Category Archives: classical=homeopathy

You can test homeopathy

For those who still doubt … here’s a simple little experiment to check ifhomeopathic potentisation really does have an effect.

Purchase  some common green bean seeds and divide them into two groups. Water the first group (your control group) as normal. With the second group, your test group, water them too but only after adding 5 drops of potentised table salt (Nat-m 6C) per 50ml. You should see the beans from your test group grow more quickly and profusely than the control group, just as they did in the pilot study referenced at the bottom of this story, and even though a 6C potency is indistinguishable under a microscope from plain water.

And where can you get the Nat-m 6C? It is easy to buy from most homeopathic pharmacies or you can make your own – its simple. Just follow the instructions found in Three Scales of Potency.

(For the purpose of this experiment, you won’t need a ‘mother tincture’ or alcohol as per the instructions. Just add approximately 1 part of common table salt to 99 parts of water. Potentisation is quite flexible so measures don’t have to be exact for an effect to take place).

So, for the price of a few beans you too can test homeopathy.

(Green beans are not the only plants you can experiment with – any plant can be affected by a homeopathic potency as Darwin himself discovered. Just Google for the growing list of homeopathic research with other plants.)

Links to More Information

Potentisation instructions: Three Scales of Potency

Darwin’s story and homeopathic plant experiments: The Surprising Story of Charles Darwin and His Homeopathic Doctor


Brain dead =organ donation #braindead is a lie #organdonations watch this brilliant doctor being interviewed you will think twice about donating your organs after watching this ” organs can only be taken from a living person never a cadaver “…….

Formaldehyde -embalming fluid in vaccines

False statements about homeopathy and the truth

Frequent False Statements About Homeopathy… and the Truth

(adapted from National Center for Homeopathy – )

“There is no evidence that homeopathy works at all.”

This is the most often repeated falsehood emanating from anti-homeopathy pundits, a tenet they hold as sacred, cite from each other and repeat without shame to media and public alike.  The truth is that there are over 600 published research studies of homeopathy and more are being completed every day.  Research shows the effectiveness of homeopathy for human and animal patients with a wide range of acute, chronic and epidemic conditions such as eczema, asthma, upper respiratory illnesses, ear infections, fibromyalgia, menopause, diarrhea, ADHD, irritable bowel and depression.  There is even laboratory research showing the action of homoeopathic remedies on individual cells, including cancer cells.  See this page for an impressive sampling… not to mention pages elsewhere on this site.

Homeopathy is nothing but placebo.”

Again, hundreds of basic science, pre-clinical and clinical studies have been published in respected, peer-reviewed journals showing effects of homeopathic remedies exceeding those of placebo. Furthermore, many homeopathy studies have been done using animals and cell cultures, which are not susceptible to the placebo effect.

Those who claim homeopathy is invalid because it is unexplained should also note that the placebo effect is always controlled for in high-quality studies–even though it, too, is unexplained.

“Homeopathy is ‘implausible.”

First, “plausible” is a subjective term; plausibility is in the eye of the beholder.  Beware subjective measures when delivered by people with strong and/or hidden agendas!

The detractor’s claim of “implausibility” directed at homeopathy arises from the system’s use of very highly diluted medicines.  These medicines are prepared through a series of sequential dilutions of medicinal substances with vigorous shaking at each stage of dilution, a process known as succussion.  Thanks to the work of scientists at institutions like Penn State University, the University of Washington, Stanford University, Moscow State University, and London South Bank University, we now know that the properties and effects of substances are dictated by their molecular structures, not their chemical composition.  Thanks to these same scientists, we also know that ultra-dilutions, like homeopathic remedies, do indeed contain stable and unique molecular structures with recognizable properties (See Materials Letters. 62. 2008). The water studies convincingly show that water is restructured in the process of homeopathic remedy preparation allowing for transfer of information from the original solute (substance) to water.

What’s more, there have been numerous high-quality peer reviewed studies showing the biological effects of homeopathic remedies.  The most frequently used experiment on ultra-dilutions has involved basophils, the white blood cells involved in the immune response.  One series of experiments conducted in Europe over a period of 25 years on a multi-laboratory basis with independent replications has consistently shown the inhibition of basophil activation by high dilutions of histamine (Inflammation Research. 2009).   Another study, a meta-analysis led by Claudia Witt M.D. of the Charité University Medical Centre in Berlin evaluated the quality and results of biological experiments with ultramolecular, agitated dilutions.  Seventy-three percent of these studies showed an effect with ultramolecular dilutions (Complimentary Therapies in Medicine.  2007).   Yet another study—this one also the subject of repeated experiments over a long period—shows the effect of ultramolecular dilutions of aspirin on blood clotting (Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis 2008).  And there are others.

