
ShangA et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet. 2005 Aug 27-Sep 2;366(9487):726-32.

If you can get access to Lancet and most universities have access, there are several letters to editors addressing concerns about the article, albeit in a more professional manner than on this board and the authors' reply to these letters as well. By the way, the editors of Lancet believed the study was valid.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:10 PM on 02/12/2008

Homeopathy works well for my family. Between that and herbal medicines that I make, we don't need much else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 AM on 02/12/2008

Dehligirl (Below) makes reference to a "junk science" comparison of 110 homeopathic and 110 conventional medical studies. These researchers (who are known to HATE homeopathy) stacked the deck (big surprise). First, they found that 21 of the homeopathic studies were a "high quality" study as a randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial, but only 9 (!) of the conventional medical studies were of a similar high quality. However, the researchers NEVER compared these high quality studies. Instead, they picked only the largest studies of this group because the largest studies using homeopathy simply gave just one homeopathic medicine, without any individualization of treatment that is usually the best way to use these medicines. Ultimately, they compared only 8 homeopathic and 6 conventional studies, and they were no longer comparable in any way (heck, one of the studies that they picked was testing a single homeopathic medicine for weight-loss, as though one remedy could work on everyone! Junk science = junk information.

I bet Delhigirl didn't even really read this study, or if she did, she is neither knowledgeable of homeopathy or of good science (whoops).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:24 AM on 02/12/2008

I just realized that the link does not work from any computer outside my university. I am sorry.
The citation (for interested people) is ShangA et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet. 2005 Aug 27-Sep 2;366(9487):726-32.
If you can get access to Lancet and most universities have access, there are several letters to editors addressing concerns about the article, albeit in a more professional manner than on this board and the authors' reply to these letters as well. By the way, the editors of Lancet believed the study was valid.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:11 PM on 02/12/2008

Alison! You've covered a lot of ground in this short article. Good work.

The gentleman above who questioned your (and my) reference to Darwin's experience with Dr. James Manby Gully who treated him with hydrotherapy (water-cure) and homeopathic medicines is thoroughly documented in my book, The Homeopathic Revolution (http://www.homeopathicrevolution.com) and there's a summary article about it here: http://www.homeopathic.com/articles/view,128

The links to Darwin's personal letters tells the story. You will learn that prior to seeing Dr. Gully, Darwin was so ill that he couldn't attend his own father's funeral and he could not work one day in every three...and this was 10 years before he published his seminal work on evolution. Read more and be surprised...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:04 AM on 02/12/2008

The problem with homeopathy is the lack of scientific evidence demonstrating efficacy. The link below is to an article in Lancet, one of the most respected medical journals, analyzing 110 different homeopathy trials and the authors concluded that there was no scientific evidence to prove that homeopathy worked.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T1B-4GYH5HK-12&_user=479005&_coverDate=09%2F02%2F2005&_rdoc=1&_fmt=full&_orig=browse&_cdi=4886&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=1&_acct=C000022959&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=479005&md5=ea94be1d5fd3859f367378371a539dad

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:59 PM on 02/11/2008


Homeopathy is best taken with a pinch of salt.

The claim that Charles Darwin was somehow 'saved' by homeopathy by was scared to admit it is a hoary chestnut: see

http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2007/12/homeopathic-revolution-by-dana-ullman.html

Given the scientific furore Darwin knew he would kick off by publishing "On the Origin of Species", to claim he was afraid of "his scientific colleagues derision" is itself risible, and demeaning of Darwin himself.

Radio waves in the 2.4GHz band is what your microwave oven uses to heat food by exciting the molecules of water in it, producing heat. Water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, both of which will burn in their pure form, but the energy required to break the chemical bond of H2O and allow it to happen exceeds the energy produced by the subsequent combustion which renders it useless as a source of energy production.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:26 AM on 02/11/2008


Professor Roy's work builds on the work of the world's leading water chemist, Martin Chaplin in London; and leading water physicist Gene Stanley in Boston. While his assertions build on materials science's central "law" in which structure trumps composition. Accordingly, whatever trace biochemical molecule is present, Professor Roy told that, "if any process changes the structure you have something different to deal with."

Professor Roy often cites graphite and diamond, which are chemically identical , and can be changed from one to the other by similar interventions.

While this is well known in Professor Roy's field of material science, the implications for human biology have not been well-studied or considered-- as they should be. The human biological organism does not operate outside the laws of physics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 AM on 02/12/2008

Western medicine has difficulty seeing the connectedness of many organs and the nuance and often subtle interactions that can go awry and cause varying degrees of illness. The affects of the unrelenting and ever-present ac currents may cause stresses that can tip the body to dis-ease. Humankind has raced forward with technologies that may compromise or challenge our health with little or no serious testing. We are surrounded by unnatural environments and ingest many man-made chemicals that evolution has not prepared us for. I am open to a all healing approachs that have generated positive testimonials....despite what western-medicine may think!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 AM on 02/11/2008

Ms. Levy, please understand that I'm not hostile to your POV. In fact, once-upon-a-time, I sold homeopathic remedies to health food stores.

However, it would be interesting and useful if you provided some links to some of the more interesting statements in your post. For example, a link to the statement that "...recent discovery that common radio waves can cause water to burst into flame and burn..." would be super.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:16 AM on 02/11/2008


Hi! There's a link to Professor Roy's research as well as to an excerpt of Dana Ullman's radio appearance with Mehmet Oz here: http://www.health-journalist.com/HufPo/SmartBody.htm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 02/12/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

 
 
Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Alison Rose Levy›
 

 Site  Web ask.com