On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mary Yugo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> The homeopaths never do the experiment even in the face of a million >> dollar standing prize from James Randi if someone can simply differentiate >> a properly made homeopathic solution from it's solvent by *any* means >> whatsoever. >> > > That is incorrect. Jacques Benveniste invited Randi to review his > homeopathic experiments. See: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Benveniste > > QUOTE: > > ". . . The team pored over the laboratory's records and oversaw seven > attempts to replicate Benveniste's study. Three of the first four attempts > turned out somewhat favorable to Benveniste; however the Nature team was > not satisfied with the rigor of the methodology. Benveniste invited them to > design a double blind procedure, which they did, and conducted three more > attempts. Before fully revealing the results, the team asked if there were > any complaints about the procedure, but none were brought up.[citation > needed] These stricter attempts turned out negative for Benveniste . . ." > > Benveniste and others disputed that last statement. > This is a bit like the story of Dr. Levi's 18 hour experiment. Why did they not repeat the whole thing? And the same for Levi. I don't really want to argue homeopathy here unless you are sure it's within guidelines to do so. Then, I'll be happy too. It's the lowest common denominator of stupidity to claim homeopathy could possibly work because no material is present except solvent in the final product if it's properly prepared. You have to assume pure water has memory. If it does, you'd better not drink it. Think about all the toilets it visited in the past.