“Homeopathy needs to be held to the standard of conventional science, using the Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) to measure its efficacy.”

The RCT is the most popular method used by pharmaceutical companies to bring a new drug to the marketplace.   However, it is not the best scientific method for researching whole-systems modalities such as homeopathy. A whole-systems approach recognizes that the human body and mind are dynamic and complex, with each part influencing the other and acting together.  Therefore, one part or system of the body cannot be studied in isolation without looking at the effect on the whole person. Scientists find the RCT methodology is too restrictive when studying a whole-system methodology, and advocate other more appropriate research paradigms.

Many scientists and health practitioners question the usefulness of RCT studies even in standard drug testing.  They prefer “real world” or “clinical outcome” studies that are more applicable to day-to-day practice instead of strictly-controlled drug trials.  Health practitioners and the US Department of Health and Human Services are calling for “comparative effectiveness” research. These are studies that compare the usefulness of various treatments and provide more practical information about their use for patients and practitioners.  “Clinical outcome,” “comparative effectiveness” and “systems-based” studies are types of research that are better suited for investigating the healing ability of the body and the effect of homeopathic treatment.

Having said all that, homeopathy has been shown to be effective in plenty of RCTs.

“Homeopathy is woo-woo, magic, quackery and pseudo-science.”

We cite the famous quote from thinker and science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” That is to say, to people who don’t understand the technology behind a process, or have not tested it empirically enough to know it is reliable, it appears to be magic.

These statements are attempts on the part of the detractors/denialists, who want to shut down homeopathy, to discredit and associate homeopathy with unscientific ideas.  Throughout its history, those with a vested interest in conventional medicine have sought to discredit homeopathy out of economic self-interest.  (See this page; for detail, read Divided Legacy by Coulter, Harris.)  That pattern continues today all over the world.  The technique is to repeat certain words and phrases repeatedly (e.g., “there is no evidence for homeopathy”) hoping they will stick in people’s minds, creating a negative impression.

Homeopathy is a complete medical system, based on principles of holism and the scientific laws of nature.  It has a 200-year history, a significant body of confirming research and hundreds of millions of people using it all over the world. It is part of the public health care systems of many nations in Europe, South America and Asia, and part of public health precautions in Cuba.

Homeopathy is dangerous because sick people will delay getting the medical treatment that they need and will die.”

Beware scaremongering, too.

1.  Homeopathy is not exclusive and can be used along with conventional and other complementary medical treatments.  There is no need for a patient to choose one over the other.

2. It is a common tactic by the detractors, when their other arguments against homeopathy fail, to infer that patients are gullible, have poor judgment and are unable to decide properly about the health treatments they want.  In fact, patients have the right to choose treatments, and spend much time researching both conventional and integrative health options, making choices based on their own needs and wishes. The homeopathic community fully supports them in doing so.

“There is no need for homeopathy because people have evidence-based conventional medical treatment to use.”

Sadly, “evidence-based medicine”–an excellent idea, in our view–has been corrupted into a buzzword that the homeopathy opponents use to attempt to discredit homeopathy and other alternative treatments.  “Evidence-based” means that data from randomized controlled studies is claimed to give certainty about whether a treatment will work and is safe. In fact, 66 per cent of the treatment procedures and drugs that are popularly used in conventional medicine have no or little evidence to recommend them.  (British Medical Journal, 2007: see this page.)  Many procedures have serious complications and many drugs cause difficult unwanted effects.  These situations drive people to search for less harmful, health promoting alternatives, such as homeopathy.

“Homeopathic remedies are unsafe.”

Often said by the same people who claim they are nothing but water, this statement is false. Current studies show that homeopathic remedies are unquestionably safe. (Thompson, Homeopathy:2004). Homeopathy has been widely used to save lives in epidemics.  Millions of people in Cuba are now routinely given homeopathic remedies as a preventative in Cuba, with no serious adverse effects reported (Bracho, Homeopathy 2010, and personal communication). Possibly the best proof that homeopathic remedies are safe has been furnished by groups of anti-homeopathy detractors swallowing entire bottles of pills as a media stunt.  The homeopathic community appreciates their work in raising public awareness of homeopathy’s safety. Article from extraordinary

Hahnemann- Medicine’s greatest unknown genius

Medicine’s Greatest Unknown Genius

Christian Friedrich Samuel Hahnemann was born on April 10, 1755. He graduated from the University of Erlangen in Bavaria in 1779 with the degree of Doctor of Medicine. He was fluent in German, French, Spanish, English, Latin, Greek and Hebrew. He was an accomplished medical translator and master chemist.

