published homeopathy and life-energy studies

eCAM 2007 4(2):149-163

Immunology and Homeopathy. 5. The Rationale of the ‘Simile’
Paolo Bellavite1, Riccardo Ortolani2, Francesco Pontarollo1, Giuseppina
Pitari3 and Anita Conforti4
1Department of Scienze Morfologico-Biomediche, University of Verona,
Piazza L. A. Scuro, 37134 Verona, 2Association for Integrative Medicine
‘Giovanni Scolaro’, 3Department of Basic and Applied Biology,
University of L’Aquila and 4Department of Medicina e Sanità Pubblica,
University of Verona, Italy

>>>>snip<<<<<<<<<

I think this journal is setting itself up for acceptance and publication of something Alan Sokal -esk.

Actually, I'm working on my own Altmed-naturopathic theory that uses the mysterious global forces that account for the powers of the Island in the series "Lost." I'm sure I can explain feng shui and any form of energy medicine. Still working on incorporating homeopathy, though. The above is an excellent article, as it has many vogue-sounding, scientifical terms and phrases I can incorporate into my theory. I especially like, "chaotic dynamics and physical-electromagnetic levels of regulation."

It is a cool idea for homeopathy to barrow ideas of using mathematics to describe abstractness with the assertion that such formulations will reveal counter-intuitive scientific truth. There is an old WB cartoon with FogHorn LegHorn, the rooster, who plays hide-n-seek with a braniac child/chick. While he hides behind the barn, the braniac child uses a slide rule and math equations to formulate a spot in the barnyard, where a shovel reveals FogHorn is hiding. While FogHorn tries to come to grips at how the braniac child dug him up in the yard when he knows he was hiding behind the barn, the child simply shows him the mathematical equation. I think this analogy is very close to what homeopathy does with their mathematics - if you hide a rooster behind the barn, you can mathematically prove it's buried in the yard.

dras
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

eCAM 2007 4(2):225-232

Ki-energy (Life-energy) Stimulates Osteoblastic Cells and Inhibits the
Formation of Osteoclast-like Cells in Bone Cell Culture Models
S. Tsuyoshi Ohnishi1, Kozo Nishino2, Satoshi Uchiyama3, Tomoko Ohnishi4
and Masayoshi Yamaguchi3
1Philadelphia Biomedical Research Institute, King of Prussia, PA, USA,
2School of Nishino Breathing Method, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo, 3Laboratory of
Endocrinology and Molecular Metabolism, Graduate School of Nutritional
Sciences, University of Shizuoka, Shizuoka, Japan and 4University of
Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Full text at:
http://ecam.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/4/2/225



My first observation is that there is a leap taken from incidental findings of post menopausal BMD exams for some people who practice specific breathing techniques, to showing "ki-energy" projection onto a petri dish alters cellular growth. It's supposed to make sense as a "possible mechanism" when you know about the authors prior investigations, but realistically it is quite a stretch. The observation does not lead to a practical theory, nor does the study correlate or consider any number of more plausible explanations for incidental high BMD results in a few post menopausal Ki-Energy practitioners.

Second, I am disappointed in the descriptions of the published study concerning the comparison between the active and control petri dishes. I'm not convinced that study groups are treated environmental equal aside from the active administration of "ki-energy." Also, the average number of samples is less than 10 in any one group. I am not a cellular biologist, or geneticist, but my suspicion is that there is some over analysis of overly broad ranges of data in finding the statistically significant differences in groups. Also, a clear reason and implications for changing the study protocols after initial results are not explained.

Overall, I don't think this study makes a good argument for further study of Ki-energy. I don't question the results of their laboratory data, or methods of data collection, but the illogical premise, lack of detail to controls, small sample size, and apparent overdependance on singular data outcomes combine to make this a rather poor source for the development of conclusions about "ki-energy" impacts on bone density.

dras