Emerging Science of Homeopathy: Complexity, Biodynamics and Nanopharmacology

From the Book

In this updated reissue of their 1995 classic Homeopathy: A Frontier in Medical Science, Italian physicians Paolo Bellavite and Andrea Signorini thoroughly examine a previous and current literature on the science of homeopathy in order to discover answers to the elemental questions: does it work? and if so, how does it work?

Tackling the problem of the nanopharmacological doses of homeopathy (high potencies, in homeopathic parlance), Bellavite and Signorini engage in a fascinating discussion of the biophysics of water, biological effects of electromagnetic fields, chaos theory, fractals.

They construct a plausible model of homeopathy’s mechanism of action and offer up a compelling argument for the inclusion of homeopathy in the world of mainstream medicine and science.

'The Emerging Science of Homeopathy' is the best available scientifically knowledgeable assessment of this field. If there is any truth, as there appears to be, to some of the claims of homeopathy, pursuing this line of argument is ethically imperative for the benefits of humanity and for the advancement of science.
Michael Lerner Ph.D.
Author, Choice in Healing: Integrating the Best of Conventional and Complementary Approaches to Cancer

'The Emerging Science of Homeopathy' establishes the theoretical basis for homeopathic medicine, compelling physicians to consider it as a viable therapeutic option, and encouraging scientists to explore the implications of this pharmacological specialty. To find out why homeopathy has a significant popular following, this book should be read thoughtfully.
- Journal of Veterinary and Human Toxicology

Bellavite and Signorini argue that evolving experimental data suggests that results from homeopathic medicine may be more than a placebo effect. The book is an excellent source for the conventionally trained physician or scientist who does not practice homeopathy but is intrigued by patients and practitioners convinced of its efficacy.
-\Marvin A. McMillen M.D.
Chief of Surgery, Michael Reese Hospital, Chicago

Back to the Top

Details

Tackling the problem of the nanopharmacological doses of homeopathy (high potencies, in homeopathic parlance), Bellavite and Signorini engage in a fascinating discussion of the biophysics of water, biological effects of electromagnetic fields, chaos theory, and fractals.

They construct a plausible model of homeopathy’s mechanism of action and offer up a compelling argument for the inclusion of homeopathy in the world of mainstream medicine and science.

Back to the Top

Author

Dr. Paolo Bellavite

is Associate Professor of General Pathology at Verona University School of Medicine in Italy.

Dr. Andrea Signorini

is a homeopathic medical doctor who specialized in clinical biology while earning a medical degree at the University of Verona in Italy.

Back to the Top

Reviews

Two Reviews:
1. THE HOMOEOPATH
2. HOMEOPATHIC LINKS


The Homoeopath
Reviewed by Francis Treuherz

This is a thoroughly revised and expanded edition, previously titled, Homeopathy, A Frontier in Medical Science, Experimental Studies and Theoretical Foundations, first published in 1995, which rapidly became an influential text.

After the introduction there are 7 further parts:

1. an explanation of the basic principles and history of homeopathy;
   
2. a consideration of its effectiveness;
   
3. a look at animal and laboratory research;
   
4. theories of complexity', chaos, information and integration;
   
5. an examination of the law of Similars also related to complexity;
   
6. the biophysical paradigm;
   
7. and the prospects for the future.

There are appendices on basic research and on science and homeopathy; I cannot see why these do not form chapters in the main book. Can we blame it all on Amadeo Avogadro who in 1811 created the theory of the smallness of things?

I have never been able to discover if Hahnemann and Avogadro knew about each other. The Italian authors of this book do not help us with this.

The core of this book is the relationship between regular science and medicine, and homeopathic science and medicine. The frontiers of physics and biochemistry and the new science of nanopharmacology are being extended by the search for explanations of the microdose.

I am not sure about the word 'nanopharmacology' in the title of the current edition,' it is perhaps too modern for my dictionaries, and thus qualifies as a neologism. ('Nano', as a prefix, indicates a billionth of a unit). Hahnemann also invented a word, the decillionth, for the measurement of the 30c potency.

Apart from this there are not many infelicities of translation, although some words like 'perturbation' are a disturbance to smooth reading. 'Classic' homeopathy is the word he uses for 'classical'; perhaps he needed a lesson in our jargon.

Anthony Steele deserves the credit for rendering an undoubtedly technical subject from Italian into clear if not flowing English.

This book has changed my opinions. It was important that my mind was open when reading this book. I had the idea that there is nothing to be done in what the authors call basic research, to influence those with prejudices against homeopathy. No matter what discoveries are made to show how our medicine is possible, these facts would not matter, nothing would change, what is important is clinical research, and provings, so that we may improve the quality of our work.

But the more I study the past and present of homeopathy I realize how we are held back by doctrinal disputes. I have been reading Basses Dilutions et Drainage en Homeopathie2, a recent French scholarly work with over 700 references. I wanted to see how these low dilutions, mother tinctures and drainage methods, might be compatible in practice with the idea of a single dose in high potency.

This area is, after all, the source of so many of our quarrels. But there does not have to be a conflict. Different patients may need different approaches, or the same patient may need something else at a different time. There are some approaches to homeopathy, such as the 'homeotoxicology' of Reckeweg, discussed on page 29, that I frankly do not understand at all; can it be called homeopathy?

Am I being disputatious here?

But the answer to some of these disputes, deep divisions and homeopathic high potency wars, may lie in the discoveries outlined and predicted in this book. They are important after all. They may change not only the prejudices of our medical opponents, but our own prejudices also. Are we not trained to be unprejudiced observers?

There are some interesting oddities - the 'strange, rare and peculiars' of homeopathic writing - in this book. For example the quotations from the Organon are not from our familiar Dudgeon and Boericke, nor from Kunzli, nor even from Decker and O'Reilly, but from the scholarly and classical Reves edition of 1994 3, from Israel.

I must look at it again. I recall a unique, interesting and rather dense commentary.

Hahnemann's death is incorrectly dated, as are the dates of translations. For example, the translation into Swedish was in 1835, by PJ Liedbeck4; news and practice of homeopathy reached India [5] and South America [6] by 1825 and not, as stated, after the death of Hahnemann.

Some works cited in the text, for example Marotta (1998), on page 291, do not appear in the bibliography. I have not checked them all as I was reading it for a review, not to mark it for a grade! The appendices have their own references but each chapter does not, relying on the bibliography which is therefore not at the end, and hard to find without bookmarks. These are elementary mistakes not to be expected in such a scholarly work.

Unfortunately the chapter on effectiveness refers to, but does not really examine, our clinical literature, which is built upon two centuries of case-reports in journals. Or that early, brilliant work of epidemiology, The Logic of Figures or Comparative Results of Homoeopathic and Other Treatments, by the indefatigable TL Bradford [7], which compared results in the great nineteenth century cholera (and other) epidemics in Europe and North America. The great modern series of IFH case conferences [8] are mentioned, for example, but one gets the impression that all this is discarded as anecdotal.

The concentration is on the results of controlled clinical trials, which are really something of a red Hering to an adherent of individualized homeopathy. The authors also fall into a linguistic or casuistic trap when looking at how homeopaths treat patients with, for example, cancer.

Instead of examining our literature, which includes the work of figures such as Grimmer, they misunderstand and claim that, since we treat the patient, we can hardly claim to cure the disease. Psssst!!! As a review of trials, however, it is of course excellent.

But on page 242 the authors betray their real attitude: our medicines have, they maintain, only a "complementary role in the context of scientific orthodox pharmacology". I would maintain that, whilst our services are complementary, our paradigm and our medicines offer a real alternative. This they do not acknowledge.

This fudge is evident on page 46, where, in the chapter on animal and lab studies, they state that these studies are "free from the methodological and philosophical constraints of classic homeopathy". I have never notice these constraints. Regarding animal experiments, it is highly likely that these studies contribute little to the practice of homeopathy.

I am aware that homeopathy reasons from experiments on humans in order to learn how to care for animals, whereas allopathy reasons from animals (which are harmed and then slain), in order to know how to care for humans. There are, of course, two separate issues, scientific and moral. Our provings could be seen as our own 'in vivo' experiments, and could easily satisfy the criteria of double blind trials. The critique of such trials by Harris Coulter' is overlooked.

I have to say that it may be my age, or my different intellectual training in social sciences and the philosophy of science, in history, and in homeopathy, or my lack of intelligence, but I do not understand the chapter on complexity. The authors seem to take 100 pages to inform us that humans are complex and so a complex type of medicine is needed, and homeopathy might be it. I hope that someone else might read it and comment for our journal (Lionel Milgrom, are you there?).

But where they relate this theory to homeopathy it is of great interest. The account of the origins of Glonoine and the Solanaceae, for example, are well done, as is the table of relationships between the ingredients of our remedies and their possible pharmacological effects. They once again fudge the issue, by adding the word "possible".

The long chapter on a biophysical paradigm is of great interest, even if inconclusive. The authors include the work of biofeedback machines, like those of Voll, and duly conclude that they are invalidated in any effective diagnosis or treatment, by the interfering effect of the field of the machine operator.

In other words these machines cannot compare with a skilled homeopath, where it is the intellect and the feelings, the science and the art of the prescriber, which does the business. All that seems to me to be missing from this book is the consideration of the human factor. Our intelligence, our balance, our diligence, and our conscientiousness as workers in homeopathy, are simply not considered as significant variables.

This is a great book for speculation, and for revealing what the allopaths and the boffins think of us, but ultimately it misses our point, which is, as it always was, the rapid, gentle healing of suffering humanity.

The above review is reprinted from THE HOMEOPATH, with permission of the publisher.



Homeopathic Links
reviewed by Harald Walach, Germany

It is not easy to review a book written by a friend whose general outlook I don't agree with.

However, I'll try my best. Paolo Bellavite is a professor of pathology at the University of Verona and Andrea Signorini is a homoeopathic doctor. Both blend their knowledge to present a book which is well written, correct and readable even for lay readers.

Specialists might want to skip some of the more lengthy passages, but I expect that everyone will find something worthwhile in this book, because it covers such a broad range of subjects.

The authors review the basic principles and the history of homoeopathy (chapter 1), which might be a good introduction for those readers who are not acquainted with the subject. This introduction is very concise, with extensive quotes from Hahnemann and it also talks about some less well known facets of the European history of homoeopathy, like homotoxicology, isopathy and the development of nosodes.

Then there are two chapters covering the empirical evidence for homoeopathy, consisting of clinical and basic research. These two chapters give a good overview because they include a brief description of the design as well as the main results of the major studies done in this field.

This could be a good introduction for students of homoeopathy into the field of research, and for researchers coming from other areas. In a somewhat lengthy chapter the authors try to convey how in modern biochemistry the cells, organs and living bodies are seen as self-organising systems, which do not follow linear, causal laws but can only be described by complex, non-linear dynamics.

Many examples are given to prevent the reader from getting lost in the complex field of complexity. The authors then go on to show that there are many instances in modern biochemistry and biology where the observed effects are similar to the homoeopathic experience, i.e. the differential effects of low and high doses, the importance of priming cells with stressors, the effects of homologous stimulation, and the like.

Finally they argue that there are some physical theories which make it plausible that homoeopathic remedies contain specific information, comparable to the specific molecule necessary to activate a certain type of receptor, which is read by the organism in a very specific sense.

In short, the authors propose that homoeopathy fits well into the emerging picture of complex systems, that homoeopathy and modern biomedicine seem to converge rather than clash, and that a combined knowledge of complex systems theory and homoeopathy would help to bridge the gap between biomedicine and homoeopathy.

They produce a lot of analogies and many examples, which make this picture seem quite plausible, at least to those who believe in the specific efficacy of homoeopathy. Those of us who, through experience or sheer wishful thinking, believe that homoeopathy is a specific therapy which, by virtue of the globules given, produces an effect only if the right remedy is chosen and does not produce an effect if the wrong remedy is given, those will want an explanation on how such a thing as a high homoeopathic potency can produce any effects at all. Bellavite and Signorini provide those people with a whole lot of arguments.

Those who say that homoeopathy can only be rubbish because there is no way it could ever work from a scientific point of view, should also read this book, because they might find that homoeopathy and the current theory in biomedicine do not contradict each other.

This book is highly informative and it is also necessary, because it tries to close the theoretical gap between modern biochemical research and Hahnemannian homoeopathy, which, after all, has still remained largely the same for the last 200 years.

I think the book does a good job in filling this gap. It accurately picks out those areas in modern science, which are relevant: chaos theory and fractals, nonlinear thermodynamics and complex systems theory. But the presentation is a bit superficial at times and relies a lot on analogies.

For instance, one of the analogies presented in the book says that chaos theory, where small differences in initial conditions lead to huge differences later on, is similar to homoeopathy where small doses can produce a huge change in health. This sounds like a good analogy, but it begs the question: Who says that there is a small amount of something in homoeopathic remedies which in fact does make a material, substantial difference? In that sense much of the discussion is good rhetoric: the examples look convincing, there are good analogies, but what is missing is specific information, a sound, convincing argument (or empirical data) that homoeopathic remedies in fact do contain something.

The book provides a good framework, or should we say a gallery, of modern images, examples, analogies, which make it plausible that homoeopathy could work in a modern sense of the word, .. if one accepts that the remedies contain a type of information, if one is willing to concede that water (what about lactose, which is never discussed in physical theories?) can have a type of memory, ... if one is prepared to accept the specific efficacy of homoeopathy as a clear and proven fact.
But still there are many missing links in the chain:

There is no single basic research paradigm yet which has consistently been able to show that homoeopathic potencies act in a simple system.
There is no clinical paradigm which has repeatedly been able to show the effects of high potencies, except the models of David Reilly.
None of the research has stood the final test of scientific fact: reproducibility in the hand of other researchers.

I read the database of homoeopathy in a different way:

I see promising beginnings which never hold up to the end.
I see exceptional data, which cannot be replicated.
I see a host of anomalies but no clear pattern emerging.

In the light of that type of data, I myself would be very hesitant to promise that a biophysical view will vindicate homoeopathy.

I disagree with the authors of this book in the interpretation of this database, and I disagree with them in the view that a biophysical outlook will change the picture and that homoeopathy can be integrated into modern biology and that homoeopathy will be part of normal science in the not too distant future.

I knew this before I read the book. But after reading the book I know why I disagree: Because my interpretation of the database is different, and because I have given up hope in finding the stable, subtle information in homoeopathic remedies which will do the job of specifically triggering the chaotic complexity of the machinery of our body. So the book has helped me to clarify my thoughts.

In the same sense I trust that the book will trigger other people's ideas about homoeopathy and will educate quite a few of them on the latest scientific developments. Homoeopaths as well as anti-homoeopaths should read the book, and all those who want to understand why they don't believe that homoeopathy could work.

So in a sense, everybody could read the book with some benefit, although the benefit will certainly be of a different type for each person. And as far as a future edition is concerned, I suggest that the authors take a somewhat more detached stance towards their own bias, so that they may step back from time to time and point out to the reader where they make presuppositions that have not (yet?) been born out by the data.

Homeopathic Links
Summer 1998, Volume 11

Back to the Top

Contents

Foreword -- ix

Preface to the American Edition -- xi
I Introduction

2 Basic Principles and Brief History of Homeopathy
2.1 The law of Similars -- 8
2.2 Homeopathic drugs (or remedies) -- 10
2.3 Hahnemann’s Organon -- 2
2.4 Opposition to the development of homeopathy -- 20
2.5 Variants of classic homeopathy -- 23
2.5.1 History of Isopathy -- 24
2.5.2 Terminology & definitions of isotherapy, nosodes, & biotherapeutic substances -- 27
2.6 Homotoxicology -- 28
2.7 Homeopathy today -- 32

3 Is Homeopathy Effective?
3.1 Empirical evidence -- 37
3.2 Clinical research -- 40

4 Animal Studies and Laboratory Research
4.1 Experiments in animals and in healthy human subjects -- 56
4.2 Studies in isolated organs -- 65
4.3 Studies of in vitro cells -- 66
4.4 Preliminary conclusions from experimental studies -- 75
4.5 Towards new paradigms -- 78

5 Complexities, Information, and Integration
5.1 Complexity of diseases -- 86
5.2 Example of a complex biological system: inflammation -- 93
5.2.1 Basic characteristics of the inflammatory process -- 95
5.2.2 Relationships between the inflammation focus and the rest of the body -- 104
5.2.3 Difficulties in controlling inflammation -- 106
5.3 Another example: cancer -- 111
5.3.1 Biochemical control of cell proliferation -- 113
5.3.2 Oncogenes and proto--oncogenes -- 116
5.3.3 Promoting factors and neoplastic progression -- 123
5.4 Homeostasis and complexity -- 128
5.5 Information -- 134
5.6 Doses, target systems, and effects -- 139
5.6.1 Apparently paradoxical effects -- 140
5.6.2 Doses -- 146
5.6.3 Receptors and transduction systems -- 154
5.7 Chaos and fractals -- 160
5.7.1 The 'discovery' of chaos -- 160
5.7.2 Attractors and fractals -- 166
5.7.3 Boolean networks and self--organization -- 171
5.7.4 Chaotic systems in medicine -- 175
5.8 General discussion on complexity -- 179
5.8.1 Birth of a complex behavior -- 181
5.8.2 Resume of the properties of complex systems -- 186

6 Homeostasis, Complexity, and Homeopathy: The Law of Similars
6.1 Mode of action of homeopathic drugs -- 193
6.2 Discussion of model presented -- 199
6.2.1 Aggravation -- 200
6.2.2 Further degrees of complexity -- 200
6.2.3 Individualization -- 204
6.2.4 Importance of small doses -- 205
6.2.5 Inhibitory or antagonistic effects -- 207
6.2.6 Relationships with other therapies -- 209
6.2.7 Limits of homeopathy -- 212
6.3 The law of Similars at pharmacological and pathophysiological level -- 214
6.3.1 Considerations on the scientific validity of homeopathy -- 214
6.3.2 The history of nitroglycerine, a homeoallopathic drug -- 217
6.3.3 Belladonna, Hyoscyamus, and Stramonium -- 218
6.3.4 Chemical groups present in plants with a spasmolytic effect: polyenes and coumarins -- 220
6.3.5 Ipecac or Cephaelis ipecacuanha -- 222
6.3.6 Anthraquinone drugs and diarrhea syndromes -- 223
6.3.7 Coffea -- 224
6.3.8 Active ingredients and inverse effect -- 225
6.4 Considerations on autohemotherapy -- 226
6.5 Homeopathic medicine and modern oncology -- 234
6.5.1 Problems related to possible therapeutic measures -- 234
6.5.2 The law of Similars in oncology -- 237

7 The Biophysical Paradigm
7.1 The biophysics of water -- 245
7.1.1 Certain characteristics of water-- 245
7.1.2 Superradiance -- 249
7.1.3 "Activation" of water and colloidal reactions -- 253
7.1.4 Water clathrates, isotopicity, and similar models -- 257
7.1.5 NMR, infrared and Raman--laser spectroscopy -- 260
7.2 Biological effects of electromagnetic fields -- 263
7 .2.1 Effects on the body -- 265
7.2.2 Molecular and cellular effects -- 268
7.3 Electroacupuncture -- 275
7.3.1 Points and meridians -- 275
7.3.2 Voll's electroacupuncture (EAV) -- 277
7.4 High dilutions, chaos, and fractals -- 284
7.4.1 Transition from disorder to coherence -- 288
7.4.2 Fractal dynamics -- 289
7.5 Discussion on high-dilution homeopathy -- 291
7.5.1 Oscillations and resonance -- 293
7.5.2 Bifurcations -- 295
7.5.3 Integrated approach and specificity -- 298

8 Prospects -- 302

References -- 307
Appendix 1: Basic Research and Homeopathy -- 336
Appendix 2: Science and Homeopathy -- 368
Index -- 403

Back to the Top