Hahnemann was the first medical reformer to urge the need for improved public hygiene, a sensible diet, regular exercise, fresh air, adequate sleep, decent housing and sewage treatment. At one point he occupied the post of Medical Officer of Health for the city of Dresden, and was a Professor of Medicine at the University of Leipzig in 1812.

It is only through reading Hahnemann’s early essays and his 1810 opus the Organon of Rational Medicine that one discovers that he was decades ahead of Koch and Pasteur in recognizing the role that microbes played in the transmission of disease. Moreover, Hahnemann’s writings on chronic disease reveal that he was the first to explore the possible role of inherited (genetic) disease on successive generations, long before the isolation of RNA or DNA.IMG_8555

He was also the first person to cure mental illness through compassion and understanding in an age when psychiatric patients were routinely physically and mentally abused.

Samuel Hahnemann is mostly acknowledged as the only person to have created and developed a complete system of medicine in the course of his lifetime—homeopathy—a science and art with principles that have stood the test of time for over two centuries.

Homeopathy is also unique for being the first system of Western medicine that is not only holistic (meaning that it treats the whole person, not just standalone symptoms), but also acknowledges and accepts a mind/body connection that predates any conventional medical consideration by at least a century.

Superficial views of homeopathic methodology regularly misconstrue the concept of “like cures like” into something other than the intended principle that a substance that can produce symptoms in a healthy person will cure those same symptoms when a micro-dose of the same substance is given to a sick one. And mere dilution of this substance is not the key to the operation of the remedy; it is serial dilutions with succussion—shaking with impact—at each step that activates the molecular energy of the starting material. This is a rather sophisticated process that requires pristine laboratory conditions and quality control.

The homeopathic view is that the human body expresses symptoms as a signpost of an underlying problem or cause. It does not view symptoms as the enemy—more like “thanks for the heads up!” that allows a homeopath to determine which remedy is best suited to the patient. Years of homeopathic clinical study have shown that symptom suppression can lead to more serious health problems, e.g. the suppression of skin eruptions can result in a patient developing asthma.

The focus of conventional drugs is symptom suppression. There is no intention or expectation of true cure, and that never happens in the case of long-term or chronic illness. Unless the patient is lucky enough to experience spontaneous remission, all they can hope for is symptom management, with the likelihood of ever-increasing doses of medication to achieve the same effect, with a gradual worsening of the disease condition until death. There is also the very real and bothersome issue of negative, unwanted effects (misnamed “side effects”) that range from mild to severe/fatal.

Homeopathic medicines can also have undesirable effects—a worsening of the patient’s symptoms, or the development of symptoms caused by the medicine! This is why professional homeopaths require years of education and training to recognize which is which and know how to avoid or rectify the problem to prevent unnecessary suffering in their patients. Detractors who claim that homeopathic remedies are “just water,” to use a cliché, are all wet.

Samuel Hahnemann’s genius eclipses that of many better-known historical figures, yet he has largely been treated as non-existent in popular medical histories. One can only assume that this bias is purely intentional.

thanks to;

original article is from

THE lies about the vitamin K shot

The Lies About The Vitamin K Shot

– Vitamin K is scheduled to be injected into babies within an hour of birth. One of their assaults out of the womb and most parents allow it. It’s a vitamin that we are told will save our baby’s life from the deficiency they are born with, so of course we would agree to it. But only because we are fed lies.
First, it is a lie that it is needed. Listen to this fear campaign delivered by the CDC:
“Babies are born with very little vitamin K stored in their bodies. This is called “vitamin K deficiency” and means that a baby has low levels of vitamin K. Without enough vitamin K, babies cannot make the substances used to form clots, called ‘clotting factors.’ When bleeding happens because of low levels of vitamin K, this is called “vitamin K deficiency bleeding” or VKDB. VKDB is a serious and potentially life-threatening cause of bleeding in infants up to 6 months of age. A vitamin K shot given at birth is the best way to prevent low levels of vitamin K and vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB).…waiting to see if your baby needs a vitamin K shot may be too late. Babies can bleed into their intestines or brain where parents can’t see the bleeding to know that something is wrong. This can delay medical care and lead to serious and life-threatening consequences. All babies are born with very low levels of vitamin K because it doesn’t cross the placenta well. Breast milk contains only small amounts of vitamin K. That means that ALL newborns have low levels of vitamin K, so they need vitamin K from another source. A vitamin K shot is the best way to make sure all babies have enough vitamin K. Newborns who do not get a vitamin K shot are 81 times more likely to develop severe bleeding than those who get the shot.”

How has humanity survived all this time without this shot? Vitamin K does pass through the placenta, it does get passed through breast milk, and moms eating plenty leafy greens, veggies, fruits, and oils are passing plenty to their babies. Interesting however that certain medications can interfere with vitamin K and deplete it or cause other clotting and bleeding issues. If mom is on IV antibiotics (often the case if she is Group B strep positive during the birth), certain pain medication, or had recent vaccines it could deplete her vitamin K levels or pass through to the baby and deplete the baby’s vitamin K levels. Want to know another thing that could cause bleeding disorders in babies unrelated to the “need” for vitamin K? The Hepatitis B vaccine, also scheduled to be given within 12 hours of birth. Actually, most vaccines have the same adverse reaction listed in the package inserts, also called thrombocytopenia or ITP. So maybe if we stopped vaccinating babies they wouldn’t be bleeding to death.

Beyond the lie that it is necessary is the lie that it is just a safe and harmless vitamin. Here it is, the bold-faced lie in print:
“Yes, the vitamin K shot is safe. Vitamin K is the main ingredient in the shot. The other ingredients make the vitamin K safe to give as a shot.”
The manufacturer disagrees, this is in the insert:
“Severe reactions, including fatalities, have also been reported following INTRAMUSCULAR administration.”
Deaths have occurred after intravenous and intramuscular administration. (See Box Warning.) Transient “flushing sensations” and “peculiar” sensations of taste have been observed, as well as rare instances of dizziness, rapid and weak pulse, profuse sweating, brief hypotension, dyspnea, and cyanosis. Pain, swelling, and tenderness at the injection site may occur. The possibility of allergic sensitivity including an anaphylactoid reaction should be kept in mind. Infrequently, usually after repeated injection, erythematous, indurated, pruritic plaques have occurred; rarely, these have progressed to scleroderma-like lesions that have persisted for long periods. In other cases, these lesions have resembled erythema perstans. Hyperbilirubinemia has been observed in the newborn following administration of phytonadione”.
“Studies to evaluate the mutagenic potential have not been conducted with Vitamin K1 Injection.
Studies to evaluate the carcinogenic potential have not been conducted with Vitamin K1 Injection.”
And direct from the package insert we have the ingredients:
Each milliliter contains phytonadione 2 or 10 mg, polyoxyethylated fatty acid derivative 70 mg, dextrose, hydrous 37.5 mg in water for injection; benzyl alcohol 9 mg added as preservative. May contain hydrochloric acid for pH adjustment. pH is 6.3 (5.0 to 7.0).
The shot contains aluminum. Aluminum is toxic when injected. Medscape references 35 published studies discussing the toxic impact of injected aluminum, and those include many skin conditions including eczema, rash, painful nodules lasting years in some cases, and dermatitis, among other conditions. At least 2 British journals confirmed that vitamin K injections significantly increase chances of childhood leukemia, in as many as 1/500. That is horrific. And it is infuriating that the statements pasted directly from the CDC above, ignore, deny, and flat out lie about the risks of this shot.
What parents deserve is full disclosure and informed consent. That would not sound like the typical jargon they hear in the hospital such as “Now we are going to give your baby a Vitamin K shot, it is perfectly safe and may save your baby’s life.”
It would sound more like:
“You have the option of having your baby injected with an acidic formulation of synthetic Vitamin K. We would like to give this to your baby because the Hepatitis B shot we will pressure you to get next to protect against STD’s might cause a severe bleeding disorder. In addition, the several shots per visit over the next 6 months will increase your baby’s risk of bleeding to death. If you would like us to give it, we also need to let you know that it is possible for your baby to suffer a severe reaction, including death or could cause severe skin conditions, such as eczema, and may increase your baby’s risk of developing leukemia through childhood. Would you like us to inject your baby?”

written by;Courtney Charles

Radio interview Gina talks to sallie about homeopathy a radio interview I just finished today -every parent with vaccine injured kids should listen

SIDS and vaccines are they related? #vaccinescausesids read the article and shareIMG_8013

%d bloggers like this: